Classification Nos. 5278.6 and 5278.7 for 1939 are comparable to 5276.9 for 1938. 5278.8 Glassware, other than bulbs, and table and kitchen utensils, blown or A comparison of glassware imports for the year 1939 versus 1938, par. 218 (c) (d) (f) (g) and 230 (d) - Continued 5278.5 Engraved Ornamental Glassware Valued at $8 each or more..... Country Total.. 1938 1939 Percent of change, 1939 versus 1938 Sweden.. 2,076 5278.7 Glassware, other than bulbs, and table and kitchen articles and uten- Total all items under paragraph 218 (f)...... 5278.1 Table and kitchen articles and utensils, pressed and unpolished. Total. 3, 017, 207 2,311,679 -23.4 Total 26,610 9,061 -65.9 Czechoslovakia 20,165 2,603 -87.1 Paragraph 1939 218 (g) 1939 230 (d).. Classification numbers 5278.8 and 5278.9 for 1939 are comparable to 5278.8 All other glass, glassware and manufactures, pressed, not colored, etc., 5278.9 All other glass, glassware and manufactures pressed, not colored, etc., After Apr. 22, 1939, 1930 Tariff Act duties applied to all imports from all countries subject only to the United Kingdom and Swedith trade treaties, countervailing duties of 25 percent additional for all German ware. Czechoslovakia ware is classified as German unless shipped before Mar. 17, 1939. There are 2 trade agreements now in force: (a) With Sweden: All engraved ornamental glassware valued at $8 each or more 1930 rate, 60 percent; treaty rate 30 percent. (b) With United Kingdom: All table and kitchen glass articles and utensils blown or partly blown in the mold, which are cut or engraved and valued at $1 or more each 1930 tariff rate, 60 percent; treaty rate, 45 percent. Statistical summory of the glassware industry versus imports based upon United States census of manufacturers and the U. S. Department of Commerce imports Senator CLARK. Mr. Chairman, before the next witness takes the stand, I should like to clear up a matter which came up in the testimony here yesterday. During the hearings of yesterday while Dr. Coulter was testifying, Senator Vandenberg inquired of Dr. Coulter concerning a seeming diametrical conflict between figures with reference to United States exports of wheat and wheat flour to trade agreement countries and non-trade agreement countries which he Senator Vandenberg-had found in the hearings before the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives and those supplied by Secretary Wallace. A careful check reveals that figures referred to by Senator Vandenberg are quantity figures for two carefully chosen years, 1935 compared to 1938; whereas the figures supplied by Secretary Wallace are value figures comparing a pre-agreement period, 1934 and 1935 and a post-agreement period, 1936 to 1938. If the percentage increase of United States exports of wheat and wheat flour to trade agreement countries and non-trade agreement countries is calculated on a quantity export basis the figures would be: Exports of wheat and wheat flour increased to trade agreement countries by 255 percent. Exports of wheat and wheat flour increased to non-trade agreement countries by 38 percent. Those figures are furnished by the Department of Agriculture at my request. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Dougherty. STATEMENT OF GEORGE DOUGHERTY, REPRESENTING NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MANUFACTURERS OF PRESSED AND BLOWN GLASSWARE, PITTSBURGH, PA. Mr. DOUGHERTY. I hope I will be able to contribute some brevity to this hearing insofar as my own statement is concerned. My name is George Doughterty. I represent the National Association of Manufacturers of Pressed and Blown Glassware with headquarters in Pittsburgh, Pa. Our manufacturers give employment to the great majority of the members of the American Flint Glass Workers' Union of North America, an organization with a membership of 22,000 or more. Our agreements with the skilled workmen have been maintained since 1887 and with the semi-skilled employees since 1936 and 1937. I might explain that some of our members are members of Mr. Dillingham's American Glassware Association, but our association comprises the employers of the union glass workers. That is the difference. So they appear here chiefly on subjects affecting the labor angle of this question. We wish to record our request that no extension be made of the Trade Agreement Act and that the plan under which it is now administered be discontinued. The experience of our industry with the trade-agreement program up to now is that under it only reductions have taken place in the rates of duty on imported glassware. We are therefore here to express the opposition of our employers and their employees to the extension of the Trade Agreements Act for another period. We are not opposed to the reciprocal theory in our commercial relationships with other countries, but we hold that all agreements we make should be on a sounder basis and provide fairer treatment to our American industries and workers than those now in effect. We believe that a nonpartisan board or committee should confine its efforts to developing all the scientific, economic facts, with liberal consideration for the welfare of American workers involved; and the recommendations of such a board should be the basis of the agreements; which, in turn, should be bilateral and subject to Senate approval. Since the record of the trade agreement policy to date reveals it as a general plan for reducing rates of duty with few, if any, increases being made, the employers and employees in the glassware industry are justified in the fear they have for the survival of certain branches glassware manufacture. We refer, chiefly, to those plants making glassware by hand. In these factories the cost of labor alone has risen to the point where it is now 65 to 70 percent of the total cost. This unusually high cost factor has been built up by the cooperation of our industry in following the theories and laws on wages and hour as promoted by the present administration since 1933. The changes in hours and wages since that year have been as follows: In enumerating the foregoing increases in wages we do not mention the increased cost involved in paying 50 percent premium on regular rates for time worked in excess of 42 hours in a week, and in