Page images
PDF
EPUB

Mr. WESTFIELD. I am not too well acquainted witht the rates miners get at the present time. I would say somewhere around $35 a day for an 8-hour day for a coal mine.

A foreman, I do not know what his salary is.

Senator SCHWEIKER. It seems to me it would be pretty relevant. If I am going out and need a top priority group of people I would like to know what my competition is and what I have to pay.

Mr. WHEELER. We are competitive, Senator.

Senator SCHWEIKER. You say you are competitive. That is what I am trying to find out.

Mr. WHEELER. And we have even been instrumental in the wages of a number of section foremen and foremen going up in the mines. because companies have been willing to pay them more in order to keep them from coming to work for us, which is all right, because they need them, too.

So we are competitive.

Senator SCHWEIKER. I guess you have the figures in your statement as to how many recruits you have received so far. I think, Secretary Dole, you said that in your statement, didn't you? I forget what page that is on.

Mr. WHEELER. Well, we have 250 in the process now of taking phys ical examinations and otherwise getting themselves ready.

Senator SCHWEIKER. I want to be fair and say that I recognize that is not an easy job. Coming from Pennsylvania, I know it is not easy to recruit people and train them, but I wonder if we are doing every thing possible, because there is a virtual emergency in this area, and I hope we are all aware of that.

That is all I have, Mr. Chairman.
Senator WILLIAMS. Thank you.
Mr. Blackwell will ask questions.

Mr. BLACKWELL. Mr. Dole, or whichever member of the panel is considered appropriate, three questions on the meeting to which Mr. Yablonski's request to attend was not favorably acted upon-in fact, he received a negative, and was invited to a subsequent and separate meeting.

Who said "No," to Mr. Yablonski's request to attend that meeting, which individual, which official?

Mr. DOLE. I would like to have the chairman of the committee. Mr. Gershuny, speak to that question.

Mr. GERSHUNY. Mr. Blackwell, I believe, if memory serves, that Mr. Yablonski was notified in two different ways, because of the lateness of the request.

As I recall, I had personally called him at a Washington law firm whose phone number he had left with me, and I told him by phone. This was, I believe, on a Friday. I advised him that there would be a letter of confirmation sent out to him, and my recollection is that that letter was sent out over the signature of Secretary Dole on Saturday.

Mr. BLACKWELL. What was the basis of denying Mr. Yablonski's request to attend this meeting?

Mr. GERSHUNY. Well, there were several factors, Mr. Blackwell. First of all, the meetings that were established had been set up spe cifically to consider concrete recommendations which the Bureau had received from the operator associations. It was going to be a par

ticularly technical meeting. The purpose was to elicit candid views from the major segments of the industry and major representatives of labor.

It was not intended to be any sort of a public hearing in which the entire public would be invited. It was a work session and the representatives of the mineworkers were invited because they had an established and recognized safety office. They were the certified bargaining agent of large numbers of miners, and to be absolutely candid, we felt that the request that we had received from Mr. Yablonski would frustrate the purpose of the meetings, because it would serve to merely pinpoint the internal politics of the mineworkers, and we did not want to allow the meeting to be changed in its course from a work session to a meeting which could be used, or might be used, as a means to highlight the internal problems within the union.

Now, I should point out something that I think is extremely important. We tried to be absolutely fair to the group which was represented by Mr. Yablonski. We had made available to him all of the recommendations that we had received, and as I

Mr. BLACKWELL. Excuse me, Mr. Gershuny. I believe you have answered my question up to a point. May I ask this: A published report at the time stated that one of the reasons for Mr. Yablonski's not being invited was that Interior felt his presence might lead the UMW representatives to walk out of the meeting.

Is that included in your response respecting the frustration of the meeting which you have already commented on?

Mr. GERSHUNY. I think it was.

Mr. BLACKWELL. The final question is, would you in similar circumstances invite Mr. Yablonski to the next such meeting, or will you apply again the reasoning and the policy you applied in the past case, or perhaps I should direct that to Mr. Dole.

Mr. DOLE. I would say, in answer to that question, that we will view each situation as it comes up, and we would take such action which we believe would give us the greatest input, and the greatest information, and the greatest service.

