strike in the city of Milwaukee. The State Labor Board had issued an Order, which, according to him, had been dissolved on the consummation between the Union and the garages. However, in carrying out the provisions of the contract, The companies have engaged in unfair labor practices and have vitiated the entire effect of the Orders including continued discharges and failure to reinstate employees ordered to be reinstated by the WLRB. He desired to know whether we would accept charges. I told him that I should think that, even if we had jurisdicTon, the advisable thing would be to confer again with the State Labor Board and try to have the record re-opened or the Order re-established. He claimed that there was precedent for taking jurisdiction over the garages in some Western case and, secondly, that he would prefer new action with us on two grounds: (a) That new phases in the effect of the national arm would have a salutary "goosing" effect upon the employers, and (b) he thought we would be able to do far more than the State Labor Board. I advised him that we would take under consideration any charges that he would file but that it would have to be a clearance board with the State Labor Board and on the question of jurisdiction. The representative of this strong AFL union desired action. However, for the time being, I told him we would accept his charges. I had a discussion with him on the Byrnes Act which, he claimed, was being violated by the transportation of strike-breakers by the manufacturing companies in Detroit to the garages here. MLF: VM. Twelfth Region Confidential. To: Nathan Witt, Secretary. From: John G. Shott, Regional Director. Subject: Lynn Beman, former Regional Director at Chicago: APRIL 3, 1939. In view of the fact that I first encountered Mr. Beman on a case where he was representing the Kroehler Furniture Company, at Binghamton, New York, in the spring of last year, this may be an old story to you, but I am sending it along. At the meeting in Binghamton, Mr. Beman as representative of the Company, had arranged a consent election with representatives of the Board in Chicago for the varions units of the Kroehler Furniture Company at Chicago, Binghamton, and some place in Ohio. I was in Binghamton simply to arrange for the details of the election, but could not help but notice the consent agreement which Beman had entered into was merely a statement of the arrangements of the election, and had Lo signature of any party attached to it. One of the arrangements was that the Union organizer was not to be permitted to sit at the election as a checker. Upon my suggesting these things, which seemed irregularities to me, Beman said the agreement had be drawn up with full approval of the Chicago office and accepted by the Union, and gave me to understand that he knew what election agreements were all about. Even more significant is the material that I take from a memorandum submitted by our Field Examiner, E. J. Brophy, on the Lullabye Furniture Corporation, case No. XII C-395, of his experience in meeting Mr. Beman during the week ending April 1st: "The questions which I raised were: 1. Recognition; 2. Whether the Company intended to bargain collectively with the Union for all production employees on the question of a new contract and/or with reference to the re-opening of the plant. "In answer to my inquiry, Beman threatened to force the Union to undergo a consent election in the event the question of their representation was pursued too diligently. At that point, I made the statement that it was my opinion that the Regional Office would take the position that the Company's request for a consent election might be construed as to be evidence of 8 (5) or refusal to bargain collectively since there did not appear to be a logical question of representation. At that point, Beman interjected the remark that he did not give a damn what the position of the Regional Office was, nor did he care a hell of a lot what the Regional Office thought about ithowever, if forced to, the Management would insist upon an election.' "Also, during the conference and at about the same time as the ab-.. paragraph was stated, Beman stated directly to the Union representative. present at the meeting that he wanted to sit down and negotiate a contras with an international representative of the Brotherhood of Carpenters ! Joiners and that he had no confidence in either the local representatives those connected with the North Central District Council of Furniture Work ers. He also stated that, while the Management was willing to enter i a contract with the Brotherhood, it would have to be iron-clad to ave repetition of the present situation and that, further, at least 10 or 12 the present workers who are presently involved in labor disputes wo never be taken back by the Company." I thought you would be interested in this account of Mr. Beman's activities JOHN G. SHOTT JGS/fsb. Twelfth Region SEPTEMBER 25, 192) To: Malcolm Ross, Director of Information. The staff reports to me that in no instance has Garet Garrett talked w any of them, nor have they had any business whatsoever with him on article appearing in the September 23rd issue of the Saturday Evening Post. JOHN G. SHOTT JGS/fsb. Exhibit No. 1616 [Introduced into evidence in Volume 24, Part I, August 1, 1940] Documents Relating to the Activities of the 18th Regional Office, N. L. R. B. (Minneapolis) Personnel Histories: REGIONAL PERSONNEL Name: Loevinger, Lee. Salary: $2,600, $2,800, $3,000, $3,200, $3,400. Rating: P-2, Assis. Att'y, Reg. Atty. Date of Birth: April 24, 1913. Place of Birth: St. Paul, Minnesota. If Naturalized Citizen when Naturalized: Length of residence in United States: Residence when Appointed: Kansas City, Missouri. Present Residence: Kansas City, Missouri. Education (with dates): Common School 6 years; High School; College 7 years; Other employment, with dates: Haugon & Holton, law clerk 4 months. Watson, Special training or qualifications: Member of Minnesota Bar 1936, Mississippi 1937. Extended Public speaking experience. Sponsors for appointment to position with Board: None. Any expression of opinion as to labor relations, economic philosophy, etc.: "If it is of any significance, I am personally persuaded both of the justice and the wisdom of the National Labor Relations Act." Relatives in Government Service: None. Date of appointment: July 26, 1937. Remarks: None. Name: Knapp, Chas. E. Salary: $2,600, $2,900. Rating: CAF-7, CAF-8, field examiner. Date of Birth: April 21, 1901. Place of Birth: Garden City, South Dakota. If Naturalized Citizen when Naturalized: Length of Residence in United States: Residence when Appointed: Detroit, Michigan. Present Residence: Detroit, Michigan. Education (with dates): 8 years common school; 4 years high school. Other employment, with dates: 15 years as accountant, purchasing and selling agent, private employers. Association with or membership in labor organizations or associations: Any expression of opinion as to labor relations, economic philosophy, etc.: Remarks: In letter of application July 10, 1937, Knapp, says "Possessing an alert and studious mind, I believe I could cope with the situations that arise in the work of the Board, which shall be many, until employers are compelled to realize the rights of their employees." Memorandum to Benedict Wolf, Executive Secretary July 13, 1937. ́ Frank K. Bowan says of Knapp, “While he has no Labor back ground, he has a fine knowledg of methods used by employers in this area and would know where to look for the "Ethiopian in the wood pile." Name: Smoot, Thurlow. Salary: $2,600; $3,200; $3,400; $3,700. Rating: P-2 (Field Examiner), P-3 (Regional Attorney). Date of Birth: December 30, 1910. Place of Birth: Glendive, Montana. If Naturalized Citizen when Naturalized: Length of residence in United States: Residence when Appointed: Cleveland, Ohio. Present Residence: Saint Louis, Missouri. Education (with dates): LL. B., University of Colorado, 1933. Books and Articles written by: Other employment, with dates: Associated about three and a half years with Association with or membership in labor organizations or associations: Sponsors for appointment to position with Board: Roger Baldwin, Director Any expression of opinion as to labor relations, economic philosophy, etc.: Date of appointment: May 3, 1937. Remarks: In a letter dated November 22, 1938 from the International Hod Carriers, Building and Common Laborers Union of America to J. Warren Madden, Chairman of the N. L. R. B., in connection with the ending of a strike and the securing of a closed shop. Mr. Smoot was especially mentioned. Name: Wiener, Robert J. Salary: $2,600-3,200-3,800-4,600. Rating: Regional Director. Date of Birth: Dec. 7, 1908. Place of Birth: New York. If Naturalized Citizen when Naturalized: Length of residence in United States: Residence when Appointed: Philadelphia, Pa. President Residence: 18th Region. Education (with dates): high school; Yale College, A. B. 1930; Study of business law. Books and Articles written by: None. Other employment with dates: B. Altman & Co. New York; various junior executive jobs Oct. '30-Jan. '32; J. A. Curtis; Yale Club, N. Y.; Publisher and promotion 1932-33; Universal Producing Co. N. Y.; Committee benefits, making arrangements 1933-34, Association with or membership in labor organizations or associations: None. Membership in any other organizations, associations, clubs, societies, etc.: None. Special training or qualifications: No other qualification shown than those under other employment. Sponsors for appointment to position with Board: The files would indicate that the subject was a protégé of Nathan Witt. Any expression of opinion as to labor relations, economic philosophy, etc.: Expresses a keen interest in labor problems. Relatives in Government Service: None. Date of appointment: 9/16/35. Remarks: This man is a regional director in district 18. This man started as a field examiner $2,600 on 5/5/37 his salary was raised on 11/13/37 his salary was raised to 3,800 and he was made acting director. He is now regional director at salary of $4,600. On May 31, 1937 Wiener wrote the following letter to Benedict Wolf, secretary of the Board: "DEAR DICK: Bob Williams, who recently applied to the Board for a field job, has written to me to ask me to put in a word for him with you. I told him you couldn't be influenced by people who really had influence and so it wouldn't do him the slightest good, but he very flatteringly insisted. "I can say that Bob has an unusually good grounding in a desirable academic background and at the same time a very practical and realistic view of labor economics. He is very liberal in his views, loyal, and particularly anxious to get with the Board. "I'm enjoying the work out here tremendously, and hope you decide to keep me out here for a while. I know it's unreasonable to ask at this time, but I would appreciate your making any criticisms that