Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

List of drivers not working, on furlough because of lack of freight

25. B.T.

26. A.W.

27. R.H_

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

93. H.H

[blocks in formation]

Jan. 2, 1960.

Do.

Do.

Jan. 3, 1960.
Do.
Jan. 5, 1960.
Do.
Jan. 6, 1960.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

43. G.H

44. R.P.

45. V.R. 46. D.W.

47. F.D_ 48. A.D. 49. W.S 50. P.A.R.. 51. W.D__. 52. C.S.. 53. W.D.S. 54. R.S 55. H.B_ 56. F.L.R

Do.

June 16, 1955. July 19, 1955. Sept. 7, 1955.

Do. Sept. 12, 1955. Sept. 15, 1955. Do. Sept. 16, 1955. Sept. 29, 1955. Oct. 1, 1955. Oct. 11, 1955. Oct. 25, 1955.

Do.

Oct. 28, 1955. Nov. 1, 1955.

57. D.J.

58. W.C

59. C.S_

Nov. 2, 1955.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

67. H.M.

68. G.S 69. C.W.

Do. Sept. 18, 1956.

131. R.G.B.

132. J.L.R_

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Do.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

138. L.F.

Do.

Do.

139. F.V.

Do.

140. L.S.D_

Jan. 30, 1960.

Feb. 1, 1960. Feb. 2, 1960.

As can be readily seen, here are men with as much as 8 years continuous experience in the same employment who are now looking for work, drawing unemployment compensation and otherwise attempting to survive with little likelihood of ever returning to their employment because of the financial inability of the employer to continue to operate his business. This is the direct result of selective rate cutting in a competitive transportation field.

As a specific example, No. 25 on the above seniority list was an employee of Commercial Carriers until the 9th day of February 1961. He had been employed for approximately 8 years, from March 20, 1953, until February 9, 1961. He earned approximately $8,000 per year in wages from 1956 through 1960 and purchased a tractor in October of 1956 with a small downpayment, and payments of $450 per month which he leased to his employer, Commercial Carriers. The tractor's total cost was $17,800 of which approximately $2,500 was owed on the date he was laid off because of the lack of work that could be supplied by his employer. The tractor has a quick sale value today of approximately $5,000 and has been sitting idle for a period of more than a month and a-half. This employee has become reemployed as a machinist in Denver, Colo., and presently earns approximately $6,500 a year out of which he must make the payments of $450 per month on his tractor while he is waiting and hoping that his job may again become available and the tractor may again be useful to him. He is, of course, making an attempt to lease the tractor to others or have the tractor driven by one of the 24 employees who presently work for Commercial Carriers and may have some success in deriving some income from that piece of equipment.

This employee estimates that there are approximately 50 small truckowners and lease operators who were employed by Commercial Carriers and at present have their tractors sitting idle.

As another specific example, we shall look at the case of employee No. 29. D. B. was employed by the company for approximately 7 years and had an average net income in excess of $9,000 per year during that period. He also owned a tractor from 1954 until the date that he was laid off. During the period from late 1957 until November of 1958, he owned two tractors, both of which were leased to his employer, one driven by himself during the course of his employment and the other driven by others in the employ of his company. However, between March 1958 and November 1958, during which time the large railroad hauls of automobiles began, one of his tractors sat idle for 10 months, and it was necessary for him to sell it for a price of about $9,000, which paid off the debt on that tractor and reduced the debt on the tractor which he was driving.

This employee was in a better financial condition than many others because prior to February 9, 1961, the date he was laid off, his remaining tractor had been fully paid for, and he was not saddled with large monthly payments. Although this employee is not yet working, he refuses to draw unemployment compensation and presently has his application in at several trucking companies for a job along with a lease for his tractor.

Other specific examples of the decrease of employment throughout the Colorado-Wyoming areas may be shown by the following employment records in regard to other common carriers active in this area.

[blocks in formation]

NOTE. An adjustment of 220 employees should be made to the figures cited from June 4, 1958, to December 16, 1959, because of the movement of part of D-C's operations to Los Angeles, Calif., and the movement of 220 drivers to that area.

[blocks in formation]

NOTE.-26 percent of the line drivers were unemployed due to piggyback operations. 3. Merchants Motor Freight

[blocks in formation]

NOTE. A decrease of 40 percent in employment due to piggyback operations. 4. Burlington Freightlines

[blocks in formation]

NOTE. A decrease of 22 percent in employment due to piggyback operations.

All of the three drivers were laid off in January of 1961; they live in Casper and are all presently drawing unemployment compensation and were employed for not less than 4 years by Burlington. These three drivers earned approximately $7,000 per year and have been unable to find any employment since their layoff in the early part of 1961.

