(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Investigation of improper activities in the labor or management field. Hearings before the Select Committee on Improper Activities in the Labor or Management Field"

r^' 



t 



cJV9 



9111415^ li 



7~^ 




Given By 
U. S. SUFT. OF DOCUMENTS 



^ 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



\ 



HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE 

SELECT COMmTTEE 

ON IMPROPER ACTIYITIES IN THE 

LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 

EIGHTY-FIFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 
PURSUANT TO SENATE RESOLUTION 74, 85TH CONGRESS 



JULY 31, AUGUST 1, 2, 5, AND 6, 1957 



PART 10 



Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Improper Activities in the 
Labor or Management Field 




INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE 

SELECT COMMITTEE 

ON IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 

LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 

EIGHTY-FIFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 
PURSUANT TO SENATE RESOLUTION 74, 85TH CONGRESS 



JULY 31, AUGUST 1, 2, 5, AND 6, 1957 



PART 10 



Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Improper Activities in the 
Labor or Management Field 




UNITED STATES 
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
8B330 WASHINGTON : 1957 



Boston Public Library 
SuperintCTT^pnt of Documents 

NOV 18 1957 



SELEC5T COMMITTEE ON IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR OR 
MANAGEMENT FIELD 

JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas, Chairman 
IRVING M. IVES, New York, Vice Chairman 
JOHN F. KENNEDY, Massachusetts KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota 

SAM J. ERVIN, Jr., North Carolina BARRY GOLDVS^ATER, Arizona 

PAT McNAMARA, Michigan . CARL T. CURTIS, Nebraska 

ROBERT F. Kennedy, Chief Counsel 
Rdth Young Watt, Chief Clerk 
n 



CONTENTS 



Area: New York (Teamsters Paper Locals) 

Pag« 

Appendix 3969 

Implementation of opening statement: 

Robert F. Kennedy 3595 

Testimony of — 

Berger, Sam 3673 

Boyar, Louis 3909 

Chernuchin, Sidney 3812 

Chester, Max 3935 

Claude, Paul 3920 

Conoval, Samuel 3802 

Ehrlich, Morris 3817 

Fine, Jerome 3831 

Garren, Murray 3826 

Gasster, Henry 3746, 3749 

Getlan, Sam 3843, 3851,3856 

Goldberg, Abraham 3734 

Holt, Milton 3876 

Kazansky, Philip 3871 

Krieger, Harold . 3945 

Lehrer, Stanley 3883 

May, Walter R 3851 

McNiflf, John 3756 

Montalvo, Mario 3792 

Nunez, Bertha 3781, 3790 

Pope, Louis 3914 

Ray, Theodore 3719, 3751 

SegHn, Stanley 3960 

Tierney, Paul J 3745,3749,3840,3849 

Topazio, Anthony 3724 

Washburn, Lester 3683, 3710 

Zakman, Samuel 3636 

EXHIBITS 

1. First application for charter of affiliation for Local 102, In- ducedon Appears 

ternational Union, United Automobile Workers of Amer- page on page 
ica, dated September 12, 1950 3644 3969 

2. Second application for charter for local 102 dated April 23, 

1951 3649 3970- 

3. Schedule of loans made to local 102 from unreported source 3971 

from September 1950 through December 1951, totaling 

$21,380.39 3660 3972 

4. Resolution adopted by the executive board of Local 512, 

AMPUC-A. F. of L., on January 7, 1954 3670 (*) 

5. Letter from UAW-AFL Amalgamated Union Local 102, 

dated November 10, 1951, signed by Johnny Dioguardi, 
president, to Anthony Doria, secretary-treasurer, United 
Automobile Workers, AFL, concerning issuance of char- 
ter to local 138 3745 3973 

6. Labor or<Tanization registration form filed by Local 649, 

United Automobile Workers, AFL, dated March 18, 1953, 

and si'2;ned bv John Dioguardi, president 3745 3974- 

7. Official application for charter for Local 198, UAW-AFL, 3975 

dated Januarv 5, 1953, signed by Henry Gasster, presi- 
dent '_ 3748 3976 

See footnote at end of Contents, p. v. 

m 



IV CONTENTS 

7A, Letter dated January 5, 1953, to Anthony Doria, United jj^^j.^. 

Automobile Workers of America, enclosing applicationduced on Appears 
for Local 198, UAW-AFL, and signed by John Dioguardi, page on page 
Amalgamated Union Local 649 3749 (**) 

8. Pamphlet issued by the Association of Catholic Trade 

Unionists describing some typical cases handled by the 
association 3792 (*) 

9. Contract dated July 5, 1955, between Amalgamated Union 

Local 649, U AW, and Sealtite Quilting Corp 3835 (*) 

10. Canceled check No. 2613, dated August 10, 1955, payable 

to Amalgamated Union Local No. 649 in the amount of 

$1,000 from Sealtite Quilting Corp 3836 3977 

11. Souvenir journal of Amalgamated Union Local No. 649 with 

a one-page advertisement of Sealtite Quilting Corp 3836 (*) 

12. Amalgamated Union Local 649 souvenir journal advertising 

contract 3836 3978 

13. Application for charter, dated November 8, 1955, by local 

275 3840 3979 

14. Letter dated December 1, 1955, from local 258 to Joint 

Council 16, requesting that the officers of local 258 be 

seated as delegates to joint council 16 3842 3980 

15. Letter dated February 2, 1956, from Harry Davidoff, 

secretary- treasurer of local 256 to Joint Council 16 3847 (**) 

16. Letter dated February 2, 1956, from Harry Davidoff, secre- 

tary-treasurer to joint council 16 3848 (**) 

17. Document entitled "Local 228" which contains certain in- 

formation requested by the Permanent Subcommittee on 
Investigation from Anthony Doria 3853 (**) 

18. Labor organization registration form filed by local 228 3855 3981- 

3982 

19. Labor organization registration form filed by local 228 3856 3983- 

3984 
20- Letter dated February 2, 1956, to joint council 16 signed by 

Joseph Curcio, secretary-treasurer, local 269 3873 (**) 

21. Letter dated February 2, 1956, to joint council 16 signed by 

Joseph Curcio, secretary-treasurer, local 269, certifjang 

Philip Kazansky eligible to vote in joint council election. _ 3874 (**) 

22. Contract dated August 18, 1955, between Equitable Re- 

search Associates and Auto Glass Dealers Association, 

Inc 3890 (*) 

23. Contract dated September 1, 1955, by and between Local 

Union 227, UAW, AFL, and the Auto Glass Dealers 
Association 3892 (*) 

24A. Check dated October 18, 1955, payable to Equitable Re- 
search Associates Corp. from Auto Glass Dealers Asso- 
ciation (labor relations fund account) in the amount of 

$499.80 with accompanying letter 3901 3985- 

3986 

24B. Check dated December 5, 1955, payable to Equitable Re- 
search Associates Corp. from Auto Glass Association 
(labor relations fund) in the amount of $199.92 and ac- 
companying letter : 3901 3987- 

3988 

240. Check dated January 17, 1956, payable to Equitable Re- 
search Associates Corp. from Auto Glass Dealers Asso- 
ciation (labor relations fund account) in the amount of 

$108.27 and accompanying letter 3901 3989- 

3990 

25. Notice of the Auto Dealers Association, Inc., dated Sept. 6, 

1955, signed by Frank Lurrey, president, Stanley Lehrer, 

counsel and Alorris S. Gorman, executive secretary 3903 (**) 

26. Letter dated May 11, 1956, addressed to Auto Glass Deal- 

ers Association, signed by Arthur Santa Maria, United 

Automobile Workers Union, Local 227 3907 3991 

See footnotes at end of Contents, p. v. 



CONTENTS 



Intro- 

27. Letter dated May 22, 1956, addressed to Local 227, Unitedduced on Appears 

Auto Workers Union, re Auto Glass Dealers Association, ^'^^^ °^ p^^® 
Inc., signed b}^ Stanley Lehrer 3907 3992 

28. Sticker reading "This is a Union Shop, Independent Auto 

Workers Union lOlA" 3916 3993 

29 A. Business card: Independent Auto Workers Union, Local 
101-A, 363 East 149th Street, New York, N. Y., James 
Dodge, business agent 3917 3994 

29B. Business card: Independent Auto Workers Union, Local 
101-A, 363 East 149th Street, New York, Alfred Naft, 
business agent 3917 3994 

29C. Business card: Independent Auto Workers Union, Local 
lOOA, 363 East 149th Street, New York, Jack Sicari, busi- 
ness agent 3917 3994 

29D. Business card: Independent Auto Workers Union, Local 
101 A, 363 East 149th Street, New York, Charles DiSilvio, 
president 3917 3994 

30. Contract form of Independent Auto W^orkers Union 101 A- - 3918 (*) 

31. Contract dated September 27, 1954, between Local 405, 

R. C. I. A. and Paragon Brass employer 3927 (*) 

32 A. Check of Paragon Brass, dated September 27, 1954, payable 

to "cash" signed by Paul Claude, in the amount of $215- . 3929 3995 
32B. Check No. 2346 of Paragon Brass, dated October 18, 1954, 
payable to "cash" signed by Paul Claude, in the amount 

of$215 3929 3996 

32C. Check No. 2373 of Paragon Brass, dated November 1, 1954, 
payable to "cash" signed by Paul Claude, in the amount 
of$200 3929 3997 

33. Check No. 1516 of Albert Oilman Associates, dated Febru- 

ary 9, 1955, payable to "cash" signed bv Albert Filman in 

the amount of $220 3929 3998 

34. Check No. 229 of Paragon Brass dated April 1, 1955, payable 

to "cash" signed by Paul Claude, in the amount of $130._ - 3931 3999 

35. Postdated check dated April 7, 1955, payable to "cash" 

signed by Max Chester, in the amount of $130 3931 4000 

36A. Postdated check dated April 6, 1955, payable to "cash" 

signed by Max Chester in the amount of $55 3932 4001 

36B. Postdated check dated April 13, 1955, payable to "cash" 

signed by Max Chester in the amount of $55 3932 4002 

36C. Postdated 'check dated April 20, 1955, payable to "cash" 

signed by Max Chester in the amount of $55 3932 4003 

36D. Postdated check dated April 27, 1955, payable to "cash" 

signed by Max Chester in the amount of $55 3932 4004 

37. Labor organization registration form filed by Amalgated 

Local 355, UAW-AFL, dated December 28, 1953 3949 4005- 

4006 
37A. Letter dated December 23, 1953, addressed to the Bureau of 
Labor Standards signed by Harold Krieger, enclosing 
forms 3949 4007 

38. Official apphcation for charter for local 224, dated September 

15,1953. 3962 4008 

39. Apphcation for charter for local 269 of the teamsters, dated 

Noyember 8, 1955 3964 4009 

40. Letter dated December 1, 1955, addressed to joint council 16 

signed by Abraham Brier, secretary-treasurer. Employees 

Union Local 362 3966 4010 

40A. Letter dated February 2, li»56, addressed to joint council 16, 
signed by Abraham Brier, local 362 certifying Stanley 

Seglin eligible to vote in joint council election 3966 4011 

Proceedings of — 

July 31, 1957 3591 

August 1, 1957 3683 

August 2, 1957 3753 

Au<4ust 5, 1957 3839 

August 6, 1957 3883 

*May be found in the files of the select committee. 
**May be found in the printed record. 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGE3IENT FIELD 



WEDNESDAY, JULY 31, 1957 

United States Senate, 
Select Committee on Improper Activities in 

the Labor and IVIanagement Field, 

Washington^ D. C. 

The select committee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to Senate Resolution 
74, agreed to January 30, 1957, in the caucus room, Senate Office 
Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the select com- 
mittee) presiding. 

Present : Senators John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas ; Irving 
M. Ives, Republican, New York ; John F. Kennedy, Democrat, Massa- 
chusetts; Sam J. Ervin, Jr., Democrat, North Carolina; Pat Mc- 
Namara, Democrat, Michigan; Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South 
Dakota ; Barry Goldwater, Republican, Arizona ; and Carl T. Curtis, 
Republican, Nebraska. 

Also present : Robert F? Kennedy, chief counsel ; Jerome S. Adler- 
man, assistant chief counsel ; Paul J. Tierney, assistant counsel ; Pierre 
E. G. Salinger, investigator ; Robert E. Dunne, assistant counsel ; and 
Ruth Young Watt, chief clerk. 

The Chairiman. The committee will be in order. 

(Members of the committee present at the convening of the session 
were Senators McClellan, Ives, Ervin, Kennedy, Mundt, and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. "\Ye are beginning a new series of public hearings 
this morning and the Chair desires to make a brief statement relative 
thereto. 

From the inception of this committee, one of its primary objectives 
has been to investigate racketeer and criminal operations in the labor- 
management field. 

This committee and its staff have been engaged in a long and inten- 
sive investigation into hoodlum activities in some unions. Hundreds 
of witnesses have been interviewed — union records have been examined 
where they could be found — many of these records have been de- 
stroyed and the facts had to be reconstructed in other ways, from bank 
accounts, employers' records, and so forth. 

We have had excellent cooperation and assistance from the city, 
State, and Federal agencies. I wish to particularly thank District 
Attorney Frank Hogan and his staff' in New York City for the assist- 
ance they have extended to the committee, and I commend liim for the 
fine job iie has done in prosecuting labor racketeers. 

"V-VTiile I usually refrain from commenting on the nature of the evi- 
dence in advance of the hearings, a preliminary study of the evidence 

3591 



3592 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

gathered by the committee staff in this case, I believe, indicates that 1 
should make some comment as this series of hearings begins. 

In my judgment, the evidence will disclose that hoodlums and 
racketeers came into the labor picture with the aid and assistance of 
certain high level union officials. 

I think before we are through with the hearings it will have been 
demonstrated, beyond any doubt, that these hoodlums were not in the 
field of labor for the benefit of the laboring man. It is apparent they 
were enabled to operate through the grant of union charters — and 
these charters were used as instruments for the commission of extor- 
tion from employers. 

But no small part of the picture is the victimization of the union 
membership. 

The initiation fees and dues of members constituted a steady source 
of income for these hoodlums and their henchmen who were put on 
the union payrolls. It provided an income for the mob that worked 
for Johnny Dioguardi and Antonio (Tony Ducks) Corallo. 

The racketeers, in effect, sold out the union members and gained the 
cooperation of management in organization of its plants by giving 
them easy, or so-called sweetheart contracts which contained little or 
no benefit to employees. 

It will be shown that the illiterate Puerto Rican and Negro laborers 
were misused by both management and labor. In some instances, the 
union contracts called for only the legal minimum wage which the 
employers had to pay anyhow under the law. In some of the plants, 
the employer paid the union dues and welfare payments without 
the knowledge of the employees. And the employees did not even 
know they were in the union. In other instances, employees gained 
little or nothing by being members of the union. The dues of tliese 
unions' members fattened the pocketbooks of racketeers and their 
henchmen. 

To the hoodlum, the union charter is a private certificate to do busi- 
ness. The hoodlum often lays out his own money to finance the start 
of the organization and then later reimburses himself many times over 
from the "profits," that is, the initiation fees and dues. 

One of the interesting facets we expect to show is that at times the 
hoodlums used Communists or former Communists because they were 
excellently trained organizers and knew all the tricks to get member- 
ship. 

The unions gave the racketeers political power ; they use the unions 
to extort money ; they fleece their members ; they have a strong impact 
on the economics of our industry and can make or break small em- 
ployers by their tactics. 

The question arises as to why certain labor leaders want racketeers 
as local union heads. The reasons are twofold : 

First, racketeers, because of their ruthlessness, toughness, et cetei-a, 
are good organizers, can gain an increase in membership, can get em- 
ployers to enter into contracts, can bring increased income to the in- 
ternationals by the payment of per capita dues. 

Second, with the help of the hoodums who are loyal only to their 
labor bosses and not to the workingman, these labor bosses are enabled 
to get control of local councils and federations with the help of racket- 
eer locals, and thus control a large geographical area. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3593 

For example, we expect in this instance there will be evidence to 
show that Mr. James Hoffa, through the help of racketeers, supported 
John CRourke, who souo;ht and did obtain control over joint 
council No. 16 of the New York area, the biggest and richest labor 
area in the comitry. 

The joint council is important because of its policymaking function, 
the centralization of power in the hands of a small group, its control 
over the grants of charters, and the right to strike, et cetera. 

In addition, there will be evidence to show that Hoffa was going to 
tie up with the International Longshoremen's Association of New 
York, a union which liad been kicked out of the AFL because of its 
control by racketeei-s. 

Thus, with control of joint council No. 16 and the International 
Longshoremen's Association, Hoffa would have a stranglehold over 
the port of New York. The next step would be the entire eastern 
seaboard and the St. Lawrence seaway. 

The economic factors involved are tremendous. Such power placed 
in the hands of persons affiliated with racketeers is a danger to the 
welfare of the Nation. 

While we have labor-racketeering provisions in our laws, it appears 
they are not adequate to prevent racketeer control of unions. These 
hearings, we hope, will serve to throw a searchlight on racket opera- 
tions, and inform not only the Congress but also the labor fraternity 
and the general public as to how the racketeers gain control of unions, 
and the evils that can result fi'om such control. It is only by gather- 
ing tlie facts and by com]iletely understanding the manner in which 
the racketeers operate that we can hope to provide legislation to 
prevent abuses. 

Preliminary to hearing the Avitnesses, I will ask Mr. Kennedy, be- 
cause of the complexity of the case, to present and explain some charts 
which have been made up under his direction. 

As Mr. Kennedy proceeds to present these charts and explain them, 
so as to put the inquiry into its proper perspective from the beginning, 
his remarks will not be testimony but simply an implementation of 
this opening statement of the Chair, and therefore he will not be 
placed under oath. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend you for that ex- 
cellent statement. It covers very thoroughly what we intend to do, 
and gives the public a good idea of what the problem is with which 
we are faced. 

Now, before Mr. Kennedy explains his charts, I would like to ask 
him some questions, or at least one question. 

How many years has this racketeering on its present scale been 
going on in New York (^ity or New York State ? 

Mr. Kennedy. I think many of the racketeers and hoodlums came 
into the union movement starting back in 1950, Senator Ives, but I 
think there has been racketeering in the labor movement up in New 
York for many, many years. 

Senator Ives. How many years would you say ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Certainly through the 1930's. 

Senator Ives. Through the 193(rs? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Senator Ives. The reason I asked the question, it happens that in 
1938, and through 1946, I was chairman of the joint legislative com- 



3594 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

mittee in New York State on industrial and labor conditions. 
While now and then we had brought to our attention a serious rack- 
eteering situation which we went after and which ultimately was ex- 
posed and taken care of, we never had anything of the magnitude we 
are now investigating. 

Do you think that in the 1930's it was that way ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Certainly in 1935 through 1939 you had great diffi- 
culties in New York City. 

Senator Ives. That is why the committee was set up. 

Mr. Kennedy. I think it lessened after Mr. Dewey's work in New 
York City. 

Senator Ives. I think we helped to lessen it some. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am sure of that, Senator, and I think that since 
1950, particularly after the drive was made on bookmakers by Tom 
Murphy in New York City in 1950, many of the people that had 
been in bookmaking turned to other sources of income, and a lot of 
them went into this labor-union movement and tried to get charters 
in order to organize employees. 

Senator Ives. Then you really think that this racketeering move- 
ment in the labor movement itself has reached the proportions which 
it now has only since 1950? 

Mr. Kennedy. I would think so, and again with the exception of 
those years. 

Senator Ives. I wondered if I had missed something over the years 
and I did not think I had. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are right, Senator. 

Senator Ives. Thank you. 

The Chairman. Are there any other Senators who want to make 
a statement? 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman, I have an opening statement here 
which supplements one aspect that the chairman's statement touched 
upon. 

I think this hearing is going to be somewhat different from any we 
have held up to date for an essential reason, which I shall discuss in 
this opening statement. 

I do not know just what individuals are going to be involved in this 
hearing ultimately, nor which unions, but involved here is a mechanism 
which is fraught with peril to the American people, as I see it. 

As these hearings progress, I think it will become evident to the 
American people that thousands of honest, industries workingmen 
and women in the New York City area have, because of a lack of 
democratic procedures in their unions, been subjected to dictatorial 
powers of a group of racketeers and unscrupulous labor leaders. 

This is indeed a sad commentary on our way of life when the work- 
ingman must depend for his livelihood on the whims and fancies of 
some of these people who will be appearing before this committee. 
We in this coimtry have always prided ourselves on our free society 
and on our system of free enterprise, but we most assuredly cannot 
say that these working people are truly free. It was not too long 
ago that the oppressed and downtrodden from foreign countries mi- 
grated to our shores to free themselves from the shackles of tyranny. 
However, we find that within the great framework of our free society, 
we today have a dictatorship rivaling the ones faced by these people 
before. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3595 

We as part of the free world, are highly perturbed, and rightfully 
so, about the Communist menace both from inside and outside our 
shores. Yet we shall be witnessing in the next few weeks a form of 
tyranny unfolding which in the long run offers to Communist con- 
spirators an opportunity to paralyze our defense establishments and 
our offensive striking powers. 

In fact, if we permit a situation to prevail whereby an unscrupulous 
cell of powerful hoodlums can tie up our transportation systems and 
close down our factories we will be making a mockery of our entire 
program of civilian defense. 

And it is this point which I wish to emphasize for those following 
these hearings, because here I think is something different, and some- 
thing unique, and something highly dangerous insofar as the freedoms 
of our country are concerned. 

Foreign agents or Communist saboteurs by gaining control of this 
unchecked power to paralyze America could go far toward destroy- 
ing our war potential and our capacity of self-defense. No multi- 
billion dollar program of overseas military aid could offset the dangers 
we nourish at home by permitting conditions like these to prevail. 

It has been traditional in this country that we have always been 
apprehensive of an overconcentration of power in the hands of a few. 
Such unbridled power coupled with irresponsibility can lead only to 
disaster. 

I ask that our fellow citizens envision with me as these hearings 
proceed, what a quick transfer from the hands of a few hoodlums into 
the hands of a few Communists for 30 dirty pieces of silver could 
mean to the entire country and our capacity to defend ourselves. 

So, I for one, Mr. Chairman, hope that the Congress of the United 
States through these hearings will be enabled to recommend specific 
legislation to rectify once and for all those monstrous deficiencies in 
our laws which permit such conditions to exist, and which in this kind 
of world imperil all of those who love freedom. 

The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Mundt. 

Do any other Senators have any comment ? 

Thank you too, Senator Ives. 

All right, with the statement previously made by the Chair, Mr. 
Kennedy, the chief counsel, will proceed to explain the charts that 
have been prepared by the committee so that we may get this problem 
in proper perspective as we begin the hearings. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF OPENING STATEMENT BY ROBERT F. 

KENNEDY 

Mr. Kennedy. As you have stated, Mr. Chairman, these hearings 
will be concerned with hoodlums and racketeers coming into the labor 
union movement. Now, we are going to trace during these series of 
hearings how they came into the labor union movement, and where 
they came from, and what their practices have been and what their 
effect has been on the individual member of the labor union, and what 
the effect has been on management or the industry, and what has been 
the effect on the community as a whole. 

We feel that this is more than just a local problem, that it is a com- 
munity problem. We have found that this same pattern is not unique 
with New York City, but that based on our preliminary study that 
we have made in other large communities throughout the country 



3596 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

that the same type of thing is going on this very day. "We feel that 
it would be important if the racketeers or hoodlums took over a union, 
eA^en if they took over a local union. It is important for the membei's 
of that union, and it is important for the industry in which these 
people work. 

But we tliink it is far more important because the union that is 
involved in these hearings is the teamsters union, and it is not only 
the largest union, about 1.5 million members — but there is no organi- 
zation, union or business, that has a greater elt'ect on the community 
life in this country, a greater effect on our economy than the teamsters 
union. They control the means of transportation. They deliver the 
milk, and the food to homes, and they make pickups and deliveries to 
hotels and businesses. 

If the teamsters ^et into the iiands of the wrong people, then the 
economy of the country can suffer greatly. 

I would like to show you a chart now concerning joint council 16 
in New York City, which is the biggest ruling hody of the teamsters 
in New York City, and it is the group about which these hearings 
will be centered. 

The CTTAiR]\rAN. What comi:)Oses a council ? 

Mr. Kennedy. "Well, the council in New York City is made up of 
approximately 58 different teamster locals. There are approximately 
125,000 teamsters in those 58 locals. When a local is chartered, it is 
obligated to aiBliate with the joint council. 

The CiiAiRisrAN. The council controls the charters, so when a new 
local is formed, it has to come to the council to get its charter and 
thus become associated with the council. 

Mr. Kennedy. No. "What happens is the international grants the 
charter, but once the charter is granted the local union must affiliate 
with the joint council. It has been a procedure in the past that prior 
to the international granting the charter, they clear through the joint 
council, which is the ruling body in that particular area. That is one 
of the important things of the joint council. 

I would like to stress, Mr. Chairman, and it is about the joint 
council that these hearings and the control of the joint council that 
these hearings will be concerned. 

Now this is a map of the New York City. These are the docks here 
in red, and these are the airports. Newark Airport and LaGuardia 
and the International Airport. All of the goods that come in here 
to the docks must be trucked out of the docks. They have to be trucked 
to their various localities wherever those goods are destined for. 

Into the ]>ort of New York, in 1055, came 191,551,291 tons of cargo. 
It is 20 percent of all of the cargo that comes into the United States; 
comes into the port of New York. 

Once it gets to the ports it has to be trucked out. 

So once again the truckers have conti-ol of that. 

The goods that come into the various airports around New York 
City, Newark Airport, and LaGusu'dia Airport, and Newark Inter- 
national Aii'port, once they arrive there, once again truckers have to 
pick it up. and take the goods where they are destined. 

The railroads for the most part, the main railroad that brings goods 
into New York City comes in here to Hoboken, and unloads there, and 
the goods are then barged across into Manhattan, and from there 
once again the goods have to be taken l)y truck and shipped to the 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3597 

various areas, or if it stops here they have to be taken by truck and 
shipped nortli. 

So the truckei^ have an important and integral part, a key posi- 
tion in the New York area through the fact that they have control 
over the shipping that comes into New York City and control over 
the airport. If that gets into the wrong hands, of course, there can 
be a stranglehold over New York City. 

Now, controlling all of this, this operation, is joint council 16. That 
is the joint council that we were discussing, and that is the one that is 
made up of some 58 locals and some 125,000 members. 

The joint council 16, Mr. Chairman, is the one that sets policy. 

Now, these are surrounding — here are some of the matters that joint 
council 16 controls. For instance, the meat shipments : the joint coi a- 
cil 16 with one of the teamsters locals having control over meat ship- 
ments, they have to look to joint council 16 for their policy. 

They control fruit and vegetable shipments, drugstore deliveries, 
garbage trucks, newspaper trucks. The control of joint council 16 as 
far as the policy of all of these locals is concerned is paramount. Its 
importance is not only the fact that the joint council 16 controls truck- 
ing done by the 58 different locals in New York City, but they have a 
great control over all other unions in New York City. 

The Chairman. Without objection, the Chair is going to order 
that chart printed in the record, at this point, so that we may be 
able to follow it and those who read the record may be able to follow 
and know exactly what we are discussing as you point this out on the 
chart. 

(The chart referred to follows:) 

Services Contkolled by Joint Council 16, International Brotherhood of 
Teamsters, New York, N. Y. 

Air-express trucks Department-store deliveries 

Meat shipments Auto salesmen 
All trucking from ships (191,551,291 of Garbage trucks 

cargo through New York in 1955) Lumber trucks 

Tobacco drivers Ambulance drivers 

Egg packers and graders Milk deliveries 

Furniture drivers Breweries 

All trucking from airports Steel trucking 

Moving vans Newspaper trucks 

Warehouse workers Jukebox installations 

Car washers Service-station attendants 
Drug and chemical industry warehouses Parking attendants 

IMagazine deliveries Railway express trucks 

Bread deliveries All trucking from railroads 

Armored-car drivers Fruit and vegetable shipments 

Clothing drivers Radio and TV equipment shipments 

Grocery drivers Sanitary-truck drivers 

Ice-cream drivers Dry-cleaning deliveries 

Gas and oil trucks Drugstore deliveries 

Hearse drivers Some city employees 

Coal trucks Flower-market drivers 

Senator Mundt, I suggest that the comisel point to the most import- 
ant of those delivery services, which causes me concern as a country 
boy, and that is milk deliveries, because without milk deliveries, New 
York City and all tlie babies die. The joint council controls milk 
deliveries. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 



3598 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. As I say, it is not only a question of the control of 
these various locals, and the trucking of these various locals, but 
the joint council lias an important role in control over all other unions 
in New York City. Once again because it is a teamsters joint 
council. 

As an example, if somebody wants, another union wants to strike a 
particular business, they can strike the business and say for instance 
there are nonunion people in the business. Those nonunion people will 
continue to go into that business in and out. The strike will not really 
have an effect, unless they can stop the trucking from going into that 
business, and stop the pickups and deliveries; if that happens that 
business will have to go out. It will be finished in 2 or 3 days and the 
strike will be a success. 

Who is going to make tlie determination as to whether those trucks 
will go in and out, and whether the milk for instance will be delivered 
if a strike is being conducted at a hotel, or whether food and milk will 
be delivered to that hotel ? Or whether there will be any pickups from 
that hotel ? 

That hotel could not operate if they did not get those deliveries, 
or a business could not operate unless there were pickups and deliveries. 

It is the teamsters joint council that makes that decision. It is the 
teamster joint council which will decide and which does decide whether 
the teamsters will support a strike of another union. They are the 
ones that make the decision as to whether the pickup and deliveries 
will be made. 

Senator Kennedy. I think that point is tremendously important, 
not only the power that the teamsters have in the moving of material, 
but the effect it has on other unions. 

Now, last February 2, Mr. O'Rourke, who I understand is head 
of the joint council 16, speaking from Miami, said, and I quote: 

We are getting our brains beat out every day by these self-appointed re- 
formers. You Icnow we control what moves in and out of a plant or store or busi- 
ness establishment. If we honor a picket line, the strike is won. We get 30 to 
40 requests a day for help, and I am going to be mighty choosey about who 
gets it. 

In other words, Mr. O'Rourke is indicating that those who oppose 
racketeering or corruption in any unions, and those who oppose that 
sort of activity go on strike, Mr. O'Rourke is going to decide whether 
he is going to permit the teamsters to cross that picket line or not. 
Therefore, tliat gives Mr. O'Rourke and that local, that joint council 
rather, free power not only over the economic life of New York but 
over all of the otlier unions who might be completely unconnected with 
the teamster leadership, and who might be opposed to some of their 
activities. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the counsel a 
question. 

Is tliere a standard form of contract used throughout the area of 
the joint council 16, the contracts with the employers? 

Mr. Kennedy. Tliere is not. 

Senator Curtis. But are they all union-shop contracts, or contracts 
that have some form of compulsory membership clauses? 

Mr. Kennedy. It varies, Senator, and it varies in various shops, 
and various businesses. There is a move now on to go more and 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3599 

more toward centralization, and having an areawide contract, but 
that does not exist at the present time. 

Senator Curtis. Some of those contracts are not union shops. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct, and we will develop some of that 
here after we get into it. 

(At this point Senators Goldwater and McNamara entered the 
hearing room.) 

Mr. I^NNEDY. I think in connection with Mr. O'Rourke's state- 
ment, that he said every day they have somewhere between 35 and 
40 requests for supports of strikes, so you can see that this is not just 
a theoretical problem. This is a problem that arises every day, and 
John O'Rourke as president of joint council 16 makes the decision 
every day as to whether they will support that strike, or not support 
it. If they support it, the strike is successful. And if they do not 
support it, the strike will fail. 

Senator Kennedy. The strike of other unions, you mean. 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Now, this goes beyond these unions here, that the joint council con- 
trols directly. This is other unions that they control. That is why 
it has such a great effect on the community life in New York City. 

Now, as I said at the beginning, we are concerned not only — I 
think it would be important if racketeers or hoodlums took over any 
labor union — but this is a fight and a struggle for the control of joint 
council 16 in New York City. During this same period of time, and 
I am talking now of 1955 and 1956, the struggle went beyond the con- 
trol of joint council 16 to an alliance that was made between chiefly 
by James Hoffa and the ILA, the International Longshoremen's 
Association, which controls the docks here in New York City. That 
alliance was made on November 27, 1955, whicli was about the same 
time as the fight took place in New York City for the control of 
joint council 16. 

The alliance continued into the middle of 1956. 

At that time, during the middle of 1956, Mr. Hoffa made arrange- 
ments to loan some $490,000 to ILA. 

Now, the ILA had been ousted from the AFL by Mr. George 
Meany, on the grounds that they were racketeered. They were ousted 
back in 1953. And yet, this alliance was made with this racket-ridden 
union in 1955, and there were arrangements made in 1956 to loan this 
union $590,000. 

That, too, would have gone through except again the intervention 
of Mr. Meany. 

So the control during this period of time could mean the lifeblood 
of New York City, and that is what we are getting into here. 

If the teamsters are controlled or run by hoodlums or gangsters, or 
run by people who have an obligation to hoodlums and gangsters, or 
Communists, then the lifeblood of New York City, and really 
of the United States, can be cut off. It can be a strangulation proc- 
ess. We are going to get into mass extortions, misuse of power, and 
mistreatment of individual union members. 

Senator Mundt. Assuming that the joint council. Bob, is in the 
hands of racketeers and establishes this control, about how many 
racketeers would Moscow have to buy off in that way to control New 
York City? 



3600 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. I have no idea, Senator. 

Senator Mtjndt. You have some idea of how many people there 
are on the joint council ? 

Mr. Kennedy. My point is not so much that perhaps the joint coun- 
cil itself is run by racketeers or hoodlums, and we are going to bring 
out some information on that, but that these people have an obligation 
to gangsters and hoodlums, because they would not have achieved 
their position of power unless they had made a deal a year or 2 years 
or 4 years earlier with some hoodlum or gangster, in order to get to 
that position. I think that that is the risk. 

Now, the same risk applies certainly as far as Communists are 
concerned. If you make an arrangement with a Coromunist that 
you are going to get to a position of power, if they do a favor for 
you, you in turn cannot turn your back on them in 2 years, and say, 
"Now I have gotten head of the miion. If you come before a con- 
gressional committee and take the fifth amendment, I don't care; 
I am not going to turn my back on you. I am going to support you. 

"If the congressional committee, or a grand jury, brings out infor- 
mation that you have been misusing union funds and misusing your 
position or have Communist affiliations, I will not turn my back on 
you. I have gotten to my position because of your help."' 

Senator Mundt. It is precisely the point I am trying to make. Un- 
less we believe we are living in a dream world, if we anticipate that 
there is any conceivable threat of an attack from Russia, it is so 
easy under this mechanism for the Communists either dealing with 
the racketeers or replacing them, to give orders which could paralyze 
the city at any giA^en hour or any given day, preliminary so some 
military movement that the Communist government might be en- 
deavoring to make. 

We think in terms of national defense, and we think in terms of a 
war potential, of the greatest city in the world. 

Unless you believe that the men of ISfoscow operate with brains of 
sawdust, they know it and they think about that. This provides them 
a tremendous opportunity to control that vast city without firing 
a shot. 

Mr. Kennedy. In that connection, in 1934 I believe, the Commu- 
nists did recognize the unportance of the teamsters, and gained con- 
trol over the line drivers that operated out of Minneapolis, and actu- 
ally gained control over them. 

Senator Mundt. Anyone who has read the Communist mandates, 
and studied the Communist literature, recognizes that one of the 
essential principles of the whole Communist movement in this country 
is to locate the positions of power, and to try to attain them. Obvi- 
ously, this is a tremendously important position of power. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, I was saying that there was control of this 
group by racketeers or hoodlums who can get to extortions and ar- 
rive at groups of extortioiis. 

Mr. Chairman, during this period of time the district attorney, 
Mr. Hogan, was keeping a close watch and touch on all of these 
affairs. Under the State law he is allowed to put a tap on telephones. 
He put a tap on a telephone call which is of some importance and 
gives the committee a picture as to how some of these extortions take 
place. We have received a court order from the State of New York, 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3601 

signed by a judge, giving this committee permission to play this 
telephone call as well as certain other telephone calls that we will 
play later in the hearings, and I think it might give you a picture 
as to how some of these extortions take place, or at least preliminary 
negotiations for an extortion, if we could play this telephone call at 
the present time. 

The Chairman. Do you want to play it now ? 

Mr. Kennedy. I would like to play it now. 

The Chairman. How is this telephone call or this tapping ob- 
tained ? 

Mr. Kennedy. It was obtained by Mr. Hogan, district attorney in 
New York City, under a court order. He received court permission 
to put the tap on the particular telephone, and the tap was obtained, 
and then they in turn turned it over to this committee under a court 
order from the State of New York. 

The Chairman. The Chair will make this observation : This has 
been discussed in conference or executive session of the committee. 
The Chair satisfied himself, and I think other members of the com- 
mittee who attended that session are satisfied that it would be per- 
fectly proper for this committee to make use of this testimony. In 
some areas, and for some purposes wiretapping is illegal, but in New 
York, as Senator Ives I am sure is familiar 

Senator Ives. It has been legal in New York for many years. 

The Chairman. Therefore the wiretapping that we shall use here, 
that we shall play, was obtained legally, and the court has granted 
authority to this committee to make use of it, and therefore I shall 
without objection, order printed in the record at this point the order 
of the court authorizing and directing this committee to make use 
of this as evidence in this hearing. 

This will be printed in the record at this point, Mr. Reporter. 

(The court order referred to follows :) 

Court of Gener-»-l Sessions, County of New York 

In the Matter of Intercepting Telephonic Communications Transmitted 
OvKU EXeter 2-0219 and EXeter 2-0220 

It appearing from the affidavit of Alfred J. Scotti. Chief Assistant District 
Attorney of the County of New York, sworn to on April 30, 1957, that it is in the 
public interest to furnish to the United States Senate Select Committee on 
Improper Activities in the Labor or IManagement Field, of which the Honorable 
John L. McClellan, of Arkansas, is Chairman, and Robert F. Kennedy is Chief 
Counsel, certain transcripts and information with respect to the interception of 
telephonic communications durintj the periods August 5. 1955. to February 1, 
1956, and February 3, 1956, to August 1, 1956. which were transmitted over the 
telephone instruments designated as EXeter 2-0219 and EXeter 2-0220, listed in 
the name of Local 405. Retail Clerks International Association, a labor organiza- 
tion affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, located at premises 
5 Court Square, Long Island City, County of C,»ucens, fur the use of said committee 
in connection with and in the course of its said investigation, it is 

Ordered, that the District Attorney of New York County be, and he hereby is, 
authorized and empowered to furnish said Committee with the transci'ipts and 
information with respect to the interception of telephonic communications trans- 
mitted over each of the above identified telephone instruments during the periods 
set forth hereinabove, for the use of said Committee in connection with and in the 
course of its said investigation. 

Dated, New York, N. Y., July 1, 1957. 

(Signed) J. C. G. S. 
89330— 57— pt. 10 ^2 



3602 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Court of General Sessions County of New York 

In the Matter of Intercepting Telephonic Communications Transmitted 
Over EXeter 2-0219 and EXeter 2-0220 

State of New York, 

Cottnty of New York ss.: 

Alfred J. Scotti, being duly sworn, deposes and says : 

I am the Chief Assistant District Attorney in and for the County of New York 
and in charge of the Rackets Bureau of the District Attorney's Office. 

This is an application for an order permitting the District Attorney of New 
York County to furnish to the United States Senate Select Committee on Improper 
Activities in the Labor or Management Field, of which the Honorable John L. 
McClellan, of Arkansas, is Chairman, and Robert F. Kennedy is Chief Counsel, 
certain transcripts and information with respect to the interception of telephonic 
communications transmitted over EXeter 2-0219 and EXeter 2-0220, listed in 
the name of Local 405, Retail Clerks International Association, a labor organ- 
ization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, located at premises 5 
Court Square, Long Island City, County of Queens, during the periods herein- 
below set forth. 

On January 30, 1957, the Senate of the United States duly adopted a resolution 
by which the said Committee was authorized to investigate improper activities 
in the labor or management field, with the purpose of obtaining information 
upon which the United States Senate could consider the advisability of adopting 
new legislation or modifying or amending present statutes. 

The said Committee thereafter conducted both public and private hearings 
with this end in view, and has subpoenaed and interrogated numerous witnesses 
from various localities and States of the United States. 

The Committee is now planning to extend its investigation to the area of New 
York State and in this connection has issued, or contemplates the issuance of, 
a subpoena to Max Chester, a former official and business representative of the 
said local, for interrogation in connection with said investigation. 

In August 19.56, and again subsequent to January 30, 1957, the date the said 
resolution above referred to was adopted, said Chief Counsel of said Committee 
requested that this office furnish him, for the use of the said Committee, all 
transcripts and information reflecting the interception of all telephonic com- 
munications transmitted over the telephone instruments hereinabove described. 

The records of this office reveal that the telephonic communications trans- 
mitted over said instruments were intercepted during the periods hereinbelow 
set forth. All of said interceptions were pursuant to orders issued by Judges of 
the Court of General Sessions under Section S13a of the Code of Criminal Pro- 
cedure. 

The dates during which the said telephonic communications were inter- 
cepted were August 5, 1955, to February 1, 1956, and February 3. 1956, to August 
1, 1956. 

It is respectfully submitted that the District Attorney of New York County be 
authorized, in the public interest, to furnish to the United States Senate Select 
Committee on Improper Activities in the Labor or IManagement Field the said 
transcripts and other information for the use of said Committee in connection 
with and in the course of its said investigation. 

No previous application has been been made for the order herein requested. 

(Signed) Alfred J. Scotti. 

Sworn to before me this 30th day of April 1957. 

(Signed) Kathryn A. Donohue, 
Notary Public, State of New York, No. 31-0993100. Qualified in New 
York County. 

Commission expires March 30, 1959. 

Senator McNamara. Before you go into the recording 

Do I understand that Senator Goldwater had a question ? I would 
be glad to yield, Senator, if you want the attention of the Chair, before 
I ask a question. 

Senator Goldwater. Wliat I have can wait. 

The Chairman. Just a moment. We will put the others in later. 

All right. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITrES ZNT THE LABOR FIELD 3603 

Senator McNamara. Mr. Chairman, we have been given a pretty 
good picture of one side of the trucking industry — I would like the 
attention of the chief counsel, if I may have it. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am sorry. 

Senator McNamara. We have a pretty good picture of one side of 
the trucking industry in the New York area, and you indicate the Joint 
Council No. 16 made up of 58 locals, and 125,000 union members, is 
the labor side of the picture. How about the management side of the 
picture? Do they have an organization comparable to the joint coun- 
cil? 

Mr, Kennedy. Not with the degree of control, Senator. There are 
some associations of truckers in New York City. 

Senator McNamara. Do you have the names of those associations? 

Mr. Kennedy. VYe have one : The Empire Trucking Association. 

Senator McNamara. Does that embrace this whole area? 

Mr. IvENNEDY. I will have to check that. We don't know in what 
area. It is in New York City, and we don't know in what area the Em- 
pire Trucking Association is. 

Senator McNamara. Ordinarily, where we find joint councils of em- 
ployees, we find comparable organizations of management. If there 
is extortion, and if there is racketeering, ordinarily there are both sides 
involved. I think when we go into a situation, we ought to get both 
sides of the picture so that we will know who we are dealing with and 
what we are dealing with. I think we got half of the picture of the 
trucking industry pretty well disclosed here this morning, and there 
is certainly the other half that we ought to have more information on. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is fine, Senator. 

The Chairman. Are there other questions or comments before we 
proceed ? 

Mr. Kennedy. I might just say about this recording, it involves 
a gentleman by the name of Max Chester, and he was formerly presi- 
dent of local 227 of the UAW-AFL, which we will go into at a lat^r 
time. 

He was involved in a bribery charge in that union and left it. He 
then established or went to work for local 405 of the retail clerks. It 
was as an officer of local 405 of the retail clerks that this telephone 
conversation took place. 

I might say that subsequently to this telephone conversation, the 
district attorney moved in on Mr. Chester and he was indicted and 
pleaded guilty to taking a $2,000 bribe. 

The Chairman. Are you ready to proceed with the recording ? 

Now, it is understood, and am I correct, that this recording and 
this wire recording was obtained from the State officials of New York ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

The Chairman. All right. 

(The following recording was played.) 

Max Chester. Mr. Wallau? 

Wallau. Yes? 

Chester. Mr. Wallau, this is in regard to your slipper place. 

"Wali^au. Regard to what, sir? 

Chester. This is regard to your shop. This is local 405, Mr. Chester speak- 
ing, business manager. We have an organizational campaign going on around 
your area in regard to your shop. Are you listening? 

Wallatt. Yes, sure. 



3604 IMPROPER AcnvrriES in the labor field 

Chester. Now, before we start doing any agitation, we always like to give 
the employer the courtesy of sitting down and talking, and maybe for the pur- 
pose of having a fine conference and getting along together 

Wallau. What type of union do you run? 

Chester. Well, we have a catch-all charter, Mr. Wallau, and we are the AFL. 

Wallau. Anything and everything in what area? 

Chester. We organize the unorganized. Now, I don't want to start any 
agitation because we did it in a few other places and it only cost the employer 
money and he did sign anyway. Now 

Wallau. You already said that, my friend, I just have — I just have to ask a 
few questions to find out just what the situation is. I'm not trying to be smart 
about it ; I know nothing about it. 

Chester. Well, there's no use in me discussing matters over the phone. We 
couldn't come to any conclusion one way or the other in that respect anyway. 

Wallau. Then, what'U you suggest? 

Chester. Well, I suggest to have a conference ; sit down in person and talk. 

Wallau. Well, that would be fine. We have no objection to that. 

Chester. When would your nearest time be, before I really start any agita- 
tion 

( Subdued laughter heard over the phone. ) 

Chester. So, you're laughing. It's a 

Wallau. It's the third time you used that word. 

Chester. Well, because I'll tell you why we did. We did have a strike out 
with Gustav, and we signed them up the same day. There's no reason why we 
should go on that way again. It only costs the person money for no reason 
at all. Why isn't this and that 

Wallau. Yes, well, I haven't any idea what 

Chester. You heard of Gu.stjiv ; didn't you? 

Wallau. I know the name. 

Chester. Yeah ; well, I guess so 

Wallau. You see, I haven't any idea whether the standard that your local 
sets up would be agreeable to our men or, or 

Chester. Oh, they'll be agreeable to your men, don't worry about that. The 
standard that we set up 

Wallau. Because we run a pretty nice shop- 



Chester. We knov;' that; everybody runs a pretty nice shop but the idea is 
the envelope — is it nice? 

Watj.au. I I)eg your pardon? 

Chester. Is the envelope nice? 

Wallau. Oh, yes. 

Chester. Well, we try to make the envelope better. 

Wallau. Well, I'm sure you do. 

Chester. (Sarcastic laughter.) 

Wallau. I'm sure you do. I understand that phase of the operation, abso- 
lutely. May I have yuur name? 

Chester. Mr. Chester. 

Wallau. Chester? 

Chester. C-h-e-s-t-e-r. 

Wallau. And how can I get in touch with you? 

Chester. Well, I'm right now in my oflQce and it was very imperative that 
I call you because I'll tell you why. My men, we're going to start operation in 
your place down somewhere :i round 20th Street where you do your shipping; is 
that correct? 

Wallau. We certainly do 

Citestkr. So I told them to stop it until I speak to the owner of the shop. 

Wallau. Well, I can understand that, too, well [laughing as he talks]. 

Chester. So, we know all your detail ; how you operate from one place to 
.•mother, so, I mean I'm trying to curtail a lot of things so, in other words, you 
conld help both sides of the picture. 

Wallait. Well, that sounds very nice of you, Mr. Chester. Now, what is your 
proposal? How soon do yon feel it is imperative that we get together? 

Chester. Well, it's imperative that we get together momentarily. I'll be 
honest with you. 

Wallau. Well, momentarily 

Chester. You know 

Wallau. Is it 24 hours, 48 hours? 

Chester. Momentarily could be within an hour or two. It don't have to be 
24 or 48. Am I speaking to Alex Wallau himself? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3605 

Wallatj. You are speaking to Wallau, Jr. 

Chestek. Wallau, Jr. Fine. Don't tell me Dad is somewhere in the Tahitian 
Islands. 

Waixau. No ; he's actually not. 

Chestee. Oh, I see. 

Wallau. He's not in today, however. 

Chester. You make decisions yourself, or do you have to 

Wallau. I've been known to make 1 or 2. 

Chester. Huh? 

Wallau. I've been known to make 1 or 2. 

Chester. Oh, you've been known to make 1 or 2. Were they good or bad? 
[Laughter.] 

Wallau. [Inaudible.] 

Chester. Well, that's all right; you're batting pretty good. Well, what 
could I tell you outside of, it's, it's important? 

Wallau. Is, is, is the fact that 

Chester. Mr. Wallau 

Wallau. That I'm hesitating has nothing to do with the 

Chester. That's all right ; it's probably something that hit you right away 
and you want to collect your 

Wallau. No, no. I want to work it into a very busy schedule. I realize the 
importance of it. We're quite- 



Chester. Well, I'm pretty busy too- 



Wallau. Conversant with these problems. We are — I assure you over the 
years they come up a number of times, and it's no different today than it has 
been. I know that you'll be very fair and very nice to talk with and I want 
to arrange it as quickly as I can. However, we're not accustomed to being 
pushed into things 

Chester. Well, I'm not pushing you; you asked me is it imperative 

Wallau. Yes ; it is imperative to you. On the other hand 

Chester. Listen a minute. The reason why I called you ; I shouldn't even of 
told yon this because I feel, well, on my own I took it upon myself — which I am 
the boss here — and I took it upon myself and told these men to stop doing any- 
thing until I spoke to the owner, well, whoever is in charge. I thought I'd give 
you that courtesy 

Wallau. Mr. Chester, but that, that's usual union practice. I mean you people 
have a 

Chester. No ; they don't. The usual union practice is to go out and picket and 
come what may. The boss or someone contacts the union or somehow or some- 
body representing the boss will 

Wallau. Well, then, let's say that you're doing that with me. We approve. 
We understand because we've had some — some understanding of these things. 
Naturally, you have to keep abreast of it. 

Chester. Well, that's the best way 

Wallau. Sure, that's how we've been able to operate and keep everybody 
reasonably contented with the pay envelope to which you refer. [Both men 
laugh.] Supposing, although I admit that even with the union scales nobody 
is completely happy with their pay envelopes. That's human nature 

Chester. Now there, in other words, you're trying to regard things as an 
exaggeration ; is that right? 

Wallau. We do everything we can. We do the best we can for everybody but 
whether or not we're doing it according to your standards has yet to be estab- 
lished. We want to talk to you and figure that out. It would be very interesting 
to do so 

Chester. Off the record, could you tell me about how many employees you 
have? 

Wallau. No ; but I'd like to do that when we sit down together and see whether 
it is worth your while or not to even fool around with us ; we may be too small 
to 

Chester. It could be. it could be eighty, a hundred, three, four, or a thousand ; 
it doesn't make a particle of difference 

Wallau. Well, that's what we'll figure out when we get together with you. I 
feel that it could be done after lunch tomorrow if .vou feel that that's agreeable. 

Chester. Well, I have 2 appointments ; 1 at 1 o'clock and 1 at 11. 

Wallau. Why don't we 

Chester. Could you make it at 9 : 30 — 9 : 30 in the moi-ning? 

Wallau. Well 



3606 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Chester. I'd only take up about 20 minutes of your time. That's all it usually 
takes me. 

Wallau. Yes ; well, I'll tell you 

Chester. I'll give you all of the fundamentals 

Wallau. Morning mail at 9 : 30 in the morning. 

Chester. Well, suppose we make it at 10 thenV 

Waixau. Let's make it at 10 o'clock. 

Chester. Ten o'clock. In other words, I stopped everything just today. 

Wallau. Ah 

Chester. But my men will be right at the situation till after we finish talking. 

Wallau. Fine. Ton keep them there, Mr. Chester. 

Chester. All right. 

Wallau. See you at 10 o'clock. 

(Phones laid down.) 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question ? 

Mr. Kennedy, is that not a threat of organizational picketing? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes ; the employees of this plant were not contacted. 
This was the conversation that takes place and the employees were 
not consulted as to whether they wanted to belong to a union. 

This was a threat of putting a picket line outside of the establish- 
ment and trying to force the employer then to have his employees 
sign a union contract. 

Senator Goldwater. The employees of this Wallau Co., is that the 
correct name, were not organized at this time ? 

Mr. Kennedy. They had not been approached even at the time Max 
Chester had this telephone conversation and after Max Chester went to 
visit Mr. Wallau on the following day, a $2,000 payment was made to 
Max Chester and those employees were never organized or never 
even approacliecl after that and the shop remained unorganized. 

Senator Goldwater. Who made that payment ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Wallau, the owner's son made the payment. 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Wallau gave in and paid $2,000 ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir; and Mr. Max Chester pleaded guilty to 
extortion and ref^iving the $2,000 payment and he is awaiting sentence 
at the present time. 

Senator Goldwater. At no time during these proceedings were the 
men consulted as to whether they wanted to join the union or become 
organized ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

Senator Goldwater. Is this a typical pattern that we are going 
to see throughout these particular hearings ? 

Mr. Kennedy. This is a pattern, not the organized pattern that is 
used by labor unions, but it is a pattern that is used by certain of 
these gangsters and hoodlums in New York City. 

It is these people that we are going to show, it is these people that 
operate these unions that use these practices that gave the votes and 
gave control of the joint council 16 to the group that controls it now. 

It is these people that were called upon for assistance when the 
joint council IG vote was in question. 

Senator Goldwater. ^Ylien I said these hearings, I mean this par- 
ticular set of hearings and I realize this is not general vmion practice. 

Now, I have one other question that might be related. I have not 
been able to ask you about this before. To allow this type of gang- 
ster operation to go on in a relatively small area of Manhattan, has it 
been necessary to receive the cooperation of local governments ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3607 

Mr. Kennedy. I do not think so. We have no evidence of that. I 
do not think during our investigation that we have found anyone that 
has done more in a community to rid the community of gangsterism 
than Mr. PTogan and his office. Without their cooperation and help, 
we would not even be able to begin to present any kind of a hearing. 

We have not received any information that there have been any 
other law or Government authorities that have assisted these people. 
We do not have any information about that. 

Senator Goldwater. Have you discovered any evidence of violence 
in picketing that has been condoned by, say, the local police depart- 
ment? 

Mr. Kennedy. No, and in fact I would not think there was a great 
deal of violence in picketing in New York City, as far as this procedure 
is concerned. That is not the procedure that is followed. 

Violence and the type of terrorism that existed before, it does not 
exist in New York City like it exists in certain other areas. They are 
far more refined in New York City. 

Senator Goldwater. That is questionable, but actually, with the 
hold that these people have on this island, violence is not needed. I 
recognize that. This teamster organization in Manhattan can effec- 
tively close that city down. They can do it on their own wishes, or 
they can do it at the request of those who want to strike. There is 
probably not a place in the United States that is so susceptible to the 
threat of union power as exercised in the wrong way as Manhattan is ; 
would that be correct? 

Mr. Kennedy. The potential certainly exists there, Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. They could effectively stop the traffic in the 
tubes, and they could effectively stop the traffic over the bridges and 
there could be no food and no milk or supplies brought into the city 
for any period of time that the teamsters wanted to hold it; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct, Senator. I think a teamster official 
recently said, showing the control over human beings : 

We drive the taxi tliat brings the woman to the hospital to have her baby. 
When that baby grows up and becomes a man and dies, we drive the hearse that 
brings that person to the graveyard. In between we deliver an awful lot of 
groceries. 

Senator Goldwater. Would I be safe in assuming that when we 
have finished this particular set of hearings on New York, that the 
pattern of union power, the sovereign power that now is vested in the 
unions, will be brought more and more to the light of the American 
people, and through the improper actions of this particular set of 
unions we can point out what has been developed here so far and 
which I feel will be developed more and more, the fact that we have 
one segment of our society, if you want to call it that, or one segment 
of our economic life that is operating completely without the bounds 
of any control of Federal or State laws. 

I think these hearings, even if they produce a long line of fifth 
amendments, will do a lot of good because it will point up to the 
American people the dangers that are inherent in power. 

I do not care if it is in management or labor. Would you agree 
with that? 

Mr. Kennedy. Any conclusions will have to be made by the mem- 
bers of the committee. 



3608 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. The Chair would like to ask one question to get 
this in its proper perspective. I do not understand that the testimony 
or the recording is regarded or intended to imply that all labor unions 
operate in that fashion. 

It is simply to contradistinguish between the legitimate union organ- 
izing and those who are crooks that get control and use the power of 
the union for extortion. That is what happened in this instance. 

Mr. Kennedy. It is a relatively minor group, Mr. Chairman. We 
have spent a great deal of time in New York City. 

Senator Ives. While we are on this subject, I want to put in a word 
for labor organizations in New York State. The vast majority of 
them are very high grade, run by leaders who are perfectly honest. 
They are not in this category at all. 

So I hope the general public would not get the idea that this is 
representative of organized labor in New York State. It is not at all. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. Kennedy, 
in reference to this telephone conversation that we have just gone 
through, it is apparent that Mr. Chester did not represent any of the 
workers in Mr. Wallau's plant ; is that correct ? 

Mr. KJENNEDY. The workers in the plant had not even been ap- 
proached. Senator. 

Senator Curtis. Now, is there any law that you recall dealing with 
an individual holding himself out as a bargaining agent when in 
truth and in fact he does not represent any of the workers at all, or 
his organization ? 

Mr. Kennedy. I am sorry. Will you repeat the question ? 

Senator Curtis. Is there any law making it an offense for someone 
to hold himself out as a bargaining agent when he does not represent 
any of the workers ? 

Mr. Kennedy. As I understand it, there is no law to prevent a 
picket line being placed in front of a business. 

Senator Curtis. I understand that. But what I mean is for an 
individual to talk terms, or, in other words, to negotiate with manage- 
ment when he does not represent the workers inside. 

Mr. Kennedy. There is no law at the present time. 

Senator Curtis. I would just want to say this in reference to the 
observations made here, that I concur in what the chairman has said 
and the distinguished Senator from New York, about the fact that 
only a very small percent of the unions are in the hands of hoodlums 
and bad characters. 

But I do not believe that the problem we are wrestling here with 
is solved wlien we merely drive them out of the labor-union movement. 

Congress is responsible for having laws that lay too much power in 
some places and make it an invitation for bad men to seize that power. 
We have not given enough protection to the people who do the work, 
the rank and file of the union members. 

The Chairman. I would like to ask one other question to get the 
record straight. Was Mr. Chester at the time, in fact, an official of 
any union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, he was. 

The Chairman. What was his official position? 

Mr. KjiNNEDY. He was secretary- treasurer of the Eetail Clerks 
Union. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3609 

The Chairman. That is what it showed, but it was not in the 
record. He definitely was secretary-treasurer ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Of local 405. 

The Chairman. That was not a teamster union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No ; it was not. 

Senator McNamara. Following up the question I asked before 
about organization of employers, do you find that this man Wallau was 
a member of any association of trucking owners ? 

Mr. Kennedy. He did not have a trucking concern, Senator. 

Senator McNamara. What was the nature of his business ? 

Mr. Kennedy. He made slippers. 

Senator McNamara. I see. 

The Chairman. He manufactured them or just sold them ? 

Mr. Kennedy. He manufactured slippers. 

Senator R^s. How many employees did he have ? 

Mr. Kennedy. We do not know, Senator Ives. 

Senator Ives. That question arose, you know, during their con- 
versation and I was curious. 

Mr. Kennedy. I do not know the answer to that. 

The Chairman. All right, proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, to understand this picture as far as what oc- 
curred in joint council 16, we have to go back to the year 1950 and the 
union called a UAW-AFL. 

The Chairman. That union is still in existence ? 

Mr. Kennedy. It is not now, Mr. Chairman, since the middle of 
1956, as the Allied Industrial Workers of America, and it has its 
headquarters out in Los Angeles, Calif. 

The Chairman. The name of it has been changed, but it has been a 
continuing labor organization? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is right. 

In the late 1930's, the UAW split into 2 parts, 1 CIO and 1 
AFL. This is the UAW-AFL and it had that name until the middle 
of 1956, when after the merger it was ruled that they should change 
their name and they changed their name to the Allied Industrial 
Workers of America. 

They have approximately 80,000 members, in 318 locals throughout 
the United States and their headquarters are in Los Angeles, Calif. 

Senator McNamara. So we might follow this more closely, Mr. 
Chairman; what is the relation now with this situation to the truck- 
ing industry that we outlined at the start? 

Mr. Kennedy. Once again, a great number of the UAW unions, 
UAW-AFL, were amalgamated locals. They went to organize the 
unorganized. Their connection with the truckers and the team- 
sters I will show with another chart and their relationship of this 
UAW-AFL and the teamsters and the joint council 16 will be de- 
veloped as we go along. 

Senator McNamara. Will you give me the local number that we 
are dealing with in this instance ? 

Mr. Kennedy. As we go along, I will do that. The joint council 
16 of the teamsters is the only one that we really discussed. 

Senator McNamara. But this fellow represented himself in con- 
versation that we just heard, not as an official of the joint council, 
or did he ? 



3610 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. My only point in that was in a sample, a classic 
example of what can happen if racketeers or hoodlums take over a 
labor union. 

He has a relationship with Johnny Dio and the UAW-AFL. 

Senator McNamara, That will be developed later. 

Mr. KIennedy. He was kicked out of there for bribery. We have 
this telephone conversation when he was convicted of extortion and 
it was a classic example as to what can happen. Max Chester is of 
interest to us because of his relationship with Johnny Dio. 

As I say, this is going to relate to the international union of the 
UAW-AFL, and they began their operations in New York City in 
September of 1950. 

At that time there was a man in New York City by the name of 
Sam Zackman, who had been in the labor movement. During the 
1930's he had been a Communist and he remained a Communist un- 
til sometime during the 1940's. 

He fought in Spain and he was a commissar with the army in 
Spain, fighting with the Communists. He came back and he was 
in the labor union movement and during the early part of 1950 he was 
attempting to get a charter, so that he could start organizing the un- 
organized. 

We had a conversation with a Sam Berger and Zackman had this 
conversation with Sam Berger at this period of time and he said, 
"I am looking around for a charter." 

Sam Berger at that time was manager of local 102 of the ILGWU 
and that is the International Ladies' Garment Workers Union, Lo- 
cal 102 of the Ladies' Garment Workers Union does the shipping in 
the garment district. 

There has always been a dispute between the ladies' garment work- 
ers and the teamsters as to who should have that jurisdiction because 
this is actually trucking jurisdiction. But the International Ladies' 
Garment Workers have always controlled that. 

Sam Berger has been the manager of that union. Sam Berger 
had been a friend of long standing with Johnny Dio. When he was 
approached by Sam Zackman, he then had some conversations with 
Paul Dorfman who is a well-known character or figure from Chicago, 
111., and has had a close relationship with the old Capone mob. 

In turn they approached a man by the name of Dave Privian and 
they all went to see Tony Doria, Anthony Doria, this gentleman here, 
out in Minneapolis or Milwaukee where the headquarters of the UAW- 
AFL was at that time. 

They spoke to Doria and he agreed to grant a charater to Sam 
Zackman and the charter members at that time were Sam Zackman, 
Paul Dorfman, and I might say as far as Paul Dorfman is concerned 
that his son now handles the insurance for the central conference of 
teamsters. 

The Chairman. At this point, since you are referring to another 
chart, I will order the chart printed in the record at this point so that 
those who read the record may follow it. 

(The chart is as follows ;) 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 



3611 




3612 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. The original charter members — there were approxi- 
mately 16, the ones that were interested — were Sam Zachman, Paul 
Dorfman, Dave Privian, who is now the attorney for the central 
conference of teamsters, which is Mr. Hoffa's group, and Berger, 
Dorfman, and Zackman. 

Senator Ives. May I interrupt you there ? I notice the name of Jolm 
Dioguardi up there on top. That is Johnny Dio, I take it ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

Senator I\ts. Under the United Automobile Workers, AFL, New 
York. Is he the controlling force in that setup with all of these 
people you are mentioning now, directly under him ? 

Mr. Kennedy. I am only here at the present time, which is Sep- 
tember 19, 1950, when the charter was originally granted. 

Senator Curtis. Will you tell us what that charter was ? 

Mr. Kennedy. It was a charter to organize, an amalgamated charter 
and it was the first time the UAW-AFL came into the New York 
City area. It was to organize the unorganized, any kind of a shop. 

Senator Curtis. It gave the holders of that charter a right to go any 
place and organize a union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Any group of employees. 

Senator Curtis. It Avas not a charter to a particular organization. 

Mr. Kennedy. No. 

Senator Curtis. It was sort of a blanket right for them to go out 
and organize ? 

Mr. Kennedy . That is right. A week after this charter was granted, 
which is September 18, 1950, Johnny Dioguardi came on the scene. 
There is some evidence he was involved in this right from the begin- 
ning, but they wanted to keep his name off the original charter. 

His name does not appear on the original charter granted on Sep- 
tember 19, 1950, but within a week, they started to make arrange- 
ments, led by Sam Zackman, and they started to make arrangements 
to get a headquarters. 

Johnny Dioguardi was introduced and he said he would finance the 
operation. He would finance the headquarters and he would put his 
money, his own personal money into this operation. He was interested 
in organizing the unorganized. 

At the same time that he came into the labor union movement, 
Johnny Dioguardi ran a number of dress concerns, and a number 
of them in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, which were not unionized 
and which he had kept nonunion. 

Subsequently, he sold one of these dress firms and while he was 
working for local 102 he sold this dress firm to another person and 
charged $5,500 over the price with the understanding that that $5,500 
was paid in order to keep that shop from being organized. 

The Chairman. Now, is Dio identified with that union at the 
time? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, he was identified as far as financing the opera- 
tions of the union and as far as working out of the union head- 
quarters. He had not become an official member until 1951. 

The Chairman. But he was Avorking for that union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. And he was financing it. 

The Chairman. He was financing tliat union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 



rMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3613 

The Chairman. When he sold his own plant, he added $5,500 on 
the sale price to grant them the privilege to remain unorganized, 
just as he had operated the plant. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

The Chairman. Did he do that in the name of the union, and did he 
have authority to do it in the name of the union, or was that just an 
individual act ? 

Mr. Kennedy. It was just an individual act. Local 102 of the 
UAW would not have had jurisdiction over that plant anyway. But 
he had contacts and power that he could keep this plant from being 
organized. 

Senator Ives. Where did he get his money to finance the union? 

Mr. KJENNEDY. That he has refused to say, where he got the money. 

Subsequently, he put in at least $25,000 in this union, local 102 and 
local 102 which started an organization of the taxicabs in 1952. 

Senator Curtis. I am not sure that I understand the connection of 
the International Ladies' Garment Workers Union to that 102 local 
that came into being in September of 1950. 

Mr. Kennedy. The only connection, Senator, is that Sam Berger 
was manager of local 102 of the ILGWU. That was his operation. 
For some reason, unexplained, he came in and got a charter for Sam 
Zackman, of local 102 of the LTAW, AFL. At that time he was a 
close friend of Johnny Dio. 

Within a week of that, a week of the time the charter was granted, 
Johnny Dio came into the operation of local 102 of the LTAW, AFL. 
There is a question as to why Sam Berger of the ILGWU even got 
involved in this kind of an operation. 

Senator Curtis. Does Mr. Diibinsky enter into it at all? 

Mr. Kennedy. Not that I know of. 

Senator Ives. May I ask whether you consulted Mr. David Dubinsky 
on this? 

Mr. Kennedy. I did. 

Senator Ives. What did you find out from him ? 

Mr. Kennedy. He was very concerned at the entrance of Mr. Ber- 
ger into this operation. He, at that time, said that he had repri- 
manded Sam Berger for doing that and subsequently, Berger ap- 
peared before a grand jury in New York City and after he appeared 
before the Senate Subcommittee of Investigations down here he took 
the fifth amendment on some questions, and he was suspended from his 
job. 

Senator Ives. I have known Mr. Dubinsky for a great many years. 
He enjoys a very enviable reputation in New York City and as a very 
outstanding citizen of New York. I think you can rely on his testi- 
mony. 

Senator McNamara. Apparently, the main character in this 

Mr. Kennedy. Operation? 

Senator McNamara. That is a good word ; I will accept that — is one 
Johnny Dio. He enters the picture in the first place not from the 
labor side, but from the management side. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

Senator McNamara. He owns one kind of business. 

INIr. Kennedy. He had been sent to jail in the late 1930's by Tom 
Dewey and Tom Dewey described him at that time, and he said — 

Johuuy Diogiiardi is a youug gorilla wlio began his career at the age of 15. 



3614 IMPROPER ACnVITIES m THE LABOR FIELD 

After he was convicted, he was convicted as a "head knocker" for 
a group of truckers, for truckers associations. He was responsible 
for the strong-arm tactics of bringing truckers into this association. 
He and his uncle, James Fumari. This was in the late 1930's and 
both of them were sent to Sing Sing at that time. 

After he got out of Sing Sing, he went into various operations, in- 
cluding the control and running of dress shops. These were non- 
union dress shops. 

Senator McNajiara. He was originally, apparently, hired as a 
hoodlum to resist the labor organization. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is right. 

Senator Goldwater. If I might, Mr. Chairman, ask Mr. Kennedy 
this question : 

Some years ago there was a character in New York by the name of 
Fay, I believe that name is right. He wound up in Sing Sing. He 
was visited during his stay in Sing Sing by a number of individuals 
connected, I imagine with management and with labor. 

Does Mr. Fay's name show up any place in these operations? 

Mr. Kennedy. No, it does not. 

Senator Goldwater. That is sort of surprising. 

Mr. Kennedy. I would not say Mr. Fay's name does not show up 
in other investigations we are conducting in New York City, but he 
does not show up in this particular investigation. 

Senator Goldwater. I am glad to hear that. I did not want him 
to feel neglected. 

Mr. Kennedy. He won't be. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. So they started their operations as an amalgamated 
charter on September 18, 1950. Johnny Dio came into the picture 
shortly afterward. 

On April 23, 1951, some 6 months later, the second charter was 
granted to local 102 and the first one was withdrawn and the second 
one was granted and at that time Johnny Dioguardi's name actually 
appears on the charter. 

Johnny Dioguardi, as I said, was financing the operations of 
local 102 at this time. More and more, as it moved along, he was 
taking control of the operations from Sam Zackman. 

Subsequently, Sam Zackman was kicked out of the union, and 
Johnny Dioguardi took control completely. 

The Chairman. Why was it necessary to grant another charter? 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, the only explanation that we have, Mr. Chair- 
man, is the fact that they wanted to legalize Johnny Dioguardi's 
operations in the charter. That is in the control of local 102. His 
name had not appeared in the original charter and in the second 
charter his name did appear. 

The Chairman. Then he became officially identified with the union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. That is in April 23, 1951. 

Senator McNamara. Before you go on, I missed a link here some- 
where in the picture, and I am sure that you have stated it, but I wish 
you would repeat it, the connection that the International Ladies' 
Garment Workers had with this and who was the man. 

Mr. Kennedy. The man by the name of Sam Berger 

Senator McNamara. Was he an officer of the International Ladies' 
Garment Workers? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3615 

Mr. Kennedy. He was an officer of the local and he managed local 
102 of the ILG^YU. 

Senator McNamara. This is the same local, or is this another local 
102? 

Mr. Kennedy. Local 102 of the UAW. They took the same num- 
ber as Sam Berber's local, ILGWU, and this is not related to ILGWU. 

Senator McNamara. That straightens me out. 

Senator Curtis. Did they take over the same operations? 

Mr. Kennedy. No, they did not. 

Senator Cuktis. Did Mr. Berger resign from the garment workers 
union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. He resigned in 1957 and he has been since indicted 
by the district attorney. 

Senator Curtis. But during this time that he was dealing with 
these other unions, he was also a. member of the garment workers, 
union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

Senator Curtis. Did he hold any office ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes; he controlled 102 of the ILGWU. 

Senator Curtis. He continued to control the garment workers union 
and he had this other enterprise also ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

Senator Curtis. Was that known to Mr. Dubinsky ? 

Mr. Kennedy. At the time it was not. 

Senator Curtis. When did he become aware of it? 

Mr. Kennedy. I do not know, he Imew it certainly in 1956, but I 
am sure he knew it prior to that time. He learned of it. 

The Chairman. Mr. Dubinsky will be given an opportunity to 
testify. He can make the explanation. 

All right, proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. To move along, the local 103 of the UAW started 
an organization of the taxicabs. That was in New York City, and 
the taxicab drivers. This organizational drive was financed by 
Johnny Dioguardi, and, to some extent, by the international union. 
In order to have just one union, and by this time Zackman had been 
kicked out of the union, and in order to have one union concentrate 
on tlie taxicab drivers, they split up the UAW 102 and got a separate 
charter on March 22, 1952, for the taxicab drivers, which is local 102, 
which is the taxicab charter. 

Then he formed a local 649, which was, again, an amalgamated 
charter, which was to organize the unorganized. Johnny Dioguardi 
became president of local 649, and manager of local 102 of the taxicab 
drivers. 

Now, this is in March 22, 1952. 
^ Thereafter, he became organizational director of the UAW opera- 
tions in New York City, and other charters were granted periodically 
for their operations. 

During 1952, and 1953, some 15 different charters were granted 
through Johnny Dioguardi by the international union in New York 
City. 

The Chairman. You said through Johnny Dioguardi. How do 
you mean? 

Mr. Kennedy. He then became in fact the regional director or the 
district director of the UAW operations in New York City. With 



3616 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

these charters that were granted, they were answerable to Johnny 
Dioguardi. 

Senator GoLDWAraR. Might I, before counsel gets away from that 
taxicab situation, ask this question: That 102 of the taxicabs was 
organized in 1952? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Was there a taxicab union organized in 
August of 1951? 

Mr. Kennedy. No, there was not. They started their operations 
and organization of the taxicab drivers back in 1951, but they did not 
receive their charter until 1952. 

Senator Goldwater. Is it true that about 2,000 taxicab drivers 
were paying dues before they had a union ? 

Mr. Kennedy, They had a union, but they weren't a union shop 
and they didn't have all of the taxicab drivers in town. They didn't 
have a contract. 

Senator Goldwater. It was operated under the amalgamated? 

Mr. Kennedy. They had a taxicab driver charter, but they didn't 
have a contract at that time between the union and management. 

Senator Goldwater. There were about 2,000 paying dues at that 
time ? 

Senator Kennedy. Yes, and finally, after their operations, they 
had as many as 2,000 taxicab drivers. 

Senator Goldwater. I am wrong in assuming that they were just 
paying dues into an organization that was not as yet a union ? 

Mr. Ivennedy. No, I think that is right. They had a union. Sena- 
tor, but they didn't have a contract. No. 1, and that was of great 
importance. 

Senator Goldwater. Is there any accounting of the dues collected 
from those 2,000 people ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No, there is not. 

The Chairman. You said that there is no accounting. Have you 
been able to get their records ? 

Mr. Ivennedy. We haven't been able to trace that. We are going 
to have a witness, Mr. Chairman, on the fact that there were dues 
coming in, and what he thought happened to the dues. But we 
cannot trace them down. 

The Chairman. There are no records to trace them ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No 

The Chairman. I did not quite understand. 

Will you proceed ? 

Senator Goldwater. That is all I had. That question came up, 
because I seem to recall in the briefing that something was mentioned 
about the fact that these people were paying dues before they had a 
union. 

Mr. Kennedy. Your recitation of the fact is correct. 

Senator Goldwater. That is correct. Then, am I further correct 
in assuming that there has been no record discovered of what was 
done with this money ? 

Mr. Kennedy. We can't trace this money. Our information, based 
on a witness, is that there were some 2,000 paying dues, and we cannot 
trace that money coming into the union even. We don't know how 
many they actually had, and if they paid that money what happened 
to the money. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3617 

Senator Goldwater, Was that witness a man named Zakman? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. He is going to testify. 

Senator Goldwater. Did Zakman work under Dio ? 

Mr. Kennedy. The original charter was granted to him, and then 
he was ousted and Dio took over from him. 

Senator Goldwater. Thank you. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, out of the 15 charters that were granted, of 
Dio's operations in New York City, only 7 or 8 of them continued 
and lasted, Mr. Chairman. The others were paper locals, who might 
have existed for a week or 2 weeks or 3 weeks and then collapsed. 

The Chairman. Those you have numbered there on the chart, are 
those the ones that survived ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Local 198, for instance, although we have it on the 
<ihart, only lasted 3 weeks. The charter was given to Gasster and 
Cohen, Gasster's wife was Johnny Dioguardi's secretary, and within 
3 weeks of the time this charter was given to these 2 gentlemen, they 
were picked up on extortion, and convicted. 

Tlie Chairman. Therefore, the union was abandoned ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That charter was abandoned. Only Colien was con- 
victed and he refused to testify against Gasster. But that was within 
3 weeks of the time it was chartered. 

So these various local charters were granted during the years 1952, 
and 1953. 

In 1953, George Meany raised a question about Johnny Dioguardi, 
because of his background and about his operations, and about the type 
of people that he Avas bringing into the labor union movement in New 
York City. He demanded at tliat time that Johnnj'^ Dioguardi and 
the UAW-AFL give up their organization of the taxicabs. He said 
that was outside the jurisdiction of the UAW-AFL and within the 
jurisdiction of the teamsters. If anybody should organize the taxi- 
cabs, it should be the teamsters. 

He felt because of the type of associates of Johnny Dioguardi, he 
wasn't the proper person to be doing this organizational work in New 
York City. 

The Chapman. It is a little strange to me. How did he get these 
charters. How did he get these unions under his control ? 

Mr. Kennedy. He got it through a relationship, a close relationship 
that he had with Anthony Doria. Anthony Doria was secretary- 
treasurer of the international union and they had a very close working 
relationship. 

Although there was a president of the union, Lester Washburn, the 
actual operation was run by Anthony Doria, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. What has become of Anthony Doria ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Anthony Doria — because of this operation, the ethi- 
cal practices committee brought charges against the UAW-AFL. 

The Chairman. When ? 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1956, 1 think, and again in 195T, mostly because of 
the results of the hearings that were held by Senator Douglas and 
Senator Ives committee. The charges were made against the UAW- 
AFL because of their bringing of gangsters into the labor movement. 
It wasn't just in New York City. It was mostly in the operations in 
Chicago, 111., and a man by the name of Ancisco, who was head of a 
local there. 

89330—57 — pt. 10 3 



3618 IMPROPER ACTWITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

One of the conclusions they reached was that Anthony Doria should 
leave the labor unidn movement, and he agreed to resign and that was 
heralded as their cleaning up of their own union, UAW-AFL. 

Unbeknownst, however, to the ethical practices committee and the 
AFL^CIO, when Anthony Doria left he left with the promise that he 
would receive $80,000 of union funds as a sort of going-away present. 

The Chairman. $80,000? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

The Chairman. His rascality paid off, then, did it not ? 

Mr. Kennedy. So, in 1953, Mr. Meany raised a question about these 
various operations, and the operations of these locals in New York 
City and specifically about the teamsters. At that time there were 
meetings between various teamster officials, including Jimmy Hotfa, 
with Johnny Dioguardi, to try to take over into the teamster opera- 
tion their work that they had done on the taxicabs in New York City. 

At that time, Jimmy Hoffa had met Johnny Dio and had a close 
relationship with him. 

AVlien Mr. Meany said that the UAW-AFL should give up the con- 
trol of the taxicabs, Jimmy Hoffa then requested that Johnny Dio 
bring his organization into the teamsters and that he would receive 
a charter from the teamsters and continue his operation as a team- 
ster member rather than as a member of the UAW-AFL. This was 
opposed at that time by a vice president in New York, Tom Hickey, 
about whom you will hear more later on. He opposed it, and he said 
Johnny Dio had a bad background and the wrong kind of friends 
and he would get the teamsters union in trouble and in difficulty in 
the N<iw York City area. 

They had a meeting about it, and subsequently, Dave Beck ruled 
that Johnny Dio should not be brought into the teamsters organiza- 
tion at that time. 

Jimmy Hoffa was overruled. 

Locul 102 of the taxicabs was given up and the teamsters organiza- 
tion started a drive on the taxicab drivers. 

So Johnny Dio continued operating local 649, and also in these 
other unions. His chief union was local 649 of the UAW-AFL. 

The Chairman. What does that cover ? 

Mr, Kennedy. It is an amalgamated local. 

The Chairman. It could organize anything ? 

Mr. Kennedy. To organize the unorganized. A lot of different 
shops were involved. He brought in his very close friends into 649 
and they were sort of a parent local. The rest of the locals were of 
less importance, although they were operating. 

Then we come to 1954. There was some question raised in New 
York City newspapers and law-enforcement agencies about Johnny 
Dio's operations in New York City. Johnny Dio at that time, during 
the middle of 1954, was sentenced to 60 days in jail for nonpayment 
of taxes. The money tliat he liadn't paid tlie taxes on was the $5,500 
that he had gotten for keeping his dress shop in New York from 
being uiaionized. He hadn't declared that on his income tax. So he 
was sentenced to 60 days in jail. 

The Chairman. Was that a Federal sentence ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No, a State sentence. During 1954, while he was 
in jail, Lester Washburn, who was president of the international 
union of UAW-AFL, lifted all of the charters of Johnny Dio's locals. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIEIiD 3619 

He said that they would bring the UAW-AFL into disrepute, and 
they were the wrong type of people that were in the labor-union 
movement. 

Immediately after that, his executive board met and they overruled 
him and he was forced out as president, and he resigned as president 
of the union. These charters were all given back to the locals and 
they continued in operation. 

The Chairman, In other words, when Dio was convicted, the in- 
ternational president of that union lifted the charters ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And then his executive board overruled him? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is right, led by Anthony Doria. They over- 
ruled him and granted the charters all back, and he resigned. 

The CiiAiRiviAN. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, when he made this move, he personally 
kicked out Dio as regional director, but again Dio, after the executive 
board met, was reinstated as in charge of all of the operations in New 
York City. 

The Chairman. All right. Proceed. 

Senator McNamara. At this point, was Washburn's office in New 
York City? 

Mr. Kennedy. It was out in Milwaukee, Senator. 

Senator McNaimara. He liad moved, I think, from Milwaukee, to 
Detroit. Or did he move back? 

Mr. Kennedy. His headquarters w^ere in Milwaukee and the UAW 
headquarters were, at that time, in Milwaukee. Subsequently, in 1955 
or 1956, the UAW-AFL moved to Los Angeles, where they are now. 

Senator McNamara. There was a time prior to 1954 when he had 
headquarters in Detroit, I believe. Maybe you did not get into that 
phase of it. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am not familiar with that. 

So, in 1954, the middle of 1954, this event I have just described oc- 
curred. Subsequently, there was a good deal written in the news- 
Eapers about Johnny Dioguardi, and the executive board decided to 
ave a meeting with him and consider the charges against him. They 
had a meeting with him and cleared him and said that there wasn't 
anything in his background or anything that they could find that he 
had done wrong. However, he wrote them and said : 

Because of the amount of controversy over this matter, I am going to resign from 
the union. 

That was, I believe, in August or September of 1954. 

Although he resigiied from the union, and that was publicized at 
the time, we will be able to show that he continued in an important 
role in the control of these unioiis into 1955. 

The Chairman. Now he continued that control without being ofS- 
cially representing the union? 

Mr. Kennedy. And after the union had announced that he had 
severed all connections with the international union. 

The Chairman. In other words, just an announcement made for the 
public's benefit? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

The Chairman. And his power, however, continued? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 



3620 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. And it was recognized ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

The Chairman. And he was consulted about union operations^ 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

The Chairman. And, in fact, he was practically the boss' of it, is 
that what 3^ou mean? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is right. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Senator Curtis. How many members did they get ? 

Mr. Kennedy. You mean in all of these locals ? 

Senator Curtis. From 1950 to 1954. 

Mr. Kennedy. They had about 5,000 members. 

Senator Curtis. 5,000 members? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Now, they had dues from 5,000 people? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Do you know how many of those conducted a 
bona fide union and had meetings and transacted business ? 

Mr. Kennedy. We have had a rather difficult time with the books 
and records of these unions. We find that we will come to one of 
these locals, for instance, and find there was a fire the day before and 
the records liave been destroyed. Or, again, that the janitor threw 
the records out, or they put the records in their car, and it happened 
that the district attorney was subpenaing the records at the time and 
to make sure they were turned over to the district attorney and to make 
sure they were clown there bright and early, they took tlie books and 
records out and put them in their automobile and then some burglar 
broke into their automobile and stole the books and records. 

Senator Curtis. From the evidence you do have of what unions they 
had, would you say they were run from tlie top or did they organize 
a few unions where the members really operated them ? 

Mr. Kennedy. We will show, through witnesses, and we will call 
here before the committee, members of these various unions, tlieir 
relationship with these various union officials. We will bring in 
some of the management people who had relationships with the union 
officials. We feel that that is the only way we can really show the 
picture, because of the fact that these books and records are not avail- 
able to us. 

The Chairman. Were you able to get the books and records of 
any of those that you have listed there ? 

Mr. Kennedy. In some, but what remained or what books and rec- 
ords were kept are very sparse. 

The Chairman. You received no complete records of any of tliem ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No. 

The Chairman. No records that would reflect the true transac- 
tions of the union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No. The only thing we can rely on is the union 
officials testimony themselves and, supplementing that, we have to 
rely on the management end and also the members of the union as to 
what experiences they had. 

