NINTH REGION-APRIL 1939 INTER-OFFICE COMMUNICATION NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD MAY 18, 1939. To: Mr. J. J. Kaufman. From: Philip G. Phillips, Region IX. Subject: Comments on Current Labor Situation. The amendments to the Act furnished the chief interest of labor unions. and employers, as well as this office during the month. We have had unusually fine cooperation from civic groups, universities, and others arranging for discussions and speeches. The locals in the A. F. of L. have been most cooperative and while few of the officials are willing to go on record because of their fears of reprisals by the National organization, none of them has backed the Federation proposals. We had a most unusual ending to one of the C. I. O.-A. F. of L. quarrels The A. F. of L. was the original union on the scene. The C. I. O. took over a company union and signed a closed shop contract. Charges were filed but as a result of conferences between the heads of the national organizations involved, it was agreed that rather than bring an inter-union quarrel to the attention of the public the unions would submit to arbitration the question of whether it was fair to force the members of the A. F. of L. into the C. I. O. by the closed shop agreement. Of course, the C. I. O. denied any unfair labor practices and such have not been proved. The coal strike continues to occupy the attention of this office. Strangely enough, due to the strike we have had less cases this month than ever before. because there are no unfair labor practices in mines when they are not being operated. The Progressives have filed a few spasmodic charges that their members have been locked out and are attempting in a few mines where they have membership to use the Act. Outside of the Logan fields in West Virginia. there is no evidence that the Progressives are doing any organizing or are actually interested in what the United Mine Workers do. Outside of the coal strike there have been few labor disturbances in the region. There were two strikes of major importance, both of which were settled with the good offices of the Regional Office. PHILIP G. PHILLIPS. FIFTH REGION-MAY 1939 COMMENT ON CURRENT LABOR SITUATION IN THIS TERRITORY During May we opened forty-three new cases and closed forty-one. Of the new cases, thirty-three (23 "C" and 10 "R") were filed by affiliates of the American Federation of Labor; nine (6 "C" and 3 "R") were filed by the C. I. O.; and one "C" was filed by an individual. The section 12 proceeding in the hills of western Virginia developed into a farce. The District Court Judge permitted the employer's counsel to saturate the jury with a scathing denunciation of labor organizations in general, and Board agents in particular. Timid objections on the part of the U. S. Attorney in charge of the government's case were vigorously overruled by the presiding Jurist. After the harangue of the employer's counsel, the Judge took it upon himself to find that our examiner, who had been threatened with a loaded 38 revolver, had not been interfered with for the reason that he had finally taken care of the duties of his office. In that part of the country apparently, it will be necessary for Board agents to present blood-stained clothing, maimed bodies and irrefutable evidence of physical torture before a charge of interference will be entertained. The Judge did not believe it necessary for the defense to present its case, and directed a verdict of acquittal for the defendant (the employer). That closed the case. Examiner Penello, always the gentleman, returned the 38, no longer loaded. to the Gargantuan employer. Cases in the District of Columbia claim more and more of our time, and although the situations generally are small and often unique, the complexity and difficulties of working out adjustments tax the ingenuity of the office. Fortunately, the warring factions in labor's camp, although often at loggerheads between themselves, still cooperate rather effectively with us. We are running into an increasing number of cases, in which refusal to bargain issues are complicated through the existence of petitions circulated in the plant and amounting to resignations from the union, which are presented to us as the employer's defense. Information seldom discloses links between the company and the petition. The technique has been effective thus far, and we are still looking for an adequate counter-technique. From: Frank H. Bowen, Director, Seventh Region, Detroit, Michigan. The fight in the U. A. W. A. has kept them so busy that the record for the past month shows that we have negotiated over twice as many settlements as there were new cases filed. Hearings are going on now in representation cases affecting plants in which both factions of the U. A. W. A. are represented. As a consequence, a hearing that would ordinarily require two days to complete strings out for weeks. It is a beautiful example of lawyers impressing their clients with the fact that they are earning their fees. FHB rg FRANK H. BOWEN. ELEVENTH REGION-MAY 1939 COMMENT Why report on minor doings out in the regions when the big show is going on in Washington. Every employee of the Board should be proud of the masterly manner in which the Chairman and the General Counsel presented the case of the Board before the Senate Labor Committee. Every hearer and reader must realize by their testimony that the affairs of our Board are not handled in a hit or miss fashion, that the men at the top know all the answers because, from the very beginning, they have never dodged any of the questions! The Board's policies, its decisions, the support of the Courts, all mean that the work of the Board was founded on a strong secure logical base, which can be likened