Page images
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

DEAR MR. FAHY: I have your letter of December 4 regarding the loans of personnel and the reports on Board cooperation with the Civil Liberties Committee in reference to my letter of October 12. I am very much surprised to read the second paragraph of your letter wherein you state that after the reports of the regional offices were transmitted to Washington at your request they were returned to the regional offices.

In my letter of October 12, in the first paragraph I requested as follows: "Will you please furnish me with a copy of all the reports made by regional directors, regional attorneys, and any other employees to the Board, or to the secretaries relating to and covering services rendered by employees of the Board to the La Follette Committee." Will you please see that the reports that you had in your possession are returned by the regional directors to you and that they will be made available to me as soon as they are received.

Very truly yours,

EDMUND M. TOLAND, General Counsel.

EXHIBIT NO. 1608-V

EDMUND M. TOLAND, Esquire,

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,
Washington, D. C., December 20, 1939.

General Counsel, Special Committee to

Investigate the National Labor Relations Board,

535 Old House Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. TOLAND: I hope you will pardon my delay in replying to your letter of December 7 regarding reports of Regional Directors covering services rendered by employees of the Board to the La Follette Committee. You have expressed surprise as to the contents of the second paragraph of my letter to you of December 4 wherein I stated, referring to the last paragraph of your letter of November 21, that the Regional Offices had at my request, after receipt of your letter of October 12, transmitted to Washington files containing copies of their reports to the Board relating to and covering services rendered by employees of the Board to the La Follette Committee, and that after completion of my reply to your letter of October 12, and the tabulations forwarded therewith, the Regional files were returned to the Regional Offices. The confusion about this matter is no doubt due to the fact that in my letter of December 4 I referred to the material which had been returned to the Regional Offices as files "containing copies of their reports to the Board," etc. As a matter of fact, these files which were returned to the Regional Offices did not contain reports of the Regional Offices to the Board concerning services rendered by employees of the Board to the La Follette Committee, and accordingly were not within the request of your letter of October 12. These files had been sent at our request, after receipt of your letter of October 12, to aid us in complying with the second paragraph of your letter of October 12 calling for a list of names of employees who had rendered services to the La Follette Committee, the number of days engaged in that work, etc. Since they were files which were in the Regional Offices and were merely temporarily sent on here to aid us in tabulating the information you had requested, I authorized their return to the Regional Offices where they belonged.

Under the above circumstances, I respectfully ask that you reconsider the request of your letter of December 7, especially as some of these files belong to the La Follette Committee itself and raise the same question about which I wrote you under date of December 7.

Yours sincerely,

CHARLES FAHY, General Counsel.

Mr. CHARLES FAHY,

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE THE

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,
Washington, D. C., December 27, 1939.

General Counsel, National Labor Relations Board,

Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. FAHY: I have your letter of December 20, 1939, regarding the reports of Regional Directors, covering services rendered by employees of the Board to the La Follette Committee.

I am certain that my request of October 12 was clear as to what I wanted, and the Committee is entitled to have, to receive, and to examine any files in the possession or in the custody of the National Labor Relations Board. Whether the contents of the same are made public, is another matter. As a matter of fact, we are still waiting for the material that was not contained in the files in the Seattle office when received by us that was there when Mr. Brock and Mr. Randall examined the same.

The Board was perfectly agreeable to turn over Mr. Blankenhorn's files, but it is difficult for me to understand the different conclusion they reached in regard to the files in the St. Louis office and the files in the other Regionai offices.

Will you therefore ask that the reports of the Regional Directors be made available to us as soon as possible?

Very truly yours,

EMT/sg

EDMUND M. TOLAND, General Counsel.

EDMUND M. TOLAND, Esquire,

EXHIBIT NO. 1608-W

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,

Washington, D. C., December 20, 1939.

General Counsel, Special Committee to
Investigate the National Labor Relations Board,

535 Old House Office Building, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. TOLAND: Yours letter of November 25 asks for a list of cases which have been transferred to the Board for decision without an intermediate report because of protests received on the manner in which the Trial Examiner has conducted the hearing.

Inquiry has been made of Mr. Emerson, Mr. Pratt and Mr. Witt on this subject. Only two cases have been discovered in which protests received on the manner in which the Trial Examiner conducted the hearing were a factor in the decision of the Board to transfer the case without intermediate report. These cases were:

Bercut-Richards Packing Company, et al, C-883 et al.
Washougal Woolen Mills, C-469

There may have been other cases. If they come to my attention I will inform you of them.

Yours sincerely,

[blocks in formation]

DEAR MR. FAHY: With further reference to your letter of December 20 in answer to my letter of November 25, will you please advise me the name or names of the individuals protesting against the conduct of the Trial Exam

iners in the cases listed in your letter. I note you say there may have been other cases and if they come to your attention, you will inform me of them. Will you be kind enough to have an inquiry made in order that I might be completely advised of all of the cases that were made Board cases without an intermediate report because protests had been made concerning the conduct or the manner in which the Trial Examiner conducted the hearing, and of course, I want to know the caption of the case, the name of the Trial Examiner, and the individual protesting.