Senator Goldwater. Mr, Kennedy, might I ask one question ? 

Zakman had the idea that there were about 30,000 taxi drivers in 
New York City, and you mentioned the figure of 4,000 or 5,000 hav- 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3621 

ing been gathered into all of these paper locals. Were the others 
organized into other unions ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, as I say, the taxicab drive was abandoned in 
1953 because of the efforts of George Meany. That was turned over to 
the teamsters. Whatever union members they had at that time were 
turned over to the teamsters. 

The local 102 of the taxicab drivers disappeared and their char- 
ter disappeared. These other miions, out of the 15 unions, only 6 
or 7 of them really got into operation. Some of them were closed 
up within a short period of time because of extortions, and other im- 
proper practices. All in all, they only had 4,000 or 5,000 members. 

Senator Curtis. How could they finance all of this with dues from 
5,000 members? 

Mr. Kennedy. They didn't make any accounting, and the members 
were paying dues. 

Senator Curtis. The fact is that they were collecting money from 
other sources, from unlawful activities ? 

Mr. Kennedy. There was some income coming every month from 
these members. As you will see from the witnesses, there wasn't much 
searching to be done for the union members. They were just receiving 
the union members' dues, and they didn't have a great number of 
expenses. 

Senator Goldwater. Do you have any testimony from management 
that would give you any idea as to the amount of extortion that is 
involved in this particular operation, that is extortion such as we have 
just heard about in the case of Mr. Chester? 

Mr. Kennedy. There are a number of extortions which we will 
bring out, but even more prevalent was the sweetheart contract, the 
deal made between management and these union officials, to the detri- 
ment of the members. Most of this occurred where the union members 
were illiterate, or people that had just come to the United States. 
Most of it centered around the Puerto Ricans and the Negroes in New 
York City. Those people were not aware of what their rights were 
and were not aware often of the fact that they were even organized 
or that they even had a union. They never even met their union 
officials. So it was more of that kind of a thing, and the management 
would say, "Well, I will pay you $100 a month and we will mark it off 
as dues in our books," and the members would never know about it. 

We will show that they were paying dues for people that didn't 
even exist, because they had made an arrangement to charge it in their 
books that so and so Avas paid and so and so might have left the 
employment 6 months earlier. 

We will show where there were contracts which guaranteed a wage 
scale of 75 cents an hour when the minimum wage was $1. 

Senator Goldwater. Do you suspect that you will be able to bring 
out that there were similar manipulations with welfare funds? 

Mr. Kennedy. Not to that extent ; no. 

Senator Goldwater. Or payments into welfare funds ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No. 

Senator Goldwater. Now I have one more question on this extor- 
tion. Is there evidence to show that this extorted money went into 
the union coffers, or did it go into the pockets of the individuals? 

Mr. Kennedy. We believe it went into the pockets of individuals. 



3622 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Goldwater. That would be a natural assumption, but I 
was trying to develop some sources of money to answer Senator Cur- 
tis' question. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am sure that these Imion officials, if they didn't 
keep the money, would be glad to answer the questions when they are 
asked about it. 

Senator Goldwater. That is fine. 

Mr. Kennedy. So, in 1954, Johnny Dio allegedly, or supposedly, 
resigned from the union. It was shortly after, in October, on Octo- 
ber 11, 1954, that he met with Jimmy Hoifa in New York City, and 
in front of the press at that time Mr. Hoffa put his arms around him, 
and Johnny Dio said, "I am looking for a job, Jimmy." And Jimmy 
said, "Any time you want a job, Johnny, you can come to me." 

During 1955, Johnny Dio remained, in fact, in control — or his lieu- 
tenants remained in control — of the operations of the UAW. 

Xow, I would like to move to another chart here. 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions about this one? 

All right, proceed. 

Senator Goldwater. Did not Jimmy Hoffa make a remark after the 
trial downtown to somebody that if he wanted a job to come and see 
him ? 

Mr. Kennedy. I believe he did. 

Senator Goldwater. That was not a juror, was it? 

Mr. Kennedy. I guess it was, Senator. I just knoAV what I i-ead 
in the paper and I wasn't there. 

Senator Goldwait.r. T just cannot quite recall it, but when you men- 
tioned that he told Johnny Dio that he could have a job at any time, it 
rang a bell and the bell said that he made a similar remark downtown 
after the trial. I did not remember whether he made it to a juror 
or not. 

Mr. Kennedy, 1 don't know. 

Senator McNamara. As reported in the local papers, he made it to 
a juror. That is the way I recall it, Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. Between Joe Louis and John Dio, they come in 
mighty handy. 

The Chairman. Let the next chart being presented by counsel be 
published in the record. Are they so connected that they need to be 
tied together ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

The Cilvirman. I suggest, then, to the reporter you refer back to 
the previous page, and it will be found on that page, so that the two 
may be printed in the record on adjoining pages so the connection can 
be apparent to those who read the record. It will be found on 
page 3611. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now we come back to joint council 16, Mr. Chair- 
maiL "We discussed that briefly at the beginning. 

Early in 1956 there was an election in New York City for the control 
of joint council 16. The election was between Mr. John O'Bourke and 
Mr. ISIartin Lacey. Martin Lacey had been the incumbent and he 
had been president of the joint council 16 in New York City. 

The Chairman. Now we are back to the teamsters ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes ; and we will show the connection between these 
two in just a moment. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3623 

The election was expected to be very close as to who would control 
the Teamsters Joint Council in New York City. 

In early December of 1955, the joint council 16 in New York City 
received letters from seven different locals that they never knew 
existed, asking to be seated at the joint council. Now, each local in 
the joint council, in the voting for the joint council president, has 
seven votes. A local has 7 votes no matter whether they have no 
members or whether they have 10,000 or 11,000 members and they still 
have 7 votes. 

The Chairman. That is in the election of officers of the council? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. So on the eve of the election, the joint council 
received notification that seven different locals that they never knew 
existed suddenly requested permission to affiliate with the joint council, 
and, therefore, to vote in the coming election. 

So Martin Lacey as head of the joint council at that time, wrote to 
the international and asked for the applications of these various 
locals that they had filed with the international and asked for the 
history of it. 

It had been agreed to earlier by the joint council and with the inter- 
national that any locals that were to be chartered in the New York 
area were to have the approval of the joint council and would have a 
notification to a general oi'ganizer, Tom Plickey. These locals evi- 
dently had been chartered, and we will show that they had been, with- 
out the notification to the joint council and without notification to the 
general organizer, the international organizer in that area. They 
suddenly had been chartered down here in Washington by the inter- 
national. 

The Chairman. As I understand it, the head of the joint council, 
Mr. Lacey, had never heard of them? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

The Chairman. They had no record of their existence? 

Mr. IvENNEDY. That is correct. 

The Chairman. And they had been chartered just previously and 
without the usual procedure that had been established? 

Mr. IvENNEDY. That is correct. 

The Chairman. So that immediately preceding the election, those 
seven locals wrote in and asked for recognition so they could be 
seated and thus be eligible to vote in the election of the international 
officers ? 

Mr. KJENNEDY. That is correct. 

We will show that the purpose of having a charter in these locals 
was to influence the election in New York City for control of the 
joint council. They have been chartered at first at the request of 
Mr. James Hoffa and that request had been made to Mr. Einar Mohn 
in the international headquarters here in Washington, D. C, and 
those charters had been granted and given to the seven different lo- 
cals. 

Senator Curtis. I would like to ask what you mean by a charter is- 
sued by international teamsters to these locals. Was that to a group 
of workers who had organized a union, or to whom were they is- 
sued ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No, that is a license, really. It is a license under 
the title of teamsters to go out and organize. Or if there is a group 



3624 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

that wants to become affiliated with the teamsters or with any union, 
it is a license to take them in under a particular charter. 

Senator Curtis. Well, it is a license, then, to an organizer or to 
an officer, is it not? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. In other words, there were not seven groups of 
workers who had assembled themselves together and said, "We want 
to affiliate with the International Teamsters Union"? That is not 
the way they get a charter ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That was not the procedure that was followed here. 
If the charter was granted, ordinarily, there would be a group in 
a particular area, say, for instance, within the teamsters jurisdiction, 
that were unorganized and wanted a charter or wanted to become 
affiliated. Or if there was an organizer who knew that there was some 
work to be done in that particular area, or with that particular group 
of plants, he would go to the joint council and he would say, "We 
need a charter in this area and we don't have enough." 

Senator Curtis, That was my conception of what a charter would 
be. 

Now, is that what was issued to these seven groups ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No, that was not in this case. 

Senator Curtis. You still call it a charter ? 

Mr. KJENNEDY. It was a charter granted by the international, never- 
theless. It was granted as if those circumstances that you have de- 
scribed existed. 

Senator Curtis. They received the same charter as if a group of 
workers were applying for bona fide charters ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. And it was issued to organizers ? 

Mr. Kennedy. I will show that in just a moment, to whom these 
charters were issued. 

Senator McNamara. You mentioned Einar Mohn. Did he have 
authority to issue charters ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Together with John English, there is an arrange- 
ment made, and I think one since then, and between the two of them 
under Dave Beck they can issue the charters. 

Senator McNamara. In whose name was the charter issued? 

Mr. Kennedy. Under Dave Beck's name. 

Senator McNamara. President of the teamsters international ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. 

Senator McNamara. And Einar Mohn, where does he fit in, and 
what was his title ? 

Mr. Kennedy. He is a vice president and he is administrative as- 
sistant to Dave Beck, and he plays a part in this, as does John English. 

So the charters were granted by the International Brotherhood of 
Teamsters, to these seven locals, and they bypassed the joint council 
16, and bypassed the general organizer and international vice presi- 
dent, Tom Hickey. 

Now, the joint council requested the applicants, the application 
cards of these charters, and who made the request for these charters. 
They received a telegram back approximately a month later, which 
would be early in January of 1957 

Senator Kennedy, That would be 1956. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3625 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, I am sorry. That these locals should be seated 
and at the same time they did not send the applicants or the applica- 
tion cards for these charters. So there was a great fuss raised about it 
because the election obviously was going to be close between Mr. 
Martin Lacey and Mr, John O'Rourke. 

Mr. Tom Hickey who had opposed Jolmny Dioguardi earlier backed 
Martin Lacey, and Jimmy Hoffa backed Mr. John O'Rourke for this 
fight. 

The election was held, and in addition to these 7 locals, which each 
had 7 votes, there were 16 other votes that were in contest. Those 
were 16 other votes contested. Dave Beck ruled that the 49 votes 
of these locals, plus the 16 other votes, should be put in a little box 
and separated and the people should vote, but they shouldn't be 
counted unless they were going to influence the results of the election. 

Senator McNamara. How do we get a figure like 16 if each local 
union had 7 votes? 

Mr. Kennedy. It will not play an important role in this and it is 
rather a complicated matter. 

Senator McNamara. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy. There were some extortions, and people had been 
out of their jobs and there was a question of who would represent the 
local. 

The election was held and Mr. Martin Lacey, without counting the 
49 votes and without counting the 16 votes, won 192 to 181. 

The election was held on February 14, 1956, and shortly thereafter 
Mr. Dave Beck ruled that the 16 votes should be counted immediately. 
Those 16 votes then gave the victory to Mr. John O'Rourke. Martin 
Lacey then brought this into a court, and said that neither the 16 
nor the 49 votes should be counted. The judge ruled to put an in- 
junction against the International Brotherhood of Teamsters from 
counting these votes and said it was obviously an attempt to influence 
the result of the election of the New York Joint Council that these 7 
locals had been chartered and that these other 16 votes had been 
counted. 

So the control of the joint council reverted back to Mr. Martin 
Lacey. 

I might say in connection with that, subsequently Mr. Martin Lacey 
resigned or said he wouldn't run again and Mr. John O'Rourke has 
taken over control of the joint council, and Mr. John O'Rourke is 
Mr. James Hoffa's representative. 

Tlie CiiAiR]MAN. Is Mr. O'Rourke presently the president ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

The Chairman. And Lacey has stepped out ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

The Chairman. Did he step out at an election time, or in between 
elections ? 

Mr. Kennedy. He stepped out prior to the election and said that 
his health wasn't very good. 

The Chairman. His health went bad? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Just for information in the record at this point, 
how often do they hold elections ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Every year. 

The Chairman. Each year? 



3626 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. So he did not Last the year ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No ; he did not. Well, you see, the court controversy 
lasted during at least half of 1956, so when he finally regained con- 
trol officially it was in the middle of 1956. 

I might say in tliat connection, Mr. Chairman, that they both had 
court costs of approximately $24,000 apiece, Martin Lacey versus 
John O'Rourke, and, subsequently, the joint council voted to pay the 
court costs of both of them. So union members dues were paid or 
used to pay approximately $24,000 to John O'Rourke's attorney and 
approximately $24,000 to Martin Lacey's attorney. 

Senator Kennedy. How many members were represented by those 
49 votes? 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, now, these locals here had no members at all. 
These five, 651, 258, 269, and 284, and 362 had no members at all. 

Senator KenxVedy. That was 35 votes. How many votes were there 
in the whole joint council? 

Mr. Kennedy. There were 380. 

Senator Kennedy. So that would represent 125,000 members, and 
now there were 35 votes which represented no members. 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. 

Senator Kennedy. But they still had the right to vote. Wliat 
about the top two locals? 

Mr. Kennedy. These two unions represented no new members, but 
I would like to put on another chart and show you what happened. 

Senator McNamara. Before you leave that chart, who is the man 
in control of 295 ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is John McNamara. 

The Chairman. As we present the next chart, I will ask the re- 
porter to have it placed in between the other two, already printed 
previously. It will be found on page 3611. 

May I ask counsel if the three charts pieced together now com- 
pletes the picture with respect to this operation ? 

Mr. Kennedy. It completes the picture as far as the people are 
concerned, the applicants on the charter, but we have another chart 
we will put up to show what happened to the shops subsequently. 

But this at least starts us off. 

We were talking about the members of the locals. These five 
locals had no members whatsoever, and they were so-called paper 
locals, and they existed just on paper. I think these two locals had no 
new members. 

The Chairman. What do you mean by "no new members"? 

Mr. Kennedy. There were transfers of certain shops from local 
875 which is operated bj^ Kleinman, Berger, and Carmel, and there 
were transfers of certain shops, refrigerator shops, over to local 275. 

The Chairman. In other words, to set up locals 295 and 275, they 
transferred out of another union segments of their members and 
placed them in these two new ones? 

Mr. Kennedy. Tliat is correct. 

The Chairman. Whereas the other five appearing there on the chart 
had no members at all ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No, sir ; that is correct. 

The Chairman. But in order to set up 2 more voting units of 7 votes 
each, they transferred a group out of 1 union into a n<iw local ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3627 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

Senator McXamara. When you say "refrigeration union,'' what do 
you mean ? Are they installing refrigeration equipment, or what? 

Mr. Kennedy. They are repairmen. That is, repairmen on refrig- 
eration units. 

Senator McNamara. Just service men. Is that it ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. The local 808 did the same thing. As to this 
local 875, although these are the chief official officers, Mr. Chairman, 
we will show that it is dominated and controlled by a man by the name 
of Tony "Ducks"' Corallo, and that he is the actual one who operates 
and controls this union. This local 808 transferred some air-freight 
drivers ; some of those shops were transferred over to local 295. 

Senator Curtis. I see that tliis Teamsters Local 875 that transferred 
members and formed a new teamsters unit No. 275 has one of its 
officers listed as "J. Berger.'' Is that the same Berger that was in 102 
of the garment workers? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is his brother, Jack Berger. 

Senator Curtis. Xow, you said a minute ago that Sam Berger con- 
tinued on in this activity until about 1956 or 1955. 

Mr. Kennedy. No ; I did not mean to, if I did say that. 

Senator Curtis. TMien did he drop out? 

Mr. Kennedy. I said Johnny Dioguardi. Sam Zakman dropped 
out shortly after. 

Senator Curtis. I mean Berger. 

Mr. Kennedy. Sam Berger dropped out shortly afterward from 
Local 102 of the UAW. He stayed in as manager of Local 102 of the 
IJjGWU until early 1957. 

Senator Curtis. Wlien did he drop out of this apparatus ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, he remained very close to Johnny Dioguardi. 
When Johnny Dioguardi ostensibly left the labor-union movement at 
the end of 1954, he set up a labor-relations firm called Equitable Re- 
search, and Sam Berger continued a close association with him, and 
on occasion referred clients to him. 

Senator Curtis. That was as late as when ? 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1955. 

Senator Curtis. Thank you. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, the importance of these locals and the impor- 
tance of what we have been discussing this morning as to the control of 
Joint Council 16, is where the people that made up these locals, the 
applicants, where they came from, and who they were, and what they 
did. This overlay that we have put in here shows what occurred. As 
I have said earlier, local 649 was really the parent local of all of the 
rest of the operations in New York City of Johnny Dioguardi. He 
was regional director and he operated out of local 649. That was his 
own local, and he was president of that, and although he had res|>on- 
sibilities in these other locals he brought in his closest friends in 
local 649. 

Joseph Curcio came down to local 269 and became secretary-treas- 
urer, and he came from local 649 to local 269. 

Harry Davidoff came from local 649 to local 258 of the teamsters, 
and he became their secretary-treasurer. 

Sydney Hodes came from local 649, down in here to local 284, and 
he became the secretary-treasurer. 



3628 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Abe Brier in local 649 came clown here to local 362, and he became 
the secretary-treasurer. 

The Chairman. You said they had no members. 

Mr. Kennedy. They had no members. 

The Chairman. There were no members and just these officers 
named on paper without an}' dues-paying members? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

Now, for instance in that connection, Senator, Sam Getlan, who 
used to be in local 228 — and we will have more about that later — 
became president and was put on as president of local 258. When we 
interviewed him over the period of the last few months, he not only 
did not know he was in the union, he not only did not know he was 
president or knew he was in the union, yet he was listed as the presi- 
dent of local 258. He never even heard of local 258, let alone being 
president of the union. 

That same situation was followed in many of these other locals, and 
many of these other people. We have people who voted in the joint 
council election who never even knew they were members of the union, 
let alone voting in the election. 

The Chairman. They voted them although they were not members 
of the union and they did not even know that they were delegates. 

Mr. Kennedy. One fellow said he was standing outside in the bar 
and he had been drinking, and somebody came up and said, "Come on, 
we are to vote." And they went down and he said there was an awful 
lot of people around, and we showed him the chart showing that he 
had voted in the election, and he said, "Well, I went there. Maybe I 
voted." 

But the main officials, the chief officials of local 649 came down into 
these four locals. They were the key officials in those. 

In local 051, the president or secretary-treasurer of that local was 
Nat Gordon. Now, Nat Gordon runs a liquor store, and he is a brother 
of Abe Gordon, who is a teamster union official and who is a very close 
associate of Johnny Dioguardi. Abe Gordon, his brother, not only is 
a teamster union official but he also runs a trucking company. 

Now, you can see the officers over here in local 224, whose names were 
used on the application blanks for local 269. These are officers and 
charter members of local 224 who were used in local 269. 

The Chairman. Do they have to have a certain number of members 
before they can get a charter ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No ; they did not. They had no members at all. 

The Chairman. I understand they had no members, but you said 
they were used on the charter. 

Mr. Kennedy. Under the teamster constitution, seven members are 
required to get a charter. 

The Chairman. So they just used officers in these other unions to 
make uy, the so-called membership to get a charter ? 

3,[r. Kennedy. That is correct. These officers and applicants on the 
charter of 227 came over into local 284 of the teamsters. 

Local 355 officers came over here and became applicants for local 
362. As I said, and as we will develop, some of these people never 
even knew they were on the applications. 

Subsequently, these people in local 224 that came over here as appli- 
cants on local 269 ended up here in local 362. They never were active 
in 269 but they ended up in local 362 of the teamsters. 



EMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3629 

The people that came over here from local 355 to local 362 never 
were active in 362, and they now run an independent union over in 
355. 

You can see Sydney Hodes came out of local 649, and he was an 
officer in 649 and he was also an officer in local 228. However, local 
2'28 of the UAW-AFL had had its charter lifted supposedly, back in 
1955, and this union should not even have been in existence at that 
time. The charter according to their records of the international had 
been lifted, but we will be able to show that that charter was active 
under a number of different people after that time. We call it the 
"bouncing charter" because it bounced from person to person, and 
was given to various people so that they could organize in their par- 
ticular district. 

The last time it was handed out, this UAW-AFL charter was 
handed out by a teamster official. 

Sydney Hodes, who was an officer supposedly down here in local 
228, and also in 649, ended up in three different unions. His name 
ended up in three different unions, and he was here as president of 
local 258, and he was here as secretary-treasurer in local 284, and he 
was here as president of local 362. All during this period of time that 
was true. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? 

Senator McNamara. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the chief 
counsel at what point did this United Automobile Workers AFL go 
out of business ? I understand they are no longer in business. 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes ; they are still in business, except under the name 
of the Allied Industrial Workers of America. 

Senator McNamara. The same officials? 

Mr. Kennedy. Except for Anthony Doria, who has left with 
$60,000. 

Senator McXamara. Then generally, it is the same setup and the 
only thing changed is the name. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

Senator McNaiviara. And they changed it themselves, or who did? 

Mr. Kennedy. After the merger of tlie AFL-CIO, it was decided 
that they should not have two T^AW's, and Mr. Reutlier kept his or- 
ganization, and the UAW-AFL changed to the Allied Industrial 
Workers of America. 

Senator McNamara. And they are affiliated with the AFL, Meany's 
organization? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. 

Now, another confusing part is local 651, and local 362 gave as 
their address in the applications, the old address of local 228, when in 
fact they were never there. 

The Chairman. Both of them gave that address ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Gave this address of old 228, where 228 was no longer 
in existence, when in fact they operated out of local 649. 

651 gave a nonexistent address. Local 258 gave the new address of 
local 228, when in fact they operated out of local 649. 

It would appear to us, at least, to have been a mad dash at the last 
moment to try to get names for various locals, and give them addresses, 
and there was some confusion on this. 



3630 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. This was a power fight, in other words, internal 
union power fight, and the interests for O'Rourke undertook this pro- 
cedure in order to get control of the joint counciL 

Mr. Kennedy. Which controls all of these things that we have dis- 
cussed earlier. 

Senator McNamara. Were these charters all issued on the same 
day, Mr. Kennedy ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, all on November 8, 1956. 

The Chairman. I hope we will get proper pictures of these so 
that those who read this may follow it. 

Mr. Kennedy. This other overlay that we have put on, Mr. Chair- 
man, shows when the stationery was ordered to make these applica- 
tions. We have traced down the shop where the stationery was 
ordered that sent the applications into the International Brotherhood 
of Teamsters. 

The Chairman. You mean the letterheads for these locals, these 
paper locals ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is right, and we found that the bills of 362, 
869, 358, and 651 were all sent to local 649. 

Now, subsequently, during July of 1956, there had been a great deal 
in the press about this battle for control of joint council 16 and also, 
the court case between John O'Rourke and Martin Lacey. So these 
locals decided that they had better get some members in their various 
locals, so what they did was transfer some shops, and without the 
concurrence of any of the members of the locals. 

Harry Davidoff brought certain of his shops that he felt belonged 
to him and he brought them down into local 258. So they came out 
of local 649. They came down with him to 258. Certain of those 
shops of Joe Curcio, he took out of local 649 and he brought them 
down to local 269. 

The shops of local 250, even though the officers had become charter 
members of local 258, the shops of local 250 came down here to 
local 362. 

Senator Curtis. By shops, you mean their membership? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, their membership. 

Senator Curtis. Who decided that ? 

Mr. Kennedy. They decided it, Joe Curcio, Harry Davidoff, and 
Sidney Hodes and Brier, and Johnny Dio. 

Senator Curtis. The members did not decide it ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. And did the employer cancel out one contract, 
and enter into a new contract with the new union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. He was just notified that the change had been 
made from the UAW to the teamsters. 

Senator McNamara. Do they come down in great numbers or in 
very small numbers? 

Mr. Kennedy. They brought all of their shops, ultimately, down 
into these locals. 

Senator McNamara. Did they amount to 100 generally, or more? 

Mr. Kennedy. How many different shops you mean? 

Senator McNamara. How many men were transferred from 649 
to 362? 

Mr. Kennedy. All of the shops altogether, had about four or five 
thousand members. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3631 

Senator McNamara. And there would be hundreds in each one 
of these mstances ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. We will show if we have time, the type of 
shops that they had. 

Local 227 transferred their shops to local 284. Local 355 re- 
mained independent, and local 228 supposedly was not even in exist- 
ence. Local 651 never got any shops and it is still a paper organiza- 
tion. It really does not exist. 

These two locals continued in operation. 

Senator Curtis. Now, how much concurrence was there with the 
teamsters' international officers in the transfer of these shops, or I 
prefer to call them transfer of union members because they were 
moved about like they were chessmen. 

Mr. Kennedy. Under the constitution, I do not believe they have 
any control over the matter. It is up to the local autonomy. These 
individuals decided these members shovdd be transferred and they 
were transferred. 

Senator Curtis. But were they in on the operation? 

Mr. Kennedy. You mean in 1956 ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. I do not know. 

The Chairman. Is there any further explanation of that chart? 

Senator Kennedy. Mr. Counsel, are you going to show later on 
who was the guiding force behind all of these transfers, and are you 
saying it was Mr. Dio? 

Mr. Kennedy. Based on this chart, and based on the operations, 
these were people that were transferred, and they were all people 
that Johnny Dio brought into the labor movement after 1950. 

These were people that he brought in and he was responsible for. 
The chief operation which this happened under came out of local 469. 
That was his local. Those people were answerable to him. 

Again, because Jimmy Hoffa had this close personal relationship 
Avith Johnny Dio, and Jimmy Hoffa was anxious to oust Tom Hickey 
from any position of power in New York City, they were bitter 
enemies. Tom Hickey was backing Martin Lacey, and this would 
have been the means whereby to do it and get these charters and 
have them vote in the election and overturn the Martin Lacey group 
and gain control. 

That was the operation that was done, and these people that came 
over were all Johnny Dio's people. 

That is, with the exception of 875, which was run by another 
hoodlum and gangster, Mr. Tony Ducks Carello, who controlled this 
union and other unions. John McNamara was also very close to 
Jimmy Hoffa and also responsible for local 295. 

Mr. Chairman, we have a chart here showing the kind of people 
or the kind of shops that existed for these various locals. 

The C'HAntMAN. It mav be presented and printed at this point in 
the record. 



3632 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 



(The chart is as follows :) 



Types of Shops Organized by United Auto Workers, ALF Amalgamated 
Locals in Metropolitan New York 



LOCAL 224 



Refrigeration repairmen 

Car washes 

Restaurant equipment manufacturer 

Paper products 

Box manufacturer 

Stone setter 

Embroidery manufacturer 

Lamp manufacturer 



Lead-pipe manufacturer 
Breadbaker 
Comic-book publisher 
Mop manufacturer 
Toy manufacturer 
Wliolesale soap 
Thread distributor 
Tfiiletries manufacturer 



LOCAL 22 7 



Chemical plant 
Vitamin-pill maker 
Glass dealers 
Plastic-bag company 
Leather embossers 
Paper products 
Handbag manufacturer 
Wallet manufacturer 



Envelope company 
Hobby store 
Converters 

Hardware manufacturer 
Rubber-products company 
Service stations 
Heating contractor 
Paint company 



LOCAL 355 



Electric-broiler manufacturer 
Quilting manufacturer 
Bias.binding company 
Hotel 



Electrical-parts manufacturer 
Linen shop 
Drugstore 
Oil companies 



LOCAL 250 



Dog-food maker 

Ballpoint pens 

Optical company 

Printer 

Notebook manufacturer 

Crucifix plater 

Brassworks 

Mattressmaker 



Textile manufacturer 

Beltmaker 

Zipper manufacturer 

TV antennas 

Discount house 

Electric shop 

Steel plant 

Candle and crayon company 

Jewelry shop 

Buttonmaker 

Screw manufacturer 

Candymaker 

New-car sales 

Yarn spinner and twister 

Packaging company 



Screw-machine manufacturer 
Ball-bearing company 
Toilet-seat reeonditioner 
Draperies maker 
Dry cleaner 
Coffee roaster 
Aircraft-parts manufacturer 



IXJCAL 649 



Plastic-novelties manufacturer 

Rayon processor 

Christmas tree lights 

Dry cleaner 

Electroplaters 

Printer 

X-ray company 

Paint company 

Machine shop 

Papermaker 

Wood products 

Truck renter 

Importers 

Soapmaker 

Chemical works 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3633 

Mr. Kennedy. So when these shops were transferred, they are 
hardly clearly within the jurisdiction of the teamsters union. 

The Chairman. What are they? 

Mr. Kennedy. They are not clearly within the jurisdiction of the 
teamsters union. 

For instance, here local 260, a dog-food maker, a notebook manu- 
facturer, a crucifix plater, a screw-machine manufacturer and a toilet- 
seat reconditioner. 

The Chairman. Those became members of the teamsters? 

Mr. Kennedy. These are the charts. These were the people here 
that had these shops and these were the shops that were transferred 
over. There is a plastic bag company, and handbag manufacturer 
and wallet manufacturer and a hobby store. 

The Chairman. They all became members of the teamsters ? 

Mr. Kennedy. These shops were transferred over. Their officials, 
and the applicants on their charters, set up these charters, were used 
as the applicants on the teamsters union charters, and subsequently 
when there was a great hue and cry about it in New York City, these 
shops were transferred over in 1956. 

Curcio brought his shops down to 269 and Davidoff brought them 
to 258, and they set up this operation. 

The Chairman. I see on there Christmas tree lights. What does 
that have to do with the teamsters union? And there are also dry 
cleaners. 

Mr. Kennedy. Admittedly the teamsters have broad jurisdiction 
because they say that anything that moves is in their jurisdiction and 
anything that affects any teamster organization is in their jurisdiction. 

The Chairman. And some soapmakers. That is where they were 
organized and they were unionized and those are the ones that were 
transferred into these paper locals, after the manipulation had been 
discovered and exposed. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, we have just one more chart and then we are 
finished. That will give the type of people that were involved in this, 
that Johnny Dio and Tony Ducks brought into the labor movement 
since 1951 or 1952. 

They played an important role in the control of joint council 16 in 
New York City. 

The Chairman. This chart the counsel is now presenting may be 
printed in the record at this point. 



89330— 57— pt. 10 4 



3634 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 



(The chart is as follows:) 

lAst of indictments or convictions for offenses committed by individuals in their 
capacity as officials of unions which were dominated or controlled by Anthony 
"Ducks" Corallo or Johnny "Dio" Dioguardi 



Local 



ASUiation 



Name 



Date of 
indict- 
ment 



Charge 



Disposition 



649 

649 
198 
198 
875 

875 
875 



875 
875 



405 



405 

405 
405 
405 
295 
295 

295 

239 
227 



227 
227 

239 
239 
522 
522 
522 

239 
239 



United Auto Work- 
ers, AFL. 

.-..do 

..._do 

....do 



Teamsters. 

-...do 

-...do 



-do. 



-do. 
-do. 



Retail Clerks Inter- 
national Associa. 
tion. 

.-..do 



do 

do 

do 

Teamsters. 
do 



.do. 



United Auto Work- 
ers, AFL. 



.do., 
-do.- 



Teamsters. 

do 

do 

do 

do 



.do. 
.do- 



Anthony Topazio, secretary- 
treasurer. 
Joseph Cohen 

George Cohen, organizer 

Henry Gasster, president 

Nathan Carmel, vice president. .- 
Jack Berger, president 

Aaron ICletnman, secretary-treas- 
urer. 

Milton Levine, organizer 875, and 
president, local 275. 

Jack Priore, organizer 

Sam Zaber, organizer 875, and 
local, 275 teamsters. 

Max Chester, secretary-treasurer. 



Manny Fink, business repre- 
sentative. 

Max Lees, president 

Irving Slutsky, vice president — 

Phihp Brody, organizer 

John Dioguardi 

John McNamara, secretary-treas- 
urer. 
MOton Holt, secietary-treasurer, 
805. 

Sam Goldstein, president 

Afthm' Santa Maria, secretary- 
treasurer. 



Domlnick Santa Maria, trustee... 
David Consentino, president, 

Local 248, IBT. 

Max Chester 

John Dioguardi 

Alfred Reger, secretary-treasurer 

Burle Michaelson 

Harry Davidoff, secretary-treas- 

surer. Local 258, IBT. 

Sam Goldstein, president 

Phillip Goldberg 



July 1952 

July 1952 
1953 
1953 
1956 
1956 
1956 

1956 

1956 
1956 



1956 

1956 
1956 
1956 
1956 
1956 

1956 

1957 
1957 



1957 
1957 

1957 
1957 
1957 
1957 
1957 

1957 
1957 



Extortion 

--do 

..do 

.-do' 

--do 

--do 

-.-do 

--do 

..do 

..do 

--do 



-do 



--do 

.-do 

.-.do -. 

...do 

...do 

Perjury... 

Bribery... 

Conspir- 
acy, for- 
gery, 
larceny. 

...do 

.-.do 



Bribery.. 

...do 

Extortion 

...do 

—do 



...do. 
...do- 



Convicted, 1953. 

Do. 
Convicted, 1954. 
Dismissed.! 
Convicted, 1957. 

Do. 

Do. 

Pending. 

Do. 
Do. 

Convicted, 1956. 



Do. 

Pending. 
Do. 
Do. 
Do. 
Do. 

Do. 

Convicted, 1957. 
Pending. 



Do. 
Do. 

Convicted, 1957. 

Do. 

Do. 
Pending. 

Do. 

Do. 
Do. 



1 Cohen refused to testify. 

Senator Curtis. The thing that disturbs me, and you perhaps can- 
not answer it right now, is that even though these miion had not been 
controlled by hoodlums and bad cliaracters, I am astounded that good 
men, good officers, might be able to transfer members from one union 
to another just at will. 

The impression that I get after listening to the investigation of the 
teamsters and the textile workers and the bakers is that these of- 
ficers assume a certain proprietary interest in their members. They 
use their members for their advantage and gain. 

Mr. Kennedy. This is a list of indictments and convictions for of- 
fenses committed by individuals in their capacity as officials of the 
unions which were dominated or influenced by Anthony "Ducks" 
Corallo or Johnny Dioguardi. 

These were people that they were responsible for and these are 
offenses and indictments and convictions that have happened since they 
came into the labor-union movement or were brought into the labor- 
union movement by Jolinny Dio or Tony Ducks. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3635 

This is not their total criminal records. We will develop that 
later on, but this is since the time that these people have come in. 

The Chairman. In other words, the law violation records that this 
chart exhibits, all of those violations are alleged violations which oc- 
curred since they were brouoht into the union by Johnny Dioguardi. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Anthony Ducks, yes, that is correct. 

Now, most of this, and I would think virtually all of it, is through 
the efforts of Mr. Hogan, and his office in New York City, who, as I 
have said earlier, has been on top of this continuously and doing a 
tremendous amount of work in New York City. 

Through his efforts these people have been indicted and some 
of them convicted. They were people brought into the labor-union 
movement in the manner w^e described. These are people who played 
such an important part in the tight to control Council IG. 

The Chairman. Are they still in the labor-union movement? 

Mr. Kennedy. Some of them are, and we will develop that. 

The Chairman. In the course of the testimony ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir, and what has been their relationship with 
their union while they served time in prison. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions? 

Now, does this conclude your presentation of what we may term our 
opening remarks here this morning, so as to get this whole hearing in 
proper perspective? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. Tlie important thing is that we have these 
Avitnesses down from management and from these various unions and 
it is not just to have them recite a particular event, but it is in this 
picture and the part that they played. 

It might be just 1 man who was involved with 5 or 6 people, but 
this can be multiplied a tliousandfold by this kind of an operation, 
it has such a great and tremendous influence. 

If people who control these unions are gangsters or hoodlums, and 
the head of the joint council 16 is a gangster or hoodlum or has an 
obligation or a responsibility or owes a debt to any gangsters or hood- 
lums, then, of course, the operations in the city of New York or in 
other big metropolitan areas are jeopardized. 

Tlie Chairman. Are there any further questions before we recess? 

The committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock. 

(Whereupon, the hearing in the above-entitled matter was recessed 
at 12 : 20 p. m., to reconvene at 2 p. m., of the same day.) 

afternoon SESSION 

(Members present at the convening of the afternoon session: 
Senators McClellan, Ives, and Kennedy.) 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

Call your first witness, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. ]Mr. Sam Zakman, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Mr. Zakman, come forward, please. 

Put up your right hand and be sworn. 

You do solemnly swear tliat the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate Select Committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Zakman. I do. 



3636 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL ZAKMAN 

The Chairman. Mr. Zakman, state your name, your place of resi- 
dence, and your business or occupation, please, sir. 

Mr. Zakjian. My name is Samuel Zakman. I live at 9 Anvil Lane,. 
Levittown, N. Y. 

I am at the present employed in a lampshade factory in New York 
City. 

The Chairman. Ha\e you talked to members of the staff of the com- 
mittee regarding your testimony ? 

Mr. Zakbian. Ves, sir. 

The Chairman. You know generally, then, the line of questions to 
expect ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you know you have the right to have counsel 
present while you testify to advise you of your legal rights under the 
law? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you waive counsel, Mr. Zakman? 

Mr. Zakman. At this time, I do, sir. 

Tlie Chairman. At this time you do. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy, you may proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, this afternoon we are going to have 
at least two witnesses on local 102 of the UAW-AFL, which appears 
over on the far left on this chart, the origin and the beginning of 
Mr. Johnny Dio's entrance back into the labor movement in 1950. 

Mr. Sam Zakman will be the first witness as he was the first presi- 
dent of local 102 of the UAAV-AFL, and then we will trace witli him 
how he got the chartei- and what his experiences were with Mr. Dio.. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Zakman, can you tell the committee a little bit 
of your background, where you were born ? 

Mr. Zakman. I was born in Russia. 

Mr. Kennedy. How old were you when you came to this country? 

Mr. Zakman. I was about 7 years old. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you came to New York City at that time? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you have been living in New York City ever 
since ? 

Mr. Zakman. Most of the time. 

Mr. Kennedy. When did you first get into the labor — first, when 
were you born ? What was your birth date ? 

Mr. Zakman. May 8, 1913. 

Mr. Kennedy. 1913. Wlien did you first get into the labor-union 
movement ? 

Mr. Zakman. Sometime during the early 1930's. 

Mr. Kennedy. In what role, what position ? 

Mr. Zakman. Sort of a volunteer organizer. 

Mr. Kennedy. A volunteer organizer? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, before we get further, may I ask a. 
question ? 

The Chairman. Senator Ives. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3637 

Senator Ives. Mr. Zakman, were you educated in the public-school 
system of New York City ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. How far did you get in school ? 

Mr. Zakman. Junior high school. 

Senator Ives. Junior high school ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. Are your parents both living? 

Mr. Zakman. Only my mother. 

Senator Ives. Wlien did your father die ? 

Mr. Zakman. I was about 10 yeare old. 

Senator Ives. ^Vlien you were about 10 years old ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. And you were left to support your mother at that 
time ? 

Mr. Zakman. I was left, my brother and my sister. 

Senator I^'ES. ^Yho supported the family ? 

Mr. Zakman. We all had to work at an early age. 

Senator Ives. You all had to work at that time, is that it? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator I\tes. From that time on ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator I\t.s. And still you got through junior high school, is 
that it? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. Thank you. 

Mr. Kennedy. You say in the 1930's you were a volunteer organ- 
izer ? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what unions, and what did tli;<t position entail? 

Mr. Zakman. The Beauty Culturist Union, local 561, I believe. 

Mr. Kennedy. Beauty 

Mr. Zakman. Beauty culturist union, beauty operators. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were organizing in that? 

Mr. Zakman. We were organizing beauticians throughout the 
Bronx. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were a volunteer, were you ? 

Mr. Zakman. At the beginning I was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you get paid ? 

Mr. Zakman. $10 a week expenses. 

Mr. Kennedy. A^Hiat was your other source of income during that 
period ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, things were pretty bad. It was during the 
depression. When I got a day's work in the shop or a couple of days 
work, I would go to work, and in my spare time I would help the 
union organize. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have much luck organizing the beauticians 
in the Bronx? 

Mr. Zakman. It was pretty rough in those days, but we managed 
to organize them until it became an established local. 

Mr. Kennedy. AVliat local was that? 

Mr. Zakman. I believe it was 561. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you do work for any other unions ? 



3638 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Zakman. Since then? 

Mr. Kennedy. No ; during that period of time. 

Mr. Zakman. On 1 or 2 occasions I helped the drug employees 
union. 

Mr. Kennedy. Again on a volunteer basis ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy. Would you get your expenses ? Is that all ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir ; there wasn't any expenses in those days. 

Mr. Kennedy. During this period of time, were you a member of 
the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Zakman. No; during that period of time I was a member of 
the Young Communist League. 

Mr. Kennedy. The Young Communist League. When had you 
joined that, Mr. Zakman ? 

Mr. Zakman. Around 1930, or so. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you were about 17 or 18 years old ? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then did you ultimately become a member of the 
Communist Party ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. "VAHien did vou become a member of the Communist 
Party ? 

Mr. Zakman. Around 1937. 

Mr. Kennedy. 1937 ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any position with the Communist 
Party? 

Mr. Zakman. I was a party organizer for a time. 

Mr. Kennedy, In the New York area ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. New York City ? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you also go to Spain ? 

Mr. Zakman. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy, Would you tell us about that ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, in September, sometime during the month of 
September 1937, 1 went to Spain as a member of the Abraham Lincoln 
Brigade. I was in Spain for 16 months, and came home around — 
somewhere around Christmas of 1938. 

Mr. Kennedy. You stayed there about 16 months? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any position with the Abraham 
Lincoln Brigade? 

Mr. Zakman. I was a commissar. 

Mr, Kennedy. You were a commissar? 

Mr. Zakman. Right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What are the responsibilities of a commissar? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, a commissar is sort of a political adviser. He 
holds the same military rank as the highest military officer of his par- 
ticular company. At one stage, the head of our company was a 
sergeant. That made me, militarily, a sergeant. Later c>n, the head 
of the company became a captain, so I received the same pay as a 
captain, except that a commissar has more authority than Ihe military 
commander. 



IMPROPER ACTIVrTIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3639 

Mr. Kennedy. You say it has more authority ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You would advise hhn? You would advise the 
captain or advise the sergeant ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, the commissars would have their own meetings 
and more or less tell the captains. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there a commissar for each captain ? 

Mr. Zakman. There was a commissar for each company and a 
commissar over the commissars. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you returned to the United States. Did you 
go back into the labor-union movement then ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, not immediately. I worked in various indus- 
tries. Of course if there was a strike in my particular industry, I 
would help out. Sometime in 1942 I started to work for Local 259 
of the TTAW-CIO on a full-time basis. 

The Chairman. 1952? 

Mr. Zakman. 1942, sir. 

(At this point, Senator Curtis entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that the local headed by Mickey Finn ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What happened after that? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I worked there until, I believe, sometime in 
1945 and after that, for awhile, I didn't work for any union. 

Then I went to work for, I believe it was, Local 642 of the United 
Auto Workers. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you not with the Hotel and Restaurant Work- 
ers International Union for a while? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir ; I was. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is local 254 of the AFL? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right. 

The Chairman. Senator Ives? 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. Zakman a 
few questions about his connection with the Communist Party. 

I understand that you are no longer a Communist. 

Mr. Zakman. That is right, sir. 

Senator I\t.s. I do not think that has yet been develoi)ed in the 
questioning, though I assume it would be. 

I would like to ask you a couple of questions in that connection. 
You were in your teens when you became affiliated with the Young 
Communist League. "Wliy did you do that? Wliat attracted you 
about it? At that time, I take it, you were in junior high school, 
or were you out of high school ? 

Mr. Zakman. Just about out of high school. 

Senator Ives. What caused you to go into the Young Communist 
League ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, there was no work. I was the same as any 
other young fellow. Most of the people I associated with in my 
neighborhood were either members of the Young Communist League 
or their parents were Communists. I listened to a lot of talk. 

Senator Ix^s. Do you mean that that area of New York City was 
pretty well populated with Communists? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

(At this point. Senator Kennedy withdrew from the hearing 
room.) 



3640 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. "Wliat area? 

Senator Ia^es. What part of New York was that ? 

Mr. Zakman. That was the Bronx. 

Senator Ives. The Bronx? 

Mr. Zakman. Right. 

Senator I^^s. I was never given to understand that the Bronx was 
communistic. 

Mr. Zakman. Well, not the entire Bronx, but around Wilkins 
Avenue there were plenty. 

Senator Ives. That is a little different. 

Go ahead. Then you went into the Communist Party. Wliy did 
you do that ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, actually, I didn't go into the Communist Party. 
Wlien I went to Spain they sort of graduated me into the Communist 
Party. 

Senator Ives. You graduated into the Communist Party ? In other 
words, you started out to be a Communist because you were sort of 
desperate, you were unemployed and could not get work; is that it? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right, sir. 

Senator Ives. And you graduated into the Communist Party itself ? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right. 

Senator Ives. I follow you so far. Wliy did you leave the Com- 
munist Party ? Wliat happened ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, actually, in a certain sense I broke with the 
Communist Party because of things I saw in Spain, but I did not 
make a complete break until sometime in 1945. 

Senator Ives. In other words, you discovered the Communist Party 
was not what you thought it was ? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right, sir. 

Senator Ives. And communism was not what you thought it was? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right. 

Senator I^^es. Thank you very much. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Counsel. 

Mr. Kennedy. We were up to 1945. You left the Communist 
Party and you went with the Hotel and Restaurant Workers Interna- 
tional Union, Local 254? You were with them for a while? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then the UAW-CIO Local 642; is that right? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you went with the International Brotherhood 
of Electrical Workers, Local 1614? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes. 

Mr. ICennedy. The secretary-treasurer of that was Milton Silver- 
man? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What year is this we are up to about now ? 

Mr. Zakman. The early part of 1949, 1 believe. 

Mr. Kennedy. The early part of 1949. How long did you stay 
then with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers? 

Mr. Zakman. Slightly less than 1 year. Toward the end of 19 — 
no. It was sometime in 1950. 

Mr. I{j:nnedy. You left then sometime in 1950; is that right? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3641 

Mr. IvENNEDY. During this period of 1950, while you were working 
for the International Brotherhood of P^lectrical Workers, did you 
have a conversation with Mr. Sam Beroer, manager of local 102 of 
thelLGWTJ? 

Mr. Zakman. a conversation pertaining to what, sir ^ 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have a conversation pertaining to getting 
a charter for yourself, to organize ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sii'. 

Mr. Kennedy. What position did you liave with the electrical 
workers ? 

Mr. Zakman. I was an organizer. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you wanted a charter of your own ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And j^ou spoke to Sam Berger about that? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate to the committee the convei'sation 
you had with Mr. Sam Berger ''i 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I asked Mr. Berger if lie laiew anyone in the 
United Automobile Workers, AFL. I "told him that I had worked 
with the United Automobile Workers, CIO, and I felt that there 
was room in New York for the AFL to move in since the CIO had not 
organized the gasoline stations or thousands of workers in the garages 
and other such workers. I felt that the AFL could do the job. I 
told him that — rather, I asked him if he could possibly find out or 
know anyone that could get me a charter, and I would be glad to 
help organize a union to organize these industries. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he say to that ( 

Mr. Zakman. At that time he said he didn't kuow at the moment, 
but if he ever finds out anything he will get in touch w^th me. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. Why did you think Sam larger, of the Ladies' 
Garment Workers Union, would be able to help you get a charter 
with the United Automobile Workers, AFL? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I knew that in his position as the head of 
his local, he would attend conventions where thei-e were other AFL 
officials, and I felt that at one of these conventions he might meet 
with some of the officers, and there he inight get into a conversation 
and woidd find out foi- me. 

Senator I\'es. Mr. Chairman ? 

The Chairman. Senator Ives. 

Senator Ives. I would like to ask Mr. Zakman what his actual trade 
or profession is, if he has one outside of being an organizer or 
commissar. 

Mr. Zakman. I am a machinist, sir. 

Senator Ives. You are a machinist? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator l\^s. How many years did you Avork at that profession 
or trade ? 

Mr. Zakman. I would say about 6 or 7 years, sir. 

Senator Ives. Then you discovered you were more cut out to be an 
organizer ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I always liked the organizing field. 

Senator Ives. You were kind of successful at that; is that it? 

Mr. Zakman. I wasn't very successful at it. 

Senator Ives. Then why did you stay at it ? 



3642 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Zakman. I just liked that type of work. I was younger, and I 
had a family, and that was the type of work I liked. 

Senator Ives. Yet you say you were not successful at it ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Senator Ives. It is rather anomalous. 

Thank you. 

The Chairman. Identify Mr. Berger for us. What was he at the 
time you had the conversation with him ? 

Mr. Zakman. He was the manager of local 102. 

The Chairman. The manager of local 102 ? 

Mr. Zakman. Of the International Ladies' Garment Workers 
Union. 

The Chairman. What kind of a union ? 

Mr. Zakman. International Ladies' Garment Workers Union, the 
truck division. 

Mr. Kennedy. Local 102 of the ILGWU, Ladies' Garment Workers 
Union, does the trucking for the clothing manufacturers, is that right, 
in New York City, the men's clothing manufacturers? 

Mr. Zakman. I believe it is the ladies. 

Mr. Kennedy. The lady clothing manufacturers; is that right? 

Mr. Zakman. I believe so. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he then talk to you again after you had this first 
•conversation with him? Did he talk to you again about getting this 
charter from the UAW-AFL, for you ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, some time passed between our first conversation, 
and he called me up one day and asked me if I was still interested in 
a charter, that it might be possible to secure one. I said I was. He 
said he would let me know if anything further transpired. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then did he bring you up on another occasion 
and introduce you to some people ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he bring you to the Hampshire House? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is a hotel in New York City ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he introduce you to some people at that time? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. To whom did he introduce you ? 

Mr. Zakman. Mr. Paul Dorfman. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who did you understand Mr. Paul Dorfman was? 

Mr. Zakman. I didn't know at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you found out since who Mr. Paul Dorfman is? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I read in the newspapers. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did not know at all who his contacts were at 
that time? 

Mr. Zakman. At that time I did not know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss with Mr. Paul Dorfman the grant- 
ing of this charter from the UAW-AFL? 

Mr. Zakman. No, we didn't have much of a conversation. I was 
introduced to him, and Berger said, "This is the young fellow that 
would like to get a charter," and that was about more or less the 
conversation. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand Mr. Dorfman had any connec- 
tions at all with the UAW-AFL? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3643 

Mr. Zak3iax. ^Vell, I assiuned he probably had some connections if 
lie was able to get a charter. 

Mr. Kennedy, Did you ever learn that he had any connections? 

Mr. Zakman. Xo, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did 3^ou understand that he had a personal friend- 
ship with Mr. Anthony Doria? 

a\Ir. Zakman. No, I didn't know about any Mr. Anthony Doria at 
that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. But Mr. Berger brought you up to the Hampshire 
House to introduce you to Mr. Paul Dorfman and discussed getting 
this cliarter from the UAW-AFL? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, at this time, Mr. Paul Dorfman, and 
.~ince that time, has had no official connection with the UAW-AFL. 

Did you understand that following that. Mr. Berger made a trip 
out to the international headquarters in Milwairkee, Wis., to try to 
obtain this charter for you? 

Mr. Zakisian. I didn't know where he went to get the charter, but 
he called me up and said that a charter would be mailed to us from 
the international. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand he went to Milwaukee, Wis., to 
get that charter? 

Mr. Zakman. Not at that time, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you learned since that time that he did ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy, What reason would Mr. Sam Berger, the manager 
of the htdies garment workers local, what reason would he have for 
going to all of this work for you, Mr. Sam Zakman? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I know that I asked him for the charter. I 
met him through a mutual acquaintance. I felt as one trade-union 
leader to another trade-union man, that he was willing to back us, 
since he had a powerful union. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any official connection with him prior 
to this time ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you know him well ? 

Mr. Zakman. I had met him on a few occasions. 

Not too well. 

Mr. Kennedy. Yet he took this trip all the way out to Milwaukee, 
Wis,, to get this charter for you ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, as I said before, I didn't know he was going 
to take any trip, or how much inconvenience there would be incurred 
in getting this particular charter. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Have you learned since what he was going to get 
out of getting this charter for you ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand at that time that he had a close 
personal relationship with Mr. Johnny Dioguardi ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. At that time I had never heard the name of 
Johnny Dioguardi. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did not know at this time his relationship with 
Johnny Dioguardi, is that right ? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right. 



3644 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently he informed you that the charter 
would be granted ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He mailed the charter to you? 

Mr. Zakman. I think it was mailed to him. 

Mr. I^nnedy. Who were the names that were going on the appli- 
cation for the charter ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, the original application— we put our own 
names down there and names of friends and relatives. We knew we 
had to have about 15 or 16 names, and those are the names that 
were on it. 

The Chairman. Did you personally sign an application for a char- 
ter? 

Mr. Zakman. I believe I did, sir. 

The Chairman. I beg your pardon? 

Mr. Zakman. I believe I did, sir. 

The Chairman. Could you recognize your handwriting? 

Mr. Zakman. I would. 

The Chairman. I hand you here what purports to be a photo- 
static copy of "Official application for charter of affiliation under the 
jurisdiction of International Union, United Automobile Workers of 
America." It appears to be dated September 12f, 1950. I ask you to 
examine this document and see if you identify it as a photostatic 
copy of the original which you signed. 

(Document handed to witness.) 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir ; I signed this. 

The Chairman. That document will be made exhibit 1. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit 1," for reference- 
and will be found in the appendix on p. 3969.) 

The Chairman. Let the witness retain that copy for a moment. 

I notice that the signatures on this application seem to be printed,, 
all of them printed, rather than written. Is that your printed signa- 
ture "Samuel Zakman" that appears third from the top? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Who printed the other names on the application? 

Mr. Zakman. I believe I printed some of them. Some I printed. 

The Chairman. Some you printed ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Had the others whose names you printed been con- 
tacted, and were they apprised of the fact that their names were being 
used on this application as petitioners for the application? 

Mr. Zakman. Some of them, to my knowledge, whose names I put 
down there, I informed him about the fact. Some of tliem, I believe, 
did not know. 

The Chairman. You informed them before or after you printed 
their names ? 

Mr. Zakman. After, sir. 

The Chairman. After you printed their names. Who was present 
with you when this application was made out, and when you placed or 
printed your name on it ? 

Mr. Zakman. Mr. Berger, and George Semelmacher. 

The Chairman. Mr. Berger, and George who? 

Mr. Zakman. Semelmacher. 

Mr. Kennedy. Semelmacher. 



IMPROPER ACTrVirrES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3645 

The Chairman. Was Paul Dorf man present ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Did he authorize you to use his name ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Who suggested the use of his name? 

Mr. Zakman. It might have been 1 of the other 2 gentlemen; I 
didn't. 

The Chairman. You didn't. In other words, did you then sug- 
gest some names that you could put on here ? 

Mr. Zakman. I suggested some of the names. 

The Chairman. And they suggested some of them. But the 3 of 
you, Sam Berger, yourself, and Semelmacher, are the 3 who actuallj^ 
prepared this petition and printed the names on it ? 

Mr. Zakman. 1 believe so, sir. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Counsel. You may proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have some of your relatives on there? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. "Wlio are your relatives on that first original applica- 
tion? 

Mr. Zakman. Esposito, Dwyer, and Jangel. 

Mr. Kennedy. John Dwyer, Albert Esposito, and who is the other 
one ? 

Mr. Zakman. Albert Jangel. 

Mr. Kennedy. George Semelmacher, he has another name; does he 
not? 

Mr. Zakman. I believe it is Baker. He had his name changed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is Semelmacher the German name for Baker? 

Mr. Zakman. I believe that is it. 

Mr. Kennedy. So he is known as George Baker and also as George 
Semelmacher; is that right? 

Mr. Zakman. t believe so. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have another name on here, Tlieodore Ray. 
Who is Theodore Ray? Who suggested his name? 

Mr. Zakinian. Well, I didn't, because I didn't know him at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know him after that? 

Mr. Zakman. Y'es, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You met him ; did you ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was an fissociate of Mr. Johnny Dio? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you understand that he is now under indictment 
in New York? 

Ml-. Zakman. Y^es, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. In connection with the throwing of the acid in Victor 
Riesel's eyes? 

Mr. Zakman. Y'es, sir. 

Mr. Ken NED V. He is under indictment with Mr. Johnny Dioguardi ; 
is that right? 

Mr. Zakman. Tliat is right. 

The Chairman. Let me ask you this : How long after you signed 
this application, after you three printed those names on there, and 
gave it to Sam Berger, was it before you got your charter? 

Mr. Zakman. I would say a couple of weeks, maybe. 



3646 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. Was it during that period of time that Mr. Berger 
is supposed to have made the trip to Milwaukee ? 

Mr. Zakman. I wouldn't know about that, sir. 

The Chairman. You wouldn't know about that? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

The Chairman. You say you never knew that he actually made the 
trip ? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right. 

The Chairman. He just told you. He called j^ou and told you that 
the charter would be mailed to you? 

Mr. Zakman. When we made this application out, he stiid we would 
send it in and it w^ould be mailed to us. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, the application was made out Sej)- 
tember 12 and they received a charter on September 18. 6 days later. 

After you received the charter from the International Union. 
UAW-AFL, did you, within a short time, meet Mr. Johnny Dio- 
guardi ? 

Mr. Zakman. I would say about a few weeks later. 

Mr. Kennedy, AYliat were the circumstances surrounding your 
meeting ? "\'\^io introduced you to Mr. Johnny Dio ? 

Mr. Zakman. I believe it was Mr. Baker. 

Mr. Kennedy. Known also as George Semelmaclier? 

Mr. Zakman. I had to meet him. I met him down in a restaurant. 
At that time he introduced me to Mr. Dio. 

Mr. Kennedy. And what business was Mr. Dio in at that time ? 

Mr. Zakman. I didn't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he express an interest in your newly acquired 
charter, local 102? 

Mr. Zakman. No. When I was introduced to him, they told him 
that I was the fellow that was going to organize the union, and he 
said he was very glad to meet me. Then Baker told liim that he had 
secured a headquarters, and he needed a downpayment or a couple of 
months' rent, or something, and Mr, Dio then loaned him the money. 

Mr. Kennedy, Dio then put up the money for your rent i 

Mr. Zakman. Yes ; secured the headquarters. 

Mr. Kennedy, You were supposed to do the organizing work. 
After they secured the headquarters, which was a couple of weeks 
after you got the charter, Mr, Dio put up the money for the rent for 
your headquarters ; is that right ? 

Mr, Zakman. That is right, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy, Then you moved along. In October, did Mr. Dio 
take an active interest in your local, your union, after that? 

Mr, Zakman, Not at that time. The first few months he took na 
active interest, 

Mr, Kennedy, Did he put any money up during those first few 
months ? 

Mr, Zakman, Yes; from time to time he would loan us various 
sums of money, 

Mr, Kennedy. To finance your operation? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what reason was Johnny Dioguardi interested 
in financing the operation of your union ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES ENT THE LABOR FIELD 3647 

Mr. Zakman. Well, at that time I didn't know what he was in- 
terested in. Wlien I was introduced to him, I was told that he 
would loan us the money and as soon as we got enough in the treasury 
we would pay him back. He was a friend of ours, and was to help 
us. 

Mr. KJENNEDT. Who was he a friend of? He wasn't a friend of 
yours. 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I hadn't known him. 

Mr. Kennedy, Who was he a friend of ? 

Mr. Zakman. He could have been a friend of Mr. Berger's or 
Mr. Baker's. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand that he was a friend of Mr. 
Berger's or Mr. Baker's at that time ? 

Mr. Zakman. I assumed so from the conversation. 

Mr. Kennedy. You moved along and you started organizing some 
shops ; did you ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Dio was financing the operation. Were 
you getting a salary during this period of time? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that monej^ coming from Dio? 

Mr. Zakman. Not all of it, because at that time we had a few 
hundred members that came into the organization. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was he advancing some of the money for your 
expenses and salary? 

Mr. Zakman. Some of it he was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you go on and tell us what happened then? 
Did he take any active control over the operation of the union? 

Mr. Zakman. Not at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently? 

Mr. Zakman. Subsequently; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have conversations preceding that with 
him about the operation of the union? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, he would frequently ask me questions, how 
we were doing, or would ask me questions how I go about organiz- 
ing shops. He took a normal interest that anybody would that in- 
vested money in anything. He seemed to be very interested. I would 
have discussions with him about how you go about organizing a 
plant. 

Senator Curtis. Tell us about that discussion. l^Hiat answer did 
you give him as to how you would go about organizing a plant ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I told him that first you approach the people 
in the plant and find out their grievances. Then you make up the 
necessary propaganda, the leaflets. Then you attach application cards 
to these leaflets. You appeal to the workers to join your local. You 
tell the workers something about yourself in the leaflets. You tell 
them about some of the things you have accomplished in other similar 
situations in their industry. You ask them to send in the cards. 

After that, then you sign a substantial number of the employees, 
and you petition for an election. If you win, the employer is required 
to sit down and negotiate a contract. 

Senator Curtis. Did Johnny Dio agree with that method, or did he 
suggest there were sometimes more rapid and direct methods? 



3648 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Zakman. He made very few suggestions at that time. He used 
to do a lot of listening and ask a lot of questions, but he didn't make 
any suggestions that there were other ways. 

Mr. Kennedy. You moved along into the end of 1950 and through 
early 1951, Did he take any control over the operations then in early 
1951? 

(At this point, Senator Goldwater entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Zakman. "Well, he actually didn't take control until he became 
business manager. 

Mr. Kennedy. When did he become business manager? 

Mr. ZakMan. To the best of my knowledge, I believe around June 
1951. 

Mr. Kennedy. Prior to that time, did he have an office in your local ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, when we moved to the new headquarters, he 
did have a place. 

Mr. Kennedy. When was that, approximately ? 

Mr. Zakman. That was, I believe, about a month prior to the time he 
became business manager. 

Mr. Kennedy. So that would have been about May of 1951 ? 

Mr. Zakman. I believe around that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Prior to that time, prior to the time you moved into 
the new headquarters, had you received a new charter from the 
international ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. While you are hunting that up, I would like to ask a 
question of Mr. Zakman. 

What was the membership of your union at the time that Dioguardi 
took over? 

Mr. Zakman. At the time he became business manager, sir? 

Senator Ives. Yes. 

Mr. Zakman. I would say about 700 or so, 700 members. 

Senator Ives. What was the membership when he became presi- 
dent, when he took it over entirely ? 

Mr. Zakman. I wasn't in the organization at that time, sir. 

Senator Ives. You were not a part of it? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Senator Ives. That is as much as you know it ever was — 700 ? 

Mr. Zakman. That is about what it was. 

Senator Ives. What does that mean in the amount of dues paid? 
What were the annual dues paid ? 

Mr. Zakman. They paid $3 a month. 

Senator Ives. $3 a month, $36 a year, for 700 ? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right, sir. 

Senator Ives. What was the initiation fee? 

Mr. Zakman. It varied, from $2 to $25, depending upon the 
situation. 

Senator Ives. Wliy did it vary ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, if a shop was a tough shop to organize, and 
the question of initiation would held back the workers from joining, 
we would lower the initiation. 

Senator Ives. It was a matter of convenience; is that it? 

Mr. Zakman. No. It is a question of holding up the entire organ- 
ization over the question of the few dollars of initiation. 

Senator Ives. That is a pretty good thing, it seems to me. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3649 

The Chairman. You spoke a while ago about the first charter you 
received. That was what date ? 

Mr. Kennedy. September 18, 1950. 

The Chairman. September 18, 1950. Did you later apply for a 
new charter? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. For the same local ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman, What year did you apply for that? 

Mr. Zakman. I believe it was the early part of 1951, 

Mr. Kennedy. It was granted April 23, 1951, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. You obtained your first charter September 18, 1950, 
for local 102, and then you applied for your second charter, or for a 
new charter, on April 23, 1951. Is that correct ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. I hand you here what purports to be a photostatic 
copy of the application for a new charter and ask you to examine it 
and state whether you recognize it as a photostatic copy of the original. 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Zakman. I believe it is a true copy, sir. 

The Chairman. It is a true copy. That may be made exhibit No. 2. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 2" for refer- 
ence, and will be found in the appendix on pp. 3970-3971.) 

The Chairman. I note on this new application the following in 
handwriting. It says, "Cancel old charter and reissue to above 
names." 

What new names are on this second application that were not on 
the first? 

Mr. Zakman. There are several new names, sir. 

The (^HxMRman. There are several new names. Among them is 
Johnny Dioguardi ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. What do you note there with reference to Johnny 
Dioguardi? Does it appear to you that his name has been circled 
and a notation made at the top to send all correspondence to Johnny 
Dioguardi ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Is that when he took over this union? 

Mr. Zakman. This piece of correspondence, as it is right now, was 
not called to my attention until much later. I had not seen it when 
it went out. In fact, the first time I had ever seen the circling of 
his name was when some of the investigator showed it to me. 

The Chairman. In other words, when it went out, you did not know 
it was going to be circled that way, and sent in in that fashion ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

The Chairman. I notice down at the bottom it says, "Charter 
reissued 4-23-1951." 

Did you ever see that writing on it before ? 

Mr. Zakman. Not until the members of the committee showed it to 
me, sir. 

The Chairman. And I notice it says, "Have charter cover" and 
this is in handwriting, and an arrow points down "Greater New York 
and vicinity." 

89330 — 57 — pt. 10 5 



3650 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Was that handwriting on it when you applied for the new charter, 
or when you reapplied for it? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

The Chairman. So what actually happened was when this appli- 
cation went in for a new charter and was granted, apparently Johnny 
Dio took over the whole operation. In other words, he became boss 
of it? 

Mr. Zakman. It was shortly thereafter that he became business 
manager. 

The Chairman. He became business manager as soon as the new 
charter was issued? 

Mr. Zakman. About a month afterward. 

Mr. Kennedy. Ostensibly, you were still in charge of the union: 
is that right? 

Mr. Zakman. I was the president. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were president of the union and Johnny 
Dioguardi, first by financing your operations and then by moving in, 
having an office, was gradually taking over control of the union from 
you ; is that right ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Let me ask you this: Did he suggest this new 
charter business? 

Mr. Zakman. No. This new charter business actually came up 
during a discussion of the executive board, when, since we had mem- 
bers now, it was felt that it was no more than fair that we put mem- 
bers names on the charter. 

The Chairman. Was Johnny Dioguardi a member at that time 
of your union ? 

Mr. Zakman. I believe he was a member of the union. 

The Chairman. You believe he had joined in the meantime? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Did he pay any initiation fee? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, that actually wasn't my department. The 
secretary-treasurer would know best. But in order to get a card, he 
would have to. 

The Chairman. You don't recall his having paid either $2 or $25, 
do you ? 

Mr. Zakman. No; I don't recall. 

The Chairman. Did he work in any shop at that time? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

The Chairman. So he was neither eligible nor was he charged 
aji initiation fee. 

Senator Ives. Did he pay the $3 a month regular dues ? 

Mr. Zakman. He paid his dues. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Also on this second charter, Mr. Chairman, there 
is a notation saying, "April 22, 1955, Okay, Doria." 

Doria at that time was secretary-treasurer of the international, is 
that right? In 1951, I mean. 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Doria was secretary-treasurer of the international ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir 

Senator Curtis. I would like to ask a question, Mr. Chairman. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3651 

The Chairman. What Doria is that? 

Mr. Kennedy. Anthony Doria, on the left hand side of the chart, 
Doria, Washburn, and Heaton. 

The Chairman. He was head of the union, was he, at that time? 

Mr. Zakman. He was the international secretary-treasurer. 
The Chairman. Senator Curtis, 

Senator Curtis. On that application, I do not know whether the 
witness can answer this question or not, but maybe the counsel can 
advise me, this writino; and circling- directs all correspondence to be 
carried on with John Dio^uardi. Wliat does the evidence show? 
Was that on the application when it was submitted to the interna- 
tional union, or does that lo} i'e:-int a decision made in the inter- 
national union? 

Mr. Kennedy. We believe. Senator, that it was a decision by the in- 
ternational union, that the writing is Mr. Anthony Doria's writing. 

Senator Curtis. In other words, it would reveal an understanding- 
on the part of Anthony Doria as to what was taking place, that this 
union was being tui'ued over to Johnny Dioguardi ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is right. And this started with his financing 
the union's operations in 1950 and continuing in the early part of 1951. 
Then they put Johnny Dioguardi's name on the application, and made 
a decision that all correspondence would be sent to Johnny Dioguardi. 
At the same time, Mr. Sam Zakman was allegedly or supposedly still 
head of the union and running the union. 

The Chairman. Let me ask you a question. 

After this charter was issued, was all correspondence from the 
national headquarters of the international sent to Johnny Dioguardi? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I know I received correspondence from them 
myself. They might have sent him a duplicate of all correspondence, 
whether it was to himself or anyone else. I also received correspond- 
ence. 

The Chairman. You also received correspondence? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes. 

The Chairman. There might have been some more confidential 
correspondence that went direct to Mr. Johnny Dioguardi that you 
didn't see ? 

Mr. Zakman. That is quite possible, sir. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Mr. Kennedy. During 1951, did you start a drive on the taxicabs 
in New York City ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you ran that drive, did you, at least initially ? 

Mr. Zakman. At the beginning I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then Mr. Dioguardi began to take over that 
drive also? 

Mr. Zakman. After I left. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you explain to the committee the circum- 
stances of your leaving local 102 ( 

Mr. Zakman. Well, there were many circumstances leading up to it. 
For one thing, there Avere dis])utes about the method of organizing. 

The Chairman. About what? 

Mr. Zakman. About the methods of organizing. There were dis- 
putes about staff members. We didn't see eye to eye on several things. 



3652 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Curtis. 'Wliat was the dispute as to the methods of organ- 
izing? Did you want to follow the methods or go along the lines that 
you stated awhile ago? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Who had different ideas on that? 

Mr. Zakman, Well, they wanted to use untrained organizers, peo- 
ple who didn't work in the industry. I was opposed to that. 

Senator Curtis. Who are you talking about as "they"? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, other members of the executive. Dioguardi. 

Senator Curtis. Dioguardi primarily? 

Mr. Zakman. As business manager; yes. 

Senator Curtis. What did he want to do about organizing? 

]Mr. Zakman. Well, he wanted to organize, but I told him that the 
only proper organizer to put on the staff is someone who would come 
from the industry. He felt that anybody could be an organizer who 
wanted to be one. I told him that when you organize an automobile 
worker, you should send an automobile worker after him, and the 
same for dress workers, that you take them right out of the shops. 
He felt that he could hire them from the street if he felt like it and 
train them to be organizers. 

Senator Curtis. Is there any difference in the approach that he 
wanted to make as to the approach that you fellows wanted? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. At that time he made no other suggestion. 
He was satisfied the way the organization was going, especially the 
taxi drive. We were pretty successful in a few short months. 

Mv. Kennedy. Was there anybody in particular that you had ob- 
jections to as far as working for the union ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I had objections to about 95 percent of those 
lie put on the payroll. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you object to Joe Curcio, for instance? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you object to Teddy Ray ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you object to Joe Cohen ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were these people all brought in by Johnny Dio- 
guardi ? 

Mr. Zakman. I don't know if they were directly brought in, as you 
say, but some of them were directly introduced to us through him 
and some through other people. Rut I just couldn't go along in put- 
ting them on the staff. I felt that I was in charge of the organization, 
and that I should have the last say as to who would be put on the 
staff as an organizer. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you object to Benny the Bug, Benny the Bug 
Ross? 

Mr. Zakman. There is a fellow that did everything wrong and 
organized better than the rest of them. 

Mr. Kennedy. You didn't object to him? 

Mr. Zakman. No ; not after I saw what he did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Johnny Dioguardi brino; him into the organi- 
zation of 102 ? 

Mr. Zakman. Frankly I don't know how he came in. We just in- 
herited him somehow. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3653 

The Chairman. You inherited liim? 

Mr. Zakman. We inherited him. 

The Chairman. You don't know who from? 

Mr. Zakman. No. The organization was getting bigger and people 
were coming and going. At times it was pretty difficult to keep up 
with them. 

The Chairman. Senator Goldwater? 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Zakman, you said that Benny the Bug had 
a little different method of organizing and he brought in quite a few 
members. 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. What was different about his procedure ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, Benny, as we call him, used the methods that 
were used about 40 or 50 years ago. He would just walk into a shop 
and pull the switch and say, "Everybody out on strike.'' That is all 
there was to it. 

Everybody thought he was crazy and they would walk out and the 
boss would sign a contract. It was as simple as that. I know it 
sounds unbelievable, but he organized many shops by the same 
methods. 

Senator Goldwater. By pulling the switch ? 

Mr. Zakman. He didn't believe in elections at that time. 

Senator Goldwater. Did he use any other method of persuasion 
that might have been used 40 years ago ? 

Mr. Zakman. No. He was a hard worker. He just ran from shop 
to shop. 

Senator Goldwater. He did not use an}- physical approach? 

Mr. Zakman. No. He did a lot of yelling and made innuendoes, 
but I have actually never seen him get into any pliysical disputes, not 
wliile I Avas with liim, anyway. 

(At tliis point, Senator McNamara entered the hearing room.) 

Senator Goldwater. I Avas curious to know, and thanks for telling 
me. I wondered what methods he used that might not be used 
regularly. 

Mr. Zakman. They were completely unetliical, but they worked. 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Counsel. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were discussing the disputes that you had with 
Johnny Dioguardi which eventually led to your resigning from the 
union. 

Did you have a dispute with him at the headquarters? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I had previously resigned once before as a 
result of him making promotions and putting so many of these people 
on the staff', but they asked me to continue to stay on for a while 
longer and reconsider. 

When this taxi thing became big, other conflicts and differences of 
opinion arose and then the newspapers started to lambast Dioguardi. 
As a matter of fact, I knew Dioguardi several months before I knew 
his name was Dioguardi. I only Knew him as Dio. 

I read about him in the New York Post, Murray Kenton's column, 
one day. 

Mr. Kennedy. So did you raise a question with him, and did you 
have a fight with him ? 

Mr. Zakman. At that time I asked him if the article that was about 
him was true and he asked me if I believed everything that was written 



3654 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

in the papers, that is about tlie whole explanation he gave me about 
that. 

Mr. Kexnedy. Did he hit you? 

Mr. Zakman. No. There have been a lot of stories about that so- 
called hitting. He didn't liit me. As he stood up there, I bent over 
to take some of my personal things, and his hand came back and the 
ring scratched my eye. That is all there was to it. I was never 
thrown downstairs as some of the papers say. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were not thrown downstairs by him ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He just happened to hit you across the eye? 

Mr. Zakivian. Well, it really wasn't a hit in that sense. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was with his ring? 

Mr. Zakman. It was with his ring and it scratched me. It was an 
accident. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you left the union after that ? 

Mr. Zakman. I very happ)ily left the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. You Avere out of it after that, is that right ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever have any connection with the taxicab 
drive there ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy. Did you ever have any connection with Johnny 
Dioguardi ? 

Mr. Zakman. I only spoke to liini once after that in my life. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went back to work for another union ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, I organized an independent union at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did you come to speak to him ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, at that time it came to my knowledge that he 
was made, I believe, a regional director and he had the power to issue 
charters. I was starting to organize three big shops. 

Since I had onl}^ a small little local, I knew I could not do it myself. 
I came over to ask him if he could possibly give me a charter of my 
own, and if the international would send over some organizers to 
possibly hel]) me with the situation. 

At that time he said he w^as too busy with the taxi drive and he 
couldn't help me himself, but he would send me over to Local 136 of 
the UAW and they would help me. That is the last time I spoke to 
Mr. Dio. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they helped you out ; did they? 

Mr. Zakman. No; they didn't help me out because local 512 itself 
could not exist as such. I began to work for local 136. 

Mr. Kennedy. T^ocal .512 is what? 

]\Ir. Z.vK.ArAN. Well, the Hrst local 512 was an independent union. 

Mr. Kennedy. In that connection, will you tell the committee or 
relate to the connnittee how you get a charter for an independent 
union? What procedure do you have to follow and what have your 
expenditures been? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, there are several procedures. One procedure 
is you have a group of people, or you organize some shops and get 
representatives of these shops to sign a petition, as we did the other 
one, and request a charter. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3655 

You send in a letter to almost any union, or the union or your trade 
and ask them how much it would be, et cetera. In other situations, 
you do not have to apply to anybody for an independent charter. 

You get together a group of people, whoever wants to help you 
organize a union or if it is the shop you have, you get the people to- 
gether and vote yourself a name and officers, and you write a normal 
petition to the National Labor Relations Board, file the normal forms 
as any other union, and you are a legal union in every sense of the 
word. 

Senator Ives. Do you do this in collusion with management? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. You do this on your own. 

Senator Tvf.s. I wanted to make sure it was not a company union you 
were talking about. 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir; this is an independent union. 

Mr. Kennedy. If you were trying to get a charter from an inter- 
national? Have you ever heard of the practice of selling charters? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I have heard of it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know if it goes on ? 

Mr. Zakman. It probably does. 

(At this point Senator Kennedy entered the hearing r(X)m.) 

Mr. Kennedy. You know that it goes on ; do you not ^ 

Mr. Zakivcan. Well, it does go on, but I do not know exactly who. 

Mr. Kennedy. With some internationalists, are the charters for 
their locals more expensive than others ? Would you give the commit- 
tee a little bit of that? 

I am sure you are not directly involved yourself, but I am sure you 
can give the committee a little information as to how these things 
are done. 

Mr. Zakman. I myself have worked for man}^ unions. I never 
bought a charter. If you can organize and you know^ how tx) organize, 
it is not necessary. Once you have membership, they are only too 
glad to give you a charter. 

If you have no membership and you want a charter, you apply 
to one of these unions. You could apply to the teamsters or to the 
carpenters or to the Hotel and Restaurant Workers Union, or other 
such unions, for a charter. 

Sometimes they issue you a charter upon the application for just 
a normal fee. Other times they don't. 

Ml-. Kennedy. What has been your knowledge about when they 
don't ? Wliat do you have to do then ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, sometimes they want a favor. They want you 
to put someone on the staff. They would say, "Well, we will give 
you a charter.'' Maybe one of the big shots in the international will 
say, "All right, we will help you out. We will give you a charter. 
But when your union is running along nicely, we would like to give 
a couple of jobs out to a couple of friends," or something like that. 

That would be one way of returning a favor. Other times, you 
just ask them how much they want for the charter, period. If jf-ou 
have the finances, you pay for it. 

Mr. Kennedy. You pay for it, if you want it? 

Mr. Zakman. For the charter. 

Mr. Kennedy. Are some unions more expensive to get chartei-s from 
than other unions ? 

Mr. Zakman. I imagine so. 



3656 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Is there any going price on any of the unions ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. There is no open market for that. 

Senator Kennedy. Woukl this sale take phice if you had members 
and wanted to get the charter, or would this be a case where there 
were no members, that you would have to do them a favor or pay 
something ? 

Mr. Zakman. If you had members, they would more or less have 
to give you a charter, especially if they were in the same trade and 
you were applying to the same union, because it would break out 
into a scandal and the people would ask, "Why can't we get a 
charter?" 

But if you did not have members, then there was no one to 
complain. 

Senator Kennedy. Would the charters of some unions be more val- 
uable than others? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I guess because the unions are more powerful, 
more important. It would be easier to organize under their charters 
as against — for instance, certainly a teamsters' charter is better than 
a beauticians' charter. Nobody gets frightened when they see you 
picket with a beautician's sign. 

The Chairman. Can we go back just a minute before we pass over 
this entirely, to this local 102, wdien you organized it and got your 
charter? You charged an initiation fee, you said, of from $2 to $25. 
To whom did that money go ? Did it go into your treasury or did it 
go to some of the organizers or individuals ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, it went into the treasury. 

The Chaipjman. Did you keep books on your expenditures and on 
all the dues? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir, there were books. 

The Chair]man. And of the moneys received up to the time you 
left the union? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you know what became of those records ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

The Chairman. You left it in 1951, sometime, I believe, did you 
not? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right, sir. 

The Chairman. You do not know anything about the records since 
that time? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Senator McNamara? 

Senator McNamara. I do not know whether this happened before 
I came in or not, but has the present employment of the witness been 
established? 

The (Chairman. The what? 

Senator McNamara. The present occupation or employment. 

The (^iiAiRMAN. You may state it again. Where are you employed? 

Mr. Zakman. I am employed in a custommade lampshade factory 
in New York City. 

Senator McNamara. In what capacity? 

Mr. Zakman. Production manager. 

Senator McNamara. Is it a union shop? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Senator McNamara. That is all. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EV THE LABOR FIELD 3657 

Senator Kennedy. In this period, did you consider that you were 
acting as an agent for Johnny Dio or as a front for Johnny Dio? 
You may not want to use that w^ord. 

Mr. Zakman. Well, about the time that we started disputing, I 
saw that I was losing control of the local and I felt that I didn't want 
to be president anymore. In fact, I raised that question. 

I told him that as long as I was president — I raised it at the 
executive board — as long as I was president, and I was recognized 
by the public as the head man, that is the way it would have to be. 

If I got another title or if I was demoted, I said I would take 
orders from somebody underneath me, but otherwise, I would not. 
That I wanted tlie decisions pertaining to organizing to go to my 
office and if they did not, I did not want to work there. 

One thing led to another and we quibbled and all that. We all tei-^ 
minated our relationship. 

Senator Kennedy. AMiat was Johnny Dio's title at that time? 

Mr. Zakman. He was business manager. 

Senator Kennedy. Who appointed him business manager? 

Mr. Zak:man. I believe the international did. 

Senator Kennedy. So you, as president of the local, were obliged to 
take orders from Johnny Dio and you told him you would not con- 
tinue as president, that you had the responsibility and you did not 
want to take his instructions, and after you left, you felt that that 
was putting you in an impossible position ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Kennedy. So Johnny Dio was, in fact, in control of the 
local ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir ; at that time he was. 

Senator Kennedy. Why do you think it was worth while for 
Johnny Dio to go to this effort to control this local ? "What was in it 
for him? He was not a trade-union man. Why would he want to 
do that ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, for one thing, the union was starting to grow 
and for another thing the taxi drive was going along pretty nicely. 
I had told him 30,000 taxidrivers, whoever controlled, them in New 
York City would be a powerful figure in New York. 

Senator Kennedy. Now, do you think Johnny Dio was interested in 
raising the wages of the taxidrivers or in his own power controlling 
the taxidrivers? 

Mr. Zakman. At that time, to the best of my opinion, I honestly 
felt that he wanted to make a success of this taxi drive. There were 
30,000 people, and it would have brought in a legitimate million 
dollars a year in income, and it would have made anyone a power in 
the city. 

The taxidrivers would have helped us organize anything that was 
unorganized. You know how the taxidrivers are. 

Senator Kennedy. It would have gotten $1 million a year? 

Mr. Zakman. AVell 

Senator Kennedy. That is what you and he discussed as the object 
of this drive ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, it was a combination of both, sir. I didn't kid 
myself. Whoever had the 30,000 members would make a nice living 
and would have a powerful organization and would be secure. Basic- 
ally, when we started, it was primarily for some security. 



3658 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Kennedy. Security for Johnny Dio and those in control? 

Mr. Zakman. Not at that time. I worked in many unions and I 
liad a family to support and believe it or not, sir, the workers as such 
are not the most generous employers themselves. Most of the time 
I just barelj' made salary to support my family. 

Here was a chance to organize a trade that never had been organized 
in New York. Cei-fainly, if we did the job, and certainly if we got 
conditions for the people, there would have been nothing wrong in us 
remaining as officers. 

It would have been a good thing for whoever did control them and 
it would still be a big thing. 

Senator Kennedy. You got forced out of this "big thing'- though? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I didn't care at that time. It didn't make much 
difference one way or the other and I felt my position was, I didn't 
know what office I held any more and I just felt I would work again. 

Senator I^nnedy. Then Dio became in complete control and j^ou 
left; is that right? 

Mr. Zakman. When I left, I heard later that he did. 

The CiiAiKMAN. Could you not fire him? Could you not fire Dio? 

Mr. Zakman. Could I fire him ? 

The Chairman. You were the president. 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir; business manager is a higher position than 
president, according to the constitution of the international. 

The Chairman. And the business manager is appointed from the 
international? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir ; or he could be elected by the local itself. 

The Chairman. But this happened to be an international man ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Appointed by the international ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And whenever that is done, Avhoever holds that 
position holds a higher position than the president of a local ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. He can boss the president of a local? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, he could fire you. 

The Chairman. He could fire the president of a local ? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right, unless they are an elected officer and 
he could not fire you from your position if you are elected, but he would 
take you off the payroll. 

The Chairman. He could take you ofl' the payroll. That is a pretty 
irood way to fire someone. 

Mr. Zakman. Yes; you would have the title, but you would not be 
receiving any salary from the local. 

The Chairman. And can he also arrange to have the local taken 
over in a trusteeship and put you completely out of business? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir; he could. 

Senator Kennedy. I have just one more question. You stated, Mr. 
Zakman, that possibly you could get $1 million a year if you were 
successful in organizing the drivers there. Now, did any employer 
groups ever offer you any money to prevent unionization, or prevent 
certain wage demands? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, we were organizing by the third week, we had 
started the drive, and I received a telephone call offering me $25,000. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX TTIi: LABOR FIELD 3659 

About a week later, they raised the ante to $50,000. The third week 
they raised it to $75,000. They did not call after that anymore. 

