h. The above-named employer has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of section 8(a), subsections (1) and of the National Labor Relations Act, . (3) (List subsections) and these unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. Basis of the Charge (Be specific as to facts, names, addresses, plants involved, dates, places, etc.) ".. On or about August 26, 1981, the above named Employer failed and refused to rehire its employees, Carmerino Suarez, Dina Arana, Nancy Lopez, Rosael Echevarria, Alexandrina Suarez, Rosanno Delgado, Rosalina Calcador, George Breland, and Maria Figueroa because said employees engaged in activities on behalf of Plastic, Mounders' and. Novelty Workers' Union, Local 132, I.L.G.W.U. By the above and other acts, the above-named employer has interfered with, restrained, and coerced employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the ACL 3. Full Name of Party Filing Charge (If labor organization, give full name, including local name and number) PLASTIC, MOULDERS', and NOVELTY WORKERS' UNION, 4a. Address (Street and number, city, State, and ZIP code) 275 Seventh Avenue New York, New York 10001 4b. Telephone No. AI 5-2530 5. Full Name of National or International Labor Organization of Which It Is an Affiliate or Constituent Unit (To be filled in when charge is filed by a labor organization) FI-C INTERNATIONAL LADIES' GARMENT WORKERS' UNION AFL-CIO I declare that I have read the above charge and that the statements therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. RILLFULLY FALSE STATEMENTS ON THIS CHARGE CAN BE PUNISHED BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT (U.S. CODE, TITLE 18, CC: Stanley Goodman. Esq. 450 Seventh Avenue, N.Y., N. Y. EXHIBIT D PREPARED STATEMENT OF SAM J. ERVIN, JR. STATEMENT ON SENATE 613 AMENDMENT TO THE HOBBS ANTI-EXTORTION ACT Mr. Chairman, I am taking this opportunity to present to you my views on an extremely important piece of legislation now pending before your Subcommittee.. The bill in question, S. 613, introduced by Senators Thurmond, Hatch, and East on March 3, 1981, would amend 18 U.S.c. § 1951, commonly known as the Hobbs Act, and would, in my opinion, eliminate a glaring imbalance that presently exists in the scheme of federal criminal law. I am writing in the hope that my views may prove helpful to you and the other members of the Subcommittee in your deliberations on this important issue. In 1942, The need for S. 613 becomes crystal clear if we briefly consider the history of the legislation leading up to the Hobbs Act. In 1934, Congress passed the Anti-Racketeering Act. That law forbade violent and coercive conduct in interstate commerce. The 1934 law, however, contained a statutory exemption from prosecution applicable to a bona fide employee who used force to obtain payment of wages from a bona fide employer. in the case of U.S. v Local 807, Teamsters, 315 U.S. 521, the Supreme Court of the United States interpreted that statutory exemption in an astoundingly overbroad manner, holding that violent conduct by a union member could not constitute the basis for a federal indictment if the union member was arguably attempting to obtain higher wages by such conduct. Shocked by the "end justifies the means" test enunciated by the Supreme Court in Local 807, Congress, in 1946, sought to rectify the situation by passing the Hobbs Act. That law, on its face, prohibits all violence and extortion that obstructs interstate commerce. By omitting from the text of the Hobbs Act any statutory exemptions, Congress made clear its intention to have a law of universal application, and to prevent the courts from carving out the sort of sweeping exceptions typified by Local 807. Until 1973, anyone familiar with the language and history of the Hobbs Act would have reasonably concluded that it was a members used violence and extortion to achieve legitimate union objectives. In my opinion, the Enmons decision is a classic example of bad law. No justification for the position taken by the Supreme Court can be found in the language of the Hobbs Act, in its legislative history, or in the events that led to its enactment. Other federal statutes do not permit criminal conduct to go unpunished based upon the criminal's motivation or identity. Violence and destruction as incidents of labor-management disputes are sadly familiar in America today, and the senseless emasculation of the Hobbs Act by the Enmons decision destroyed a powerful tool for combating such excess. S. 613 would simply and succinctly rectify the gross imbalance in the application of the Hobbs Act that has resulted from the Enmons decision. The language of the bill makes clear that federal jurisdiction extends to criminal acts that "take place in the course of a legitimate business or labor dispute or in pursuit of a legitimate business or labor objective." As we are both aware, organized labor has voiced loud objection to S. 613. I would like, at this point, to address briefly that aspect of the situation confronting your Subcommittee. The principal