STEEL CASE ISSUES, UNION DEMANDS, AND WSB RECOMMENDATIONS-Continued

Contract issues

1 Involves more than 2 issues.

2 Involves more than 3 issues.

3 Involves more than 10 issues within United States Steel contract, substantial variations between companies.

4 Involves more than 3 issues. Variations also exist between companies.

5 Involves more than 20 issues.

Mr. FEINSINGER. May I say in answer to a question of Senator Benton before he left, I endorse the Governor's remark 100 percent and I can only say this: I only wish with all my heart that this committee, or whatever committee is appropriate, had suggested to Congress and Congress itself had suggested what this country should do in an emergency of the kind we have just gone through.

The CHAIRMAN. This committee passed the Defense Production Act, the Control Act, only as an emergency act. You know that. In my judgment the only thing Congress is going to pass is what comes out of this committee.

The reason we have you gentlemen down here is not to have a lot of public hearings where everybody can condemn everybody. We want your judgment. If any control bill comes out, or if any decision comes out, anything on rents or price ceilings, it is coming out of this committee.

Senator CAPEHART. You quoted from Mr. Fairless in the New York Times where he said that the collective bargaining would not be sufficient and that the thing would end up in Washington. I believe that is what you quoted.

Didn't he make the only statement he could have possibly made, because the steel companies would have been unable to put any wage increases into effect without your permission? Is that not correct?

Mr. FEINSINGER. No, sir. We have self-administering regulations under which parties can agree to a cost of living wage increase and do not even have to come to the Board for approval.

Senator CAPEHART. Your answer is that he could have put some wage increases into effect without your permission. He would have had to have notified you?

Mr. FEINSINGER. No; he just has to keep records. He does not even have to file.

Senator CAPEHART. Just a minute.

Were your recommendations more than they could have automatically placed into effect?

Mr. FEINSINGER. Let me explain our regulation, to answer your question: If the parties want to use the normal base period or base date of January 15, 1951, they can do it without coming to the Board. If they claim that they have special circumstances and want to use some other base date they have to come to us for approval.

Senator CAPEHART. Couldn't the steel companies have given the steelworkers everything that you recommended, without your permission?

Mr. FEINSINGER. They could have agreed to it, surely, and then submitted the agreement to the Board.

Senator CAPEHART. I understand that, but they could not have automatically put it into effect without your permission. Mr. FEINSINGER. That is right, sir.

Senator CAPEHART. That is correct, is it not?

Mr. FEINSINGER. That is correct, Senator.

Senator CAPEHART. Therefore, his statement was possibly correct when he said that it would end up in Washington?

Mr. FEINSINGER. I do not think that is what he meant at all. Senator CAPEHART. Well, I think it is what he meant because I know of a company that offered their employees "X" amount of

increase in wages and a part of it of course they could automatically put into effect but the balance they would have to get your permission to do so.

Mr. FEINSINGER. He says, "I do not think there is any use in collective bargaining. This whole thing is going to be settled in Washington, wage and price." That is what he said. I do not say he was wrong or right.

I just say we have not interfered with collective bargaining.

Senator CAPEHART. Let me ask one more question, if you will, please. Why did you give them more than they were entitled to in all your regulations?

Mr. FEINSINGER. I went through that this morning, sir. You can petition to the Board under our regulation for everything that was permitted and we have regulations and prior decisions under which every mill that we recommended could have been approved if they had come to us with an agreement.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Moody.

Senator MOODY. The hour is late and I have but a few questions. I want to say I commend Governor Arnall for his desire to hold the line. I am sure all he wants, and certainly all I want, is a settlement of this thing which is fair to everybody and unfair to nobody, and which will return the industry to its owners as soon as possible.

It seems to me we have to keep steel production going. We also have to have a stable economy. We also must of course operate our Government within the provisions of the Constitution. It was a terrible thing for the President to be forced, as he saw it and interpreted his responsibility and his authority, to seize this industry.

It seems to me we should find out whether the union is being unreasonable when it insists on a wage increase of this amount; whether the Board was unreasonable in insisting on a wage increase in lieu of a strike, or whether the industry staged a sit-down strike and refused to settle on fair terms. That is why I moved this morning and again in executive session this afternoon, that you two gentlemen and perhaps Mr. Putnam should be at a single table with the companies and the unions to get any differences there are between you right out in the open, in open rather than in executive session.

I do not know whether the chairman informed you or not but that session has been scheduled for May the first. I am looking forward to it with a good deal of interest.

Mr. ARNALL. Wonderful.

Senator CAPEHART. The gentleman was here when we agreed to it. Mr. FEINSINGER. I want to differ with my colleague for the first time today. Gentlemen, anything that you see fit to do in your wisdom and request me to do I will do. I will participate in that discussion and do the best I can, but I want you to know the risks that you are taking. What you are doing is actually asking this case to be retried. You do not want to bring my whole tripartite board over here, do you?

The CHAIRMAN. The reason why I asked for executive hearings here today and the reason why I have had others is because I have tried to keep out of any newspaper arguments over who said what, or to have any dog fight because the only interest I have is in this committee doing its job regardless of what anybody else may do, in the interests of the people and not in the interests of the newspapers.

Senator MOODY. I have been hopeful right along, as I am sure you have been hopeful, that this thing would be settled.

It has seemed to me, however, that in the actual situation we are facing, where you have had an industry taken over by the President's inherent powers, or what he considers to be his inherent powers, when you have the Senate of the United States in an uproar over the fact of whether he has exceeded his powers and there is a proposal made in the House by Representative Bender that he should be impeached for what he has done, it seems if the case that you gentlemen have laid before us here is the proper case and cannot be refuted, I think the American people are entitled to know it. They have been very much confused by all the heat.

It seems to me that the only way to get down to cases here is to have around the same table, not for the benefit of the wage board or the steel companies or the unions or anyone else, but for the benefit of the public and of this committee, which has a responsibility for writing this legislation, a cross-fire of discussion in which the differences can be ironed out end the facts brought cut.

Mr. FEINSINGER. Do I take it that you intend to have the industry people here with you one day and the labor people another day, and us separately a third day?

Senator MOODY. No, sir.

The industry people are coming in to testify, the labor people are coming in to testify as you have, in executive session. And then thereafter, after all three parties to this situation have presented their cases to the committee in executive session, and after the committee has had an opportunity to study the presentation made by each of the three parties, then there should and will be a panel discussion of those facts.

It seems to me that the American people ought to have the facts as they have been presented here today, or perhaps as they may be contradicted.

Mr. FEINSINGER. I think you ought to reconsider that, Senator. Senator CAPEHART. To get the facts you are talking about would take 3 weeks.

Mr. FEINSINGER. I am willing to do it if you want me to.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me say one thing for the record. When this thing first started one afternoon it was thought that it would be wise to have the steel people down here and Mr. Feinsinger and I believe our office called you about a meeting to be held shortly.

Mr. FEINSINGER. That is right, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. I determined that it would be unwise. If I have talked to Governor Arnall 1 time I have talked to Governor Arnall 10 times, in person and in my office, about the same thing. Mr. Putnam has been to my house and has been to my office and we have discussed this thing. I believe the situation is serious in this country. This is the only committee that can legislate price control. They can have all the hearings they want in the Labor and Public Welfare Committee about wages and that is their business, but the control bill must come from here. I have never wanted to do anything wrong—and I said this before that I just do not want to do anything that would upset the apple cart. That is the reason I have not had a meeting. I could have had a meeting here 2 weeks ago.