Mr. BLACKWELL. If this situation arises again, are you saying that you would have the same policy in denying Mr. Yablonski attendance? Mr. DOLE. No, I am not saying that at all. What I am saying is that we would take it and view it and make a decision in the light of matters at that time.

Mr. BLACKWELL. The most you are saying is that he might be invited at the next meeting, then?

Mr. DOLE. I think that there is some misunderstanding here. There is a lot of difference between a closed meeting and meeting in which people are invited, where we have meetings on offshore and some of these that have to deal with land problems. Some of them have to do with the machinery, the engineering.

People are certainly welcome to come to any of these meetings, but we would hope that the people that we would invite would be those that would have the greatest expertise and could make the greatest input so that we could come out with the best decision possible within the Department.

Mr. BLACKWELL. Well, the obvious character of this, Mr. Dole, is that a policy which invites attendance by the press to a meeting to which a particular individual who represents miners and is concerned

with safety and health, invites the press and denies the other individual admittance is a questionable policy.

We will leave the record at that.

Mr. RUSSELL. The meetings belong to the purpose. They are not designed to provide everybody an opportunity to serve purposes other than the meeting.

Mr. BLACKWELL. It is clear to me that Mr. Yablonski's request was to participate in accordance with the purposes designated by the Department. His request was to participate under your purposes.

Mr. RUSSELL. And his request was granted by the scheduling of such a meeting for that purpose.

Mr. BLACKWELL. Well, a second meeting would hardly meet the needs of that, sir. I was at the meeting, and I heard the dialogue, and without a transcript of the dialogue of the first meeting, individuals meeting subsequently and separately would be greatly handicapped.

Mr. DOLE. This could very well be, but once again I go back to the comment that the decisions on these are going to be ours, and we make them. We get our information from many sources.

Mr. BLACKWELL. Thank you, sir.

Senator WILLIAMS. I think that covers it.

We have reached a point where I would like to make an observation, that probably we could have anticipated that we would be into detail, deeply involved in detail, and we did anticipate it, but there are four or five major areas that remain for discussion here: the inspection program was covered in the dialogue that came up this morning. I personally wanted to talk further about the methods of fixing penalties. and the partial but representative inspections, the spot inspections, and the policy on that, and, indeed, the handling of the Virginia case in Abingdon.

I am going to suggest to my colleagues that we terminate and ask you at a later time to come back, gentlemen, because we do have people who have come from other States, and we must get to them yet this afternoon.

Senator Randolph ?

Senator RANDOLPH. Yes, I think that is a preferable way. Those who are now at the witness table are in a position to return, given proper notice, and discuss these matters with us. Is that correct?

Mr. RUSSELL. We would be glad to.

Senator WILLIAMS. That is the way we will have to do it to discharge our responsibility; with our great apologies to Dr. Peterson for holding the doctor and his associates from HEW, and we appreciate your cooperation.

Senator RANDOLPH. Mr. Chairman, with no criticism whatsoever, because I do it in the Public Works Committee-it is done in all committees but this is the time for observations.

We attempt to schedule too many witnesses. We ought to have more days and less witnesses on a specific day.

Mr. RUSSELL. Also, alternately, too, if you would prefer, we would be very glad to respond to written question that you might have, if you would prefer that.

Senator WILLIAMS. Well, that might be something we will consider. and I was going to mention it. Possibly the areas we want to explore

could be more efficiently done with written questions. This we will think through, and we will be in communication with you. Thank you ever

so much.

Mr. DOLE. This has been very beneficial to us, and we thank you, and we will look forward to meeting with you again.

Senator WILLIAMS. Mrs. Mazie B. Gutshall, executive deputy secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Mines and Mineral Industries, from Harrisburg.

When I announced you were going to be here, there was a spontaneous applause. The staff people knew all about the good work you do in Pennsylvania.

Senator SCHWEIKER. I would like to say a word, if I may.

Senator WILLIAMS. All right. I should have let you heap the applause first, Dick, and I apologize.