Senator Kennedy. Who called? 

Mr. Zakman. They didn't identify themselves, but they asked 
me if 1 was interested. At least I reported the conversation and I 
don't know if anyone else got a telephone call. But I reported this 
and they didn't identify themselves, but if I was interested and I 
stated I was interested, they would have arranged a meeting. 

Senator Kennedy. Was it an emplo3^er group i 

Mr. Zakman. They claimed they represented the employers. 

Senator Kennedy. Do you know if they talked to anyone else in 
the local ? 

jSIr. Zakman. I don't know, sir. 

Senator Kennedy. Did you refer them to anj'one else, or did you 
just turn them down? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Senator Kennedy. What did you say? What was your answer to 
them? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I used a few four-letter words and told them 
what to do with themselves. 

Senator McNamara. Your testimony indicates perhaps, by insinua- 
tion, that tmion charters are for sale, at different prices. What kind 
of unions are you talking about? Are these so-called independent 
unions that you organize more or less of your own intiative or are 
you talking about sale of charters from bona fide international unions? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, from the majority of bona fide international 
unions, you could not buy a charter, so to speak. I can best explaiii 
it this way : The. sale of a charter is not in the sense you just approach 
someone who can get a charter. The only way to get a charter is if 
you know someone from within a union, and you might know the 
second vice president or somebody like that and he would use his in- 
fluence to get it for you and if you made a private arrangement with 
him that would be it. 

The international as such might be interested in knowing what was 
going on, but that particular individual would have given you a 
charter under those circumstances. 

Senator McNamara. When you are talking about the second vice 
president, you have somebody in mind ? 

Mr. Zakman. Any vice president. 

Senator McNamara. You picked out the second vice president and 
obviously, you have someone in mind. What is his name? 

Mr. Zakman. I really haven't, and I just made that point. 

Senator McNamara. You skipped the first and you were not talking 
about the third and you were talking about the second. 

Mr. Zakman. I never bought a charter. 

Senator McNamara. Are you afraid to identify these people and is 
there any reason? Are you afraid of Dio at this point, or do you 
have anj^ fear? 

Mr. Zakman. I have no fear of him. 

Senator McNamara. No fear of him at all ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Senator McNamara. You are free to testify without any fear ? 

Mr. Zakman. That is right. 



3660 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Ives. Mr. Zakman, what was the total amount of money 
loaned to the local 102 by Johnny Dioguardi ? 

Mr. Zakman. I believe it was a few thousand dollars up to the 
time I left. 

Senator Ives. Only $2,000? 

Mr. Zakman. A few thousand dollars. 

Senator Ives. Was the loan carried on the union books ? 

Mr. Zakman. To the best of my knowledge it was, at least most 
of it. 

Senator Ives. Did the union ever repay the money to Dio ? 

Mr. Zakman. Not up to the time I left, sir. 

Senator Ives. That is all. 

Mr. Kennedy. We have a list here taken from the bank records of 
what books were available of local 102, of all of the loans that came 
into local 102 during this period of time. 

Senator Ives. Without objection, this will be put in the record. 

Mr. Kennedy. Perhaps Mr. Zakman could identify it. 

Senator Ives. Could vou identify this, Mr, Zakman? 

This will be exhibit No. 3. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 3'' for refer- 
ence and will be found in tlie appendix on p. 3972.) 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Zakman. No; I don't recognize all of these figures, sir, I 
wouldn't be in a j^osition to state if it was so. I do know that up 
to the time I left there liad been a few thousand dollars loaned to us. 

The Chairman, I did not quite understand you. Up to what time? 
What is that? 

Mr, Zakman. A few thousand dollars had been loaned to us, but 
as far as the larger amount, I don't know, and I don't know about 
after that. 

The Chairman. In other words, if they were loaned to you, you 
did not know it. 

Mr. Zakman. No. It states in 1950. I would probably know some 
of that, and part of 1951, but that amount I don't recall if it was near 
that amount while I was there. 

The Chairman. Do you think the amounts there are excessive for 
1950 and 1951 during the time you were with the union? 

Mr. Zakman. No ; they are not necessarily excessive, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you think that they are inaccurate? 

Mr. Zakman. As I stated before, sir, 1 don't know if these are the 
exact figures. 

The C'hairman, You do not know if they are the exact figures, but 
from your knowledge would you say that they are excessive or inac- 
curate, or if they could not be true, that your union did not borrow 
that nnich money from Johnny Dio, or Johnny Dioguardi ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, they could have borrowed that amount of 
money. I don't know whether it is all from Johnny Dio, but they 
could have used that amount of money because they did have a big 
overhead at that time. 

The Chairman. The witness is not able to identify the document and 
we will have to have some testimony to identify it. He says he does 
not i-ecognize it, 

Mr. Kennedy. JVIr. Chairman, it is a schedule made by our investi- 
gator, taken from the books of local 102 and shows the loans that were 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3661 

made to local 102 diirino- the period 1950 and 1951 and I believe the 
loans totaled $21,380.39 during; this pertinent period of time. 

I wonder if Mr. Zakman knows anybody else who was loaning money 
to the union other than Johnny Dioguardi. 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir; not at that time. 

The Chairman. These figures will have to be verified by our staff 
member who took them from the original books. 

Senator Curtis. Were you handling the finances during this period? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. You were not making the deposits in the bank? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. The secretary -treasurer was. 

Senator Curtis. You were not signing the checks ? 

Mr. Zakman. I was signing checks, two signatures. 

Senator Curtis. Were you in charge of the books, the entries that 
were to be made ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Were all of the funds handled by the union run 
through the bank? 

Mr. Zakman. To the best of my knowledge ; yes, sir. 

Senator Curits. And while as an ofiicer of the union, you had to 
sign checks, you did not have a day-to-day knowledge of the books? 

JNlr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. And when they would borrow money would there 
be any note executed 'f 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. You never signed a note or contract, that you recall, 
to repay money to Johnny Dio or to anyone else? 

Mr. Zakman. I never did ; but the treasurer might have. 

Senator Curtis. The treasurer might have? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Zakman, I have a few questions in connec- 
tion with the current points that are being brought out. 

First, why in your opinion was the taxi drive unsuccessful? 

Mr. Zakman. I really don't know, sir. I was very much surprised 
and it was going on quite nicely. 

Senator Goldwater. There were about 33,000 taxi drivers, I believe, 
in New York at that time? 

Mr. Zakman. Around that figure. 

Senator Goldwater. How many did you sign up ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, when I left we had signed up, maybe, I would 
say around 5,000 or so. 

Senator Goldwater. Do you not have any idea why it was unsuc- 
cessful after you left? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Senator Goldw^^ter. Were Johnny Dio's connections with it instru- 
mental in slowing the drive down? 

Mr. Zakman. I really don't know, sir. 

Senator Goldw^ater. Have you ever given it much thought? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I don't know, I know by the papers that the 
teamsters suddenly said it was their jurisdiction and there was a 
dispute between them. 

Senator Goldwater. You recognized that these 30,000 or 33,000 
men with their potential million-dollar-a-year income avouIcI be a 



3662 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

source of power to the officers who controlled that. Did you just drop 
it when 30U moved out of tliat union ? 

Mr. Zakmax. We]], it wasn't sometliing for me to drop. I Avent out 
and it was going along, as I said, very well. In fact, they signed up 
a few tliousand more, to tlie best knowledge I was able to pick up 
about it. It seemed they were linally going to succeed. 

Senator (told water. Are tliey organized now? 

Mr. Zakmax. No, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Tliey are not organized to any great extent? 

Mr, Zakmax. No, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Well, Mr. Zakman, getting back to tlie original 
102, I notice that you have with j^ou Mr. Berger and Mr. Dorfraan. 
Can you explain wliy Berger, as an officer of the International Ladies' 
Garment Workers Union, and Dorfman, who is an officer of the waste- 
handlers union in Cliicago, were so influential in obtaining a charter 
fortlieUAW-AFL? 

Mr. Zakman. I don't knoAv, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. You went to Berger for help in getting this 
charter ? 

Mr. ZAKJtAx. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Wliy did you go to liini ? 

Mr. Zakman. We just happened to be talking one day, and I was 
at that time with the ITAW-CIO. 

Senator Goldwater. You were with the UAW-CIO at that time? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. And we w^ere just talking generalities about 
unions, aud we got to talking and I mentioned there was a UAW- 
AFL. In fact he didn't at that time seem to even know that such a 
union existed. I said, "Yes; there is, the original union, the AFL." 
I said, "I would like to get a charter from that. I wish I knew some- 
one wlio could get me a cliarter." 

I aslved him, "If you ever find anybody M'ho would give me a char- 
ter, I would be very much interested in knoAving about it." 

Senator Goldwater. Then did he subsequently come to you and said 
that he had someone who could help you get a chai'ter? 

Mr. Zakman. He said he believed he could get a charter. 

Senator Goldw^ater. Did he say that right at the time or later? 

Mr. Zakman. Later on ; subsequently. 

Senator Goldwater. It took a period of time ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Do you recall how much time it took? 

Mr. Zakaian. I would say from our original discussion up to the 
time we actually got a charter, it nuist have been around 9 months, 
at least. 

Senator Goldw\\ter. Did Mr. Dorfman get into the picture about 
that time in your efforts to get this charter? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I met Mr. Dorfman I would say about 8 weeks 
or so before Ave secured the charter. 

Senator Goldwater. That was after you had met Mr. Berger and 
talked to him about the charter? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Do you have any idea of the influences they 
used in obtaining this charter from the UAW-AFL? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3663 

Senator GtOldwater, Now, do you have any idea why their names 
were placed on the original charter ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Here were two men who were members of 
different unions whose names suddenly appear on the charter for 102, 
along with yourself and others. Did you give that any thought at 
the time ? 

Mr. Zakman. At that time, no, sir. As I said, we had no mem- 
bership, and we all suggested a few names at the moment in order 
to be able to send in the necessaiy amount of names. 

Senator Goldwater. Did you suggest Mr. Berger's and Mr. Dorf- 
man's names, as appearing on the original charter? 

Mr. Zakman. I don't believe I did, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Do you recall who did ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, there were only three of us : Mr. Berger, and 
myself, and Baker, and so I know I suggested a few members of my 
family, but I don't recall suggesting anyone else. 

Senator Goldwater. How can an officer of the International Ladies' 
Garmeiit Workers' Union and an officer of the waste handlers' union 
be officially affiliated with another union such as the UAW-AFL? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, actually it is not illegal. 

Senator Goldwater, You can do that ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Is it customary ? 

Mr. Zakman. It is not customary, but sometimes there are union 
officials who receive honorary memberships in other unions. 

Senator Goldwater. This wasn't honorary. 

Mr. Zakman. No; but, as I said, it is not illegal, and it has been 
done. 

Senator Goldwater. Then, did you not say that you were a member 
of the UAW-CIO at tlie time you first contacted these men ? 

Mr. Zakman, Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. You were a member there of UAW-CIO and 
the UAW-AFL at the same time? 

Mr. Zakman. I was a member of the CIO when I disoussed the 
question with them ; but, when I actually came over, I was with the 
AFL, 1614, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, 

Senator Goldwater. You quit the CIO and went with the AFL? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. That doesn't happen usually, does it? Don't 
you find a man who is an officer of one union is an officer of that union 
and none other? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, there was only one local in New York City 
which was supposed to have jurisdiction over the gasoline stations at 
that time and they v;ere controlled by a Connnunist clique, and I felt 
if the AFL came in we certainly could do a better job than they did. 
That was one of the reasons we asked to get a charter of our own. 
Local 259 Avas pretty well known as a left-wing group. Many of the 
gasoline-station attendants and mechanics would not join. There were 
many disjiutes about why the leadership had never been removed, 
and they haven't been removed until the present date. 

Senator Goldwater, They have not been removed ? 

Mr. Zakman. They have not been removed. 



3664 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Goldv,^4ter. And those leaders are still identified with the 
Communist movement ? 

Mr. Zakman. I don't know if presently they are members of the 
Communist Party, but I certainly know at that time they were. 

Senator Goldwater. Would you be in a position to give us their 
names ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mickey Finn, the head of the union. 

Senator Goldwater. Mickey Finn? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Go on. 

Mr. Zakman. Sam Myers, and one or two others whose names I 
don't recall but they are officers of the union. And Charles Keddick. 

Senator Goldwater. R-e-cl-i-c-k ? 

Mr. Zakman. I believe it is R-e-d-d-i-c-k. 

Senator Goldwater. I see. 

Mr. Zakman. They were all officers of local 259, and to the best 
of my knowledge are still officers. 

Senator Goldwater. They were and are still officers ? 

Mr. Zakman. To the best of my knowledge. 

Senator Goldwater. Of local 259 of the UAW-CIO ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. And they were at one time and might possibly 
still be connected with the Communist Party ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Thank you for that disclosure. 

Now, was there anything to the coincidence in the number of this 
union, 102, and the fact that Mr. Berger was, I believe, an officer of 
102 of the International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union and this 
same number is given to this union that Mr. Berger and Mr. Dorfman 
and you were actively identified with when the charter was issued ? 

Why did you get the same number? 

Mr. Zakman. I don't think that there was any particular reason 
at that time. 

Senator Gouiwater. Would there be an advantage to Mr. Berger 
in having the same number — or, put it this way, in belonging to two 
unions not affiliated with the same international but having the same 
number? Would that be an advantage to him, to keep questions off 
of his belonging to both of them, being an officer in both of them ? 

Mr. Zakman. He never was an officer of our union. He wasn't an 
officer. 

Senator Goldwater. Well, he held an official position. He was on 
the charter. 

Mr. Zakman. No, the charter doesn't mean official position. 

Senator Goldwater. I asked you before how you happened to con- 
tact Berger As I recall it, you said that you met him and told him 
of the opportunities in this field, and about 9 weeks later he came 
back with the information that he ^bought he could get a charter. 

Mr. Zakman. No ; when I met him and we discussed it, it took longer 
than 9 or 10 weeks. It was months before he finally let me know. 

Senator Goldwater. Was Berger's reputation such that it was well 
known in New York that he was quite influential in labor matters? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, when I met IVIr. Berger at that time, I never 
heard anything detrimental to his character. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES Dv THE LABOR FIELD 3665 

Senator Goldwater. That wouldn't be detrimental, if he had power. 

Mr. Zakman. I mean I didn't know much about him one way or the 
other. 

Senator Goldwater. Did you meet him accidentally or on purpose 'I 

Mr. Zakman. No; it wasn't accidentally, nor was it on purpose. 
It just happened. I believe I was walking with some mutual friend, 
and he was introduced, and the conversation started, and that is how it 
led up to it. 

Senator Goldwater. Do you think that Mr. Dubinsky was aware of 
Mr. Berger's connection with the 102 charter ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I don't know what Mr. Dubinsky was aware of. 
There is very little he is unaware of. 

Senator Goldwater. Would it be possible for one of his officers of 
one of his locals to be engaged in the .obtaining of a charter for an 
unrelated union without him knowing about it? 

Mr. Zakman. It would be possible, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. It would be possible ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Do you think that it actually happened? 

Mr. Zakman. To the best of my knowledge, I would say so. 

Senator Goldwater. Do you have any reason to think that Dubinsky 
did know that Berger was mixed up in this new charter? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Do you know Mr. Dubinsky ? 

Mr. Zakman. I don't know him personally. 

Senator Goldwater. Did you ever discuss this charter with him ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Did Mr. Berger ever discuss the charter with 
him ? 

Mr. Zakman. I really don't know. 

Senator Goldwater. You don't know ? 

Mr. Zakman. No. 

Senator Goldwater. Would it have been of assistance in obtaining 
this charter to have Mr. Berger talk to Mr. Dubinsk^^ about it i 

Mr. Zakman. Well, if Mr. Berger spoke to Mr. Dubinsky, it could 
have helped, but I don't know if he ever spoke to him about it. 

Senator Goldwater. A word from Dubinsky to those who would 
issue the charter might help ? 

Mr. Zakman. It would help to speed up things a bit, but I don't 
imagine — I think it ought to be clarified that the United Automobile 
Woi'kers-xA^FL, was not a difficult union to secure a charter from. 
Later I found out that there was a charter in New York that never 
had been used. Someone had sent in $25, and they always had a char- 
ter in their possession and never used it. It was after we had 1 or 2, 
and I thought we were the first. 

Senator Goldwater. You didn't know at the time, though, that 
charters were easy to get from the UAW-AFL ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. When you started out to get one? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Are they still easy to get ? 

Mr. Zakman. I don't know anything about that union now. 

89330—57 — pt. 10 6 



3666 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Goldwater. Have you heard any rumors that might lead 
you to believe that they are easy to get? 

Mr. Zakman. I have had no association with the labor movement 
for the last few years. 

Senator Goldwater. Did Mr. Berger at any time in your conver- 
sations mention anything that Mr. Dubinsky might have said about 
his connection with your charter? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. I never discussed Mr. Dubinsky with him 
to the best of my knowledge. 

Senator Goldwate]{. That is all I have. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, while we are on this question of Mr. 
Dubinsky, in view of the fact that his name has been drawn into this 
discussion the way it has, I think it is most important that Mr. Dubin- 
sky be invited down here to speak for himself. I know he would be 
only too glad to do so. 

The Chairman. The Chair will say that the Chair announced this 
morning that Mr. Dubinsky would have an opportunity to appear 
before the committee. 

Senator Goldwater. I don't want the senior Senator from New 
York to thiiik that I was attempting to disparage one of his con- 
stituents. But it did seem to me rather strange that with Mr. Berger's 
position in connection with the International Ladies' Garment Work- 
ers Union, that the head of that union — and I know the zealous way 
in which he guards that union — did not know something about 
his interest in obtaining a charter for some entirely unrelated pur- 
poses. That is the reason that I asked the questions that I did. I 
certainly agree with the Senator from New York that if there is any- 
thing disparaging in my remarks, that Mr. Dubinsky be given an 
opportunity to visit with us and explain why he did not know that 
this type of operation was goins: on. 

Senator Ives. Well, Mr. Chairman, before we leave this subject, I do 
not know of course whether Mr. Dubinsky knew anything about this 
or not, but I can easily see how it might have occurred without his 
knowing anything about it. However, I am sure that he would not 
approve of it if he had known anything about it, knowing Mr. Du- 
binsky as I do. 

The Chairman. We have information, I think this is correct, that 
after Mr. Dubinsky foinid out about it, about a year later, he repri- 
manded Mr. Berger for it; is that correct? 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Berger received a public reprimand from Mr. 
Dubinsky and from the Ladies' Garment Workers Union for his par- 
ticipation in obtainino- the charter for Mr. Z«kman and Mr. Dio. 

The Chairman. Whether that was adequate or not I am not pre- 
pared to say. My guess is that, as I said this morning, Mr. Dubinsky 
>'''ill be given an o)->portunity to ceitainly appear before the com- 
iiiictee on any of tliese iiuittors which may be developed in the course 
of the hearings and he will be given an opportunity to answer or 
explain. 

Senator McNamara. To raise the question, Is Mr. Berger still con- 
nected with Mr. Dubinsky? 

Mr. Kennedy. He was suspended or removed from his position as 
manager of the union in early 1957, I think in February of 1957, and 
he no longer has any official connection M-ith the Ladies' Garment 
Workers Union. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3667 

Senator Goldwaitsr. May I ask this in connection with tliat same 
question : Is Mr. Dorfnian still connected with the waste handlers 
union? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwatek. He still is? 

Mr. Kennedy. I believe he is. 

Senator Goldwater. 1-^ he still seeretary-treasurei- ? 

Mr. Kennedy. I believe so. 

Senator Goldwater. So the waste handlers did iiot take the same 
action as Mr. Dubinsky did? 

Mr. Kennedy. The action that the Ladies' Garment Workers Union 
and Mr. Dubinsky took against Mr. Berger was not as a result of his 
particij)ating in obtaining a charter for Mr. Zakman and Mr. Dio- 
guardi. It was entirely unrelated. It was for his appearing before 
a grand jury in New York City, after the ethical practices committer 
took their position on the hfth amendment. He appeared before a 
grand jury in New York (^ity and took the fifth amendment, and there- 
after Mr. Dubinsky released him. 

Senator Goldwater. So Mr. Dubinsky did not actually punish him 
for participating in this action ? 

Mr. Kennedy. What happened was that it was a public reprimand. 

Senator (joldwater. And Mr. Dorfman as far as you know is still 
secretary-treasurer of his local in Chicago? 

Mr. Kennedy. And I believe, as I pointed out this moniing, it 
is his son who handles the insurance, who is the broker for the in- 
surance, for the teamstei-s union there. 

Senator Goldwater. That will be discussed later? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Zakman, about how long had you known these 
two men who assisted in forming this union, Mr. Baker and Mr. 
Berger ? 

Mr. Baker had another name. 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. How long had you known them ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, I met Mr. Baker through Mr. Berger. I knew 
Mr. Berger, as I said, a few months, and Mr. Baker I didn't know. 
I met him. 

Senator Curtis. A few months before when ? 

Mr. Zakman. Before we secured the charter. 

Senator Curtis. Probably sometime m 1948 or 1949 ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. When did you return from Spain ? 

Mr. Zakman. 1938. Around Christmas. 

Senator Curtis. Around (Christmas 1938. "WHiat was your work 
or occupation upon your return from Spain ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, for aAvhile, I worked as a bakery machinist for 
Tip-Top Bread Co . Then I went to work for the Mack Truck Co., 
in Long' Island City, as a machinist. 

Senator Curtis. Did 3'ou continue to work as a machinist up to 
1945? 

Mr. Zakman. LTp to 1942 when I went on the stafi' of local 259 of 
the UAW-CIO. 



3668 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Curtis, Which union was that? 

Mr. Zakman. United Automobile Workers, local 259. 

Senator Curtis. "Wliat local number? 

Mr. Zakman. 259. 

Senator Curtis. That was probably about 3 years before you sev- 
ered your Communist connection ; is that right? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. And what position did you hold at that union? 

Mr. Zakman. I was an organizer. 

Senator Curtis. Who was the business manager for the imion at the 
time? Do you recall? 

Mr. Zakman. The head of the union was Mickey Finn, the president. 

Senator Curtis. That is the same union referred to awhile ago ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. So they knew of your Communist activities when 
they hired you as an organizer ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. They were all Communists. 

Senator Curtis. They were all Communists. 

Were your activities and Communist connections known to these 
other labor individuals and groups with whom you were active after 
1945? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, after 1945, when I broke away, and I would 
work for a different union, I more or less let them know that I had 
broken with the Communists and assisted in fighting the Communists 
and have assisted until the present date. 

The Chairman. If you will permit the Chair to interrupt for a mo- 
ment, before you get away from another matter that has just been 
discussed here, the Chair has a news bulletin just received today, stat- 
ing that : 

AFL-CIO President Meany today expelled Paul Dorfman, a close associate of 
teamster vice president, .Tames R. Hoffa, as an officer and member of a small 
local union in Chicago. Meany said Dorfman was guilty of violating AFIj-CIO 
rules and ethical practices, and of having compromising personalities with an 
insurance agency doing business with the teamsters. 

It goes on to state about some other action being taken against labor 
leaders that we have had before us. 

But that part of it relates to the subject matter here under dis- 
cussion, and I thought for the information of those who were listening 
I would give out this news bulletin. 

All right. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. I have just one more question about another mat- 
ter. 

Did you have any feeling at or near the time you left your last 
union connection, or following that, when the organization drive with 
the taxi drivers did not go on or anywhere near reach a majority of 
the 30,000 taxi drivers, that they were perhaps making a payoff to 
somebody else, even though you turned down the proposition? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. As a matter of fact, I felt that there was an 
internal union dispute going on between the teamsters at that time, 
and local 102 for control of them. 

Senator Curtis. You do not know who that telephone call came 
from? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN" THE LABOR FIELD 3669 

Senator Curtis. You do not know whether it came from employers 
or whether it came from the teamsters? They said they were em- 
ployers ? 

Mr. Zakman. They said they represented the employei-s. 

Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. While Senator Ives was actino; as chairman a few 
moments ago, a certain document, a compilation of figures taken from 
the records of local 102, UAW-AFL was presented to the witness. I 
believe he was unable to identify it. That refers to the loans of Dio- 
guardi and others to this local union totaling some $21,380.39. 

When I returned to the chair, I did not understand that this docu- 
ment had already been made exhibit No. 3. Since it has been made 
exhibit No. 3, it will so remain in the record, and the Chair will pro- 
duce a member of the staif, a witness, to verify it later. 

It will remain in the record where it has been placed by Senator 
Ives. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I just have a few more questions 
going back to local 102. 

Johnny Dioguardi was signing the checks, he was stipuated as the 
one to sign the checks for local 102, was he not ? 

(At tins point, Senator McNamara withdrew from the hearing 
room.) 

Mr. Zakinian. I don't recall when he started to sign the checks. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you signing them originally? 

Mr. Zakman. To the best of my knowledge, I signed them almost 
until I left, or countersigned them. You have to have two signatures, 
I think. I was shown checks that he had signed. I don't recall 
whether it was done slightly before I left the union or just after. 

The Chairman. A^^iat did Johnny Dioguardi have to do with 
signing checks in 1950 before he took over? Rather, in September 
1951. Were you still with the union at that time ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir; if he was business manager, he could have. 

The Chairman. He was business manager of the union at that time. 

Mr. Zakman. Then he would have the authority to countersign the 
checks. 

The Chairman. He would have authority to countersign the 
checks. 

Mr. Kennedy. I think the point is, Mr. Chairman, that the record 
shows at the Trade Bank & Trust Co. there was one signature only. 
All that was required was Mr. Johnny Dioguardi's signature on the 
checks. 

The Chairman. I hand you what purports to be a photostatic copy 
of United Automobile AYorkers I'nion Local 102, AFL, a bank card 
giving the authority for the signing of the checks at the Trade Bank 
& Trust Co. I will ask you to examine it and see who is authorized 
to sign checks on your union at that time, 

(Document handed to witness.) 

Mr. Zakman. I don't know anything about this particular record, 
sir. 

The Chairman. You do not know anything about that record ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you know Dioguardi's handwriting? Do you 
recognize that ? Do you recognize his signature ? 

Mr, Zakman. It looks like it might be him. 



3670 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN TTTE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. It looks like it might be him. If that was pre- 
sented to the bank by Dioguardi as him being the sole and exclusive 
officer, as business manager, authorized to sign checks for that union, 
then at that time you had no authority to sign the checks. Would 
that not be true ? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, except that it says here the welfare fund. They 
might have set up a special fimd here, if you will notice it on the 
bottom. 

The Chairman. There may have been a special fund set up? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Did you know about that special fund? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

The Chairman. So that was a special fund set up that had the 
authority for him to sign the checks? 

Mr. Zakman. No; I don't Imow anything about this, sir. 

The Chairman. That document may be returned. It will not be 
made an exhibit at this time. 

Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Going on, after you got out of local 102, you ulti- 
mately ended up in 512 of the cleaners and dyeworkers? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. During the period of time you were with 512, you 
were indicted for extortion, you and another official ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you ultimately went to jail and paid your 
penalty, and you are on probation now ; is that right ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you do not have anything to do with union 
work, you are employed and you have a wife and three children, as I 
understand it; is that correct? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. I would like to ask you about a resolution that was 
passed by local 512, Mr. Zakman, when you and your fellow official, 
Mr. Leone, were convicted. 

The Chairman. I hand you the resolution counsel has referred to, 
a copy of it, and I ask you to examine it and see if you recognize it. 

(Document handed to witness.) 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir ; I recognize it. 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit No. 4, for reference 
only. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 4," for ref- 
erence, and may be found in the files of the subcommittee.) 

Mr. Kennedy. It stipulated in there, did it not, that you and Mr. 
Leone were to receive your salaries while in jail; is that right? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir ; but we did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. They never paid you ? 

Mr. Zakman. I haven't received a single penny from them. 

Mr. Kennedy. It says : 

Whereas, eei'tain oflScers, by virtue of their earnestness, sincerity, and dili- 
gent efforts to organize membership for this labor organization, become t-argets 
of antilabor campaigns to discredit them : and 

Whereas, these officers are presently under a cloud and are charged with 
violations of the penal law of the State of New York ; and 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3671 

Whereas, the executive lioard of this labor organization is fully aware and 
cognizant of the circurostances and facts surrounding the charges made against 
these officers, it is resoh'ed as follows : 

1. Resolved, That the executive board of local 512, AJVIPCU-AFL does hereby 
express, announce, affirm, and reiterate its complete faith, tinist, and belief in 
the integrity of Nicholas Leone and Samuel Zakman ; 

2. Resolved^ That the executive board of local 512, AMPCU-APL, does further 
affirm its belief that the charges against the aforesaid officers are fabricated, 
completely false, and devoid of any indecia of truth; that these charges are 
made for the purpose of hampering labor organizations and discrediting the 
work of these two labor officers ; 

3. Resolved, That in consideration of the afoi-ementioned, and in further 
consideration of the work performed by these two labor officers. 

Then it goes on that they were going to give you assistance and help^ 
and your family assistance and help, when you went to jail. 

But they never gave you that ? 

Mr. Zakman. They never gave us anything. 

Mr. I^NNEDT. They never assisted you ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That union broke up after that ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir, 

Mr. Kennedy. And the officers went into local 875 of the team- 
sters ? 

Mr. Zakman. That is what I heard, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. It became local 875 of the teamsters ? 

Mr. Zakman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And some of the officials were transferred over, 
finally, just prior to the election, into local 875 of the teamstere, is 
that right? 

Mr. Zakman. Well, some of those officials Avere not officials while 
I was there, but I heard that they were made officials after, and they 
were transferred. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know what connection Tony "Ducks" 
Corallo had with local 875 ? 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know him at all 2 

Mr. Zakman. No, sir ; I never met him. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions? 

Senator Goldw^\ter. Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to make a state- 
ment here before we close up. 

If management kicked labor around the way it is obvious that some 
leaders of labor have kicked labor around, we would have a howl going 
up that would shake the Washington Monument. I want to thank 
Mr. Zakman for the testimony he has given today. It brings out more 
and more and more the fact that this uncontrolled, unbridled power 
that is vested in the leadership of labor has got to come under the 
scrutiny of law of this country. 

The Chairman. Are there any other comments ? 

Senator Iv'es. I would like to comment on that, Mr. Chairman. 
Unfortunately, to too great an extent, management sometimes has 
tangled up with that kicking around process, as Mr. Zakman himself 
knows, and both sides of the pictur-e have to be dealt with, both manage- 
ment and labor, when it comes to kicking around the workers. 

Senator Goldwater. I think the Senator from New York will agree 
with me that the labor law's of this country and the laws that pertain 
to monopoly, the laws that allow management and labor to kick work- 



3672 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

ing people around, are inadequate, to say the least, and they must be 
revised, and they must be strengthened. 

Senator Ives. ' I think that is what the purpose of these hearings is, to 
find out where the strengthening should take place. 

Senator Goldwater. I could not agree with you more. 

The Chairman. Gentlemen, are there any further comments? 

If not, the Chair will make this announcement. We are going to 
conclude for the afternoon, due to the fact that a live quorum call is 
in process in the Senate Chamber. 

There may be a vote afterward, and the members of the committee 
probably could not get back. Therefore, we will 

Mr. Falk. I am representing Mr. Berger. He is a very sick man, 
just out of a hospital. They postponed his treatment until tomorrow 
so he could be here today. I am also under doctor's care. 

The Chairman. Just a moment. 

Mr. Falk. Can we have our hearing adjourned until next week? 
We can come back next week. 

The Chairman. In order to accommodate him — can you get through 
with him this afternoon, Mr. Counsel? 

Mr. Kennedy. We could have him as the first witness tomorrow. 

Mr. Falk, He must be treated tomorrow. 

Mr. Kennedy. Can he not be treated tomorrow afternoon? 

Mr. Falk. No. He is getting X-ray treatments. They must be in 
series. He had a serious operation and now he is getting X-ray treat- 
ments. I called last Friday to explain that. 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis, can you return in a few minutes for 
further testimony if we are not compelled to remain on the floor? 

Mr. Falk. We can come back next week. 

The Chairman. It appears that we can have a quorum here. We 
will undertake to accommodate Mr. Berger as much as possible. We 
will stand in recess for a few moments until we return from the Senate 
chamber. 

(Members present at the taking of the recess : Senators McClellan, 
Ives, Goldwater, and Curtis.) 

(Brief recess.) 

(Members present after the taking of the recess: Senators Mc- 
Clellan and Goldwater.) 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

Before proceeding with the next witness, the Chair wishes to an- 
nounce that in view of Mr. Zakman's testimony regarding Mickey 
Finn, Charles Reddick, and Sam Myers, in which he referred to them 
as Communists or former Communists who were in the UAW-CIO, I 
have had a staff member contact New York and they talked to Mr. 
John White. Mr. White has watched the television, and I assume 
he is one of the officials or members of the union, he has watched the 
hearings and knew what had been stated and testified to by Mr. 
Zakman. 

Mr. White stated that Mickey Finn is president, Charles Reddick 
is a delegate, tliat is a business agent, and Sam Myers is a delegate 
or business agent, and that they knew that this committee was coming 
in to investigate, and, therefore, they moved in on local 259. He 
stated that they had justification for doing so because the local was 
in bad condition. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3673 

There was a terrific fight on between Finn and Myers, so that on 
January 18. 1957, that union, or that local, was placed in administra- 
torsliip, meaning, I assume, trusteeship. It is administered now 
by Charles Kerrigan and Emil Mazey. 

John White is acting international representative, representing 
Kerrigan in the union. Joseph Berry represents Mazey. 

Finn, Keddick, and Myers are still technically officers, but their 
powers have been suspended and will remain so until the new election 
takes place, or proof is presented and charges are heard to disprove 
them. 

Local 259 jurisdiction is auto dealerships and 5 or 6 industrial 
plants. It has about 4,000 members. 

I thought that should go into the record in view of the testimony 
that has been given by Mr. Zakman. 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Chairman, was there any statement as to 
the present affiliation of these men with the Communist Party ? 

The Chairman. I have no information as to their present affiliation 
with the Communist Party. I do not know whether Mr. White told 
them about that or not. Apparently he made no comment. 

All right, Mr. Berger, will you be sworn ? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give l)efore this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Berger. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF SAM BERGER, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

SAMUEL FALK 

The Chairman. Be seated. 

State your name. 

Mr. Falk. Samuel Falk. 

The Chairman. Just a moment. 

State your name, your place of residence, and your business or 
occupation, Mr. Berger. 

Mr. Berger. Sam Berger, 350 East 54th Street, New York City; 
presently unemployed. 

The Chairman. Presently unemployed. 

Have you elected to have counsel present with you to advise you 
as to your legal rights while you testify ? 

Mr. Berger. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, you may now state your name for 
the record. 

Mr. Falk. Samuel Falk, of Falk & Orleans, 1()5 Broadway, New 
York City. 

On behalf of Mr. Berger, may I ask that these lights be turned oif, 
and that these people who are taking pictures of him ever}' minute 
be asked to leave? He is a sick man. He is just out of a hospital 
and he cannot testify under these conditions. 

The Chairman, just one moment. 

The Chair is going to make this observation with respect to that 
request during the course of these hearings. 

The Chair will make this statement, and I think I made the sug- 
gestion the other day in executive session, that where a witness makes 
such request and if he testifies, the Chair will grant such a request. 



3674 IMPROPER ACTivrriES est the labor field 

Where a witness comes in here purposely not to give testimony, but 
simply to invoke the Hfth amendment, the Chair does not intend to 
grant* the request unless the committee overrules him. 

Therefore, the Cliaii- would ask the witness whether it is your 
purpose to testify freely and answer such questions as may be asked 
jou pertinent to the inquiry by membere of the staff, counsel, or 
members of the committee. 

Mr. Falk. In the light of the statements that were made by counsel 
for this connnittee, and the fact that Mr. Berger is presently under 
indictment in the southern district of New York, in the United States 
court, and is being under daily investigation, I have advised him that 
he should re-sort to his constitutional rights. 

The Chairman. I see. 

All right, gentlemen. 

The Chair will state to the witness, if he is not in any physical dis- 
tress because of illness, but if he is not going to testify, if all he is 
going to do is take the fifth amendment, I do not see that the lights 
will greatly distract him from doing that, and, therefore, we will 
proceed. 

Mr. Falk. I respectfully file my objection. 

The Chairman. The objection is noted and overruled. 

Proceed, Counsel. 

Mr. Kennedy. IMr. Cliairman, we have information that Mr. Sam 
Berger was manager of local 102 of the ILGWTJ for some 12 years, up 
to approximately February 1957. 

Is that correct, Mr. Berger ? 

(At this point, Senator Curtis entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And local 102 of the ILGWU, Mr. Chairman, 
handles the trucking mainly between 34th Street and 40th Street in 
Manhattan, handles the trucking for the ladies dress firms in that 
area. They have contracts between 300 and 350 trucking companies, 
and these trucking companies are under his jurisdiction; that Mr. 
Berger has been a friend of Mr. Johnny Dioguardi for some 25 years ; 
that Mr. Berger had a business relationship with Mr. Johnny Dio- 
guardi, or with Mr. Johnny Dioguardi's brother. Tommy Dioguardi, 
and that business relationship was under the name of "Just Another 
Corporation.'' 

Would you conniient on those facts I have recited, Mr. Berger? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Beroek. I nnist decline to answer on the grounds it may in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have this business relationship with Tommy 
Dioguardi from 1951 to 1953? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berber. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Kennedy. And was this company that you formed a corpora- 
tion called Just Another Corporation and you worked under the 
business name of Flowerland Florist, is that right ? 

Mr. I^ERGER. I decline to answer on the grounds that it may in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And amongst the customei-s of the Flowerland 
Florist that you sent flowers to were various of the ladies garment 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3675 

companies in New York City as well as certain of the trucking; com- 
panies, is that right? Were they some of your customers? 

Mr. Berger. 1 must decline to answer on the grounds it may in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. The information we also have is that Mr. Johnny 
Diogiiardi did some work for you in order to obtain some customers 
for that company. 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

The Chairman. In declining to answer these questions, the Chair 
wishes to ask you whether you will state under oath that you honestly 
believe that a truthful answer to them might tend to incrnninate you 'i 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. Would you repeat that, Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman. With respect to the questions counsel has asked 
you now, the Chair asks you whether you are willing to state under 
oath, and if you do now state under oath, that you honestly believe 
that a truthful answer to those questions might tend to incriminate 
you? 

Mr. Berger. I do. 

The Chairman. That is one answer. 

All right, proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. As I stated before, our information is that you have 
been a friend of Mr. Johnny Dio's for some -J5 years, and that back 
in 1950, approximately September of 1950, you suggested to Anthony 
Doria and Mr. Paul Dorfman and Mr. Dave Previant, that this charter 
be granted to Mr. Johnny Dio, a local charter from the UAW-AFL. 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you appeared before the Senate Subcommittee 
on Investigations on May 29, 1956, and were asked tliat question, you 
said that you had suggested that this charter be gotten from Mr. 
Johnny Dioguardi. Do you remember that? 

(The witnesses conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. I do remember appearing before the committee. What- 
ever I said is in the record. I don't intend at this time to amplify 
it, as you already have it in the record. 

The Chairman. I will not ask you to amplify it. 

Mr. Berger. That is on the ground that it may incriminate me. 

The Chairman. We will not ask you to amplify it at the moment. 
We will just ask you if you did not so swear. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. Whatever you have in the record, whatever I testified 
to, that is what I said. 

The Chairman. Let me ask you some of these questions. 

Did you state that you helped to get the charter for this union, 
localld2? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. 1 am not going to answer that question at this time 
because being under investigation it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Let me ask you this : Do you say you remember 
testifying ? You stated, I believe, that you remembered testifying be- 
fore the connnittee on May 29, 1956. Is that correct ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. That is correct. 



3676 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. At this time I will ask you if you testified as fol- 
lows, aud these are questions and answers : 

Mr. Kennedy. How long have you been head of that union- 
referring to the union local 102. 

You answered : 

Well, I have been head of it for 12 years. 

Is that correct? 

That is local 102 of ILGmi. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Beroer. If I answered it at that time, that was correct. But 
at this time, I don't want to answer any questions pertaining; to that 
as it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. I understand you do not want to answer it, but I 
feel it is the duty of this committee to call your attention to your 
previous testimony, and give you the opportunity to deny your pre- 
vious testimony, if it is not true, or to amplify it if you desire to 
change it in any respect. 

I think it is only fair to you that you have that opportunity, since 
you are now resorting to the fifth amendment, contending that it 
might tend to incriminate you. 

You were asked the question : 

Mr. Kennedy. How long have you been head of that union? 

You answered: 

"Well, I have been head of it for 12 years. 

Do you want to make any comment on that or change your tes- 
timony ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. I have no comment to make at this time, and I don't 
wish to answer the question. As I have said before, I am under inves- 
tigation by different Government agencies, and the answers may tend 
to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Do you think they would tend to incriminate you 
any more today than they would have then ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. I don't know. 

The Chairman. Well, I do not either. 

Let me read you some of these questions here, because they are perti- 
nent to the testimony we have had here today. I want to read them 
to you and read your answers and see if yoli wish to deny it or if you 
wish to amplify it. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have been head of it for 12 years? 

Mr. Bekgek. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Has it always existed as local 102, ILGWU? 

Mr. Bekgek. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. It has always been under that name. Have you had anything 
to do with any other unions? 

Mr. I'ekgek. Never. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you involved at all in this UAW 102? Did you have 
something to do with that? 

Mr. Berger. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had nothing to do with it? 

Mr. Berger. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you work with Johnny Dioguardi to get its charter, to see 
some people to get the charter? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3677 

Mr. BE3RGER. I helped to get the charter. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you do on that? 

Mr. Bergek. I visited the international oflSce of the United Automobile Work- 
ers of tlie AFL and spoke to the secretary-treasurer, Mr. Doria, and told him 
that there is some oi'ganization work that could be done in New York, there are 
some fellows that think they know they have some potential members and would 
he issue a charter to them. That is about the extent. 

Mr. Kennedy. You suggested that the charter go to Johnny Dioguardi? 

Mr. Berger. That I did. 

Now, then, do you wish to make any comment on that testimony, 
your previous testimony, before the committee? 

(The witness conferred with his counseL) 

Mr. Berber. Mr. Chairman, at that time, when I came before the 
committee, I came before the Committee on Investigation of Govern- 
ment Operations. 

The Chairman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Berger. And I testified, and I answered all the questions. 

Since that time, there is another investigation going on, and it is 
centered around me. I seem to be a target. In view of that, I can- 
not and will not answer any questions that I think may tend to in- 
criminate me. 

The Chairman. I understand your position now. But I feel that 
in all fairness, and for the purpose of this record, I want to read you 
some of tliese questions and the answers you gave when when you 
appeared before the other committee making some investigation along 
these lines. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you censured by your own union for taking part in that 
type of activity? 
Mr. Berger. I was. 

Mr. Kennedy. What has been your relationship with Johnny Dioguardi? 
Mr. Berger. Social. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long have you known him? 
Mr. Berger. About 25 years. 

Mr. Kennedy. Where did you meet him, in New York? 
Mr. Berger. In New York. 

Mr. Kennedy. What year? Approximately 1930? 
Mr. Berger. Somewhere in the 1930's. 
Mr. Kennedy. And you knew his uncle, James Plumeri? 
Mr. Berger. Sure. 

And it goes on. 

I have read that part that pertains to the securing this charter, which 
is reflected in your former testimony. 

You say now that something has developed since, that you feel that 
you cannot afford to answer it for the reason that it might tend to 
incriminate you ? 

Mr. Bf^RGER. That is riglit. 

The Chairman. Is that correct? 

Well, then, you do not want to deny what you stated under oath to 
the other committee ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. BERCiER. I am not making any comment. I am not denying or 
admitting. 

Mr. Kennedy. There might have been some confusion, Mr. Berger, 
on your statement that you answered all questions before the Investi- 
gating Committee. In fact, you refused to answer some questions 
before the investigating committee, also, on the grounds of the fifth 
amendment. 



3678 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Bp:kger. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Berger, are you acquainted with Mr. Sam 
Zakman, who testified here today? 

Ml-. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Senator Curtis. Were you present in this hearing room when he 
testified today ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Did you hear his testimony ? 

Mr. Berger. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Did vou hear him recite anything that was not 
true? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Senator Curtis. I did not ask you what he stated. I asked you if 
you heard him testify to anything that was not true. You must 
answer yes or not. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Senator Curtis. You cannot tell me whether you heard it or not, 
whether you heard anything that was not true ? 

]\Ir. Berger, are you or have you been an officer in the International 
Ladies' Garment Workers Union? 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Senator Curtis. Do you know whether any of the funds of either 
local 102 of the International Ladies' Garment Workers Union, or 
the international organization have been used for political purposes? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. I don't know. 

Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Counsel. 

Mr. Kennedy. Going back to local 102 of the UAW, at that time 
Mr. Sam Sobel appeared on the application blank, on the original 
102 application blank. 

Did not Sam Sobel work for the ILGWtJ at that time? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kennedy. If he did not, I will not pursue it. But our under- 
standing was that he had. 

(Tlie witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. At that time he was working for one of the ILG 
unions. 

Mr. Kennedy. I was wondering, Mr. Berger, about this. Our 
information is that when these paper locals were chartered on Novem- 
ber 8, 1055, that a number of the officials from the Ladies' Garment 
Workers Union appeared on those application blanks. Could you tell 
us anything about that, whether you know anything about that? 

Mr. Berger. I don't know the first thing about any of the paper 
locals. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3679 

Mr, IvEivrNEDY. Do you know George Monica ? 

Mr. Berger. Would you repeat the name? 

Mr. Kennedy. George Monica, M-o-n-i-c-a. 

Mr. Berger. Never heard the name. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Joseph Monica ? 

Mr. Berger. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know any Monicas ? 

Mr. Berger. Not to my recollection. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know David Koch ? 

Mr. Berger. No. sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Mr. Nick Kaminetzky ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

JNIr. Berger. 1 decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Mr. Kaminetzky as Mr. Charles Duke? 

Mr. Berger. 1 decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Mr. KENNiiDY. He is known both as Mr. Nick Kaminetzky and 
Charles Duke. 

Do you know that he works for Mr. Tony "Ducks"" Corallo? 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Tony "Ducks'"? 

Mr. Berger. 1 decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr Kennedy. Do 3'ou know Carmine Tramunti ? 

Mr. Berger. 1 decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is it not a fact that Carmine Tramunti also works 
for Tony Corallo? 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on tlie same grounds. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you not out in Burbank, Calif, with Mr. 
Charles Duke, also known as Kaminetzky? 

Mr. Berger. 1 decline to answer. 

Mr. Kennedy. In that connection, Avere you attempting to set up 
in Los Angeles, Calif., a trucking company? 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have some arrangements with the union 
out there at that tune? 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Are you familiar with the Gilbert Carrier Corp.? 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know INIr. James Hoffa ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long have you know Mr. Hoffa ? 

Mr. Berger. For many years. I don't know how man3^ 

Mr. Kennedy. When did you first meet Mr. Hoffa ? 

Mr. Berger. I haven't any idea how long ago. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was it 5, iO, 15 years ago ? 

Mr. Berger. I wouldn't say. I don't remember. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you meet him in New York City ? 

Mr. Berger. I don't remember exactly where I met him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you ever visited him in Detroit? 

Mr. Berger. No, sir. 



3680 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Has he ever visited you at your home ? 

Mr. Berger. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever arrano:e for him to meet any people in 
New York City? Did you ever introduce liim to people at his re- 
quest ? 

Mr. Berger. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever have any business relationship with 
him? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell the committee what business rela- 
tionship you have had with Mr. Jimmy Hoffa ? 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you also have a business relationship with Mr, 
Johnny Dioguardi ? 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Dioguardi have anything to do with the 
business relationship you had with Mr. Hoffa ? 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

The Chairman. Are you declining to answer because of some phys- 
ical fear you liave of these people, rather than because you think you 
might involve yourself in some legal problem ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. Mr. Chairman, I am not under any physical fear of 
anybody. 

The Chairman. That is fine. Then we must assume that there 
have been some transactions that you are most reluctant to relate to 
the public ; is that correct ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. I don't know what you assume, but I decline to answer 
on the grounds that it may incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Counsel. 

Mr. Kennedy. After you obtained this charter, or after you had 
the relationship with Mr. Johnny Dio in 1950 regarding this charter, 
did you have any further business relationships with Mr. Dio? 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you ever been out socially with Mr. Dio and 
Mr. Hoffa ? 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

The Chairman. May I ask you if it is because of the character and 
reputation of Mr. Hoffa and Mr. Dio, or Dioguardi, that causes you 
to feel the possibility of incrimination, or is it because of some actual 
involvement in something? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Mr. Kennedy. ^Vliat we are chiefly interested in, of course, is any 
negotiation that you conducted with Doria, how you obtained your 
transportation out to see Doria in Milwaukee. I would like to find out 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3681 

who paid for that transportation, what your conversations were with 
Paul Dorfnian in this period of time, how he happened to get into it, 
how Mr. Dave Previant happened to get into this charter of local 102 
of the UAW-AFL. Would there be any comments that you would 
make on any of those matters? 

Mr. Berger. I cannot make any comment at this time. I must de- 
cline to answer on the grounds that it may incriminate me. 

]Mr. Kennedy. Have you ever met Mr. Hoff a in Detroit ? 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate 
me. 

Mr. Kennedy. I don't understand, when you say you don't refuse 
to answer whether you know him, why you decline to answer whether 
you had any business transactions with him. 

Mr. Berger. I must decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we have some facts that I would 
like to ask questions about, but it does not seem that we will get very 
far. 

The CiiAiKiMAN. Ask him a few of them so we might get a general 
idea of what circumstances cause the witness to feel that he might 
be incriminated if he answered and told the truth. 

Mr. Kennedy. The first, of course, comes around to what we are 
chiefly interested in, local 102. Sam Berger's name appears on the 
original charter of local 102. 

The Chairman. Did you sign yoi^n' name to the original applica- 
tion for charter of local 102? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. I didn't sign anything. 

The Chairman. Did you authorize your name to be submitted as 
one of the applicants for a charter ? 

Mr. Berger. No, sir. 

The Chairman. You knew nothing about it? 

Mr. Berger. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Whoever submitted your name as one of the appli- 
cants for a charter did so without your knowledge, consent, or authori- 
zation ; is that correct ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Falk, May I have the question repeated, please? 

The Chairman. I say whoever submitted your name, if your name 
was on the application for the original charter of local 102, whoever 
did it did so, as I understand your testimony, without your knowledge, 
consent, or authorization? 

Mr. Berger. That is right. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further, jNIr. Counsel? 

Mr. Kennedy. There was some question about the financing of 
the union, and I was wondering if 3^011 assisted or helped finance this 
union at all. 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incrimi- 
nate me. 

The Chairman. Do you know about Dioguardi financing it ? 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

The Chairman. Do you know about him taking it over a little 
later, taking complete charge of it after it had gotten organized? 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 
sossn — 57 — pt. 10 7 



3682 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. You know about those activities, do you not ? 

(The witness conferred with his counseL) 

Mr. Berger. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

The Chairman. Mr. Berger, do you feel any sense of obligation 
whatsoever to union members who have been manipulated in that 
organization, whose dues you took '^ 

Mr, Berger. I don't quite understand that. 

(At this point, Senator Curtis withdrew from the hearing room.) 

The Chairman. Do you feel an}^ sense of obligation to the union 
members of this country, whose dues are being taken, who are re- 
quired to pay dues, to belong to a union, and who are often required 
to belong to a union to work? Do you feel under any sense of obliga- 
tion as a citizen of this country to try to cooperate with this com- 
mittee and help us find out what the facts are so that tlie Congress 
of the United States might consider appropriate legislation? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Berger. I have always had an obligation to any member of 
any union, any trade unionist, but I must decline to answer any ques- 
tions while I am under investigation on the grounds that it may 
incriminate me. 

The Chairman. In other words, you feel self-preservation, or keep- 
ing within yourself any knoAvledge you may have, is a higher obliga- 
tion than is your duty to the union member and to the public of the 
country ? 

Mr. Berger. I must decline to answer on the grounds it may in- 
criminate me. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr, Chairman, 

The Chairman. Is there anything further? 

Do you need him any further ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No, sir. 

Mr. Falk. May I thank j^ou gentlemen foi- giving iis this oppor- 
tunity to finish today. 

The Chairman. The witness is excused. 

The committee stands in recess until 10 o'clock in the morning. 

(Thereupon, at 4:57 p. m., the committee recessed, to reconvene 
at 10 a. m., Thursday, August 1, 1057.) 

(Committee members present at the time of recess: Senators; 
McClellan and Goldwater.) 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



THURSDAY, AUGUST 1, 1957 

United States Senate, 
Select Committee on Improper Activities in the 

Labor or Management Field, 

Washington^ D. C. 

The select committee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to Senate Resolution 
74, agreed to January 30, 1957, in the Caucus Room, Senate Office 
Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the select com- 
mittee) presiding. 

Present: Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas; Sen- 
ator Irving M. Ives, Republican, New York; Senator John F. Ken- 
nedy, Democrat, Massachusetts; Senator Pat McNamara, Democrat, 
Michigan; Senator Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota; Sen- 
ator Barry Goldwater, Republican, Arizona; Senator Carl T. Curtis, 
Republican, Nebraska. 

Also present : Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel ; Jerome S. Adler- 
man, chief assistant counsel; Paul J. Tiernej^, assistant counsel; Rob- 
ert E. Dunne, assistant counsel ; Ruth Young Watt, chief clerk . 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

(Membei's of the select committee present at the convening of the 
session were Senators McClellan, Ives, Kenned}^, and McNamara.) 

The Chairman. y<[\\o is your next witness? 

Mr. Jvennedy. Mr. lister Washburn, please. 

The Chairman. Mr. Washburn, will you come around, please. 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God % 

Mr. Washburn. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF LESTER WASHBURN 

The Chairman. Will you state your name, place of residence, and 
your business or occupation, please, sir? 

Mr. Washburn. Lester Washburn, Rinelander, Wis. I run a sum- 
mer resort in that area, and I am a builder by trade. 

The Chairman. You have talked to members of the staff, I assume, 
regarding your testimony, and you know generally the line of in- 
terrogation to expect ? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You also know of your right to have counsel pres- 
ent while you testify to advise you as to your legal rights, do you? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes, sir. 

3683 



3684 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. You waive counsel? 

Mr. Washburn. I don't figure it will be necessary, sir. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

All right, Mr. Kennedy, proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Washburn, you used to be president of the 
UAW-AFL, did you not? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was during what period of time ? 

Mr. Washburn. From 1943 until 1953. 

Mr. Kennedy. You resigned in 1953? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that 1953 or 1954, Mr. Washburn? Was it 
not 1954? 

Mr. Washburn. I think it was 1953. I may be mistaken on that. 

Mr. Kennedy. I think the record shows 1954. 

Mr. Washburn. Then it was 1954. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell the committee a little bit of your 
background, where you were born? 

Mr. Washburn. I was born in Muskegon, Mich., and later moved 
to Detroit when I was just a kid, and I spent about 25 years living 
in Lansing, going to school in Lansing, Mich. 

Mr. Kennedy. What year were you born? 

Mr. Washburn. 1908. I entered the labor movement in 1933 in 
Lansing, and that is when I started working. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went to school in Lansing ? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much school did you have ? 

Mr. Washburn. Through the 10th grade. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you entered the labor-union movement ? 

Mr. Washburn. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. As what, and in what position ? 

Mr. Washburn. Just as a member. 

Mr. Kennedy. Of what union? 

Mr. Washburn. It was the Federal Labor Union, Automobile 
Workers Federal Labor Union. 

Mr. Kennedy. '^^Hiat year was that? 

Mr. Washburn. 1933. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you become an officer or official of that union? 

Mr. Washburn. I became recording secretary of that local union 
shortly after I became a member, and the union was just starting 
at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were doing some organizational work yourself ? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, yes, like any other member that is interested 
in organizing a union. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you obtain any other position with the automo- 
bile workers at that time? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, after the Federal labor unions then were 
chartered iiito the International ITnion of Automobile Workers, I was 
a delegate to the first constitutional convention. 

Mr. Kennedy. When was that? 

Mr. Washburn. In 1935. I then became vice president of an 
amalgamated local embracing nil of the automobile workers in Lan- 
sing. Then later I became president of that local union. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3685 

Then in 1936 I was elected to the international executive board of 
the Automobile Workers Union. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many members did yoU have, approximately, at 
that time ? 

Mr. Washburn. I don't remember, at that time. I would have tc 
get into the records to find out. It was the beginning of the union in. 
1936 and 1937, at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were organizing the automobile companies at 
that time ? 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you continue as to your career in 1936 and 
1937? 

Mr. Washburn. I continued as a member of the international execu- 
tive board, and as such I was regional director of the western half of 
the State of Michigan from 1936 until 1943, at the time I was elected 
international president. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have anything to do with the so-called 
Lansing holiday on June 7, 1937 ? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes; I was organizational director of that area 
at the time that that took place. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat happened at that time? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, it involved a small strike, a small plant about 
25 people. We organized them and elected officers one night and the 
next morning the officers all got fired, and we tried to negotiate them 
back to work and the company went out of town and got "scabs" to take 
their place, and we immediately, of course, established a picket line 
and there was an injunction against picketing. 

Then one night about 2 o'clock, the police and the sheriff's depart- 
ment came in and dragged 2 women and 9 men out of bed and took 
them to jail for a misdemeanor of violating an injunction. 

That touched off the holiday, and all of the automobile plants the 
next morning shut down as a protest demonstration. 

We felt at that time that with any other average citizen the police 
would have waited until a decent hour in the morning, and then went 
and served their warrants, but in this case they just dragged them out 
of bed, including women, and threw them in jail without any chance 
to see an attorney or anything else. 

By that time^ of course, and during that time, even the district at- 
torney in Lansmg had made a public statement that the automobile 
workers were getting too strong and it was time they were stopped. 
We had a bad time there, and we couldn't even rent a building to 
hold meetings in, and we had to go out when we couldn't afford it 
and buy one. 

The opposition, I mean, was terrific at that time. We thought this 
capped it off, and it was a spontaneous situation, and all of the plants 
shut down, and everybody went downtown and protested with a pro- 
test demonstration on the capitol lawn, and the people were finally 
released from jail that day. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that the period of the so-called sitdown strike ? 

Mr. Washburn. During that period, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you the one chiefly responsible for this event, 
the Lansing holiday ? 

Mr. Washburn. If any one person could be named as being responsi- 
ble, I suppose it would have to be me ; yes, sir. 



3686 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, subsequently, in 1937 and 1938, and 1939, was 
there a split within the UAW between certain factions ^ 

Mr. Washburn. Yes. Right from the very beginning, of course, 
there w^as a fight for power in the union which got started and come to 
a climax in late 1938 and early 1939. There were separate conven- 
tions and we had our regular convention in March of 1939 and the 
opposing forces had theirs, I think, some time later in 1939 in Cleve- 
land. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat was the basis for the two factions, and what 
was their dispute ? 

Mr. Washburn. Primarily the question was over communism, and 
the question of whether Communists were going to get control of the 
union or whether they weren't. Of course, when it came to a head, 
there were a lot of personalities involved in it and power politics, 
but the primary issue was whether or not the Communists were going 
to take control of the union or not. 

Mr. Kennedy. "N^Hien the actual split occurred, which group had 
the greatest in numbers ? 

Mr. Washburn. ^'NHien the actual split occurred, when we had our 
special convention in 1939, according to the official local union dele- 
gates that were attending our convention, we supposedly figured we 
had slightly over a majority of the membership. 

(At this point Senators Mundt, Goldwater, and Curtis entered 
the hearing room.) 

Mr. Washburn. But it changed shortly after that, and eJohn L. 
Lewis gave his blessing to the other side, and John L. Lewis at that 
time was very popular among the auto workers, and so the CIO auto 
workers got the breaks on that. 

John L. Lewis Avas very popular among the auto workers, and he 
gave his support to the opposition. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was the first president of your group ? 

Mr. Washburn. Before the split or after the split, do you mean? 

Mr. Kennedy. After the split. 

Mr. Washburn. After the split. Homer Martin. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was president of the rival group ? 

Mr. Washburn. R. J. Thomas. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then did the rival group take the automobile shops 
themselves, and you people had the repair shops; is that Avhat 
happened ? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, it turned out pretty much that way. We 
had some automobile shops, and quite a few parts plants, and the 
union was composed mostly of automobile-parts plants with very few 
basic automobile plants. 

Mr. Kennedy. Approximately how many people did you have in 
your union and how many did they have ? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, over what period? 

Mr. Kennedy. Right after the split. 

Mr Washburn. Well, right at the time of the split, it was pretty 
close to 50-50. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many were there in the union altogether? 

Mr. Washburn. I couldn't give you that figure now. 

Senator Goldwater. Before we leave this question that counsel was 
interrogating you on, just a moment ago, namely communism, were 
you connected with the AFI^UAW at that time ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3687 

Mr. Washburn. At the time of the split, you mean ? 

Senator Goldwater. Yes. 

Mr. Washburn. Well, at the time of the split, we were the United 
Automobile Workers, and we were alined with the Committee for 
Industrial Organization at that time. 

After the split, of course, when John L. Lewis gave his support 
and blessing to the other side, we had no place to go, and so we reaffi- 
liated with the American Federation of Labor. We originally were 
affiliated before. 

Senator GoLDWA^rER. Is it true that when the UAW-CIO began to 
organize they used Communists in the organizing effort ? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, I have very definite opinions on that. sir. 
But I don't know whether that is pertinent to this particular inves- 
tigation or not. 

Is it, Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman, What is the question ? 

Senator Goldwater. I wanted to know if Mr. Wasliburn can recall 
if Communists were used in the CIO's effort to organize in the auto- 
motive field. That was back during the years of 1934 and 1936 and 
1937, and the time that we have been discussing here of the sitdown 
strikes, and so forth. 

Mr. Washburn. As I say, I have some very definite opinions on that, 
and I took some very definite sides in that situation, but I am not cer- 
tain whether that is pertinent, and whether we ought to go into that. 

The Chairman. Just a moment. The question cloes not call for an 
opinion. It calls for an answer of fact, if you know. The question is, 
did they use Communist organizers at that time, and that calls for a 
question of fact, if you know. 

Senator Goldwater. I might say, Mr. Washburn, that this question 
is not prompted out of total ignorance of the subject. The subject 
has been discussed at some great length in numerous magazine articles 
and newspaper articles from time to time, but it is very rare that we 
in the Congress have the opportunity to ask that question of a person 
who was rather intimately connected with that period. 

To let you know why I think it is pertinent we have had just yester- 
day the disclosure of three more names in the CIO who either were or 
are Communists. Before the Internal Security Subcommittee as you 
probably know, there have been already disclosed 12, and I believe a 
13th is to come up, who have been or are members of the Commvmist 
Party and are connected with the CIO. 

Now, if the conunittees of Congress are constantly bringing that 
fact out, I think it is necessary to ask a person like you a question like 
that, so that we can develop this subject further. 

Mr. Washburn. I have no objection to answering the question, sir, 
and I just don't think it is pertinent to this investigation. I will say 
this, however, that I don't know whether those during that period 
who were in charge of hiring personnel deliberately hired Communists 
or not, but I am satisfied that they got some during that period. 

Senator Goldwater. The reasons that we have heard, and the rea- 
sons that have been advanced by the majority of the writers who have 
investigated in this field, is that the Communists were the only people 
available at that time Avho understood organizing of that nature. The 
organizers of the CIO took them on in rather copious quantities for 
that purpose with the idea that they could dump them later. 



3688 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. WASHBURisr. Well, some people may have tlioiifjlit that, sir, but 
from my experience the people that came right out of the automobile 
plants turned out to be the best organizers in the automobile industry. 

Senator Goldwater. But you feel there were some Connnunists? 

Mr. Washburn. I am satisfied that they got some. "^^Hiether they 
were hired deliberately or not, I couldn't say. 

Senator Goldwater. I notice that one of the reasons that has been 
advanced for Berger seeking this charter was the fact that a group 
of garage mechanics were having a dispute with a Communist-con- 
trolled union in the UAW-CIO in New York, and I think that was the 
same union that was referred to yesterday when Mr. Zakman named 
the three men who he felt either had been or are now Communists in 
that union. 

So that the Communists have continued to pop out of this box. 
I think testimony like yours is going to be valuable to the CIO, who 
I know are very anxious to rid themselves of the remaining vestiges 
of communism. I think we must all agree they took them on in their 
efforts to organize and found that you could not get rid of them. 

Mr. Washburn. Certainly I have no objection to helping that work. 

Senator Goldwater. Thank you very much. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, moving on, Mr. Washburn, during the period 
1940 and 1945, were you an officer and did you have some other posi- 
tion in the UAW-AFL ? 

Mr. Washburn. "\Vliat period ? 

Mr. Kennedy. From 1940 on, did you hold some official position ? 

Mr. Washburn. From 1936 on, I was either a member of the inter- 
national executive board or international president. 

Mr, Kennedy. After the split occurred in the UAW, did you have 
some position then, some official position ? 

Mr. Washburn. I was a member of the international executive 
board. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any other position after that ? Were 
you elected to any other position, other than as a member of the execu- 
tive board ? 

Mr. Washburn, Well, as a member of the international executive 
board, each member was also a director of organization, or organiza- 
tional director of a given region, or a given area. All during this 
period, I was regional director of the western half of the State of 
Michigan up to 194B when I was elected international president. 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1943, you were elected international president? 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you remained so until 1953 or 1954; is that 
right? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, in 1949 or 1950, in that period of time, were 
you approached by Mr. Anthony Doria, who was then secretary- 
treasurer, was he not, of the UAW-AFL? 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he speak to you about granting a charter in 
New York City to Mr. Sam Zakman? 

Mr. Washburn, Yes, he did, 

Mr, Kennedy, Could you relate to the committee the circum- 
stances ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3689 

Mr. Washburn. Well, to the best of my recollection, the first con- 
tract or the first information I had on the request for a charter was 
that there was a group of people in a New York local union of the 
UAW-CIO, which was reported to be Communist dominated, that 
wanted to get out from under and wanted to find a place to go. They 
wanted to affiliate with our organization. We didn't have a local 
union in the metropolitan area of New York at the time, and we were 
rather interested in being able to establish a beginning there. 

Now, that information came to the best of my knowledge to Doria 
from David Previant, our general counsel. 

About the same time, and this is a connection that I have made in 
my own mind on the matter, Doria was invited by Previant to at- 
tend a dinner of the heads of the Central States Drivers Council of 
the Teamsters Union in Chicago. I wasn't invited. Doria was, 
and he figured that he was invited mostly because the insurance com- 
pany that handled the insurance for the Central States Drivers 
Council was interested in having Doria there so that he could talk 
to them about our international placing our insurance business with 
their outfit. 

Now, in this meeting, in this dinner, I understood that of course 
Jimmy Hoffa was there, who was the head of the Central States 
Drivers Comicil, and a number of other teamster leaders. 

Of course, these insurance peo]:)le and Paul Dorfman were there, 
and that was my first knowledge of anything about who Paul Dorfman 
was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand he also was interested in getting 
this charter for local 102 ? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes; I found out later, that is after this dinner 
was over, and Doria was talking about it, and he mentioned Dorfman. 
I couldn't see his connection in the matter, and in fact I didn't know 
who he was or what connection he had in the labor movement until 
some time after that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand at that time when Doria spoke 
to you about the granting of this charter, that Johnny Dioguardi 
was involved in it ? 

Mr. Washburn. No; Johnny Dioguardi wasn't involved in it at 
the time. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did understand subsequently that he became 
interested in it ? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes ; it didn't take long, and we began to hear a 
lot about it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand that he began to take control 
over local 102 ? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, the first that I recollect on it was that sud- 
denly Sam Zakman was out and a person by the name of Johnny 
Dioguardi was in. I still didn't know too much about it. I didn't 
know one way or the other who Dio was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand or learn how he was able to 
take over this union from Sam Zakman? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, I soon found out ; yes. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. Wliat did you find out ? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, I just found out that he more or less muscled 
in and pushed him out. There were no particular details, but I 



3690 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

mean those things happen, and then we began to hear that Dio was 
financing the deal, and then I began questioning it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that the ordinary procedure, to have a private 
individual finance a union ? 

Mr. Washburn. No, it isn't. That is what I couldn't understand 
about it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know why Johnny Dio would be so inter- 
ested as to finance one of your unions in New York City ? 

Mr. Washburn. No, I never could figure that out. The only thing 
I could do was to guess. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat is that ? 

Mr. Washburn. The only thing I could do was guess, and then of 
course after finding out who Johnny Dio was, and his background, 
and all of that, then I could only guess the purposes for which he 
wanted to get into the union movement. I had heard and found out 
by various sources that he was actually more of a businessman than 
he was a labor man, and with the number of business connections he 
was supposed to have, or reported to have, why he would be interested 
in financing a labor organization, I couldn't understand. 

The Chairman. You didn't think he was particularly interested in 
the welfare of the laboring people ? 

Mr. Washburn. I never thought so ; no, sir. I never thought he was 
very much interested. I thought actually that it was mob money 
rather than Johnny Die's personal money that was in the organi- 
zation. 

The Chairman, "Whose money ? 

Mr. Washburn. It was underworld mob money. I thought, was 
being put into grab control of unions. That is actually what I thought 
it was, and whether it was that or his own personal money, I don't 
know. 

Senator Kennedy. What was Johnny Dio's reputation at that time ? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, at that time I didn't know too much about 
it, and I was just beginning to gather the information. 

Senator Kennedy. You gathered, as I understand, that he was a 
businessman. 

Did you gather anything else about him ? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, t know, or I had heard and found out from 
his background that he had served time for extortion, and I had heard 
and read that he was connected with the so-called Lepke mob, oper- 
ating in trucking rackets. 

Senator Kennedy. From all you heard as far back as 1950, do you 
think that any self-respecting union man would associate with Johnny 
Dio, or anybody interested in the welfare of workers who have any 
connection with Johnny Dio ? 

Mr. Washburn. Not if they knew his background, and knew what 
he was operating. 
_ Senator Kennedy. Was it difficult to find his background at that 
time? 

Mr. Washburn. Was it difficult to find his background? No. 

Senator Kennedy. You were able to find it? 

Mr. Washburn. I found it. 

Senator Kennedy. And you feel that Johnny Dio even then was 
recognized as a businessman and as a hoodlum", and therefore there 
was no excuse for any trade unionist who had any responsibilities to 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3691 

the workers to associate directly or indirectly with Johnny Dio; is 
that not correct ? 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

Senator Kenxedy. And it was obvious that as the witness said 
yesterday afternoon, as to the point of this, particularly in the taxicab 
situation, as the witness said, was to pick up $1 million legitimately 
from the dues of the union members. So it was quite obvious to 
you, I am sure, that the opportunities to a man like Dio who com- 
bined business enterprise with being a hoodlum, were extensive and 
were obviously not in order to improve the living standards of the 
workers but to exploit it for his own uses. Is that correct? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes. Well, the first thing I ran into, that is that 
I could get ahold of to do something about, was when I found out he 
was the owner or a part owner of a nonunion dress factory. I raised 
hell about that, and shortly thereafter he sold it. Or he was reported 
to have sold it. 

Senator Kennedy. I think that is important. As far back as 1950 
all of this was information which could be obtained, even if it were 
not general information, as to Johnny Dio's character. Therefore, 
I think it is of interest to this committee that he was permitted to 
play such a significant part in major labor action in New York City 
from this date on. 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

Senator Kennedy. It is most unfortunate. 

Mr. Washburn. As soon as I could get ahold of it, I got a copy 
of his background from the New York State Crime Commission, of 
his activities and his associates, and a list of his associates. 

I had a pretty good idea of what his motives were, or at least I 
thought I did, if you can deteruiine anybody's motives in anything. 

Senator Kennedy. You were never under any misapprehension 
that his motives were to improve the w^orking standards of the workers 
of New York City? 

Mr. Washburn. I never thought that was his main objective ; no. 

Senator INIcNamara. TVHiile there is an interruption, in 1950 were 
you international president of the UAW-AFL? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes, sir. 

Senator McNamara. Then were you a party to issuing the charter 
to Dio? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes, sir. 

Senator McNamara. Despite the fact that you knew of his reputa- 
tion ? 

Mr. Washburn. I didn't know it then. I didn't even know Johnny 
Dio at the time the charter was issued. 

Senator INIcNamara. In 1950, you indicated that you had looked 
into his background. 

]Mr. Washburn. Oh, no. You see, we didn't hear of Johnny Dio 
until some time after the charter was issued. The first charter in 
New York was issued at the recommendation of Sam Berger, and 
I had never heard of Johnny Dio before that. 

Senator McNamara. Sam Berger as far as you knew at that time 
was a responsible individual ? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes. We always had a good respect for the Inter- 
national Ladies' Garment Workers Union, and we had friendly rela- 
tions with them. Many of the International Ladies' Garment Work- 



3692 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

ers organizers were sent out to the Middle West to help us organize 
in the early days, and a recommendation coming from the Interna- 
tional Ladies' Garment Workers or anybody responsible in it we never 
questioned. 

Wlien Sam Berger who I had never met before or never even heard 
of in fact, when we found out he was manager of the trucking local 
for the garment workers, and he was recommending this charter be 
issued, there was no question about it. We issued the charter. 

But at the time we issued the charter, we were told or at least I 
was told that there was a group of workers, legitimate workers I 
mean, involved in the request for a charter. We soon found out that 
that wasn't true. 

Senator McNamara. To take you back a little bit, you indicate your 
first activities in the union were in 1933 ; am I correct? 

Mr. Washbuen. That is right. 

Senator McNamara. You became a member of the Federal local that 
was chartered by the AFL directly ? 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

Senator McNamara. Who was heading up the organizing drivel 
Was that the days of, I can't think of his name, this fellow with the 
deep voice? 

Mr. Washburn. The fellow before him, at that time. 

Senator McNamara. Before him was Collins? 

Mr. Washburn. Bill Collins was first, and followed by Francis 
Dillon. 

Senator McNamara. Then the 1933 period was when Collins was 
leading the organization? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes; he was the first director of organization 
among the auto workers for the AFL. 

Senator McNamara. And about this time, the NRA came in, and 
when was that ? That was in 1933 ; was it not ? 

Mr. Washburn. It was in that time ; in 1933. 

Senator McNamara. Were you elected under the NRA as a repre- 
sentative of part of the group of employees of the plants? 

Mr. Washburn. No. The plant I was working in had the NRA 
representation, so-called representation plan, but we were already 
starting organizing at that time, and we would not subscribe to it. 
We had our own union, our own legitimate union going on a small 
scale. There were 2 or 3 departments of the plant involved and so 
we refused to become a part of it. 

Senator McNamara. You did not enter into the election under the 
NRA? 

Mr. Washburn. No. 

Senator McNamara. What plant was this ; the Oldsmobile ? 

Mr. Washburn. Reo Motor Car Co. 

Senator McNamara. When did the CIO come into being? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, the CIO actually came into being sometime 
late in 1936. We had had our first constitutional convention under 
the AFL in 1935, and then sometime in 1936 there was this top level 
fight in the AFL over the question of industrial versus craft organ- 
izations, and then there were six international unions suspended as a 
result of that fight. Of course right from the very beginning we of 
course were industrial union minded, and working in industrial in- 



EVIPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3693 

clustiy, so-called, and naturally we were working pretty closely with 
and supporting the industrial union idea. 

We were suspended along with five other international unions, in- 
cluding the International Ladies' Garment Workers, the Amalgam- 
ated Clothing Workers, Textile Workers, and the Mine Workers. 

Senator McNamara. You were expelled by whom? 

Mr. Washburn. By the AFL. The AFL suspended six interna- 
tional unions. 

Senator McNamara. They did not lift your charter at that time. 
Did they lift the Federal charter at that time ? 

Mr. Washburn. We weren't Federal then. We had built enough 
by 1935 ; we had enough members in our Federal labor unions tlirough- 
out the country in automobile and automobile-parts plants that the 
AFL set up an international union and gave us an international char- 
ter in 1935. 

Senator McNamara. This was Homer Martin's day? 

Mr. Washburn. Homer Martin was the first president. 

Senator McNamara. Then when you referred to this, actually the 
CIO was born at that convention at the Fort Shelby Hotel. Is that 
the time you are talking about, when Dillon was practically elimi- 
nated from the picture ? 

Mr. Washburn. ^Mien you say "CIO", no ; because the CIO com- 
prised a lot more unions than just the automobile workers. 

Senator McNamara. I am talking about the UAW-CIO. 

Mr. Washburn. Well, the UAW, the United Automobile Workers 
were formed officially at the Fort Shelby Hotel convention. 

Senator McNamara. That is when Dillon practicall}^ went out of 
the picture? 

Mr. Washburn. Oh, no. That is when Dillon became provisional 
president of the union. In 1935 when we got our first charter, you 
see the AFL practice had always been that when they chartered an 
international union, they would keep it under surveillance and close 
watch to help. 

Senator McNamara. Pretty much of a trusteeship ; was it not ? 

Mr. Washburn. Sort of a trustee proposition. Dillon was made 
the provisional president in the 1935 convention. We had our inter- 
national charter and all of that, but we were still being financed pri- 
marily by the AFL. 

Senator McNamar-V. Now, in 1936 in the convention 

Mr. Washburn. That is when we elected our own officers. 

Senator ^IcNamara. That is the time that Dillon practicallv went 
out? 

^Ir. Washburn. That is when Dillon went out and Homer Martin 
was then elected to the international presidency. 

Senator McNamara. That is when you had the break in the UAW, 
CIO and it was born at that time? 

]Mr. Washburn. In essence, yes. There was actually no break with 
the federation at that time. 

Senator McNamara. No; I know. 

Mr. Washburn. There was no break with the federation. 

Senator McNamara. That was later? 

Mr. Washburn. That came later, and Ave were just pressurins for 
the right to elect our own officers, and we were still affiliated with the 



3694 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

AFL and we still had our charter. But it was later that the top level 
fight on the council of the AFL took place, and the six international 
unions were suspended. 

We were included among them because we were pretty much indus- 
trial union minded. 

Senator jMcNamara. You mentioned a period of time when you had 
a struggle between what you termed the "Communist element" and 
the "anti-Communist element" in your union. 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

Senator McNamara. Was that prior to 1936? 

Mr. Washburn. No ; the big fight came afterward. The big fight 
started in 1937, and actually the fight in the union probably started 
in 1937, 1 think. Finally it "blew up in late 1938. 

Senator McNamara. When did this come to a head ? Was that at 
the Atlantic City convention ? 

Mr. Washburn. It came to a head not in a convention. It started 
in the 1937 convention, and then there was at that time, we voted con- 
ventions every 2 years, and the s])lit actually took place in late 1938 
before a convention was called. The result of that split was two sep- 
arate conventions. There was a separate convention for each side. 

Senator McXamara. Whom did you consider Avas the top man in the 
Communist element in the union at that time? 

Mr. Washburn. In the union at that time, well, George Addes 
seemed to be the fellow that wielded the most power. 

Senator McNamara. He wielded the most power with what you 
considered the Communist element? 

Mr. Washburn. It was a so-called bloc that was always supporting 
the Communist element. 

Senator McNamara. Su])porting the Communist element ? 

Mr. Washburn. I don't know whether George Addes was a Com- 
munist or not. 

Senator McNamara. I don't think that you intended to imply that 
he was ; did you ? 

Mr. Washburn. No; there were lots of people in there, and if I 
say that, basically it started over the Communist issue. But before 
it got done, there were a lot of personalities involved in it. 

Senator McNamara. You do not have any idea of who might have 
been the topman of the Communist element? It was an unknown 
person ? 

Mr. Washburn. No; I don't. There were a lot of Communists 
around, but as far as in the union, I don't know. I could not say 
whether one was a Communist or not. 

Senator McNamar.\. Your record up to now in this hearing indi- 
cates that you thought that there was a substantial number of Com- 
munists. I presume that you had in mind they were probably Com- 
munists and Communist su])]:)orters. 

Mr. Washburn. ]\Iore supporters than there were Communists, 
probably. 

Senator McNamar^s., I would think that you would want the record 
to show that, and I do not think you would want to show, as it does 
up to this point, that there were this number of Communists in your 
union. Did you want to show that? 

Mr. Washburn. What is that ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD ^695 

Senator McNamara. You did not want to show that there was this 
number of Communists in your union ; did you ? 

Mr. Washburn. No. 

Senator McNamara. You did not want to leave the record that 
way? 

Mr. Washburn. Oh, no ; not particuLarly. 

Senator McNam^^a. There were probably people who were taken 
in, more or less. 

Mr. Washburn. A lot of people were taken in ; yes. 

Senator McNamara. You were not one of them, I am sure. 

Mr. Washburn. No. Eight early in the game I found out what 
the deal was. 

Senator McNamara. That is all. 

Senator GoldwxVter. To get back to that point, I don't believe that 
I left the inference with you that the AFL employed Communists 
to organize ; did I ? 

Mr. Washburn. No. 

Senator Goldw^ater. My questions were directed to the rather well- 
known fact that the CIO in their efforts to organize the auto workers 
employed Communists as organizers, and I did not, I hope, leave the 
inference that the (JIO memberslip was or is predominantly Commu- 
nist ; did I leave that in your mind ? 

Mr. Washburn. I don't think so; I hope my answer did not infer 
that the CIO or the AFL deliberately hired any Communists. I 
think that I said that I believed they got some. 

Senator Goldwater. That is exactly the answer that you gave, and 
it substantiates wiiat investigations have brought out from time to 
time. I did not, as Senator McNamara I believe misunderstood, leave 
the impression that it was entirely a Communist movement. I think 
it was a very regrettable thing that at that period in labor's history, 
those who were attempting to organize the CIO, and the CIO particu- 
larly in the Michigan and Indiana area, felt they had to go to Com- 
munists to obtain good organizers under the impression tliey could get 
rid of them Avhen they wanted to. I think that they have since found 
out that they cannot get rid of Communists as easily as they thought, 
because they are still popping up in congressional investigations. 

That was the fact Senator that I wanted to bring out, inasmuch as 
Mr. Washburn had been most cooperative in revealing the history or 
part of the history of the development of the CIO. It is a very inter- 
esting part of labor's history, and I hope during the course of our in- 
vestigations we can bring it out. It is entirely ditfeient than anything 
that the American Federation of Labor ever dreamed of doing, or 
would have even allowed to have happen within their ranks. 

Senator McNamara. There seems to be some misunderstanding. 
For sure, I had no reference in my line of questioning to anything 
that you had said. I am sure if there is a misunderstanding it is com- 
l)letely on your part. I was in no manner referring to your questions. 
You had your questions and answers, and I did not have thein in mind. 
I do not understand this involving me in this. 

Senator Goldwater. Possibly I did misunderstand you, but I 
thought that you might be trying to erase from the record any refer- 
ence that I miglit have made to the fact 

Senator McNamara. That was the last thought in my mind. 

Senator Goldwater. That is fine. 



369§ IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Washburn, I am interested in knowing to what 
extent various labor leaders knowingly worked with and mingled with 
convicts, lawless people, and the like. Do you know what Johnny 
Dio's reputation was in 1950 and 1951 among the people with whom 
you associated ? 

Mr. Washburn. I didn't know until after he became connected 
with our union, and I began to hear some things, and then I began 
to get into it and find out just what his background was. 

Senator Curtis. A\nien did you first learn that he was an individual 
that lived outside of the law ? 

Mr. WASiiBURiSr. Well, my first information on that came from a 
telephone call from somebody in New York City who claimed that 
he knew me when I was in the CIO. 

Senator Curtis. I am not asking that we reiterate all of the testi- 
mony that has gone before here this morning. But I would like to 
ask you now, what labor leaders in particular would you say knew 
Dio well and were friendly with him? 

Mr. Washburn. You mean 

Senator Curtis. You do not have to give the details. 

Mr. Washburn. Based on what I know now ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Mr. Washburn. Well 

Senator Curtis. "V^Hio, for instance, in the teamsters union? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, Jimmy Hoffa. He associated with Jimmy 
Hoffa, and those surrounding Jimmy Hoffa. 

Senator Curtis. That was was rather frequent and continuous? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, to my best information, Jimmy Hoffa con- 
sidered Johnny Dio his friend, and they were together in numerous 
meetings that I also attended, such as AFL conventions, and he was 
also considered to be a friend of Johnny O'Rourke in New York, of 
the teamsters union, and he was also considered to be friends with, I 
don't know their names, but there were a couple of teamster local 
officials in San Diego, Calif., and through those contacts, through 
Johny Dio's contacts or his influence introduced to Doria, and Doria 
then became interested in doing some work in the San Diego area. 

Senator Curtis. In unions other than the teamsters, who were some 
of Dio's pals and close friends and individuals who cooperated with 
him? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, there were some of course in the ILGWU, 
in New York. 

Senator Curtis. Who, for instance? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, Sam Berger was considered to be a friend. 
In my investigation of Johnny Dio, I had our educational director 
while he Avas attempting an educational conference in New York with 
some of the ILG people, a fellow by the name of Elder, who was on 
the educational staff of the ILG, and Marc Starr was in this confer- 
ence, and our educational director was Francis Henson, I asked him 
when he went to this conference, since he was going to be in contact 
with ladies garment workers people, if he would try and find out 
everything he could about Johnny Dio in the New York situation, 
and to see if we could get sometliing that we could use to get rid of 
him, and get him out of our union. 