[blocks in formation]

General Counsel, Special Committee to Investigate the

National Labor Relations Board,

House Office Building,

Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. TOLAND: This is in reply to your letter of December 27, 1939, requesting the name or names of the individuals protesting against the conduct of the Trial Examiners in the cases listed in my letter of December 20, 1939, and also requesting that an inquiry be made to ascertain the names of any other cases that were transferred to the Board "without an Intermediate Report because protests had been made concerning the conduct or the manner in which the Trial Examiner conducted the hearing."

My letter of December 20th listed two cases, Bercut-Richards Packing Company, et al, C-883, et al., and Washougal Woolen Mills, C-469. The files in the former case have been in your possession and were returned on January 5, 1940; the files in the latter case are still in your possession and we have so far been unable to secure them upon request.

In the Bercut-Richards case, a protest concerning the Trial Examiner's conduet was filed by the Central Labor Union of Santa Clara County, California, in the form of a resolution dated July 28, 1938. We are advised by Mr. Woodruff J. Deem that this document is in your possession in the folder marked "Charles Wood" in Chief Trial Examiner Pratt's files.

In the Washougal Woolen Mills case, I am advised by Chief Trial Examiner Pratt that the protest concerning the Trial Examiner's conduct of the case came from the charging union and the Board's attorney. In the absence of the files, which are now in your possession, no more specific information can be furnished.

Further, in compliance with your request, another inquiry has been made as to the existence of other cases transferred to the Board because of protests concerning the Trial Examiner's conduct of the hearing. We have thus far been able to find no such cases other than the two cases discussed above and listed in my letter of December 20, 1939.

Sincerely yours,

CHARLES FAHY, General Counsel.

EXHIBIT NO. 1608-Z

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,
Washington, D. C., February 7, 1940.

Honorable HOWARD W. SMITH,

Chairman, Special Committee to Investigate the National Labor Relations Board,

535 Old House Office Building, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR CONGRESSMAN SMITH: On February 1, at page 400 of the record of the hearings being conducted by your Committee, you requested a breakdown of the employees as between Civil Service and non-Civil Service employees. I am glad to enclose herewith a tabulation which I believe gives the information you desire.

Yours sincerely,

Enc.

CHARLES FAHY, General Counsel.

National Labor Relations Board, Personnel, December 31, 1939

[blocks in formation]

Source: Compiled by Herbert Glaser, Chief Clerk, National Labor Relations Board.

EXHIBIT NO. 1608-AA

Honorable HOWARD W. SMITH,

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,
Washington, D. C., February 12, 1940.

Chairman, Special Committee to Investigate the National Labor Relations Board,

House Office Building, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR CONGRESSMAN SMITH: At page 555 of the record (Vol. II, No. 14) you granted permission to me to have printed as an exhibit a statement on certain cases criticized by Mr. Green in his testimony before the Committee on January 25, 1940. I enclose herewith the statement covering these cases, signed by the Chairman of the Board, and beg to ask that you will kindly instruct the reporter to print this statement as an exhibit as of the day on which the permission to insert the statement was granted.

[blocks in formation]

DEAR MR. FAHY: This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of February 12 addressed to Judge Smith, together with the enclosed statement to be printed as an exhibit.

I am again going to bring to the attention of the Committee their policy prohibiting the filing of statements. In view of Judge Smith's permission, the enclosure will be filed as an exhibit.

Very truly yours,

EDMUND M. TOLAND, General Counsel.

[blocks in formation]

DEAR MR. FAHY: Will you please furnish the Committee at the earliest possible time with a list of all employees of the National Labor Relations Board who were appointed on a temporary basis and subsequently took unassembled and/or non-competitive Civil Service examinations, together with the number of times such employees have taken such examinations, and the present status of all such employees.

Very truly yours,

AGH: CG

HOWARD W. SMITH.

EXHIBIT NO. 1608-AD

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,
Washington, D. C., February 19, 1940.

Honorable HOWARD W. SMITH,

Chairman. Special Committee to Investigate the National Labor Relations Board,

House Office Building, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR CONGRESSMAN SMITH: Under date of February 16 you asked that I furnish the Committee at the earliest possible time a list of all employees of the Board who were appointed on a temporary basis and subsequently took unassembled and/or noncompetitve Civil Service examinations, together with the number of times such employees have taken such examinations, and the present status of all such employees.

In compliance with your request, I beg to advise that the following persons were appointed on a temporary basis and subsequently took unassembled and/or noncompetitve Civil Service examinations:

David J. Saposs

Rosemary S. Macke

Each of the above named employees took such examinations once.

The present status of David J. Saposs is Chief Industrial Economist, P-7, $6500.

The present status of Rosemary S. Macke is Clerk-Stenographer in the office at Cincinnati, Ohio, CAF 4.

[blocks in formation]

DEAR MR. FAHY: With further reference to the letter of Judge Smith, dated February 16, please furnish me with the names of all of the employees who now have civil service status who did not have any civil service status at the time of their appointment, and, if there are any such employees, if they took

« PreviousContinue »