some cases the hours worked over 40 in a week. In connection with this matter of 50 percent for overtime, we would point out the loss sustained by the employer who, for overtime, pays 50 cents premium on labor costs which already constitute 70 percent of his total cost. When paying the increase for overtime, he has raised the percentage to 105 percent or normal cost. Our industry does not come here to complain about its wages and hours, but we are here to oppose the continuation of a foreign trade policy which ignores the importance of those wages and hours in relation to domestic cost and the importation of foreign glassware made under inferior wage and living standards. A policy which on one hand, and then on the other, deliberately aids and assist foreign producers to supply a large part of our American market (by failure to provide adequate protection for those improved wage and hour standards) is already causing distress by unemployment, disruption of the hand-blown branch of the industry and destruction of the very standards it seeks to improve. Employees who have expected to realize better living conditions through higher standards of employment have been unable to continue in regular and steady work. Factories failing to compete with the prices quoted in the American market by foreign producers have closed; others have reduced wages; some workers have left their union and others have raised funds by using their savings, mortgaging their homes and pledging the credit they could command to join in cooperative enterprises which contribute further to the general demoralization of industrial and commercial conditions. In connection with these cooperative efforts in glassware manufacturing on the part of the workmen, we call your attention to the illustrated article appearing on page 51 of the February 1940 issue of the trade journal, the Glass Industry, which gives its report of the conditions responsible for the cooperative factories and the struggie they have made to eke out an existence in competition with foreignmade glassware. To illustrate the extent of the sacrifices made by these cooperatives under the pressure of foreign competition, we submit exhibit labeled Sample No. 1, which is a staple shape of hand-blown glass goblet used in hotels, clubs, restaurants, and so forth. The cost of union labor in this goblet is 87 cents per dozen pieces, nothing being included for the many other items which go to make up the total factory cost of $1.25. This goblet, and similar ones, are reported as being sold in the market by the cooperatives for 75 cents per dozen pieces complete, including the shipping container, the value of which is 10 cents per dozen pieces (including packing material and the cost of packing labor). Hand-made glassware has been imported for many years preceding the advent of the Trade Agreements Act, and American producers have always had difficulty in competing with it. Today, these difficulties have been increased by higher wages, and the reduction of working hours we have mentioned in this statement, and the failure of the negotiators of the trade agreements to recognize (a) That the accurate comparison of imports with domestic production should be dozens or pieces brought in, which would show the number of American productive man-hours displaced. Foreign factory values in terms of dollars do not make for accurate comparison when foreign wages are but a fraction of the rates of those paid in America. (b) That in the effort to maintain American wage and living standards, our employers and employees are entitled to a greater measure of protection than now applies to imported hand-made glassware under the prevailing schedule. We are interested in changing the present plan of formulating trade agreements to one that will be more responsive to the important interests of American production and employment, and to this end we are petitioning the Senate of the United States to vote unfavorably on the bill proposed to extend the Trade Agreements Act for another period. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Dougherty. In connection with the testimony of those representing the glass industry, I desire to insert in the record a telegram addressed to the clerk of the committee by Mr. Harry H. Cook, international first vice president, American Flint Glass Workers' Union of North America, Toledo, Ohio. Mr. F. M. JOHNSON, TOLEDO, OHIO, March 1, 1940. Clerk, Committee on Finance, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. It being utterly impossible for us to appear before the honorable committee now conducting hearings on the extension of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Act to orally present for the American Flint Glass Workers' Union of North America, speaking for the more than 35,000 workers in the flint-glass industry, the serious effects of glassware manufactured in foreign countries under cheap labor conditions, being imported to our shores before and since the negotiation of trade treaties, we feel compelled to vigorously protest against the continuation of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Act beyond its expiration date, June 12, 1940. The serious effects of importation have been repeatedly stated in brief filed and otherwise in the past by the American Flint Glass Workers' Union, hopeful, always of securing adequate protection for our industry and the employment opportunities of the workers. We are now confronted seriously with a 10 to 25 percent wage reduction, demanded by one of our large factories because of conditions created largely by importation of glassware in competitive lines under reciprocal trade agreements. To submit to this reduction means the complete disruption of this particular branch of the glass industry, namely, the thin-blown hand-made glassware branch. To resist it means a serious strike with loss of employment and tremendous financial loss. There are other similar aspects. What this glass industry, one of the oldest in the country needs, is more security and encouragement and not to be constantly harassed by the prospect of downward revision in tariff rates under trade agreements with foreign countries that have already demoralized the glassware markets and destroyed the employment |