He was referred to a vice president of the ILG, because Dave 
Dubinsky was out of town, and this vice president, whose name I can't 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3697 

recall, was sort of a liaison man between the international headquar- 
ters of Mr. Dubinsky and the New York Central Labor Union. 

In other words, he was active in New York. 

Mr. Henson went to this vice president of the ILG, and this vice 
president told Mr. Henson that Johnny Dio was O. K., and he was 
a good man. 

Senator Curtis. That was at a time when there was no reason why 
this vice president should not have known Johnny Dio's true char- 
acter ? 

Mr. Washburn. I was satisfied that he did know. I was also sat- 
isfied that Dave Dubinsky knew. 

Senator Curtis. What makes you say that ? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, because Johnny Dio, I mean, was reported 
by all of the facts, that is of all of the history and his record, that 
he was connected with the old Lepke mob, connected with the garment 
rackets, and in the truckino; rackets in the garment industi-y. and 
how could Dave Dubinsky not have known Johnnj^ Dio? 

Senator Curtis. Now, in any other unions, other than the garment 
workers and the teamsters, who were some of Johnny Dio's pals? 

Mr. Washburn. That I can't tell you. That I don't know. I know 
he associated with different people around the AFL conventions, but 
to pin it clown, I couldn't tell you that. 

Senator Curtis. Well, it is a fair assumption on the part of this 
committee or anyone else, that these people who did work with Johnnj^^ 
Dio and any other criminal element in New York, were not innocently 
and blindly led into any such contact, were they ? 

]\Ir. Washburn. Well, that is a hard one, sir, to answer, A lot of 
people can be innocently led into something. 

Senator Curtis. If they continued on ? 

Mr. Washburn. Well once they knew the background, they 
wouldn't be continuing innocently. I would agree with you on that. 

Senator Curtis. The point is, the background was available, and 
well known to those who were concerned, is that not right? 

Mr. Washburn, That is right. 

Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask ]SIr. Washburn a 
question because of what a]:)pears to be his long experience and broad 
experience in the labor movement. He apparently has had experience 
in the labor movement when the Communists were active. 

INIr. Washburn. That is right. 

Senator Ites. And being used by certain elements in the labor 
movement to expand. Now he has been active in the labor movement 
when during a period of time racketeers have been engaged in obtain- 
ing control of certain labor organizations. 

I am just curious to know whether he has sized things up yet so 
that he has an idea as to which is worse as a factor in the labor 
movement : the Communists or the racketeers. 

Mr. Washburn. Personally, I would say the racketeers, sir. 

Senator Ives. That is the way it seems to me because I think that 
they can do a great deal more damage to the country than the Com- 
munists. 

Mr. Washburn. Well, I don't know which would be true in the long 
run. I never agreed with the Communists, and I always fought them 

89330^57— pt. 10 8 



3698 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

in the union, but I will say this : They would, fight for conditions and 
when you would find a guy connected with the Communists, he was 
always fighting for the conditions for the workers and they were not 
signing sweetheart agreements, as a rule. 

But I don't want to give them my blessing by that statement. But 
I would say that as far as the racketeers, I would say that they were 
worse. 

Senator Ives. We know that both elements, both the Communist 

Mr. Washburn". In the labor movement, whether it's Government 
or wliat phase of our society it is, I think racketeers can be more 
dangerous than anything else. 

Senator Ives. I think so, too, and we know both of them are under- 
mining our society, 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

Senator Ives. It is a question of which one is doing the greater 
damage, and I think from what I know about it, you have sized it up 
about right ; I want to thank you for j^our observations. 

Senator McNamara. Mr. Chairman, if I might ask a question. 

Senator Mundt, I would be glad to yield to you if you want to 
pursue this phase of it. 

Senator Mundt. It does not make any difference. 

Senator McNamara. You mentioned a name that is very familiar to 
me, a fellow who was prominent in Michigan and Detroit for a long 
time, Arthur Elder, who died a couple of years ago. 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

Senator McNamara. What reference did you make to Arthur 
Elder? 

Mr. Washburn. Arthur Elder, I merely mentioned his name in that 
he was working at the time for the International Eadies' Garment 
Workers Union in their educational department along with Marc 
Starr. 

There was a conference in New York at which our educational di- 
rector was invited to attend. He did attend and I asked our educa- 
tional director, Mr. Henson, to contact Arthur Elder and Marc 
Starr, and anybody else who would give him some leads in the Inter- 
national Ladies' Garment Workers Union, who could give us some 
information on Johnny Dio. 

I was trying or I was asking him to do a little investigating for me 
when he was on that trip. 

Senator McNamara. There was no insinuation that Arthur Elder 
had any contact with Dio ? 

Mr. Washburn, Absolutely not. 

Senator McNamara. I wanted the record to show that. 

Mr. Washbt'rx. Arthur Elder, in my book, is very high caliber. 

Senator McNamara. I agree thoroughly. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Washburn, you have testified to the fact that 
3^ou, having discovered Dio's background, endeavored to oust him and 
were outmaneuvered in your efforts. 

Now, my question is, in your opinion, what was the reason that 
a racketeer like Dio would want to get into the labor-union move- 
ment and seek positions of control. What w\as his motive? Wliat 
was the advantage to be to him ; that is, to expand his illegal activities 
to include functions within the union ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3699 

You had a chance to observe his methods and recognize that he 
was trying to mnsicle in and, in fact, he did muscle in, and you tried 
to keep him from muscling in. 

In your opinion, why was he trying to get in? There were lots 
of places that racketeers can profit themselves other than in a labor 
union. 

Mr, WASHBURisr. Oh, yes. There are racketeers in all phases of our 
life right now. There isn't any question about that. 

Senator Mundt. Why did he want to get into that particular 
union ? 

Mr. Washburn. To begin with, of course, shortly after we got 
started in New York, this question of organizing taxicabs came up. 
I was opposed to that, by the way. 

But especially in that particular organizational effort, and after 
learning what the history of the rackets in New York was, you could 
see pretty well the advantages to any underworld organization to 
have control of the taxicab drivers of New York. 

It would be a pretty powerful outfit with approximately 30,000 
members, if they succeeded in organizing them. 

Senator Mundt. I can understand that. 

Mr. Washburn. There are a lot of angles to the advantages along 
that line. Of course, there are shakedowns of employers and lush 
living off the dues and initiation fees of the members and there are 
just a lot of angles to it — the pressure that you can wield politically 
and everything else. 

Senator ]\Iundt. It was all aimed at getting some easy money by 
illegal methods ? 

Mr. Washburn. I don't know that, but the possibilities were there, 
certainly. 

Senator Mundt. The reason that Communists work into the union, 
and the reason the Communists try to seek control of an apparatus 
like this one in New York is not usually for money. 

Mr. AVashburn. Not as a rule ; no, sir. 

Senator Mundt. They are after power. 

Mr. Washburn. Power ; yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. And they are after power for political purposes. 

Mr. Washburn. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Some of them may be getting some money from 
Moscow, but primarily they are after power. 

Mr. Washburn. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. And they are after power because they are trying 
to do injury to this country, and benefit the Soviet Union. That is 
€lear and understandable. 

I am not going to participate in a debate as to which is worse. I 
think that they are both pretty highly abomniable and tremendously 
dangerous. 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. And certainly from the standpoint of the general 
public, the Communist menace is tremendously greater than the rack- 
eteer because you have millions of Americans not directly affected 
by the racketeers in control of the union, but all Americans would be 
affected directly if the Communists got control of a city through get- 
ting control of unions. 



3700 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

But that is a philosophical argument that leads nowhere. What I 
am trying to find out is the particular reasons why racketeers, to get 
easy money by illegal practices in other fields should select control 
of labor unions as a theater of activity. 

You have said that enables them to get money by shakedown. It 
enables them to collect dues and misuse the dues, and enjoy plush 
living on the dues. Are there any other reasons ? 

Mr. Washburn. I suppose there are a lot of them that I could not 
tell you. I can't think of any at the moment. 

Senator Mundt. Looking at the other side of the coin, you have 
testified about the close friendly relationships, for example, between 
Jimmy Hoffa and Dio, and others have mentioned that. 

You brought in the picture of what was the supposed advantage to 
Dio. "Wliat was the advantage to Jimmy Hoffa and other labor lead- 
ers to form these friendly associations with the underworld? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, so far as the advantages to Hoffa, sir, I 
wouldn't know. 

Senator Mundt. They must have had some motive. 

Mr. Washburn. If Hoffa thought 

Senator Mundt. They were joining up with these creepy char- 
acters of the illegal underground. 

Mr. Washburn. If Jimmy Hoffa thought. I suppose, that Johnny 
Dio had some connections in New York that would make him a good 
emissary of his in the organization field, or in comprimising people 
to be on Jimmy Hoffa's side, I would say then Jimmy Hoffa might 
be using Johnny Dio for the purpose of gaining power. 

That would be the only thing I could see in the labor movement. 

Senator Mundt. These underworld characters 

Mr. Washburn. Other than tliat, I know nothing about Jimmy 
Hoffa. 

Senator Mundt. T am trying to explore this from the standpoint of 
a man who is in the union. It is a little hard for me to understand both 
sides of this unholy marriage that has been formed between some 
labor leadei'S and some underworld characters. 

Now, this occurs to me as a possibility : that these underworld char- 
acters are pretty good technicians when it comes to rough stuff. It 
might be that these union leaders were trying to organize a reluctant 
plant and one might say that these are pretty good goons that they 
could have available. 

Underworld leaders know wlio these rough guys are, and maybe 
that is tb.e reason that they need that kind of association. 

Mr. Washburn. Well, T would say from the developments of the 
situation that it looked to me like Jimmy Hoffa had his eye set on the 
liresidency of the teamsters union, and that he was looking to enlarge 
ins field of support, and I suppose he felt that Johnny Dio was in- 
fluential in New York among certain forces and Johnny Dio might 
be able to help him gain control of the New York Joint Council of 
Teamsters. 

That is how I got beat, in people lining up with Johnny Dio and 
that crowd. 

Senator Mundt. I wanted your own interpretation as to why. No. 1, 
tlie underworld wants to join with the union and why certain union 
officials want to join up with the underworld, and I am glad to have 
the infoiTnation. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3701 

You mentioned Mr. Dubinsky. Do you suppose that Dubinsky 
inew about Sam Berger's activities ? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes, he did. I am satisfied that he did. 

Senator Mundt. Because Berger, of course, was in his area of union 
activity. 

Mr. Washburn. I liad a conference with Dubinsky on the whole 
matter. 

Senator Mundt. Will you expand a little bit on what took place in 
the conference? 

Mr. Washburn. AVell, Dubinsky, of course, as you know at that 
time, was a member of the — I don't know whether they called it 
ethical practices committee of the AFL; this was before the merger — 
and Dubinsky and Mr. Meany and McFatrick were a three-man com- 
mittee looking into these matters. 

Dubinsky was particularly rough with our union, which surprised 
me somewhat because we had always been friendly, and all he would 
say was to get rid of Dio. 

Senator Mundt. Dubinsky said to get rid of Dio ? 

Mr. Washburn. "He is no good, get rid of him." Well, in a labor 
organization, it is like anything else. It is just like the courts of 
our land. You can't convict a man without some evidence. You 
can't convict him on nothing, and the only thing actually we could 
pin down on Dio was the fact that he had been convicted for extortion. 

We couldn't throw him out of our union for that and our constitu- 
tional provision did not permit that. You can't just throw a man out 
of a union and it wouldn't be right if you could, just arbitrarily to 
throw him out without a trial. 

When you have a trial, you have to have evidence. I thought that 
Dubinsky being in New York, and being in the International Ladies' 
Garment Workers Union, and being involved in having the trucking 
industry being racket-ridden in the industry for many years, and 
knowing all about the so-called Lepke mob, and Murder Incorporated, 
and so on, you couldn't live in New York without knowing something 
about that, and especially you can't live in the ILG without knowing 
something about it. 

I thought Dave Dubinsky could have been some help to us when 
this matter came up. I went to Dave Dubinsky, and I asked him for 
some information. I said, "What have you got that I can use in our 
union to get rid of Johnny Dio ?" 

He went and he got the files on Johnny Dio and all he had was a 
bunch of newspaper clippings from the New York Times. 

I said, "Dave, I have got the same thing. I can't convict a man 
in our union and you couldn't convict a man in your union on those 
newspaper clippings." 

He said, "He is no good. Get rid of him." Then he got real excited 
about the fact, about 102 of our union, the first union we chartered 
there, being the same number as Sam Berger's local union, in his 
union. 

He thought that there was a tieup there. Actually, it was coinci- 
dental. There was no tieup between the fact that the two locals 
happened to be the same number. It was the next number in line that 
we were issuing as far as charters were concerned. Sam Berger was 
in the office when we talked about it, and he said, "Well, that is the 



3702 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

number of my union." I said, "Of course, you don't have to take that 
one if you don't want to, and if you think that it is going to hurt 
anything or be confusing and take another one." 

"No," he says, "It might be a good omen." And so we left it 102. 
That is actually the story. Mr. Dubinsky never believed that, even 
from me, but that is neither here nor there. 

Then he got into the question of Sam Berger's connection with 
Johnny Dio and so I asked him, and I said, "If Sam Berger is a close 
associate of Johnny Dio's for as many years as you say he is, and he is 
as bad a character as you say he is, why is he still w^orking for 
thelLG?" 

Senator Mundt. What did he say to that ? 

Mr. Washburn. He said, "We consider him less dano-erous in than 
out." 

Senator Mundt. Did he elaborate on that any ? 

Mr. Washburn. No ; that is all he said. 

Senator Iyes. You know ]ie is out now ; do you not ? 

Mr. Washburn. A long time, after, sir. He also knew Johnny Dio, 
but denied it to me. When I proved that Johnny Dio had once 
worked for his organization on a special assignment, he got pretty 
excited. He got pretty excited and I got pretty mad at Mr. Dubinsky 
at that time for 

Senator Mundt. Did Dio work for ILG ? 

Mr. Washburn. I found out through Johnny Dio and other 
sources — after this vice president reported that Johnny Dio was O. K., 
then I felt that tliere was some information that I could have had 
or should have had from the ILG to help us get rid of Johnny Dio 
if they wanted him out of the labor movement so bad. 

Senator Mundt. And it was after that 

Mr. Washburn. So Dubinsky got pretty mad at me. He said he 
didn't even know Johnny Dio. I said, "Mr. Dubiusky, I understand 
that he worked for your organization, one time on a special assign- 
ment." 

"I don't even know the man," he said. 

I named the plant and city in whicli he worked, and he got very 
excited. His only reply was, "Well, there is sometimes," he says, "we 
hire people to do certain jobs for us, but we don't let them get on the 
inside of the organization." 

Senator Mundt. You say you named the plant. ^Vhat plant was it, 
what city? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, I didn't have the name of the plant, actually. 
It was Roanoke, Va. 

Senator Mundt. Roanoke, Va. ? 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. He was assigned to that job by the 
vice president of the ILG. The man's name, I don't know. The only 
information I could get on it in trying to pin it down was that his 
wife was Dave Dubinsky's personal secretary. 

Senator Mundt. His wife was Dave Dubinsky's personal secretary ? 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

Senator JNIundt. About what time, what year? 

Mr. Washburn. I would say that was about — well, the actual time 
that the job was done I don't know. But it was pretty recent. I mean 
recent in terms of then, at the time I was talking to Mr. Dubinsky. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3703 

Senator Mundt. Well, could you give us a general area? "VNHiat 
j^eriod of time are we talking about? 

Mr. Washburx. The exact date he was in Roanoke, Ya., on that 
job, I don't know. 

Senator Muxdt. Would you say it was the 19o0"s, the 1920's, or 
what? 

Mr. Washburn. It was later than that. I would sa}' it was pretty 
close to the 1950's. I gatliered it was pretty close to the time that 
Johnny Dio became connected with our union. 

Senator Mundt. Do you recall the name of Dubinsky's secretary? 

Mr. Washburn. No ; I don't. I never knew her. I never knew her 
name. I gathered, after the information I got from our educational 
director, that the vice president that had stated that Johnny Dio was 
all right and a good man, I assumed then that that was the same vice 
president that probably assigned Johnny Dio to do this job. It 
happened to be a plant, as I understand it, that Dubinsky's organiza- 
tion had tried to organize for many years, and was never able to 
cr'ack it. 

So they apparently were trying another way to get it, and used 
Johnny Dio to do it. 

Senator Mundt. That would lead back to the assumption I made 
earlier. ^Vliat the labor leaders seek and secure with their connection 
with underworld characters, is that they have their men who are 
experts in high pressure, experts in goon squad activities, experts in 
trying to persuade reluctant plants to come along because of their 
capacity to intimidate and coerce. 

What you have testified about the Roanoke, Va., plant seems to 
square ])retty neatly with that particular hypothesis. 

Mr. Washburn. Well, my faith in people, I mean, was shaken quite 
a bit by that situation. I always had a lot of respect for the ILG. 
And I had a lot of respect for Dubinsky. But when he was in a posi- 
tion to help and wouldn't help, I just began to wonder why. Then I 
found out. 

Senator Mundt. You found out that probably the reason he would 
not help was because he, himself, had employed Dio or had associated 
himself with Dio. 

Mr. Washburn. Well, he probably had become involved is the best 
I can figure out. 

Senator Mundt. Well, any labor leader who employs or utilizes 
an underworld character ultimately gets involved to the point where 
he no longer is a free agent. 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. They are on the hook and it is 
pretty hard to get off. 

Senator JMundt. This in interesting. It is the same identical proce- 
dure with the Communists. They get a fellow going along with them 
for awhile on comparatively unimportant matters and then thej^ stick 
in the barb and pin him down that they otherwise would expose him. 

Mr. Washburn. What bothered me so much was because he was 
really riding me in my organization, and at the same time he wouldn't 
help when he could have helped. 

Senator Mundt. You could not elicit from Mr. Dubinsky any 
further reason why he continued his association with Sam Berger 
except that he said it was easier to get along with him in the union 
than out? 



3704 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Washburn. It was more than that. He said, "We consider 
him less dangerous in than he ^YOuld be out." And when you got back 
into Sam Berger's history, back quite a few years into the fight in 
the trucking industry, the trucking business in the garment industry, 
you can guess a little bit why. 

Senator Mundt. You could guess better than I could, because you 
know more about the background. What would be your guess ? 

Mr. Washburn. Wliat? 

Senator Mundt. I say you could guess better than I could because 
you know more about Sam Berger's background activities than I do. 
Wliat would your guess be ? 

Mr. Washburn. I don't know whether I do or not. All I know 
is what I could find out from records and so forth. 

I was a little surprised to find a person like that in the ILG, I will 
tell you that very frankly, and have him supported and still be there 
for some length of time. 

Also, somewhat surprised to find out the fact that while I was sit- 
ting in the audience here yesterday, that finally we get news that 
Paul Dorfman is suspended by the American Federation of Labor. 
Finally. 

When we, as an international union, almost got kicked out because 
we didn't get rid of Dio, who was brought into our organization 
through Dorfman. 

Senator Mundt. I thought that was a little late myself, 

Mr. Washburn. It was plenty late. 

Senator Mundt. Thank you. 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Chairman? ' 

The Chairman. I have one other question. I am trying to get some 
background. 

You referred awhile ago to the close association and friendship of 
Mr. Hoffa and Johnny Dio. How long has that friendship continued, 
to your knowledge ? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, just about the same period of time, sir, that 
Johnny Dio was connected with our union, from, about the time — 
well, from my Imowledge, from the time I first found out about Dio, 
which was a short time after we first chartered local 102 in New York, 
from that time until now. I mean, I say now — since I have been out 
of the labor movement, all I know about it is what I read in the paper. 

The Chairman. Is that association and friendship such that you 
would conclude that Mr. Hoffa is bound to know of the character 
and reputation of Johnny Dio ? 

^ Mr. Washburn. Well, I don^t know whether I could put it exactly 
like that, but I would say that if I know, and if I could find out, I 
am certain that Jimmy Hoffa could have, and probably did. 
^ The Chairman. I do not want to convict anyone just by associa- 
tion, but we have a character here, I think you pretty well agree, that 
does not belong in any position of authority in the" labor movement. 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

The Chairman. And here we have a pretty high man in unionism, 
with a close association with this party. My imderstanding is that 
he has made some statements about his friendship for Johnny Dio. 
Do you have any information about that? 

Mr. Washburn. There was one statement that I think was rather 
-a public statement that came out in the press, that he considered 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3705 

Johnny Dio to be a friend of his. I don't know personallj^ about that. 

I also don't know personally about another situation that after I 
suspended Johnny Dio and pulled the charters on the six locals in 
New York there was a State federation convention in Michigan, and 
Jimmy Hoffa, of course, was there. I wasn't there because I had 
just resigned. It was just a few days after I resigned. But Jimmy 
Hoffa made a statement to the press out at the Grand Rapids con- 
vention to the effect that this business of charges of racketeering 
and all of the charges against Dio that I had made was rather silly 
and asinine because there was no truth in them, and now that the 
charters had been restored and Johnny Dio had been reinstated back 
in the union by the international and executive board after I left, 
that everything was peace and harmony in New York. That was the 
statement that he made. 

The Chairman. You suspended Dio? 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

The Chairman. And took up the chartei-s of those locals ? 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

The Chairman. You did that as president of the union, of the 
intei'national ? 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

The Chairman. Then your executive board overruled you and 
reinstated Dio and returned the charters ? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Is that when you left? 

Mr. Washburn. I left the next day. After that board meeting 
adjourned, I left. 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Chairman ? 

The CH.\niMAN. ^Y\\Rt date was that? May 1954? 

Mr. Washburn. It was May 8 when I resigned. The board meetings 
adjourned, I think, on a Thursday or Wednesday, and I resigned as 
of Friday, the end of the week. 

Mr. Kennedy. May 1954. It was not 1953. 

Mr. Washburn. Was it 1954? I haven't been out as long as I 
thought I had. 

The Chairiman. Senator Goldwater? 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Washburn, you suspended Johnny Dio on 
April 22, 1954, and the meeting of the executive board was called for 
May 5, 1954. At that time, Mr. Doria offered amendments to your 
original action that, in effect, erased your efforts to get rid of him. 
Is that substantially correct ? 

Mr. Washburn. I wouldn't say that Doria made the motion. 

Senator Goldwater. Pardon ? 

Mr. Washburn. I wouldn't say that Doria made the motion. To 
the best of my recollection, Earl Heaton made the motion. 

Senator Goldwater. Well, Doria or Heaton, what motives would 
they have to try to keep Dio in the union ? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, Doria, of course, was an ally of Johnny 
Dio's, and was the main problem that I had in the union. I knew 
that whenever I attempted to make a move against Johnny Dio that 
I would have a first-class fight on my hands. 

Doria, there was not question about it, was an associate, a very 
close associate of Johnny Dio's. 



3706 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

All the contacts from Dio to our organization were made to Doria. 
Dio would never contact me except on a very minor matter. 

(At this point, Senator Ives withdrew from the hearing room.) 

Senator Goldwater. To your knowledge, had Doria or Heaton at 
any time had any connection with the ILG? 

Mr. Washburn. No. 

Senator Goldwater. Any connection with Dubinsky ? 

Mr. Washburn. No. 

Senator Goldwater. So that there would be no reason to suspect 
that Dubinsky or the members of the ILG might have had some effect 
in the effort to keep Dio in your union ? 

Mr. Washburn. No. I don't want anybody to misunderstand my 
previous testimony. I don't think that there was any design on the 
part of anybody in the ILG with the possible exception of Sam Berger, 
on placing or keeping anybody like Johnny Dio in our union. 

My conclusions to my experience is that Dave Dubinsky could have 
helped but didn't because of circumstances. It might have exposed 
something in his own union. That is the way I feel about it and I am 
quite convinced of it. 

That is as far, I think, that the ILG's connection with the situation 
goes, as far as our own union situation is concerned. 

Senator Goldwater. Earlier, when I first started questioning you, 
you wondered whether or not questions along these lines were perti- 
nent to this particular investigation. 

I have here what I consider to be the key sentence of the resolution 
adopted by the last Communist Party convention. I want to read 
it to you, because I think you are going to agree that gangsterism, 
racketeering, and communism, are two evils that are possibly related, 
but they are certainly related in their desire to get power. 

This is very short. I will quote from it : 

To a degree the cooperation of labor reformists (trade union leaders who 
stand for capitalism and with no Socialist background or traditions), social re- 
formists (those labor leaders like Dubinsky, Reuther, Randolph, et cetera, who 
have a Socialist background), and bourgeois reformists (liberal wing of the 
Democratic Party) in such organizations as Americans for Democratic Action 
is, in the absence of a mass social democratic party in the United States, and 
under the conditions prevailing in our country, performing the function of social 
democracy. 

That was adopted in the last Communist Party convention in the 
United States. I think it points out more clearly than anything I can 
say why we as United States Senators are interested in not only the 
infiltration of Communists into the orio-injil CIO, but the infiltration 
of gangsters and hoodlums into the AFL and into the CIO, also. 

I do not say that to be critical of you, nor of your union. I just 
read it to point out why I was pursuing the line of questioning that 
T was. 

I think you responded splendidly. I think you realize the danger 
as probably very few union leaders do. I just wanted to put this into 
the record so you would understand my reasons for the questioning 
that I was following. 

Senator Mundt. Is that resolution you quoted from. Senator Gold- 
water, from the Communist convention, or was that a labor conven- 
tion? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3707 

Senator Goldwater. It was adopted at the last Communist Party 
<jonvention held in the United States, the date of which I do not 
have. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, that is part of the present day 
Communist line that we hear so much about, the change and so forth. 
It incorporates that. 

Incidentally, I can assure you it is not much of a change from the 
old Communist line, because I have been reading Communist con- 
vention platforms for 20 years. That kind of thing has popped up 
time after time, the tactics of the Communists to employ wherever 
they can respectable organizations and intertwine them with the Com- 
munist apparatus in order to achieve the power that they seek, which 
they seek for the purpose of trying to weaken the defense potential of 
this country. I think it is a tremendously important statement. Sena- 
tor Goldwater, and I am glad to put it into the record. 

Senator Goldwater. To my mind, there is no question but that it 
was, and it still is, the intent of the Communist Party to infiltrate in 
every way the trade movement in this country. 

In fact, during World War II, if my memory serves me coiTectly, 
a strike was called at the North American plant to prevent the ship- 
ment of fighters to overseas bases. I think that was probably the 
first time that Mv. Reuther became really concerned about the extent 
to which control had been obtained by the Communists in the CIO. 
I think if we read history we will find that from that time on there 
has been, more or less, an effort to clean out the Communists. 

That strike was not successful, but it points out what could be done 
in the event of another war. 

I think they would be far more successful in stopping our defense 
efforts than they were in the last war. 

Senator Mundt. I am also glad that you stated it for this reason : 
It is hard for me to constantly realize and accept the fact that the 
racketeers, big league thugs, need to procure the dues of laboring men 
in order to get the plush living which they otherwise get. To the 
uninitiated, it is a little difficult, I suppose, to realize the big power 
grab that the Communists seek, for which they would pay millions of 
hundreds of millions of illegal money. Once you have concentrated 
that in the hands of a few men who are unscrupulous and willing to 
sell out their associates for gold and for loot, you have a situation 
which is very attractive to the Communists. 

I think in hearing testimony of this kind, so frequently Americans 
who have not had this background of study of the Communist move- 
ment are inclined to listen to the music which comes from playing the 
flyspecks on the sheet music rather than the dots, the dashes, the 
sharps, and the notes. You do not establish a tremendous concentra- 
tion of power such we are talking about the possibility of here in 
order to pick up a couple of dollars a week from a laboring man. You 
do that because you are aiming at a big target. 

I hope that the American public will learn that we are wrestling 
with a problem of first-class magnitude. This is not a peanut-stand 
program that we are trying to stop and avert. 

You were talking about this conference, Mr. Washburn, that you 
had with Dubinsky. I do not believe we dated that. Could you tell 
us about when that conference was? 



3708 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Washburn. It would be probably sometime in 1952, sir. The 
exact date I couldn't remember. 

Senator Mundt. Early in 1952? 

Mr. Washburn. Somewhere in about 1952. It might have been 
1951. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Chief Counsel, you may proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequent to this meeting that you had with Mr. 
Dubinsky, was Mr. Dio appointed as regional director in New York 
City, in the New York area? 

Mr. Washburn. Prior to that time, yes. 

Mr. I^NNEDT. Did he continue in that position? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And various charters were granted by the UAW- 
AFL to individuals in the New York City area upon his recommenda- 
tion ? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, they were granted, not intended for in- 
dividuals. They were granted to, supposedly, groups of workers. 

Of course, with Dio as acting director in this area, it would nat- 
urally come through him in the course of the operations of a union. 

Mr. Kennedy. As you had a feeling or some suspicion about Johnny 
Dio, why did you continue to allow him to be the one to direct your 
operations in the New York area ? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, it was a board decision, in the first place, 
to put him on. I wasn't in a position to stage that kind of a fight 
at that time, the kind of a fight I knew it would be. 

Mr. Kennedy. "Wlio would have opposed you in the board ? 

Mr. Washburn. Doria, at the outset. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Who ran the operations in the New York area for 
the international? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, Doria was Dio's contact all the time. As I 
said before, he very seldon contacted me except on very minor matters. 

Mr. Kennedy. "\Y1io are Doria's contacts? ^^^^o are his close as- 
sociates in the labor movement? 

Mr. Washburn. About the same as Dio's. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wlio are they? 

Mr. Washburn. Jimmy Hoffa, Paul Dorfman, O'Rourke, of the 
teamsters, and 

Mr. Kennedy. Sam Berger? 

Mr. Washburn. Sam Berger. 

Mr. Kennedy. You spoke earlier about the fact that you under- 
stood that Dio and Hoffa were close friends. Could you tell th& 
committee what you base that on ? 
^ Mr. Washburn. Well, just on the basis of conferences and conven- 
tions that were held at different times in the union, in the AFL Hoffa 
and Doria and Dio, they all hung around together. They all hung 
around together and associated together socially, and had frequent 
meetings. Of course, as far as Doria is concerned, there was no ques- 
tion about his support and loyalty to Dio, because he didn't make any 
bones about it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Dio speak to you also about his friendship with 
Jimmy Hoffa? 

Mr. Washburn. No. Dio never talked to me very much. I mean, 
if we were together at times, it would be just general conversation 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 



3709 



about Hoffa and different people that he professed to know, and to be 
friends with. 

Mr. Kennedy. ^Vlien Dio was granting these charters, or the 
charters were being granted by the international through Dio, did you 
make an examination or investigation of the people to whom these 
charters were being granted ? 

Mr. "Washburn. No. There wasn't any particular reason to, and 
I couldn't — that is, we never had made an investigation as to who the 
charters were going to, because they were usually recommended by our 
people in the field, as a general rule. We had never run into any 
trouble on a charter before in the history of our union, to my knowl- 
edge, until we ran into this 102. Then as we got into that, I knew we 
were into something, and my investigations, of course, had to be with- 
out anybody's knowledge because I just didn't want the fight to start 
until I was ready to have it start. 

Mr. Kennedy. INIr. Chairman, we have a list here of the charters 
that were granted in the New York area by the international while 
Johnny Dioguardi was director of operations. 

Could he identify them and we will have that list made a part of 
the record ? 

The Chairman. The Chair presents to you a list of locals that were 
chartered in the New York area during the time that Dioguardi was 
director of that area. I will ask you to examine this list and see if it 
IS accurate. 

(Document handed to witness.) 

Mr. Washburn. I think it is. 

The Chairman. That may be printed in the record at this point. 

(Document referred to follows:) 

Charters issued 'by International Union, VAW (ALF), while John Dioguardi 
was director of activities for that union in New York 



Local 


Description 


Date 


Remarks 


136 

138 

648 

3d 102 ' 


Amalgamated, Long Island, N. Y 

Amalgamated, eastern Pennsylvania and 

southern New Jersey. 
Amalgamated Metal Working Industries, 

New York, N. Y. 
Taxicab drivers 


Oct. 15,1951 

Nov. 13, 1951 

Feb. 4, 1952 

Mar. 17, 1952 

do 

Oct. 13, 1952 
Oct. 14,1952 
Jan. 13.1953 
Feb. 17,1953 
June—, 1953 
Sept. 15. 1953 
Oct. 19,19.53 
Nov. 3, 1953 
Nov. 9,1953 


Louis Lasky, Feb. 20, 1953; 

revoked June 17. 
Dissolved Apr. 22, 1954. 

Abe Saul, attorney; never 

active. 
Withdrawn June 1953; AFL 


649' 

185 

250' 

198' 

355'. 

214 


Amalgamated, Greater New York and vicinity.. 

Taxi meciianics, New York City 

Amalgamated, New York, N. Y 

Amalgamated, Bronx, N. Y 

Amalgamated, New York, N. Y 


pressures. 
Became 269, teamsters. 
Revoked; never active. 
Became 362, teamsters. 
Extortioi indictment. 
Now independent. 
Never active. 


224' 

225 


Amalgamated, New York, N. Y 


Now Independent. 

Out of existence July 6, 1955. 


227 ' 




Became 284, teamsters. 


228 ' 


Amalgamated Long Island, N. Y - 


Out of existence July 6, 1955. 









' Are those on the chart. 

Note.— Not all of these are shown on the chart because they became inactive at very early dates and 
played no part in subsequent activities. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. When the taxi drive started at the end of 1951 and 
continued in part of 1952 and part of 1953, ultimately the Interna- 
tional T'AW was forced to give up that taxicab drive, is that right? 

Mr. Wa.shburn. Yes. 



3710 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you take part in tlie negotiations with the team- 
sters union about their taking over the drive? 

Mr. Washburn. No, 

Mr. Kennedy. You did not. Who handled that ? 

Mr. AVashburn. Doria. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was all handled by Anthony Doria for your 
union ? 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Avith whom he had conferences on that 
matter ? 

Mr. Washburn. The teamsters appointed a committee to handle 
that. I think Einar Mohn was one of the members on the committee. 

At the moment, that is about the only name that I can think of. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was Harold Gibbons on that committee? 

Mr. Washburn. I don't know whether Gibbons was on that or not. 

I remember a remark by either Dio or Doria at the time, that the 
makeup of the committee was satisfactory. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand that the teamsters were going- 
to take your operation into the teamsters ? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were they going to take Dio with them.? 

Mr. Washburn. That was supposed to be part of the negotiations, 
as I understand it. 

The Chairman. The committee will have to suspend. That was 
a signal for a rollcall vote in the Senate. We will return as soon as 
the vote has been cast and resume the hearings. 

(Members present at the taking of the recess: Senators McClellan, 
McNamara, Gold water, Mundt, and Curtis.) 

(Whereupon, at 11 :20 a. m., the committee recessed, to reconvene 
at 2 p. m., the same day.) 

afternoon session 

The Chairman. The hearing will be in order. 

(Members present at the convening of the session: Senators Mc- 
Clellan, Ives, and Goldwater.) 
The Chairman. Mr. Washburn, will you come around again, please ? 

TESTIMONY OF LESTER WASHBURN— Resumed 

Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Washburn, at the conclusion this morning, we 
were discussing the taxicab drive of local 102, which was headed by 
Mr. Dio and I was asking you about the arrangements that were made 
with the teamsters union regarding the taking over of the taxicab 
drive. 

Now, were there negotiations conducted originally that Mr. Dio and 
his operation were to go into the teamsters or to come into the team- 
sters ? 

Mr. WAsnp,i'RN. The proposition was, or the attempt was on Dio 
and Doria's ])art, to have the teamsters take over the taxi union and 
continue the drive with the same organizational setup and the same 
personnel. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tl\at would be Mr. Dio. 

Mr, Washburn. Yes. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3711 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know who in the teamsters was interested 
in having that done, or were you informed ? 

Mr. Washburn. No; I don't. 

Mr, Kennedy. You were not informed ? 

Mr. Washburn. No; I wasn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you remember who the negotiations were with, 
regarding that aspect of things ( 

Mr. Washburn. Well, as 1 said this morning, there was a committee 
appointed apparently by Mr. Beck, and I am quite sure that Einar 
Mohn was on it, and who the other 2 members of the committee, it 
was a 3-man committee, I just couldn't say. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know why Mr. Dio was not brought into the 
o})eration of the teamsters at that time ? 

jNIr. Washburn. Only from reports that I received from Mr. Doria. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand it was because of the opposition 
of the vice president in the area, Mr. Tom Hickey I 

Mr. Washburn. Well, now maybe I didn't quite get your question 
clear. Are you talking about the conferences to take over the taxi- 
cabs 'I 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes; and I know they took the taxicab drive over, 
but now I am talking about the move that was underway to take over 
the personnel such as ]Mr. Dio into the teamsters union to conduct that 
drive. 

]Mr. Washburn. Maybe I can do it better if I just relate what I 
know about it. 

Mr. Kennedy. That would be fine. 

Mr. Washburn. As I understand it, conferences were held and 
Doria was in on the conferences according to his reports to me. They 
reported that it was agreed that this committee had agreed to take 
over the taxi union and continue the drive, with the same persoimel. 

Doria was also interested in trying to g,^i our union repaid for the 
amount of money we had spent on the drive. That was supposed to 
be taken care of according to Doria's report. 

Conferences were held in New York, There was supposed to be 
a final conference in Washington, at which Dave Beck was to be present 
and the final agreement or conclusions made. 

Dona was to meet with Beck at noon on what date I don't remember, 
I couldn't give you the date, but as I get the story, Mr. Meany had a 
meeting with Beck at breakfast that morning, and the conference at 
noon never took place. 

(At this point. Senators McNamara and Curtis entered the hearing 
room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. The conference at noon — was that the conference 
that was supposed to formulate the agreement to take in the person- 
nel ? 

Mr. Washburn. It was supposed to be, sir. The meeting, as I got 
the report, was supposed to be the meeting at wliich Beck was to put 
liis stamp of ap])roval on it. The committee had, as I understood it, 
already agreed to take over the cab union and the drive and the per- 
sonnel lock, stock, and barrel, and to give some consideration to the 
money that our union had put in the drive, 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was in the teamsters union that ]irevented the 
personnel of your drive — namely, Mr. Dio — from coming into the 
teamsters? 



3712 IMPROPER ACTWITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Washburn. I don't know as it was anybody in tlie teamsters 
union. I giye credit for blocking the whole deal to George JMeany. 

Mr, Kennedy. George Meany prevented it? 

Mr. WASHBrRN. As far as I know. I understand there was a break- 
fast meeting between Dave Beck and George Meany that morning of 
the day that the deal was supposed to be concluded, and the conference 
at noon to conclude the deal never took place. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand that Mr. Hoffa at that time was 
interested in having your personnel and your work that you had clone 
brought over into the teamsters union ? 

Mr. Washburn. I understood Hoffa was in favor of it; yes, sir. 

(xVt this point in the proceedings, Senator Kennedy entered the 
hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy'. Did you understand that he had participated in some 
of the meetings in New York and in Washington in connection with 
this? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes, but I could not say that he was participating 
as a member of the committee because I don't know, and I don't think 
Hoffa was a member of that committee. 

Mr. Kennedy^. But he was actively interested. 

Mr. Washburn. He was in and around at the time those confer- 
ences were going on. 

Mr. Kennedy'. Did you imderstand from the conversations that you 
had with Mr. Doria at the time that he was actively interested in 
Mr. Dio and your taxicab personnel being brought into the teamsters? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes, sir. It was quite generally known that Mr. 
Hoffa was interested in promoting that, and in fact I think he used 
his influence on the committee. 

Mr. Kennedy^. Now, Mr. Chairman, this morning you were dis- 
cussing, Mr. Washburn, about what occurred regarding the lifting 
of the various charters in New York in 1954:, and we have some docu- 
ments regarding that that I would like to have made a part of the 
record, if we may, also Mr. Washburn's suspension or removal of 
Mr. Johnnv Dioguardi at that time as regional director in New York 
City. 

The CiTAiRMAN. The Chair hands you what appears to be a carbon 
copy of a letter dated April 22, 1954, from you as international pres- 
ident to John Dioguardi. 

Will you please examine that and state if it is a carbon copy of your 
letter to Mr. Dioguardi ? 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

I\Ir. Washburn. Yes. 

The Chairman. That letter may be published in the record at this 
point. 

( The letter referred to follows : ) 

April 22, 1954. 
Mr. John Dioguardi. 

.577 0th Avenue, New York, N. Y. 

Dear Sir: In accordance with the authority vested in me as international pres- 
ident, please be advised that effective immediately any membership you may 
hold or claim to hold in the International Union UAW-AFL, or any of its local 
unions, and any office, titles, oi- commissions you may claim to hold as a repre- 
sentative of the international union or any of its local unions are hereby termi- 
nated. This action has become necessary in light of the continued activities 
of yourself and some of your associates which has brought disrespect and dis- 
grace to the International T'nion. Ignited Automobile Workers of America, AFL, 
and to the labor movement generally. Misrepresentation and extortion have no 



UMPEOPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3713 

place in the framework of a legitimate labor organizatiou and will not be 
tolerated in the UAW-AFL. 

In view of the above, you are hereby requested to return to me immediately 
any books, documents, papers, funds, or evidence of ownership of any funds and 
other property that may be in your possession or under your control which is the 
property of the International Union UAW-AFL. 

In addition to the above, and effective immediately, the charters of UAW-AFL 
Local Unions 214, 224, 225, 227, 228, and 355 are hereby revoked. Inasmuch as 
these charters are now under the control of yourself and your associates, you 
are hereby requested to see that they are returned to me. together with all records 
and supplies that are the property of the International Union UAW-AFT^, at 
the earliest possible date. 
Yours truly, 

Lester Washburn, 
International President, 

The Chairman. I hand you then what appears to be 5 carbon copies 
of letters written by you to 5 different parties, whom I assume were the 
presidents of those 5 locals whose charters you lifted. Will you exam- 
ine these copies please, and state if you identify them ? 
Mr. Washburn. Yes. 

The Chairman. Those five copies may be printed in the record also. 
Those are the letters where you wrote lifting the charters of the five 
locals ? 

Mr. WASHBTiTiN. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. The other letter you identified was the one expel- 
ling Johnny Dioguardi? 
Mr. Washburn. Yes, sir. 
(The five documents above referred to follow :) 

April 22, 1954. 
Mr. Harry Davidoff, 

1780 Broadway, New York, N. Y. 
Dear Sir : Enclosed is a copy of a letter addressed to John Dioguardi which 
is self-explanatory. If you are still connected in any way with Local No. 228 
UAW-AFL, you are herewith requested to return to me immediately the charter, 
supplies, and any other documents with respect to the said Local No. 228 
UAW-AFL 

Yours truly, 

Lester Washburn, 
International President. 

April 22, 1954. 
Mr. Harold Krieger, 

591 Summit Avenue, Jersey/ City, N. J. 
Dear Sir : Enclosed is a copy of a letter addressed to John Dioguardi which 
is self-explanatory. If you are still connected in any way with Local No. 355, 
UAW-AFL, you are herewith requested to return to me immediately the charter, 
supplies, and anv other documents with respect to the said Local No. 355, 
UAW-AFL. 

Your truly, 

Lester Washburn, 
Interna lion al President. 



April 22, 1954. 
Mr. Joseph H. Reitman, 

2151 Ocean Avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
Dear Sir: Enclosed is a copy of a letter addressed to John Dioguardi which 
is self-explanatory. If you are still connected in any way with Local No. 214, 
UAW-AFL, you are hereby requested to return to me immediately the charter, 
supplies, and anv other documents with respect to the said local No. 214, 
UAW-AFL. 

Your truly, 

Lester Washburn, 
International President. 

803.30— 57— pt. 10 9 



3714 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

April 22, 1954. 
Mr. Stanley Seglin, 

IIH DeKalb Avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
Dear Sir : Enclosed is a copy of a letter addressed to John Dioguardi which 
is self-explanatory. If you are still connected in any way with Local 224, UAW- 
AFL, you are herewith requested to I'eturn to me immediately the charter, sup- 
plies, and any other documents with respect to the said Local 224, UAW-AFL. 
Yours truly, 

Lester Washburn, 
International President. 

April 22, 1954. 
Mr. Arthur Santa Maria, 

8218 Uth Avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
Dear Sir : Enclosed is a copy of a letter addressed to John Dioguardi which is 
self-explanatory. If you are still connected in any way with Local 227, UAW- 
AFL, you are herewith requested to return to me immediately the charter, sup- 
plies, and any other documents with respect to the said Local 227, UAW-AFL. 
Tours truly, 

Lester Washburn, 
International President. 

The Chairman. Did you receive an answer to your letter to Mr. 
Dioguardi ? 

Mr. Washburn. No, He was in jail at the time that I sent the 
letter. 

The Chairman. He was in jail? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes. 

The Chairman. I do not know whether this is written in jail or 
not, but I will ask you to examine this letter and see if you recall it. 
That is the one I now hand you. 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Washburn. I remember that now, and I didn't remember it 
before. 

The Chairman. Will you read that letter, please ? 

It mav be printed in the record at this point. State what it is. 

Mr. Washburn (reading) : 

Airmail 

Registered mail 
Return receipt requested 

April 24, 1954. 
Mr. Lester Washburn, 

President, United Automobile Workers of America, 

Milwaukee, Wis. 
Dear Sir and Brother : I have your letter as of April 22, 1954, setting forth 
my expulsion on the basis of the authority vested in you as international 
president. 

Please axcept (sic) this letter as my appeal from such action to the interna- 
tional executive board, I would like to be notified of the time and place of the 
meeting of the international executive board, so that I may be able to appear 
in order to present my own case before the international executive board, or file 
evidence with the international executive board. 
Fraternally yours, 

John Dioguardi 
By J. C. 
President, Local 649 UAW, American Federation of Labor. 

Mr. Washburn. It says "by J. C," and I don't know who that is by. 

The Chair^sean. Do you recall having received that letter? 

Mr. Washburn. I do recall. 

The Chairman. And the appeal was taken ? 

Mr. Washburn. An appeal was taken. 



IIVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3715 

The Chair]vian. Who constituted 



Mr. Washburn. After I resigned, however. 

The Chairman. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. Washburn. An appeal was taken, but it was after I resigned. 

The Chairman. Who constituted the executive board to whom he 
appealed ? Give their names. 

Mr. Washburn. You mean the names of the members ? 

The Chairman. The names of the members of the board to whom 
he appealed. 

Mr. Washburn. Well, myself, of course, as president of the interna- 
tional union ; Anthony Doria, as secretary-treasurer ; George Gresham, 
vice president ; Frank Evans, board member at large. 

Carl Smeagle, board member from region No. 3, which would be 
eastern Ohio. Morris Wientraub, regional director of region 4, which 
would be western Ohio and Kentucky. I. Lopogle, board member and 
director of region 6, which would be eastern Michigan. 

Edward Donohue, board member of, and regional director of west- 
ern Michigan, region No. 7. Earl Heaton, board member and di- 
rector of region 8, which would be Illinois and Indiana and Missouri. 

Carl Greipentrog, board member and director of region 9, which in- 
cluded Wisconsin and North and South Dakota and Chicago. 

The Chairman. That makes 10 members, a total of 10 members? 

Mr. Washburn. A total of 10 members, sir. 

The Chairman. Now, you had resigned ? 

Mr. Washburn. No. IVhen do you mean ? I beg your pardon. 

The Chairman. Before the appeal was taken, I thought you said. 

Mr. Washburn. Before the appeal was taken. However, there was 
a special board meeting called right after I took the action. 

The Chairman. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. Washburn. There was a special meeting of the international 
executive board right after I took the action. Johnny Dio was in 
jail, and his appeal could not be acted upon and I did not notice the 
date of that letter when I just looked at it. 

The Chairman. What I am trying to get is, were you president and 
did you participate in this board meeting? 

Mr. Washburn. On the appeal, no. 

The Chairman. You had resigned, I understood you to say, by the 
time the board considered the appeal or before it considered the ap- 
peal. 

Mr. Washburn. Before it considered the appeal ; yes, sir. 

Tlie Chairman. Well, there were two different board meetings, and 
you resigned at the conclusion of the first meeting, is that correct? 

Mr. Washburn. That is correct. 

The Chairman. Why? 

Mr. Washburn. Because the board voted to rescind my action. 

The Chairman. They voted to rescind your action ? 

Mr. Washburn. Regarding suspension of Dio, and the lifting of 
the charters in New York. 

The Chairman. They did that even before the appeal was taken ? 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

The Chairman. You were present then, when they voted to rescind 
your action? 

Mr. Washburn. I was present. 



3716 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. And to restore these unions and also restore Dio- 
guardi to his position ? 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 
The Chairman. What was the vote? 

Mr. Washburn. Well, the vote was 7 to 2, not counting mine. I 
did not vote. 

The Chairman. Seven to two? 
JNIr. Washburn. Yes. 

The Chairman. Do you remember who of these voted favorably 
on the motion to restore these unions and Dioguardi ? 
Mr, Washburn. Very well. 

The Chairman. Name the seven who voted accordingly. 
Mr. Washburn. The seven that voted against my action were An- 
thony Doria, secretary-treasurer; Gresham, vice president; Carl Smea- 
gle, I. Lopogle, Earl Heaton, and Carl Greipentrog. 
The Chairman. That makes six. 
Mr. Washburn. And Frank Evans. 

The Chairman. There were only two who supported you, Donahue 
and Wientraub. 
Mr. Washburn. Yes ; they supported my action. 
Senator McNamara. You indicate that at this first board meeting 
they rescinded your order suspending or expelling Dio. 
Mr. Washburn. Yes. 

Senator McNamara. What would be the occasion to have him make 
the appeal if they had already reinstated him in effect by reversing 
your suspension? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes, they did. They rescinded the action and they 
did hold in abeyance Dio's suspension. 

Senator McNamara. I am trying to understand. How do you ex- 
plain this ? 

Mr. Washburn. As far as I am concerned, by the action of the 
board and in such a meeting, it was quite a battle, and there were a 
lot of things said, and a lot of positions taken. By and large, they 
rescinded my entire action. 

Senator McNamara. Did that not in effect reinstate him ? 
Mr. Washburn. In effect, it did, but they went through the process 
for publicity purposes of voting a hearing in order to give Johnny Dio 
a clean bill of health. 

Senator McNamara. What year was this ? 
Mr. Washburn. This would be in 1954. 

Senator McNamara. Was this before he was convicted of extortion ? 
Mr. Washburn. Oh, this was after that. What do you mean ? You 
mean this recent conviction? His first conviction for extortion as I 
get it was back in 1934 or 1935 or somewhere along there. 

Senator McNamara. In 1934 or 1935 before he was a member? 
Mr. Washburn. Yes ; before I ever knew him. 
Senator McNamara. Before he had any connection with organized 
labor? 

Mr. Washburn. I don't know what connection he had. 
Senator McNamara. Or you know of any connection he had. 
Mr. Washburn. That I know of ; yes, sir. 

Senator McNamara. And then what pressure was he using to extort 
money then, do you know ? 
Mr. Washburn. No ; I don't. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3717 

Senator McNamara, Then he was a businessman at this time ? 

Mr. Washburn. For all I knew, he was a businessman. 

Senator McNamara. He was in the dress-manufacturing business? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes ; and florists' shops. 

Senator McNamara. It is hard to find out how this businessman 
was involved in the extortion. If the record shows that, I think we 
ought to have an explanation. But you do not have the facts? 

Mr, Washburn. He is quite a mixed-up character and I don't have 
the facts. 

Senator McNamara. Many characters are mixed up. Apparently 
his first connection with organized labor was when he was issued a 
charter by your union. 

Mr. Washburn. As far as I know ; yes, sir. 

Senator McNamara. And he got into the teamsters union because 
you were ordered to transfer this local miion that he represented into 
the teamsters ? 

Mr. Washburn. He didn't get into the teamsters at that time, sir. 
That deal fell through flat. 

Senator McNamara. How did he get into the teamsters ? 

Mr. Washburn. He got into the teamsters after I resigned, as I 
understand it, and these locals that were involved in the suspension 
or lifting of the charters that I made, were later manipulated as I 
read in the papers now, and I don't have any evidence on that. 

I understand, in accordance with the charts here, these locals that 
were involved in my suspension were later involved in this transfer 
of shops and members into the teamsters union, to manipulate the 
vote in the joint council of teamsters. 

Senator McNamara. If you will glance at the chart, there is an 
indication in the left-hand column, local 649 apparently was a sort 
of parent local of all of these others; is that the way you under- 
stand it ? 

Mr. Washburn. That is right. 

Senator McNamara. And the red line transferring members from 
649 to 651, did that include the transfer of Dio in that operation as 
you understand it ? 

Mr. Washburn. I wouldn't know that, sir. 

Senator McNamara. That was later than your time ? 

Mr. Washburn. I never knew, actually, except by newspaper arti- 
cles as to what happened in that situation. I do not know whether 
Dio actually became a member of the teamsters union or not and I 
couldn't say that. 

Senator McNamar.\. You do not know whether he is or not? 

Mr. Washburn. No ; I have no information on that. 

Senator McNamara. But this early conviction was before the time 
that you had issued him a charter ? 

Mr. Washburn. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy, Just finishing up, irajnediately after you lifted the 
charters, then you were overruled by your board, and then you told 
us this morning of the conversation or the speech that Mr. Hoffa made 
to the Michigan Federation of Labor ; is that right ? 

Mr, Washburn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was early 1954, or the middle of 1954, in which 
he made the speech about Johnny Dio's character, and that it all would 



3718 IMPROPER ACTIVmES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

be peaceful in New York now that Dio had his charters back ; is that 
right? 

Mr. Washburn. I can give you a newspaper clipping on that. That 
is the best I can give you on that. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is the sum and substance of what you testified ? 

Mr. Washburn. Yes ; and I get my direct information on that from 
Mr. Donohue, who was our regional director in the western Michigan 
area, and was in attendance at that convention. He had some ex- 
change of words with Mr. Hoffa at that time. 

The Chairman. Do you have the newspaper clipping with you? 

Mr. Washburn. I think that I do; yes, sir. 

The Chairman. It will be filed as an exhibit for reference. 

Mr. Washburn. It is not a newspaper clipping, and if I have it, 
it is a photostat of it. 

I am sorry, I don't have it. I can send it to you, though. 

The Chairman. You may send it to us. I don't know whether it 
has any value or not, but you may send it to us and we will examine it. 

We will proceed. 

Senator Kennedy. I was not here all morning or all of the time 
this morning, but I understand that the witness testified, or at least 
I was here for part of that, about Mr. Dio and about the connection 
between Mr. Dio and Mr. HoflPa. 

Now, I understand there was also some mention of Mr. Dubinsky. 
Was Mr. Dubinsky opposed to Mr. Dio, from your knowledge, during 
some of these years ? 

Mr. Washburn. Was he opposed to Mr. Dio? Yes, he was. He 
was moving heaven and earth for us to get him out of our union. 

Senator Kennedy. Thank you. 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions of this witness ? 

Senator Goldwater. Just to comment, Mr. Chairman, that I think 
the witness has been an excellent witness, and I hope that we have 
more like him. From what you have said, I think we can sum up 
that the situation we have been hearing has been caused by the Hoffa- 
dominated racket-labor clique which is responsible for Johnny Dio. 
Hoffa has been convicted twice as a labor racketeer, and Dio has been 
convicted and Dorfman, a member of the Capone mob, has been deter- 
mined to be an unfit person to be in labor, and Doria has been forced 
out of the UAW-AFL, and Sam Berger has resigned from the Inter- 
national Ladies' Garment Workers Union. 

All of which leads me to believe that more and more the need is 
appearing for legislation to correct this infiltration of racketeers into 
unions. When a man like Hoffa can exert his influence in a union 
to the extent that he can bring with him and keep with him men of 
this caliber, I think the union movement is in a dangerous situation. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions? 

The Chair wishes to thank you for your testimony. I have reason 
to believe that there are many instances where people know as much 
and possibly more than you, but they are not going to favor us with 
what they know and what would be helpful. 

I certainly personally commend you for withdrawing from a situa- 
tion where you would have had to be a party to condoning the action 
that was taken by your board. I think that you are to be commended 
very highly for doing so. You no doubt did it at some personal finan- 



IMPROPER ACTIVITrES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3719 

cial sacrifice. I am sure that you love unionism and you would like 
to see unionism advanced in this country, and the rights of the work- 
ers protected and the benefits secured for them to which they are 
entitled. 

But I applaud you for disapproving of the methods of using gang- 
sters and hoodlums and people like that to operate the unions or 
handle the funds of working people who pay dues for the purpose of 
having their rights protected. 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. Washburn. Thank you, sir. And if I might say, I certainly 
do believe in organized labor, and any time I can help any legitimate 
labor organization in the future I will do so. 

Thank you. 

The Chairman. Call the next witness. 

Mr. K[ennedy. Mr. Theodore Ray, of New York City. 

The Chairman. You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall 
give before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Ray. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF THEODORE RAY 

The Chairman. State your name and your place of residence and 
jour business or occupation. 

Mr. Ray. Theodore Ray, 218 Seventh Street, New York. Unem- 
ployed at the present. 

The Chairman. What is your past employment? 

Mr. Ray. I can't hear you. 

The Chairman. What is your past employment ? 

Mr. Ray. Businessman in the trucking business. 

The Chairman. Do you own trucks and operate trucks ? 

Mr. Ray. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Have you discussed with members of the staff your 
testimony, or you know or you are familiar with the inquiry that 
will likely be made of you ? 

Mr. Ray. I stand on my rights under the Constitution, of the fifth 
amendment. 

The Chairman. I do not think it would tend to incriminate you to 
talk to a member of this staff. If that is what you propose to do, to 
take the fifth amendment, we might just as well get down to business. 

Proceed to ask him questions, Mr. Counsel. 

Mr. Kennedy. "VYlien we first subpenaed Mr. Ray, and our investi- 
gator went up to hand him the subpena, IVIr. Chairman, he denied that 
he was Teddy Ray, and he said that he was Mike Ray. Is that not 
correct ? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the grounds of incriminating my- 
self. 

The Chairman. I did not understand you. 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the grounds that it will incriminate 
me. 

The Chairman. You might incriminate yourself? 

Mr. Ray. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right, proceed. 



3720 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Just a little bit of your background, Mr. Ray, As 
I understand it, you are also known as Samuel Arenson. Is that an- 
other name that you use? 

Mr. Eat. I decline to answer on the grounds of incrimination. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you are also known bv the nickname of 
"Skinny." 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the grounds of incrimination. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long have you had the name "Skinny," Mr. 

Kay? ' .... 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the grounds of incrimination. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ray at the present time is under 
indictment in connection with the acid blinding of Victor Riesel, and 
we do not intend to go into that at the present time. 

"Wlien the FBI was looking for him, they described him as "apt to 
be armed and extremely dangerous." We don't expect to pursue that, 
but Mr. Ray was on the original charter of local 102 when it was 
granted and he also had some business dealings with Mr. Dio since, 
and once in a dress company, and he was also one of the original offi- 
cers of Equitable Research Co., which was a management-labor con- 
sulting firm operating out of New York City. 

I would like to ask you, Mr. Ray, about how you happened to be an 
applicant on the original charter for local 102? 

Mr. Rx\Y. I decline to answer on the gTounds of incrimination. I 
don't want to incriminate myself. 

The Chairman. Don't you think that kind of incriminates you, the 
kind of answer that you are giving? You are so sure about wanting 
not to incriminate yourself. 

The Chair is reminded that he forgot to ask you whether you waive 
counsel. 

Do you ? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer. 

The Chairman. Very good. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell the committee a little of your back- 
ground before you applied for this charter for local 102 ? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer. The same grounds, it will incrimi- 
nate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us what your connection has been 
with Mr. Dio ? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he approach 5^011 about going on this charter? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer. 

The Chairman. I want to present to you here an exhibit of the 
testimony which is a photostatic copy of the original application for 
charter for local 102'. I see a name there, Theodore Ray. 

Will you look at it, please, sir. Is that your name? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the ground it would incriminate 
me. 

The Chairman. Is that your handwriting ? 

Mr. Ray. Again on the fifth amendment, I decline to answer on 
gi'ound of incrimination. 

The Chairman. Are you ashamed of it? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the grounds I stated. 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Counsel. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3721 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Ray, we understand, also, that you were in 
business with Mr. Dio in the Acme Dress Co.; is that correct? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the ground of incrimination. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. "Was that a nonunion shop that you and Mr. Dio 
were operating? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the grounds of incrimination. 

The Chairman. Do you honestly believe that if you answered 
these questions truthfully, that a truthful answer might tend to in- 
criminate you ? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the grounds of incrimination. 

The Chairman. The Chair orders and directs )"ou to answer the 
question. 

Mr. Ray. I stand on the fifth amendment, and I decline to answer 
on the ground of incrimination. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, after local 102 was set up, there 
was also established local 649, which as we described yesterday was 
the parent union of the operations in New York City by Mr. Johnny 
Dioguardi. We have an organization registration form which is filed 
with the Department of Labor, for local 649 of the UAW-AFL, and 
on there it shows Theodore Ray as vice president of that local. 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the ground it would incriminate 
me. 

The Chairman. You don't object to my answering, do you? The 
question was addressed to me. 

Mr. Counsel, this local 649 is what you termed yesterday the parent 
local of the paper locals; is that correct? 

Mr. Kennedy. It is the parent local. It is the first local after 102 
that was established, and it was established on March 22, 1952, Mr. 
Chairman, and it was the headquarters of Mr. Johnny Dioguardi and 
his operations in New York City when he was district director. 

From 649 Mr. Joseph Curcio, and Mr. Davidoff, and Sidney Hodes, 
and Abe Brier came down into the paper locals, the so-called teamster 
paper locals, Mr. Chairman. 

This is the document that is filed with the Labor Department re- 
garding the officers of that union. 

The Chairman. On this document which is official in the Labor 
Department, it is entitled, "Labor Organization Registration Form 
Under Public Law 101, 80th Congress." 

In reporting who were the officers of local 649, United Automobile 
Workers of America, AFL, it is reported in here that Johnny Dio- 
guardi is president and he was elected on March 25, 1952. Is that 
correct, and was he president of this organization ? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the ground of incrimination. 

The Chairman. Right under his name appears yours, as vice presi- 
dent, elected at the same time. Do you deny that? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the ground of incrimination. 

Senator Curtis. When were you born ? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the ground of incrimination. 

Senator Curtis. What schools, if any, did you attend ? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the ground of incrimination. 

Senator Curtis. Do you have any friends in the labor movement ? 

Mr. Rat. I decline to answer on the ground of incrimination. 



3722 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Curtis. Do you know Mr. Hoffa ? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the ground of incrimination. 

Senator Curtis. Have you ever seen Mr. Hoffa ? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the ground of incrimination. 

Senator Curtis. Have you ever discussed any business, labor busi- 
ness or otherwise with Mr. Hoffa ? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the ground of incrimination. 

Senator Curtis. Have you ever had any conversations with Mr. 
Hoffa that would not incriminate you ? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the grounds of incrimination. 

Senator Curtis. Have you ever been in any meetings with Mr. 
Hoffa, the facts concerning which would not incriminate you ? 

Senator Kennedy. I must raise some question about this. I do not 
know whether it is going to be deferred that this witness has a con- 
nection with Mr. Hoffa, but this witness is, from all I gather, a repre- 
hensible citizen. Because he has taken the fifth amendment as part 
of his policy, which is part of his constitutional right, I think that 
we should be careful about asking him questions on which he will 
take the fifth amendment, using people's names which may give an 
impression which may or may not be accurate. 

I know the Senator is within his rights, but I do think as a matter 
of committee policy, unless there has been clear evidence linking him 
to people, we should not, because a witness takes the fifth amendment, 
permit a conclusion to be drawn that there is necessarily a connection 
between the two people. 

The Chairman. Well, the Chair would say this : If anyone has an 
idea that possibly there is a connection, he has a right to ask the 
witness about it. In this instance, which I am about to ask, there 
appears to be an official connection where Johnny Dioguardi was 
president and Theodore Ray a vice president of local 649. 

I want to ask you if you know Mr. Dioguardi. 

Mr. Ray. Under my constitutional rights, I decline to answer on 
the ground of incrimination. 

The Chairman. Have you every worked for him ? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the ground of incrimination. 

The Chairman. Have you served as a bodyguard for him? 

Mr. Ray. I am standing on my rights, constitutional rights, not to 
answer on the ground of incrimination. 

The Chairman. Are you in his employ now ? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the ground of incrimination. 

The Chairman. Do you work for any labor organization? 

Mr. Ray. I am standing on my constitutional rights, and decline 
to answer. 

The Chairman. Do you have any official position with any labor 
organization now? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the ground of incrimination. 

The Chairman. Have you had any in the past ? 

Mr. Ray. I am standing on my constitutional rights and I decline 
to answer. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Chairman, before we finish with this wit- 
ness I just want to say, that inasmuch as Senator Ives has rightly 
pointed out on numerous occasions that the great majority of labor 



IMPROPER ACnVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3723 

leaders are not to be classified in the same breath with some of those 
that have appeared before us here, I think it is proper that I make 
a similar disclaimer about the dress business. 

I have been closely connected with this business most of my life, 
and I want to assure the American people that the likes of Johnny 
Dio and Ted Ray do not represent the dress business of New York 
nor of any other city in America. 

In fact I am rather ashamed that people like this would hide be- 
hind the skirts of America. 

The Chairman. All right. Is there anything further ? 

Mr. Kennedy. In addition to the information that we had of the 
connection originally of Mr. Ray with local 102, and Mr. Johnny Dio- 
guardi, and local 649 and Johnny Dioguardi, and the Acme Dress 
Co., we also had information that Mr. Ray was one of the first offi- 
cers for the Equitable Research Co., which is the labor-management 
firm, and I was wondering if you could tell us anything about how 
that was formed, Mr. Ray. 

Mr. Ray. I am standing on my constitutional rights, and decline 
to answer on the ground of incrimination. 

Mr. Kennedy. In that concern, you and Mr. Dioguardi were ad- 
vising employers as to their labor problems ; is that right ? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the grounds of incrimination. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you able to assure any employers that they 
would not have any difficulties with any labor unions ? 

Mr. Ray. I am standing on my constitutional rights. I decline to 
answer on the ground of incrimination. 

Mr. Kennedy, We understand, also, Mr. Chairman, that Mr. Ray 
drives a car and was the driver for Mr. Dioguardi. Is that correct? 

Mr. Ray. I decline to answer on the ground of incrimination. 

The Chairman. You may stand aside for the present. 

Senator Kennedy. I just want to ask Mr. Ray a question. 

As I understand it, you were indicted for having driven the car 
which was used at the time of the throwing of the acid in Mr. Riesel's 
eyes, but that because of the pressure put on the witnesses, the mat- 
ter was dismissed. 

Mr. Kennedy. It has not been dismissed. It has been postponed. 
They went to trial, and the witnesses that were to testify concerning 
the matter, and involving Mr. Ray and Mr. Dioguardi, refused to 
testify, as they had testified before the grand jury, and the case was 
postponed by the United States attorney in New "^ York City. Those 
witnesses were given sentences for contempt of court when they re- 
fused to testify, but the trial had to be postponed because of that. 

Senator Kennedy. He was indicted for driving the car ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, after the acid was thrown in Mr. Riesel's eyes. 

Senator Kennedy. Thank you. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further ? 

The witness will stand aside, and you will remain under subpena, 
and you will be dismissed at the pleasure of the committee. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Topazio. 

The Chairman. You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall 
give before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so held you God ? 

Mr. ToPAzio. I do. 



3724 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE L.\BOR FIELD 

TESTIMONY OP ANTHONY TOPAZIO, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS 
COUNSEL, JOHN N. ROMANO 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, please, sir. 

Mr. TopAzio. Anthony Topazio. 

The Chairman. ^"VHiere do you live ? 

Mr. ToPAzio. 33 Mardino Avenue, Yonkers, N. Y. 

The Chairman. What is your business or occupation ? 

Mr. TopAzio. Truckdriver. 

The Chairman. Mr. Topazio, have you discussed with members 
of the committee staff, the information that you may have to give 
to the committee. 

Mr. Romano. Mr. Chairman, at this time I would like to make a 
statement. 

The Chairman. Just one moment. If you will let me make the 
record, just one second. 

First of all, I will ask you this : It appears that you have an attorney 
present. You have counsel to represent you, have you ? 

Mr. ToPAzio. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Now you may identify yourself for the record. 

Mr. Romano. John N, Romano, 45 South Broadway, Yonkers, N. Y. 

The Chairman. You are a member of the New York bar? 

Mr. Romano. Yes ; a member of the New York State bar. 

A meeting was held approximately, I believe it is 2 weeks ago, with 
Mr. Dunne, from your committee. 

The Chairman. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr, Romano. A meeting was held between Mr. Topazio and a Mr. 
Dunne in which I represented Mr. Topazio, at Foley Square, New 
York City. 

At that time, I asked Mr. Dunne certain questions as to procedure. 
He handed me a booklet here, which I read very thoroughly. 

The Chairman. You have a copy of the rules of the committee? 

Mr. Romano. That is correct. Now, I wonder if I may ask one 
question at this time. I realize it is unusual and it is the first time 
I have ever been to Washington and I feel that I would like to ask a 
question. 

The Chairman. You may ask a question. 

Mr. Romano. On the procedure, you are to put questions to my 
client and may I at this time object directly to the Chair or must I 
first have my client speak through me to the Chair as to objections ? 

The Chairman. The procedure is that your client at any time a 
question is asked, may confer with you as to whether he should answer 
the question, as to whether you think the question is pertinent or not, 
and whether he should answer it. 

If you have any doubt about it, then you may address the Chair 
or you may give him such advice as you think proper, representing 
him. 

But you are at liberty to address the Chair at any time that you 
feel that you wish to interpose objections to questions and the Chair 
will promptly rule on it. 

Mr. Romano. The first request and the first application I make 
to the chairman here is in accordance with paragraph 8, Rules of 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES INT THE LABOR FIELD 3725 

Procedure, as to cameras and TV. If possible, I would appreciate 
that they be turned away from my client. 

The Chairman. I can answer that very promptly. We usually 
grant it where a witness is willing to testify and does testify. If it 
is his purpose to take the fifth amendment, then it will not be granted. 
Lights cannot bother anyone very much if all they intend to say is, 
"I take the fifth amendment." In that case, I do not think there is 
much of a distraction to them. 

Mr. Romano. I take exception to it and I feel it is a violation of the 
constitutional rights, article I, and article IV. 

The Chairman. You n^iy take exception. 

Mr. Romano. Strike that out. It is the first amendment and the 
fourth amendment. 

This is the second request I make of the chairman : At the termina- 
tion of this hearing and examination of my client, assuming that my 
client were to invoke the fifth amendment, will the Chair recite a 
basic rule of law that the invocation of this privilege is not to be 
construed in any manner against him ? 

The Chairman. The Chair will let the public draw any inference 
it cares to from any statement that your client may make from his 
invoking of the fifth amendment. 

He is not on trial and we are here to get information. He is 
not charged with any crime so far as this committee is concerned, and 
I do not know whether he is anywhere else. 

But as to any inference, any statement I would make would not 
contribute one thing either way. He is not charged with guilt or a 
crime at this time, not by this committee at least, and we simply are 
seeking information. 

If he takes the fifth amendment, anything I would say could not 
influence what someone else might think. 

Mr. RoarANo. But, sir, I will say in seeking the information, my 
client has certain constitutional rights which I believe you as chairman 
must recognize. Now, keeping that in mind, I certainly feel that to 
inform the American public of that privilege and that no aspersions 
in any manner, shape, or form 

The Chairman. The Chair declines to grant the request. I am not 
going to tell the American public that the}^ cannot draw such infer- 
ences as they may and will from his demeanor on the stand, and from 
whatever he ma}^ say or refuse to say. 

I will submit it to the committee and I should have done that, I 
assume. 

Senator Curtis. That is a correct statement. 

The Chairman. The committee sustains the Chair. 

All right, Mr. Kennedy, proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, as I stated before, the union that was 
the parent union of the operations of JVIr. Dioguardi in New York City 
was local 649. We have information that Mr. Topazio was secretary- 
treasurer of local 649 and had a close personal relationship with Mr. 
Johnny Dioguardi. 

I would like to ask him first about his histoiy in the labor-union 
movement and when you first joined a labor union. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 



3726 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. ToPAzio. I respectfully refrain from answering the question in 
accordance with the rights established, guaranteed me under the fifth 
amendment of the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am wondering, specifically, how you came to be 
secretary-treasurer of local 649, Mr. Topazio. 

Mr. Topazio. Again I respectfully refrain from answering the ques- 
tion in accordance with the rights established and guaranteed me under 
the fifth amendment of the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Johnny Dioguardi suggest you for that 
position ? 

Mr. Topazio. I respectfully refrain from answering the question in 
accordance with the rights established and guaranteed me under the 
fifth amendment of the Bill of Rights. 

Mr, Kennedy. Now, Mr. Chairman, our information is that while 
secretary-treasurer of local 649, Mr. Topazio and a Mr. Cohen were 
placed as trustees over another local of the UAW, namely, local 136. 
It was then headed by a man by the name of Lou Lasky. They were 
given that position as trustees by Mr. Johnny Dioguardi; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Topazio. Again I respectfully refrain from answering the 
question in accordance with the rights established and guaranteed me 
under the fifth amendment of the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Kennedy. What we understand is that Mr. Lasky opposed the 
trusteeship of Mr. Dioguardi, which he sought to impose upon him, 
with Mr. Topazio and Mr. Cohen and he was assisted in this by the 
fact that just prior to the time that Mr. Cohen and Mr. Topazio came 
in to take over their positions, they were picked up on extortion; is 
that right? 

Mr. Topazio. I respectfully refrain from answering the question 
in accordance with the rights established and guaranteed me under 
the fifth amendment of the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that you and Mr. Cohen as officials in 649, 
sought to extort $10,000 from the LTniversal Bulb Corp; is that right? 

Mr. Romano. Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, before my client replies 
to that, I think that it is a matter of public record that my client had 
pleaded guilty to a charge of attempted extortion in the city of New 
York and he has paid his price. 

I don't think going into that, and I humbly submit this for your 
examination, would assist this committee in any way. 

The Chairman. Let me see just a moment. I think it is already 
a part of the record. 

Mr. Kennedy. He is the one over here. He is the top of the list 
in July 1952. 

The Chairman. Well, it is a matter of record and I assume that 
would not incriminate him to answer it. 

I will ask the question. Are you the same person who was convicted 
for extortion in July of 1952? 

Mr. Romano. We have already conceded that, and it is a matter 
of public record. 

The Chairman. That is conceded. Proceed. 

Mr. Romano. At this time, I notice again, for your information, 
and here I am only concerned, or my main concern is my client's rights, 
and I notice there is a chart on which his name is placed first on. 

At this time, I object to that chart. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3727 

The Chairman. The objection is overruled, and the chart is al- 
ready admitted in evidence. 

Proceed. 

Mr. Ej:nnedy. Mr. Chairman, the importance of Mr. Topazio once 
again, is that he was one of the first officers and officials of the labor 
union movement that was started by Johnny Dioguardi, in New York 

City. 

Immediately, within a short time after becoming an official in the 
union, he and Mr. Cohen were picked up on extortion. It is clear 
from the record how close they were to Johnny Dioguardi by the 
fact that Johnny Dioguardi attempted to make them trustees over 
another local, Local 136 of the UAW. 

The Chairman. Let me ask if that followed their conviction for 
extortion ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat happened, Mr. Chairman, is that Mr. Dio- 
guardi appointed Mr. Topazio and Mr. Cohen as trustees of local 136. 
This was opposed by Lasky of 136 and prior to the time that it could 
be decided, Mr. Topazio and Mr. Cohen were picked up on extortion. 

Now, I have just the facts here and I think, once again, the facts 
in this case indicate the type of operation that can exist if people of 
the wrong type gain control of some of these locals. 

I would like to point out that even after this, Mr. Dioguardi's em- 
pire or group of unions expanded in NeAv York City and then, of 
course, he had the important position, and his people had the impor- 
tant position in the teamster fight at the end of 1955 and early 1956. 

The Chairman. Ask the witness any questions you wish. 

Mr. Kennedy. It states from the indictment that the facts in this 
case establish 

Mr. Romano. Excuse me at this point. Counsel, we have gone over 
this, and I have already said before that we have conceded tliat, and 
for what purpose at this time, sir, may I say, can this question serve 
any purpose? 

The Chairman. We will ask the questions so that the public may 
know some of the information we are seeking. 

We have before us witnesses who have that information. Now, if 
they want to take the fifth amendment, that is their privilege. But 
we think that the laboring people of this country, who are paying 
their dues for the purpose of or in the hope that they will be bene- 
fited by the labor organization to which they belong, are entitled to 
have information about how their union is operated. 

We feel that the Congress is entitled to have information as to 
how unions are operated today, particularly some of them, so that if 
they are not operated properly and lawfully or operated by gangsters 
and thugs, the Congress might have information upon which to pass 
legislation. 

Mr. Romano. Mr. Chairman, I myself, and my client are in com- 
plete agreement with that statement. My client has paid liis price, 
and he has left New York City, and he has not returned. 

Now, I feel to labor on a question of whether or not this man has 
been guilty of a particular crime which is conceded, and he serves 
time, I feel personally will only injure whatever life he has left after 
these hearings. 

The Chairman. Well, let me ask him a question or two. Are you 
now a member of any labor organization ? 



3728 IMPROPER ACTTVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. KoMANO. Will you restate that, please? 

The Chairman. I ask your client, the witness, if he is now a mem- 
ber of any labor organization. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. ToPAZio. I respectfully refrain from answering the question 
in accordance with the rights established and guaranteed me mider 
the fifth amendment of the Bill of Eights. 

The Chairman. Are you now employed by an}^ labor organization? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. ToPAzio. I respectfully refrain from answering the question 
in accordance with the rights established and guaranteed me under 
the fifth amendment of the Bill of Rights. 

The Chairman. Are you now or have you been since your convic- 
tion an officer in any labor organization ? 

Mr. Romano. Mr. Chairman, again I have a question to ask. I am 
concerned here with a waiver, and that is one of tlie principal reasons 
that this particular amendment is being invoked here now. Some of 
the questions are probably extraneous to the hearing here, but we 
must — and it is my opinion we must — invoke this. 

The Chairman. You mean pertinent to the hearing here? 

jMr. Romano. That is correct, sir. Well, some are pertinent and 
some are not, sir. But we must invoke it not to be considered or not 
to have my client waive his privilege. That is the only reason. I 
want to point that out to you, sir. 

The Chairman. I understand your position entirely. The only 
purpose in now asking the question is we think the laboring people, 
again, those who work and who pay their dues, are entitled to know 
the character of the people and some of the operations of the heads 
of the unions or those employed by the unions. For that reason, I am 
asking these questions. 

Mr. Romano. Sir, you are entitled to an answer, and I put this to 
your counsel, Mr. Duiine. I indicated to him if the committee, since 
the statute does not provide for any immunity, keeping that in mind 
there is a possibility here of also being prosecuted 

(At this point, Senator McNamara withdrew from the hearing 
room.) 

The Chairman. "\^niat I am asking now is, Does he now have any 
position witli the union or has he had since the time of his indictment? 
If so, I want to know who is res]:)onsible for his having that position. 

(Tlie witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. TopvzTo. T respectfully refrain from answering the question 
in accordance with the rights established and guaranteed me under 
the fifth amendment of the Bill of Rights. 

The Citair:\lan. Any other questions ? 

Mr. I\JENNEDY. Our information is that he is very active in the 
labor movement at the present time, that he is connected with local 
500, an independent teamster local in Westchester County. 

Is that correct, j\Ir. Topazio? 

Mr. Topazio. I respectfully refrain from ansAvei-ing the question 
in accoi'dance with the rights established and guaranteed me under 
the fifth amendment of the Bill of Rights. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3729 

Mr. Kennedy. This is local 500, an independent teamster local, a 
rnmp group from local 445 of the teamsters union. They have had 
disputes in Westchester County 

Mr. Romano. jNIr. C'hairman, I am going to object to the term 
"rump." I happen to rei^resent some of the 

The Chairman. I do not know just what the term means. Wlien 
we split oft' down in Arkansas from the Democratic Central Com- 
mittee, when it nominates somebody and we think they are exceeding 
their authority', we have what we call a rump convention. I do not 
know what it means, but we raise the roof, anyhow. 

Mr. Komano. This group of 500 are just men who were thoroughly 
disgusted Avith the men who were running 445. 

The (/iiAiRMAN. AVe will use any other term that you wish to use 
to describe it. 

Mr. Romano. I call them blood-and-guts Americans. They know 
what tliey want, these men. 

The Chairman. Let us talk about these blood-and-guts Americans, 
then, a little, 1 believe they will answer questions. 

Mr. Ro^kfANO. Tlie ]:)resident of it, Mr. Cavanaugh, just resigned, and 
I understand he did under pressure from the joint council. 

The Chairman. You are talking about 445 ? 

Mr. Romano. Local 500, sir, independent teamsters. In fact, the 
tires to my car have been slashed on two separate occasions because 
1 had, let us say, the temerity to represent people who don't want to 
be affiliated with an international. I pointed that out to Mr. Dunne. 
We went through this down in Foley Square. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Stickels and Mr. Masielo are not connected with 
500, are they ? 

Mr. Romano. Sir, every man who is connected w'ith 500 has no kind 
of record at all, I can honestly say the thing has been blown to bits 
because of the duress used by the members of 445, the officials right 
now. 

Mr. Kenni:dy. Can 1 get an answer to the question of whether 
Mr. Stickels or Mr. Masielo are in any way connected with local 500? 

Mr. Romano. Is that directed to me, sir? 

Mr. Kennedy. I would like to get the answer to the question. Will 
he tell me? He is under oath. 

Mr. RojMANo. You can appreciate my position on the waiver, sir. 
I can tell you, but it would be violating a principle which is essential 
to this country, tlie privilege between client and lawyer. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman 

The Chairman. Ask the client. I mean, ask the witness and then 
we will jjroceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Are Mr. Stickels and Mr. Masielo connected in any 
way Avith local 500 ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. ToPAzio. I respectfully refrain from answering the question in 
accordance with the rights established and guaranteed me under the 
fifth amendment of the Bill of Rights.^ 

Senator Ives. May I butt in here just a minute, Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman. Senator Ives. 

Senator Ives. I cannot help thinking that your reluctance to be 
honest about this and give us the lowdown puts the whole thing in 

89330— 57— pt. 10 10 



3730 IMPROPER ACTIVrriES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

great doubt. I come from New York State myself, as you probably 
know. I know something about Westchester. Why can you not be 
frank, if you are on the level? 

Mr. Romano. May I answer you, Senator ? 

Senator Ives. No ; I am asking your client. 

Mr. Romano. I am representing him, sir. 

Senator I\tes. I do not care who you are representing. Can't he 
talk ? He is a New Yorker and so am I, It is liigh time he learned 
to talk a little bit for himself. 

I mean business. 

I do not want your testimony ; I want your client's testimony. 

The Chairman. The witness may answer the question. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Topazio. If in talking to you, Senator, I waive my rights, I 
can't answer. 

Senator Ives. Well, I thank you. Go ahead. 

Mr. ToPAzio. Am I waiving my rights. Senator? 

Senator Ives. You cannot talk to me ? 

Mr. Topazio. Yes, if I waive my rights. 

The Chairman, "Wliat the witness is saying, as I understand him, 
is if he answers your question he waives his rights then to invoke the 
fifth amendment. 

Is that correct ? 

Mr. Romano. That is correct, sir. 

Senator Ives. I cannot for the life of me understand, as one New 
Yorker to another, why he cannot be on the level. 

Mr. Romano. Sir, if I may. Senator, I turned to the authorities in 
giving my client advice, and I have turned to the law and the Consti- 
tution, the common law. I honestly feel we should give it some respect 
here. 

Senator Ives. Can you not give honesty a little respect here, too? 

Mr. Romano. We are attempting to give honesty respect. 

Senator Ives. You are ducking all around the yard, as far as I 
can see. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I might say Mr. Stickels and Mr. 
Masielo were the officials of local 445; and they were indicted and 
convicted for extortion, I believe, of somewhere around $50,000. 
They served their time in prison and, as I understand it, they are out 
now. 

That is why there are two groups in New York, in Westchester 
County: local 500 that is independent, and local 445 which is part 
of the teamsters, and which officers took over after Stickels and 
Masielo left. 

That is why I would be interested in finding out whether Stickels 
and Masielo are noAV connected with your independent local 500. 

(^'he witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Topazio. I respectfully refrain from answering the question in 
accordance with the rights established and guaranteed me under the 
fifth amendment of the Bill of Rights. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Are there any otlier questions? 

I would like to ask, before the witness is excused, if we have any 
information, or any documentation or information, that this witness, 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3731 

since his conviction for extortion, has been employed by, is a member 
of, or an official in, any labor organization. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, our information is that he is an active 
participant in local 500 of the teamsters union, which is not a rump 
group but is independent. 

Mr. Romano. Mr. Chairman, I want to call your attention to this 
fact. The president of 500, independent, I believe, has transmitted his 
resignation to the National Labor Relations Board, and I understand 
that as a result of the economic pressure and other pressures put on by 
the teamsters, and I understand further that they sent officials out in 
the field, local 500 is no more in existence. It was just one of those 
things. They just couldn't stand up to it. 
The Chairman. All right. 
Senator Goldwater? 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Topazio, you were convicted of extortion 
back in 1952. Were you given any term in connection with that ? 
Let him answer, please. 
(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 
The Chairman. Did you understand the question ? 
Mr. Romano. I don't believe I understood it, sir. He doesn't un- 
derstand it. 