occur to you as well as the extremely helpful suggestions you have been making. "I'd like to take this chance of saying that, if the Board sets the two hearings I asked for, my feeling is a "tough" trial examiner is very much in order. The lawyers in both cases are the slickest hereabouts, and I feel certain each will do al he can to cloud the issue and to drag in all sorts of extraneous irrelevancies as well as trying (as they have with me) to argue the case on the basis of the personalities of the union leaders. "If the Board wins these cases-and I believe there is no doubt on that score- I feel that we will get a lot more business here than we have now. "Thanks for your help, and best regards, "from "BOB." This letter is contained in the personal file of Robert C. Williams who has since been Acting Regional Director at Chicago, Lee Loevinger: JANUARY 81939. To: Mr. Robert J. Wiener, The Constant Springs Hotel, Kingston, Jamaica, B. W. 1. From: Lee Loevinger. DEAR BOB: There is nothing that has come up in the office that I think is important enough to justify interrupting your holiday for. There are, however, a couple of matters that I think might interest you. First, you may recall that just before you left, Jim and I were joking about the fact that probably the first thing the Board would do after you had gone would be to transfer Herb and then call Jim in for some special assignment. Well, as a matter of fact, the joke was not so funny. January 2. the first day after you had gone, we received a telegram from Bea Stern which was in substance as follows: rease wire reply immediately if you can spare James Shields for a special investigation to be undertaken by the Board for at least 3 months. After we had re covered from three fainting spells and an epileptic fit, we called Madam Stern on the telephone and explained in my own peculiar impartial manner the problems confronting us in this office. Since then we have received no communication of either a social or anti-social nature from her, so I rather fancy that the matter Las been dropped. In addition to the above, we have recently received a memo from Shover, a copy of which is attached, together with my reply thereto. These are, I think, selfexplanatory. If you care to concur, dissent, or add to my memorandum, you may consider this an invitation to do so. As a matter of fact, the reasons that I named chly two persons to Shover were, first, that I couldn't think of a third person whom I thought was particularly outstanding for that purpose, and second, that I thought you might have some particular person that you would rather name yourself. I did, however, answer Shover's letter since I wasn't sure that you would get this letter, and I didn't want the matter to go by default so that we would be lacking any representation. You will, no doubt, be delighted to hear that shortly after you left we suffered a cold wave which took the temperature down to 10° below. There are one or two new strikes in the region, but nothing of any importance, and so far we have been able to handle everything that has come in. I hope that you and Phyllis are having a completely enjoyable time and that you are absorbing plenty of Jamaica sunshine, even if it is from a non-setting British sun. With best regards to both of you. LL/mw Enclosures-2 Airmail MINNEAPOLIS, March 8th, 1939. Memorandum for file. Subject: Marigold Dairies Inc., Rochester, Minn. : John Bray, Business Agent, General Drivers Union, Local 874-3221⁄2 S. Broadway, Rochester, Minn. Elmer Grimm, 429 7th St. NW., Rochester, Minn. The above were in, claiming that Grimm had been discriminatorily discharged. The Drivers Union at one time signed up ten or eleven of the company employees, but the company apparently put pressure on them, and all except Grimm quit the union and joined the Independent Truckers Association, a city-wide company union. Grimm refused to have anything to do with the "Association" and maintained his membership in the union, and the company called him in and told him that there had been complaints about his work from customers around the city. The company, however, refused to tell him who had lodged the complaints, and fired him. The company did get Grimm a job in a plumbing shop after his discharge. The job at the plumbing shop, however, was not as good as his job at the dairy was, and he wants his old job back. The dairy company uses only local dairy products and ships only a negligible amount out of the state. I told the men that we probably did not have jurisdiction, but that they could file a charge, and we could try and get something for them from the company. A charge was prepared and given to them to file if they so desired. To: The Files. LEE LOEVINGER. INTER-OFFICE COMMUNICATION AUGUST 22, 1939. From: Lee Loevinger. Subject: The Creamette Company. Harold Sorenson and Henry Litezke were in regarding the above-named company. The situation briefly is this: They had a contract which expired last July. The union, represented by Roy Wier, attempted to bargain with the company and secure a wage increase of 5 cents an hour. On July 25, the union went on strike. Haney's office was called in and one of Haney's assistants held several conferences but was unable to get anywhere. Sometime later the company offered the union a 2 cents an hour increase for some of the workers, instead of 5 cents for all of the workers. The union refused to accept this and continued on strike. 218054-41-vol. 24, pt. 2—— 18 |