objections raised by organized labor are three: (1) that the objective of S. 613 is to make minor picket-line altercations federal crimes; (2) that S. 613 is unnecessary since state and local laws are adequate to deal with labor violence; and (3) that S. 613 is unfair in that it would penalize the employee and not the employer. All three of these objections lack merit. (1) The a aument gument that the purpose of the pending bill is to make the Hobbs Act applicable to minor scuffles collapses when one considers that the bill is intended to undo the harm wrought by the Enmons decision, and that Enmons did not involve a minor scuffle; it involved "firing high-powered rifles at three company transformers, draining the oil from a company transformer, and blowing up a transformer substation owned by the company." 410 U.S. at 398. The bill is designed to make emphatically clear that federal criminal jurisdiction extends to that sort of major criminal act. (2) The "state and local laws are adequate" argument yields to a simple common sense test. Local authorities frequently lack the resources necessary to deal effectively with major acts of violence, and, furthermore, are often unwilling to act when to do so would force them to take a position against one or more competing local interests. An effective Hobbs Act is necessary to insure a reliable mechanism for dealing with large-scale industrial violence. (3) The argument that the bill would penalize one side and not the other in a labor-management dispute is simply not true. Its provisions apply to any person who obstructs, delays, or affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce, by robbery, extortion, or serious violence to person or property. For the reasons set forth above, I respectfully urge you and the members of your Subcommittee to act expeditiously with regard to S. 613, a piece of legislation that this nation urgently needs. STATEMENT OF DONALD T. FRITZ OF J.T. FRITZ AND SONS My name is Donald Fritz, and before I begin my story, I'd like to say that I appreciate the chance to come here today to share my experience with the members of this committee. I just hope that after these hearings end the necessary changes in the law will be made -- so that other Americans do not have to go through what my employees and I went through at the hands of union militants. For me, the story begins in 1951, when upon discharge from the Navy, I joined my father in the business of erecting fences. mostly it In 1954, when my father died, I took over the company, J.T. Fritz and Sons of Lutherville, Maryland. Early on, as head of a nonunion business, I was confronted by numerous incidents of intimidation and harassment from elements of Local 16 of the Ironworkers Union in Baltimore involved threats of what would happen if I continued to operate without using unionized ironworkers. Their message, expressed in the most foul and vile language, was clear either I hire from Local 16 or get a steel H-beam wrapped around my neck. - When the threats included promises to tear up a job we were working on the state and local police responded by not responding -- never -- not once were any police sent to at least keep an eye on the situation I know because many a night my brother and I used to stand guard with loaded rifles just to make sure the militants from Local 16 were not able to make good on their threats. - Finally, even though state and local authorities refused to help us, things began to settle down. I guess the people from Local 16 realized we were not going to be intimidated and we intended to protect our property and to run our business. Still, in looking back, the whole thing represented a pretty sad state of affairs. There is something very wrong when a businessman in the 20th Century in what is supposed to be the greatest democracy on earth has to guard his property with a gun because he can't look to the law for protection. Things are out of kilter when the representatives of a union can, without fear of punishment, use the most violent and threatening language as a means to intimidate people into accepting their demands. However, I'm convinced that by standing up to the Ironworkers Union in those early years, we bought ourselves a period of relative peace. But even with that peace, always in the back of my mind was a sense of dread, a fear the intimidation business would begin anew and that the next time the threats would be followed by some real violence. In the summer of 1974, the worst of my fears were realized when the Ironworkers Union began a drive in the Baltimore area to organize the industrial and commercial chain-link fence industry. Both The first victims were our two major competitors. had refused to sign contracts with Local 16. Rather than just hurl threats, goons from 16 vandalized equipment, threw rocks at the cars of company officials, and beat up a number of workers. Immediately after one bloody attack, an official of the company under siege (Anchor Post) asked a business agent from Local 16 at the scene if all the violence 92-211 0-82--18 |