Senator Goldwater. I will try to repeat it, Mr. Topazio. You were 
convicted of extortion back in 1952. Was there any term connected 
with that? Did you serve a term in jail? 
(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 
Mr. Topazio. Yes, sir. I did serve time. 

Senator Goldwater. You did serve your time. Then you served 
the sentence for that particular crime. 

Are you under indictment for anything else at the present time? 
(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 
Mr. Topazio. No. 

Senator Goldwater. You are not under indictment. You are in no 
trouble, are you, with the law? 
Mr. Topazio. No, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Why are you taking the fifth amendment ? 
Mr. Romano. Sir — 

Senator Goldwater. Wait a moment. I am not talking to you. 
"VVliy are you taking the fifth amendment ? 
I will talk to you sometime else 

Mr. Topazio. On advice of counsel, sir 

Senator Goldwater. That is a very strange situation. Usually 
when a person takes the fifth amendment, we feel that he certainly 
has the right to because he is under indictment or what he might tell 
us would tend to incriminate him. But here is an American citizen 
who, in the eyes of the law, and in the eyes of some citizens, at least, 
has nothing against him, and yet — just a moment — and yet he comes 
down here and takes the fifth amendment. It is a rather unusual 
procedure. 

I will get to you. 

If you want to talk, I will ask you why you give the client this 
kind of advice. 

Mr. Romano. Sir, you might say he is under investigation. As I 
understand it, some officials from the Government have been to see 
him. 



3732 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES m THE LABOR FIELD 

Is that correct ? 

Mr. ToPAzio. Yes. 

Mr. Romano. That is the reason wliy. There is no indictment 
but there is still the possibility that somethinor might come out of these 
other investigations. 

Senator Goi.dwater. There is that possibility, I guess, hanging 
over any American citizen. 

Mr. R():\rAX(). I will oiily ask this question: How many times does 
an official of the United States Government knock on anybody's door'^ 
Only when there is suspicion of a crime being committed or the pos- 
sibility of a crime. 

Senator GoLmvATKR. If you keej) up with my speeches, you will find 
it is becoming increasingly so. 

In this case, it seems unusual to me, Mr. Chairman, to have the fifth 
amendment taken, particulai'ly when he is not incriminating himself. 
We are only seeking infoiniation which will help us in creating legisla- 
tioFi. facts we liave to have. I cannot understand his unwillingness 
to cooperate. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? 

Senator Curtis ? 

Senator Curtis. I would like to ask the witness this question ; Wlien 
was the last that yon were connected with local 649, UAW-AFL, or 
its successor in name? 

Mr. Topazio. I respectfully refrain from answering the question 
in accordance with the rights established and guaranteed me under the 
fifth amendment of the Bill of Rights, sir. 

Senator Curtis. I wonder if the staff could furnish this information. 

Wlien Avas the witness last connected with local 649, UAW-AFL, 
or its successor by a different name ? 

Mr. Kennedy. I think we would have to ask him for that infor- 
mation. 

Senator Curtis. He declines to answer. 

Mr. Kennedy. I believe when he was convicted, we know officially 
he ended his connection. However, like Johnnj- Dio was supposed to 
end his connection with the UAW in 1954, he continued in 1955. So 
I think he would be the best source of information. 

Senator Curits. I know he is the best source. 

Mr. Kennedy. We wouldn't know, except officially it endexl when 
he went to iail. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

Senator Goi.dwater. Mr. Topazio. trying to reason why you are 
raking the fifth amendment, are you afraid of Johnny Dio? 

Mr. Topazio. No, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Has he threatened you ? 

Mr. Topazio. No, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Has anybody else threatened you in connec- 
tion with the testimony that you might give here ? 

Mr. Topazio. No, sir. 

Senator GoLDW^VTER. Are you afraid of yourself? 

Mr. Roiviano. Sir, as I said before to the committee, he has rights 
under the Constitution. The same document that produced the Con- 
gress and the Senate also produced human rights. That is all the 
man is doing. He is taking advantage of one of the basic rights. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3733 

Senator Goi.dwater. I have my rights, too, I might remind you, 
and I am just trying to find out why lie is taking that right. I am 
not going to find out. I am not tliat optimistic. 

The Chairman. Are tliere any other questions ? 

Some members of the committee have raised a question about your 
being in contempt. I am going to weigh that. I will not make any 
annoancement about it at the present. 

You may stand aside for the present. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman. Senator Ives. 

Senator Ives. Before you do that, I would like to put into the 
record an article that appeared in this morning's press entitled "Pres- 
sures Cited in the Hotfa Trial." I think it ought to be placed in our 
record. 

I would like to ask counsel to comment on any information we may 
have on the subject. He may have seen the article. 

The Chapman. The Chair would feel that this may be made an 
exhibit for reference. I do not think we will print it in this record. 
It is not pertinent in tliis particidar hearing. 

Senator Ives. Tliat is all right. 

The Chairman. If it is agreeable, I will make this article that 
appeared in the Washington Post of Thursday, August 1, 1957, en- 
titled "Pressures Cited in IIofFa Trial,*' an exhibit for reference to 
this hearing. 

I may say that this exhibit refers to expenses of Joe Louis having 
been paid, his expenses liaving been paid by Mr. Iloffa to get him to 
come down here and sliake hands with him, and call him his friend, 
while Hoffa was on trial. 

The committee has more information than that. 

In the course of developments, and the staff may wisli to comment, 
Mr. Hoffa did not pay his liotel bill. It was paid by union members, 
out of their dues, apparently, by a union and not by Mr. Hoffa per- 
sonally. So to that extent, the article would be ])ossibly misleading. 

Is there any comment you wish to make, INIr. Counsel, on the basis 
of information you have? 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, several days ago we subpenaed the 
hotel record of Mr. Joe Louis. He stayed at the Woodner Hotel. 
The arrangements were originally made for him by Mr. Baker. Mr. 
Baker is an organizer who operates out of St. Louis, who works for 
Mr. Hoffa and for Mr. Harold Gibbons. He has been arrested a 
number of times. He is an ex-fighter and has been arrested a num- 
ber of times in connection with the throwing of stench bombs. He 
made the reservation for Mr. Louis and also for certain of the other 
teamsters' officials that came and stayed during the trial. 

The bill for Mr. Louis while he stayed at the Woodner Hotel — he 
stayed for 1 night — this bill was sent to Mr. Donald Peters, the Ware- 
housemen's Union, Local 743, of the Teamsters, 220 South Ashland, 
Chicago, HI. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further with this witness? 

You are pursuing that matter further; are you? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes; we are. 

Mr. Romano. I want to thank the chairman for the opportunity 
to appear before you. Is it all right if I go back to Yonkers this 
evening, sir? 



3734 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. We will let you know after a little while. The 
Chair will determine whether we have any further need for your 
client. 

Mr. Romano. Thank you. 

The Chairman. I am sure everyone understood what I meant by 
investigating or looking into these expenditures with reference to 
the Hoffa trial. It occurs to me, and I think other members of the 
committee will agree with the Chair, that that would not be a proper 
expenditure for the dues-paying members to have to make. I do not 
know how much other expense of the trial was being paid out of 
union funds. 

It would be a matter of some interest to this committee to find out, 
I think. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Abe Goldberg. 

(Members present at this point: Senators McClellan, Ives, Gold- 
water, and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. Mr. Goldberg, will you be sworn, please, sir? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF ABEAEAM GOLDBERG 

The Chapman. Will you state your name, your place of residence, 
and your business or occupation, please, sir? 

Mr. Goldberg. Abraham Goldberg, 1357 Fanshawe Street, Phil- 
adelphia, Pa. I am employed in a kosher catering service in the city 
of Philadelphia. 

The Chairman. Mr. Goldberg, have you discussed your testimony 
with members of the staff? 

Mr. Goldberg. I did and I didn't. 

The Chairman. You did and you did not? Did you discuss it 
enough so that you have some general idea of the questions that may 
be asked you? 

Mr. Goldberg. Definitely not. 

The Chairman. I beg your pardon? 

Mr. Goldberg. No, sir. 

The Chairman. You have a right to have counsel. Have you 
arranged for counsel to be present while you testify ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I have no counsel and I don't intend to have any. 

The Chairman. Then you wai\^e counsel. 

Mr. Kennedy, you may proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just to clear up the record, we requested permission 
to talk to you ; isn't that right, Mr. Goldberg? 

Mr. Goldberg. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you declined ? 

ISIr. Goldberg. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Goldberg, you knew Mr. Johnny Dioguardi ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Yes, sir ; I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Your name, or a Mr. Abraham Goldberg's name, 
appears on the first charter of local 102. Are you one and the same 
Mr. Abraham Goldberg as the name that appears on here? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3735 

Mr. Goldberg. That I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you stipulate that your name could be used on 
the application for the charter for local 102 ? 

Mr. Goldberg. No ; I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know that your name had been used ? 

Mr. Goldberg. No ; I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know Mr. Johnny Dioguardi in September 
1950? 

Mr. Goldberg. No, sir ; I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know Mr. Sam Zakman ? 

Mr. Goldberg. At that time I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know Mr. Sam Berger ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Yes, sir ; I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know Mr. Anthony Doria at that time ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I knew of him through the labor movement ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know him personally at that time? 

Mr. Goldberg. Personally, I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any information that Mr. Berger was 
going to use your name on the application for the charter for local 
102 f 

Mr. Goldberg. I don't know whether he used my name or not. I 
don't know whether that was me or not. 

Mr. Kennedy. I understand that. But did you have any informa- 
tion, did he let you know or did anyone else tell you, that your name 
was going to be used on the application for the charter for local 102 ? 

Mr. Goldberg. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Prior to this, prior to September 1950, you had been 
living in Philadelphia, Pa. ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you been associated with any labor unions prior 
to September 1950? 

Mr. Goldberg. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What labor union ? 

Mr. Goldberg. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 929. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you an official in that union ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Yes, sir ; I was. 

Mr. Kennedy, What position did you hold ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I was secretary-treasurer and business manager. 

Mr. Kennedy. During what period of time ? 

Mr. Goldberg. From 1941 up until 1948. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you left in 1948 ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you resign in 1948 ? 

Mr. Goldberg. No, sir ; I did not. I resigned in 1949. 

Mr. Kennedy. You resigned in 1949? 

Mr. Goldberg. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. What month in 1949 ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I believe it was March 10, 1949. 

Mr. Kennedy. What brought about _your_ resignation? 

Mr. Goldberg. It was a voluntary resignation, based on the fact that 
it was the outcrop of an indictment under the Hobbs Act for which 
I was convicted. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is the Hobbs Antiracketeering Act? 

Mr. Goldberg. Yes, sir. 



3736 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Was the indictment that you had conspired with — 
you, as a union official had conspired — with some individuals from 
an employer association to keep independent fruit shippers out of 
the city of Philadelphia ? 

Mr. Goldberg. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. AVliat was the indictment ? 

Mr. Goldberg. The indictment was based on a conspiracy that we 
conspired to fix and set selling hours in the Dock Street area in 
Philadelphia. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was it also in connection with the fact that you 
kept certain independent trucks and certain independent fruit ship- 
pers from moving their trucks in and out, and, thus, having that fruit 
perish ? 

Mr. Goldberg. That is not true. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was not mentioned at all ? 

Mr. Goldberg. In the original indictment, it may have been men- 
tioned, but I said it is not true. 

Mr. Kennedy. That never happened ? 

Mr. Goldberg. That never happened. 

Mr. Kennedy. But the original indictment contained that charge; 
did it? 

Mr. Goldberg. The original indictment contained the complete 
charge under the Hobbs Act. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were convicted during what period ? 1949 ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I would say it was 

Mr. Kennedy. I think the record shows March 11, 1949. Is that 
correct. 

Mr. Goldberg. If the record shows it, that is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you were sentenced to 3 months imprisonment, 
is that right, which was suspended ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Not to my recollection ; no, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that right? 

Mr. Goldberg. No, sir. To my recollection, it is not right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were sentenced to 3 months imprisonment and 
fined $2,500, and the imprisonment was suspended and you were placed 
on probation for 2 years. That probation was actually lifted October 
20, 1950. Those are the facts that we have. See if you can correct 
them. 

Mr. Goldberg. Well, I won't dispute the facts. 

Mr. Kennedy. I thought you said that is not the way you remem- 
ber it. 

Mr. Goldberg. That is right. That is not the way I remember it. 

Mr. Kennedy. How do you remember it ? 

Mr. Goldberg. As I understand it, the sentence of the court was 
that I could not hold office in my own local union for a period of 2 
years, and for that period of 2 years I was to be under probation. 

The Chairman. Was the fine paid ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. The fine was paid. 

This record that we have here shows that you were placed under 
2 years of probation, and the fine was to be paid within 15 days of 
the sentence. A condition of the probation was that you resign as 
secretary-treasurer of local 929, and refrain from holding any office 
in the union for 2 years from the date of the sentence. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 3737 

That is what you said you remember? 

Mr. Goldberg. That is correct, sir. 

(At this point, Senator Gold water withdrew from the hearing 
room.) 

The Chairman. The probation was on that condition. 

Mr. Goldberg. That is right, sir. 

The Chairman. Therefore, you did not have to serve your jail 
sentence if you carried out the condition of the probation. 

Mr. Goldberg. Well, I don't want to go into technicality, but there 
was never any mention of any jail sentence. 

The Chairman. You never heard that mentioned? 

Mr. Goldberg. No, sir. 

The Chairman. The sentence, according to the official records, of 
which we have a copy, starts off "Imprisonment for 3 months with a 
fine of $2,500." 

Mr. Goldberg. Well, I won't dispute the facts. 

The Chairman. It is not important other than you said you did 
not think this was correct. I am just reading from the record. 

All right, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were not supposed to be in the labor-union 
movement for a period of 2 years : is that true ? Is that the probation ? 

Mr. Goldberg. No ; that is not true. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just to hold office ? 

Mr. Goldberg. In my own local union. 

Mr. Kennedy. In your own local union? 

Mr. Goldberg. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequent] v, did vou meet Mr. Johnny Dioguardi 
in the year 1950? 

Mr. Goldberg. I would say subsequently I met him, but whether it 
was 1950 or not, I just can't remember. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you join local 102, UAW? 

Mr. Goldberg. I was never a member of local 102. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you do any Avork for local 102 ? 

Mr. Goldberg. If you are speaking about Local 102 Taxicab Drivers 
Union ; yes, sir, I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Of the UAW-AFL? 

Mr. Goldberg. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did do some work for them ? 

Mr. Goldberg. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did some work for them in connection with the 
taxicab drive? 

Mr. Goldberg. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was up in New York City ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who suggested that you come to New York City and 
work for local 102? 

Mr. Goldberg. I applied for that position on my own. 

Mr. Kennedy. Through whom did you apply? 

Mr. Goldberg. I applied to Mr. Anthony Doria, general secretary- 
treasurer of the United Automobile Workers. 

Mr. Kennedy. From whom did you hear that this position was 
open and available? 

Mr. Goldberg. It was general knowledge. I didn't have to hear it 
from anyone, in particular, other than it was generally known that 



3738 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

they were organizing or attempting to organize the cabdrivers in New 
York. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you hear that from Mr. Sam Berger? 

Mr. Goldberg. I could have ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you talk to Mr. Berger about it ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I may have talked to Mr. Berger about it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he, in turn, suggest that you contact Mr. Doria ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Well, maybe during our conversations he did, I don't 
know. I just actually don't remember. 

Mr. Kennedy. You contacted Mr. Doria and he recommended you 
for this position with local 102 ? 

Mr. Goldberg. As international representative ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. As international representative? 

Mr. Goldberg. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that based on your career with you labor union 
down in Philadelphia ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I would say it was based on my experience in organiz- 
ing in the labor movement. 

Mr. Kennedy. Your experiences in organizing ? 

Mr. Goldberg. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you went to work on this taxicab drive ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Yes, sir ; I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you remained with the taxicab drive for how 
long a period ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Until its termination. 

Mr. Kennedy. Which was 1953 ? 

Mr. Goldberg. If those are the facts, that is how long I remained 
with them. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there then a movement to bring you and your 
organization into the teamsters at that time ? 

Mr. Goldberg. That I have no knowledge of. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did the drive end ? 

Mr. Goldberg. The drive ended — to the best of my knowledge, I was 
told that the teamsters had claimed jurisdiction and that the jurisdic- 
tion was going to be awarded to the teamsters. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any discussion at that time about your 
transferring over into the teamsters, and continue the drive ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I took the position that I wanted no part of trans- 
ferring over personally to the teamsters. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what reason ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Well, I honestly felt that there was no need or neces- 
sity, that we had the cabdrivers organized, and that they would be best 
served just where they were. 

Mr. Kennedy. Meaning with the UAW^ 

Mr. Goldberg. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many taxicab drivers did you have organized 
by that time ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I would say at tliat time there were two-hundred- 
and-eighty-some elections and I guess out of those two-hundred-and- 
some elections we must have covered over 10,000 cabdivers in the city 
of New York. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were they paying dues every month ? 

They were paying dues, were they not ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Some of them were, and some were not. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3739 

Mr. Kennedy. Can you tell the committee who kept the books and 
records on the moneys that were paid in ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Well, they had a set of officers of their own, and, of 
course, officers of that particular local they kept their own books and 
their own records. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who received the dues that were paid ? 

Mr. Goldberg. The dues have to be received by local 102. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wlio was the manager of local 102 ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Well, I would say the manager of local 102 was 
headed by a Mr. Sam Smith, and a fellow by the name of Nemo. They 
had their own president. They, in my opinion, managed their own 
affairs. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was Mr. Johnny Dio in that union ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Mr. Dio, to the best of my knowledge, was director 
of that area. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was director of the area ? 

Mr. Goldberg. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And in his official position with that union, did he 
not have the title of manager of the union ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I assume that — that the operation of 102 was sub- 
ject to Mr, Dio, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much in dues did you receive each month? 

Mr. Goldberg. That I have no knowledge of. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were responsible to whom, in your position? 

Mr. Goldberg. I was responsible to the UAW. 

Mr. Kennedy. The international? 

Mr. Goldberg. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you not keep them advised as to how much dues 
you were receiving each month, how many members you had ? 

Mr. Goldberg. That was not my job, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What were you keeping them, advised of? 

Mr. Goldberg. As to the progress we were making in the organiza- 
tion of the cabdrivers. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wouldn't part of that be how many members you 
had and how many members were paying dues ? 

Mr. Goldberg. It would be as to how many members we had the 
right to represent and organize, those who signed authorization cards 
allowing us to represent them, and those elections that we won before 
the State labor relations board. 

Mr. Kennedy. It would not also be your responsibility to tell them 
how much money you were receiving each month ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I was not involved in any of the financial transac- 
tions or matters of local 102. 

Mr. Kennedy. After the drive ended, and the jurisdiction was taken 
over by the teamsters, did you return to Philadelphia? 

Mr. Goldberg. After a while, I did, yes ; I voluntarily left and re- 
turned to Philadelphia. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you requested to stay on in any other local? 

Mr. Goldberg. Well, I was told that I could stay on if I wanted to, 
in the city of New York. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who told you that? 

Mr. Goldberg. Mr. Doria. 

Mr. Kennedy. In what capacity ? 

Mr. Goldberg. As an organizer. 



3740 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. And you turned that down ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I turned it down. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what reason? 

Mr. Goldberg. Well, more or less for personal reasons. First of 
all, I was commuting between Philadelphia and New York, and I was 
terribly disappointed that after making such a successful attempt, for 
the first time in the history of our country, I would say, and in the 
history of New York, the cabdrivers had an opportunity to become 
organized, it was destroyed. And that completely disillusioned me, 
and I went back to Philadelphia. 

Mr. Kennedy. "\Aniat is your explanation as to why it was de- 
stroyed ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Well, I would have to guess, and T don't think guess- 
ing is the proper thing to do before this committee. 

Mr. Kennedy. I just don't want you to guess, but if you have some 
conclusion that is based on fact, a fact that you know, then the. com- 
mittee would be interested in that. 

Mr. Goldberg. Would you repeat that question again, please? 

Mr. Kennedy. I am trying to find out what your explanation is, or 
what conclusion you reached, as to why the drive on the taxicabs that 
was made by your union collapsed or ended. 

Mr. Goldberg. Well, I personally believe that Mr. Hickey, in New 
York, who was international representative of the teamsters, and Mr. 
Meany, of the American Federation of Labor, thought that the full 
organization of the cabdrivers in New York, which may have exceeded 
oved 50,000 drivers, would place the UAW in too powerful a position 
as one local unit in the city of Philadelphia, and for that reason, they 
destroyed it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hickey himself, if he wanted to get jurisdiction, 
or wanted this drive, he could make it as an official of the teamsters; 
could he not? 

Mr. Goldberg. That was a matter of opinion. 

Mr. Kennedy. You felt that the UAW-AFL could do it, while the 
teamsters under Mr. Hickey could not? 

Mr. Goldberg. We done it while nobody else could have done it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you mean that you had 10,000 members ? 

Mr. Goldberg. We done it. I say to you in all sincerity, we had the 
cabdrivers in the city of New York organized. We won some 280 
elections. We went before the State board and every other board. 
We had a newspaper, of which I was editor, which had the full sup- 
port of every cab driver in the city of New York. I say to you that 
those individuals deprived the cabdrivers in the city of New York, for 
the first time in their life, from representation under the banner of 
organized labor, and they destroyed it. 

Mr. Kennedy. TSTiat was Mr. Dio doing during this perio<l of time ? 
Was he directing the drive on the taxicabs ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I was directing the drive of the taxicabs, and I was 
its organizer. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was he taking instructions from you, or what ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I will say to you from the time that I walked into 
that office, I was not interfered with at all in the organization of the 
cabdrivers in the city of New York. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was he doing ? "V\^at was Mr. Dio's position 
in all of this ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES LNT THE LABOR FIELD 3741 

Mr. Goldberg. Mr. I)io was director, i-epresenting the UAW in New 
York. 

Mr. Kennedy. So he was also director of what your operation con- 
sisted of, is that right ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I kept him acquainted with our progress ; yes, I did. 

Mr. Kennfj)y. Well, he was director of your operations as he was 
director of the rest of the operations in New York City. 

Mr. Goldberg. My understanding in coming to New York City was 
that I was not to be interfered with. I came there with one specific 
job and that was to organize the cabdrivers. 

The Chairman. The question was: Was he your superior insofar 
as authority in the union ? 

He would be, I assume. 

Mr. Goldberg. I would say I was answerable to Mr. Dio, but he 
never interfered with me at any time. 

The Chairman. You were answerable to him and, therefore, he was 
your superior, although he gave you free rein and let you organize 
and direct the organizing drive. 

Mr. Goldberg. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You say that you came up there originally in ap- 
proximately 1950 or maybe 1951, based on the requet of Mr. Anthony 
Doria, of the international ? 

Mr. Goldberg. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further? 

Sen tor Curtis. ^Yho did you say destroyed the organization of 
taxicab drivers ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I will repeat again. In my opinion, the destruction, 
the opportunities taken away from the cabdrivers in my personal 
opinion, was by Mr. Meany of the American Federation of Labor and 
Mr. Tom Hickey of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 

Senator Curtis. I do not mean to argue with you, but I would like 
this information: A^Hiy was it to their advantage to pursue such a 
course ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I could only answer that this way, sir, that the 
obvious was very evident, because after the jurisdiction was trans- 
ferred, there was no future organization of the cabdrivers any more 
and no more attempt was made to organize them. 

Senator Curtis. What did jNIr. Hickey and Mr. Meany gain by 
that? 

Mr. Goldberg. That is anybody's guess and I am not in a position 
to gueas. 

Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. What happened to the union that was organized? 
You had it organized. Was it transferred over to the teamsters? 

Mr. Goldberg. I was given to understand that the certifications 
from the State labor relations board for the elections and everything 
else, materials and what have you, were transferred over to Mr. Tom 
Hickey of the teamsters union. 

Tlie CHAiR]vrAN. iVnd, thereafter, nothing was done? 

Mr. Goldberg. And thereafter, nothing. 

The Chairman. What happened to those that had already been 
organized ? 

Mr. Goldberg. That I don't know, sir. 



3742 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. In other words, you had 10,000 of them organized ; 
they were in some kind of an organization. If the teamsters took it 
over, they took over, it would seem, some sort of organization. 

I wonder if they abandoned them. They might not have con- 
tinued a drive, but they had a union; they had an organization of 
cabdrivers. Did they dissolve it and quit collecting dues, or what 
happened to those? 

Mr. Goldberg. Sir, I don't know. I left New York and washed 
my hands of it. 

The Chairman, You do not know ? 

Mr. Goldberg. That I don't know. 

Senator Ives. You do know this, do you not, that there is no cab-- 
drivers' union in New York today? 

Mr. Goldberg. To the best of my knowledge, you are right, sir, 
there is not. 

Mr. Kennedy. I might say, Mr. Goldberg, as director of organiza- 
tion, perhaps j'^ou know exact figures, the figures we have received as 
to the number of taxicab drivers that were organized is not nearly 
as high as yours, or the number of elections that were won. 

At the same time that you were directing organizational work for 
the taxicab drivers in New York City, did you have a local of your 
own? 

Mr. Goldberg. No, sir ; I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you apply for a local to the UAW in Phil- 
adelphia ? 

Mr. Goldberg. No, sir ; I did not at that time, no, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there a time in 1951 that you applied for a 
charter in Philadelphia? 

Mr. Goldberg. Yes, sir before I came on to New York. 

Mr. Kennedy. Before you came to New York ? 

Mr. Goldberg. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you receive that charter? 

Mr. Goldberg. Yes, sir, I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that charter granted through Mr. Johnny 
Dioguardi in New York City? 

Mr. Goldberg. No, sir, it was not. 

Mr. Kennedy. That local charter was for what number? 

Mr. Goldberg. Offhand I don't remember. 

Mr. Kennedy. 138, Philadelphia? 

Mr. Goldberg. I believe you are right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did it ever get any members? 

Mr. Goldberg. I did not get enough for us to continue and so the 
thing was disbanded completely. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did the local vote in the international elections? 

Mr. Goldberg. No, sir, it did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. It did not. That was local 138. 

Are you familiar with local 225? 

Mr. Goldberg. No, I am not. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was also a UAW-AFL charter in Philadel- 
phia? 

Mr. Goldberg. That you will have to refresh my memory on. 

Mr. Kennedy. You do not remember that at all? It succeeded 
local 138. 

Mr. Goldberg. If it succeeded 138, 1 know nothing about it. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3743 

Tlie Chairman. To refresh your memory, I will ask you if you 
did not receive your charter in Philadelphia through Mr. Dioguardi ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I may have been forwarded a charter from Mr. Dio- 
guardi. I did not get it through Mr. Dioguardi. 

I don't want to stand on technicalities, but the charter came to me 
from the international union. 

The Chairman. I am sure it comes from the international union. 
The charter was issued in the name of the international union. But 
my information is that it was secured, through Mr. Dioguardi, actual- 
ly secured. 

Mr. Goldberg. As I understood, as I was subsequently given to 
understand, as director of the area which Mr. Dioguardi was director 
of, all charters had to be presented through him anyway. 

The Chairman. That would come through him because he was di- 
rector. I think that is correct. The charter is actually issued, of 
course, by the international union, but his having been director in 
that area, he had to approve it. 

Mr. Goldberg. Well, I don't know whether that is so or not. 

The Chairman. It is hard to find out what is true with some of 
these operations. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you also an officer in local 649 ? 

Mr. Goldberg. No, sir, I was not. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were not vice president? 

Mr. Goldberg. No, sir, I was not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know another Abraham Goldberg in New 
York City, that was vice president of local 649 ? 

Mr. Goldberg. The only Abraham Goldberg I know is myself. 

The Chairman. I have before me a photostatic copy of, "Labor 
Organization Registration Form," filed with the Labor Department 
here in Washington. I will show it to you so you may see it. 

This shows that Johnny Dioguardi was president, and Abraham 
Goldberg was vice president, Joe Curcio was secretary-treasurer of 
local 649, United Automobile Workers, AFL. 

Did you ever hold any office in that union? You may examine 
this photostatic copy which I present to you. 

(The document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. I^NNEDY. Mr. Chairman, you may also notice in there that it 
says he was elected. 

The Chairman. It also certifies that you were elected vice presi- 
dent. 

Mr. Goldberg. I will not argue with this document. If this docu- 
ment says so, then I was an officer. 

The Chairman. Did you ever know before you were an officer in 
that local ? 

Mr. Goldberg. I can only answer it, Mr. Chairman, that I would 
not argue with that document. 

The Chairman. It is not a question of arguing. I am not arguing 
either. The document shows that you were. You may not have been. 
You may have been and not know it. 

Did you know it ? Did you ever hear of it before ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Again, I can only repeat this, that the facts stipu- 
late that my name is on that, and I will substantiate that that is my 
name. 



3744 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. You substantiate that is your name. That does 
not answer the question. I will ask you if you ever knew before that 
you were an officer in that union, in that local. 

If you had gotten elected vice president of a local as reported in 
that, it seems to me that that would be something you would remem- 
ber and be grateful for. You do not know anything about it, do you ? 
You do not even remember it ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Again I repeat and I 

The CiL\iRMAN. I am not asking you to repeat. I am asking you 
if you remember it, if you have any loiowledge of it. You know 
whether you have or not. 

Mr. GoLDiiERG. I don't remember it. 

The Chairman. You do not remember. 

Is there anything further ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Once again, Mr. Chairman, we have a situation 
where there is a person appearing as an officer of a local who does not 
know that lie was an officer and it stipulates that he was elected and 
he does not know^ that he was elected. 

This is a document that is filed with the Government. 

The Chairman. I may say this for the information of the witness : 
These reports are required to be filed by law. It is the belief of this 
committee that the law intended that honest reports be filed, and 
accurate reports. 

We are very much concerned that the intent and spirit of the law 
is not being observed in some instances. It may be necessary to enact 
remedial legislation to make certain that we do get, that the Govern- 
ment does get, accurate and truthful reports where the law requires 
them. 

Otherwise, there maybe should be some penalty imposed for these 
false reports. You have been helpful in saying that you do not re- 
member it. I am very confident that if you had known anything 
about it or had ever known anything about it, certainly if you had 
been elected to an important position in a local as large as that local, 
you would have remembered it. 

It indicates that the affairs of some unions and some locals are 
simply manipulated by some people who apparently, from the evi- 
dence here, are unworthy to hold those positions. 

Can you throw any further light on this after I have made that 
comment ? 

Mr. Goldberg. Mr. Senator, no, sir, I cannot. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, could we have tlie document on the 
local down in Philadelphia, of which Mr. Goldberg was president, 
made a part of the record and, also, this Government document filed 
by local 649? 

The Chairman. I do not know whether the witness can identify 
this document. 

I hand you here what purports to be a photostatic copy of a letter 
from Mr. John Dioguardi, president, addressed to Anthony Doria, 
secretary-treasurer, United Automobile Workers, AFL, dated Novem- 
ber 10, 1951, in which he refers to you as president of the charter being- 
granted in Philadelphia. 

Will you examine the document and state if you identify it? 
(A document was handed to the witness.) 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES LS^ THE LABOR FIELD 3745 

Mr. Goldberg. I cannot identify the document. 

Mr. Kennedy. We have a staff investigator who can identify this. 

(Present at this point were Senators McClellan, Ives, and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. Be sworn, please, Mr, Tiemey. 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select coimnittee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. TiERNET. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF PAUL J. TIERNEY 

The Chairman. State your name, place of residence, and your 
present employment. 

Mr, TiERNEY. Paul Tierney, assistant counsel to the select com- 
mittee. 

The Chairman. I hand you a document and I ask you if you can 
identify it, and if so, where and how it was procured. 

Look at tliis otlier one first. I will hand you the two documents. 
Look at the letter, first, that I interrogated the previous witness 
about. 

(The documents were handed to the witness.) 

Mr. TiERNEY. Mr. Chairman, this is a letter from UAW Amalga- 
mated Union Local 102, dated November 10, 1951, signed by Johnny 
Dioguardi, president, to Mr. Anthony Doria, secretary-treasurer of 
the United Automobiles Workers, AFL. 

This was obtained from the international's files in Los Angeles. 

The Chairman. Obtained by our staff from the international's 
files, the files of the international union ? 

Mr. Tierney. That is right. 

The Chairman. The letter may be made exhibit No. 5. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 5" for ref- 
erence, and will be found in the appendix on p. 3973.) 

The Chairman. I do not believe it needs to be printed in the rec- 
ord. It may be made an exhibit for reference. 

Now, you have the other document. Will you examine that and 
state if you identify it? 

Mr. Tierney. Yes, sir, Mr, Chairman, This is a labor organization 
registration form, filed by local 649, United Automobile Workers, 
AFL, on March 18, 1953, signed by John Dioguardi, president. This 
was obtained by the staff from thet Department of Labor. 

The Chahoian. All right. That may be made exhibit No. 6 for 
reference. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 6" for ref- 
erence and will be found in the appendix on pp. 3974-3975.) 

The Chairman. Are there any questions about these documents, 
Mr. Kennedy? 

Senator Curtis. With reference to exhibit No. 6, is that a form 
prescribed by the Department of Labor, do you know ? 

Mr. Tierney. Yes, it is. 

Senator Curtis. Does it call for a witnessing of the signature of 
the president or officer submitting it? 

Mr. Tierney. No, it does not. 

Senator Curtis. It does not have to be notarized ? 

89330— 57— pt. 10 11 



3746 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. TiEKNEY. No, it does not. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

The Chairman. I may say to the Senator that in our preliminary 
investigation in examining the Secretary of Labor in an executive 
session by the subcommittee, before we started these proceedings, 
their interpretation of the law is that it does not have to be accurate, 
it does not have to be correct. 

Senator Curtis. I asked my few questions on the premise that it 
might be that there should be some changes in the law in reference 
to the form of these reports as a protection to the public and to the 
people who are filing accurate reports. 

The Chairman. I cannot understand why the Congress in enact- 
ing a law requiring someone to file a report, did not carry a forceful 
implication that you expected an accurate and truthful report. That 
is not the interpretation some people are giving it. 

Is there anything further ? 

Mr. Kennedy. We have one other witness, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much, sir. 

You may stand aside. 

(Present at this point in the proceedings: Senators McClellan,, 
Ives, and Curtis.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Gasster. 

The Chairman. Mr. Gasster, will you be sworn, please ? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Gasster. I do, 

TESTIMONY OF HENRY GASSTER 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and 
your business or occupation. 

Mr. Gasster. Henry Gasster, Kego Park, N. Y. I am unemployed 
at present. 

The Chairman. You are what ? 

Mr. Gasster. I am unemployed at present. 

The Chairman. Unemployed at present. 

Have you talked to members of the staff of the committee ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You know, then, generally, the line of questions 
to expect, I assume? 

Mr. Gasster. Well, I don't know. 

The Chairman. Do you know you have a right to have counsel 
present to represent you if you desire ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you waive counsel ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Mr. Kennedy, you may proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Gasster, you have been in the labor-union move- 
ment? You have been an official of a labor union; have you not? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Of various, different locals, or of just one? 

Mr. Gasster. Well, one prior to the one in question. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3747 

Mr. Kennedy. What union were you in prior to the one in question ? 

Mr. Gasster. Federal Labor Union 21908. 

Mr. Kennedy. What position did you hold in that? 

Mr. Gasster. Organizer and vice president. 

Mr. Kennedy. Let me go back to a little bit of your background. 
You came from New York originally ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have always been from New York ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went to school there ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Through what grade ? 

Mr. Gasster. A couple of years of high school. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then what did you do ? You went to work in New 
York City? 

Mr. Gasster. I went to work. 

Mr. Kennedy. Excuse me ? 

Mr. Gasster. I worked. 

Mr. Kennedy. At what? 

Mr. Gasster. At various things. Trades. 

Mr. Kennedy. Such as what? 

Mr. Gasster. Well, I was a taxi driver. I had concessions in the 
mountains. I worked as a counterman. I was a steward in a club. 

Mr. Kennedy. When did you have an interest in being an officer 
or official in a labor union? 

Mr. Gasster. 1940. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is when you took over and became an officer in 
this local that you just mentioned? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you remained in that position until when? 

Mr. Gasster. 1950, outside of the time I spent in the Army. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what reason did you leave your local at that 
time? 

Mr. Gasster. Well, I was a little bit dissatisfied with my coworkers. 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1952 or 1953, 3^ou received a charter from the 
UAW-AFL. 

Mr. Gasster. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, your wife was working for Mr. Johnny 
Dio, is that right ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. She was the secretary for Mr. Dio ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You applied for a charter from the international? 

Mr. Gasster. From Mr. Doria. 

Mr. Kennedy. From Mr. Anthony Doria ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you known Mr. Doria ? 

Mr. Gasster. I was introduced to him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who introduced you to him ? 

Mr. Gasster. I can't recall who it was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Dio introduce you to him ? 

Mr. Gasster. No, sir. I never met Mr. Dio. 

Mr. Kennedy. You never met him ? 

Mr. Gasster. No, sir. 



3748 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. You don't know who introduced you to Mr. Doria? 

Mr. Gasster. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You applied for a charter? 

Mr. Gasster. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he sent you a charter? 

Mr. Gasster. He told me to send him a letter stating my qualifica- 
tions. 

The Chairman. Did you make your application through Dio- 
guardi ? 

Mr. Gasster. What was that? 

The Chairman. Did you make your application for a charter 
through Dioguardi ? 

Mr. Gasster. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Sir? 

Mr. Gasster. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you know he got into possession of it? 

Mr. Gasster. No, sir. 

The Chairman. I hand you here a photostatic copy of the appli- 
cation, together with photostatic copy of a letter purported to be 
signed by John Dioguardi, addressed to Mr. Anthony Doria. 

I will ask you to examine these documents and see if you identify 
them. 

(Documents were handed to the witness.) 

The Chairman. Examine first the application for a charter and. 
see if that is a photostatic coi)y of the application that you filed. 

Mr. Gasster. I never seen this letter before. 

The Chairman. I am not talking about the letter at the moment. 
I am talking about the application. 

Mr. Gasster. The application? Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. The application is a photostatic copy of the appli- 
cation you filed ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Now read the letter. 

Mr. Gasster. I did read it, sir. 

The Chairman. The application may be made exhibit No. 7. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 7" for refer- 
erence and will be found in the appendix on p. 3976.) 

The Chairman. Have you read the letter ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. The letter is from John Dioguardi, is it? 

Mr, Gasster. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And it is to Anthony Doria ? 

Mr. Gasster. Anthony Doria. 

The Chairman. Does not the letter say he is transmitting your 
application ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Then the application did go through John Dio- 
guardi ; did it not ? 

Mr, Gasster. Not to my knowledge. 

The Chairman. According to the letter, it did. 

Mr. Gasster. According to the letter, it did. 

The Chairman. Do you know how he came into possession of your 
application, if you were handling the matter directly with Doria? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3749 

Mr. Gasster. The original letter I sent Mr. Doria, my original 
letter, stating my qualifications. He, in turn, sent me applications. 

The Chairman. Sent you the application blanks ? 

Mr. Gasster. The blanks. I filled them out. I really don't recall 
how he got them. 

The Chairman. You do not recall how Dioguardi got them^ 

Mr. Gasster. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Obviously, he had something to do with it, in 
view of that letter from him. 

TESTIMONY OF PAUL J. TIERNEY— Resumed 

(Present at this point in the proceedings : Senators McClellan. Ives, 
and Curtis. ) 

The Chairman. May I ask Mr. Tierney this question : 

Was that letter found in the files ? 

Mr. Tierney. Yes. 

The Chairjian. Let the record show that I directed that question 
to Mr. Tierney, and lie answered that this copy of this letter was 
found in the files of the international union. 

That letter may be made exhibit No. 7-A. 

TESTIMONY OF HENRY GASSTER— Resumed 

(Present at tliis point in the proceedings : Senators McClellan, Ives, 
and Curtis.) 

Mr. Kennedy. You received the charter, did you not ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

(Letter referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 7-A'' and follows.) 

Mr. Kennedy (reading). This is January 5, 1953, addressed to Mr. 
Antliony Doria, United Automobile Workers of America, 429 West 
Michigan Street, Milwaukee 3, Wis. 

Dear Tony : Enclosed please find application for charter to be issued in the 
metropolitan area. I have investigated the people involved, and find that they 
have an excellent labor background. As per your instructions, I emphasized 
the necessity for proper per capita tax payments, furnishing copies of all labor- 
management agreements to the international, and making themselves available 
at all times for instructions, and check by the international regarding their 
records and activities. 

Mr. Gasster and his fellow officers agree to the terms and conditions of the 
international. 

I will appreciate your immediate action in the issuance of this charter, as I 
am convinced that this union will be an asset to the international and to the 
labor movement. 

Fraternally yours, 

It is signed by John Dioguardi. 

You received that cliarter, did you ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And local 198 went into existence ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long were you in existence ? 

Mr. Gasster. Less than a month. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were arrested for extortion ? 

Mr. Gasster. That is a bad word. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were arrested ? 

Mr. Gasster. Anybody can be arrested. 



3750 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. I understand that. But you and Mr. Cohen were 
arrested for extortion ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you were indicted ? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Cohen was convicted? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. And Mr. Cohen then refused to testify against you ? 

Mr. Gasster. He did testify. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. But he refused to testify 

Mr. Gasster. That I was 

Mr. Kennedy. Let me ask you this: Did he not refuse to testify, 
and told the district attorney that his wife had been threatened, and 
he refused to testify ? 

Mr. Gasster. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are not familiar with that? 

Mr. Gasster. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are familiar with the fact that he refused to 
testify in your case ? 

Mr. Gasster. No. We were offered a plea to a lesser offense. I re- 
fused to take it. In fact, I was not there at the time of the so-called 
extortion. I don't know nothing about it. I wasn't present. 

Mr. Kennedy. I understand the facts as they came out at the trial 
were that you and Mr. Cohen went up there and had this conversa- 
tion with the gentleman who owned the store, and then Mr. Cohen 
came back. At that time, according to the people that owned the store, 
you asked for some money. Mr. Cohen came back to pick up the 
money 3 days later and he was arrested. You were downstairs and 
he was arrested. 

Mr. Gasster. That isn't so. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Were you downstairs? 

Mr. Gasster. I was in the neighborhood, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you arrested? 

Mr. Gasster. I was arrested. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Was he arrested? 

Mr. Gasster. He was arrested. 

Senator Curtis. Was he convicted ? 

Mr. Gasster. He pleaded guilty. 

Senator Curtis. You stood trial? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. And you were found not guilty? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. That was the end of it? 

Mr. Gasster. That was the end of it. That was the end of my 
career in labor. 

Senator Curtis. How many members did you recruit during that 
time ? 

Mr. Gasster. We didn't recruit any. We were just going out or- 
ganizing. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

Mr. Kennedy. I don't know if this is true or not, Mr. Gasster, but 
I note in the file on this case from the district attorney's office that it 
says, 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3751 

Gasster was tried on March 8, 1955, and on oral motion of Assistant District 
Attorney Blustein, the indictment was dismissed. Cohen wouldn't testify 
against him. A note in the file says, "his wife is dying." — - 

meaning Cohen's — 

"and that he is afraid of testifying because the codefendant threatened against 
him." 

You say that is not true, that you did not threaten him ? 

]\Ir. Gasster. I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you a commission agent at that time? 

Mr. Gasster. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Are you a commission agent now ? 

Mr. Gasster. Occasionally. 

Mr. Kennedy. Occasionally? 

Mr. Gasster. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is your source of income now ? 

Mr. Gasster. Well, I 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all right. I am not going to go into it. 
Mr. Gasster. It is just as well ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Your wife's source of income up until the time Die 
was arrested was as his secretary ; is that right ? 
Mr, Gasster. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further? 

Mr. Gasster. In fact, my wife quit the job the day I was arrested. 
The Chairman. Is there anything else? 
Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 
The Chairman. You may stand aside for a moment. 
Mr. Ray, come forward, please. 
(Present at this point were: Senator McClellan, Ives, and Curtis.) 

TESTIMONY OF THEODORE RAY— Resumed 

The Chairman. Mr. Ray, the Chair is considering recalling you 
for further testimony. If I excuse you today, it might be necessary 
to resubpena, unless I place you under what is known as recognizance 
to reappear upon notice. 

Will you give us your address ? 

Mr. Ray. You have it. 

The Chairman. Then we will know where to reach you. 

INIr. Ray. You have it. 

The Chairman. I beg your pardon. 

Mr. Ray. You have the address. You sent me a telegram. You 
sent somebody to the house. 

The Chairman. I want you to agree before the committee that upon 
reasonable notice for a time for you to appear 

Mr. Ray. Give me a definite date. You give one date then another 
date. I don't know if I am coming or going. 

The Chairman. We will get you going both ways. 

Mr. Ray. That's all right. 

The Chairman. The question is, I want you to agree and the record 
will so show, that upon reasonable notice to appear again 

Mr, Ray. It is agreed. 

The Chairman. Before the committee, that you will do so. 



3752 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Rat. It is agreed. 

The CriAiRMAisr. All right. You may be excused until further 
notice. 

The committee stands in recess until 10 o'clock in the morning. 

(Present at the taking of the recess were : Senators ]McClellan, Ives, 
and Curtis.) 

(Whereupon, at 4 : 15 p. m., the hearing in the above entitled matter 
was recessed, to reconvene at 10 a. m., of the following da3^) 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



FBIDAY, AUGUST 2, 1957 

United States Senate, 
Select Committee on Improper Activities 

IN the Labor or Management Field, 

Washington, D. C. 

The select committee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to Senate Resolution 
74, agreed to January 30, 1057, in the caucus room. Senate Office 
Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the select com- 
mittee) presiding. 

Present: Senator Jolin L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas; Senator 
Irving M. Ives, Republican, New York; Senator John F. Kennedy, 
Democrat, Massachusetts; Senator Pat McXamara, Democrat, Mich- 
igan; Senator Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota; Senator 
Barry Goldwater, Republican, Arizona ; Senator Carl T. Curtis, Re- 
publican, Nebraska. 

Also present : Robert F. Keimedy, chief counsel ; Jerome S. Adler- 
man, chief assistant counsel ; Paul J. Tierney, assistant counsel ; Robert 
E. I)unne, assistant counsel: Ruth Young Watt, chief clerk. 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

(Members of the select committee present at the convening of the 
session : Senators McClellan, Ives, Kennedy, McNamara, and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis, you have a statement you wish to 
make ? 

Senator Curtis. Thank you, Mr, Chairman. 

On yesterday, the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts, Sen- 
ator Kennedy, raised a question in reference to an inquiry that I made 
of the witness, Theodore Ray. Senator Kennedy was very proper in 
raising that question, and I know it was raised in the spirit of friend- 
ship and cooperation. 

My remarks in the record are made with the same spirit, but I do feel 
that the record should be clarified a little bit. 

I asked the witness, Theodore Ray, "Do you have any friends in the 
labor movement?" He declined to answer on the grounds of incrim- 
ination. I asked this, "Do you know Mr. Hoffa?" and the same re- 
fusal. I asked, "Have you ever seen Mr. Hoffa?" and the same 
refusal. 

I asked, "Have you ever discussed any business, labor business or 
otherM'ise, with Mr. Hoffa ?" and the same refusal. I asked, "Have you 
ever had any conversations with Mr. Hoffa that would not incriminate 
you V and the same refusal. 

Then, my next question was, "Have you ever been in any meetings 
with Mr. Hoffa, the facts concerning which would not incriminate 

3753 



3754 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

you ?'• Before an answer could be given or an objection made, Senator 
Kennedy, and again I say very properly, and I am not criticizing- 
Senator Kennedy, and I merely want to make the record straight, said : 

I must raise some question about this. 

I do not know whether it is going to be inferred that this witness has a con- 
nection with Mr. Hoffa, but this witness is, from all I gather, a reprehensible 
citizen. 

Because he has taken the fifth amendment as part of his policy, which is part 
of his constitutional right, I think that we should be careful about asking him 
questions on which he will take the fifth amendment, using people's names 
which may give an impression which may or may not be accurate. 

I know the Senator is within his rights, but I do think as a matter of committee 
policy, unless there has been clear evidence linking him to people, we should 
not, because a witness takes the fifth amendment, permit a conclusion to be 
drawn that there is necessarily a connection between the two people. 

Wliereupon, the Chair ruled : 

Well, the Chair would say this : If anyone has an idea that possibly there is 
a connection, he has a right to ask the witness about it. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, I would like to have the record show that the 
chart on my left, the same being chart No. 55, which is already in the 
record for July 31, was prepared by the staff. 

It purports to show a struggle for power in certain unions in New 
York City. On that chart it shows where Johnny Dio and others 
entered this labor movement. The record shows that Ray was an 
associate, sometimes referred to as the chauffeur of Dio. 

That chart also shows, and was not prepared by me, but prepared 
by the staff, that the teamsters union does come into the picture and 
where one group of unions in a sense failed, the teamsters have their 
paper unions and they are merged to make a case. 

^ There was before the committee a very definite connection or possi- 
bility of a connection between the witnesses Ray and Hoffa. Last 
evening I asked the committee counsel for a memorandum giving in 
summary what is known about Theodore Ray's connection with these 
same unions, and what is known about Hoffa's activity with them. I 
wish to read that memorandum. 

Ray appears as a charter member of Local 102, UAW-AFL, on an application 
dated September 12, 1950. This was the charter issued to Zakman through 
Berger. Zakman did not know Ray at that time, and he assumed that Ray was 
a designee of Sam Berger. 

Dioguardi's name first appeared on the second local 102 charter issued some 6 
months later. Ray's name does not appear on this charter. However, several 
people interviewed described Ray as an extremely close confederate of Dio's 
in the union oflices at that time. He has been variously described as his 
"chauffeur" and as his "bodyguard." 

Theodore Ray was a vice president of Local 649, UAW-AFL, as of March 1952, 
as reflected by the registration form filed with the Department of Labor. It is 
noted that local 649 was originally chartered in March 1952. It would appear 
then that Ray was its first vice president. 

Johnny Dio stayed with local 649 as its president until September 1954, when 
he resigned. Preci.se information of this local, during that period of time, has 
been diflScult to ascertain because of the disappearance of its books and records. 
However, it is assumed that Ray stayed with the organization until Dio left. 

James Hofifa is known to have been a close associate and personal friend of 
Johnny Dio from at least 1953 until the present time. In 1953 Hoffa did some 
behind-the-scenes work in an attempt to have the then existing taxi local 102 
integrated into the teamster movement. 

The seven teamster "paper locals" were chartered in November 1955, at which 
time Dio was ostensibly out of the labor movement, but still exercised control 
over the UAW locals from whence came the paper locals. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3755 

Testimony will develop that Hoffa endorsed the issuance of these teamster 
charters to the Dio-con.trolled locals in New York. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, I wanted to put in the record, I wish to again 
say that this is in no sense intended to be a criticism of Senator Ken- 
nedy, lie raised a point that the committee should think about, and 
certainly we should be careful in all of the evidence that we put in. 

I felt in this particular case that it would be well to have the record 
show that we did have ample grounds for inquiring into the acquaint- 
anceship and the connection between Theodore Eay and James Hoffa. 

Senator Kennedy. I appreciate very much what Senator Curtis 
has said, and the spirit in which he said it. I think obviously, as I 
said yesterday, that Senator Curtis was within his rights as is any 
Senator to ask any question he wants. 

The only point that I was concerned about was that we had before 
us, as I said yesterday, one of the most disgraceful citizens in the 
United States who was under indictment for driving the getaway car 
at the time of the throwing of the acid into Mr. Riesel's eyes. 

At the time that the questions were asked, a clear connection had 
been brought out between Johnny Dio and this man but not between 
Mr. Hoffa and this man, although a connection had been brought out 
between Johnny Dio and Jimmy Hoffa. 

Now, the only exception that I took at all to the question was that 
there was not just 1 question, but there were 6 or 7 all moving around 
the same area and rather repetitive. We are on television and there is 
a television audience. 

Now, it might be possible for a Senator to ask if the witness knew 
President Eisenhower and under his fifth amendment procedures he 
would say, "I will not answer on the ground it may incriminate me." 

The television audience looking in might gather the impression that 
there was some connection, when all it was, was that he felt obliged 
under the procedures set down for the fifth amendment to continue to 
give that same answer regardless of who may be brought into the 
questioning. 

Now, I will say, too. Senator Curtis, that you have documented very 
well the connection between Mr. Dio and this man, and the connection 
between Mr Hoffa and this man, and certainly your questioning was 
along the lines of the investigation. 

The only reason I brought the question up at all, and perhaps it was 
not an appropriate time, was that the questions were asked again and 
again on this same point, driving home a connection between this man 
and Hoffa, which at that time at least, had not been proved to me, and 
that was the only reason it was brought up at this point. 

Senator Curtis. I thank the Senator again, and again I say liis 
position was very proper. 

Senator McNamara. Mr. Chairman, while we are talking about the 
record of yesterday, we had a witness appear here before us by the 
name of Lester Washburn. He made some reference to the fact that at 
the Michigan Federation of Labor Convention, in 1954, Hoffa made 
some remarks that indicated a close friendship between himself and 
Dio. 

I have secured a copy of the minutes of that 1954 convention, and I 
have gone through it very carefully, and I have read the speeches, and 
up to now with a more or less casual looking over the rest of it, I find 



3756 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES m THE LABOR FIELD 

no reference to Johnny Dio in any remarks by Jimmy Hoffa. I think 
that our records should show that. 

The Chairman. If you have the minutes of the meeting, they may 
be filed as an exliibit for the committee's information. 

Senator McNamara. I have a copy that was borrowed from the 
Library of Congress and I have to return it. But I will secure a 
copy for the records. 

The Chairman. Very well. 

All right, Mi\ Chief Counsel, Mr. Kennedy, will you call your first 
witness, or do you wish to make a brief statement outlining testimony. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, yesterday we had some testimony 
from witnesses first showing that the man that was retained by Mr. 
Dio to conduct the taxi drive in Xew York had just come from Phil- 
adelpliia., and was brought up from Philadelphia to Xew York City, 
and tliat he had just been convicted of extortion in 1949. He was 
brought up to New York City by Johnny Dio to conduct tlie taxicab 
drive in that city. 

After Mr. Dio started his activities, one of the first charters that 
he issued Avas a charter to local 198, and within 3 weeks of that charter 
being granted, Mr. Chairman, the 2 individuals to whom the charter 
had been granted were arrested for extortion. That was Mr. Gas- 
ster's testimon}' yesterday. He and ISIr. Cohen were arrested for 
extortion within 8 weeks of the time that they obtained the charter 
for local 198 from Mr. Dio. 

In addition, during the same period of time in 1952, Mr. Dio 
appointed Mr. Topazio and another Mr. Cohen to be the trustee of 
a local 188. Just before the}' were to take over that position, they 
also were arrested for extortion. 

So this is the history up until at least 1952 as far as Dio's activities 
and the activities of those whom be brought into the labor union 
movement. 

Today we are going into, as you pointed out in your original state- 
ment on the opening day, the effect of this kind of activity on the 
community and on the employee and on the industry. 

Today we are going to have some witnesses representing the 
employees, and representing the people that were members of these 
unions, to find out what the effect has been on them. 

The fii-st witness wlio will give a background of this situation is 
Mr. John lilcNiff. 

The Chairman. Mr. INIcNifl', will you come around, please. 

Will you be sworn ? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth, so help vou God i 

Mr. McXn F. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF JOHN McNIFF, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, 

ROBERT S. PERSKY 

The Chairman. Please state your name, and your place of residence, 
and your business or occupation. 

^ Mr. McXiFF. My name is Jolm McNiff, and I live at 270 Church 
Street, in Poughkeepsie, X. Y., and I am presently acting as execu- 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3757 

tive secretary of the Association of Catholic Trade Unionists, New 
York chapter, located at 327 I^exin^on Avenue, New York City. 

The Chairman. Do jon have counsel with you to represent you? 

Mr. McNiFF. I do. 

The Chairman. Counsel, will you identify yourself for the record. 

Mr. Persky. I am Robert S. Persky, an attorney practicing with the 
firm of Luca, Persky & Mozer, at 150 Broadway, New York City, 
and we are here as counsel to the Association of Catholic Trade Union- 
ists. 

The Chairman. All right. Thank von veiy much. Do vou expect 
to testify ? 

Mr. Persky. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Mr. McNilt', 3'ou have a prepared statement, have 
you? 

Mr. McNiFF. I have. 

The Chairman. It was tiled at the appropriate time'^ 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. ]VIcNitl', you may proceed to read 
your statement. 

Mr. McNiiT (reading) : 

In 1037. the Association of Catholic Trade Uni^nisrs was organized to help 
the American working men and women learn, understand, and put into prac- 
tice (Christian social priucijiles. Its ohjective is to work together with all men 
of all creeds and of all races to achieve the establishment of a just social struc- 
ture in America. 

The assi^K-iation helieves slr(»ngl.v that an honest, democratic and militant trade- 
union movement is essentia! for a sound and just economic structure in America. 
The association believes every man has a right, even a duty, to freely join a union 
of his choice and through officers freely elected to enter into collective bargainings 
with his employer. 

In order to forward these ideals and others, the ACTU has for 20 years con- 
ducted labor schools in New York City where any man, regardless of race, creed, 
or color may come and learn trade-union practices, labor legislation, and the 
other tools of effective trade unionism. Out of these schools we are proud to 
say came many of the great trade-union leaders of today. 

In 19.58 it became obvious to our association that the Puerto Rican workers in 
New York City was a negative factor in the dynamism of the New York City 
trade-union movement. Except for a handful of locals, no one seemed impressed 
whether these people were trade-union members or not, whether they became 
active, loyal trade unionists or cynical inhabitants of our sweatshops. Thus 
the ACTU began training bilingual persons to teach in labor schools that were 
later established in many parish halls throughout Manhattan and the Bronx. 

Through the medium of these schools and the active cooperation of Mr. .Jose 
Lumen Roman, feature reporter for New York Si>anish language newspaper, El 
Diario, the ACTU came in contact with a situation which staggers the imagina- 
tion. The facts we have seen are fantastic. The utter injustices of some exploit- 
ing employers and their partners, the extorting unions, are beyond belief. 

We have seen how countless incidents of labor-management collusions have 
resulted in the destruction of democratic trade unionism and have brought 
forth such fruits as racketeer control of unions, misuse of union funds, bribery 
and extortion. It cannot be stressed too often that the worst evil of all in the 
traderunion picture today is collusion between crooked management and crooked 
unionism because such collusion necessitates the total annihilati(m of all the dem- 
ocratic procedures which act to check the officers of any union, because such 
collusion negates any grievance procedures which act to protect the employee, 
because such collusion makes collective bar.uaining, contract negotiation and 
ratification a joke, and because in short, such collusion obliterates the whole 
purpose behind American democratic trade unionism. 

The standard procedure for companies and unions involved in this collu- 
sion designed to exploit workers follows these lines : 

I. The union approaches the employer or is called by him to ward oft unioniza- 
tion by a group genuinely interested in protecting the workers. 



3758 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

II. A contract is signed which has all or most of the following characteristics : 

1. A wage scale a few cents ahove the legal minimum of $1 an hour, or a 
weekly average of $40 to $42 a week. 

2. Two to four holidays. 

3. No sick leave. 

4. Little or no vacation pay. 

5. No welfare benefits. 

6. No seniority, and 

7. A promise — always fulfilled — and no enforcement. 

III. From the signing of this initial "gentlemen's agreement" between the 
company and the union the labor-management climate existing in the factory or 
shop covered by such a contract may be described as follows : 

1. The workers are afraid of both union and company. 

2. No meetings of the union are ever held. 

3. The workers are flatly refused a copy of the contract they work imder, 

4. Workers who protest are fired without redress. 

5. The "business agents" of these unions are unknown to the workers. Their 
yearly or semiyearly visits are confined to conferences with the employer. 

6. If an occasional shop meeting is called it is held in the presence of the 
employer. 

7. Union elections are unknown. 

A partial list of unions cooperating with companies to exploit the Puerto 
Rican workers and other unskilled or semiskilled workers in the metropolitan 
New York area would have to include : 

Locals 7, 8, 122, 222, 225 of the International Jewelry Workers. 

Locals 1648, 136, 246, 111.5A of Retail Clerks International Association. 

Local 223 of the Toy and Novelty Workers. 

Local 679 of the Pulp Sulfite and Paper Workers. 

Local 229 of the United Textile Workers. 

Local 138 of the Distillery Workers. 

Locals 821 and 2632 of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters. 

Locals 239, 2.58. and 362 of the teamsters, and 

Locals 224, 250, 355, and 649 of the Allied Industrial Workers. 

Summarizing the situation we found to exist in this group of unions — which 
comprises the worst of all those whose members have come to our oflSce for 
aid — we find : 

1. The workers are the victims of labor-management collusion which results 
in the complete destruction of all their individual rights. If they are treated 
unfairly by management, a union which will not help them get a family living 
wage in contract negotiations because of a "deal" between company and union, 
can hardly afford to break its agreement of guaranteed labor peace — for a 
price — by forcing the company to respect the employee's rights. 

2. Consequently, contracts are "negotiated" without any rank and file par- 
ticipation, ai'e then classified "top seci-et" and forbidden to the members. This 
practice of secret contracts, or at least the practice of not giving a copy to 
the workers is imfortunntely even practiced by some of the more respected in- 
dustrial unions in New York City. 

3. Under section 9 of the Taft-Hartley Act, local unions must supply members 
with copies of an annual h'nancial statement. No membei* who has come to 
us of any of the above locals has received any information of the finances of 
their union. 

Senator Goldwater. May I interrupt, Mr. Chairman? 
Mr. McNiff, going back to page 3, in the last sentence of your 
paragraph 2 at the bottom, you say : 

This practice of secret contracts, or at least the practice of not giving a copiy 
to the workers is unfortunately even practiced by some of the more respected 
industrial unions in New York City. 

Would you be able to give us a list of those that you know have that 
practice ? 

Mr. McNiFF. I will direct my attention primarily, since we are 
dealing with the garment industry, to those shops we have been in 
contact with most of the time. The union in New York City which 
has most of those sliops and does not distribute copies of the contract 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3759 

to tlieir members is the ILGWU. We have often pushed for the 
practice, as with the steelworkers, and with many unions, of having 
copies of the contract distributed to the workers, so that they will 
know all of their rights and that they will know just what conditions 
they are working under. This I think is fundamental. 

Senator Goldwatek. I agree with you. Have you discussed that 
practice with Mr. Dubinsky? 

Mr. McNirr. I have not seen Mr. Dubinsky. 

Senator Goldwater. Has any of your staff ? 

Mr. McNiFF. We have discussed this matter with some of the inter- 
national vice presidents of the ILGWU. 

Senator Goldwater. Are you getting any encouragement that would 
lead you to believe that they might be willing to do that? 

Mr. McNiFF. I don't know whether it will become a general prac- 
tice, but I do know that in some of the locals, local 155, Louis Nelson's 
local, he distributed a copy of the contract after we requested it. We 
requested it on behalf of the workers who came in and asked for it, 
but this has not become general practice as of yet. 

Senator Goldwater. Are you contacted by many workers who 
would like to have a copy of these papers ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Descending from the' ILGU, and speaking of locals 
in general, I would say that that is one of the biggest complaints and 
that whenever there is labor-management collusion, very often no con- 
tract exists. It is a verbal agreement between the crooked union and 
the crooked management to exploit the workers. Without a copy of 
the contract, the worker does not know where' h ' stands. 

I could give you a good example of how this liappens very often in 
New York City on vacation pay. Very often, the contracts in some 
of these industries have a clause about vacation pay stating that un- 
less the worker is employed in the period of July 21 to August 31, as 
a hypothetical figure, unless he is employed during that time he cannot 
receive vacation pay. 

What the employers then do is lay off about two-thirds of the shop 
for that period of time, and get out of paying all of the vacation pay. 
The workers then come into our organization and want to know if they 
are entitled to vacation pay. They have the idea that vacation pay is 
something that the law^ guarantees them. We try to explain tliat the 
vacation pay is provided for in the contract and if we don't have a 
copy of the contract we do not know whether they are entitled to 
vacations or not. 

Now very often workers are fired, are kicked right out of the union 
for asking for a copy of the contract in some of these racket locals. 

Senator Goldw^\ter. Mr. McNiff, does this occur with the union 
knowledge ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Well, for example, in local 1648 of the retail clerks, 
when that was under the leadership of David Lustigman, who is now 
in Atlanta for extortion, two workers went in and asked for a copy 
of the contract at the union headquarters and they were subsequently 
fired. 

Senator Goldwater. The union then is in collusion with manage- 
ment to deny vacation pay ? 

Mr. McNirr. That is one example. 

Senator Goldwater. And wlien management fires these people be- 
tween the period you mentioned 



3760 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. McNiFF. It lays them oif and then brings them back. 

Senator Goldwater. The union doesn't do anything about it'^ 

Mr. McNirr. No, because they have nothing to gain by fighting for 
the workers, and they will get the dues, regardless. 

Senator (toldwater. Does that occur in the International Ladies* 
Garment Workers Union ? 

Mr. McNiFF. No. 

Senator Goldwater. I don't want to prolong this, but would you 
be willing to give us a list of other industrial unions that you know 
are practicing that ? 

Mr. MgNiff. I could not give it to you right now. 

Senator Goldwater. I don't mean right now. But I say when you 
return to your office would you send it down to us ? 

Mr. McNiFF. I will go through the files and check all of those in- 
stances which we have. 

Senator Goldwater. Thank you very nnich. 

The Chairman. You may prepare any list that you care to and 
submit it, supplementing your testimony here today. Submit it under 
oath, the same as your testimony. 

Senator McNamara. Mr. Chairman, I think that this lack of ques- 
tioning leaves the conclusion that Dave Dubinsky is part of this kind 
of a deal. Do you mean to imply that i 

Mr. McNiFF. No, sir. Mr. Dubinsky is nowhere near, and he is so 
far away from this type of union that I would never like to give that 
impression. 

However, because Mr. Dubinsky \s miion is such a very good union, 
it does not mean that it is perfect. I think one of the places where 
it has fallen down is in distributing the contract to the workers. This 
is very fundamental. 

Senator McNamara. You mentioned a local of the International 
Ladies' Garment Workers, and what local number was it? 

Mr. McNiFF. No. 155. 

Senator McNamara. Is that an old local or a new local ? 

Mr. McNiFF. That is an old local. 

Senator McNamara. 155 ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes, sir. 

Senator McNamara. Then you mentioned the terms of the contract 
regarding the layoff instead of vacation pay. 

Mr. McNiff. That is right. 

Senator McNamara. What do you think the union could do about 
it, and what do you think they do not do about it that they should i 

Mr. McNiFF. Could I keep the unions straight ? This has nothing 
to do with the International Ladies' Garment Workers now. That is 
unions in general, and what could they do ? First of all, we will put 
it this way : A copy of the contract, even in a racket local, would let 
the workers know where tliey stand legally. Tliat is just a very funda- 
mental step. Now, unfortunately, even Avitli the contract from a racket 
local, generally there are no rights in it, anyway, so it doesn't help 
them out too iiiuch. But it is a step toward the right way. 

On this layoil, for example, if the union is in collusion with manage- 
ment, it will do nothing about laying oif three-quarters of the shop 
and then bringing them back 2 montlis later when this period is over. 

However, if the union is actually interested in the workers, it will 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3761 

see that such a chiuse does not appear; that you have to work from 
July 21 to August 21, or else you get no vacation pay. That is an 
obviously vicious way to exploit the workers. 

Senator McNamara. On the other hand, if it is a legitimate union, 
and they negotiate terms of a contract with the employers through 
collective bargaining, and this is the best that they can secure in such 
a process, then this could occur in a perfectly legitimate union. 

Mr. McISTiFF. It could occur in a perfectly legitimate union. The 
only thing is that the unions we liave come across in which it has 
occurred have not been legitimate unions. 

Senator McNamara. But it could also occur in legitimate unions. 
I do not think it is a charge in itself that is of great value to the 
committee unless we get some substantiation. 

Now, you might classify something as a legitimate union and 1 
might classify it as a racket union, and the reverse might be true, 
too. 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes, sir. 

Senator McNamara. So I think in fairness to these contracts that 
are negotiated legitimately, the terms have to be lived up to and in 
many instances the union recognizes that it should be better but are 
unable to obtain it. I am not talking about racket unions. 

Senator Ives. Mr. McNiff, I think that I know a little bit about 
the situation in New York where this matter is a matter of concern. 

Is the situation in which the employers generally find themselves, 
and I am not talking about these racket emplo3'ers — and I am talking 
about tliis idea of the layoff — is it that the employers generally just 
do not have the work so they have to lay them oft'^ The sufferer in 
this thing is largely the ujiion employment insurance fund in the 
State of New York. As you know, this year they tried to raise the 
rates in order to have sufficient amount with which to pay the benefits 
for this period of time, and extend the time of the benefits. They got 
into a political argument over the matter, and nothing happened. 

But that is what is back of all of this, and I am very sorry that it 
has become a part of this racket. But that is what the real situation 
is, as you know, in New York City. 

Mr. McNiFF. The seasonal situation ; yes. 

Senator Ives. Further than that, I want to say this for Mr. Du- 
binsky: I wish you yourself would try to get hold of him, and tell 
him that I told you to do so. 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. The Chair would suggest now, if we can, to let 
the witness conclude his statement, the prepared statement, and then 
we can make notes and come back to it. I believe we can make more 
progress that way. 

Mr. McNiFF (reading) : 

No. 4. Even the criminal provisions of the Taft-Hartley are often violated. 
It is a crime to deduct union dues without the signed authorization of the given 
workers. Twice the associutiou has handed over to the United States district 
attorney of the southern district. State of New York, sworn affidavits of workers 
from two shops, to the effect that dues were deducted without any written 
authorization. These shops were : Gilbertson Co., Brooklyn, then under contract 
witli Local 224, Allied Industrial Workers; and Freezmore Metal Products, 
Brooklyn, under contract to Local 122, International .Jewelry Workers Union. 
We mention these two shops because of the mass violations which occurred in 

89330— 57— pt. 10 12 



3762 IMPROPEK ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

them. However, in nearly every shop that we have investigated we find people 
from whom dues are illegally deducted. 

5. Union meetings, when held, are only at a shop level and these are held 
principally for the purpose of intimidation. As an example, we would like to 
briefly describe the last known New York City rank-and-file meeting attended 
by Lloyd Klenert, secretary-treasurer of UTW. 

Archie Katz, an ex-bookmaker and president of racket local 229 of the UTW, 
in an effort to ward off defeat in three of his shops where union shop deauthori- 
zation elections were filed, called a joint meeting of the shops in question. As 
a character witness, Archie Katz summoned Mr. Klenert, his international 
secretary-treasurer. Klenert told the workers that he understood that they had 
complaints and he was in New York City to solve them. One worker, from Macon 
Umbrella Co., rose and stated that he had been in the union since 1952 and was 
earning only $42 weekly. Klenert asked his name, consulted a list, and in- 
formed the worker that when he joined the union he was making only $36 weekly. 
Now after 5 years, he was earning $6 more every week. 

The worker replied : "Yes, but the Federal minimum law says $40 a week." 
Klenert, visibly angered, rebuked the worker and explained that UTW dues have 
been spent in political action to raise the minimum wage. The rest of the meet- 
ing was spent in Klenert attacking the workers as ungrateful for not appre- 
ciating his role and that of the UTW in the American labor movement. 

To illustrate in a more graphic fashion how these distortions of American trade 
unionism operate, we would like to cite some typical cases which have come to the 
attention of our oflSce. 

The Gilbertson Co. is a mailing house in Brooklyn. Two years ago organizers 
from Local 224, Allied Industrial Workers descended upon the shop. A meeting 
was held between the union and the employers, and a contract signed. The 
workers were then told they had a union. Initiation fees of $25 were deducted 
from their wages. Dues of $3.50 per month were exti'acted from an average 
$40 a week wage. There was no shop steward, no meetings, no seniority ob- 
served in layoffs, no grievances ever processed, no health and welfare benefits, 
and, of course, no contract was ever seen by the workers. 

What makes this situation even worse is the fact that many workers never 
even signed checkoff authorization cards as required by the Taft-Hartley. 
Still dues were deducted. 

We were fortunate here. We put these workers in contact with a bona fide 
union that organized them, struck the shop, and forced the employer to cease 
doing business with local 224. 

To illustrate what kind of men Dio surrounds himself with and how rackets 
and gangster control spreads once it has gained a foothold in the labor move- 
ment, we would like to sketch the activities of one Louis Lasky. 

A tragic example of injustice at the hands of this man whose immorality and 
inhumanity knows no bounds, came to our attention in January 1957 when a 
group of 100 Spanish-speaking workers, led by Juan Tavares, came into the 
ACTU offices and i-ecounted a tale of exploitation at the hands of RCIA, Local 
136, headed by Louis Lasky. 

Louis Lasky is an old friend of Johnny Dio and served as vice president of 
local 102 of the AFL Auto Workers. After a falling out between the two, Lasky 
went on to make a name for himself collecting racket shops as did Dio. Local 
136 of the RCIA was formed when Lasky and Dio split in 1952. It was for- 
merly one of Dio's United Auto Workers-AFL locals, and its list of ofiicers, 
while in the RCIA, reads as follows : President, Harold Weiss, Lasky's brother- 
in-law ; secretary-treasurer, Louis Lasky ; recording secretary, Louis Lasky ; 
business manager, Louis La.sky. 

But Lasky is an ambitious man, and formed several other unions. Lasky has : 

1. Local 136A, National Independent Union Council. 

2. Local 142 of the Aluminum, Metal Alloys?, and Allied Trades. 

3. Local 031, Amalgamated Textile Workers of America. 

4. The National Union of Butchers, Drivers, Helpers, and Warehousemen of 
America ; and 

5. The Amalgamated Metalcraft, Wood, Plastic, and Wireworkers Union, 
136A. 

They are all Lasky independents. 

For the past few years Lasky slowly transferred the members of his RCIA 
locals into the independent unions he controlled. By doing this he is able to 
keep all the dues money instead of paying the international per capita tax. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITTES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3763 

The following incident is a good example of how Lasky treated his members 
as mere pawns to be used for his own personal advantage. 

One hundred Puerto Rican workers were employed by Merit Enterprises, Inc., 
a metal factory which at that time was located in Queens Village. The com- 
pany planned to move to Brooklyn, N. Y., and wanted to get rid of tbe old 
workers, because they had started to assert their rights and Lasky was begin- 
ning to have diflSculty living up to his guaranty of labor peace. Lasky helped 
the employer get rid of the old employees by refusing to negotiate a new con- 
tract with the employer when the old one at the Queens Village plant ran out. 
This left the employer legally free to move his shop and tire all 100 workers in the 
old shop, open the new plant in Brooklyn and hire new more easily controlled 
workers at a lower wage scale. 

Lasky's gain in the transaction was the transfer of the company from local 
136 of the RCIA to Lasky's own personal union, local 136A. of N. I. U. C, whose 
president is Pearl Weiss Lasky, Lasky's wife, and whose secretary-treasurer is 
Daniel Lasky, his brother, and whose director^ — a symbolic title if there was one — 
is Louis Lasky. 

The RCIA situation also is worthy of study to illustrate how many of the 
welfare funds provide welfare only for the union officers. For example, in 
another now expelled RCIA union, local 433, headed by Al Cohen, the con- 
tracts required that an employer pay $5 per week per employee to a welfare 
fund and $10 per week per employee to the union to study a pension plan. 

When the international took over the books of this local 433, the welfare 
fund which was getting $10 a week per employee, had a balance of $7 in the 
bank and the pension study plan had a balance of $17. 

It must be constantly emphasized that such incredible mismanagemet of funds 
could not take place without the happy cooperation of employers and their 
representatives. 

Let me give you an example, the individual in question is Marshall M. Miller, 
a labor-relations consultant with offices at 1700 Broadway. l^Tr. IMil'pv was 
formerly a union organizer for the Upholsterers International Union. He was 
tired by the union for making collusive deals with employers in New York in 1949. 

Immediately he went into business as a management consultant. He ap- 
proached and was hired by many of the employers with whom he had made deals 
in the past. 

Miller first came to our knowledge when he appeared representing three dif- 
ferent employers who have contracts with an ex-bookmaker turned union leader, 
Archie Katz, president of Local 229, United Textile V\^orkers, AFL. H„> appeared 
at many NLRB proceedings and in open cooperation with Katz, attempted to 
keep the shops under local 229 control. 

He now has formed a management association, the Textile Trades Association, 
which according to its bylaws, was formed to "maintain freedom from unjust 
extractions, regulate conditions of employment, and maintain industrial peace." 

The real purpose of this association, which is by the way a union-dominated 
employer association, is to write a master industrywide contract to prevent the 
workers in the individual shops from decertifying local 229. 

Miller also has appeared to represent the Keystone Garter Co. recently. This 
company employed 60 Puerto Rican workers and for the past 4 years has paid 
the dues of all the employees to local 138 of the Distillery Workers Union. What 
the garter shop was doing with distillery workers, I don't know. 

The average wage here as in the local 229, UTW shops, was $40 a week. No 
welfare benefits, no seniority, no grievance procedure and no one even knew the 
union existed. Obviously, a type of industrial peace was fostered by Marshall 
Miller. 

Over and above Mr. Miller's career in labor-management relations, he also 
has time to be public spirited. He is a consultant to the New York State Legis- 
lative Committee on Industry and Labor. This is a title of honor he utilizes to 
create a facade of legitimacy. 

Senator Ives. I just want to interrupt you there. 

You say this Miller is consultant for the New York State Leo;isIa- 
tive Committee? Is that the joint committee on industrial and labor 
conditions in New York State? 

Mr. McNiFF. I believe it is. 

Senator Ivtis. This fellow is a consultant for it ? 

Mr. McNirr. He is. 



3764 impropp:r activities in the labor field 

Senator Ives. I am very <i^lad to learn this about him. The com- 
mittee will find ont about it, too. Thank you very much for the 
information. 

Mr. McNiFF. I might say, Senator, that this information appeared 
in a series on the New York situation, runnino; in the New York Post 
about 3 weeks ago. It identified Mr. Miller in this capacity, and as 
of yet, nothing has been done. 

Senator Ives. There would not be any opportunity to do anything 
yet. That committee was reorganized about 2 months ago. 

Mr. McNiEF. He uses this title to appear legitimate. 

Senator I^^s. What service does he perform for that committee ? 

Mr. McNirr. That I don't know. 

Senator Ives. Is he in research or something like that? 

Mr. McNiFF. The title he uses is "consultant." 

Senator Ives. What is his appearance? 

Mr, McNtff. I haven't a description of him. 

Senator Ives. Is he a short fellow ? 

Mr. McNeff. Could I see you on that later, Senator? 

Senator Ives. I wish you would give me full information about it. 
I am very much disturbed about anything like this. 

Go ahead, I do not want to interrupt you any more, and pardon 
me, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. McNiFF (reading) : 

In addition to the failures of the unions we have mentioned, all of which are 
members of the AFL-CIO, the situations treated hy the many indei)endent unions, 
unaffiliated with the AFLf-CIO are fantastic to a point beyond belief. 

Some indeiJendents, such as those of Lasky's, which we have already touched 
ui)on above, are larue-seale extortion outfits. Others, such as those affiliated 
witli Confederated Unions of American, National Independent Union Council, 
Allied Craft Unions, and the United Industrial Unions, are pathetic in their 
petty larceny. 

For example, Visamer Industries, a Brooklyn concern, signed a contract with 
Local 242. Amalgamated I'roduction Workers Union, in 1953. This union has 
filed 1 financial report in Washington in 1953, in which it listed assets of $4. 
As its oflice location, it listed first one address and then another. The former 
was a barbershop, the latter, a vacant lot. 

This situation would be very comical if it were not for the fact that the 
employer deducted $3 each month from every employee to pay this phantom 
union and gave substandard wages and no benefits in return. 

But in summary may we state that we believe that there are a few basic 
principles that can be adduced from this situation. 

First, any contract establishing a rate of pay of $40 to .$45 for a 40-hour week 
is immoral. It is not a living family wage. A union that contracts for such a 
wage does not deserve to exist, much less collect dues. 

Thus, our organization advocates the establishment of a provision on the part 
of the AFL- CIO that no local union may collect dues if its members earn from 
$40 to $45 per week for a 40-hour week. 

Secondly, the only effective cure of the Puerto Rican labor problem in New 
York must come through trade-union action. In this we commend AFI^CIO 
President Meany's concern for this problem. We heartily agree with the honest 
trade unionists like Harry Van Arsdale, of the International Brotherhood of 
Electrical Workers, and Jack Rubenstein, of the CIO Textile Workers I^nion of 
America, and Morris lushevitz, who are heading a special committee estab- 
lished by Mr. Meany to clean up this corruption in their program of raiding 
this element out of existence. 

Thirdly, we would respectfully urge the following amendments to the National 
Labor Relations Act which we think would strike at the heart of this problem, 
chiseling employers and their satellites, the union racketeers. 

These proposed amendments were approved after exhaustive debate at the 
12th National ACTU Convention held .Tuly 5, 6, and 7. 19.57. The new claU.ses 
added to the National Labcn- Relations Act would provide : 



IMPROPER ACTIVITrES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3765 

1. That any collective-bargaining agreement be void unless the appropriate 
unit has approved the agreement by an NLRB-conducted secret ballot. 

2. That any collective-bargaining agreement be void unless filed within 10 days 
after execution at a designated place open to inspection by members of the 
covered unit. 

3. That all moneys collected in violation of existing NLRB regulations and 
under voice contracts be recoverable from the employer and/or the union ofiicials 
involved. 

4. That it shall constitute an unfair labor practice for either the employer or 
the union to directly or indirectly enforce a void agreement. 

5. That it constitute a violation of the Criminal Code to collect moneys 
pursuant to a void agreement. 

These amendments would guarantee the employee an effective mechanism by 
which he would be able to approve and to have access to the contract under 
which he earns his livelihood, surely something which is but an elementary 
right of all employees. It would thus make private deals between crooked 
unions and crooked management almost impossible. 

In conclusion, we would like to state that the picture in New York City's 
marginal industries, is a complicated one. But one factor stands out. The mob 
is nearly in control of every union that deals in this type of shop. With the 
emergence of James Hoffa and John O'Rourke as leaders of the teamster unions 
in metropolitan New York, the Puerto Rican and Negro worker will be extremely 
hard pressed to ever gain honest democratic trade unionism. 

The Chairman. Why do you include Hoffa in that statement ? 

Mr. McNiFF. I included Mr. Hoffa, if I may say so, because while 
this may not be evidence admissible in court procedures, I was speak- 
ing from what you would call common knowledge in New York labor 
circles. In other words, it is the same thing as knowing who blinded 
Riesel but not being able to prove it in court. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. McNiFF (reading) : 

The alliance which has been made by Corallo-Dio-Hoffa and their petty satel- 
lites, Lrouis Lasky, Hyman Powell, Archie Katz, Doniinick Pape, and others, to- 
.i^etlier with their employer fronts, like Marshall Miller, has already brought 
honest New York City employers and their employees to their knees. 

Gentlemen, if this alliance is allowed to continue, we can assure you that over 
a million workers will be deprived of any bona fide union representation. 

The social effects of this collusion have already been felt by the taxpayers. 
Much criticism has been leveled at the Puerto Rican and Negro workers in New 
York City because they allegedly overflow the New York City welfare rolls. It 
has been our experience that over one-half of the Puerto Rican workers we have 
interviewed who are on welfare are receiving aid for dependent children or 
supplementary assistance. The cause of this is the happy cooperation of the 
employers and the unions to exploit the worker. Together they have created 
a depressed-job area. They have made it virtually impossible for an unskilled 
Puerto Rican worker, supporting a family, to earn over $4.5 a week. This situa- 
tion is costing New York City over $25 million a year in welfare payments alone. 
The looting of welfare funds has cast an overwhelming burden on our city 
hospital system, especially its clinics. 

In order to rid themselves of this type of economic slavery the workers must 
seek the aid of the bona fide union in New York City. In this process many 
strikes must ensue. However, any strike not supported by the teamsters in the 
marginal industries is almost i>reordaiued to failure. If the employees of an 
Allied Industrial Workers' shop strike to rid themselves of the AIW, a call by 
Mr. Dio to his cohort, Mr. O'Rourke, starts the trucks rolling away with the 
production. 

Should a decertification petition be filed, the employer simply picks up his 
cheap machines from Brooklyn, and with the help of the Dio-Hofifa-0'Rourke axis 
moves to the Bronx where he finds another friendly union to dominate and 
intimidate a new crop of unskilled and unlettered workers. 

The unknowing employer has no difliculty finding a union willing to supply 
him with a management consultant well versed in happy cooperation. 

The continuance of this situation may create a condition in which honest 
unionism shall cease to exist in New York City. 



3766 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chatrman. Thank you very much, Mr. McNiff. 

Senator Ives has a question. 

Senator Ives. The reason I am particularly interested in this is 
because it is a New York matter, and I know a little about it. In 
the first place, on page 4 of your statement, under paragraph 4, you 
refer to taking these matters up with the district attorney, but you 
do not indicate what kind of results you received. 

Did you get any results worthy of the name ? 

Mr. McNiFF. The letters that we sent to the United States district 
attorney of the southern district were transferred to the eastern dis- 
trict because of jurisdiction, and that caused a lag of time. 