Senator SCHWEIKER. It is all right. I am delighted to say we are happy to have Mrs. Gutshall with us. She has set quite a record in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. She was first appointed by Governor Scranton in 1964 as the first woman to be named to a subcabinet post in Pennsylvania. She has a very distinguished and outstanding record in her own right in this position.

She also comes from a mining family, so she knows the ins, outs, and the nitty-gritties from a first-hand experience. She has done a lot of personal inspection and traveling both in the hard and soft coal areas of Pennsylvania, and she has been working in this whole area of mines and mineral industries for many, many years beyond her recognition as deputy secretary.

So I am pleased to present to the committee our deputy secretary of mines, Mrs. Gutshall.

Senator RANDOLPH. Just a moment, Mr. Chairman.

You proposed Dr. Walker a day or two ago for the director of the bureau of mines.

Senator SCHWEIKER. I will amend it.

Senator RANDOLPH. Yes.

Senator SCHWEIKER. I think if we took her from Pennsylvania, the Department would collapse, so I am not sure we could spare her.

STATEMENT OF MAZIE B. GUTSHALL, EXECUTIVE DEPUTY SECRE-
TARY, DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND MINERAL INDUSTRIES,
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA;
OF PENNSYLVANIA; ACCOMPANIED BY
CHARLES B. MANULA, DEPUTY SECRETARY OF THE BITUMINOUS
COAL DIVISION

Mrs. GUTSHALL. Thank you, Senator, very much.

As Senator Schweiker mentioned, I am Mazie B. Gutshall, executive deputy secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Mines and Mineral Industries. With me is Charles B. Manula, our deputy secretary of the bituminous coal division.

We appear before you today in the absence of Dr. H. B. Charmbury, the secretary, who is both closely connected and vitally concerned with the health and safety of Pennsylvania's miners. Unfortunately he could not be reached in time to appear before you personally today in this specially called session.

47-135 0-71- -39

Pennsylvania has the strongest set of laws in the Nation governing the mining of coal, and especially concerning the deep mining of this mineral resource.

Coal mining was a substantial commercial enterprise in Pennsylvania even before the Civil War, and our Commonwealth had trained mine inspectors in the field working towards better health and safety requirements since 1870, or precisely 100 years.

Through this century of time, gentlemen, both the role of our Commonwealth's mine inspector force and the laws they are charged with enforcing have been honed to the highest possible degree of integrity and efficiency.

Today a Pennsylvania deep mine inspector is quite more than just a professional person, highly qualified and trained for his job. And incidentally, it is interesting to hear and compare our own requirements in comparison to those of what is now required under Federal law. To become one, a person must posesss infinite knowledge of mining and then succeed in passing the most stringent examination of its kind in the Nation.

Of the many persons who periodically take these exams, which is about once every 2 years, less than 10 percent pass them or basically qualify for the position.

A Pennsylvania mine inspector is then appointed by the Governor and he has life tenure. But even before that, the man's personal integrity is subjected to the closest scrutiny upon appointment. He is beyond the realm of political life and interference, and removable from his position only under the severest breach of ethics and behavior.

A Pennsylvania mine inspector lives, eats, and breathes the concepts of safety as required and even implied-in our laws. And enforcing those laws to the betterment of the health and safety of the men who work in the mines is his primary charge in safety of the men who work in this highly skilled and professional world of mining. He is an officer of our Commonwealth and possesses police powers when it comes to citing infractions of the laws he is charged with enforcing.

To give you an idea of the intensity or the degree of intensity of Pennsylvania's deep mining health and safety laws: In a given deep mine even the assistant mine foremen-to say nothing of the foreman himself-must undergo rigid written and oral examinations before they can qualify for appointment to these positions. These men are also not only officials of their companies they become, like the inspector to which they are responsible, officers of the Commonwealth at the same time, charged like the inspector with enforcement of Pennsylvania's deep mine health and safety laws.

In other words, gentlemen, Pennsylvania, after a century of experience with the deep mining of coal, believe in placing responsibility for mine health and safety on those field people best qualified to do the job of enforcing its laws. I might add that penalties for infractions of these laws can be severe, not only for the companies themselves, but to the individuals at fault.

To give you some of the outstanding requirements of Pennsylvania's bituminous mining law, it requires as follows:

« PreviousContinue »