to the foundations of the Great Pyramids and similar to the pyramids that have withstood the test of time and storm, the Board's undertakings cannot be toppled over by the anti-union blasts of Senator Burke, or the narrow minded rantings of Wm. Green. If political dynamite does not undermine the future work of the Board, I see nothing to fear from the investigations, except a few minor amendments: SIXTEENTH REGION-MAY 1939 INTER-OFFICE COMMUNICATION To: National Labor Relations Board. From: Edwin A. Elliott, Director, 16th Region. JUNE 1, 1939. This month we received seventeen new cases and closed sixteen. This is the first month for some time that we have closed fewer cases than the number received. Our record of hearings is still favorable, 5.6% of the cases received since July 1, 1938, have gone to hearings. The percentage of cases going to hearings since the passage of the act is 18.9%. The election of Maury Maverick as Mayor of San Antonio has given the workers in that area great encouragement, and this office enjoys the same feeling. San Antonio has been famous for its opposition to unionism. Dallas, Texas, is one of the prize open-shop cities in the country, but we have been encouraged recently because some contracts have been negotiated between parties that had 8 (5) charges before our Board. Surprisingly enough, two of these contracts covered two newspapers, one of which has been very hostile in its attitude toward the Act and toward the Board. The strike on the Atlantic Coast has had some violent reverberations in the Texas Gulf Coast area, but no charges have been presented to this office growing out of the situation. We have been the recipient of invitations from several groups to present the work of the Board, and the local committee on defense of the National Labor Relations Act is becoming active over the radio. There is still a lag in union activity which gives us some concern, though the number of cases presented to us is holding fairly well to the normal number. The hearings in Washington are receiving very little attention in the local papers, but the reading of the daily transcript brings to the staff great encouragement because of the manner in which the Board has been able to present its case. We are proud of the intelligent courage exercised by the Board in this hearing. The Mid-Continent Oil Company case is now beginning its third week in the hearing. We should not be surprised to see this hearing last through the course of the summer. We think, however, some revelations might be made in the course of the hearing which will cause the company to wish to settle. Sincerely, EAE/dm EDWIN A. ELLIOTT, Exhibit No. 1615 [Introduced into evidence in Volume 24, Part I, August 1, 1940] Documents Relating to the Activities of the 12th Regional Office. N. L. R. B. (Milwaukee) DEAR NAT: The confidential memorandum on the above subject, requested by you of me in our telephone conversation of December 23, 1938, will be sent to you via airmail late today or early tomorrow. Very truly yours, DEAR NAT: The following report is made in compliance with your phone request of December 23, 1938. On December 22, 1938 upon receipt of my official designation as Acting Regional Tor, I called the entire regional staff together in my office for a short confer ence. Without any explanations whatsoever, I made the announcement that Mr. Clark was no longer with us and added, that the Board had designated me to act in his place. My remarks came as a pleasant surprise to all except Mr. Hoebreckx and Mrs. Bronson, the former, one of our field examiners, the latter, our chief clerk; to these two my remarks came as a shock. Since December 22, the staff on the whole has cooperated with me in every respect and altho certain problems still exist insofar as Mr. Hoebreckx and Mrs. Bronson are concerned, I am making every effort to straighten these out. On Tuesday I held my first conference with the field examiners. Definitely scheduled weekly conferences with these members of the staff will follow. Tomorrow morning and tomorrow afternoon will witness the first of regularly scheduled weekly conferences with the members of the legal staff and those of the clerical staff. I have for a long time felt that a definite need for certain changes in procedures existed in our Milwaukee office. I have on occasion during Mr. Clark's Regional Directorship made what I believed were constructive suggestions which, I dare say, were not adopted. Now, after a full discussion with the entire staff, and uniess more constructive suggestions are advanced, or mine are shown to be less productive of efficiency than those now in existence they will be tried. I might aid, that what I have in mind involves no departure from what I consider established and recognized office procedure by the Board, and covers in the main the establishment of procedures suggested by the Special Examiners, as well as others which have to my knowledge been productive of a high degree of efficiency in other regions. I shall be happy to keep you informed from time to time, if you desire, as to our experience in these matters. On Saturday morning, December 24, 1938, Mr. Clark appeared at the office. Messrs. Brophy, Komaroff, and I were present to greet him. He was very friendly and gave no evidences of animosity toward any of us. To Komaroff and me he stated that he had conferred with the Board; that the Board had confronted him with certain “indefinite" problems that allegedly existed between it and him; and that since it appeared from the position taken by the Board that he could never see "eye to eye" with it, he "up and resigned" for the mutual benefit of both. To Brophy alone he gave what appears on its face to be the full and accurate story of what