Right now, they are in the eastern district, and as of yet, nothing 
has been done. 

Senator Ives. How long have they been there? 

Mr. McNiFF. Since February. 

Senator Ives. Since February ? 

Mr. McNiTF. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. Knowing how those courts are jammed up, I am not 
surprised at that length of time. 

Mr. McNiFF. Pardon me, may I correct that? I have the papers 
here. That was another case. I have the letter here. It was May 
20 when Mr. Ambrose sent it to the eastern district. 

Senator Ia^s. That is not too bad considering the way those courts 
are jammed up up here. There is another thing. I take it you are 
acquainted, having been in this field in New York State, with the 
fact that New York has a State labor relations board ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes, sir. 

Senator Im^.s. Have you ever used that? You are talking in your 
statement all of the time about the National Labor Relations Board 
and about the Taft-Hartley Act. 

We have a State Labor Relations Act in New York State, which I 
think is impoitant from your standpoint because I think a great deal 
of this activity is intrastate, is it not, and it might be fully as effective 
for you as the National Board. 

Mr. McNiFF. I must confer on one thing, and may I confer with 
counsel ? 

Senator Ia^s. That is what I am trying to find out. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. McNiFF. I just wanted to check this. The main reason why 
we have used the NLRB has been that the biggest weapon that we 
have been able to use in getting rid of racket unions has been decer- 
tification elections or union-shop deauthorizations. 

Senator Ives. Which the State Labor Relations Act does not 
provide ? 

Mr. McNiFF. It does not provide for it. 

Senator Ives. I realize that. 

Mr. McNiFF. What happens, and why we are so excited about the 
contract always, is that as you know the contract is a bar for an elec- 
tion for at least a peiiod of 2 years. So that what happens when you 
have a racket shop is this : 

Suddenly, they produce a contract, and the ink is still wet on it, 
which goes for the next 2 years. This makes it impossible for us to 
have an election or for a decent union to have an election to come in 
and take the shop. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3767 

Lacking the ability to have an election by a good union, we have a 
union-shop deauthorization election. This way, no more dues are 
collected by that racket union. What then happens is that most of 
these unions are only interested in the dues anyway, so when we get 
the dues thrown out, they disappear. 

Legally, they are still the bargaining agent for the 2-year period. 
However, once they have no dues, they just forget the shop ever ex- 
isted, and then a good union can come in. 

Senator Ives. Have you sought to appear before a legislative com- 
mittee to have the State law amended ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Honestly, Senator, we have been so busy just taking 
care of the cases that have come in to us 

Senator Ives. I can see you have been busy, but it occurs to me if 
you could get a State statute under which you could operate, you could 
use the State courts and things of that kind, I think that it might be 
fully as effective as what you are trying to do through Washington. 

I would suggest you try to get some legislation through the legis- 
lature of the State to help you. 

Mr. McNirr. Along the same lines of union-shop deauthorization, 
you mean, Senator ? 

Senator Ives. Yes. 

Mr. McNiFF. And decertification ? 

Senator I\'t;s. You may have trouble there. These racketeers may 
try to block you, you know, posing as union leaders, but I think you 
have a pretty good group in that legislature. 

Thank you. 

The Chairman. Are there any questions ? 

Senator McNamara. I think the young man has made a marvelous 
presentation, and I am sure overall it is of great help to the commit- 
tee, and I want to compliment him on coming here and cooperating 
with this committee. 

Certainly, this situation needs the attention of this committee and 
all decent people involved. 

On page 4 you spell out in great detail what happened at a union 
meeting starting out with, "Archie Katz, an ex-bookmaker," and so on. 
How do you get this information in such detail ? Were you there ? 

Mr. McNiff. At the meeting you mean ? Oh, yes, we were at the 
meeting. 

Senator McNamara. You were there ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes. 

Senator McNamara. Are you a member ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Of the union, no. Could I explain the situation 
there ? 

Mr. Katz attempted in this meeting to convince some of the union 
leaders in New York City and some members of the press that his was 
a good union and Klenert was supposed to come up and smooth things 
over. 

We were uninvited, but invited were Jose Perez of the Puerto Kican 
affairs committee of the AFL-CIO and, if I am not mistaken, I think 
Mr. Murray Kempton of the New York Post was there. 

Mr. Perez, after the meeting, said to Mr. Katz to the effect of, "Wliy 
invite me to this meeting? Obviously you were trying to put some- 
thing over on me." He was quite distressed about that. 



3768 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator McNamara. It is interesting to me that you were there and 
you go to these ends to follow it up. 

Mr. McNiFF. Sometimes we get thrown out. 

Senator McNamara. I think it makes it much more valuable. You 
are a full-time employee ? 

Mr. McNirr. No; well, during the summer I am. I am a student in 
the law school, or I will be in September. I might add about our 
organization that it is all volunteer work and that is why our staft' 
is so limited. 

Senator McNamara. You are paid to some degiee in the summer. 

Mr. McNiFF. During the summer I receive some expenses. 

Senator McNainiara. How does your organization get financial 
support ? 

Mr. McNiFF. We have members who believe in spreading Christian 
social principles, and we have a connnunion breakfast once a year 
which publishes a journal and in which ads are sold. We publish a 
newspaper, which gets some money in, and then we run a dance once 
a year. 

Senator McNamara. Obviously, you yourself do a lot of work that 
you do not get paid for. 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes. 

Senator McNamara. I think that you are to be commended for 
doing this job and I for one, speaking only for myself, appreciate your 
appearance. 

Senator Kennedy. I Avant to join Senator McNamara, Mr. NcNiff, 
in complimenting you for what you have done, and what your organ- 
ization is attempting to do. I think the facts you have brought: out 
liave been tremendously valuable to the committee, indicating who 
really pays for these racketeers in the labor union movement. 

Now, it is interesting that these people who come before us are 
supposedly trained union leaders, but are actually racketeers — people 
like Mr. Cross of the bakery workers. 

We had an example of his tieup with an employer in order to deprive 
the workers in one of his locals of a reasonable wage, and a comparable 
wage in the area around and com])arable to other locals. 

We had Mr. Klenert, who came before us for misusing union funds, 
and his name has come into this hearing as an exploiter of workers 
and now we have these other examples that you have given. 

I think it indicates these people that this committee has been investi- 
gating are not labor-union leaders. They live off labor unions. I 
think your testimony perhaps more than any other dramatizes this 
close tieuY) between corrupt employers and racketeers who move into 
the labor-union movement and exploit the worker. I think your 
testimony has been especially valuable in throwing light on this and 
I liope that any trade-union members who are looking in will realize 
hoAv important it is that these racketeers be thrown out of the labor- 
union movement, for their own interests, let alone the public interest. 

I think your testimony has been particularly lielpful and valuable 
and I am hopeful as time goes on the committee can attempt to develop 
this point more and more frequently. 

The only question which I had was with reference to your sugges- 
tions as far as amending the National Labor Relations Act. Do you 
feel these sugaestions are sufficient and that thev would do a measur- 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3769 

able job, or is it your opinion that in the last analysis it will be up to 
honest trade-union people to drive these hoodlums out ? 

Mr. McNirr. Senator, as I tried to say, first of all I tliink it is im- 
possible to legislate this out of existence, utterly impossible. I think 
it has been unfortunate and there have been some benefits and sonie 
loss from the AFL and CIO merger when they signed a nonraiding 
pact, because this has hampered good unions that have seen a bad 
situation and want to take it away from a crooked local. 

But if that crooked local happens to be affiliated, you can't raid. 
So, therefore, there is immunity there. It would be helpful if the 
AFL-CIO were to set up just one special committee a trouble-shooting 
committee, to take locals out of the international completely and put 
them under the arm of the AFL-CIO, and clean up the situation and 
then transfer them to those who have jurisdiction over them. 

That would be a very vital and a very important way of doing it. 

Now, this matter of contracts Avas suggested to us from the clause of 
the National Labor Rehations Act now, which makes it obligatory to 
file your financial statement. Before financials were filed in Wash- 
ington it was impossible for a worker to find out what the finances 
were. 

Now. nil he hns to do is ask Mr. Rothman, the Solicitor of Labor, 
and till out the proper affidavits, and he will get the financial state- 
ment that was filed by his union. 

Speaking otl' the cutl", probably every one of the crooked locals has 
crooked financials, but at least you have something. With the con- 
tracts, making contracts be filed would make it impossible to have the 
employer suddenly appear with a contract for the next 2 years. 

In other words, you would know when your expiration date is, you 
could get your strategy ready to bring in a good union and have a 
decertification election when that contract was up. 

Now, filing of contracts is just something which has to be done. 
Most of it has to be done by the AFL-CIO itself. 

Senator Kennedy. I am glad that you brought up that point. I 
know Mr. Meany mentioned to the committee that he is attempting 
to assist. I am hopeful that as a result of the work that they have 
done, and with your testimony, that they will consider taking further 
action. I am rather concerned that any possible amendments to the 
Taft-Hartley Act, which certainly could not come for another year, 
anyway, will really not irieet this situation which will exist in the 
next 12 months. So it has to be met partly by the legal authorities. 

While I know the court dockets are overcrowded, since May 20 have 
you had an investigation of your charge? 

Mr. McNiFF. We have received no reply since May 20. 

Senator Kennedy. In the last 2i/2 months, you have not heard any- 
thing ? Have you had an acknowledgement ? 

Mr. McNiFF, Other than from the southern district that it was sent 
to the eastern district ; no. 

Senator Kennedy. I think it is time that the eastern district met 
their responsibility in this. 

In 21A months, it seems to me that you ought to get some sort, of an 
answer as to whether they are going to do something or are not going 
to do something. 

I know that they are busy, but it seems to me that this is an out- 
rageous situation. I cannot believe they are that busy that they can- 



3770 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

not at least indicate to you if an investigation is taking place or when 
an investigation is going to take place. It seems to me that their 
responsibility to you and to the people who are involved in this is to 
take some action, or at least indicate when they are going to take some 
action. 

On the last point, it seems to me what is involved here, the people 
being exploited, Negroes and Puerto Kicans, are those who, through 
lack of being able to speak English, such as the Puerto Ricans, or 
lack of education, or lack of a community establishment for them to 
protect themselves, those are the people that are being lived oflf of by 
these people. It is the people at the bottom of the heap who have no 
protection of their own and no resources which they can fall back on. 

Is that correct? 

Mr. McNiFF. It is virtually a repetition of what has happened to 
every immigrant who has entered the United States. 

Senator Kennedy. That is why they have to depend on groups like 
yours, which is a volunteer group, or on the authorities. That is why 
I am particularly anxious to see some action taken by those in a posi- 
tion of responsibility in this area on your complaint. In any case, 
in summing up, I want to compliment you. I am hopeful that the 
AFL-CIO, even though they have done a good job in this field, will 
attempt to do more, in view of the "no raiding" which you have dis- 
cussed, and see if they can work out an alternate solution perhaps 
along the lines you suggested. 

The National Labor Relations Board and the local New York 
authorities can also work on it. 

It is a disgraceful situation. 

I am glad you brought it to our attention this morning. 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. McNiff, I want to join my colleagues who 
have complimented you on this report. I think it is by far the most 
outstanding one I have listened to in nearly 5 years of labor hearings. 

I want to compliment you on it, not only for your organization's 
sake, but for the work that you, yourself, put in it. 

I have just one or two questions. Have any of the larger retail 
establishments in New York City been guilty of the practices that 
you have outlined on pages 6 and 7 in relationship to the retail clerks? 

Mr. McNiFF. In all my comments, sir, I try to limit what I would 
say on my own personal firsthand information and the experience of 
our association, anything that I would say on that. All the work 
that we have done has been on what I would call fly-by-night shops, 
very marginal industries, men who are in business 5 years and then 
maybe out of it. 

I would say the better elements of business — and I want to mention 
one association which has done an awful lot, the Commerce and Indus- 
try Association in New York, headed by Thomas Jefferson Miley — 
on this business is very much against this. But it is what I would 
put in quotes, the "sharp operator," who wants to cut costs to the 
minimum, and the biggest cost to cut is labor. 

So we have honest industries paying a decent wage, competing 
against substandard industries who are just cutting the corner, and 
underselling their honest competitors by exploiting the workers. 

This is something that I think busiiiess is just as responsible for 
and should take just as active an interest in wiping out. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3771 

As I mentioned, the Commerce and Industry Association lias done 
a lot of work to try and get business to realize this is their responsi- 
bility, too. 

(At this point, Senator McNamara withdrew from the hearing 
room.) 

Senator Goldwater. I have one other question that touches on 
what Senator Kennedy was asking you. On page 8 you say "In addi- 
tion, failures of the unions we have mentioned, all of which are mem- 
bers of the AFL-CIO" and then you go on to discribe those that are 
not affiliated with this merged union. 

To your knowledge, has the committee on ethical practices been 
informed of these violations? 

Mr. McNiFF. Well, the committee on ethical practices has been 
informed on the violations of the unions in the AFL-CIO. We sub- 
mitted a 50-page document. 

Senator Goldwater. How long ago did you submit the evidence to 
them ? 

Mr. McNiFF. I can't get exact dates, but it was about the last week 
in May. Mr. Meany appointed Mr. McGavin and we met with him. 
]\Ir. McGavin spent about a month in New York, going back and 
forth from Washington to New York, investigating the situation, 
collecting information. I am not sure but I understand that he has 
submitted his report to Mr. Meany, and that it is being worked upon. 

Senator Goldwater. But there is no action as of yet ? 

Mr. JNIcNiFF. Yes. There have been some individual cases. I will 
just sketch one little one. What I want to emphasize constantly is 
that this is not like General Motors or United States Steel. These are 
all 60 people in a shop, so it is multiplied again and again. 

One example that was just recent was that district 65 of the Retail- 
Wholesale Clerks Union struck a shop in Manhattan which had been 
formerly in a crooked local of the jewelry workers. The international 
president of the jewelry workers, Mr. Powell, rescinded the jewelry 
workers protection from this crooked local and let district 65 come in 
and clean up the situation. 

In the meantime, the employer, who was trying to get around paying 
decent wages, was building a plant in Flushing. He also had a plant 
in Brooklyn. He was going to move both into Flushing, and make 
a deal with a crooked union. 

Actually, then, what he did was take all the business from the Man- 
hattan plant and put it in the Brooklyn plant, so that the strike in 
Manhattan was ineffective. 

The plant in Brooklyn was organized by the lUE, the optical 
workers division of the lUE, and they at first did not want to strike 
the Brooklyn shop, and did not want to support the raiding of the 
crooked union in Manhattan. However, after conferring with Mr. 
Meany and McGavin and the committee and discussing the entire 
issue, their complaint was that it wasn't in district 65's jurisdiction, 
that they were the optical workers, and if anyone was going to do it, 
they should. 

Well, after much conferring, they went right along with Mr. Meany, 
I tiiink he gave the initial push on it, the ItJE cooperated completely 
with district 65, would not let the employer run the shop out of Brook- 
lyn while the one in Manhattan was on strike, cleaned out the crooked 



3772 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

union, and now the AFI^CIO itself has not delegatecl this new shop 
in Flushing to either one of the unions. District 65 has the one in 
Manhattan. The IT"E has the one in Brooklyn. 

AVhen they move to Flushing, then it will be determined which one 
will take care of both. 

But they all cooperated in that situation, and that was just last 
week. It ran for i2 weeks, to clean up a very bad situation. 

That was a very good step. 

In unions, one" of the worst things is jurisdictional arguments. If 
the lUE had not cooperated, this could have stopped the clean-up 
right in the initi al stage. However, they said — 

Regardless of this jurisdictional argument we will go completely along with 
it, first clean out the racketeers and then we will take care of these jurisdictional 
questions. 

Senator Goldavater. That is veiy encouraging. Thank you very 
much. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman ? 

The Chairmax. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. McNiff, I want to join with the others in com- 
mending you for a fine statement. You rej^resent sinceie concern for 
the people involved, and it is a courageous statement. 

You have been associated with the Catholic Trade ITnions for some 
little time, have you ? 

Mr. McNiFF. While I was in college, for the 4 years, I went nights 
down to the organization. 

Senator Curtis. You are a resident of New York ? 

Mr. McNiFF. lam. 

Senator Curtis. I believe you stated that considerable of this work 
has been volunteer work on your part ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes. Well, the whole organization is volunteer. I 
want to stress that. I don't like you to get the idea that I am a one- 
man organization. We have lawyers that have worked on these cases 
time and time again, all without fee. 

Senator Curtis. I think your entire group are entitled to very high 
praise, not only for the fine work you have done but there is always 
a good reason for people not speaking out about abuses that exist in 
any field of activity. 

I will be quite brief, but there are a few points I want to clear up. 

These dishonest practices and collusion that you have talked about, 
that has not been confined entirely to the Puerto Ricans and Negro 
workers, has it ? 

Mr. McNiFF. No, they have not. However, our organization has 
come in contact, I would say, where 80 percent of the work has been 
with Puerto Ricans. We spotlight the Puerto Ricans because num- 
berwise that is tlie biggest group being exploited right now. 

Senator Curtis. And perhaps the dishonesty and exploitation is 
more pronounced and very much more commonplace with respect to 
these groups ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes, I think it is. 

(At this point. Senator Ives withdrew from the hearing room.) 

Senator Curtis. But these practices here do exist outside of those 
two special groups you mentioned ? 

Mr. McNiFF. I would say so. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3773 

Senator Curtis. I was impressed by what you said at the bottom 
of page 2 and the top of page 3, about the workers are afraid of 
both union and company; no meetings of the union are ever held; 
workers do not get a copy of the contract; workers who protest are 
fired, and so on, and the union elections are unknown. 

It is true at the present time a union or a bai.uaining agent can 
just be set up by almost anybody. 

It is a voluntary association, is it not ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes, that is right. 

Senator Curtis. Do you tliink that it might be appropriate for the 
Congress to give consideration, at least, to tlie possibilities of certain 
minimum requirements as to what constitutes a bargaining miion, 
and whether or not it should be incorporated as a nonprofit corpora- 
tion, or given some identity where the members can seek protection 
of the laws of tlie various localities where they are located? Do you 
think that should be explored ? 

Mr. McNiFF. This is speaking quite extemporaneously. 

Senator Curtis. Or do you think it should be done by definition 
in the National Labor Relations Act ? 

Mr. McNiFF. What I think as a constant stress with unions is that 
unions are basically democratically run. That is the one thing that 
can always save a union. 

I kiiow of so many examples of men who, in racket situations, stood 
up, had families, antl they really put themselves on the spot. They 
had other people together, and they fought these miions. Through 
the democratic process, they were able to take control. 

I would hesitate, very, very much to speak in favor or think of 
any legislation which would transfer it from voluntary to something 
like a corporation setup. I think it wouldn't be the right thing to 
do with unions. 

Senator CimTis. I certainly share your view on the idea of keep- 
ing it voluntary. But there is a problem in that somebody like this 
man Lasky that you mentioned says "I am the union" and that is it. 
Somewhere there should be some basic definitions of what constitutes 
a union and who can be a bargaining agent, sliould there not? 

Mr. McNiFF. I just received a note from our lawyer, something 
which I had completely forgotten, which might bear looking into, 
and that is an enactment like section 8 of the Waterfront Act of New 
York, where officers of unions may not be felons, where a convicted 
person may not hold an office. That might be a big step, but many 
unions may look with disfavor on my saying it. I think it would 
be a step at cutting down this racketeering. 

Senator Curtis. I was interested in the expression you used that 
when these corrupt and dishonest situations exist one remedy you 
could pursue would be the union-shop deauthorization. Would you 
expand on that a little bit ;• what you mean by it ? 

Mr. McNiFF. The union-shop deauthorization is a vote. I won't 
go through all the procedure of getting the vote. It is a vote which 
is administered by the NLRB, a secret ballot, where the voters decide 
whether they want to rescind the union-shop authorization. What 
that does, in effect, is make it possible for a person to work in the shop 
who is not a member of the union. 



3774 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

That is voted by a majority of voters. They decide that you can 
work in the shop without being a member of the union. Therefore, 
you do not have to pay dues. 

This is the way to getting the dues not paid to the union. 

Senator Curtis. In other words, if a union is in corrupt hands, 
or it is not serving the interest of the workers, they can refuse then 
to pay dues and still not lose their jobs ; is that right ? 

Mr. McNirr. That is correct, according to the law. However, in 
the struggles that we have had on union-shop deauthorizations, wher- 
ever there is a lawyer there is a way to delay, there is a way to get 
around it, and we have had some difficult fights. 

Senator Curtis. I understand it is difficult, but the objective you 
are driving at is a situation where these workers can protest against 
the treatment they get from a union by not paying dues and without 
losing their job ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes. Wliat I would say is if the union does not 
have the support of the people in the shop, obviously it should not 
represent those people. 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Mr. McNiFF. If they vote not to pay dues, obviously they do not 
think enough of the union to want it. 

Senator Curtis. Is it true that most of these dishonest contracts,, 
when they are entered into, do provide for a union shop ? 

Mr, McNiFF. The way I understand it, and I am open to correc- 
tion, originally when the Taft-Hartley was enacted there was an elec- 
tion to be held to establish a union shop. However, I think in over 
98 percent of the elections that were held by the NLRB on this clause, 
the union won. So it became sort of, let us say, senseless bureaucracy 
and repetition, and very cumbersome to have all of these elections, 
if in 98 percent of the time you knew what the outcome was going 
to be. 

So then this was taken out of the Taft-Hartley so you didn't have 
to have an election to establish a union shop. 

Senator Curtis. What I am talking about is. When there is collu- 
sion, these cases that are frowned upon, when there is collusion be- 
tween management and labor, and the members do not have access to 
look at their contracts and so on, in most of those cases is the union 
shop in there ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Theoretically it is. However, once there is collusion, 
what often happens is if somebody is a friend of the boss he doesn't 
bother paying dues. They just make an arrangement. The union 
says, "How many workers do you have" and the employer says, "200." 

"What is your low point ?" 

"One hundred and twenty-five." 

"From now on, send me dues for 150 people." 

Senator CuiiTis. In other words, it is operated as a union shop and 
in order to get at the corruption, one of the steps you take is to strive 
for this procedure that you referred to, a union shop deauthorization ? 

Mr. McNiFF. That is correct. 

Senator Curtis. As long as the practice of the union shop is carried 
out, then the union leaders have a hold over the workers; is that cor- 
rect ? Or, at least, they are financed in whatever they are doing. 

Mr. McNiFF. I wouldn't know whether it is the union shop that puts 
the hold over the workers. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3775 

Senator Curtis. I will put my question this way : What, then, are 
the advantages of deauthorization ? 

Mr. McNiFF. It opens up a way of not paying dues. It is just a 
roundabout way not to pay dues. That is the principal advantage. 

Senator Curtis. I understand that. 

Why do you not want them to pay dues, and what is gained when 
you shut off the dues ? 

Mr. McNiFF. When you shut off the dues, the union leaves, if you 
have enough of the people behind you. What also often happens is 
that that does not stop people from being fired or laid off. If the boss 
wants a crooked union and the union is working with him, and a 
union-shop deauthorization election is filed, they will, together, either 
lay off most of the people and bring in new people, and then we have 
to sign up their names, or they will fire, outright, the petitioner. But, 
luckily, under the Taft-Hartley now, being fired for union activities 
is an unfair labor practice, so we can go to the NLRB for this. How- 
ever, that generally takes 6 or 7 months. 

So the procedure involved in it certainly puts the employees in a 
difficult position. 

But if we do win the election, that means that no longer will these 
people have to pay dues. If they no longer have to pay dues, the union, 
who was only there to get dues anyway, will leave, nine-tenths of the 
time. 

(At this pomt. Senator McClellan withdrew from the hearing 
room.) 

Mr. McNiFF. If we are strong enough to win the election, generally 
we are strong enougli to have the workers all leave, go out on strike, 
if they try to fire the leaders, or if they try to lay off the good people 
in the shop. 

(Members present at this point: Senators Kennedy, Goldwater, 
Mundt, and Curtis.) 

Senator Curtis. I did not mean to imply that once you accomplished 
the deauthorization it solved your problems. But the big thing you 
gain is to shut off' the money that finances a bad labor union. 

Mr. McNiFF. Right. 

Senator Curtis. Again I want to commend you for a comprehensive, 
well thought-out statement and a courageous one, and all of your 
associates. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator Kennedy. Senator Mundt. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. McNiff, I am very sorry that I was detained at 
another meeting so I was not here when you read your statement. But 
I have read it from the manuscript while my colleagues have been 
interrogating you. I certainly desire to associate myself in congratu- 
lating you on the constructive and courageous nature of that state- 
ment. 

It has described a very shocking situation which, in my opinion, 
rivals, insofar as these Puerto Ricans in the city of New York are 
concerned, the conditions under which Negroes in America lived before 
the P^mancipation Proclamation, and I suspect, actually, that some of 
the Negroes in those days lived better than some of the Puerto Ricans 
under these deplorable racket-ridden union conditions that you have 
described. 



3776 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE K\BOR FIELD 

I believe and hope that our committee is going to be able to help 
write a second emancipation proclamation, which, insofar as the 
American working man and woman is concerned, is going to give the 
protection which is badly required. 

As I read your statement, it would appear that ultimately the tax- 
payers of New York City and New York State wind up holding the 
sack because of the racket-ridden conditions existing in New York 
City, because these poor workers wind up eventually on the public 
welfare rolls, do they not? 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes. They receive supplementary assistance. That is, 
if you earn $40 and you have a family of 6, the welfare department 
decides that you need another $1'2 in order to exist, and this comes 
from the welfare department. 

(At this point. Senator Curtis withdrew from the hearing room.) 

Senator Mundt. It w^ould seem indicated from that, that the State 
government of New York State and the city government of New York 
City, and the county governments involved, should join with this com- 
mittee in trying to work out some correction. This is a cancerous 
condition which can become even more serious than what is exposed. 

I sincerely hope that the representations that you have made to the 
AFL-CIO ethical practices committee are speedily acted upon. I 
am sure that there are some corrective steps that they could take. 

I am equally positive that legislation by Congress is going to be 
required, as you have indicated, to completely correct the situation. 

(At this point, Senator McClellan entered the hearing room.) 

Senator Mundt. I notice on page 9, you have five recommendations. 
1 want to ask you about reconnnendation 2, that any collective-bar- 
gaining agreements be void unless filed within 10 days after their 
execution in a designated plac«, open to inspection by members of the 
covered union. 

Do you anticipate in this family of five recommendations that you 
make that the National Labor Relations Board or some representative 
of the ethical practices committee, or some third party somewhere, be 
tliere to examine the books to be sure. No. 1, that the number of 
workers covered jibes with the number of workers from whom dues are 
being collected, and, 2, that they are receiving the national minimum 
wage provisions, whatever they happen to be, in that particular 
locality or in that particular line of work? 

Mr. McNiFF. Well, this specific clause would only say that any col- 
lective-bargaining agreement would be void unless it is filed. In other 
words, what that means simply is that when you make a contract, that 
a copy of that contract must be sent probably to the regional director 
of the NLRB. He w^ould then keep this on file. 

If a worker from a shop covered by that contract wanted to see 
that contract, he Avould send in a request to the NLRB, the regional 
director, who would then send him a photostatic copy. 

As for examining books, that wouldn't enter in here. That is a 
step we have not contemplated. 

To be honest, sir, my background has been limited to this type of 
business and I would not really be capable to speak in favor of examin- 
ing union books or things like that, to check figures. 

I do know, of course, that if you are paying substandard wages, 
under the minimum wage, that definitely the Government agencies do 
subj^ena the books and check them. They have helped in many situa- 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3777 

tions, where people have not been receiving the Federal minimum 
wage, and the company has been forced to pay all the back wages 
which they had not received. 

(At this point, Senator Goldwater withdrew from the hearing 
room.) 

Senator Mundt. The payment of substandard wages must form an 
inherent part of this whole racket, or otherwise there would be very 
little incentive for dishonest employers to engage in collusion with dis- 
honest representatives of labor. 

Mr. McNiFF. I would say, sir, that the Federal minimum wage is 
much too low, and if the Federal mininunn wage were more than a 
dollar an hour, at least $1.25, if there were some kind of hookup or 
correspondence b3tween the minimum wage and the cost-of-living in- 
dex, I think it would demonstrate that $1 an hour, $40 for a 40-hour 
Aveek, is far too little. Presupposing that the Congress were to raise 
the minimum wage to, taking a low ligure, $1.25 an hour, $50 a week, 
that would automatically force these unions to give the workers much 
iiearer a living wage, and then in order to stay in existence, they 
would have to get the worker ^not $50, but woukl have to get him at 
least $52. There is no sense paying dues for the Federal minimum 
wage. 

Senator Mundt. That is right. You get that as a consequence of 
law. 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. When you are talking about minimum wages, do 
you recognize the validity of the argument th t a national minimum 
wage is, m itself, an instrument of inequality because living conditions 
and cost of living in your hometown of New York City are a great 
deal clilferent from working conditions and living conditions and 
cost of living in my hometown of Madison, S. Dak.? A minimum 
wage, it seems to me, that is going to be equitable, and a minimum wage 
that is going to take care of the needs of New York City, would have to 
be a minimum wage which recognized zones or regions or areas. If 
not, it automatically has to be either too high in my part of the coun- 
try or too low in your part of the country. 

How do you propose to meet a situation of that kind? 

Mr. McNiFF. Well, sir, I wouldn't really want to go into the mini- 
mum wage at this point because that is a rather long and involved 
discussion. 

Senator Mundt. One of the many problems that confronts labor, 
and one of the roadblocks which prevents labor from getting the kind 
of minimum wage which you feel would be an actual honest minimum 
wage in New York City is the tendency to look at the country as a 
v.hole and say, "Well, everybody has the same cost of living, every- 
body has the same problems as they have in New York City." 

Such simply is not the case. 

If we can ever get a concept of the national minimum wage which 
recognizss the Federal Eeserve bank regions, zones, or something else, 
so that you deal equitably with the laborer wherever he lives, then 
some progress can be made. But there is this tendency to try to look 
at the whole country and say, ''What is good for New York City is 
essential for the whole country." 

That is not necessarily the case. 

89330— 57— pt. 10 13 



3778 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

I have lived in New York City. I know the extra costs involved in 
living in New York City as compared with living in the Midwest, for 
example. I do not think that New York City should try to impose 
bankruptcy wages on the Midwest any more than the Midwest should 
try to impose sweatshop wage standards in New York City. But I 
think those of you who are leaders in labor and interested in the work- 
ingman wherever he lives should recognize the complex nature of this 
country and approach the problems by regions and by zones so that 
you deal equitably with the worker wherever he lives and not just pick 
out a theoretical schedule and say, "This is what we probably need 
in the Battery, so surely this is what they must also need in Madison, 
S.Dak." 

Mr. McNirr, All I would say is that it should correspond with the 
cost-of-living index, as arranged by zone. 

Senator Mundt. As arranged by zones ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. That is what I have been saying. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further ? 

Senator Kennedy. When these Puerto Ricans get off the planes 
coming into New York, how do they get the job? Do they go to an 
employment agency? 

Mr. McNiFF. Sometimes they do. 

Senator Kennedy. Is there any collusion between employers and 
employment agencies? 

Mr. McNiFF. We worked quite a time on one. It was very difficult 
to in^'estigate. That Avas all I could say. We do not have proof to 
the fact on employment agencies. 

However, I will say that in one of the strikes that we ran, local 1648, 
on Morgan Leather Goods and Ruddee's Leather Goods shops on 
Greene Street, it was against the racket control by David Lustigman. 
Wlien we were on strike at that shop, the workers went out on strike 
and then through the labor school heard of us and came to us for 
advice. 

We kept them on strike. We helped them with the picket signs. 
While these people were picketing this racket union which was paying 
the low wages, that strike was broken, in part, by employment agencies 
licensed in New York City by the commissioner of license, Daniel 
O'Connor, who did nothing to help us, and the welfare department 
took people through the picket lines who needed jobs, and brought 
them rieht into the shop. 

Senator Kennedy. I am hopeful the Commissioner will be coopera- 
tive. I would think that when these Puerto Ricans arrive off these 
planes they are subject to exploitation immediately, particularly by 
the employment agency which might work with the corrupt union 
and manufacturer. 

I understand also that sometimes they pay a $25 initiation fee and 
then they are fired in 2 weeks, or the}'^ work a year to be given a vaca- 
tion and just before vacation begins they are fired. 

Mr. McNiFF. That is very often true. 

Senator Kennedy. In other words, if they are promised a week's 
vacation at Christmas, they work up to Christmas or 3 or 4 days 
before the vacation is to begin, and they are discharged ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes. 

Senator Kennedy. Do you have any cases of that ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3779 

Mr. McNiFF. I have many cases of that. I couldn't give it to you 
offhand, but I have it in the files. 

Senator Kennedy. The last point is this : You have been in many 
of the shops where these people work. What are the working condi- 
tions like as far as toilet facilities, lighting, air, and so on ? Are they 
sweatshops ? 

Mr. McNiFF. I would think it would shock a great number of peo- 
ple if they did two things : First, visited the factories that these peo- 
ple work in and then visit the homes that they pay good rent to live in. 

Senator Kennedy. Good rent ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Very good rent. Twenty dollars a week is not excep- 
tional for one room. 

Senator Kennedy. The Bureau of Labor Statistics found recently 
that it cost $52 a week, roughly, for a single woman to live in New 
York City on a minimum basis. You make the point that many of 
these people get $42 and they have to deduct something for families. 
Do they have families ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Most of them have families. 

Senator Ivennedy. Obviously, they are all living on the thin edge. 
I hope someone who is in a position of responsibility in New York 
City will visit these shops. I am hopeful you will cooperate with 
them and go through them and check them for these matters of work- 
ing conditions, lighting, toilet facilities, and so on, which I under- 
stand are very bad. , 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. In that connection, you said about $40 a month 
for a single room in New York City ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Not $40 a month; no. Twenty dollars a week for a 
single room. I have seen that often. 

Senator Mtindt. That would be 50 percent of their income. 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. The people with families do not live in a single 
room, do they ? 

Mr. McNiFF. Often they do. _ 

Senator Mundt. With families? 

Mr. McNiFF. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. TVhat would they have to pay in New York City 
to live in what you would call reasonable living conditions, either an 
apartment with a suite of rooms or a home, where a family is supposed 
to live ? What would they have to pay ? 

Mr. NcNiFF. Well, it is such a big problem of housing in New York 
City. To begin with, you don't have enough apartments. The public 
is always slow to help public housing, which is desperately needed. 
The people who own these slums are certainly not going to assist in 
their destruction. 

I would say to live decently in New York you could do it on $20 a 
week, you could do it on $80 a month, which would even be a little less, 
for rent. However, you will come across the discrimination barrier. 

Senator Mundt. In New York State? My, my. Is there discrim- 
ination there ? I thought they were the gilded white lily. 

Mr. McNiFF. Right now in the city council, they are trying to pass 
an antibias law, housing law. 

Senator Mundt. Is there not a State law against discrimination in 
New York ? I have been hearing a lot about a State law. 



3780 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. McNirr. Not in housing. 

Senator Mundt. Not what? 

Mr. McNirr. Not in housing. 

Senator Mundt. Not in housing ? 

Mr. McNiFF. No. 

Senator Mundt. It is in hotels, but not in private homes ? 

Mr. McNiFF. In public places. That is one step, to try and allow 
Puerto Ricans 

Senator Mundt. Do they have zones up there where certain colors, 
where certain national groups have to live in areas ? 

Mr. McNiFF. No; it is rather fluid. 

Senator Mundt. It is what? 

Mr. McNiFF. It is very fluid. You will find in one block Irish, 
Italians, Jews, Puerto Ricans, and Negroes. 

Senator Mundt. I would think that New York City would be fair 
game for our eager-beaver Supreme Court to work on. Certainly that 
must be a violation of the Constitution or violating something. 

Mr. McNiFF. I would think New York City itself in that antibias 
law is taking a very good step. I hope it is passed. Of course, the 
real-estate interests have much power. 

Senator Mundt. I gathered from your statement you felt that pub- 
lic housing was the only solution to the substandard living conditions. 

Mr. JNIcNiFF. Not the only, but it is very big. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, if you are going to perpetuate sub- 
standard wages, tlien probably substandard housing become a neces- 
sity. If employers, unions, and the rest, work to give a man a regular, 
respectable working wage, then the pressure is off on public housing, 
because private realtors would build houses and apartments and 
people could afford to pay respectable rent. Is that correct ? 

Mr. McNiFF. I w^ouldn't say it is an either-or situation. First of 
all, you have the crowding. That is one of the reasons. Even if the 
person was earning, a Puerto Rican earning, $65 a week, he has to live 
in the same slums because of the crowded conditions, because the anti- 
bias legislation has not yet been enacted and endorsed. Not only 
should we have public housing, but many unions have housing. 

Senator Mundt. I think you might explain to a country boy from 
South Dakota just why my poor depressed farmers back home should 
pay extra taxes to build public housing in the city of New York so they 
could continue to practice discrimination, which they vote against 
in Congress and practice at home. It is confusing to me. I have 
to explain this to the folks back home where we have no substandard 
living and no discrimination. 

Mr. McNiFF. This is the whole thing of the interrelatedness of the 
Nation, sir. I couldn't at this point go into a discussion of why one 
region should help another region. I have not prepared myself 
that much. 

Senator Mundt. I am not trying to get you out on a theoretical 
basis on all the complications we have in the economy. I am simply 
trying to point out that in my opinion as you move away from dis- 
crimination in New York State and New York City, and as you move 
away from substandard wages in New York City, you also move 
away from the necessity of shouldering off on the general taxpayer a 
responsibility for building houses, because once people have income, 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3781 

and once there is no discrimination, private capital is always willing, 
eager, and able to build apartments and homes to rent to people who 
have the money to pay for them. 

Mr. McNiFF. I would say so. 

The Chairman, Thank you very much, sir. 

The Chair joins with the other members of the committee in ex- 
pressing appreciation and commending you for your testimony. 

Mr. McNiFF. Thank you, sir. I wish to thank the committee for 
its kind attention Avhile I spoke. 

The Chairman. Call the next witness. Counsel. 

Mr. Kennedy. Bertha Nunez. 

The Chairman. AVill you be sworn, please ? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God ? 

Miss Nunez. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF BERTHA NUNEZ, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
ROBERT S. PERSKY 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and em- 
ployment. 

Miss Nunez. My name is Bertha Nunez. I work for Century Prod- 
ucts Works, 2926 White Plain Road. I started to work in Century 
on March 18, 1955. We don't know how this union came into the 
shop. 

The Chairman. Just one moment, please. 

Counsel, are you appearing to advise her ? 

Mr. Persky. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. The record will reflect the same counsel appearing 
for her as appeared for the previous witness. 

Now you may proceed. Go ahead and tell us your story. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell a little bit of your background, first, 
where you Avere born ? 

Miss Nunez. I was born in Honduras, Central America. I am 27 
years old. I want to give you a story on how everything was started. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell when you came to this country ? How 
long ago did you come ? 

Miss Nunez. I have been in this country 4 years. 

Mr. Kennedy. You learned English once you got here ? 

Miss Nunez. Well, yes ; I learned some. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then you went to work for this company ? 

Miss Nunez. Then I started to work in Century March 18, 1955. 

Senator Mundt. Would you tell us how you first got your first job ? 

Miss Nunez. I worked in other shops before. My third job over 
here was in Century Products. 

Senator Mundt. I am interested in how you got your first job when 
you first came to this country. Was it through some relative, a friend 
of yours, or how ? 

Miss Nunez. I went to an agency, and I paid $12 to buy my job, and 
I took the first job that way. 

Senator 'Mundt. For $12? 

Miss Nunez. $12, yes. But I know now some other way. In the 
shop I work right now, the company were with the agencies, and the 



3782 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

workers have to pay $17 to buy the work, and sometimes they just 
work for 1 month, and then later they fire them. 

Mr. Kennkdy. They pay $17 ? 

Miss NuxKZ. $17 for the shop, for the job. 

Mr. Kennedy. The worker pays tliat to the employment agency ? 

Miss Nunez. To the employment agency. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they work just a month and they are fired? 

Miss Nunez. And then they are fired. 

Senator Mundt. Plow does the worker pay it? Is it in cash, or do 
they take it out of the first month's wages? 

Miss Nunez. If they have the money, they pay cash. If they don't, 
so they pay by terms. Most of the workers in that shop, they go for 
the agency. 

Mr. ICennedy. How much were you making in your first job when 
you came here ? 

Miss Nunez. AVlien I came here I was making $32. That was the 
first shop I had, the first job I had. But when I start to work for Cen- 
tury, I was making ^36, and then was when the union came in. I 
think I am going to give you the story first on how the union came in? 

Mr. Kennedy. How many employees do you have in Century? 

Miss Nunez. We have 150 employees. All are Spanish, most of 
them. 

Mr. Kennedy. "V\Tiat? 

Miss Nunez. Ninety percent are Spanish workers. 

Mr. Kennedy. Ninety percent are Spanish workers? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Out of the 90 percent that are Spanish workers, how 
many speak English? 

Miss Nunez. About 4 percent. 

Mr. Kennedy. Four percent? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. So very few workers speak English, is that right ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. A few of them speak English. Most of them 
don't know how to speak English. Most of them are Puerto Ricans, 
Most all of them are Puerto Ricans. 

Mr. Kennedy. TVhen you first came there, you were making $36 ? 

Miss Nunez. Thirty-six dollars. 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1955 ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes, in 1955. And 1956 was when the union came in, 
and I got a raise of $38, but I have to pay $1 a month dues. 

Mr. Kennedy. You got a raise up to $38 ? 

Miss Nunez. Rut I have to pay the $4 a month dues. 

Mr. Ke^s^nedy. Four dollars a month in dues, is that right ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. ^Vlien the union came in, what union was it that 
came in? 

Miss Nunez. Well, it was the Allied Industrial Workers. 

Mr. Kennedy. Allied Industrial Workers? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Local number what ? 

Miss Nunez. Two hundred and fifty. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have a vote amongst the employees as to 
whether you wanted the union? 

Miss Nunez. No. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3783 

(At this point. Senator Kennedy withdrew from the hearing room.) 

Miss Nunez, One day before they told all the workers to stay in the 
sho]) after 4 : 30 because the union was coming to talk to the workers. 
So most of the workers stayed in the shop, and later on two delegates 
from local 250, Neil Levin and Albert, I think it is, a Spanish organ- 
izer for local 250, Levin spoke to us. 

Mr. Kennedy. There were two organizers that came in ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. One was Spanish, Alverez ? 

Miss Nunez. And the other one was Neil Levin. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then the foreman for the employer told you you 
would have to stay afterwards ? 

Miss Nunez. The foreman told the workers we would have to stay 
because the union was coming to talk to us. So then Neil Levin spoke 
to us and he promised wage increases, benefits, and a lot of things. 
Then most of the workers refused to join local 250, but they talked 
to us, Neil Levin talked to us, if we don't join local 250 we are going 
to be fired. 

So then everybody 

Mr. Kennedy, You were told that the employer would fire you 
unless you joined the union? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Go ahead. 

Miss Nunez. So then everybody has to join local 250. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the initiation fee for the local ? 

Miss Nunez. The initiation fee was $1 a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was the dues. Did you have to pay any initia- 
tion fee when you first came in ? 

Miss Nunez. No; the initiation fee was $15 and some persons they 
were forced to pay $18 and $20, you see, because sometimes they take 
the dues in the first month and they pay $15. So sometimes they fired 
the workers. Tliey give layoffs to the workers. When they come 
back to work, they start to take the book again, so they pay $18 or 
$20 for a book. 

Mr. Kennedy. The initiation fee was $15, $18, or $20 ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Some workers paid $20, some paid $18 and some paid 
$15? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

]\Ir. Kennedy. And after they paid, some of them were fired ? 

Miss Nunez, Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they might have been rehired and they would 
have to pay the initiation fee all over again ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And' in addition to that, you ]Daid your dues, is that 
right, of $1 a week ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. "V\n^ien the organizer was there from local 250, was 
the employer there at the same time? 

Miss Nunez. The employer, the boss, Mr. Klein, and the foreman, 
Walter, they were present all the time with us, and Walter, the fore- 
man, he helped Neil to sign the cards. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was present when it was announced to the 
workers ? 



3784 IMPROPER ACTIVmES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Miss Nunez. Yes, he was present. 

Mr. Kennedy. When he announced that unless they joined the 
union they would be fired ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes, they were present. 

Mr. Kennedy. The employer was there at the time ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes, the boss. 

Mr. Kennedy. The union organizer had gone in and talked to the 
employer prior to the time he talked to you ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you continue, then ? 

You all joined the union at that time? Did you get a copy of 
your contract? 

Senator Mundt. Would you bring out what this meant in terms 
of wages ? Did they get more wages or less wages ? 

Mr. Kennedy. You got a raise to $38 a week ? 

Miss Nunez, That is what I said before. I was making $36, and 
they give me $38, and I have to pay $4 a month dues. 

Senator Mundt. So you came out $1 a week raise ? 

Miss Nunez, Yes, and the next raise we got was when the $1 mini- 
mum Federal wage came out, to make $40. 

Mr. Kennedy. In addition to the $1 a week, you mentioned the $15, 
$18 or $20 that you had to pay initially. 

Miss Nunez, Yes, 

Mr, Kennedy, Did you get a copy of the contract that was signed ? 

Miss Nunez. Nobody saw the contract. We always asked to see 
the contract, but they never wanted to show it to us. One day a girl, 
she grabbed it from Levin's hands. 

Mr. Kennedy. She grabbed it? 

Miss Nunez, Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. She grabbed it out of Levin's, the organizer's hands ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes, and she say that much of the contract would be 
inked out. 

Mr. Kennedy. That many of the provisions were inked out ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand that the contract that was to be 
signed for you was just to be for 1 year? Were you told that it was 
for 1 year ? 

Miss Ni'NEz. Yes. In tlie summer 1955, when Neil give the cards, 
he say that it was going to be for a year contract, but then when he 
come again he told us that the contract is for 2 years. Before he say 
it was for 1 year, when he start to talk to us, to say did we want to 
join the union, but later they put it 2 years in the contract. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you hear that there was any pension or welfare 
benefits in the contract? 

Miss Nunez. They don't give nothing to us. 

Mr. Kennedy. No health or welfare? 

Miss Nunez. No welfare, no benefits. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any arrangement made as far as seniority? 

Miss Nunez. No. They do whatever they want with the workers. 
Some of the old workers they got fired, and they would give layoff to 
them. During the layoff time, they were taking new workers. I 
figure they take new workers because that way they start to pay dues 
again, and start with the union and everything. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then they get the initiation fee? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3785 

Miss Nunez. They get the initiation fee. 

Mr. Kennedy. So it wouldn't matter when they Lay people off 
whether they had been there a long time or a short time ? 

Miss Nunez. It doesn't matter. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tell me, did the union ever process any grievances 
by the employees? 

Miss Nunez. No. In the 2 past years, I know in local 250 we only 
have about 4 or 5 meetings. I went to those meetings, and Neil Levin, 
he sit at a table and then all the workers started to talk at once and 
nothing was accomplished, because everybody would talk at the same 
time. Somebody would call him a racketeer and then the meeting was 
ended. 

Mr. Kennedy. The meetings that you did hold or did attend, the 
workers started talking about their grievances? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. He just sit at the table, you know, and he don't 
call attention to the workers. He start to talk to one or another one. 
That is not the kind of meetings we are supposed to have. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did the workers complain at that time about the 
fact that some of them had been there many years and were laid off? 

Miss Nunez. We give the complaint to them, but they never did 
anything. 

Mr. Kennedy. What were the conditions in the shop itself that 
you work under ? 

Miss Nunez. In winter, the factory was unheated. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was what? 

Miss Nunez. Unheated. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was not heated ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. And then in winter, in December 1956, the fac- 
tory was so cold one girl, I remember, she was pregnant, she asked 
for a few days off' because of the cold and they refused it, the fore- 
man refused to give her the days off, and then she contracted pneu- 
monia and lost the baby. She asked the union for some benefits, but 
the union don't do anything. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were there any facilities at all to keep the plant 
warm in the wintertime ? 

Miss Nunez. I think vso. If she wants to do something 

Mr. Kennedy. Was it cold all the time in the winter? 

Miss Nunez. One time everybody went home. Nobody would stay 
in the shop because it was so cold. Then it was the time when they 
start to fix the heats. 

Mr. Kennedy. What about in the summertime? Are the con- 
ditions difficult then ? 

Miss Nunez. In summertime, we have a lot of troubles right now. 
It is very hot, but one time they were going home again, and then 
the boss called me because I am the shift steward, he called me and 
say to me what he can do, all the workers want to go home. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the reason they wanted to go home? 

Miss Nunez. Because it is too hot, and they need some more fans. 
It is too hot in there and they can't work, so they want to go home. 
At that time, they promised us in 1 hour they are going to get some 
fans. So we waited the hour and they bring about four fans and 
now it is a little better. 

Mr. Kennedy. What about the woi'king conditions themselves, 
other than being; too cold in the winter and too hot in the summer? 



3786 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

What about the conditions under which you work as far as the work 
that you were doing ? 

Miss Nunez. Well, over there, they like to rush thg people too 
much and they like to get all the orders and rush the people to 
make an extra work, and then later give layoffs to the workers be- 
cause they rush too much. 

Mr. Kennedy. They would rush you through your work and then 
there would be layoffs. 

Miss Nunez. Yes. They would give layoffs. 

Mr. Kennedy. What about vacation? Was there any stipulation 
as to what vacation you were to receive ? 

Miss Nunez. On the vacations, they would give layoffs or fire the 
people before the holidays or the vacations and then they don't want 
to give the vacations to the workers. That was the trouble we have 
right now. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just before you were to receive your vacation you 
would be fired ? 

Miss Nunez. No; they don't want to give the vacations. Before 
they would fire you. 

Mr. Kennedy. Before you would receive the vacation, you were 
fired from the job? 

Miss Nunez. Laid off or fired. They never called them workers 
back again. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever make a protest against this union, 
local 250 of the Allied Industrial Workers ? 

Miss Nunez. Well, yes. 

In the first time, some of the workers went on the strike. That was 
the first time. 

Mr. Kennedy. When was that? 

Miss Nunez. That was in November 1955. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. And you were striking against the union at that 
time? 

Miss Nunez. Yes, they were striking against the union because 
they don't have no benefits, and they were tired of paying dues and 
getting nothing. So they write to the National Labor Kelations 
Board, but they were told that because of the contract bar rule they 
can't obtain the certification election. Therefore, we have to remain 
and stay in local 250. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. So you had to go back and stay ? 

Miss Nunez. And stay with local 250, yes. We went that way for 
a few months, but we always keep complaining to the local and they 
never did anything. 

They would fire the people. 

So one day we tried to ao something and I went to El Diario. 

Mr. Kennedy. To whom? 

Miss Nunez. To the Spanish paper. We need some help, so we 
went to the Labor Relations Board first and they couldn't do any- 
thing, so the workers went on strike, in November 1955. So they 
make a strike. 

The boss promised the workers 5 cents raise, so the workers come 
back to work again. 

That was the first strike they have. 

At the next time, I was the one who started everything. I say to 
you, we need some help, and I went to El Diario. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3787 

Mr. Kennedy. That is the Spanish paper ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes, for help. 

Mr. Ejennedy. You went to them after November 1955 when you 
struck against the union ? 

Miss Nunez. No, that was 

Mr. Ivennedy. Wait a moment. In November 1955, you went on 
strike against the union ? 

Miss Nunez. That was the first strike. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you went to the National Labor Relations 
Board and they were unable to help you because of the technicality 
in the law, is that right ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you went back to work and at that time tlie 
employer gave you 5 cents an hour increase in wages ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you continued for awhile and then you decided, 
speaking for the rest of the employees 

Miss Nunez. I was the leader. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were the leader and you decided to go to the 
Spanish newspapers ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. I went over there and asked for help. We 
made a group of about 20 persons. Jose Roman 

Mr. Kennedy. Who is he, the editor ? 

Miss Nunez. He is a reporter, I guess. 

Mr. Kennedy. R-o-m-a-n? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. He sent us to the Association of Catholic Trade 
Unionists. 

So we start to work the first week with small groups, and later they 
introduced to us the organizer for 485. So then we have an agree- 
ment with the National Labor Relations Board for elections, but we 
still have to pay the dues to 362. That is what I don't understand 
myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. We are ahead. You had local 250 ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then, this time, did you have any general organ- 
izational meetings of the local ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. We started to have a lot of meetings. 

Mr. Kennedy. No, I mean, did the miion call any, did your union, 
250, the gangster union ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. They called a meeting. But that time, George 
Knight and Neil Levin called a meeting, but nothing was done. 

(At this point, Senator Kennedy entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently, in 1956, did they come along and 
attempt to transfer you from 250 to 362 of the teamsters ? 

Miss Nunez. They may call it transfers, but they never say anything 
to the workers, just the company and the unions, they make the 
transfers. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you were transferred from local 250 ? 

Miss Nunez. From local 250, yes, I was transferred to local 362 of 
the teamsters. 

Mr. Kennedy. She went to 362 of the teamsters, which originally 
had no members at all, Mr. Chairman. 

You will notice on the chart that the officers of 250 originally went 
to 258 of the teamsters, and then they all transferred subsequently 



3788 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

into 362, and brouolit the shops. You can see from the lines they 
also brought some of the shons from 250 down into oG2. 

You were transferred. Were you ever consulted, were the em- 
ployees ever consulted, about whether they wanted to transfer to the 
teamsters ? 

Miss Nunez. They never say anything to us. One time Mr. Klein, 
the boss, called me to his office and he told me that no one in another 
local is going to represent the workers than 362, that that was the 
union we were supposed to have now. That w^as when we went to 
the National Labor Relations Board, and we agree that we have an 
election. We win and local 485 got 106 votes. 

Mr. Kennedy. We will get into that. 

You were transferred to 362 ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then you were still objecting because there 
was no increase in wages, and the working conditions remained the 
same ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You weren't able to have any of your grievances 
processed ? 

Miss Nunez. Nothing at all. 

Mr. Kennedy. The older employees were still being fired ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. There was no attention paid to seniority ? 

Miss Nunez. None. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you could never get in touch 

Miss Nunez, We were having about a year without a raise. 

Mr. Kennedy. Without a raise ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you couldn't get in touch with your union rep- 
resentatives ; is that right ? 

Miss Nunez. No. We used to call the local and nobody would 
answer. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you decide to strike again, to try to get a differ- 
ent union ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, through the suggestion of ACTU, did 
you go to local 485 ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. 485 is 

Miss Nunez. I went to 485 lUE-CIO. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went to 485 of the lUE ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes, of the CIO. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you able, then, to get permission to have a 
strike and have an election in the plant ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. We have a strike. We were working with them 
for 7 months, and we have on a strike, and the strike was about 5 
minutes, because then the bosses agreed with the 485. After that was 
when we went to the National Labor Relations Board. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tlien was there an election held in June of 1957? 

Miss Nunez. The election was on June 24, 1957. 

Mr. Kennedy. June 24, 1957 ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3789 

Mr. Kennedy. And tlie election was whether you would have local 
362 of the teamsters, 485 of the lUE, or no union at all; is that right? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you remember what the election results were? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. We got for 485, 106 votes. 
• Mr. Kennedy. 106 votes for 485 ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. And for no union we got 1 vote, and for 362 
they got nothing, the racketeers. 

Mr. Kennedy. The racketeers got nothing ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. The lUE of local 485 got 106 votes, no-union vote 
was 1, and local 362 of the teamsters was no vote ? 

Miss Nunez. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did tlie same people that represented 250 of the 
Allied Industrial Workers also represent 362 of the teamsters? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that correct ? 

Miss Nunez. They were before the automobile workers, and then 
with the Allied Industrial Workers, and then was the teamsters, 362. 
But the same delegates were all the time in the three unions. 

Mr. Kennedy. You spoke about the employer of Century Products, 
that he was anxious to have you get into 250 of the Allied Industrial 
Workers. What was his position toward 485 of the lUE ? 

Miss Nunez. He told me that 

(The witness conferred Avith her counsel.) 

Mr. Persky. She wants the question repeated. 

Mr. Kennedy. I was wondering about the position of the em- 
ployer. Was he against you going into any other union? While he 
was for you going into 250 of the Allied industrial Workers, what 
was his position toward the employees going into some other union? 

Miss Nunez. He called me to his office and he promised to me wage 
increases or he is going to see that I am a floorlady, if I stop fighting 
local 250. 

Mr. Kennedy. He called you into his office and promised you an 
increase in wages and told you that he would make you floorlady if 
you would stop fighting local 250 ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. So I told him "No, I can't do it," because I was 
representing the workers and I want to try to do something for them. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he tell you that he would close the shop? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. He told me that if another local than 250 came 
to the shop he was going to close the shop or he was going to move or 
anything like that. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was going to close the shop if any other local 
came in other than 250, or he was going to move ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes. One time in front of the shop I went out to the 
shop, and there was Neil Levin there. I call him a racketeer, be- 
cause he would just go to the company when he had to get the dues, but 
he never spoke to the workers. He would always go at the time when 
he would have to get the money. 

INIr. Kennedy. He came in to get the dues, but he never addressed 
the workers ? 

Miss Nunez. Never address the workers. 



3790 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. The only contact in your shop between the union 
and the shop was between the employer and the union, not between 
the employees and the union ? 

Miss Nunez. That is it. 

That day I went out, and I called him a racketeer. He was talking 
with the foreman. So he say to me that I was going to be sorry for 
what I was doing. 

Mr. Kennedy. A^Tiat did he say to you ? This is the foreman ? 

Miss Nunez. No. Neil Levin told me that. I called him a racketeer, 
and I told to him how come any time he come to the shop he never 
spoke to the workers, he always go to the office. I call him a racketeer, 
and he say to me that I was going to be sorry for what I was doing. 
But I never was afraid. I told him he was going to be sorry. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any conversations with the foreman 
about what you were doing? 

Miss Nunez. No. They used to talk to me sometimes, and they say 
to me to think about what I was doing because somebody was trying to 
hurt me or something like that. 

Mr. Kennedy. The foreman said to you that you would be sorry 
for what you were doing ? 

Miss Nunez. Well, he told me, too, the same thing that Neil Levin 
told me, that maybe someday somebady is going to hurt me. 

The Chairman. It appears that we cannot conclude with this wit- 
ness before lunch. We would probably have to run sometime longer. 

Therefore, we will recess until 2 o'clock. 

You will return at 2 o'clock. 

The committee stands in recess. 

(Whereupon, at 12 : 25 p. m., the committee recessed, to reconvene 
at 2 p. m., the same day. ) 

(Members present at the taking of the recess: Senators McClellan, 
Kennedy, and Mundt.) 

AFTERNOON SESSION 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

(Members of the select committee at the convening of the session: 
Senators McClellan, Ives, and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. Senator Ives has a message he wishes to read. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, I have received a telegram from one 
of my constitutents which I should like to read because I think it has 
a direct bearing on what we are doing, and I assume that you may 
want to make a statement concerning it as chairman. 

It reads as follows : 

Am watching on TV iiresent proceedings Select Commission on Union Affairs. 
No one asks who are the employers dealing with alleged racket-controlled unions. 
Suggest you ask right after lunch today. 

Well, I think the answer why that is not being clarified in each 
instance is perfectly clear. I will turn this over to the chairman be- 
cause I think it is more proper for him to make the answer. 

TESTIMONY OF BERTHA NUNEZ, ACCOMPANIED BY HER COUNSEL, 
ROBERT S. PERSKY— Resumed 

The Chairman. The witness who is testifying presently I think, 
stated the name of lier employer. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3791 

Did you state where you worked this morning ? 
Miss Nunez. Yes. 

The Chairman. I have forgotten the name of it. Wliat is the name 
of the company ? 
Miss Nunez. Century Products Works, Inc. 

The Chairman. What do they manufacture, or what do they 
produce ? 
Miss Nunez. Electrical appliances. 

The Chairman. You have testified here this morning that your 
employer is in collusion with these union racketeers. That is what 
you testified and that is the effect of your testimony. The Chair will 
say that there is no disposition whatsoever on the part of any member 
of this committee to withhold the name and the identity of any em- 
ployer who may conspire with labor racketeers or others to deprive 
working people of their rights and benefits to which they are entitled. 
Now, we did have on the stand, and I wonder if he is here this morn- 
ing, and it is difficult for us to remember everything that we might — 
the witness, Mr. McNiff. Is he present? 

We could recall him and ask him to name some of the employers. 
Senator Curtis. JMr, Chairman, right in that connection, do you 
know who is the head of the company for whom you work ? 
Miss Nunez. I think you mean the principal in the company? 
Senator Curtis. The manager or president or whoever seems to be 
in charge of running things for that company. 
Miss Nunez. Yes ; Mr. Sam Klein. 
Senator Curtis. Will you spell the last name ? 
Miss Nunez. K-1-e-i-n. 
Senator Curtis. What was the first name ? 
Miss Nunez. Sam, S-a-m. 

The Chairman. Incidentally, I see counsel is present who was pres- 
ent with Mr. McNitr this morning. 

Do you have the names of any of those employers that he referred 
to? 

Mr. Persky. The Association of Catholic Trade Unionists will be 
glad to supply the names of all of the employers mentioned in Mr. 
McNitf' s statement. I am not prepared at this time to give you a 
written list, but it will be forwarded to the committee. 

The Chairman. The list will be received and announced, and 
placed in the record. It will be received under oath just as the testi- 
mony was received this morning and since he was the witness and was 
sworn, let Mr. McNiff send it to us. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, in that connection, it seems to me that 
the list should be made public. 

The Chairman. I said I would read the list when we received it. 
Senator Ives. All right. 

The Chairman. I want to receive the list under oath. We do not 
want to do someone an injustice when we are talking about people. 
We want to have the witness under oath. 

Mr. Kennedy. I might say that the ACTU organization has put 
out a booklet consisting, I believe, of about 75 or 80 pages, giving 
vai'ious examples of the type of thing that was discussed this morning. 
It might be that you would want to make this booklet a part of the 
record for reference, at least. I think it bears particularly on the 
problem that we have been discussing. 



3792 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. This is a pamplilet put out by the Association of 
Catholic Trade Unionists. That may be made "Exhibit No. 8" for 
reference. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 8" for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

The Chairman. All right, we will proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. I think we have just about finished with Miss NunezJ 
I just wanted to bring her back and thank her for coming down, and 
express my appreciation for her help. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further that you think of that 
you might testify to that you did not tell this morning ? 

Miss Nunez. No; I think that is all. I think that I am finished. 

The Chairman. You think you have finished ? 

Miss Nunez. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. The committee thanks you very much for your 
attendance and for the help you have given. 

Miss Nunez. I want to thank you all myself for letting me appear 
in this meeting. 

The Chairman. You may stand aside. 

Who is the next witness ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Mario Montalvo. 

The ChairMxVN. Do you solemnly swear that the evidence you shall 
give before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Montalvo. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF MARIO MONTALVO, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS 
COUNSEL, ROBERT S. PERSKY 

The Chairman. State your name and your place of residence and 
your present employment or business. 

Mr. Montalvo. I was born in Puerto Rico and I came here in 1946. 

The Chairman. Give your name and where you now live. 

Mr. ]\Iontalvo. My name is Mario Montalvo, and I live at 60 Stan- 
hope Street, Brooklyn. 

The Chairman. What is your present occupation ? 

Mr. Montalvo. I was hired as a foreman at the Del Pen Co. 

'ine chairman. The Chan- regrets to announce there is a rollcall, 
and members of the committee have other duties besides holding these 
hearings, and we have a duty to vote. We will take a recess for a few 
minutes Imtil we can return. 

(Thereupon, a brief recess was taken.) 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

(Members of the select committee present : Senators McClellan, Ives, 
and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. Did you state where you are now employed ? 

Mr. Montalvo. I work now at the Del Pen Co., 141 West 24th 
Street, New York. 

The Chairman. That is the Del— D-e-1— Penn Co., 141 West 24th 
Street, New York ? 

Mr. Montalvo. That is right. 

The Chairman. Let the record reflect that the same counsel appears 
with the witness. 

That is a pen- assembly plant ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3793 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, you were born in Puerto Rico. How old were 
you when you came to the United States ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Twenty-one years old. 

Mr. Kennedy. And wliere did you go to when you came to the 
United States ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. I went to Flemington, N. J. 

Mr. Kennedy. And how old are you now ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Thirty-two years old. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you moved from New Jei-sey to New York 
City? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long ago ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Eleven years. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you started working in New York City ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. In your first job in New York City, how much were 
you making then ? 

Mr. MoNTALVO. $83.60. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much money are you making now ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. $58 a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, from October 15, 1956, to about December 25, 
1 956, were you employed l 

Mr. MoNTAEVO. I was woi-king at Miro Pen Co., 561 Broadway, New 
York City. 

Mr. Kennedy. "What did they make there ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. All writing instruments. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many employees or how many workers were 
there ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo, About 160 people. 

Mr. Kennedy. And were most of them Puerto Rican extraction ? 

Mr. MoNTALVO. About 45 percent, and the rest Negro. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the rest of them were Negro ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. About 45 percent were Puerto Rican, and the rest of 
them were Negro ; is that right I 

Mr. MoNTAi.vo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were hired at that job as a foreman ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you were hired at $60 a week ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now was there a union at that shop when you came 
to work ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes ; Local 250 of the Allied Industrial Workers. 

JNIr. Kennedy. JNIr. Chairman, that is one of the unions that we were 
interested in, and it was formed by Mr. Johnny Dio in October 14, 
1952. 

Now, what was the average pay of the employees at the shop ? 

Mr. AIoNTALVo. About 90 percent, $40 a week, $1 an hour. 

Mr. Kennedy. $1 an hour I 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And did you learn how the shop became organized? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes. I learned from a steward. 

89330 — 57 — pt. 10 14 



3794 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. The shop steward told you how it was organized? 

Mr. MoNTALVO. Yes, sir. One day James Iscola came into the sliop. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was the organizer for local 250? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, sir, and he went into the office and spoke with 
the bosses. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was Mr. Morgan ? 

Mr, MoNTALVo. Yes, sir, and there was a conference for about three- 
quarters of an hour, and then later he called one of the workere, 
Johnny, and he told him, "There is a union in the shop."' He gave 
a local 250 card, and a working paper, and they signed cards and 
working hours. 

Mr. Kennedy. So the employer received the cards from the union 
organizer, Iscola, and then came out and had the cards distributed 
among the workers and told them that there was a union going to be 
in the shop now, and that they were all to sign the cards. Is that 
right? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much was the initiation fee of the union? 

Mr. MoNTALVO. $10 initiation fee. 

Mr. Kennedy. And how much was the dues ? 

Mr, iSIoNTALvo. $1 a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did everybody have to pay the initiation fee and 
the dues ? 

Mr. Montalvo. No. Some workers did not have to join the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. The favorites of the boss, special employees, they 
did not have to pay the initiation fee or the dues; is that right? 

Mr. Montalvo. That is right. 

Senator Ives. May I ask a question? Was your employer in any 
way involved in this? 

Mr. JMontaevo. Will you repeat the question again, please? 

(The witness consulted with his counsel.) 

Mr, Montalvo. Yes, 

Senator Ives. Did he make the deal himself ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes. 

Senator Ives, He made the deal, your employer? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes. 

Senator Ives. He made you join, that is it, your employer? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives, I am talking about your boss. He is the one who made 
the deal for you with the union ? Your boss made the deal ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes. 

Senator I^-es. And you had a checkoff, did you? You had your 
dues deducted from your pay by your employer, by your boss ? 

Mr. Montalvo, Well, I never joined the union. 

Senator I\tes, You never joined? 

Mr, Montalvo, Because I was a foreman. 

Senator Ives. You were the foreman ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. How about the members of the union? Do you know 
about them ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes ; the members of the union, they had to join. 

Senator Ives. But what I am driving at is, did they have their dues 
taken out of their pay ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes ; that is right. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3795 

Senator Ives. Before they got their pay ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. That was all agreed and arranged by the boss who 
made you join the union, and made them join the union ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. That is right. 

Senator Ives. What is the boss' name ? 

Mr. MoNTALVO. Mr. Morgan and Mr. Isadore. 

Mr. Persky. There are two individuals involved. The first one's 
name is Mr. Morgan and the witness has said that the other one he 
calls Mr. Isadore, but does not know his last name. 

Senator Ives. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Kennedy. The contract was signed between your boss and the 
union, and did you ever see a copy of the contract? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. One time I asked the boss for the contract and he 
told me he didn't have it. 

Mr. Kennedy. What is that again ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. I asked him about the contract and he told me that 
he didn't have it. 

Mr. Kennedy. You asked him for the contract and he told you that 
he did not even have it ; is that right ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did any union official ever come in and talk to the 
employees ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Never any unionman came around to talk to the 
workers. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any idea, or did you learn what the 
terms of the contract were ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo, Well, when Mr. Iscola came last summer, in 1956, he 
told the workers there were to be three paid holidays. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, did you learn any of the other terms of the 
contract? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. No. 

jNIr. Kennedy. Did you learn that there were any health or welfare 
benelits ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. There were no health or welfare benefits? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any process for serving your grievances? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Nothing like that. Was there any procedure for 
seniority ? 

Mr. MoNTALVO. None. The boss was able to fire people anytime 
tliey want. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were there ever any general meetings of the mem- 
bers of the union ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. No meetings. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you say that the employer was free to fire 
any of the employees that he wished, did that ever happen, that he 
fired employees who had worked there a long period of time? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any personal knowledge of that? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you as a foreman, were you ever instruated to 
fire anyone? 



3796 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Yes, sir. Every day they gave orders to fire people 
without any reason, just because they figured out they were smart 
men and hiter on they could make trouble. 

Mr. Kennedy. You say tliat he would have you fire the smart 
people in the plant who would make trouble for him? 

Mr. MoNTALVO. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you would be forced to fire them; is that right? 

Mr. MoNTALv-). Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever protest against this ? 

Mr. IVIoNTALVo. Yes, 1 day I went on strike against them. 

Mr. Kennedy. You led a strike against this ? 

Mr. MoNTALVO. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And what happened then, how long did the strike 
last? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. About S^/^ hours, not even that long. About 3 or 4 
hours. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you picket the shop ? 

Mr. McNTALvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did your signs say ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo (quoting) : 

This is a racket shop, local 250 is Die's local. Racket local must be destroyed. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had another sign saying — 
Racket locals must be destroyed? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you walked up and down in front of your shop 
with that ? 

Mr. McNTALvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you were striking against your own union; is 
that right ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And what did the employer say to you then? Did 
he say he would give you better wages ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Well, for some people, for about 90 percent they got 
a $2 increase. 

Mr. Kennedy. After you went on strike against your own union ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Yes, sir; and 10 percent of the employees got a $4 
increase. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then you got more paid holidays ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Six paid holidays. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you received six paid holidays ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. And the union dues were paid by the boss. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did any officer of your local 250 appear at the picket 
line, when you were picketing? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, subsequently, after you led this strike against 
local 250, in the shop and the deal that had been made between the two, 
was your employment terminated and were you fired by your boss? 

Mr. McNTALVo. Yes; 3 or 4 days before Christmas of 1956. He 
called me into the office and there was a policeman there. He told me 
because I don't trust the company and they don't trust me, I would 
have to leave. 

Mr. Kennedy. He said to you, because you did not trust the com- 
pany and the company did not trust you, you would have to leave. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3797 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So did you leave then ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. They paid me off and the policeman escorted me out 
of the shop. 

Mr. Kennedy. The policeman escorted you out of the shop ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then did you go to work for the Del Pen Co., at 141 
West 24th Streets 

Mr. MoNTALvo. No ; I went to work at that company the last week 
of February of 1956. 

Mr. Kennedy. In February after you left this other employment, 
you went to work in February of 1957 for the Del Pen Co. ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. That is ri|rht. 

Mr. Kennedy. 141 West 24th Street, New York ? 

Mr. MoNTALVO. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tliatisapenassembly plant; is that right? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many workers are employed there ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Fifteen employees. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the average pay at that time ? 

Mr. MoNTALVO. $40 to $42 a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. And was the ])lant organized at the time that you 
came to work for them in February of 1957 ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. W^as there any attempt to organize the plant ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes ; on June 4, 1957, Mr. Iscola. 

Mr. Kennedy. The same one who had come from local 250 ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Yes, sir, and he went into the office and as soon as I 
saw him I recognized him, that he was for local 250. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you saw him come into the plant, he went into 
your boss' office and you recognized him as the same man that had 
represented local 250 ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. That is right and this time he was representing 
local 362 of the teamsters. 

Mr. Kennedy. Once again local 362 is one of the teamster paper 
locals, and the shops of 250 ultimatelv came down into local 362 in 
June of 1956. 

Now, what did you say or what did you do at that time ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Well, the Del Pen Co. boss called three workers 
into the office and he told them he got a union for them and so he gave 
a card to us to sign, but they refused to sign the card. 

Mr. Kennedy. They refused ? He brought them into the office and 
said he had a union for them to sign up with and they said, "We don't 
want to sign now. Why don't they call you into the office ? " 

So were you called in then ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. At that time I was working in the shop. 

Mr. Kennedy. He brought Mr. Iscola out into the plant and intro- 
duced him to all of the employees? 

Mr. MoNTALVO. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then did Mr. Iscola speak to you ? 

Mr. MoNTALVO. When he started to talk to the workers, I told him 
he is a racketeer. 

Mr. Kennedy. You told him he was a racketeer ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes. 



3798 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. You said they were all racketeers ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you make that statement in front of your fellow 
employees ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. When Iscola was speaking to them ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he say about that ? 

Mr. Montalvo. He didn't say he was a racketeer and he negotiated 
a contract with the boss. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. He said what? 

Mr. Montalvo. He could help us to sign a contract with the boss. 

Mr. Kennedy. He could tell the boss to sign a contract ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir ; I don't let no workers sign the card. 

Mr. Kennedy. You would not let any of your fellow employees 
sign the cards for local 362 ? 

Mr. Montalvo. I called him a racketeer, and I went back to work. 

Senator Curtis. May I ask, was your boss present during this 
conversation ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. He heard you call this union leader a racketeer 
twice ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Is there any union at Del Pen now ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, now is Local 485 of the lUE. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did they come into your plant ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Well, the same night we no sign for the local 362 
and I went to the Catholic Association. 

Mr. Kennedy. The Association of Catholic Trade Unionists? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you had a talk with them ? 

Mr. Montalvo. I explained to them what happened, and we set 
a meeting for the next evening with all of the workers for 485. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you arrange a strike of your fellow employees? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, 5i/^ hours. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went out on strike for 5^4 hours ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. In order to become members of local 485 of the 
lUE? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that successful? 

Mr. Montalvo. We struck the shop for 5% hours and then we were 
recognized. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Felder — was he one of your employers ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was the employer there ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he attempt to prevent you or dissuade you from 
joining up with 485 of the lUE? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes. After the strike he called me into the office 
after work and he told me he would give me $100 and a steady job 
for life. 

Mr. Kennedy. He said if you would not join 485 he would give 
you $100 a week and a steady job for life? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3799 

Mr. MoNTALvo. For life, if I talked to the other workers to throw 
out support of 485 and make them join the union, 362. 

Mr. Kennedy. If you would tell the workers to join local 362 of 
the teamsters and not to join local 485 of the electrical workers he 
would give you a job, $100 a week, and the job would last for life; 
is that right ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. What did you say to him ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. No. I said I am not a doublecrosser. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are not a doublecrosser ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, 485 of the lUE is there at the present time? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, sir ; that is right. 

Mr. Kj:nnedy. Of the employees there, you have about 13 employees 
there. 

Mr. Montalvo. Now it is 7. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many of them are Puerto Rican ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Six. 

Mr. Kennedy. Six out of the seven ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir, and the other is a Negro. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

Senator Ives. I would like to ask the witness a question regarding 
any boss he ever had. 

Do you know whether any of the bosses you ever had starting with 
the first one, who was Morgan — was that his name ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. Do you know whether they paid any money to the 
leaders of these so-called unions ? 

Mr. Montalvo. I don't know. 

Senator Ives. You don't know anything about any of that, and 
you never heard anything of that kind ; did you ? 

Mr. Montalvo. No. 

Senator Ives. Thank you. 

The Chairman. What I would like to inquire about, did the union 
ever perform any service for the working people at those plants? I 
am talking about the first one, the first one from which you got fired. 
You got fired where you were working, sometime about Christmas? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You were a foreman and you were not a member 
of the union ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. As a foreman, you had the opportunity to observe 
and to know if the union performed any service for the working 
people ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Did it perform any service? Did the union then 
help the workers get any benefits whatsoever ? 

Mr. Montalvo. The union never obtained anything for any of 
the workers. 

The Chairman. Did they ever come around to see about their 
working conditions or make any effort to get them an increase in 
wages ; or do anything ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Never. 

The Chairman. You have been in New York some 11 years ? 



3800 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You worked at different places ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. I assume you know a lot of the people from your 
own country. 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you know where they work ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You visit with them ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you know of any of them that get any real 
protection from these racketeer unions ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes ; but right now in the Duro Pen Co, they have 
the same union. 

The Chairman. They have what ? 

Mr. Montalvo. The same union, and before they have 250, Allied 
Industrial Workers, and now they have the local 362 of the teamsters. 

The Chairman. They have local 362? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. They have been able to get some benetits? How 
recently was that ? 

Mr. Pi:RSKy. The witness misunderstood your question, and he 
would like to make a statement. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Montalvo. No, they have no benefits. They have no benefits 
at Duro Pen. 

Mr. Persky. He thought you were asking for similar situations 
and you were asking for situations which were dissimilar, and he 
did not understand that. 

The Chairman. What I am trying to find out, is this a general 
practice up there with respect particularly to your people, and the 
Negroes wlio work in the same plants? In other words, they are 
pretty much forced to join a union, and your boss or the management 
simply puts you in a union, and tells you you have got to join, and 
yet you get no benefits from it ? 

Mr. Montalvo. When anybody has to join the union, they always 
took the initiation fees. 

The Chairman. I understand they took the initiation fees, but 
they were told they had to join the union by their boss. 

Mr. Montalvo. By the boss, surely. 

The Chairman. And then after they once joined and paid their 
dues, the union gave them no service and did not help them in any 
way, is that correct? 

Mr. Montalvo. No, sir. 

The Chairman. You got no help from them? 

Mr. Montalvo. The union was no help. They did nothing for us 
in the plant. 

Senator Imss. 1 would like to ask the witness a question, following 
up what you are talking about. 

You understand the word "rackets," don't you ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. You know what a racket is ? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 



IMPROPER ACnVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3801 

Senator Ives. Are most of the unions where your friends, the Puerto 
Ricans, work, and I am also talking about the colored people in the 
area of New York City where you live, are most of the unions where 
they work run bv the rackets? Are they racket unions, about all of 
them ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Not everybody. 

Senator I\'es. Not everybody, no, but how many would you say, or 
how large a percentage? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. I think about 90 percent. 

Senator Ives. 90 percent? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. About 90 percent; yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. Are run by the rackets ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. Were the Puerto Ricans and the Negroes in that area 
of New York ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. That is a pretty serious situation then, Mr. Chair- 
man. 

Mr. MoNTALVO. I could point out many places in New York. 

Senator Curtis. How many years has this bad situation existed ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Well, for about 3 or 4 years. 

Senator Curtis. Now, in some of these companies, the bosses were 
willing to enter into such an arrangement because it gave them an op- 
portunity to exploit labor, is that correct ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Yes, that is right. 

Senator Curtis. Were there some instances where the union leaders 
used methods of violence or intimidation, or to incite fear in order 
to deal both with the employees and management ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes, but they never shared with the workers. 

Senator Curtis. Do you know whether they used threats and intimi- 
dation and violence in any of their acts, regardless of who they dealt 
with ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. I don't understand. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. There was some of that? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Did you ever have any trouble with union leaders 
yourself ? I mean did they cause you any trouble ? 

Mr. MoNTALVO. Well, at the Duro Pen factory. 

Senator Curtis. Wliat happened ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. The local 250 was trying to raid the shop but I was 
there as a foreman also, and so when the official came around, he was 
trying to organize the shop, I don't let nobody sign the cards, and so 
that evening he called the boss after dinner and after dinner the boss 
came over to me and explained to me what was happening. He said 
he would like to put the union into the shop, but I told him, as long as 
he gives the bonetits, he was given vacations with pay, he treated good 
the people, I didn't think the people wanted a union. 

So the boss paid attention to me, and so he don't let nobody sign the 
cards, and he stopped signing the cards. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Counsel, I didn't quite understand that. 

Mr. Persky. The w^itness has told you of an instance where he 
talked the boss out of letting the union 250 get into his shop, by the 



3802 IMPROPER AcnvrriES m the labor field 

argument that "Mr. Employer, the benefits you give us now are 
better than those we would get with local 250." 

Senator Curtis. In that case, the boss agreed with you? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. And quit doing business with that union leader? 

Mr. MoNTALVO. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. What was that boss' name ? 

Mr. MoNTALvo. Mr. Beline. 

Senator Curtis. What was the name of the company ? 

Mr. MoNTALVo. Duro Pen Co. 

Senator Curtis. How long did you work there ? 

Mr. MoNTALVO. Seven or eight months. 

Senator Curtis. Now, this situation of corruption and wrongdoing 
and racket unions that you said has existed for 3 or 4 years, is that 
pretty generally known by everybody that you see ? 

Counsel, would you explain to him, if you wish. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Montalvo. Well, there is a Spanish paper, and they read about 
the racketeering, and now they know a little bit. I know most of 
them, about 30 or 35 percent of them have lost their job because they 
don't speak English, and so how can they live and work. 

Senator Curtis. The things you have been telling us about here 
are quite generally known by many, many people, is that right? 

Mr. Montalvo. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further ? 

Thank you very much. You may stand aside. 

Mr. Montalvo. Thank you. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Samuel Conoval. 

The Chairman. You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall 
give before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL CONOVAL 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, please. 

Mr. CoNOVAL. My name is Samuel Conoval. I live at 139-10 28th 
Eoad, Flushing, Long Island. The company name is Carnival 
Spraying Co., Inc., of which I am the president. 

The Chairman. That is your company? 

Mr. CoNovAL. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Have you talked to members of the staff regarding 
your testimony? 

Mr. Conoval. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You waive the right to have counsel present? 

Mr. CoNGVAL. I have spoken to my counsel, and he doesn't tliiuk 
it is necessary for him to appear here. 

The Chairman. You have taken his advice ? 

Mr. Conoval. That is right. 

The Chairman. You may proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Conoval, you run the Carnival Spraying Co., 
Inc.? 



^ ^^fer EvtPROPE'R ACTivmE'S en the labor field 3803 



Mr. CoNOVAL. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is at 144 West 27th Street ? 

Mr. CoNovAL. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You do commercial spraying of enamel and lacquers 
and small objects ? 

Mr. CoNovAL. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You also do work for the United States Government 
on a subcontract basis ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many employees do you have ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. Steady employees ? I have 14. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many employees working in your shop? 

Mr. CoNovAL. Eight now I have about 20. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have a contract with any union ? 

Mr. CoNovAL. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What union ? 

Mr.CoNovAL. It used to be 649. It is 269. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, 649 was the first one formed by Mr. 
Dio, and then these paper locals were form.ed, and the shops from 649 
went into 258. Davidoff brought his shops down to 258, and Curcio 
brought his to 269. 

Do you have a contract with the teamsters ? 

Mr. CoNovAL. Yes, sir. Mr. Dunne has it. 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1951, or so, were you approached by a union or- 
ganizer from 649 ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. At that time it was 102. 

Mr. Kennedy. Local 102, and it became 649 subsequently ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was the local that was formed by Johnny Dio. 

You were approached by Benny the Bug Ross, were you ? 

Mr. Conoval. I knew him as Benny Ross. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, he is Benny the Bug. 

Mr. Conoval. So I found that out. 

Mr. Kennedy. He came up and approached you about signing up 
your shop ? 

Mr. Conoval. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you enter a contract with him at that time ? 

Mr. Conoval. Not immediately. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you do? 

Mr. Conoval. At first he wanted all the people, and naturally I 
refused. 

Mr. Kennedy. You didn't want him to talk to the people ? 

Mr. Conoval. No; I didn't say I didn't want him to talk to the 
people. 

Senator Curtis. Do you mean by that he wanted you to put all the 
people in the union ? 

Mr. Conoval. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. That you do it and not the workers joining? 

Mr. Conoval. That is right ; I refused. 

Then we started discussing, and then he wanted at least 7 or 8 
names regardless of who it is, as long as they are on the corporation 
books. 

Mr. Kennedy. He wanted 7 or 8 names of employees ? 

Mr. Conoval. That is right. 



3804 IMPEOPER ACTIVITIElS EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. And for you to make a contract with him, with the 
union that he represented, with the understanding that you would 
pay dues for 7 or 8 employees ; is that right ? 

Mr. CoxovAL. Correction. Not that I should pay dues. He wanted 
names of 7 or 8 people on the books to belong to the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. So that the corporation. Carnival Spraying Co., 
Inc., would pay money 

Mr. CoNOVAL. Incorrect. 

Mr. Kennedy. All right. You tell me. 

Mr. CoNOVAL. He wanted me to give him so many names to be un- 
ion members. They shall pay the clues. I would get cards for them 
to sign, allowing me to deduct from their pay once a month. At 
that time I think it was $3.50 a month dues. 

Mr. Kennedy. So what happened ? And plus the welfare ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. Plus the welfare. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much was that to be, the welfare ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. The welfare? I am not sure what it was. I think 
it was $8 or $5 at that time. I think it was $5 at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy . That was to be paid every month ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently you decided that you would pay the 
money out of corporation funds ? 

