You After examination of the motions please make the order denying them as suggested with the express reservation mentioned and return the order to me. can send the motions back addressed to me express collect. Copies sent to Mr. Watts and Mr. Witt. gop/ld. INTER-OFFICE COMMUNICATION NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD FEBRUARY 7, 1938. To. Mr. Nathan Witt and Mr. Robert B. Watt. Subject: Inland Steel Company, Case No. XIII-C-351. I am attaching Trial Examiner Wood's Order upon the motions heretofore referred to him for ruling. Mr. Wood suggests that the "off the record" pages ought to be certified to by the reporter before being presented again on motion. Mr. Wood also suggests that probably the only way that we could be sure that all the "off the record" material is before us is to have it submitted in connection with the official transcript, so that the context would be complete. Encl. G. O. P. Inland. DEAR GEORGE: Ruling on the motion is off by air with this mail. The motion, nevertheless going separate, by express, and expected to arrive Tuesday 17th. Suggesting re order denying motions; off-the-record pages ought to be certified by the reporter before being presented as motions to the Board; complete off-therecord transcript is nevertheless out of context unless submitted complete with official transcript so as to show the full running account. Some of the stuff exhibited looks sour; nobody ever had an opportunity to check off-the-record material, and those particular reporters Sol and I didn't trust too much. Counsel to Special Committee of House of Representatives The Capitol, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. TOLAND: The information from the Inland Steel Company which you requested on January 2nd of Mr. P. C. King, Jr. of our Washington office is as follows: Q. The date the strike commenced? A. May 26, 1937. Q. The date of the termination of the strike? A. July 1, 1937. Q. What participation the company had, if any, before the President's Commission to settle the strike? A. The executive of the Inland Steel Company, who was primarily responsible for all matters of policy having to do with the strike was Mr. W. Sykes, Assistant to the President, who still holds that position. Mr. Sykes spent Monday, June 21, 1937, in Cleveland in conference with the President's Commission. There is no letter in the Inland files requesting this conference and it is the opinion of the Inland officials that an invitation to it came by telephone from Mr. Taft. Mr. Sykes returned to Chicago that night and spent the next day in conference with other executives of the company. Mr. Sykes returned to Cleveland on Wednesday, June 23, where his conference with the Commission was resumed. Late that afternoon the members of the Commission expressed a desire to talk with other executive officers of the company who had participated in decisions of policy. Mr. L. E. Block, chairman of the board, and Mr. E. L. Ryerson, Jr., vice chairman, left Chicago that evening and met with Mr. Sykes in Cleveland Thursday morning, June 24. Mr. Clarence B. Randall flew to Cleveland from Cambridge, Mass., and joined them at the same time. At about 10:00 o'clock the morning of June 24 the Inland officials referred to had an hour's conference alone with the Commission. Later executives of other steel companies were called in to a general conference. Q. What the President's Commission did, if anything, toward settling the strike? A. It was the impression of the Inland executives who conferred with the Commission that the members of the Commission were in good faith seeking some compromise that would settle the strike, but since the issues did not involve such matters as wages, hours and working conditions, but broad matters of principle, it was not a subject matter that lent itself to compromise. No suggestion was made to the Inland executives by the Commission that did not involve the abandonment of what the former regarded as important principles which they believed to be essential to the management of the business and it was clear by noon of June 24 that the Commission would be unsuccessful in contributing to the settlement of the strike. It is the opinion of the Inland executives that the President's Commission accomplished nothing whatever towards a settlement. Q. Did anybody in the Inland Steel Company receive any communication, oral or written, from the Board between June 3 and June 12, 1937, or was the formal complaint the first knowledge the company had of the proposed proceedings against it? A. The first knowledge that anyone connected with the company had that the Labor Board had interested itself in the strike was when the formal complaint was served. Between June 3 and June 12. 1937, the company received no communication whatever, either oral or written, from the Labor Board, and the filing of the complaint was the first knowledge the company had of the proposed proceedings. National Labor Relations Board, 13th Region, 20 North Wacker Dr., Chicago.: Inland Steel petition and charge will probably be filed in your office tomorrow in view of need for immediate action this case. Please keep Dorfman clear to commence work on it immediately. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, EXHIBIT NO. 1632-J NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD To: I. S. Dorfman-Region #13. JUNE 5, 1937. In compliance with your memorandum of June 3, I have ordered the S. E. C. registration for the above-named company and shall send it to you immediately on receipt. The I. C. C. reports that the company does not appear on any of their registrations or/and files. Good luck to you. E. S. F. EXHIBIT NO. 1632-K NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD JUNE 11, 1937. To: Nathan Witt, Asst. Gen. Counsel. From: I. S. Dorfman, Chicago. Subject: Inland Steel Company. Inclosed please find copy of amended charge and draft of complaint in the above matter. Please call me after you have read these copies. In response to your wire of even date, enclosed please find copy of original charge and of complaint in the above matter. With the exception of proof of a majority, the various aspects of this case are developing very well. We shall have difficulty in proving the authenticity of signatures on the 7,500 application cards offered by the SWOC. (Written notation:) In formal file. STATEMENT ISSUED BY INLAND FOLLOWING CLOSING OF CONFERENCE TODAY, JUNE 24, 1937 It has been stated by the C. I. O. that the Inland Steel Company made an oral agreement with them but would not sign a written contract. These statements have been made in order to reflect upon the good faith of the company in its dealings with its workers. They are not