5. Ringsby Truck Lines

Although Ringsby has employed from 150 to 155 employees regularly since 1958 and has not reduced the number of employees because of lack of freight, a look at the number of piggyback trailers which were shipped in and out of Denver, Colo., for Ringsby on March 25 and 26, 1961, will indicate the effect of this operation upon the employment of line drivers. The trailer number, tonnage, and its destination for the dates of March 25 and 26, 1961, are set out below. Mar. 25 and 26, 1961-Ringsby Truck Lines, Inc.

[blocks in formation]

Mr. FLEISCHLI. When the revenue department is down on their revenue from traffic over the road, then our business, of course, it is pretty obvious. I think probably I could go into an awful lot of detail, but there are many, many people affected by this thing in our industry and we are very concerned with it. The gallonage that we have lost is something terrific and every time we lose a gallon of gasoline sale that is going down on the railroad, the State of Wyoming is losing a nickel, the Federal Government is losing 4 cents a gallon, and I am not sure, Senator, I have no idea because I don't know anything about the railroad business, but I bet the taxes the railroad pays to the Federal Government and the State of Wyoming is nowhere in comparison to what we have collected for you in the past.

Senator MCGEE. Again, the record will have to speak for itself from the statement you have made. Be sure and leave your figures with the reporter. Did you have a prepared statement?

Mr. FLEISCHLI. I have a prepared statement of my own. I just picked up the balance of the figures from the department of revenue. Senator MCGEE. Leave the prepared statement with the reporter as well.

Mr. FLEISCHLI. I would give you this figure, and our business is not too secretive, I guess. In January the purchase from Commercial Carriers alone, to my company, was $9,943.83 gasoline, lubrication services, diesel fuel. In January of 1961, $3,310.17, a drop of over $6,000 in 1 year.

Senator MCGEE. I ought to add, after your testimony, that we have grouped the morning witnesses so that individuals in general representing the questioning group, who have some deep concern in this, will appear pretty much in a body, and then those who have an interest in this from the other end of the line, that is, the railroads, will appear as a group. Then spokesmen officially for railroad management and the railroads in general will appear. We have tried to group them together so that related statements can hang in the same context rather than to alternate between the various segments, which would be like watching a tennis match, I suppose.

Thank you very much, Mr. Fleischli.
(Information referred to above follows:)

pension policies, particularly, I think they are wrong, I think they are procedurally wrong, in that the time element after a rate is initially filed is some 18 days, that you must make the protest some 6 days after, then another 2 or 3 days in order to have a hearing.

Now, the ICC, of course, never actually looks at these rates. It is a clerical thing, it is being done by rate clerks, and it is something that perhaps because of the time element involved is not properly looked into.

Now, I think the report of the other Subcommittee on Intercoastal Affairs is an excellent report. I think it points out to anybody who is interested in this problem exactly what does occur with the selective price cutting.

Senator MCGEE. Is your point there, Mr. Myrick, that the existing provision that permits this greater latitude in ratemaking for the railroads for competitive reasons should be returned completely to where it was before, or is there a margin in there?

Mr. MYRICK. I think there is a margin in there, Senator. Here is what I am concerned about. From an overall policy standpoint, I don't think from our other laws-take the Federal Trade Commission as an example and the way it controls in this country, although it is certainly not applicable in this situation, but the theory behind that and the cases behind that theory is not to destroy competition. The competition is protected for competition sake alone.

Now, in this situation we are destroying competition within a completely controlled area, and it is something that is very vital to the national defense as set forth in the policy, in the public policy alone, that we must have a transportation system. In this specific instance where we are allowing discriminatory price cutting-now, I am not talking about a cut in price which can be justified and can be shown, but I think some of the Federal Trade Commission rulings and the cases as set out-I would like to cite as an example there, perhaps, some wording out of the Morton Salt case, an FTC case which I think shows some of the overall public policy of the United States in this regard, in protecting competition, and in an area where it is not even completely controlled and where we are protecting competition for competition sake alone.

Mr. BARTON. That doesn't apply to the interstate carriers operating under the Interstate Commerce Act, does it?

Mr. MYRICK. What was that?

Mr. BARTON. This materiel you are about to read.

Mr. MYRICK. What I am trying to do, Mr. Barton, is from a philo sophical standpoint and a public policy standpoint only to show-I know that this is not in effect something that we are talking about, but I am trying to show the overall public policy of the United States in relation to our other laws and how the ICC-well, the interpretation of the national transportation policy, in my opinion, has subverted some of the other policies of this country and is at least crossways with them.

Now, in that particular case, which was a 1948 case, in the definition of the type of price discrimination which tends to destroy competi tion, the Supreme Court concluded that if the price discrimination was sufficient to influence the resale price of the buyer, the discrimination substantially lessens competition and was therefore unlawful.

« AnteriorContinuar »