Mr. CoNovAL. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you do ? 

Mr. CoNovAL. 1 put my self in the union because I was a working 
employee at that time, my expartner, my wife, my sister, who is in 
the employee, and three steady employees. 

Mr. Kennedy. You put them all in the union ? 

Mr. CoNovAL. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did "Beimy the Bug" ever talk to the employees? 

]Mr. CoNovAL. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Kennedy. . But you became a union shop, did you not? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You became a union shop because you, your wife, 
your sister, your treasurer, and three of your employes, you sent their 
names into the union, and every month you Avould take from the cor- 
poration funds 

Mr. CoNOVAL. Not from the corporation funds, 

Mr. Kennedy. '\'\niere would you take the money from ? 

Mr. CoNOvAL. Right from their pay envelopes, which they signed 
for me to take out. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that checked out, substituted, or deducted from 
your salary ? 

Mr. CoNOVAE. It was deducted from the salary. The way they 
used to make out the pay envelope there would be gross pay less deduc- 
tions for the Federal Government, social security, unemployment, net 
pay, and from that was deducted the union dues. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did you take the money out? Did you take 
the money out in cash, or how ? 

Mr. CoNovAL. I used to take it out cash and redeposit it back — no.. 
I used to write on the pay envelope less that, when I used to make out 
a check, and the check showed, on the stub, less union dues. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you mean the stub where you paid yourself ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3805 

Mr. CoNOVAL. No. The stub in the checkbook, when I took out a 
payroll check, "Less union dues." 

Mr. Kennedy. And you would deduct it at that time ? 
Mr. CoNOVAL. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And your sister worked there at that time? 
Mr. CoNOVAL. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you became a union shop, then, did you not? 
Mr. CoNOVAL. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. So if any other union came around and tried to 
organize you, you could say, "I am already a member of a union" ? 
Mr. CoNOVAL. Correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you would have these deductions which you 
would make each month ? 
Mr. CoNOVAL. Correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were the employers ever consulted as to whether 
they wanted this union to represent them ? 
Mr. CoNOVAL. I spoke to them. 
Mr. Kennedy. Did they vote to find out ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. Well, they were willing to go along. There was no 
such thing as a regular vote. I asked them if they wanted to, and 
they went along with it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have a meeting of all of your employees as 
is required under the Taft-Hartley Act ? 
Mr. Conoval. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have a meeting to find out whether they 
wanted local 102, Johnny Dio's local, to represent them as a bargain- 
ing agent ? 

Mr. Conoval, No ; that I didn't. 
Mr. Kennedy. You did not? 
Mr. Conoval. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. How many of your employees, besides yourself, 
your partner, and sister, were put into the union ? 
Mr. Conoval. At that time or now? 
Senator Curtis. At that time. 
Mr. Conoval. At that time ? Three. 
Senator Curtis. Hoav many did you have in total ? 
Mr. Conoval. At that time, well, they were transient help. They 
stood a week or 2 weeks, back and forth. Nobody was ever steady 
employed. The only ones that were steady were the three, and they 
were in the union. 

Senator Curtis. And those that you said you talked to, to see if 
they would go along with this union idea, you are referring just to 
those who became members of the union ? 

Mr. Conoval. That was at that time. At this time, I went over to 
everyone of my steady workers that has been with me for quite awhile, 
and I asked them if they want a union and they said "Yes." I asked 
them if they are satisfied with this or with any other. 

Personally, I don't think they cared, so we wind up with this one. 
I figured that was the lesser of the two evils. 

Senator Curtis. Did you gain anything as an employer by signing 
up with this Benny Ross and his union ? 

Mr. Conoval. In which way do you mean that ? 
Senator Curtis. Did you gain any advantage as an employer by 
signing up with Ross ? 



3806 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. CoNovAL. No ; I don't see that I gained any advantage. 

Senator Curtis. What compelled you to do it? 

Mr. CoNovAi.. Well, for one simple reason, the only thing that com- 
pelled me to do it was if we didn't sign up at once, then somebody 
else would be around. Then they would stop you on the street, to get 
you to sign up. They would cause you some inconvenience. 

Senator Curtis. In other words, by stopping you on the street or 
causing you inconvenience, you are referring to these union officers, 
not the employees in your own plant? 

Mr. CoNovAL. No ; I don't say union officers stopping me directly, 
but stopping me from making deliveries to union shops and stuff like 
that, which causes a lot of inconvenience for a businessman. 

Senator Curtis. And because of that is M^hy yo.u sisrned up with 
Ross? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. It would either have been Ross or somebody else, if 
I could have gotten a fair enough contract. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman ? 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

Senator Ives. In connection with these union officers j^ou are talk- 
ing about, I would like to inquire whether you are speaking of legiti- 
mate union officers, representing legitimate unions, or this racketeer 
gang. We all know by this time that "Benny the Bug" is one of the 
racketeers, one of the gangsters. You apparently at that time didn't 
know it, did you ? 

Mv. CoNovAL. At that time I did not know. 

Senator Ives. Why are you talking about these union officers or 
union organizers stopping you on the street ? Are they representing 
good unions? 

Mr. CoNovAL. I wouldn't be the judge to tell you which is good and 
which is bad. 

Senator I\t^:s. Don't you think it would be up to you to clieck and 
find out wliat they were ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. HoAv do you go about that ? 

Senator Ives. There is such a thing as the National Labor Relations 
Board, and it has offices in New York City. Is that not where you 
are located ? 

Mr. CoNovAL. That is right. 

Senator Ivrh. There is a teleplione book up here. You can go 
around there and inquire and find out. 

Mr. CoNovAL. All that is good and well, but, don't forget, when 
you are a small-business man and you have to do a lot of your own 
work, and yoii have a lot of other things to think about, you will grasp 
at the first thing tliat comes along that looks best to yourself. 

Senator Ives. Just a minute on that. You must liave had some idea 
when they were trying to organize you on this kind of a basis that 
there was something funny about it. 

Did it not ever occur to you that there was something peculiar 
about it? 

Mr. CoNovAL. Well, that is true ; it did seem a little peculiar. 

Senator In-es. It is most peculiar. I would have thouglit that the 
natural thing for you to have done would be either to go to the Na- 
tional I^abor Relations Board office in New York, the regional office 
there, or the State labor- relations board there, and find out what the 
story was. They could tell you in a hurry. I think if the employers 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3807 

that are being victimized by this kind of business had used the com- 
monsense that the Lord gave them in a lot of these cases a great deal 
of this could have been avoided. 

I do not think all the employers that are involved in this business 
are dishonest. I think they are scared to death. I do not think they 
used the weapons that they had at their command. I do not think 
you followed the course you could have followed. 

That is one of the things that has to be done if we are ever going 
to straighten this thing out. 

Thank you. 

The Chairman. Are you still unionized ? 

Mr. CoNovAL. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. In the same union ? 

Mr. CoNovAL. 269. 

The Chairman. In 269 ? 

Mr, CoNovAL. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Are all of your employees now members of the 
union ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. Everyone, every one of my employees is a member. 

Tlie Chairman. Everyone is now a member. 

When did you get the rest of them in the union ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. I think that was 1956, I think it was. 

The Chairman. Was it after this committee started investigating? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. I don't know if it was after or before, because I don't 
know when you started investigating. 

The Chairman. We have been investigating, not this committee but 
the Permanent Subcommittee of the Government Operations Com- 
mittee started an investigation, in this New York area more than a 
year ago. It was nearly 2 years ago. 

What happened that caused all of j^our people to join the union? 

Mr. Conoval. Well, because all the people joined the union I tigured 
this way, as long as I am paying them more than the union requires, 
and I give them more holidays than the union requires, what difi'erence 
does it make to me if they are in a union or not, as long as they get some 
benefit out of it. 

The Chairman. Do you have a contract with the union? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. I certainly do. 

The Chairman. Do tlie employees know about it ? 

Mr. Conoval. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Did you have a contract when you first signed up, 
the seven or whatever number it was ? 

Mr. CoNovAL. Yes, sir. 

The Chair3ian. You liad a contract then ? 

Mr. Conoval. That is right. 

The Cjiairman. Do the members of your union approve the con- 
tract or do you just approve it? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. I told them what it was all about, and they seemed to 
be satisfied. 

The Chair:man. They took no vote on it? 

Mr. Conoval. There was no such thing as a vote. 

The Chairman. I did not understand you. 

Mr. CoNovAL. There was no such thing as a vote. 

The Chairman. What I mean is you made the contract with the 
labor union. 



3808 IMPROPER ACTIVITIElS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. CoNOVAL. I made a contract after I spoke to the employees, if 
they wanted it. 

The Chairman. Which were you representing, yourself or the 
employees ? 

Mr. CoNovAL. Well, eventually I was looking for myself, too, as 
well as the employees. 

The Chairman. You are representing both sides ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. That is right. 

The Chairman. And they did not have much to say about it ; did 
they? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. No ; it is not that. If they don't want a union, I don't 
have to have a union. 

The Chairman. I understand. But the employees who you signed 
up, when you first did, did not have a chance, were given no oppor- 
tunity, to vote on approving or disapproving the contract that you 
entered into? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. They had every chance in the world. 

The Chairman. What chance did they have ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. At that time when I approached them about joining 
the union, there was other people downstairs trying to organize one 
of the other floors and they were stopping all of my employees to find 
out whether they wanted to join the union. They told them to drop. 

The Chairman. My understanding is that the proper practice with 
a legitimate union, once it makes a contract with the employer, is that 
it submits that contract to the union members and they vote to approve 
or disapprove it. 

Mr. CoNovAL. As far as my employees are concerned, they were all 
for it. 

The Chairman. Sir? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. As far as the employees are concerned, they were all 
for it. 

As far as I know, as far as they told me. 

The Chairman. As far as you know. 

Mr. CoNovAL. That is right. 

The Chairman. But, again, I think the procedure that is being 
followed is very much out of line. I think the people who do tlie 
work should have an opportunity to approve or disapprove the 
contract. 

Is there anything further? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

I just want to get back to this time that Benny the Bug came in from 
local 102. It is not just a question of a racketeer union coming in. 
You had some employees in your plant, and it was a question of what 
union they were going to sign up with. 

Once you signed with local 102, it prevented other unions from com- 
ing in there. So it was a distinct advantage to you. 

I would like to go through the terms of the contract. Did tlie 
employees get any better terms once you had signed a contract with 
local 102? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. At 102? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. CoNuvAL. Well, I don't remember what the contract actually 
read risfht now 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3809 

Mr. Kennedy. In the first place, look at the facts. Yoii did not 
talk to any of the employees at the time ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. Not at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. You presented 7 or 8 names, including your own 
name, who owned the shop, your wife's name, your partner's name, 
secretary-treasurer, your sister's name and 2 or 3 other employees; 
is that correct ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. Right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. None of the other employees in the plant were even 
consulted as to whether they wanted, to belong to this union ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. You signed a contract which provided for the 
minimum legal wage ; isn't that right ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So the employees got no advantage that way. The 
same vacation and holiday provisions as had existed before; isn't that 
right? 

Well, actually, there was a great advantage for you, no advantage 
for your employees, there was a great advantage for you because 
when you were walking down the street or when you Avere trying to 
make deliveries, nobody would stop the deliveries because you were 
now a union shop, and you had made this sweetheart contract with 
local 102, which was to the detriment of your employees, to j^our 
workers. 

Mr. Conoval. There is one more thing. Even if the union called 
for a 5-cent increase after the signing of a contract, I never gave an 
employee a 5-cent increase. It was always a minimum of $5 per 
week. I don't wait for a union to tell me when to give or how to 
give it. I give it when the employee deserves it. 

Mr. Kennedy. The union provided no services and you knew at 
the time you signed this contract you were not being imposed upon. 
You knew at the time that you signed this contract that your employees 
were getting no advantage out of it. 

Mr. Conoval. You're right. 

Mr. Kennedy. All right. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. I would like to raise a question which I do not 
think this witness can answer, but I am prompted by Senator Ives' 
statement. 

Does the National Labor Relations Board maintain lists of racketeer 
and nonlegitimate unions? Is that information available for both 
workers and management? 

Senator I^^s. Are you asking me ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Senator Ives. I will answer that. 

No ; I do not think they do, as far as that is concerned. Senator, but 
what they could tell tlie gentleman is how to have his plant organized 
from the standpoint of his employees. Tliat is the thing about which 
I was talking to him. 

What he was doing here is having them organized in a very dubious 
manner. He, himself, admits that it sounds funny and it sounds funny 
to me. It is that procedure itself that should have made him suspi- 

89330— 57— pt. 10 — —15 



3810 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

cious SO that he should have gone around to either the State Labor 
Relations Board, or the regional board of the National Labor Rela- 
tions Board and found out about it. 

That could have helped him decide what to do. 

Senator Curtis. But I take the position that management should 
not do the organizing in their plant. 

Senator Ives. That is not the point. I think management has the 
responsibility when it comes to these things, when the approach is 
made in this manner. I do not think there is any question about 
that. I am not talking about management doing the organizing. 

Senator Cuktis. I believe they could furnish the information that 
the workers were being taken advantage of by racketeers and that 
would not be an unfair labor practice. 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions? 

Mr. Kennedy. "Wliat kinds of employees do you have? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. I have both Puerto Ricans and colored. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that we have 
made a study of Mr. ConovaPs records, the payroll records, and they 
show no checkoffs for any of these dues being paid during this period 
of time. 

The only conclusion we can reach from a study of the payroll rec- 
ords is that the money was taken out each month from the corporation 
funds and paid as a tribute to the union each month. 

Mr, CoNOVAL. As far as the checkoff is concerned, the first time I 
misunderstood what the word checkoff meant. As far as money taken 
out of corporation funds, it is not taken out of corporation funds. It 
is deducted off the emplo3'ees' payrolls, for which they sign cards 
alloAving me. 

IVIr. Kennedy. That might be the present situation, but the situation 
when you originally signed up 

Mr. CoNOVAL. At all times that was the situation. 

Mr. Kennedy. Your payroll records do not indicate that. They 
indicate that you got the full amount of your salary and that there 
was no deduction for the payment to the union. 

Mr. CoNOVAL. At all times it was deducted. At that time I wasn't 
taking care of the books. I was only taking care of the payrolls. 
My partner took care of the books. But I know the payroll was 
always deducted because the employees signed cards authorizing me 
to deduct from their pay. Cards are in Mr. Dunne's possession 
now. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, in addition, from an examination 
of the records, it indicates that this company paid some $6,000 to 
this local, first local 102, then 649, over this period of time. 
Mr. CoNOVAL. $6,000 for what ? 

Mr. Kennedy. During this period of time, since you have been 
signed up with them. 

Mr. CoNovAL. For dues and welfare. 

Mr. Kennedy. Has anybody ever received any benefit from the 
welfare? 

Mr. CoNovAL. My wife received it once when she gave birth. As 
far as anybody else, I wouldn't know because they wouldn't approach 
me for that. 

Mr. Kennedy. But vou do not know of anything else ? 
Mr. CoNOVAL. Not that I know. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3811 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you ever taken an ad in local 649's journal? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. Three times. Twice it was $25 and last June it 
was for $50. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is it just because you like the local ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. No ; it is not because I have any particular love for 
them, but I take ads in a lot of magazines. It is good for advertising. 

The Chairman. If I understand your testimony correctly, all the 
money that you have given this union, paid to it, all of that money 
you \Yithheld from the salaries or the wages of your employees? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. That is correct. 

The Chairman. All of it, whether it was $6,000 or what ? 

Mr. CoNovAL. Whatever was paid to the union, that was taken out 
for dues and welfare which we agreed upon. 

The Chairman. How did you enter that deduction on your ledger 
books ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. I don't know how they got that deduction. 

The Chairman. You do not know what ? 

Mr. CoNOVAL. I say I don't know how they have the deduction 
of $6,000. 

The Chairman. I guess they totaled up some figures. The point 
I am making is, Did you show on your books that you kept that this 
money was withheld from the wages of your employees? 

Mr. CoNovAL. Whatever deductions were on the books is legitimate 
deductions. Whatever deductions — when they came into my office, I 
gave them free wheel of the office. I haven't got nothing to hide 
whatsoever. Whatever deductions they made, whatever figures they 
took from my books, is not to my knowledge. They didn't tell me. 
They asked to see my books. I said, ''Fine, see it." I cooperated 
with them 100 percent. What figures they arrived at, I don't know. 
They didn't present the figures to me. This is the first time I heard of 
these figures. 

The Chairman. It is quite probable that with the payroll that you 
have, during that period of time you have paid $6,000 into the union. 

Mr. CoNOVAL. The only way they could figure what I paid to the 
union is from canceled checks for welfare and dues. If that is what 
the checks say, they can very easily look at the books and see if that 
was coming to them. 

The Chairman. I can understand that they can take your canceled 
checks and see what you paid into the union. But the only thing at 
issue here is that you say you deducted it from their wages. 

It seems to me that that deduction would appear on your books. 

Mr. CoNovAL. That certainly would. 

Mr. Kennedy. It does not appear on the payroll records that any 
money was deducted until recently, until this year, after the Senate 
Subcommittee on Investigations began their investigation in New 
Yoi'k of these locals. 

The Chairman. We can check that further. 

Are there other questions ? 

If not, you may stand aside. 

Call the next witness. 

(Members present at this point: Senators McClellan, Ives, and 
Curtis.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Sidney Chernuchin. 

He is another employee in New York City. 



3812 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall 
give before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Chernuchin. I do, Senator. 

TESTIMONY OF SIDNEY CHERNUCHIN, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, ABKAHAM H. STEINBERG 

Tlie Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation. 

Mr. Chernuchin. My name is Sidney Chernuchin, 610 West End 
Avenue, New York City. I am a belt manufacturer. The name of 
the concern is All-Rite Belt Co. 

The Chairman. You are the owner of this company ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Well, it is a corporation. 

The Chairman. It is a corporation ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes. 

The Chairman. You are one of the principal stockholders? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And you manage it ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you have counsel with you ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Would you identify yourself ? 

Mr. Steinberg. Abraham H. Steinberg, practicing in the State of 
New York, 551 Fifth Avenue, New York City. 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Counsel. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chernuchin, you are the principal stockholder, 
are you, in this garment organization ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Half, yes. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. There are 4 or 5 different companies involved in 
it? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have a contract or you had a contract with local 
258of theUAW? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, I had and have. 

Mr. Kennedy. You still have it ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is 258 of the teamsters, is that right? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. ICennedy. You have a contract for your delivery boys ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. And you have had a contract covering your delivery 
boys? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. With local 258? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had a contract preceding that, did you not, with 
another local of the UAW? 

]\Ir. Chernuchin. No, sir, not that I know of. The only thing I 
know is 258. If they had another number I don't know of it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Didn't your company have a contract with 649 at 
onetime, of the UAW? 

Mr. Chernuchin. It is possible, I don't know. 



^ IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3813 

Mr. Kennedy. You have reviewed your records since we discussed 
this matter with you. 

Mr. Cherntjchin. The only number that is familiar to me is 258. 

Mr. Kennedy. 258 ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. 258. 

Mr. Kennedy. You say that is what is familiar to you because you 
conducted those negotiations yourself, but you reviewed the record 
and you know that you had a contract, your company had a contract, 
with 649, did you not? You told me this 2 hours ago in the office. 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. I\JENNEDY. Don't say you don't remember it again. 

Mr. Chernuchin. Mr. Steinberg said that. The number is not 
familiar. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. You know you had a contract with the UAW local 
649, is that right? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. That contract, from an examination of the files, 
was made some 3 or 4 years ago ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. i 

Mr. Kennedy. That was 649 of the UAW, is that right ? ! 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. That contract was made to cover eight delivery 
boys, is that right ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And was it the procedure and practice of your 
company to just check off any eight names and send their dues in 
for welfare benefits and for union dues ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you also find that none of the employees of 
your company were ever consulted as to whether they wanted to be- 
long to that union or not ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. They were not consulted ? 

Mr. Kennedy. And the eight names were just taken at random 
during this period of time ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And their dues were checked off, or their dues were 
taken out of corporation funds 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. The welfare and pension payments were taken out 
of corporate funds and sent into the union, is that right ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the eight people whose names were used, some 
of them were not even working at the company at the time? 

Mr. Chernuchin. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. So there was nobody that was receiving any bene- 
fits from these payments, is that right ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Well, I doubt if they were. I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. The $96 that you were paying each month, or your 
company was paying, not you personally but your company was 
paying each month, was merely to be able to say that your company 
was union, is that right, so that you wouldn't be bothered by other 
unions ? 

Mr, Chernuchin. I don't know, no. 



3814 IMPROPER ACTIVITIEiS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, there was no benefit for anyone other than 
management in that type of arrangement, is that right ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Well, I would like to explain something to you. 
It would seem that way, but I never negotiated the contract, I never 
had any union dealings with anybody. I had a partner who is de- 
ceased who did all of that. It would seem that way, but I honestly 
don't know. I never had any dealings with them. We have several 
other unions, and I didn't negotiate contracts with them either. I just 
don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. "\'\^iat are most of your employees, the 28 or 30 
delivery boys ? What nationality are they, or extraction? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Well, they are white, they are colored and they 
are Puerto Rican. We don't pick them on any basis at all. We also 
get a lot of school boys who are part-time workers coming in after 
school. It is very unskilled work. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just on the contract that you haA^e recently nego- 
tiated with 258, of the teamsters — is that right ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That provides for a $40 week, is that right? 

Mr. Chernuchin. I think $42. 

Mr. Kennedy. $42 a week? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chernuchin. It is $40, to be increased within 30 days to $42. 

Mr. Kennedy. And how much vacation does the employee receive? 

Mr. Chernuchin. One week, after a year. 

Mr. Kennedy. After he has worked there a year he receives 1 week 
vacation ; is that right ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chernuchin. May I add if they work for less than a year, there 
is a prorating on the vacation. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kennedy. So if they work for only three-quarters of a year, 
then they might only get 4 days vacation ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. If they work for 9 months, they might get 3 or 4 
days vacation? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they get $40 a week, receive $40 a week ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes. And after a month it is $42. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many employees are members of the union out 
of your 28 employees ? How many of them are members of the union ? 
That is, 28 delivery boys. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chernuchin. I want to explain that this agreement is with All- 
Rite Belt Co., not with the other firms. We use the services of 8 boys 
who are listed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Has tliat always been tlie situation, that you had 
eight boys listed from All-Rite Belt Co. ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. We had eight boys listed. I don't know where 
they were listed from. 

Mr. Kennedy. Your records show that up to recently, up to the 
time you signed the contract, you only had one boy listed. 

Mr. Chernuchin. Then they were listed on the other firms. Re- 
member, sir, these names were sent at random. I told vou that. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3815 

Mr. Kennedy. Even the ones that you sent in recently ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Those for this agreement, they were names at 
random. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the names are at random now ? 

(The witness conferred with his counseL) 

The Chairman. What do you mean at random ? Do you mean 
they were not even working for you ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. No. You have to understand. You see, I just 
found this out myself. 

These boys were doing errands and they were transient help. 
Each paying period there would be a ditferent set of boys. They 
probably had an original set of names and then they sent in these 
welfare fees and dues under those names. The help would change 
and we did not make a change in the names. In other words, we were 
paying for people who, after a certain amount of time, were not 
employed there. 

Mr. Kennedy. Recently when you negotiated the contract with the 
teamsters, were your employees consulted as to whether they wanted 
to sign up with the teamsters ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel. ) 

Mr. Kennedy. He must know that. 

Mr. Steinbercx. I just want to be helpful to everyone. 

Mr. Chernuchin. Mr. Steinberg negotiated the contract and I 
know there was a meeting between him and the employees, and some- 
body from the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were the employees representing the 28 messengers 
or 8 messengers or representing only 1 person that you had on your 
payroll ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. There were eight employees, errand boys, in All- 
llite Belt. This meeting and the contract is with that concern. These 
eight boys are the errand boys in that concern. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, you had only 1 employee, only 1 mes- 
senger on the payroll ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wlien the representatives of the employees met with 
the union, was it representing that 1 employee or was it representing 
the messengers from the other 3 or 4 companies? 

Mr. Chernuchin. It represented the required amount of messengers 
from this firm. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many is that ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. I would say about eight. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did you select which eight you were going to 
have work for this one ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Well, I would say we took the ones with the most 
stability, because a lot of the boys would come and go. These boys 
seemed to have the most stability. 

Mr. Kennedy. They elected to become members of the teamsters 
union? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. But a review of your records shows that originally, 
when the contract was first signed with this union, the UAW union, 
that 8 names were selected at random, that money was sent in for their 
union funds and their pension and welfare funds amounting^ to $96 ; 
that these 8 names, after the initial payment, were perhaps fictitious 



3816 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

people because they no lon^^er worked there, and the $96 was sent in 
every month for a period of 2 or 3 years. 

Mr, CiiERNUCHiN. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And this arrangement was changed somewhat by 
you recently in your contract with the teamsters ? 

Mr. Churnuchin. I guess it is more than somewhat. I just became 
aware of the whole situation when we had to negotiate this new con- 
tract. 

The Chairman. There is something a little peculiar about this. 

Why would you pay $96 a month out of your corporate funds and 
not deduct it from wages ? 

Mr, Chernuciiin. Well, actually, I had been paying it for this 
number of years. 

Let me explain something to you. The why's I cannot tell you, 
because I don't know. I am out selling all day, as Mr. Dunne can 
verify. I had no union dealings ; I didn't know much about this con- 
tract at all. 

When they called to renegotiate it, I didn't even know who they 
were. I told them they must have the wrong number. When I found 
out and checked in the office, I called them back and I advised them to 
see my attorney. 

Up until this time, I can't tell you why, because I — I knew I signed 
a check for it, but there was no particular reason, and I can't answer 
that question. I just don't know. I had no dealings with the union 
people at all. 

The Chairman. You are talking about yourself, personally ? 

Mr. Chernuchin, Personally, yes. 

The Chairman. But you knew that the $96 a month was being paid 
out? 

Mr. Chernuchin, Yes. I didn't know why or to whom, and I just 
found out about the situation and names afterward. 

The Chairman. Did you find out now that that $96 a month was 
paid out of corporate funds and not withheld from wages, in the same • 
amount paid each month, irrespective of the number of employees you 
had? 

Mr. Chernuchin, That is right. 

The Chairman, If you had 1 you still paid for 8 and if you had 
20 you still only paid for 8, and that is the arrangement you had with 
this union ? 

Mr, Chernuchin. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Once again, the employees of your plant — it wasn't 
arranged for them to get much benefit out of this arrangement between 
your company and the union ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. I don't know what you call much benefit. This 
is something that was negotiated between my attorney and the people 
and whoever the help were. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am talking about the arrangement as it had been. 

Mr. Chernuchin. As it had been ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Specifically, with no benefit for the employees of 
your plant, 

Mr, Chernuchin, I would say "No," 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions ? 

Senator Curtis. You have contracts with other unions ? 



EVIPROPER ACTIVITIES EN' THE LABOR FIELD 3817 

Mr. Chernuchin. Yes, sir; I do. 

Senator Curtis. What other unions? 

Mr. Chernuchin. It is in the ILG. It is local 40 and local 66. 
They are most of my employees. 

Senator Curtis. Do you transmit dues and welfare funds for them ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. No. We have a shop chairman who collects the 
dues and turns it over. 

Senator Curtis. So it does not go through your hands at all ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Even though this arrangement was made by some- 
one else, you knew that this $96 was being paid out all the time ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Well, I signed the check. I know. I never knew 
why or to whom. 

Senator Curtis. "Wliy were you paying it ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. "\Vliy was I paying it ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Mr. Chernuchin. I don't know. I was signing a check on arrange- 
ments my partner made. We had a contract with them, and I suppose 
he saw fit to do it. 

Senator Curtis. With each check was there anything attached to 
show what employees it was paid for ? 

Mr. Chernuchin. Not that I am aware of. I don't know. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

The Chairman. You may stand aside. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Morris Ehrlich. 

(Present at this point in the proceedings: Senators McClellan, Ives, 
and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. Will you be sworn ? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF MORRIS EHRLICH 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, please, sir. 

Mr. Ehri.ich. Morris Ehrlich, 221 East 76th Street, Manhattan, 
secretary of the Eden Aero Parts, the Bronx, N. Y. 

(At this point. Senator Curtis withdrew from the hearing room.) 

The Chairman. Is that a corporation ? 

Mr. EiiRLicH. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Plave you talked with members of the staff, and 
know the general line of interrogation to expect ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I talked to Mr. Dunne. 

The Chairman. I see you appear without an attorney. Are you 
an attorney yourself ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You are an attorney ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You waive counsel, then, do you ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I do. 



3818 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. I am g'oing to ask the photographers again about 
this. You can get some other angle on this instead of being right in 
front of me all the time. 

Senator I\^s. The same thing applies to me. 

The Chairman. Mr. Kennedy, you may proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are secretary of the Eden Aero Parts ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many employees does that have ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. We have 10 to 12 at the present time. 

Mr, Kennedy. And you manufacture what ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Engine parts and miscellaneous items. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that for jet engines ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Some parts for jet engines. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that a subcontract ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Sub-subcontract. 

Mr. Kennedy. Your employees are of what extraction ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Mixed. All. White, colored, Puerto Rican. 

Mr, Kennedy. You made a contract, did you not, in 195G, signed a 
contract, with 649 of UAW ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Your contract was with a Mr. Abe Brier ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I met Mr. Brier later; yes. 
' Mr. Kennedy. That was 649 or 362 ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. May I have the contract ? I think it is 362. 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. That is 362. It was formerly 649. 362 was 
one of the paper locals of the contract. Mr. Abe Brier came down 
from 649. 

Mr. Brier came in to see you ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. He didn't see me at first. He saw my associate, 
Mr. Aborn. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then he came in and talked to you ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I heard he came around and he made an appoint- 
ment for me to see him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss with him a contract? 

Mr. Ehrlich. We did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he represent the employees at that time, of 
your plant? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Well, he claimed he had been approached to organize 
our shop. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he have any cards from any of the employees 
showing that he represented them ? 

Mr. Etirltch. He claimed he had, but he never exhibited any. 
Mr. Kennedy. Did vou sign a contract with him? 
Mr. Ehrlich. We did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he show you the cards prior to signing the con- 
tract ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. He did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Under the Taft-Hartley Act, doesn't it hold that the 
bargaining agent must represent a maiority of the employees, prior to 
the employer signing a contract with them? 

_ Mr. Ehrlich. I wouldn't know that. I don't know about that pro- 
vision, 

Mr. Kennedy. You just went ahead and signed a contract with 
him? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3819 

Mr. EnRLicH. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. What arrangements were made in the contract? 
How many employees did you have at that time? 

Mr. Ehrlich. We had various numbers, but I think around that 
time we had a total of about 26. 

Mr. Kennedy. And were all the employees signed up in the union? 

Mr. Ehrlich. They were not. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many were signed up in the union? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I believe about eight. 

Mr. Kennedy. About eight employees? 

Mr. Ehrlich. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was not a majority of the employees? 

Mr. Ehrlich. It was not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were they consulted as to whether they wanted to 
be members of the union ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. The eight ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. Ehrlich. Yes. They signed the contract. 

Mr. Kennedy. They signed it. Were any of the others consulted 
as to whether they wanted to be members of the union ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Not by me ; but we asked one of the men who has been 
many years with us, and he went around the shop and came up with 
these eight names. 

Senator Ives. May I ask a question there, Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman. Senator Ives. 

Senator Ives. Did you request them to sign up? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Personally, no. 

Senator Ives. Did anybody representing you request them to sign 
up? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Yes. One of the employees went around the shop. 

Senator Ives. That would be the same thing as if you requested 
them ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Not necessarily. 

Senator Ives. You sent him around, did you not? 

Mr. P^HRLicH. We told him to see whether the men wanted to join 
this particular organization. 

Senator Ives. Well, suppose they had not? TVHiat would have 
happened ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Nothing. We had been approached many times, 
and we were never organized because they had rejected it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any increase in wages or betterment of 
conditions once you signed the contract ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. To some extent. 

Mr. Kennedy. Didn't the contract stipulate that the minimum wage 
would be paid ; namely $40 for a 40-hour week ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. That is not the true picture, because when you get 
inexperienced help you start them at $1 and if you get experienced 
help you start them at $2. But that is the minimum you want to start 
them at, 

Mr. Kennedy. The contract stipulated that is how much was to 
be paid? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Certainly. 

Mr. Kennedy. So that was no benefit for the employee, was it? 



3820 IMPROPER ACTIVITIEiS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. EiiRLiCH. I think practically all of them were getting more 
than the minimum. 

:'■ Mr. Kennedy. I understand they might have been gettmg more 
than that, but signing the contract with the union was no benefit for 
the employee? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Xo, of course not, in that regard, anyway. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. It was an advantage for the employer, namely, your- 
self, because you could tell anyone else that came to you after that, 
any other union that came to you, that you were already a union 
shop ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. That is perfectly true. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who paid the dues for these employees, these eight 
employees ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. The employer did. 

Mr. Kennedy. You paid them ? i 

Mr. Ehrlich. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Out of corporate funds ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there ever any contact between the representa- 
tive of the union and the employees ? 

Mr, Ehrlich. I don't know because I am there generally only in 
the afternoons. I believe in the begimiing there was some slight 
contact, if at all. I can't honestly say. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you not refuse initially to allow Brier to see 
the employees ? 

Mr, Ehrlich. I believe I did, but I don't recall, 

Mr. Kennedy. But you know of no contact after that between Brier 
and the employees ? 

Mr. Ehrlich, Well, I have seen notices posted in the shop to the 
effect that there was a meeting to be held. 

Mr, Kennedy. And at one time you kept the dues books of the 
members in your own drawer, is that right ? 

Mr. Ehrlich, Yes, 

The Chairman. Did they know that they were members at that 
time ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Yes. They signed the contract, sir. Their signa- 
tures appear on the original contract. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just in summary, out of some 26 employees that you 
had 8 of them became members of the union ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You never had a majority that requested to become 
members of the union anyway, but only 8 signed, only 8 became mem- 
bers of the union, the dues were paid by the corporation, and they were 
not checked off from the wages of the employees ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. That is correct. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. The union representative, Abe Brier, never had any 
contact with the employees ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I wouldn't say that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, not that you know of. 

Mr. Ehrlich. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the wage conditions provided the minimum 
wage of $1 an hour. You could not have paid less than that anyhow, 
could you ? 

Mr, Ehrlich. That is right. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3821 

The Chairman. Is this what you call a soft contract or a sweet- 
heart contract, where the employer gets all the advantages and the 
employee nothing ? 

Mr. P2iiRLiCH. I wouldn't say that, sir. 

The Chairmax. Tell us what advantage they got. 

Mr. Ehrlich. The}- had an advantage of having frozen their sen- 
iority. We had no fixed vacation regulation. And they got for 1 
year 1 week and for 2 years 2 weeks. They had provisions made 
for settling of disputes, and, in general, that is the advantage they 
received. 

The Chairman. Did the}' ever have any disputes that they settled ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. No. 

The Chairman. So they got no adA^antage there, because they have 
had no disputes. 

Mr. Ehrlich. "We don't have disputes. 

The Chairman. What is the advantage to you now in having this 
union contract ? 

Mr. Ehri.ich. Well, it is an advantage in that it wards off others 
from interfering with our business by stopping employees. 

The Chairman. In other words, it prevents a legitimate union from 
coming in there and organizing those people and trying to honestly 
represent them and get benefits for them. That is the truth about it, 
is it not ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. That is not, sir. When I first met Mr. Brier, I 
had no idea who he was. He was just another organizer. Somehow 
he appeared to be an honest man. He never asked us for a nickel; 
we never gave him a dollar. It was the understanding right from 
the very beginning he wanted nothing from us outside of the union 
dues. 

The Chairman. And that you agreed to pay ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tliat is the point of today's hearing, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. That was getting something from you was it? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Well, if you were approached like we were, sir, 
over the years, bj' many, many people who wanted nothing but money, 
we were happy to stand with somebody who had, as we understood 
it to be, a legitimate union. 

The CiTAiR3rAN. He offered to do it for less. He would just take 
eight members. 

Mr. Ehrlich. We made the best contract we could, naturally. 

The Chairman. I am sure. I do not doubt that. But does it not 
seem to j^ou, and you appear to be a pretty intelligent fellow, that 
from a pro])er analysis of it, you recognize it as a racket ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I think the trouble is with the system, sir. 

The (^HAiRMAN. The what ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. With the system itself, the entire system. It should 
be overhauled. 

The Chairman. It is a system that is a racket. That is the way 
you understand it, it is not ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. We are forced to do these things. 

Senator Ives. Mv. Chairman ? 

The (^hairman. Wait a moment. 

You say j'ou are forced to do it. But you feel 3'ou have to do it to 
protect yourself ? 



3822 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES m THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. EnRLicTi. That is right. 

Senator Ives. Were you here when I was questioning one of the 
witnesses before you, Mr. Ehrlich ? 

Mr. Ehri.ich. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. Did you hear what I said about conferring with the 
National Labor Relations Board regional office in New York and the 
State labor relations board ? 

Mr. Ehrltch. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. You are an attorney. You have the knowledge that 
those boards exist ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. And to some extent, undoubtedly, you have knowl- 
edge of the law ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. If you are in any doubt, you should know that you 
can go to those boards and get the matter cleared up. Did it ever 
occur to you that in that situation in which you were confronted at 
that time, you could go to one of those boards or both of them to find 
out? 

(At this point. Senator Goldwater entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Ehrlich. Yes, sir ; if we went through the routine 

Senator Ives. If you did go through the routine ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I said if we went through the routine, such as you 
suggest, we might be out of business at this time with a struck shop. 
All they need is one man walking up and down and we get no de- 
liveries. 

Senator Ives. No. That is where you are all wrong. In doing 
what I suggest, you would at least be following the law, which you 
obviously did not do in what you did do. 

The Chairman. Do you think it might depend on the people you 
are dealing with, their character and so forth, as to whether you 
would be out of business or not ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I am not saying about this particular organization. 
Others have come along over the years. The threat is always there. 

The Chairman. I understand, but you did not sign up with the 
others. 

Mr. Ehrlich. No, because the pressure was not as great in the 
years gone by as it has been in the last few years. I really don't know 
why, but the pressure is bad. 

The Chairman. What do you mean by "pressure" ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Organizational pressure. 

The Chairman. Let us define it a little. Give us some illustrations. 

Mr. Ehrlich. We would have men come around. I have been ap- 
proaclied by a few of your employees who want to organize the sliop. 

Other organizers stand out on the street stopping our employees, 
talking to them. Tlien they would come in and see us. We could see or 
someliow get the feel of it that they were racketeers and wanting noth- 
ing but money. 

We would not sign with them. Again, I repeat, we signed with Mr. 
Brier because we felt he was not out to line his pockets with our 
money. Maybe he wanted to run a union business and earn a living 
in the dues, that may be, but he didn't want anything extra. 

(At this point. Senator Ives withdrew from the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. And also, he wanted your employees. 



IMPROPER ACTIVmES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3823 

Mr. Ehrlich. That is something I found out. They tried to get in 
in the beginning. 

Mr. Kennedy, Do you mean some union tried to get something for 
your employees ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I didn't say that. I said they will take whatever 
they can, and then try to get more employees and unionize the entire 
shop. But they have to get in first. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you found Mr. Brier a very gentlemanly man 
because he did not attempt to get anything for your employees, is 
that right? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I didn't say anything of the kind. I said I found him 
to be a gentleman because he didn't want any graft. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he didn't want anything for your employees? 

Mr. Ehrlich. He did get something, some things they didn't have. 

Mr. Kennedy. Which was what? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Vacations, and seniority. 

Mr. Kennedy. You broke down and gave them a week for every 
year they worked ? 

Mr. P]hrlich. Well, I didn't have to. 

Mr. Kennedy. You didn't have to ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. That is right. 

Mr. Ivennedy. So they got that advantage and the advantage of 
the minimum wage of $1 an hour, the $40 a week ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. AVell, you stress the minimum wage whicli is not 
important because if they have any skill at all, they will get twice 
that. 

The Chairman. But your contract does not jn-ovide that. In otlier 
words, under this contract, you could have reduced the wages of every 
employee to $40 a week and not violated the contract. 

Mr. Ehrlich. Well, as a practical matter, it does not work out 
that way. 

The Chairman. Probably, you do not even want to do it, but I 
am talking about — insofar as the contract protecting the workers, 
you could, as the employer, under this contract, reduce everyone's 
wages to $40 a week, could you not? 

Mr. Ehrlich. That is a legal interpretation. Maybe we could, 
but they would not be there the next day. 

The Chairman. That may be true, but there was nothing in there 
that protected or benefited the people who were working. 

Mr. Ehrlich. I have never seen a contract which in its basic fea- 
tures was different from the one we drew, and I have seen a number 
of contracts. I think it is quite elaborate. 

The Chairman. I have never heard of a contract that took the 
minimum wage and said that was the wage. 

Mr. Ehlrich. I think they all do. 

The Chairman. I think, in actually representing the working peo- 
ple, they usually try to get something a little above what is the 
minimum wage. 

Mr. Ehrlich. When you have inexperienced help, you have to have 
some basis to start with. 

The Chairman. The law fixes that basis at $40 a week. 

Mr. Ehrlich. Except for apprentices. 1 think apprentices are 
at a smaller figure. 

The Chairman. Do you have apprentices ? 



3824 IMPROPER ACTIVrriEiS in the labor FIEIiD 

Mr. Ehrlich. We do have a training program. 

Mr. Kennedy. Prior to this time, prior to the time that you signed 
this contract, you were not giving your employees any vacation at all ? 

Mr. EiiRLicii. Older employees we did. We had no set program. 

Mr. Kennedy. No arrangements were made for your employees to 
get any vacation at all ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. There was no definite program about it. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. And this came in and changed this by giving all of 
your employees a week's vacation? 

Mr. Ehrlich. There it is, right in the contract and we follow on 
it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, one of the mattei*s that we are in- 
vestigating, of course, m racketeering, is a collusive deal between 
management and labor. If the union is a racket, certainly, the em- 
ployers who make these kinds of arrangements have to fall into the 
same categoiy. 

This would not be possible if it Avas not for you making this kind of a 
contract. 

Mr. Ehrlich. That isn't so. We don't know who the union is 
when they come in. 

Mr. Kennedy. It does not matter who the miion is. You made this 
contract. 

Mr. Ehrlich. But we would do what you would do. We make the 
best possible deal. We cannot, voluntarily, unless we are forced to, 
give more than we have to, because we can be put out of business, too. 

I have seen unions approach us with most extraordinary deals : 10- 
percent welfare, $5 a month dues, and everything. We cannot stay in 
business. We have to make the best deal we can. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is a good argument, on the part of manage- 
ment for sweetheart contracts. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further ? 

Senator Goldwater ? 

Senator Goldwater. "Wliat parts do you make for jet engines? 

Mr. Ehrlich. We make single parts. We don't Imow what the 
actual end use is. It may be 1 part of 500 that go into an engine, or 
we may do 1 operation or 2 operations for someone else. 

Senator Goldwater. How much skill is required? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Quite a lot of skill. We work down to tolerances of 
two-tenths and you have fine finishes involved. 

Senator Goldwater. To tAvo-tenths ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Yes. 

Senator Goldwater. That is not very fine. 

Mr. Ehrlich. Two-tenths ? 

Senator Goldwater. No. 

Mr. Ehrlich. Well 

Senator Goldwater. How many employees do you have ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. We have about 12 now. 

Senator (toldwater. You do not know what that part is ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. For instance, we are working for some other concern 
on a blank gear. 

Senator Goldwater. Wliat kind of a machine does it take to make 
that part? 

Mr. Ehrlich. We have turret lathes, grinders. 

Senator Goldwater. '\'\niat do you pay a turret-lathe operator? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3825 

Mr. EiiRLicii. I don't know. I don't handle that end of it. 

Senator Goldwater. You are the secretary ? 

Mr. Ehrlicii. That is right. 

Senator Goldwater. You have 12 employees ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. That's right. 

Senator Goldwater. You don't know what you pay a turret-lathe 
operator ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Sure. 

Senator Goldwater. You pay him more than $40 a week? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Yes ; he probably gets $80 or $90 a week and maybe 
a hundred. 

Senator Goldwater. $2.40 an hour? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I think that is about right, if they are experienced. 

Senator Goldwater. How many of those would you have out of 12? 

Mr. Ehrlich. We rotate. We don't have fixed operators. 

Senator Goldwater. Where do you get them, when 3'ou need them ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. The Xew York State Employment Bureau, generally. 

Senator Goldwater. Does the union not provide them ? 

Mr. Ehrlich. They don't have that type of worker, I don't think. 

Senator Goldwati:r. Did you ever ask them for a replacement 
worker, when you lose one or start to rotate? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I don't handle that end of the business. I handle, 
generally, the clerical work. 

Senator Goldwater. What do you pay a precision grinder? 

Mr. Ehrlich. We don't have any of that work at the present time. 
We have one man who is capable of doing it. He gets $150 a week. 

Senator Goldwater. How many people get this $40 a week? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I don't think there is anybody in our organization 
who gets $40 a week. 

Senator Goldwater. Where did it come into this discussion? 

Mr. Ehrlich. Because the contract provides for a minimum of $40 
a Aveek. 

Senator Goldwater. And you did not give any vacations to these 
highly skilled people before that time? 

Mr. Ehrlich. There was no set policy, but if we wanted to retain 
the good will of an employee, we would take care of him. 

Senator Goldwati^r. Do you have anybody who gets $40 a week? 

Mr. Ehrlich. I believe not. 

Senator Goldwater. That is all, I think. 

That is all. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you paid $32 a month for 8 employees ; is that 
right? 

Mr. Ehrlich. We had been paying $32 a month, and then we found 
out that we were paying for 2 employees who had laid oif. We had a 
policy of instructing our young lady to send for eight employees, and 
when they were laid off it was overlooked. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you were paying $32 a month to this union in 
order to be a union shop, and for a period during 1957 you were pay- 
ing for some employees that did not even work for you. 

Mr. Ehrlich. That was an error. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mv. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Is there any other witness ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Murray Garren. 

89330— 57— pt. 10 16 



3826 IMPROPER ACTivmES m the labor field 

The Chairman. You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall 
give before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Gaeren. I do, sir. 

TESTIMONY OF MURRAY GARREN, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS 
COUNSEL, WILLIAM SPARAGO 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, your 
business or occupation. 

Mr. Garren. Murray M. Garren, 29 Park Lane, Eockville Centre, 
N. Y. I am an automatic car-wash operator. 

The Chairman. You have with you your counsel ? 

Mr. Sparago. William Sparago, 50 Court Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. You run a car wash ? 

Mr. Garren. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you are a member of an association, are you 
not? 

Mr. Garren. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Does the association consist of 12 or 15 shops? 

Mr. Garren. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that association has a contract with Local No. 
224of theUAW-AFL? 

Mr. Garren. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You can see local No. 224 is up on our chart, Mr. 
Chairman. 

Each of these 15 shops, approximately, have between 8 and 20 em- 
ployees ; is that right ? 

Mr. Garren. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. The contract that you have signed with Local No. 
224 of the UAW-AFL provides for what salaries for these employees? 

Mr. Garren. I don't recall. I think I told Mr. Dunne from 85 cents 
to $1 an hour, or a weekly basis of $40 a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. You either paid them 85 cents an hour or $40 a week 
for a 57-hour week ? $40 for a $57-hour week ? 

Mr. Garren. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is the contract you signed with Local No. 224 
oftheUAW? 

Mr. Garren. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. For 57 hours in a particular week he gets paid $40 ? 

Mr. Garren. Tliat is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Most of the employees of these shops, these 15 shops, 
are Negro or Puerto Kicans, is that right ? 

Mr. Garren. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. The initiation fee for them to belong to the union ia 
$10? 

Mr. Garren. I don't recall what the initiation was, but at the time 
we signed the contract I believe the initiation fee was waived, because 
we came over from the CIO to the AFL 224, based upon a decision of 
the board of New York State. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was that, again ? 



IMPROPER ACnVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3827 

Mr. Garren. We were transferred from the CIO 365 UAW to the 
local 224, UAW-AFL, by a decision of the Labor Relations Board of 
New York. 

Mr. Kennedy. I understand. 

Who pays the initiation fee ? 

Mr. Garren. On the shops, on the master contract, my recollection 
is the initiation fee has been waived. The only moneys paid are the 
$3.50 a month for the steady help. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that is the dues for the members ? 

Mr. Garren. Pardon ? 

Mr.' Kennedy. That is for the dues for the employees ? 

Mr. Garren. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that checked off their salaries or is it taken from 
the funds of the corporation of the company ? 

Mr. Garren. Are you talking about my particular company? 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, give me your company. 

Mr. Garren. In my company, sometimes I pay the dues and some- 
times the employees pay the dues, depending upon how I feel and how 
business is at the time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Sometimes if you feel good you pay the dues and 
other times they pay them, is that right ? 

Mr. Garren. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat do the other companies do, of your associa- 
tion? 

Mr. Garren. Some members pay all of the dues and some members 
pay none of the dues. It depends upon how they feel toward their 
particular employees. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

The Chairman. Are these contracts submitted to the workers them- 
selves ? Are they given an opportunity to approve them ? 

Mr. Garren. I don't know, sir. Before we signed this contract, 
we had a contract which is similar to this, with local 365, UAW-CIO, 
Local 365. At the time we had contract difficulties with 365. During 
the interim, other locals must have gotten wind of it, and they tried 
to come in and organize our shops. 
The Chairman. Started what? 

Mr. Garren. They tried to organize our shops. And they couldn't. 
However, local 995 received cards from almost all the members 
in our shops and also on those that were not in our master contract 
or not in our association. However, it took several months before 
the decision was handed down by the National Labor Relations 
Board. 

There was a contest between 995 and 365, CIO. The association, 
I don't recall whether each member signed or just the president at 
that time signed the agreement with local 365 of the CIO and 995 
of the AFL, to go before the Labor Relations Board for a union vote. 
Based upon a decision of the Labor Board, 995 was instrumental 
in receiving cards from all these men. 

At the time they handed down the decision, I was there with 
several other members of my committee, and there was also Ann 
Mazacara, and Tommy DeLorenzo of local 365, CIO, when the decision 
was handed down that we are to sign a contract or negotiate a con- 
tract with AFL 224, substituting for 995. 



3828 IMPROPER ACrn'TTIBS IN THE L.\BOR FIETiD 

The CiiAiRMAX. What about this wage of 85 cents an hour? Is 
that below the minimum ? 

Mr. Garren. I haven't seen the contract in about a year, sir. It 
might be. I don't know. 

The CiiAiRMAx. I think the minimum wage is a dollar an hour. 

Mr. Kennedy. They are getting 85 cents an hour optionally or $40 
for a 57-hour week. 

Mr. Garren. "We are not covered by the minimum- wage law, sir. 

We have made inquiries with the State labor board several times, 
checking to see whether we are covered or not. 

The Chairman. Does anybody from the union actually look after 
the interest of these workers ? 

Mr. Garren. Well, when they have complaints up there, they come 
back and the union tries to straighten us out. 

The Chairman. Have you had any complaints ? 

Mr. Garren. There are sometimes complaints. 

The Chairman. I am just trying to find out what service, what 
business these laboring men get out of a contract like tliis. 

Mr. Garren. Sometimes w^e fire a man and then he goes back to 
the union hall and the union tells us to put him back to work. We 
put him back to work. 

The Chairman. Senator Goldwater ? 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Garren, in addition to being president of 
the association 

Mr. Garren. I am no longer president. 

Senator Goldwater. But you still operate Boulevard Auto Laundry 
in Queens and the Quick Car Wash in the Bronx ? 

Mr. Garren. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. How many employees do you have generally 
between the two places i 

Mr. Garren. The Boulevard Auto Laundry operates with approxi- 
mately 8 employees and the Quick Car Wash in the Bronx operates 
with between 15 and 20 employees. 

Senator Goldwater. How much do you get per car for a wash ? 

Mr. Garren. In Queens we get $1.50, Monday to Thursday ; $2 Fri- 
day and Saturday. In the Bronx we get 99 cents, Monday through 
Thursday, and $1.25 on Friday and $1.50 on Saturday. We are closed 
Sunday. 

Senator Goldwater. It is kind of hard to get 57 hours in 6 days. 

Mr. Garren. Nine and a half hours a day. 

Senator Goldwater. Nine and a half hours a day ? 

Well, that is not hard. 

Mr. Garren. However, the men do not work all the time. They 
go out for coffee breaks whenever they feel like it. 

Senator Goldwater. But they are around the place. 

Mr. Garren. Yes ; they are around. 

Senator Gch.dwater. Everybody gets coffee breaks these days. 

Mr. Garren. They take it when'they want to. 

Senator Goldwater. How many cai's a da}' Avould you say you 
handled at Queens ( 

Mr. Garren. Queens ( 

Senator Goldwater. Yes. 

Mr. Garren. It depends upon the weather and the amount of men 
I have workinjr for me. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3829 

Senator Goldwater. Say this time of year. 

Mr, Garren. This time of year. Business is off. 

Senator Goldwater. Well, if it is off, what is it off to ? 

Mr. G~ARREN. I may do today 60 cars. 

Senator Goldwater. How many would you do on a good day ? 

Mr. Garren. Double. 

Senator Goldwater. How about the Bronx establishment ? 

Mr. Garren. The Bronx establishment might do anywhere fi'om 
400 to 700 cars today. 

Senator Goldwater. Four hundred to seven hundred ? 

Mr. Garren. It is a different type operation. 

Senator Goldwatj:r. Would that be a bad day ? 

Mr. Garren. That is right. 

Senator Gold WxVTEr. What would be a good day at the Bronx ? 

Mr. Garren. Over 1,000 cars. 

Senator Goldwater. And you have 15 to 20 employees there that 
you are paying, actually, on a 57-hour week, you are paying them 70 
cents an hour. 

Mr. Garren. At the Bronx ? 

Senator Goldavater. Yes. 

Mr. Garren. The one in Queens I own with my wife and on the one 
in the Bronx I have a partner. They are both different operations. 

Senator Goldwater. But you pay these salaries at both of them. 

Mr. Garren. Yes. 

Senator Goldwater. It is 70.1, at $40 a week, for 57 hours. 

Mr. Garren. However, the $40 was stopped about a year ago. 

Mr. Sparago. May I ask at tliis time the pertinence of this ques- 
tioning with respect to the number of cars ? 

Senator Goldwater. Yes ; I will tell you. I am a businessman. I 
am going to be just as rough on businessmen that pay their employees 
too little as I am on union officials that are crooked and racketeers. I 
do not think that this is any kind of a wage to be paying men who 
work 9% hours a day washing cars. That is the gist of my ques- 
tioning. 

The Chairman. Will the Senator yield? 

Senator Goldwait^^r. Yes. 

The Chairman. It also establishes the fact that these men who are 
paying the dues are actually getting no service and no protection from 
the racketeers' unions. 

Mr. Garren. However, it was not my choice which union 

Mr. Sparago. In tliat event, I must object to that line of questioning, 
because I feel it is not pertinent, and the question of how much a busi- 
nessman should pay is not within the scope of this investigation, or in 
the investigation of this committee. 

The amount of wages that are paid to any employee is a question of 
bargaining, and that is why a union is picked as the bargaining agent. 

The Chairman. Just a moment. 

The Chair rules that the testimony sought is within the jurisdiction 
of this committee. We are investigating racketeers and labor unions, 
and collusion between business and unions. 

To establish the low rate of pay that these employees are getting 
is a very strong circumstance, if not a conclusive fact, that these men, 
notwithstanding their paying their dues, having joined a union, that 
this union is giving no service, is not looking after their interest, and, 



3830 IMPROPER ACTivrriEis m the labor field 

therefore, it tends to show that it is possibly not a legitimate union but 
is simply a racketeering organization. 

If management is dealing with that sort of a union, for getting the 
benefit of these very low wages, it thoroughly means it is within tlie 
jurisdiction of this committee. 

Proceed. 

Mr. Sparago. I would like to record my objection to any 

The Chairman. The objection is heard and the objection is over- 
ruled. 

Proceed. 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Chairman, I had about completed my 
questioning. 

I would say for your information, the subject of extending the Fair 
Labor Standards Act is before the Labor Committee of the Senate 
now — it is also before the Labor Committee of the House — and, with 
the extension, would naturally touch on this business. I might say 
we have had a lot of complaints from businesses not now covered that 
they could not afford to pay the proposed minimum wage if the cover- 
age were extended to them. 

I think that, in itself, Mr. Chairman, would show the pertinency 
of this information. I do not care where we develop this information, 
whether it is in this committee or before the Labor Committee, or, 
by chance, before any committee. If it is pointed out that there are 
abuses, I think the abuses should be noted. I cannot bring myself to 
believe that the union, charged with the responsibility of negotiating^ 
for decent wages, has done their job, and in the absence of any respon- 
sible union, that management is doing a particularly generous thing 
toward employees when they pay them 70 cents an hour and work them 
9I/2 hours a day, which even stretching arithmetic, the intake of that 
would be about $140 a day wages from a $1,500 possible income. 

I do not know tlie other details of your business, such as taxes and 
so forth. But 10 percent out of a sales dollar is mighty low. 

Mr. Sparago. The question of 57% hours sound very bad, or 57 
hours, or even 52 hours. The fact of the matter is, though, that this 
type of help that comes around are not regular and steady workers. 
They don't work 57 hours. When they report to a job, they don't 
work 8 hours. If they would work continuously for 6 hours, and 
create production during those 6 hours, they would be underpaid. 
But in a great many of these cases, if you listen to the complaints 
of the general public, who are the beneficiaries of their efforts and 
labor, you would find that these people sometimes are not even worth 
the wages that they get. 

There is a lot to be said and a lot to be argued from both points. 
You must remember that you get a very, very low type of intelli- 
gence and a very low type of worker in this particular field. 
All those factors go into it. 

I don't care to be too argumentative, but the fact is that inferences 
can be made. We know there are conditions in every industry. We 
know that this committee is doing a very good job. I, for one, appre- 
ciate it. 

Of course, the appreciation will be not for the work that is done by 
this committee, but the appreciation will be shown by the public if 
some proper legislation is enacted to cover the sorry conditions that 
we have in the labor field. 



IMPROPER ACTIVmES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3831 

There are a lot of things that go on and we know it. Nobody can 
talk about it. The general public feels it. They are affected by it. 
The general public is hurt. It isn't the individual worker here who 
doesn't get an adequate wage. It isn't the fact that 

The Chairman. Just a moment. 

Do you have any further questions ? 

Senator Goldwater. No. 

The Chairman. I do not mind listening to counsel, but we are 
rather tired and trying to get through. You are not a witness. We 
are only trying to get facts. We can make our own deduction. 

As you say, there are a lot of things going on which the public feels 
but which are hard to prove. 

There are some pretty good feelings about these soft contracts made 
by these racketeering unions with small-business people. Maybe they 
are under a feeling of fear that if they do not sign up with them some- 
thing worse will happen to them. 

It is pretty hard to get that established in the record as a fact. 
When we establish circumstances like this, the contracts that they are 
making, on the face of them it shows the working people are not getting 
any benefit out of it, and not even getting now under the law what 
are minimum wages. The minimum wage may not apply to this 
business. I understand that. 

But this certainly indicates to me, and I think it will to other mem- 
bers of the committee and to the public, that this is more of a racket 
than it is a service to the working people. 

Mr. Sparago. I will agree that in a great many cases it is so. That 
is why I approve of the action of the committee. As a matter of fact,, 
when my client was called by the investigations, I was called and said 
"Give them all the information you have." 

And we furnished the committee with an affidavit. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Are there any other questions ? 

If not, you may stand aside. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Jerome Fine. 

( Present at this point in the proceedings : Senators McClellan and 
Goldwater.) 

The Chairman. Will you be sworn, please ? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Fine. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF JEROME FINE 

The Chairman. State your name and your place of business. 

Mr. Fine. Jerome Fine. Seal Tight Quilting Co., 471 Manhattan 
Avenue, Brooklyn. 

The Chairman. Have you talked to members of the staff and know 
generally the line of interrogation to expect? 

Mr. Fine. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you waive counsel? 

Mr. Fine. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 



3832 IMPROPER AcrrvrTiES m the labor field 

Mr. Kennedy. What is the Seal Tight Quilting Corp.? What do 
you manufacture? 

Mr. Fine. We do processing of electronic quilting. 

Mr. Kennedy. What is electronic quilting ? 

Mr. Fine. We take two pieces of plastic material, with cotton wad- 
ding between it, and we quilt it without stitches. It is a heat sealing 
process. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many employees do you have? 

Mr. Fine. At the moment ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. Fine. Three. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many employees did you liave in the middle 
of 1955? 

Mr. Fine. It varied from 12 to 25 or 30. 

Mr. Kennedy. What nationality were most of those ? 

Mr. Fine. Completely mixed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Negro, Puerto Rican, and white? 

Mr. Fine. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You made a contract on the 5th of July with Local 
649, UAW-AFL? 

Mr. Fine. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, 649 is on the chart. 

That was to cover all of your employees ? 

The Chairman. What year was that ? 

Mr. Kennedy. July 1955. 

That was to cover all of your employees ? 

Mr. Fine. Yes, sir, 

Mr. Kennedy. With whom did you negotiate the contract ? 

Mr. Fine. Mr. Davidoff. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Harry Davidoff? 

Mr. Fine. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he have any conferences with your employees 
prior to that time? 

Mr. Fine. I don't think so. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he ever meet with your employees, do you 
know? 

Mr. Fine. A representative of the local did. 

Mr. lO.NNEDY. Were you there at the time ? 

Mr. Fine. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you urge them to join the union at that time? 

Mr. Fine. I believe they were already members at the time. 

Mr. Kennedy. They were already members of 649 ? 

Mr. Fine. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had already signed them up ? 

Mr. Fine. They were already members ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You made them members of local 649 ? 

Mr. Fine. The foreman or my bookkeeper. 

Mr. Kennedy, l-^rhen were they told that they were members? 
Shortly afterward? 

Mr. Fine. Wlien was it ? 

Mr. Kennedy. T^Hien were they told that they were members of 
local 649? 

Mr. Fine. At the time that there was a meeting called and the men 
were told that the shop was becoming union, that they were getting 



IMPROPER ACTn^ITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3833 

increases, they were getting additional holidays, that they were get- 
ting vacation money — well, they were getting that anyway. And 
they agreed to become unionized. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you taken them into the union prior to that 
time? Had you already signed the contract with Mr. Davidoff in 
649? 

Mr. Fine. I think it was simultaneous. 

Mr, Kennedy. Did they have a vote as to whether they wanted 
to become members of the union, or how was it arranged ? Did you 
just arrange it with Mr. Davidoff? 

Mr. Fine. Well, I had wondered. I should say that I met with Mr. 
Davidoff' and we agreed on my factory becoming a union. It had 
not been union and I had been in business about 5 years. I guess it 
was time. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, you say there were some benefits for 
the employees. I have the contract in front of me, and it says that 
the minimum wage will be 85 cents an hour. Is that right? 

Mr. Fine. At the time, I believe the Government minimum wa-ge 
was 75 cents an hour. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you guaranteed 85 cents? 

Mr. Fine. I never paid a man 85 cents. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was the guaranty in the contract? 

Mr. Fine. That is what it states, I believe. I haven't read it 
recently. 

Mr. Kjinnedy. "Wlien the minimum wage was raised to a dollar, 
did it still remain at 85 cents in the contract? 

Mr. Fine. I don't believe the contract was ever changed. In fact, 
shortly thereafter, my business had gotten very bad, to the point where 
it is only three people at the moment, and almost complete union 
negotiations were cut off. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you had a contract for guaranteeing to your em- 
ployees a wage of 85 cents an hour when the minimum wage federally 
was $1 an hour, is that right ? 

Mr. Fine. No, sir ; I believe that is incorrect. At the time of the 
union conti-act — — 

Mr. Kennedy. I know at the time of the contract. I am talking 
about subsequently, when the contract was in effect it provided for 
85 cents an hour when the minimum wage was already a dollar. 

Mr. Fine. It was an old contract. 

Mr. Kennedy. The contract was not changed, was it? 

Mr. Fine. There was no rider attached to it. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had no pension or welfare provisions in the 
contract ? 

Mr. Fine. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And it was stipulated that after an employee had 
worked there for 12 months, he would receive 1 week's vacation? 

Mr. Fine. I believe that is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And after he had worked there 36 months, he would 
receive 2 weeks' vacation? 

Mr. Fine. That is correct, sir. I also believe that there isn't any- 
thing in there suggesting bonuses to my men, which they always got at 
Christmas time. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am just talking about the contract. 



3834 IMPROPER ACTIVmElS EST THE LABOR FIELD 

And the provisions for the promotion on the basis of plantwide 
seniority, that was crossed out, that provision of the contract ? 

Mr. Fine. I don't recall. If you have it in front of you, sir, you 
would have it at your fingertips. 

Mr. Kennedy. There was no arrangement made for rest periods 
and washup time? That provision usually contained in a contract 
was also crossed out? 

Mr. Fine. It may have been. I don't believe there was any reason 
for it, because I believe that a happy shop will do the best for me. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am just talking about the contract. Once again, 
you were able to sign a contract with this union with no real benefits 
for the workers? 

Mr. Fine. I wouldn't say that, sir. They did get benefits. They 
got more benefits than they did before they were unionized. 

Mr. Kennedy. They got a week's vacation and a wage scale of 85 
cents an hour. They got a week's vacation a year. The sickness and 
accident benefits were crossed out also. You had nothing to cover 
sickness and accident? 

Mr. Fine. I believe that is taken care of by the insurance that I 
carry for the factory. 

Mr. Kennedy. There is nothing in the contract. 

The Chairman. I hand you here a copy of the contract and I ask 
you to examine it and state if that is the contract you signed. Counsel 
has been referring to it, about certain provisions being crossed out. 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Fine. Sir, there was a question about this contract. On the top 
it is very clearly marked "Retype completely." I haven't had an office 
staff since 

The Chairman. Is that a signed contract ? 

Mr. Fine. This is signed by Mr. Davidoff, and my signature also 
appears on it. As I say 

The Chairman. Did you have another contract, a different contract 
from that? 

Mr. Fine. As I say, I haven't had an office staff for over a year now. 
I couldn't find another copy of this. This is the one. This is the only 
copy I have. 

The Chairman. I assume you agreed to it by signing it, did you 
not? 

Mr. Fine. Actually, sir, this copy was signed by me in the presence 
of one of your men in my office the day they took it away. All I 
had was this contract signed by Mr. Davidoff. My signature was first 
put on my copy, which was this, the day that it was taken from me. 

The Chairman. You had not signed it until the day that the staff 
came to see you ? 

Mr. Fine. No. The staff had been in my office for 2 days, but the 
third day that they were there is when they took this. 

The Chairman. In other words, you had an unsigned copy insofar 
as your signature is concerned. But it was signed by Mr. Davidoff? 

Mr. Fine. Yes. A contract in my possession not having my signa- 
ture is still good. It had the signature of the union delegate. 

The Chairtman. That is the one you had from him that you were 
relying on. Did you have any other ? 

Mr. Fine. I can't recall, sir. I read on the top of this where it says, 
"Retype completely." 



IMPROPER ACTIVmES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3835 

If there is another copy, that should exist, with the provisions as 
marked in here, it should exist somewhere. 

The Chairman. All right. That copy will be made exhibit No. 9 
for reference. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 9" for ref- 
erence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr, Kennedy. How did you arrange for the dues to be sent in to 
the union ? 

Mr. Fine. I believe my bookkeeper deducted it from the salaries 
of the men, and when the due date — I believe she took out a dollar 
a week so that the men would not be taxed too much, or not have to 
give up the $4 at one time. When the full money was collected, a 
-sheet was made up bearing the full amount of the dues, and sent to 
the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you pay any other money to Mr. Davidoff or 
anybody connected with him ? 

Mr. Fine. No, except for the check that you have in your possession, 
which was for an ad in tlie booklet. 

The Chairman. How many employees did you have on the 10th 
■of August 1955 ? 

Mr. Fine. I couldn't just pull that answer out of the air, sir. 

The Chairman. You know about how many you had. 

Mr. Fine. ^Vhen was this ? The 10th of when ? 

The Chairman. The 10th of August 1955. It would be 2 years ago. 

Mr. Fine. Fifteen or eighteen, or twenty. Something like that. 

The Chairman. What was the volume of your business in that year ? 
What did you gross ? 

Mr. Fine. I think close to $800,000, sir. 

The Chairman. $800,000? 

Mr. Fine. I believe so, sir. 

The Chairman. As I understand your operations, you do not have 
to buy any material? 

Mr. Fine. We have to buy the backing and the wadding, the cotton 
wadding. 

The Chairman. The backing? 

Mr. Fine. The cotton and the backing of the process. There are 
three materials in the process. We buy the back and the center. 

The Chairman. I present you here a canceled check in the amount 
of $1,000, dated August 10, 1955, payable to the order of Amalgamated 
Union, Local 649, 1780 Broadway, New York. 

Will you examine that check and state if you identify it? 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Fine. This is the check that was presented to the imion. 

The Chairman. You presented that to the union ? 

Mr. Fine. It was mailed to them. 

The Chairman. For what ? 

Mr. Fine. As best as I know, for an advertisement in their booklet. 

The Chairman. For this advertisement? 

Mr. Fine. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you know what that advertisement sold for ? 

Mr. Fine. Since I met the gentleman that interviewed me in New 
York, they showed me that other slip which you have in your hand 
which says that that ad should be $500. 



3836 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES m THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. I will let this bookl&t be made exhibit No. 10 for 
reference. 

Do you identify this as the ad you took ? 

Mr. Fine. Yes. 

The Chairman. The check will be made exhibit No. 10 and that 
booklet will be made exhibit No. 11. 

(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibit No. 10" which 
will be found in the appendix on p. 3977 and No. 11 may be found in 
the files of the select committee.) 

The Chairman. I hand you now a blank form from the Amalgam- 
ated Union, Local 649, and ask you to examine it and see what it says. 

( A document was handed to the witness. ) 

The Chairman. What does that blank form state with respect to the 
co9t of the ads in this book ? 

Mr. Fine. According to the rates listed here, a gold page is $500, 
a silver page is $250, a full page is $100, and a half page is $50. 

The Chairman. So you got the highest priced ad that they had ? 

Mr. Fine. It appears that way, sir. 

The Chairman. And paid double for it ? 

Mr. Fine. You have the back of it, sir. It is on the other side. 

The Chairman. Well, whatever page it is on. That is the highest 
price they had? 

Mr. Fine. As far as I knew at the time, sir. I don't recall receiving 
one of these. 

The Chairman. Anyway, they charged you $1,000 for it and they 
advertised it for half price. 

Mr. Fine. Can I get a rebate ? 

The Chairman. Can you explain that? 

Mr. Fine. I can't, sir. 

The Chairman. In the course of getting the contract — what is the 
date of the contract? 

Mr. Kennedy. July 1955. 

The Chairman. A few days later, you bought this big ad and paid 
double for it ? 

Mr. Fine. A few days ? I believe a month had passed. 

The Chairman. Let us see the date of the contract and check the 
date of the check. 

The contract is July 5, is that correct? The check is dated in 
August. 

Are there any further questions? 

Mr. Kennedy. I would like to find out why you were so interested in 
getting an ad in the dance book for local 649. 

Mr. Fine. Actually, in that same book is a competitor of mine. 

The Chairman. Let us see his ad, and see what he took? 

Mr. Fine. At the time it was a smaller firm. He has a half page. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is it gold? 

Mr. Fine. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tell why you wanted to pay $1,000 to advertise in 
the dance book of local 649. 

The CiiAiRiNiAN. He got a $50 ad if he got a half page, according 
to the advertising here. 

Mr. Fine. As I say, I don't recall seeing one of those, sir. 

The Chairman. This slip may be made exhibit 12. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 12," for 
reference and will be found in the appendix on p. 3978.) 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3837 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did you want to pay $1,000 ? 

Mr. Fine. At the time we were asked for an ad and we gave one. I 
guess I didn't think of it. It was an advertisement that was asked for, 
and that was it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was it the undei'standing when you signed the con- 
tract which stipulated your employees would get only 85 cents an 
hour, was it understood at that time that you would pay $1,000 for 
an ad? 

Mr. Fine. My employees never received 85 cents an hour and I made 
no stipulation. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is the contract, that is what it provides, that 
3'our employees were to get 85 cents an hour. I am asking you 
whether there was an understanding at that time when they said 
your employees w^ould only have to get paid 85 cents an hour, was 
it understood at that time that you would give them an ad in the dance 
book ? 

Mr. Fine. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. There wasn't discussion about that ? 

Mr. Fine. No, sir, because if it was understood, I would have paid 
my men 85 cents an hour and I didn't. 

The Chairman. This is the point : At the time you made the con- 
tract, did you have any understanding about taking an ad in this — 
what is it? 

Mr. Fine. It is a souvenir journal. 

No, sir. I subsequently learned of their affair in the journal a few 
weeks later. 

The Chairman. You learned of it a week later? How did you 
learn about it? 

Mr. Fine. I was approached by one of the men who asked me to 
contribute to their journal, and I did. 

The Chairman. For $1,000. 

Do you regard that as a pretty generous contribution ? 

Mr. Fine. I had a pretty nice business at the time, sir. I would 
give them three times as much to get my business back to where it was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who approached you on the ad? 

Mr. Fine. It might have been Mr. Davidoff. I don't recall. 

Mr. Kennedy. You don't recall ? 

Mr. Fine. It may have been Mr. Davidoff. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you meet Mr. Dio at all ? 

Mr. Fine. No, sir. 

Ml'. Kennp:dy. Did you ever meet him ? 

Mr. Fine. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Are you sure of that? 

Mr. Fine. If I see the man, I may have seen him, but I don't recall. 

If you told me this man was Mr. Dio right now, I would say I 
don't know. 

The Chairman. All right, sir. You may stand aside. 

Are there any other witnesses ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock 
Monday afternoon. 

(Whereupon, at 4 : 47 p. m., the committee recessed, to reconvene 
at 2 p. m., Monday, August 5, 1957.) 

(Members ]iresent at the taking of the recess: Senators McClellan 
and (rold water.) 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGE3IENT FIELD 



MONDAY, AUGUST 5, 1957 

United States Senate, 
Select Committee on Improper Activities 

IN THE Labor or Management Field, 

Washin(/,ton, D. C. 

The select committee met at 2 p. m., pursuant to Senate Resolution 
74, agreed to January 30, 1957, in the caucus room. Senate Office 
Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the select com- 
mittee) presiding. 

Present : Senators John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas ; Irving 
M. Ives, Republican, New York ; Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South 
Dakota; Barry Goldwater, Republican, Arizona; Carl T. Curtis, 
Republican, Nebraska. 

Also present : Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel ; Paul J. Tierney, 
assistant counsel; Walter R. May, assistant counsel; Ruth Young 
Watt, chief clerk. 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

(Members of the select committee present at the convening of the 
session were: Senators McClellan, Ives, and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. The Chair has 1 or 2 announcements to make. 

We received this morning from Mr. Marshall M. Miller, of New 
York, a telegram relating to testimony that was heard last week which 
resulted in his being discharged by the State legislative committee, 
New York State legislative committee on industrial and labor condi- 
tions in which capacity he was employed as a consultant. He re- 
quested an opportunity to appear before the committee and that 
opportunity will be granted him, but the Chair may note that his 
complaint, apparently, should be against the New York State legisla- 
tive committee. 

That is the committee that he was working for and the committee 
that discharged him, but under our rule if anyone feels that deroga- 
tory testimony has been given against him, that is unfair or that 
he desires to explain, we usually grant him an opportunity to appear. 

In this instance as in others, we will have to do it at the commit- 
tee's convenience. So, because this wire has been given out to the 
press, or because the press had information about it, the Chair thought 
it would make that announcement. 

We have also received another wire from someone whose name was 
mentioned, and he denies the implications of the testimony, but he 
does not request any opportunity to appear before the committee and 
so no action will be taken on that wire. 

3839 



3840 IMPROPER ACTIVrriES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Is tliere anythinf^ further before we proceed ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Just on Max Chester, Mr. Chairnuin. 

The Chairman. Mr. Max Chester, a witness subpenaed to be here 
today, through his counsel, has requested that his appearance be post- 
poned until tomorrow for sufficient reasons, we think, and, therefore, 
his testimony will not be heard today. 

But he will be expected to be here tomorrow and called tomorrov: 
afternoon. 

Is there anything further ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

The Chairman. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. I might explain that we are going into two matters 
today, one dealing with the election for the joint council 16 in New 
York and the events that preceded it, and this incidentally also in- 
volves a man who received a charter from the UAW-AFL, which we 
call the bouncing charter and we will have testimony on these two 
points today, and our first witness will be a member of the staff, Mr. 
Paul Tierney. 

The Chairman. Will you come around, Mr. Tierney? 

TESTIMONY OF PAUL J. TIERNEY— Resumed 

The Chairman. You have been previously sworn ? 

Mr. Tierney. I have, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Counsel, you may proceed. Mr. 
Tierney is a member of the staff, and he has been previously sworn, in 
this series of hearings, and he will remain under the same oath. 

Mr. Kennedy. I would like to have him identify this document, 
Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. The Chair hands you a docmnent entitled, "Ap- 
plications for Charter, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 
Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America," dated Novem- 
ber 8, 1955, and please examine it and state if you identify it. 

Mr. Tierney. I do identify it, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. What is it? 

Mr. Tierney. This is an application for a charter which was issued 
to local 275, and the application is dated November 8, 1955, for an 
organization entitled, "Warehouse and Processing Jurisdiction in 
Greater New York Area, New York." 

It has on it seven applicants who are Daniel Ornstein, Sam Getlan, 
Fred Russell, George Cohan, Martin Smith, Harold Thomas, James 
Watkins. 

The Chairman. That document may be made exhibit No. V\. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 13" for refer- 
ence and will be found in the appendix on p. 3979.) 

The Chairman. What does it do? Does it seek a charter and is it 
an application for a charter signed by those individuals ? 

Mr. Tierney. It is an application for a charter and the names are 
typewritten, but it is an application for a charter by those individuals, 
Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Where did we get the document ? 

Mr. Tierney. We got it from the offices of the International Broth- 
erhood of Teamsters in Washington. 

The Chairman. It was in their files ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3841 

Mr. TiERNET. That is correct. 

The Chairman. Was a charter issued on it, do you know ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. Yes, sir, it was. 

The Chairman. A charter was issued on that application that you 
hold in your hand ? 

Mr. Tiernet. That is correct. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. Tierney, that is local 275 of the teamsters ; 
is that right ? 

Mr. Tierney. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that local according to our chart, shops from 
that local came out of 875 of the teamsters, which had been in existence. 

Mr. Tierney. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And 875 we will show later, was controlled by Mr. 
Tony Ducks Corallo ; is that right ? 

Mr. Tierney. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, the important name on that charter application 
that you have just read is what ? 

Mr. Tierney. Sam Getlan. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was the second name that you read ? 

Mr. Tierney. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Thank you. We have another — How do you spell 
his name ? 

Mr. Tierney. G-e-t-1-a-n. 

The Chairman. I hand you another document, photostatic copy of a 
letter dated December 1, 1955, addressed to the joint council 16, Martin 
T. Lacey, president. New York, signed by Harry DavidofF, secretary- 
treasurer of Warehouse and Processors Employees Union Local 258. 

Is that the same union that the charter referred to, or the same local ? 

Mr. Tierney. No. sir ; it is a different union. 

The Chairman. I hand you this document and I ask you to examine 
it and see if .you identify it and state what it is. 

Mr. Tierney. I do identify this document, Mr. Chairman, and it 
is a photostatic copy of a letter dated December 1, 1955, from Local 
258, Warehouse and Processors Employees Union, of the teamsters, 
and to joint council 16, Mr. Martin T. Lacey, president, listing the 
names and titles of officers of local union 258 and requesting that they 
be seated as delegates to the joint council 16. 

It is signed by Harry Davidoff', secretary-treasurer. 

The Chairman. What names appear there ? 

Mr. Tierney. The seven officers listed are Sam Getlan, president, 
the same spelling as the previous name. 

The Chairman. Are they identical with the charter application ? 

Mr. Tierney. No, they are not. Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Proceed to read them. 

Mr. Tierney. The other names in addition to Sam Getlan are 
Richard Easton, vice president. Harry Davidoff. secretary-treasurer, 
and Manny Baglini, recording secretary, and Anthony Barber;'., trus- 
tee, David Koch, trustee, and Charles Kapelowitz, trustee. 

The only name that is the same is Sam Getlan, as I recall, the presi- 
dent, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. All right, proceed. That document ma}' be made 
exhibit No. 14. 

89330— 57— pt. 10 17 



3842 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 14" for refer- 
ence and will be found in the appendix on p. 3980.) 

Mr. Kennedy. There is a distinction between the two kinds of docu- 
ments. No. 1 for local 275, that was an application for a charter ; is 
that right ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, that was for local 2Y5. This is a request from 
the secretary-treasurer, Harry Davidoff, from local 258, that the offi- 
cers of that local be seated ; is that right ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. In joint council 16, once they were seated, then they 
could vote in the election, and this was a request from 258, which is 
one of the paper locals, to vote or to have these people seated in the 
election. 

The Chairman. This reads : 

The following are the names and titles of the officers of local union 258, and 
same are requested to be seated as delegates to joint council 16. 

(At this point. Senator Mundt entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. There are 7 names here and each local as we have 
pointed out before, would have 7 votes ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they have seven votes no matter how big the 
local is, is that right ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. That is true. 

Mr. Kennedy. And this local at that time had no members. 

Mr. TiERNEY. That is true. 

Mr. Kennedy. This local 258? 

Mr TiERNEY. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they list seven people that would have a right 
to vote in the election for the president of the joint council, isn't that 
correct ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that is local 258 over here on our paper locals. 

Now, local 258 gave as its address, 10 Park Avenue ; is that right ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is in Mount Vernon, N. Y. ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, this also fits in again and gets into some com- 
plications, Mr. Chairman, but we will have to try to go through it. 

This 258 lists as its address 10 Park Avenue, Mount Vernon, N. Y. 
What local was at that address ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. Ten Park Avenue, Mount Vernon, N. Y., was the 
address of 228 and it was actually a second address of local 228. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was the second address of this local 228 here? 

Mr. TiERNEY. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, that local 228 had a new address? 

Mr. TiERNEY. That actually was the second or new address. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did it have an old address ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, did certain of these locals over here give the 
old address of local 228 ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. Yes, sir; and local 651 of one of the teamsters paper 
locals, gave the old address of local 228, on its letterhead. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3843 

Mr. Kennedy. Did any other local give an address similar to the 
old address of 228 ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. Yes ; local 362 gave an address of 19 Columbia Street 
in West Hempstead, which was actually we found out to be a fictitious 
address. 

]\Ir. Kennedy. So 362 gave a fictitious address, 19 Columbia Street? 

Mr. TiERNEY. 119 West Columbia Street in Hempstead. 

Mr. Kennedy. Which was the old address of 228 ; is that right ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. That is right, 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, did 362, which gave the fictitious address, and 
651 give the same telephone number ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. Yes, they did. 

Mr. Kennedy. They both had the same telephone number ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. That is right, 

Mr. Kennedy. Which was the old address of 228 ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And did they, in fact, 362 and 651 actually have the 
address of 649, and operate out of 649 ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. To all intents and purposes they did operate out of 
649, although on their letterhead they listed the address in Hemp- 
stead, and actually they were paper locals, and were not operating as 
such at the time. 

The Chairman. At that time, did they have any members ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. None that we know of, no ; they didn't. 

The CiiAiRiMAN. You are unable to find any members at that time ? 

Mr. TiERNEY, Not at that time. 

The Chairman, And they were giving these fictitious addresses and 
also sending delegates there to be seated and to vote? 

Mr, TiERNEY. That is right. 

The Chairman. In the Joint Council 16 ? 

Mr. TiERNEY, That is right. 

The Chairman. All right ; call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr, Sam Getlan. 

The Chairman. Will you be sworn first, please ? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr, Getlan. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF SAM GETLAN 

The Chairman. State your name and place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, please, sir. 

Mr. Getlan, Sam Getlan, 420 West 206th Street, Manhattan. 

The Chairman. Can you speak a little louder ? 

Mr, Getlan. 420 West 206th Street, Manhattan. 

The Chairman. What is your business or occupation ? 

Mr. Getlan. Secretary-treasurer of Coin Machine Employees 
Union Local 26. 

The Chairman. Local what? 

Mr. Getlan. Local 26. 

The Chairman. What international is that ? 

Mr, Getlan, I didn't hear the question. 



3844 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. You are secretary-treasurer, you said, I believe of 
local 26, of what mternational union ? 

Mr. Getlan. International Jewelry Workers Union. 

The Chairman. International Jewelry Workers Union ? 

Have you talked to members of the staff regarding your testimony ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You know generally then, the line of mterrogation 
to expect ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You waive the right of counsel ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right ; thank you. 

Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out as we start 
that Mr. Getlan has been sick, and has lost some 50 pounds over a 
short period of time and he is not a well man, but he has been answer- 
mg the questions of the committee. I would like to point that out 
before we start. 

The Chairman. He has been cooperating with the staff? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is right. 

The Chairman. We will extend you every courtesy and considera- 
tion. If you get tired, let us know. 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. I would like to have Mr. Getlan identify this. 