true. There have been no agreements oral or otherwise with the C. I. O. The C. I. O. stated that there were no complaints by our men as to wages, hours, or working conditions but the C. I. O. wanted us to sign a contract with them. This we refused to do. We do not consider the C. I. O. a responsible labor organization with which any binding contract can be made. The Company is fully responsible for the fulfillment of any contract which it may make. The C. I. O. is not responsible in any way for the conduct of its members As an explanation of many actions of its members which it could not defend. it has confessed that their conduct was beyond the control of their organization. It is not only the conduct of the rank and file of the organization that is irresponsible, but the leaders have also shown they cannot be depended upon to respect the sanctity of a contract or to respect the law. These leaders of the C. I. O. have stated that they would not hesitate to close down every coal mine in the United States to force us to sign their steel mill contract. This means they will break all existing mine contracts to make us submit to their terms. If the steel companies should sign their contract is it not to be expected that they would cut off the supply of a basic material, by shutting down the mills, to force their will on all American industry. There have been over 200 strikes and walkouts in the plants of the General Motors Corporation since that company signed a contract with them last February. This is in spite of the fact that the contract forbids strikes or other interrup tions in operations. The same organization closed all business in the City of Lansing to intimidate the local law enforcement authorities. These are but a few of the actions of the C. I. O. Can any responsible company hope to make a binding contract with such an organization that would insure industrial peace? We have in effect all the terms as to wages, hours and working conditions which their contract contained and more beside. It is clear, therefore, that the sole objective was to obtain a weapon which could be used to further their organization. In view of the existing circumstances the mere fact of signing any contract with this organization at this time would be assumed by our men as an endorse ment of the C. I. O. by the company. As our employees have stated it would be used to force them to join the C. I. O organization if they wished to be free from annoyance and intimidation of their families and themselves. We cannot take any action which we believe will coerce our workers. The declared objective of the C. I. O. is the closed shop and the check off. Of this there can be no doubt. The fulfillment of this objective would force every worker to join the C. I. O. union to have the right to work in our mills. It would require the company to deduct from their wages the union dues, assessments and fines. We know that the contract submitted does not have such provisions but we also know this contract is not intended as a final settlement. After it has served for organization purposes the closed shop and check off are the next step. While we will not sign a contract with the C. I. O. we will deal in good faith with its representatives on matters of collective bargaining and promptly put into effect any settlements that may be arrived at. There are many people with whom we will deal but with whom we will not make signed contracts. We know that if a contract cannot bind both parties equally it is futile. The C. I. O. has initiated legal proceedings before the Labor Board to determine if it is the duty of the company to sign a contract. The Courts will decide this question. The present strike is an attempt by the C. I. O. to force submission by the Company to their demands before the courts make their decision. Clearly the workers would receive no material benefits by the settlement of the strike in the manner demanded by the C. I. O. The only objective is a signed contract for organization purposes. The orderly process of the law has been invoked by the C. I. O. to settle the point at issue. The 13,000 men now kept from work by threats of violence and intimidation should not be prevented from earning a living for themselves and families pending the outcome of these legal proceedings. We greatly regret the loss of earnings by our men and the hardship that it imposes not only on them but on the whole community, but we cannot submit to illegal force to make us abandon a principle which we believe is of vital importance to all our employees. EXHIBIT NO. 1632-N NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD JUNE 25TH, 1937. To: Nathan Witt, NLRB. From: I. S. Dorfman, 13th Region, Chicago. Enclosed please find original Petition filed by Inland Steel Company requesting that a subpena Duces Tecum be issued to David J. McDonald, secretarytreasurer of the Steel Workers Organizing Committee, Pittsburgh, Pa. The agreement between the Steel Workers Organizing Committee and the Amalgamated will be offered in evidence by the Board, as will the membership cards, books and records of the three Locals of the Amalgamated. I do not believe that the company is entitled to any of the other data requested in the Petition, and would recommend against the issuance of a subpena in that respect. Regards, Sincerely, FMG. Enc. SOL. AIR MAIL. EXHIBIT NO. 1632-O JUNE 29, 1937. To: Mr. Nathan Witt, Asst. Gen. Counsel. Enclosed please find original and two copies of application on the part of Inland Steel Company for subpenas running to Harry W. Anderson, General Motors Building, Detroit, Michigan, and Wayne Eddy, c/o Packard Motor Co., Detroit, Michigan. They desire to subpena each of the witnesses for the purpose of proving the irresponsibility of the SWOC. The examiner has already ruled that he will not permit the introduction of any evidence on that issue. However, he has stated that he will not accept offer of proof unless the witnesses thru whom such proof is adduced are present in the court room at the time. Therefore, unless I should stipulate that these witnesses, if called, would testify as counsel for respondent believes that they will, counsel will insist on the issuance of these subpenas. If you deem it advisable for me to enter into such a stipulation, please advise, To locate Nicola bullet extend line of north wall Sam's Place east approximately 63 feet thence at right angle south 44 feet 8 inches. Stop. Possible violence tomorrow mornnig Inland Steel plant Indiana Harbor Advise whether I should attempt observe. Stop. Staying tonight Lake Shore Athletic Club Phone Whitehall 4850. Collect. Senate Civil Liberties Committee, Washington, D. C. 218054-41-vol. 24, pt. 2—57 DAVID D. LLOYD. |