transpired at the Board's offices on. Wednesday, December 21. On the twenty-fourth Mr. Clark removed from the office only a few of a number of personal items of his. At that time he asked me if I had given the newspapers a story on his leaving the Board. When I stated that I had not he said that he would take care of the matter. In the afternoon the Wisconsin News carried the enclosed article. There have been only a few queries :bout the "resignation". We have answered these queries by quoting from the enclosed article. His leaving has apparently caused no repercussions in the AFL camp. On Tuesday, December 27, Mr. Clark returned to the office to "clear out completely" as he had promised on the twenty-fourth. Between getting compliance with the Board's order in the Marathon Rubber Products case and completing other necessary tasks, I checked him out. Before packing he laid the items which he took on the table in full view. I questioned none of them because all appeared to be his own personal materials. While he was packing his grip I went to the personnel files, paged through them, and not finding a file there for him. I asked him if he ever kept one. He stated that he had not. Not knowing whether he had or not, but rationalizing that he must have had some personnel correspondence concerning himself, I left the room and asked Mrs. Bronson his "confidential" secretary what she knew about the matter. Her answers were very unsatisfactory. I immediately instructed her to ask Mr. Clark where his own personnel correspondence was if she knew that he had any. After a few words with him she returned and stated that he had told her that he had taken nothing but his own personal things. While talking to her Mr. Clark left the office. I immediately grilled Mrs. Bronson and learned from her that Mr. Clark kept his own personnel correspondence as well as some general office personnel correspondence in his Personal and Confidential file as well as in 'other places in his desk. The Personal and Confidential file as well as the general personnel correspondence he had taken from the office. On the same day I sent a letter to Mr. Clark tactfully requesting him for the office materials which he had taken. He has not answered my letter to date. Last Tuesday night I called him at his home and renewed my request. He obstinately replied that he had not taken anything that belonged in the files of the office; after a short argument he promised to call me as soon as he had searched thru the materials which he had taken. I have not heard from him yet. A search of the files and numerous discussions with Mrs. Bronson definitely reveal that he removed not only all his own personnel correspondence but also certain general personnel correspondence as well as all the materials in the Robert Rissman matter. To my knowledge no other office materials of any kin whatsoever were removed by Mr. Clark. Since Mr. Clark left the office his automobile license plates as well as his November expense check have arrived through the mails. Am I to hold these until I get satisfaction on my requests for the personnel correspondence? his last visit to the office he promised to submit to me for my approval his December expense voucher. To date he has not submitted the same. Am I authorized to hold that up if it comes until the other matter is straightened out? I am expecting your advice in the matter. I am interested in recovering the Robert Rissman materials for the Board, for the reason, that I have recently been lead to believe, that the evidence they contain against Mr. Rissman was solicited by Mr. Clark from the AFL. Before the recent announcements of the resignations of Mr. Witte and Father Haas from the State Labor Relations Board there was circulated a semi-official rumor that Mr. Clark would be appointed to the State Board. That rumor is now dissipated. With kind personal regards, FPM/fbm FREDERICK P. MEIT. (Pencil notation: Enclosed Dec. 24 Wis. News clipping "N. S. Clark resigns from NLRB.") INTER-OFFICE COMMUNICATION Personal and confidential. JANUARY 11, 1939. To: Frederick P. Mett, Twelfth Region. DEAR FRED: Thank you for your confidential memorandum of January 2 I am glad that the episode went off as smoothly as it apparently did. I do not think that you have any authority to retain Clark's automobile license plates until he returns the files and you should let him have his plates as soon as possible. As for the November expense check, that should be returned to Calkins immediately, inasmuch as it should never have been sent to your office in the first place, nor should you hold up Clark's December expense voucher when it comes in. You should check it as soon as possible and transmit it to Mr. Glaser immediately. I agree with you that we should have the files in the Rissman matter at least. Unless the files have been returned in the meantime, 'you should make a formal demand for them in writing and then report further to the Board after Clark has had an opportunity to act on your demand. I should appreciate hearing from you further concerning any matter that arises, and in any event I should like to have your general reports from time to time along the lines of your memorandum of January 5. Sincerely, Twelfth Region NAT. PERSONAL and CONFIDENTIAL. To: Nathan Witt, Secretary, National Labor Relations Board. JANUARY 23, 1939. I am enclosing herewith copies of two self-explanatory letters dated December 27, 1938 and January 20, 1939 respectively, and adressed to Mr. Nathaniel S. Clark. During the first week in January, 1939, I called Mr. Clark at his home and asked him to return the materials requested in my letter of December 27, 1938. During our conversation Mr. Clark promised to call on me at the office on January 13, |