The CiiAiPtMAN. I hand you here an exhibit to the testimony of this 
committee, exhibit No. 13, entitled "An Application for a Charter,'' 
dated November 8, 1955, and I ask you to examine this document and 
state whether you identify it and whether you have ever seen it be- 
fore, and give us any information you can about it. 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Getlan. It is the first time I ever saw it. 

The Chairman. The first time you ever saw it ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

Tlie Chairman. Your name is on that document? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes ; it is on the second line. 

The Chairman. Your name appears second on the list of seven 
that are applying for a charter. 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

The Chairman. There is no handwriting there? 

]Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Tlie Chairman. Did you authorize anybody to place your name on 
an application of that kind? 

Mr. Getlan. I don't know anything about it. 

The Chairman. You know nothing about it? 

Mr. Getlan. Absolutely not. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Kennedy, you can proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is for local 275, and you did not apply for that 
charter ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did not tell anyone they could use your name 
in applying for the local, for the charter for 275 ? 

Mr. Getlan. I don't know any of the signatures on there, the names 
that are on there. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3845 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know any of the other people ? 

Mr. Getlan. Not a one. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know of the existence of local 275 ? 

Mr. Getlan. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Mr. Milton Levine ? 

Mr. Getlan. No, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy, Do you know Mr. Irving Slutsky ? 

Mr. Getlan. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Sam Zaber ? 

Mr. Getlan. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. They are all officers of that local. 

Mr. Getlan. I don't know them. 

Mr. Kennedy. I would like to have you identify this application 
to be seated for the joint council 16, as a representative of local 258. 
Again, 258 is one of the paper locals of the teamsters. 

The Chairman. The Chair hands you exhibit No. 14, which is a 
photostatic copy of a letter from Harry Davidoff, secretary-treasurer 
of Local 258, Warehouse and Processing Employees Union, and the 
letter is addressed to joint council 16, Martin T. Lacey, president, 
dated December 1, 1955, and I will ask you to examine that document 
and state if you identify it and what you know about it. 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

(At this point. Senator Curtis withdrew from the hearing room.) 

Mr. Getlan. It is the first time I have ever seen this letter, and I 
don't know anything about it. 

The Chairman. What is that? 

Mr. Getlan. It is the first time I have ever seen this letter and I 
don't knoM^ antyhing about it. 

The Chairman. Your name is certified there bj^ Mr. Davidoff as 
secretary-treasurer of that local. 

Mr. Getlan. As president. 

The Chairman. Your name is certified as president of that local? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And asked to be seated as a delegate to Joint 
Council 16, which would give you voting rights. 

Did you know that you were there as a delegate of that union ? 

Mr. Getlan. No, sir ; I never knew. 

The Chairman. Did you attend the meeting ? 

Mr. Getlan. No, sir ; I never did. 

The Chairman. So again, your name has been used without your 
knowledge. 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

The Chairman. You never heard of that local before ? 

Mr. Getlan. No. 

The Chairman. Did you give any authority for anybody to certify 
you as a delegate ? 

Mr. Getlan. No, sir. 

The Chairman. You were never consulted about it ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

The Chairman. All right. Thank you. 

Senator Mundt. Can you give the committee any explanation that 
would help us understand how your name happened to be on there? 

Mr. Getlan. I don't know anything about this. 

Senator Mundt. You have no idea whatsoever ? 



3846 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR PTELD 

Mr. Getlan. Absolutely none, and I never attended any election, 
and I didn't know I was elected president. 

The Chairman. Did you ever function as president of that union 
in any way ? 

Mr. Getlan. No, sir; I was never elected president, as far as I 
know. 

Senator Ives. Just a moment, Mr. Chairman. 

Do you know of any reason why anybody should put you on there 
as president ? 

Mr. Getlan. Do I know of a reason ? 

Senator Ives. Yes. 

Mr, Getlan. Absolutely none. They have not got my permission 
to do it. 

Senator Ives. I gathered they haven't got your permission, but do 
you know of any reason why they would do it ? 

Mr. Getlan. Well, maybe they needed an officer, and that is all. 

Senator Ives. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Getlan, could you tell the committee what the 
address is that is used for 256, on which you are listed as president? 

Mr. Getlan. 10 Park Avenue, that is my address, that is my phone 
number, too. That is where I have my office in local 26. 

Mr. Kennedy. So they not only used you as president of a local, 
but they used your address and phone number. 

Mr. Getlan. Not my home number. 

Mr. Kennedy. Your telephone number? 

Mr. Getlan. My office number and phone number. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you get any mail there for that local? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes; I did get mail for that local, and finally I got 
tired of the mail and I sent it back. I told the mailman not to 
deliver any more mail for the teamsters union at my office. 

Mr. Kennedy. That address, was that address for local 228 and 
that had been there ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is 228 of the UAW? 

Mr. Getlan. Tliat is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you identify this, please? 

The Chairman. I hand you what purports to be a photostatic copy 
of a letter dated February 2, 1956, from Harry Davidoff, secretary- 
treasurer, to joint council 16. It is on Warehouse and Processing 
Employees Union, Local 256, Park Avenue, Mount Vernon, N. Y., 
and I will ask you to examine this photostatic copy, and see if you 
know anything about it and if you can identify it. 

(A document Avas handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Getlan. Tliis is all new to me. All of this information where 
I am president, I don't know any of the members, either. 

The Chairman. Will you read the letter ? 

Mr. Getlan (reading) : 

In accordance with the order of 

It is addressed to the Local Council 16, International Brotherhood 
of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen, and Helpers Union of 
America, 265 West 14th Street, Room 709, New York, N. Y. 

Dear Sib and Brother: In accordance with your letter of January 19, 1956, 
we give you below a list of officers of our local union who are eligible to vote 
in the joint council election : 



EMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3847 

Sam Getlan, president ; Richard Easton, vice president ; and Harry Davidoff, 
secretary-treasurer ; and Manny Baglini, recording secretary ; Anthony Barbera, 
trustee; and David Koch, trustee; and Charles Kapelowitz, trustee. 
Fraternally yours, 

Harry Davidoff, 
Secretary-Treasurer. 

The Chairman". Did you attend the meetino; ? 

Mr. Getlan. No, sir; I don't even know where it was held. 

The Chairman. Yon do not even know where it was held ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

The Chairman. Do you know any of those other people on there? 

Mr. Getlan. I don't know any of tliem. 

The Chairman. You do not know any of them ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

The Chairman. You did not attend as a delegate and you did not 
vote as such ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

The Chairman. Do you know who substituted for you ? 

Mr. Getlan. I said I don't know any of them, and I don't know 
who substituted, and I wasn't there. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

That document may be made exhibit No. 15. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 15" for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Senator Mundt. You testified a little earlier that you received mail 
addressed to you as president. 

Mr. Getlan. Addressed to me at my address, with the teamsters' 
local, you understand. I don't rememlaer what local it was, whether 
it was 256 or 885, but mail came to my office at 10 Park Avenue, Mount 
Vernon, N. Y. We are the only union at 10 Park Avenue. 

Senator Mundt. You got the mail. Did you open any of it ? 

Mr. Getlan. No. 

Senator Mundt. You said you returned it ? 

Mr. Getlan. I gave it, or I told the girl to bring it back to the mail- 
box — and there is a mailbox hanging on the wall — and put it in the 
mailbox. 

Senator Mundt. How did you know the mail was not intended for 
you if you had the name on it ? 

Mr. Getlan. It was addressed to me, at my address, and if it was 
addressed to me personally I would open it up. I got tired of opening 
it up, and after getting a few letters I got tired of opening the same 
letters. 

Senator Mundt. So you started getting the letters and you opened 
a few of them and you found out that they dealt with the business of 
some other union besides yours ; is that right ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. It was the teamsters' union, and they 
are addressing it to them, and it was teamsters' information, and I 
could not help them on that. 

Senator Mundt. Who were the letters from ? 

Mr. Getlan. John English, I believe, the secretary-treasurer of the 
teamsters. 

Senator Mundt. So that during the first few instances, while you 
were receiving the mail and opening it, because you had a perfect 
right to open it, and it came to your address, and you have a right to 
open that mail 



3848 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. And you read it and you saw they were talking to 
you about the teamsters' business, and it was signed by John English, 
whom I suppose you did not know. 

Mr. Getlaist. I received a letter from Ohio, or out in California, 
about a trucking concern out in that section, coming into my area, and 
please see that they are unionized. 

Senator Mundt. So you wrapped it back up in an envelope and 
sent it back. 

Mr. Getlan. I got tired of getting mail in, and I told the mailman, 
and he usually comes to the office and I see him about once a week, and 
I instructed him, "Do not deliver teamsters' mail here." 

(At this point, Senator Curtis entered the hearing room.) 

Senator Mundt. Do you remember any other letters, the authors of 
any other letters besides Mr. English, and do you remember anybody 
else who wrote those letters ? 

Mr. Getlan. No ; I don't know. I don't know who any other letters 
came from, for the teamsters union. 

Senator Mundt. Do you remember, Mr. English ? 

Mr. Getlan. I remember that name, English; yes. 

Senator Mundt. All right. 

The Chairman. The Chair presents to you a photostatic copy of 
another letter, dated February 2, 1956, addressed from Harry Davidoff, 
secretary-treasurer to joint council 16, and I will ask you to examine 
it and state if you know anything about it or you can identify it. 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Getlan. In other words, that is supposed to be my signature 
there, too. 

The Chairman. I think not. I think they just filled in your name 
there. 

Mr. Getlan. They filled it in. I don't know anything about it. 

The Chairman. You cannot identify it and you know nothing 
about it and you never saw or heard of it before ? 

Mr. Getlan. No. 

The Chairman. Will you read the letter ? 

Mr. Getlan. This is addressed to the Joint Council 16, IBFT, 265 
West 14th Street, New York 11, N. Y. 

Dear Sib and Buotheb : This will certify that the bearer, Sam Getlan, is an 
executive board member of local 258 and is eligible to vote in the joint council 
election. 

Fraternally yours, 

Harby Davidoff, 
Secretary-Treasurer. 

The Chairman. Did you ever become the bearer of that letter ? 

Mr. Getlan. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Again, you did not vote ? 

Mr. Getlan. Absolutely not. 

The Chairman. Tliat letter may be made exhibit No. 16. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 16" for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Senator Mundt. I am just wondering, since we have elicited from 
the witness the fact that at least John English thought he was presi- 
dent of this fictitious local, I am wondering whether our counsel or 



IMPROPEil ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3849 

staff lias been in contact with Mr. English to find out how he happened 
to be of the opinion that this man was president of the local union. 

Mr. Kennedy. These documents were furnished, once the interna- 
tional granted these charters, originally because of the request of 
Jimmy Hoff'a, once the international granted these charters, these 
names of people were listed as officers. 

Mr. Sam Getlan was one of those, or that name was listed as presi- 
dent of local 258, so that all correspondence then, from the inter- 
national to 258 would be sent to Mr. Getlan, at this address that had 
been given. 

Senator Mundt. So that Mr. English's office would have received 
this information from the office of Jimmy Hoffa? 

Mr. Kennedy, x^o ; we are going to go into exactly how it was done, 
Senator, but they received this information from an individual in 
New York whose name will come out. 

Actually, it is on there now, on the chart, John McNamara. He 
came down and the information was given to John English, and to the 
international here in Washington, D. C. That is as to who the officers 
were going to be. 

Senator Mundt. As far as Mr. English was concerned, he was as 
badly deceived as the man now on the witness stand ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? 

Mr. Kennedy. As I said, we are going to take up two matters today, 
and Mr. Getlan is involved in the second matter, but prior to that 
maybe w^e could finish this story as far as Mr. Getlan is concerned by 
putting a staff member on, to find out how Mr. Getlan voted. 

The Chairman. Will you come around, please ? 

Just keep your seat and he may sit there by your side. 

Mr. Kennedy. You do not know liow you voted, do you, ISIr. 
Getlan ? 

Mr. Getlan. I never voted. I never attended the election. 

Mr. Kennedy. You voted, Mr. Getlan. 

Mr. Getlan. I voted? 

TESTIMONY OF PAUL J. TIERNEY— Eesumed 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Tierney, you have been sworn. As 
an investigator for this committee, you have heard the testimony of 
Mr. Getlan that he did not serve as an officer, and he did not even 
know he was an officer, and yet he was appointed a delegate and certi- 
fied as such with voting rights to the meeting of joint council 1(). Are 
there any comments you have to make from your investigation ? 

Mr. Tierney. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. The votes we are dis- 
cussing are the votes of the officers of the seven paper locals. The 
local we are discussing here is local 258. The credentials committee 
of the joint council prior to the election agreed that each individual 
])rior to voting would present a credential. 

The Chairman. What ? 

Mr. Tierney. Present a credential prior to voting. The 7 
paper locals, it was ultimately discovered, cast a total number of votes, 
cast a total of 42 votes ; and, by order of the general president, Dave 
Beck, these votes from the paper locals were impounded in a vault, 
in New York, and not to be counted until it might be determined 



3850 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

whether or not the votes would actually affect the outcome of the 
election. 

The Chairman. His was 1 of the votes of the 7 paper locals? 

Mr. TiERNEY. That is right. 

The Chairman. Mr. Getlan's was, as far as the documentation is 
concerned ? 

Mr. Tierney. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And these votes were to be deposited, or in other 
words held in escrow until it was determined whether they were 
needed ? 

Mr. Tierney. That is correct. 

The Chairman. If they were not needed, they would not be used; 
and, if they were, then these phony votes would be thrown in. 

Mr. Tierney. That is correct. We examined the credentials and 
the votes which were together in the vault, in New York. 

The Chairman. Are they in possession of a court now ? 

Mr. Tierney. No; the credentials we have are not in the court. 
They were impounded by orders of the general president and not in 
the possession of the court and never were. 

The Chairman. Impounded by order of whom? 

Mr. Tierney. The general president of the teamsters, Mr. Dave 
Beck. We examined the votes, and the credentials which accom- 
panied them, and there were 42 credentials and 42 votes cast. We 
could only assume that the credentials pertained to the actual votes 
which were cast. All 42 votes were cast for John O'Rourke. 

The Chairman. That is for president of the joint council ? 

Mr. Tierney. For president of the joint council. One of the cre- 
dentials there presumably was issued to Sam Getlan, so we 
can safely presume it was Sam Getlan or an individual using his 
credentials voted in the election. 

The Chairman. In other words, this certificate of authority to vote 
which has been made exhibit No. 16, I believe, you found that there ? 

Mr. Tierney. That is correct. 

The Chairman. There were 42 votes cast, and this is one of the 
certifications of voting rights ? 

Mr. Tierney. That is correct. 

The Chairman. And it would take the vote on tliis certificate to 
make up the 42 that were authenticated and authorized to vote? 

Mr. Tierney. That is correct. 

The Chairman. The record does not show, then, other than the 
name of Mr. Getlan, as being present and voting. In other words, 
the record — there is nothing in the record to reflect who else may have 
cast the vote for him, or in his name ? 

Mr. Tierney. Nothing in the record. 

The Chairman. You know someone did, because 

Mr. Tierney. We know someone cast the vote, but we don't know 
who cast the vote. 

The Chairman. From the record, there are 42 certifications and 42 
votes cast? 

Mr. Tierney. That is correct. 

The Chairman. And his name was one of those that was certified 
as a right to vote ? 

Mr. Tierney. That is correct. 

The Chairman. There were 42 votes ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3851 

Mr. TiERNEY. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Is there anything else ? 

Mr. IvENXEDY. Somebody, either Sam Getlan voted or someone 
voted for him. 

Mr. TiERNEY. Someone voted, because there were 42 votes cast, and 
there were 42 credentials, and someone voted, either Mr. Getlan or 
somebody else. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. Someone in his name ? 

Mr. TiERNEY. Someone in his credential. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. And he has testified, of course, that he didn't vote, 
so somebody else voted in Mr. Sam Getlan's name. 

Mr. TiERNEY. That is correct. 

The Chairman. You may stand aside for the present. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now we are going on to local 228 of the UAW, Mr. 
Chairman. 

TESTIMONY OF SAM GETLAN— Resumed 

Mr. Kennedy. You were an officer of 228 ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, I would like to have some preliminary ex- 
planation of 228 by a member of the staff, if Mr. Getlan could step 
aside. 

The Chairman. All right; have the member of the staff come 
around. 

You liave not been previously sworn, have you ? 

Mr. ]May. No, sir. 

The Chairman. You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall 
give before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and noMiing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. May. I do. 

The Chairman. Be seated. 

TESTIMONY OF WALTER R. MAY 

The Chairman. State your name and place of residence and your 
business or occupation and your present employment. 

Mr. May. I am Walter R. May, Arlington, Mass., assistant coun- 
sel. United States Senate Select Committee on Improper Activities 
in the Labor or Management Field. 

The Chairman. Counsel suggests you give some of your back- 
ground, briefly, for the record. 

Mr. JNIay. Mr. Chairman, I served in the Navy Air Corps during 
the war and I attended Boston University Law School, and entered 
the FBI in 1948. I left the FBI in 1954, and I worked for a period 
with the Boston Post, in Massachusetts. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are familiar with this situation regarding the 
UAW-AFL locals ? 

Mr. May. Yes, sir ; I am. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you are familiar particularly with Local 228 
of the UAW-AFL? 

Mr. May. Yes, sir; I am. 



3852 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. These were locals that Avere chartered under Mr. 
Johnny Dio ; is that correct ? 

Mr. May. That is correct. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. In New York City, is that right ? 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, did you identify for the committee Mr. An- 
thony Doria ? 

Mr. May. Anthony Doria is secretary-treasurer, international sec- 
retary-treasurer of the Allied Industrial Workers of America. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, the Allied Industrial Workers of America is 
what used to be the UAW-AFL ; is that right ? 

Mr. ]VL\Y. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. They changed their name during 1956, to the Allied 
Industrial Workers of America ? 

Mr. May. That is true. 

Mr. Kennedy. And we had some correspondence regarding local 
228 with Mr. Anthony Doria ? 

Mr. May. Yes, sir ; we did. 

The Chairman. Did he furnish you certain documents ? 

Mr. May. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAiR]\rAN. And responded in request to letters that you di- 
rected to him ? 

Mr. ]\Iay. That is correct. 

The Chairman. I hand you a document here that appears to be a 
photostatic copy of a document entitled "Local 228," and I ask you to 
examine this particular document, photostatic copy, and see if you 
identify it, and if so, state what it is. 

Mr. May. Mr. Chairman, I identify this exhibit by letter dated 
December 29, 1956, the committee requested certain information. 

The Chairman. Dated what date ? 

Mr. May. December 29, 1956, and we requested information from 
Mr. Doria concerning certain locals, UAW locals. 

The Chairman. That was the other committee requesting it, the 
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations ? 

Mr. May. Yes, sir; and this particular document is that portion of 
Mr. Doria's answer, return letter, which pertains to local 228. 

The Chair]man. All right. It may be made exhibit No. 17. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you read the pertinent parts ? 

The Chairman. It may be printed in the record, but you may read 
the pertinent parts of it. 

Mr. May. We requested certain items of information from Mr. 
Doria. First we asked for a photostatic copy of the original request 
for the charter, for local 228. Mr. Doria replied : 

This local never became active, and since the charter was issued on November 9, 
1953, all records of this local union have been destroyed as far as the interna- 
tional office is concerned. For this reason, no photostatic copy of the charter 
application can be furnished. 

The Chairman. What information do we have as to when the char- 
ter was applied for ? 

Mr. May. I don't believe we have information concerning that, Mr. 
Chairman. 

The Chairman. I understand the charter had been granted in No- 
vember of 1953. 



EMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3853 

Mr. Mat. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And in the meantime. Mr. Doria reports in his 
letter to you and in reply to the letter from the committee, that the 
union never became active. 

Mr. Mat. That is correct. 

The Chairman. And that all records regarding it and the inter- 
national had been destroyed? 

Mr. Mat. That is true. 

The Chairman, Are there any further questions ? 

Mr. Kknnedt. That is the important part of that. Go ahead. 

Mr. Mat. Later in this same document, Mr. Doria in answer to an- 
other query stated : 

The local never became active ; local is not active now. Tlie charter was with- 
drawn and canceled, and local 228 is no longer in existence, and it has not been 
in existence since approximately 1955. 

The Chairman. He reported in 1956, that it had not been active 
since Avhen ? 

Mr. Mat. It had never been active. And he said the charter was 
withdrawn and canceled and local 228 is no longer in existence, and 
it has not been in existence approximately since 10/55. Although he 
says it never became active. 

Tlie Chairman. And all records regardino; it had been destroyed? 

Mr. Mat. That is true. 

Mr. Kexnedt. The second point that is important, is that he says 
in there that the charter v»'as withdrawn, and canceled in approxi- 
mate! v 1955. 

Mr. Mat. In the previous paragraph, ]Mr. Doria also said : 

This local union was dissolved, and the charter withdrawu some time in 1955. 

Mr. Kexnedt. Those two things are of particular note. 

The (^HAiR.AiAN. That document may be printed in full in the record 
at this point. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit Xo. 17,'' and is as 
follows :) 

1. Photostatic copy of original request for charter. (This local never became 
active and since the charter was issued on November 9, 19.58, all records of this 
local union have been destroyed as far as the international office is conceincd. 
For this reason no photostatic copy of charter application can he furnished.) 

2. I'hotostatic copy of the ori.uinal charter issued to this local. ( Local union 
not in existence, no charter in existence.) 

.3. The identity of all officers or organizers on record with the International 
since the original chartering of this local. (The internationnl office retaiiis no 
records listing people who were associ-ited with this local union.) 

4. The date and nature of any action taken by the International with respect 
1o any New York area local which affected its charter such as the revocation 
or suspension thereof. (This local was also suspended and the charter i-evoked 
by action of former President Washburn on April 22, 10.")4, but although Vue 
local union still had not attained active status, the charter was again reinstated 
on or about May 11, 1951. The local union was dissolved and the charter with- 
drawn sometime in 1955.) 

5. A statement as to this local with respect to whether or not it is presently 
active, inactive, and/or dormant. If inactive or doi'mant. how long in such a 
status? Is the charter still outstanding, or has it been canceled? (Local never 
became active — local is not active now — the charter was withdrawn and canceled 
and local No. 228 is no longer in existence and has not been in existence since 
approximately 19.55.) 

(>. The listed address of each local whether active or inactive. (Local not in 
existence, no records available.) 



3854 IMPROPER AcnvrriES m the labor field 

]Mr. Kennedy. In view of the statement by Mr. Doria, that that 
local union 228 never became active, would you identify this docu- 
ment, please? 

The Chairman. I hand you a photostatic copy of a document en- 
titled, "Labor Oro-anization Registration Form, Public Law 101, 80th 
Congress," and ask you to examine it and state if you identify it, and 
if so, what it is and where you procured it. 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. May. Tliis is a copy of a labor-organization registration form 
dated June 8, 1954, which carries a signature, Sidney Hodes, financial 
secretary and treasurer. We received this document from our Depart- 
ment of Labor. 

Tlie Chairman. That is a photostatic copy of a document in the 
Department of Labor, official document? 

Mr. May. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. May. It would be well to point out that here they give the 
full name of the orsfanization as the Ignited Automobile Workers 
[Tnion, Local 228, AFL. They list the address as 119 West Columbia 
Street, Hempstead, Long Island, and they give the international union 
us United Automobile Workers, AFL, Milwaukee, Wis. 

The officers are listed as George Doyle, president, Sidney Hodes as 
secretary-treasurer, and Paul Newman, recording secretary. 

The Chairman. AVhat is the date of that ? 

Mr. May. That is June 8, 1954. 

The Chairman. Well now, according to the testimony, or accord- 
ing to the report of Mr. Doria, the charter for 228 of that local had 
never been active. 

Mr. May. That is correct. 

The Chairman. And it had never been activated. 

Mr. IVLvY. That is right. 

The Chairman. And he claims that the charter was withdrawn in 
1955. 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. AYliat does that indicate, that it was active, and 
that they were making reports under it ? 

Mr. May. This is simply evidence that a charter was issued and 
three individuals at least were involved, and they did have a presi- 
dent, secretary, and a recording secretary, and we shall show later 
that that becomes pertinent because of a change of officers, a total 
change of the charter. 

The Chairman. That is a report required to be filed under law, 
under Public Law 101, 80th Congress. 

Mr. May. Yes. 

The Chairman. It was complying or it was functioning, and it was 
filing reports required under the law, as of that date, 1954? 

Mr. May. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Does it also show a salary there for one of the 
officers ? 

Mr. May. It shows $5,200 for President George Doyle. 

Mr. Kennedy. Does it show how he came to be president of the 
local ? 

Mr. May. In answer to the question "How selected?" it shows 
"elected" for all three officers. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EN THE LABOR FIELD 3855 

Mr. Kennedy. Who are the other two ? 

Mr. May. Sidney Hodes, secretary-treasurer, and Paul Newman, 
recording secretary. 

Mr. Kennedy. And it shows they all three were elected, is that 
right ? 

Mr. May. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now Sidney Hodes is of some importance to us, is 
he not, in this investigation ? 
Mr. May. He is. 

Mr Kennedy. He came out of local 649. 
Mr. May. That is true. 
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Dio's own local. 
Mr. May. That is right. 

The Chairman. That document may be made exhibit No. 18 for 
reference. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 18" for 
reference and will be found in the appendix on pp. 3981, 3982.) 

Mr. Kennedy. At this time, the local supposedly was inactive, at 
least one of the officers was getting a salary of $5,200, and three of 
the officers were elected to their positions. 
Mr. May. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you gave as the address, 119 West Columbia 
Street, Hempstead, Long Island? 
Mr. May. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is the address that was given by the two paper 
locals of 362 and 651. 
Mr. May. That is correct. 

The Chairman. I hand you another similar document, photostatic 
copy of labor organization registration form under Public Law 101, 
80th Congress, and ask you to examine it and state if you identify it. 
(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. May. I identify this as a copy of a labor organization registra- 
tion form dated September 18, 1955, carrying the signature of Sam 
Getlan, secretary-treasurer. We received this also from the Depart- 
ment of Labor. 

The Chairman. That is another report required under the law, and 
it is on the same form as the one you previously testified to ? 
Mr. May. That is right. 

The Chairman. It appears that they were reporting as late as Sep- 
tember 18, 1955, on this same local, 228. 

Mr. May. That is correct. Although this document differs in many 
respects from the previous document. 

The Chairman. Point out who it is reported as officers of 228 at 
that time, a year later than the previous report. 

Mr. May. At this time, Sam Weiss is shown as president, total 
compensation and allowances for the year, $6,250. 
And this document shows that Mr. Weiss was elected. 
Sam Getlan is shown as secretary-treasurer, total compensation 
and allowances, $8,840, and elected. 

Caneo Trotta, shown as recording secretary, total compensation and 
allowances for the year — none. 
He was elected. 

Also, we note that the full name of the organization differs from 
the previous document. Is is shown as Coin Machine Employees 



3856 IMPROPER ACTIVmES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Union, Local 228, AFL. The address is sliown as 10 Park Avenue, 
Mount Vernon, N. Y., and the parent or international union is shown 
as United Automobile Workers of America, AFL, Washington, D. C. 

The Chairman. Is that the same charter or reported under the 
same charter? 

Mr. Mat. Evidence will be brought out later, Mr. Chairman, which 
will show it is the same charter. 

The Chairman. It is the same number and affiliated with the same 
international ? 

Mr. May. That is right. 

The Chairman. Although it shows a different set of officers a year 
later, and different salaries, and it shows they were all elected, just 
as the other set of officers were elected. 

Mr. May. That is true.^ 

The Chairman. And it also is under the same charter? 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And it shows that it was active at least as late as 
September 8, 1955. 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. It is operating, whether the international knew 
about it or not. 

Mr. May. That is correct. 

The Chairman. And it was filing reports required under the law. 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. 

This may be made exhibit No. 19. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 19" for refer- 
ence and will be found in the appendix on pp. 3983-3984.) 

TESTIMONY OF SAM GETLAN— Resumed 

The Chairman. Mr. Getlan, you have heard the testimony there, 
that you received a salary of $8,840, salary and allowances in 1955, as 
secretary-treasurer of local 228, that we have been talking about. 

Did you receive such salary ? 

Mr. Getlan. I don't believe so. Let me see a pencil and paper. 
That is $8,800 and what? 

The Chairman. $8,840. 

Mr. Getlan. It is possible that I drew that much. 

The Chairman. Well, you had gotten ahold of the charter at that 
time. 

Mr. Getlan. With the expenses, that is. 

The Chairman. It included expenses ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. It is possible that you drew that much ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

The Chairman. I may state that this is the charter that we have 
been calling the "bouncing charter," and did it bounce to you ? 

Mr. Getlan. It did. 

The Chairman. How did you get it? 

Mr. Getlan. I got it from the teamsters union, at one time, and 
it was presented to me, and I was operating independently prior to 
that. I needed an AFL charter. 

The Chairman. Did you apply for one ? 



rMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3857 

Mr. Getlan. I did. 
The Chairman. How did you apply ? 
Mr. Getlan. Through same people that I knew. 
The Chairmax. Well, let us have their names. 
You didn't file a formal application to the AFL? 
Mr. Getlan. No ; I didn't. 

The Chairman. To the United Automobile Workers ? 
Mr. Getlan. No. 

The Chairman. You didn't send in a formal application applying 
for a cliarter ? 

Mr. Getlan. No, sir. 

The Chairman. But you dealt through some other people? 
Mr. Getlan. That is right. 
The Chairman. Let us talk about it. 
Go ahead. 

Mr. Getlan. I Avas operating independently prior to that for a 
couple of years, and I was with the CIO prior to that, a couple of 
years before, and I iiotified people that I know I am working without 
a cliarter. Well, this one could liave gotten me this charter, and finally 
somebody told me about the UAW charter. They said come down 
to the teamsters office in New York City, between 57th and 58th 
Street I received this charter. 
The Chairman. From whom ? 
Mr. Getlan. From local 805. 

The Chairjman. That is from local 805. Was that a teamsters 
union ? 

Mr, Getlan. Yes. 

The Chairman. Tlie local couldn't operate without some individual 
operating for it. Who gave you the charter ? 

Mr. Getlan. I do not know — who gave it to him, I don't know. 
The Chairman. I did not say who gave it to him. Who did you 
get it from ? 

Mr. Getlan. I got it from a Mr, Holt of local 805, secretary- 
treasurer. 

The Chairman. Mihon Holt ? 
Mr, Geti.an, Yes, 

The Chairman, Secretary-treasurer of what ? 
Mr. Getlan. Local 805 of the teamsters. 

The Chairman, Did he have any other spare charters laying 
around ? 

Mr. Getlan. No ; he had this one lying around, and he said, "Here, 
take it." It was in a frame. It was all framed up. 
The Chairman. Was it for sale ? 
Mr. Getlan. No, sir. 
The Chairman. How did 3^011 get it ? 

Mr, Getlan. "Here, improve your membership." That is all. 
"Here is a cliarter to work with." 

The Chairman. He just handed you a charter in a frame? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

The Chairman. And you went to work on it? 

Senator Mundt. Had you ever met Mr. Holt before that date? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

89330— 57— pt. 10 18 



3858 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Mundt. Tell us your background or connections with him. 
Had he been a member of your union ? 

Mr. Getlan. No; he was secretary-treasurer of local No. 805. 

Senator Muxdt. I understand. But what was your personal con- 
nection with him ? 

Mr. Getlan. He handled the cigarette coin machines in New York 
City, and I handled the coin machines out of New York City. 

Senator Mundt. By handling them, do you mean you owned the 
machines or that you worked with the men who operated them and 
had a union in that ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right, the coin employees. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Holt had a union that included the coin 
machine collectors and repairmen? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. And that was in New York City. You had a union 
which handled the same type of personnel outside ? 

Mr. Getlan. From Westchester County up. 

Senator Mundt. So in that way you had become acquainted ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. And you went to him and said, "I would like to 
have a charter for my union outside of New York City" ; is that right ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. And he said, "I happen to have a spare one here" ? 

Mr. Getlan. No ; it was never mentioned to me what I have got or 
what I am going to get. 

Senator Mundt. You must have arrived at a meeting of minds 
some way where you walked out with a framed charter. How did you 
get that? 

]Mr. Getlan. I got a framed charter, and that was it. 

Senator Mundt. Without any mention at all? You just tucked it 
under your coat on your way out of the door ? 

]Mr. Getlan. He said, "Take it with you." I hung it up on the wall 
and that was it. 

Senator Mundt. It sounds a little mysterious. I want to get this 
clear. 

Senator Curtis. ^'\'lien was that? 

Mr. Getlan. 1955. 

Senator Mundt. You walked into the office and said, "I am one 
charter short. I have the union, but I haven't got a charter. I would 
like to get a charter." Is that what you told him ? 

Mr. Getlan. I was working without a charter. I was working in- 
dependently. 

Senator Mundt. You said you did not want to be independent, you 
wanted an organization? 

Mr. Geti.an. That is right. I wanted a father and mother. 

Senator Mundt. You said, "Mr. Holt, what shall I do about that?" 
and what did he do? 

Mr. Getlan. He helped me get a charter. About 5 or 6 months 
elapsed. 

Senator Mundt. You did not get it at the first meeting ? 

Mr. Getlan. No. I got a telephone call to come down with "Here is 
your charter." 

Senator Mundt. How did he advance himself out of that? 



IMPROPEiR ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3859 

Mr. Getlan". Just improving the membership, that is all, with "Go 
out and go to work." 

Senator Mundt. You did not pay him anything for the charter? 

Mr. Getlan. Absolutely not. 

Senator Mundt. You did not promise him anything ? 

Mr. Getlan. Nothing. 

Senator Mundt. You did not vote for any of his friends? 

Mr. Getlan. I had nothing to do with him. He was the teamsters 
union and I was a UAW charter. 

Senator Mundt. You got that in 1955 ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. That was the charter we have been hearing about 
this afternoon as having been canceled ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. I didn't know it until the investigation 
came out. 

Senator Mundt. You did not know that what you had was • 

Mr. Getl.\n. That my charter is a canceled charter. 

Senator Mundt. Anyhow, you took it in good faith ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. And you put your members into the union ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. And you paid your dues ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. I transferred them 

Senator Mundt. Out of the dues, you got a salary and your ex- 
penses ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. What did you do with the portion of the dues that 
belonged to the international union ? 

Mr. Getlan. I didn't pay no per capita tax. 

Senator Mundt. You just collected the dues and kept them yourself ? 

Mr. Getlan. Well, it was put in the union. It was union funds. 
Checks were mailed into the union, and salaries were drawn, service 
was given the members, and so forth. 

Senator Mundt. What did the international union get ? 

Mr. Getlan. The international didn't get anything. 

Senator Mundt. They got nothing ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is ridit. 

There wasn't anything for them after expenses. 

Senator Mundt. You fellows took care of that. The money came in 
and out it went and that was all right. 

Mr. Getlan. There was enough salaries to be taken out, and 
expense. 

Senator Mundt. What did you do at convention time ? Did you go 
to the convention ? 

Mr. Getlan. I didn't. 

Senator Mundt. Did you take this old, dilapidated charter with 
the cancellation notice on it and vote ? How long did you operate with 
the charter ? 

Mr. Getlan. About 3 months. 

Senator Mundt. Three months ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator INIundt. Then what did you do with it ? 

Mr. Getlan. Then I changed over to local 26 of the International 
Jewelry Workers. 



3860 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Mundt. What did you do with the old charter ? 

Mr. Getlan. I sent it back to Mr. Holt. 

Senator Mundt. You sent it back to Mr. Holt ? f 

Mr. Getlan. In the same frame. 

Senator Mundt. In the same frame. Why did you change ? Why 
did you switcli from that charter to the jewelry workers' charter? 

Mr. Getlan. It was just 

Senator Mundt. It was a pretty good system. You did not have 
to pay per capitji tax. The money came in and you used up this 
money. That was ;; very convenient arrangement. What induced you 
to change ? 

Mr. Getlan. I didn't like anything I got for free. 

Senator Mundt. Did not like what? 

Mr. Getlan. Didn't like anything I got for free. 

Senator Mundt. Well, you took it for free to begin with. Did it 
take you 90 days to decide you did not want it for free? 

Mr. Getlan. It wasn't worth it. 

Senator Mundt. In what way was it not worth it? 

Mr. Getlan. The service I got wasn't worth it. 

Senator Mundt. The service from whom ? 

Mr. Getlan. The service from the international. 

Senator Mundt. It was wortli all you paid for it. You did not pay 
anything. If you felt badly about that, how do you suppose the inter- 
national felt? We could dilate on that a little further. I cannot see 
how you would complain too seriously about the service. Wliat spe- 
cific service had you re(j[uested and had been unable to get? Get down 
to cases hei-e, if you are going to complain. You were complaining 
a,bout what ? 

Mr. Geti.an. Well, you are entitled to something. If you don't pay 
nothing, you are not entitled to it, that is right. You are not entitled 
to nothing. 

Senator Mundt. You got all you were entitled to ? 

Mr. Getlan. Well, that is what they gave me. 

Senator Mundt. All right. You decided, then, after 90 days, that 
you were not getting your money's worth, though you paid nothing 
for it, so you took the charter back ? 

Mr. Getlan. I delivered it to the same office. I had it delivered 
to the same office. I sent it down by messenger. 

Senator Mundt. What reason did you give Mr. Holt? Did you 
complain to him about the service you were not getting? 

Mr. Getlan. I guess I did. 

Senator Mundt. Did you send him a letter of complaint? 

Mr. Getlan. No. 

Senator Mundt. It was oral ? 

Mr. Getlan. I called him up and I told him I had no use for the 
charter, and I was able to get another charter from the International 
Jewelry Workers. 

Senator Mundt. That is the last you ever heard of the charter of 
228? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. When you got this charter in 1955, how many mem- 
bers did you have in your union, approximately? 



IMPROPER ACTIVmES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3861 

Mr. Getlax. a little over 100 members. 

Senator Curtis. Where were they employed ? 

Mr. Getlan. They were employed in Westchester or above. 

Senator Curtis. Were all of them employees or were some of them 
owners of coin-box machines ? 

Mr. Getlaist. Some were owners. 

Senator Curtis. You approached owners for membership in your 
union ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Were some of those owners individuals who had 
no employees ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. You see, we do not force a man to 
employ anyone where he don't operate enough machines to have an 
employee. Pie is taken in as an employee member of the union. 

Senator Curtis. You had 100 members. Where did that union 
hold its meetings? 

Mr. Getlan. It held its meetings at diffierent places. In New- 
burgh, N. Y., or down in Mount Vernon, at a hotel. 

Senator Curtis. In a meeting hall ? 

Mr. Getlan. At a hotel, at a meeting hall in a hotel. 

Senator Curtis. Plow many people would you get out ? 

Mr. Getlan. You would get about 10 to 15 members who would 
come in. 

Senator Curtis. Did you have a meeting any time during the time 
you had this charter ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Did you show the charter to the members? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Whose names were on the charter? 

Mr. Gett.an. I do not know. 

Senator Curtis. You knew that it was not your name? 

Mr. Getlan. No, sir ; my name was not on it, and none of my em- 
ployees. 

Senator Curtis. The names of none of your members were on it? 

Mr. Getlan. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. In fact, anyone who looked at it would have known 
it was not a charter issued to you or to your union, would they not ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator I\^s. Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman. Senator Ives. 

Senator Ivtes. I would like to continue the questioning along the 
line of where these employees lived. 

You said Westchester or above, Mr. Getlan, and then you mentioned 
Newburgh. It that the only place? 

Mr. Getlan. Newburgh, Middletown, through Orange County. 

Senator Ives. Sullivan County ? 

Mr. Getlan. Sir? 

Senator Ives. Sullivan County, too ? 

Mr. Getlan. Sullivan County. 

Senator IvEJs. Do you mean you had 100 employees scattered in all 
that area ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right, in that area. 



3862 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Ives. That is quite a large area for 100 people to be living 
in. li'ou could not have had many employees in any one spot. 

Mr. Gett.an. You got 2 in Sullivan County or 3 in Sullivan County. 

Senator Ives. Just three in Sullivan County? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator Ives. What did they do in Sullivan County? 

Mr. Geti^ax. They repaired machines for different operators in 
Sullivan County. 

Senator Ives. How many did you have in Orange County? 

Mr. Gett.an. In Orange County I know we got 1 member that 
employs, a boss in Orange County that employs 10 workers. 

Senator Ives. You had one member in Orange County? 

Mr. Getlan. You see, 1 worker can service 60 machines. 

Senator Ives. Well, that one member is in Newburgh, I take it? 

Mr. Getlan. No, he is out of Chester, N. Y. 

Senator Ives. What? 

Mr. Getlan. He is out of Chester, N. Y. 

Senator I\i:s. How many members did you have in Newburgh? 

Mr. Getlan. In Newburgh about four members out of Newburgh. 

Senator Ives. Did you have anybody in Dutchess? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. And out of Poughkeepsie. 

Senator Ives. How many ? 

Mr. Geit.an. We got maybe 5 or 6. 

Senator Ives. Then you were sprinkled around there, were you 
not? 

Mr. Getlan. We go all through your area. 

Senator I\^s. My area ? Where do you think I live ? I live ni) at 
Chenango. 

Mr. Getlan. You live in that area. 

Senator Ives. A little bit north of that. 

Did you have anybody up in there? How far west did you go? 
Did you go as far west as Buffalo? 

Mr. Getlan. No. We tried to organize not that far up, liut around 
Schenectady and Troy and Amsterdam. 

Senator Ives. I do not live up in there. 

Mr. Getlan. Up through Albany County. 

Senator Ives. I do not live up there. 

Is that as far as you went ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes. 

Senator Ives. Thank you. 

The Chairman. What amount of dues did you charge these men? 

Mr. Getlan. Dues was $5 a month. 

The Chairman. $5 a month, and none of that went to any inter- 
national or to any council ? 

Mr. Getlan. That was while I was with the UAW it didn't go. 

The Chairman. You charged $5 a month ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

The Chairman. And with 100 members you Avere getting about 
$500 a month income. 

Mr. Getlan. Well, there is other charges, also. 

The Chairman. You added some to that? 

Mr. Getlan. They pay per machine. 

The Chairman. How much after the $5 dues was it per machine? 

Mr. Getlan. It is 50 cents per month per machine. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3863 

The Chairman. Fifty cents per month per machine. 

So that is the way you got the income to pay the officers ? 

Mr. Getlax. That is right. 

The CiiAiRMAN. And you were one of the officers ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

The Chairman. Was any other money expended other than for a 
little stationery ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes. There was a girl in the office and there were 
two men working, to go out on service calls. 

The Chairman. To go out on service calls ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. Organizational work. 

The Chairman. All the good it did was to provide a job and salary 
for some 4 or 5 ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is about all that would take care of the union. 

The Chairman. That is the only benefit that came from it, it just 
provided jobs for 2 or 3 of you ? 

Mr. Getlan. About three men. 

The Chairman. About three men ? 

Mr. Getlan. There was three men on salary, and a girl in the office. 

The Chairman. You accumulated no surplus for pension funds or 
anything ? 

Mr. Getlan. No. We had no pension fund and no welfare fund. 

The Chairman. Just enough to support the officers ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is all it did. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. I am interested in these businessmen, these em- 
ployers who belong to your union. You said some of them did not 
have any employees. What services could the union render to a 
proprietor who has no employees ? 

Mr. Getlan. You see, he becomes the employee. 

Senator Curtis. And he must negotiate with himself; is that the 
point? 

Mr. Getlan. He becomes a member of the union as an employee. 

Senator Curtis. And you could help him get a pay raise, if he 
owned the establishment and belonged to the union? You could help 
him get a pay raise ; is that right ? 

Mr. Getlan. As far as that goes, you see, this service— — 

Senator Curtis. Could you help him get a pay raise, if he owned 
the place? 

Mr. Getlan. He don't own the place. 

Senator Curtis. Well, if he is the proprietor, he owns the business. 

Mr. Getlan. He is an operator. You see, a coin-machine operator 
is different. He is not stationary in one place. He services quite 
a few places. 

Senator Curtis. And if he has no employees, he is a businessman. 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. And working for himself. 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. You could not get him a raise in pay, you could 
not get him more vacation, you could not improve his working con- 
ditions. What inducement was there for him to join the union? 

Mr. Getlan. In order to keep his locations. 

Senator Curtis. Sort of a licensing thing? 



3864 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES LST THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Getlan. It is not a licensing thing. 

Senator Curtis. Not ofiicially, but by paying money to your union, 
he could keep his locations ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. What do you mean by that ? 

Mr. Getlan. Nobody would jump his locations, a nonunion man 
wouldn't jump his locations because he happens to be a member of 
the same union. 

Senator Curtis. "Wliy would not a nonunion man jump his loca- 
tion? 

Mr. Getlan. In the first place, he couldn't give them a better 
machine. They work on better types of machines. A newer jukebox, 
that will cost $1,200 or $1,400. To work for $10 or $12 a week, it 
would take him a couple of years' time to get the money out. 

Senator Curtis. In other words, it was sort of a dividing up of the 
territory. 

Mr. Getlan. He was what ? 

Senator Curtis. By joining the union, the territory would be di- 
vided up so he would have a place to operate, is that right ? 

Mr. Getlan. He don't pick his territory. If he lived in Pough- 
keepsie, he is going to operate as close to Poughkeepsie as possible. If 
he has 25 locations, we do not compel him to employ or to get a worker, 
you see. As long as he can repair his own machines and service his 
own machines, he is not compelled to get a worker. 

Senator Curtis. ^Vliat would happen to him if he did not want to 
join the union ? 

Mr. Getlan. Nothing would happen to him. 

Senator Curtis. What would happen to his locations? 

Mr. Getlan. Nothing. Follow me, he could get 

Senator Curtis. "Wliat service, then, did a seii-employed business- 
man get out of joining your union? 

Mr. Getlan. It would prevent other operators from going into his 
locations and offering better percentages to get in there. 

Senator Curtis. That is what I mean. So you divided up the terri- 
tory, is that right ? 

Mr. Getlan. Well 

Senator Curtis. And you would give him a chance- 



Mr. Getlan. I would say a man from Westchester County don't 
go into Sullivan County. It is too far for him to travel. 

Senator Curtis. Then he did not get anything out of it? 

Mr. Getlan. The man stays in his own county. 

Senator Curtis. Because he joins the union no one else comes in? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator IVIundt. If I may pursue this inquiry another way, who 
got anything out of this operation except you three fellows who were 
the officers? 

Mr. Getlan. The service he got that nobody would jump his lo- 
cations or canvass his locations once he is in there. 

Senator Mundt. That would apply to the owner-operator? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. You had members who were not owner-operators. 
You had mechanics, did you not? 

Mr Getlan. That is right. 



IMPROPER ACTWITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3865 

Senator Mundt. Wliat benefits did they get from joining tiie union, 
paying $5 a month dues, $60 a year out of tlie hoiisehohl budget? 
Wliat benefits did they get ? 

Mr. Getlax. They got a job. or in other words, tliey got it in .sahiry 
and commission from the operator. 

Senator Mundt. They could liave liad tlie job without joining the 
miion, could they not ? 

Mr. Getlan. They could have had the jol) witliont joiniiig the 
union ? 

Senator Mundt. Yes. 

Mr. Getlax. The bosses do not compel the men to join the union, 
but it is for their benefit that they are in the union. 

Senator Muxdt. I am trying to find out what beneiits they got in 
belonging to the union. That was the purpose of my question. 

Mr. (xETLi^x. Their wages wei-e better, coniniissions were l)e.tter, by 
being in the union. 

Senator Muxdt. Are the employers interested in setting u;) :! union 
arrangement so that the employees get more money and tliey liave to 
pay bigger wages, bigger benefits ( 

Mr. Getlax. They are interested in being in tlie union, being 
unionized. 

Senator Muxdt. Well, if they are as bighearted as tiiat, these 
employers, they could make the lienefits available without the union. 
The employer that wants to be good to his employee does not neces- 
sarily say "You have to belong to the union, and pay $5 a month dues 
to union officers, and if yon do that I will give you an extra week's 
vacation." 

lie could say, "Here, you can have your extra weelv's vacation and 
keep your $5 a week also." That would i-eally be being good. 

Mr. Getlax. Well, we have had the un.ion in New York City for 
3^ears. I \vasn't the first on.e that started the union. It has been 
unionized 

Senator Muxdt. I understand if they belong to the legitimate union, 
with international affiliates, then they are part of a regular organiza- 
tion of that type. The l>enefits can pi-obably be secured for the em- 
ployee. But I cannot understand how 1()() memlx^rs of a union paying 
$5 a month to belong to a union without a charter, without any inter- 
national connection, without any benefits coming back — I do not see 
where they come in. 

I think he is at the low end of the totem ])ole. AVhat do you think? 

Mr. Getlax'. I don't think you are right, though. 

Senator Muxdt. Well, would you try to convince me why you think 
I am wrong? 

Mr. Getlax. The benefits we give the people, the membei'S, nobody 
goes out looking to jump their locations. They stay in their own 
area. A certaiii workers, those canvassing locations, he don't canvass 
a man that has a union label on his machine. He knows they are 
unionized. That is what counts. 

Senator Muxdt. Did the workers who ])aid this $5 a month monthly 
dues know that they belonged to a bobtail union that did not have any 
connections any higher up than your office ? 

Mr. Getlax. Why is it a bobtail office ? 

Senator Muxdt. Because it has no international connection. It is 
short-circuited at vour office. 



3866 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Getlan. No. We belong to the International Jewelry Workers. 

Senator Mundt. I am talking about the time you belonged to the 
union and bought the secondhand charter. 

Mr. Getlan. We operated independently. We give them the same 
service as if we operated out of an international service, whatever they 
could get from there. We would give them the same service. 

(At this point, Senator Goldwater entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Getlan. We give them the same service they would get any- 
where else. 

Senator Mundt. You said that Mr. Holt was head of that union ? 

Mr. Getlan. I. B. of T., the teamsters. 

Senator Mundt. I wonder if counsel can tell us something about 
Mr. Holt. 

Mr. Kennedy. About Mr. Milton Holt? 

President of local 805 is Mr. A. Gordon. Mr. Abe Gordon and 
Johnny Dioguardi are very close. Local 805 headquarters were used 
by Dio as a headquarters for himself. A. Gordon is not only president 
of this local, but he also runs a trucking firm. That is about A. Gordon. 

Local 651 of the teamsters. Senator Mundt, is A. Gordon's brother, 
Nat Gordon, and they received a charter from the teamsters just prior 
to this election in February of 1956. Their charter was granted at 
the same time as these other paper local charters, on November 8, 1955. 
We will develop as the hearings go on the relationship between Gordon, 
Holt, and Dio. 

The Chairman. I would like to ask this witness one other question. 

You said, I believe, that you got 50 cents a week? 

Mr. Getlan. No ; a month per each machine. 

The Chairman. Per each machine per month. 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

The Chairman. How many machines were involved in this 100 
members you had. 

Mr. Getlan. Approximately 4,000. 

The Chairman. So you got $2,000 a month out of the machines, in 
round numbers, and $500 out of the members ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

The Chairman. So that gave you an income of around $30,000 a 
year, gross income ? 

Mr. Getlan. Well, you got the pencil. 

The Chairman. You got $2,000 out of the machines per month, at 
$24,000 per year, and $6,000 per year for members, in round numbers; 
so it would be $30,000 a year? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

The Chairman. All of that went for the benefit of those of you 
who organized it. 

Mr. Getlan. That is pickets and so forth that you have to have. 

The Chairman. Did you have to have pickets ? 

Mr. Getlan. Certainly. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kr.NNEDY. Mr. Getlan, I would like to get your history in the 
record. You have been in jukeboxes or interested in jukeboxes? 

Mr. Geti^an. In the coin-machine business since 1923. 

Mr. Kennedy. And did you have coin machines back in 1923 ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had them yourself? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3867 

Mr. Getlan. Yes. 

Mr. Kenistedy. Did you distribute them ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Where were you distributing them ? 

Mr. Getlan. Sullivan County, N. Y. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you also distributing down in Florida ? 

Mr. Geti.an. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you distribute them in Florida in 1930? 

Mr. Getlan. 1935 and 1937. 

Mr. Kennedy. They were outlawed ; were they ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir ; voted out. It was 

Mr. Kennedy. When you were distributing these coin machines, 
what would be the weekly income that you would receive, approxi- 
mately ? 

(At this point. Senator McClellan and Senator Ives withdrew from 
the hearing room.) 

Mr. Getlan. Well, I haven't got no records. 

Mr. Kennedy. I know you haven't got any records, but I am saying 
"approximately." Approximately, what would be your weekly income 
on the distribution ? 
Mr. Getlan. At what time ? 

Mr. Kennedy. When you were down in Miami, for instance, in 
Florida ? 

Mr. Gett.an. It would average about $30 per machine, or $35 per 
week. 

Mr. Kennedy. Altogether, weekly, how much would you make? 
Mr. Getlan, I operated 250 machines. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much approximately would you make each 
week? 
Mr. Getlan. About $7,000 a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. About $7,000 a week. Would that be slot machines ? 
Mr. Getlan. That is right; slot machines. 
Mr. Kennedy. And that was your operation in Miami ? 
Mr. Getlan. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you would clear about $6,500 or $7,000 a week? 
Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ultimately move up to New York City? 
Mr. Getlan. I moved my clothes up to New York City after a run. 
Mr. Kennedy. After what ? 

Mr. Getlan. After the run was over. We were voted out with the 
slot machines. 
Mr. Kennedy. And you didn't have anything left by that time? 
Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You didn't save much of the $7,000 a week? 
Mr. Getlan. No ; I didn't have no time. 
Mr. Kennedy. You didn't have any time? 
Mr. Getlan. I didn't have time to save any money. 
Mr. Kennedy. What were you busy doing ? 
Well, I will go on. 
You went up to New York City ? 
Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And did you meet some people up there that offered 
you a job, to put you to work ? 
Mr. Getlan. That is right. 



3868 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Who did you work for in New York City ? 

Mr. Getlan. When I came back to New York? I got a proposi- 
tion with the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. When was this ? 

Mr. Getlan. In 1950. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am still back in the 1930's. 

Mr. Getlan. I didn't come up to New York, then. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you work in New York at all in the 1930's? 

Mr. Getlan. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you work in the 1940's in New York? 

Mr. Getlan. In 19 

Mr. Kennedy. In the 1930's. Let us go back. Did you work in 
New York at all then ? 

Mr. GETLiVN. I worked in New York in 1930, yes, up to 1935. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is prior to going to Miami ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wlio did you work for then ? 

Mr. Getlan. I worked as a distributor for Mills Novelty Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you work for Frank Costello at that time ? 

Mr. Getlan. No ; not at that time. 

Prior to that I did. In 1929. 

Mr. Kennedy. "Vivien did you work for Frank Costello ? , 

Mr. Getlan. In 1929, or 1928. 

Mr. Kennedy. 1928 and 1929? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. What kind of a job did you have then ? 

Mr. Getlan. As an agent. 

Mr. Kennedy. What would an agent do ? 

Mr. Getlan. Servicing the slot machines. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat area were you in? 

Mr. Getlan. In Harlem. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then after doing that, you went back to Miami,, 
you went down to Miami, or you stayed in New York ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is when I went back to Miami, the first time, in 
1935. 

(At this point. Senator McClellan entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you work for Costello in just 1928 and 1929? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then for the Mills Distributing Co. ? 

Mr. Getlan. I worked for them in 1934 and 1935. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who ran that company? Who did you work for? 

Mr. Getlan. It was a concern by the name of United Automatic 
Coin Machine Co. I was a distributor for Mills Novelty Co., and sold 
their merchandise. 

Mr. Kennedy. These coin machines? 

Mr. Getlan. Slot machines. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you have been interested in slot machines all your 
life? 

Mr. Getlan. I have been interested in the coin-machine business 
since 1923. 

Mr. Kennedy. T^Tien did you become interested in the union busi- 
ness ? 

Mr. Getlan. 1950. 



IMPROPER ACTIVmES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3869 

Mr. Kennedy. And you started in Westchester at that time I 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were any of them organized in Westchester ? 

Mr. Getlan. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there an association ? 

Mr. Getlan. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. There wasn't an association. When you got out to 
WT'estchester, did you write to the various people that had 

Mr. Getlan. I knew who the operators were in Westchester County. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you wrote to them ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And suggested they become members of the union ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they gradually all becouie members of the 
union ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many members of tlie union do you have now ? 

Mr. Getlan. Around 100 members. 

Mr. Kennedy. Of that 100, how many are employers, wlio own their 
own machines or distribute their own machines ? 

Mr, Getlan. About 30 percent. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you talk about the outsiders coming in, or 
keeping locations from being jumped, would that mean if an outsider 
came in from Chicago, for in.stance, and wanted to estnblish n new 
location, you could prevent that ? 

Mr. Getlan. Tliat is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you are soit of working witli the association that 
exists out in AVestchester now, to keep new people from coming in ? 

Mr. Getlan. Tliat is i-ight. 

Mr. Kennedy. You woukl prevent it by placing pickets? That is 
how you would use your ])ickets ? 

Mr. Getlan. Tliat is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. If somebody came in and opened a new bar, and they 
didn't Avant to get their slot machines or their coin machines from a 
member of the association, they wanted an independent, then you 
could place a picket around that bar and prevent beer from being 
delivered ; is that right ? 

Mr. Getlan. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that right ? 

Mr. Getlan. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. So it is really a close association that the union has 
with the association itself, the coin machine association itself; is that 
right? 

I menu, it is a close, working relationship. 

Mr. (Jktlan. We have members that do not belong to an association, 
if]'. Kennedy. But the basic reason for existence is because of this 
■close relationship that exists between your union and the association? 
Mr. Getlan. That is right. Most of my members belong to an 
; association. 

Mr. Kennedy. Your brother has some machines out there, Izzy ? 
Mr. Getlan. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Izzy Getlan. He has a club out there, has he? 
Mr. Getlan. In Westchester County. 



3870 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr, Kennedy, Does he belong to the union ? 

Mr. Getlan, No, sir, 

Mr. Kennedy, You have never picketed him ? 

Mr, Getlan. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. I think that is alL 

The Chairman. Why don't you? Why don't you make him join? 

Mr. Getlan. I don't talk to him. 

The Chairman. Is the reason that you are afraid he might con- 
vince you instead of you convincing him ? 

Mr. Getlan. I am afraid they will come to you people. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further? 

If not, call the next witness. 

Thank you very much. You may stand aside for the present. 
Remain here. We might have to call you back for something. 

Mr. I^nnedy. Mr. Chairman, at this point, we have the situation 
as far as 228 is concerned, that the international said it was never in 
existence, that the charter was lifted actually in 1955, and we find that 
in 1954 they filed financial statements, 228 filed financial statements, 
with the Labor Department, and then later on in 1955, under Sam 
Getlan, it was active again. 

And Mr. Getlan has testified that he received the charter from 
Milton Holt of the teamsters. So we had the charter going from 
Sidney Hodes, and from there we don't know exactly but it ended up 
at least with Milton Holt. Then it bounced over to Sam Getlan, and 
Sam Getlan bounced it back to Milton Holt. 

We have tried to trace it from there. We have an affidavit that 
may be of some assistance. 

The Chairman. The Chair reads into the record an affidavit. 

United States Court House, 
Foley Square, New York, N. Y., June 26, 1957. 
State of New York, 

County of New York, ss: 

Amelia McCarthy, being duly sworn deposes and says : 

I, Amelia McCarthy, furnish the following statement to Walter R. May, who 
has identified himself to me as a staff member of the United States Senate 
Select Committee on Improper Activities in the Labor or Management Field. 
I give this statement freely and voluntarily and with the knowledge that the 
statement may be used at committee hearings held in public session. 

I reside on Main Street, Hurleyville, N. Y., and my husband, William, and I 
own and operate the Catskill Amusement Co. in Hurleyville, a company engaged 
in operating and servicing coin-operated amusement machines. 

Beginning about 1952 and for a number of years thereafter our company as 
well as other similar companies in our area had a labor-management agreement 
with Sam Getlan, a labor-union oflScial who maintained an office at 10 Park 
Avenue, Mount Vernon, N. Y. During this period Getlan operated under various 
charters and was aflSliated with different international unions. About July 
1955, Mr. Getlan notified me and other company owners that he had obtained 
a new charter, Local 228, UAW-AFL and that, henceforth, we would be members 
of that union. 

In January 1956 we were notified by Sam Getlan that our dues were being 
raised which caused me and other owners some concern. At the regular monthly 
meeting of the New York State Operators Guild some of the owners indicated 
a desire to join some other union if possible. Shortly thereafter Philip Kazan- 
sky, who is an official of a teamster union and who maintains an office at 229 
Broadway, Monticello, N. Y., was contacted by me and my husl)and and asked 
if he would be able to take the owner-employees and other employees into his 
union. He said he was not positive ; that he was going to visit New York City 
and would let me know. A few days later, Mr. Kazansky told me he had 
learned that the local 228 charter had been taken from Sam Getlan. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3871 

A regular meeting of the New York State Operators Guild was held a short 
time later at the Governor Clinton Hotel, Kingston, N. Y., at which meeting 
Mr. Kazansky was present and announced that Getlan had lost the local 228 
charter. One of the guild members telephoned Sam Getlan who stated that the 
local 228 charter was still in his possession hanging on the wall of his office. 
At the meeting Mr. Kazansky was asked to prove that the 228 charter had 
been taken from Getlan and Kazansky stated he would produce the charter at 
my home the following Saturday. 

On that Saturday evening, sometime in February 1956, Mr. Kazansky appeared 
at my home and showed the local 228 charter to me and my husband. The 
charter was contained in a frame ; was titled "UAW Local 228, A. F. of L." ; 
and contained two lists of names. 

A week or two later a special meeting was held at the Nelson House, Pough- 
keepsie, N. Y., which was attended by owners, owner-employees, and employees. 
Mr. Kazansky was also present and it was indicated to him that his story con- 
cerning his possession of the local 228 chaiter was doubted. Mr. Kazansky then 
said he would produce the charter at his office in Monticello the following Sun- 
day. On that Sunday in March 1956 my husband and I invited the owners and 
Mr. Kazansky to our home. On that day at our home in Hurleyville, Mr. 
Kazansky showed the charter to me and other owners including Jack Wilson, of 
Nevvburgh, N. Y. ; Mrs. Ann Koenig, of Kingston ; and Mrs. Gertrude Brown, of 
Beacon, N. Y. At that time Mr. Kazansky stated he did not want to sign us up 
with either Teamster Local 269 or with local 228 because he did not want to 
become involved with our group. Kazansky also said he was not sure how 
Getlan might have abused the local 228 charter and therefore he did not want 
to use it. 

Later at a regular meeting of the New York State Operators Guild it was 
decided by most of the owner-employees and employees to continue as members 
of Sam Getlan's union, local 26, IJWU. To my knowledge Mr. Kazansky did 
not use the local 228 charter since Mr. Kazansky's visit to my home in 
March 1956. 

I have read this 2-page statement. It is true and correct. 

Amelia McCakthy 
Walter R. May. 

Witness : 

Sworn to before me this 26th day of June 1957. 

[seal] Raymond A. Murphy, 

Notary Pullic, State of New York, No. 03-8075000. Qualified in Bronx 
Count!/. Certificates filed in Neiv York and Kings County. 

Commission expires March 30, 1958. 

(At this point, Senator Goldwater withdrew from the hearing 
room.) 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions of Mr. Getlan? 

Mr. Kennedy. Not for the moment. 

The Chairman. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Philip Kazansky. 

(Members of the select committee present at this point in the pro- 
cedings: Senators McClellan, Mundt, and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. You may be sworn. Do you solemnly swear that 
the evidence you shall give before this Senate select committee shall 
be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you 
God? 

Mr. Kazansky. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF PHILIP KAZANSKY 

The Chairman. Mr. Kazansky, will you state your name, your place 
of residence, and your business or occupation ? 

Mr, Kazansky. Philip Kazansky. I reside at 36 Liberty Street, 
Monticello, N. Y. 

The Chairman. What is your business or occupation, please? 



3872 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Is it that bad ? 

Mr. Kazansky. It may be, sir. 

The Chairman. You do not intend, then, to answer questions? Is 
that correct ? 

Mr. Kazansky. I believe that is correct, sir. 

The Chairman. I can proceed a little further. I want to give you 
an opportunity to testify because your name has been presented here 
tinder oath with respect to some of your activities in connection with 
the charter of local 228. 

Mr. Counsel, you may proceed to interrogate the witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, according to the testimony so far, 
the charter came from Milton Holt to Sam Getlan, and then Sam 
Getlan returned it to Milton Holt, and Mr. Philip Kazansky, accord- 
ing to the affidavit of Amelia McCarthy, appeared with the charter, 
and attempted to organize these individuals. 

I would like to ask you if you ever had in your possession the charter 
of local 228, Mr. Kazansky. 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question on 
the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you receive the charter from Mr. Milton Holt ? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I repeat again, I respectfully decline to answer 
the question on the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Do you have counsel to represent you ? 

Mr. Kazansky. No, sir. 

The Chairman. You knew you had a right to have counsel; did 
you? 

Mr. Kazansky. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You have waived counsel? 

Mr. Kazansky. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. We understand, as I pointed out before, that there 
is a close relationship between Mr. John Dioguardi and Mr. Milton 
Holt. 

I would like to ask you whether Mr. Johnny Dio had anything to 
do with your getting the charter from Milton Holt ? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question on 
the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Mr. John Dioguardi ? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question 
on the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Mr. Milton Holt? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question on 
the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Mr. A. Gordon ? 

Mr. Kazansky, Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question on 
the grounds it may tend to incriminate me? 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. A. Gordon, Mr. Chairman, is president of 805. 

Do you know Nat Gordon, A. Gordon's brother ? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question on 
the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennei^y. Were you present when these charters were given 
out for the so-called paper locals of the Teamsters? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3873 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question on 
the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you still have the charter for local 228 in your 
possession ? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question 
ou the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell the committee what you did with the 
cliartei- ? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question on 
the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Are you now a member of a labor union? 

Mr. Kazansy. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question on 
the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Do you think it might tend to incriminate you if 
you were a membei- of a labor union ? 

Mr. Kazansky. It might. 

The Chaik3ian. Do you state under your oath that you honestly 
believe that if you answered tliat (luestion truthfully, that a truthful 
answer miglit tend to incriminate you? 

Mr. Kazansky. It may. 

The Chairman. You are stating that under oath? 

Mr. Kazansky. Yes, sir. 

The Chlmrman. I wonder what kind of a labor union it is. 

You see, you cast aspersions upon that union if you are a member 
of it by taking that position. 

Mr. Kazansky. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You realize that, do you? 

Mr. Kazansky. It may, sir. 

The Chairman. Then are we to assuu)e that that is a union that a 
decent citizen would not be proud to belong to? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question on 
the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

The CiiAiRiNiAN. Is that one too close to the truth? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, again I respectfully refuse to answer the ques- 
tion on the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Yes, sir, I realize that. 

Senator Mundt. Do you know Mr. Sam Getlan, who testified just 
ahead of you on the stand? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I refuse to answer the question on the grounds 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. The Chair presents to you a photostatic copy of a 
letter dated February 2, 1956, signed by Joseph Curcio, secretary- 
treasurer of local 269, Warehouse and Processing Employees Union. 

Will you please examine this document and state if you identify it? 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question on 
the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Let this document be made exhibit No. 20, the one 
that was presented to the witness. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 20,*" and is as 
follows.) 

The Chairman. I shall read this document. As I pointed out, it 
is on Warehouse and Processing Employees Union Local 269 sta- 

80330 — 57— pt. 10 19 



3874 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

tionery, dated February 2, 1956, addressed to Joint Council No. 16, 
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen, 
and Helpers of America, 265 West 14:th Street, Room 709, New York 
11, N. Y. 

Dear Sib and Bbother : This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of Jan- 
uary 19, 1956. We give you below a list of officers of our local union who are 
eligible to vote in the joint council election. They are : 

Armando Simontacci, president; Basil Koschel, vice president; Joseph Cur- 
cios, secretary-treasurer ; Philip Kazansky, recording secretary ; Frank Easton, 
trustee ; John Korsizor, trustee ; Rozario Catalano, trustee. 
Fraternally yours, 

Joseph Curcio, 
Secretary-Treasurer. 

Do you know anything about that letter ? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer that question 
on the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Did you attend the joint council meeting at which 
the election was held? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question on 
the ground it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Did you know local 269 was one of these paper 
locals that was phony and that the whole purpose of this arrange- 
ment, this scheme, was to vote illegal votes in that election for the 
purpose of electing John O'Rourke ? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir ; I respectfully refuse to answer the question on 
the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Do you not think if you have been perpetrating a 
fraud on honest working people you ought to have the decency to 
answer such questions? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir; I refuse to answer such questions on the 
grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. I will hand you another one. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 21" and fol- 
lows : ) 

The Chairman. On the same stationery, of local 269, dated Febru- 
ary 2, 1956, addressed to the same joint council, and it reads as follows : 

Dear Sir and Brother: This will certify that the bearer, Philip Kazansky, 
is an executive board member of our local union, 269, and is eligible to vote in 
the joint council election. 
Fraternally yours, 

Joseph Cuecio, 
Secretary-Treasurer. 

I present this ]:)hotostatic copy of the letter to you, and ask you to 
examine it and state if you identify it. 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question 
on the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. I will ask you if you attended that election. 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question 
on the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

The CiiAiRisrAN. Do you think it would tend to incriminate you if 
you attended the election under that certificate and voted for Mr. 
O'Rourke? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I refuse to answer the question on the ground it 
may tend to incriminate me. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIE'S IN THE LABOR MELD 3875 

The Chairman. Was there anything about that election, about 
this transaction, that you feel is improper, and, therefore, might re- 
flect upon your character and integrity ? 

Mr. IvAZANSKY. Sir, I refuse to answer the question on the grounds 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You would be the best judge of it. I am about to 
accept your statement as a fact. 

Are tliere any questions ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, our information now is that Mr. 
Kazansky works for local 269 and received $35 in expenses every week 
from local 269 of the teamstei*s. 

The Chairman. Is that true? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question 
the question on the ground that it may tend to incriminate me. 

The CiiAiRinAN. Well, let us see. What is that union affiliated with ? 

Mr. KJENNEDY. 269 is one of the paper locals, Mr. Chairman, local 
269 of the teamsters, where they voted in this election we discussed. 
The votes were impounded. Forty-two votes were cast. Philip Kaz- 
ansky was one of them, and that vote was cast for Mr. John O'Rourke. 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions? 

Senator Curtis. How many members are there in local 269 ? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I res]Dectfully refuse to answer the question 
on the ground it may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. Do you know any of the members ? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question 
on the gromids it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Kazansky was called for two 
reasons: Because of his knowledge of the bouncing charter 228, 
and because of tliis information that he should have regarding the 
elections for the joint council 16 of New York City. Those are all 
the questions I have. 

The Chairman. You are not willing to testify before this com- 
mittee ? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question 
on the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. I think that is one you can answer, if you are un- 
willing to testify. You are apparently demonstrating that. I won- 
dered if there was anything that you would testify to if we asked 
you about it. 

Can you think of any question we could ask you that you would 
give a truthful answer to? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully decline to answer the question on 
the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You feel like you are in pretty bad shape, do you 
not? 

Mr. Kazansky. Sir, I respectfully refuse to answer the question 
on the grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. I sympathize with you. You are excused. 

Mr. Kazansky. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we had the information from the 
first witness that the international said that this charter was never 
active. It nevertheless ended up in the hands of Mr. Holt, from Mr. 
Hodes to Mr. Holt of the teamsters union, and then bounced to Mr. 
Getlan, came back to Mr. Milton Holt, came back to Mr. Kazansky. 



3876 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

We feel that the testimony of Mr. Milton Holt could t]u'o^y a lot 
of light on this situation. He is the next witness. 

The Chairman. Mr. Holt, come forward, please. 

(Present at this point were Senators McClellan, Mundt, and 
Curtis. ) 

The CiiAiKMAN. You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall 
give before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Holt. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF MILTON HOLT, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, 
JOSEPH E. BEILL, ESQ. 

The Chairman. State your name, please, your place of residence 
and your business or occupation. 

Mr. Holt. Milton Holt, 7219 136th Street, Flushing, N. Y. 

The Chairman. State your business or occupation, please, Mr. Holt. 

Mr. Holt. I must respectfully decline to answer under the fifth 
amendment, which guarantees me due process of law, and the privi- 
lege aeainst self-incrimination, because to answer mav incriminate me 
and would deny me due process of law. 

Furthermore, my answer would not serve the legislative purposes 
of this committee and, in addition, the question is not pertinent. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Holt, would you explain to me what the legis- 
lative pur])(>ses are? 

The Chairman. Just a moment. 

The Chair overrules the witness' objection on the grounds that his 
testimony would serve no legislative purpose. We cannot determine 
about that until he answers his questions. He is overruled on the 
second ground that the testimony he would give is not pertinent. 

Therefore, on those bases, you are ordered and directed to answer the 
question. 

Mr. Holt. Senator, to answer would incriminate me, and would 
deny the due process of law. 

The Chairman. We will ask you another, and see if this will 
incriminate you. 

Have you hired a law3"er to represent you today ? 

Mr. Holt. Yes, sir. 

The Chairiman. That does not incriminate you. 

Mr. Counsel, will you state your name, please, for the record? 

Mr. Brill. I will, Senator. It is Jose])h E. Brill. 

The Chairman. Your address, please ? 

Mr. Brill. I have it already written for the record. It is 165 
"Broadway, New York City. 

The Chairman. Senator Mundt, did you wish to ask the witness a 
question? 

Senator Mttndt. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

I was intrigued by one part of the witness' reply. He said, in his 
■opinion, it would not serve the legislative purposes for which this 
connuittee was created. I would like to have the witness tell us what, 
in his mind, are the legislative purposes for wliich this committee is 
created. 

Mr. Holt. T did not get the question. Senator. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIE1.D 3877 

Senator Mundt. I want to know what, in your mind, are the legisla- 
tive purposes for which this committee is created. 

You told us that you did not think that particular question would 
serve them. So I can test the validity of your reply, I want to know 
what you feel are our legislative purposes. 

Mr. Holt. Senator, if I was to go beyond what I have already said, 
it might result in a waiver of my rights, upon which I desire to stand. 

Senator Mundt. This would support your rights, if you have a 
position which is defensible. 

If you feel that we are going beyond the legislative purview which 
has been given us by the Senate, you should make it a point to sub- 
stantiate it. 

You said that you did not think the questions that the chairman 
asked you were pertinent to our legislative purpose. I ask you what 
do you think is the legislative purpose of the committee ? 

JNIr. Holt. Again, I state the previous grounds which I have already 
stated. 

Senator Mundt. Which grounds are those ? 

Mr. Holt. That it might result in a waiver of my rights. 

Senator Mundt. You have not established any rights until you have 
set out for us what you think are the legislative purposes so that we 
can measure them against the pertinency of the question. 

Mr. Holt. What is the question ? 

Senator Mundt. The question is, What do you think is the legisla- 
tive purpose of this committee ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Holt. Senator, I am sorry, but if I were to answer or discuss 
any more pertaining to that question, it could result in a waiver of my 
rights upon which I desire to stand. 

Senator Mundt. On the contrary, I think when the witness elects 
to take unto liimself the function of giving us gratuitous advice, what 
questions are pertinent and what questions are not pertinent, I think 
he has the responsibility of following through to tell us what he thinks 
are the purposes of the committee. 

Mr. Holt. I wouldn't know that. 

Senator Mundt. Then how would you Imow the question was not 
pertinent '? 

JNIr. Holt. I wouldn't know that either. 

Senator Mundt. I thought you must be well versed in all this, be- 
cause you were giving us a lecture on pertinency. 

Mr. Holt. I have already stated my position. Senator, that I can- 
not answer anything beyond what I have already answered. 

Senator Mundt. I am not asking you to go beyond what you have 
already said. You have already said too much, I think, because you 
liave tried to tell us what tlie functions of the committee are not, and 
if you know what we should not ask, you certainly must know what 
you think are the guidelines which should govern the questioning of 
the committee. 

Mr. Holt. I cannot answer anything further pertaining to the 
question. It could result in a waiver of my constitutional rights. 

Senator Mundt. You have no constitutional right insofar as the 
part of the question I am talking about is concerned. You have some 
under the fifth amendment, but you have none from the standpoint 
of a counselor tellino; this committee what its functions are. 



3878 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

If you appear in that unique capacity and you say that you thought 
the question was not pertinent, I want to know why. 

Mr. Holt. I stand on the previous answer I gave. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. How old are you, Mr. Holt ? 

Mr. Holt. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that I 
have stated before. 

Senator Curtis. Where were you born ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Senator Curtis. Do you wish to reconsider your answer as to how 
old you are ? 

Mr. Holt. I cannot discuss anything further than what I have al- 
ready said for fear it might result in a waiver of my rights upon 
which I desire to stand. 

Senator Curtis. Where were you born ? 

Mr. Holt. I stand upon the answer I just gave. 

Senator Curtis. IVhere did you go to school ? 

Mr. Holt. I respectfully stand on the previous answer, Senator. 

Senator Curtis. At what age did you begin to work ? 

Mr. Holt. I respectfully stand on the same answer I gave pre- 
viously. 

Senator Curtis. When did you first have any connection with any 
labor organization? 

Mr. Holt. Senator, I respectfully submit that any discussion any 
further might result in a waiver of my rights which I desire to stand 
upon. 

Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. I would like to ask 1 or 2 questions. 

Are you presently a member of a labor union ? 

Mr. Holt. I didn't get that, sir. 

The Chairman. Are you presently a member of a labor union ? 

Mr. Holt. I must respectfully decline to answer on the grounds 
I have previously stated. 

The Chairman. Is it not a fact that you are secretary-treasurer 
now of local 805 of the teamsters union ? 

Mr. Holt. I respectfully submit that I cannot go into any further 
discussions than what I have previously stated. 

The Chairman. Do you think the members of the teamsters union 
who work and pay dues appreciate the attitude of denying or refusing 
to state whether you are representing them in an official capacity or 
whether you are associated with them as a member ? 

Mr. Holt. Senator, I cannot answer the question because it might 
result in a waiver of my constitutional rights on which I desire to 
stand. 

The Chairman. You keep emphasizing your constitutional rights. 
Do you think the membership of your union and the American people, 
and this Government have any rights at all as to the conduct of unions 
and to inquire about their conduct ? 

Mr. Holt. I stand on the same answer I previously stated. 

The Chair^nian. Are you under indictment now for perjury ? 

Mr. Holt. I respectfully decline to answer. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3879 

The Chairman. The court record will show that. It may reflect 
on you, I do not know. But you know we can always find that out. 
Do you not know that is a fact ? 

Mr. Holt. To answer may incriminate me and deny me due process 
of law. 

The Chairman. Do you not know that is a fact and that you are 
still an officer in the union, secretary-treasurer of local 805 of the 
teamsters union? 

Mr. Holt. Senator, I respectfully submit again that to go beyond 
what I have already stated might result in a waiver of my rights upon 
which I desire to stand. 
The Chairman. Senator Mundt? 

Senator Mundt. Has your case been brought to the attention of 
Walter Eeuther and Mr. Meany and the members of the ethical prac- 
tices board of the CIO-AFL? 

Mr. Holt. I reiterate the statement I just made previously. 
Senator Mundt. It seems to me that it is such a startling case of a 
flagrant violation of the published provisions of the ethical practices 
code that inasmuch as it has definitely been established that you are 
a secretary-treasurer of a branch of organized labor, that quite ob- 
viously your case must be before them for disposition. 

I was wondering whether or not you knew whether it was pending 
and whether a decision would be handed down by that high governing 
board. 

Mr. Holt. Senator, I respectfully stand on the statements I made 
previously. 

The Chairman. I may say, Senator Mundt, if it was not before them 
today, I think this is headed for them. 

Senator Mundt. I think the American people are getting a little 
bit impatient, Mr. Chairman, about the fact that these cases are being 
brought before the ethical practices board without any expeditious 
disposition. A case as flagrant as this does not require a long period 
of deliberation on the part of that board, and I think the public 
would appreciate having a verdict, that either they approve this kind 
of practice or they do not. 

If they do not, we ought to have some decisions coming down 
pretty rapidly. 

The Chairman. We may have one situation where they would 
have to request the international teamsters to act since he is in the 
teamsters union. I think they could act as international officers. 

Senator Mundt. As I recall the testimony of Mr. Meany, that was 
the way in which they functioned. But the triggering off of this 
process has to be by the ethical practices board. They can then 
act — Mr. Jimmy Hoffa and the teamsters group, can take action — 
and if they do not taken action, Mr. Meany outlined the procedure 
which would be followed. 

The Chairman. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. I get a lot of letters from people around the 
country who are following these hearings on television and through 
the press, criticizing the fact that nothing is happening on this ethical 
practices board on fifth amendment witnesses who take the amend- 
ment allegedly to protect some corrupt practice in a part of the union. 
I think we should start getting some action on cases as flagrant as 
this one. 



3880 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Could I say there, Senator, because I have been 
in touch with them to some extent, that they have already made cer- 
tain representations, the AFL-CIO ethical practices committee, and 
the AFL-CIO officials themselves have already made representa- 
tions to the teamsters union in certain areas. When these things 
are brought to their attention, then they make representations to the 
international union and request that certain action be taken. They 
have given them certain dates and are trying to get together now for 
a meeting. I thought that those facts should be brought to your 
attention so you would undersand the complete picture. 

It is now in the hands of the teamsters rather than in the hands of 
the ethical practices committee or the AFL-CIO. 

Senator Mundt. All the public wants is to translate these repre- 
sentations into results. There is failure to produce a result, because 
of the failure on the part of the teamster leadership, if that is the 
point — let the chips fall where they will — but let us get those results 
publicized, because this type of procedure is working a great injustice, 
in my opinion, and a great injury, on honest trade unionism in Amer- 
ica. It is certainly most exasperating to the tens of thousands of 
teamsters and other union members who are paying dues. They are 
about ready to find out whether or not their money is being used to 
advance working conditions and improve them, or whether this is a 
whole pattern of corruption on tlie part of labor officials in minor posi- 
tions or in high ones, using these dues from the workingman's family 
to further their own efforts. 

Mr. Holt, you could be very helpful if you wanted to, in trying to 
disabuse the public consciousness of this conclusion. By taking the 
fifth amendment, you simply throw oil on the fire. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further? 

Mr. Kennedy ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, our primary interest in Mr. Holt was 
the fact that he, according to the sworn testimony of Mr. Getlan, he, 
as a teamster official had a charter of the UAW. 

I am wondering if you would tell us how you got that charter, where 
you got it from, and how it happened to come into your possession? 

Mr. Holt. Counsel, I cannot answer the question. It might result 
in a waiver of my rights, and I do not want to be deprived of my 
rights. 

Mr. Kennedy. You say that you refuse to answer on the grounds 
that the truthful answer might tend to incriminate you ? 

Mr. Holt. My answer is the same as I have previously stated. 

Mr. Kennedy. What is that? 

Mr. Holt. I cannot answer the question because it might result in 
a waiver of my riglits, upon which I desire to stand. 

Mr. Kennedy. What are your rights that you understand? 

Mr. Holt. I must respectfully decline to answer 

(The wdtness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Holt. Because to answer may incriminate me and would deny 
me due process of law. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you do not want to answer the question as to how 
this UAW charter came into your possession, on the grounds that it 
might tend to incriminate you ; is that right? 

Mr. Holt. I cannot answer any question that might result in a 
waiver of my rights. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 3881 

Mr. Kennedy. It lias to be something more than that. It has to be 
that yon feel that an answer might tend to incriminate you, not just 
that yon were going to waive yonr rights. Do you feel that a truthful 
ansAver might tend to incriminate 3"ou ? 

Mr. Holt. To answer may incriminate me, sir, and may denj'^ me due 
process of law. 

Mr. Kennedy. That answer, I think will stand. 

Did you buy this charter from anybody in the UAW, Mr. Holt ? 

Mr. Holt. I cannot answer beyond what I have already stated, 
because it might result in a waiver of my rights, upon which I desire 
to stand. 

Mr. Kennedy. Which includes that it might tend to incriminate 
you; is that right? ' 

Mr. Holt. Yes ; that is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you make any arrangements to sell this charter 
at any time? 

Mr. Holt. I decline to answer respectfully, on the grounds that it 
may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kj:nnedy. Mr. Chairman, on the question of Mr. Holt and 
his present indictment, he is under indictment for perjury in connec- 
tion with the indictment of Mr. Johnny Dioguardi and John Mc- 
Namara in New York on the grounds of extortion. Mr. Holt appeared 
before the grand jury and, based on his testimony before the grand 
jury, he was indicted for perjury. 

The Chairman. Mr. Holt, I sup]:)Ose we could ask many questions 
and you would give the same answers, that you would decline to 
answer on the grounds that it might tend to incriminate you. The 
only observation 

Mr. Holt. I couldn't hear that, sir. Would you please repeat it? 

The Chairman. I will say it again. 

I say I assume that we could ask you many questions pertinent 
to this inquiry, and you would continue to decline to answer on the 
same grounds. You stated that joii feel that a truthful answer might 
tend to incriminate you. I do not challenge that statement as to 
some of the questions, at least, that it might tend to incriminate you. 
But I just wonder if you and the others like you have any conception 
or care of the great damage you are doing to honest unionism in 
this country and to the honest laboring men and women who work 
and pay dues in good faith to a labor organization in the hope and 
in the expectation that they will receive benefits therefrom. 

Do you have any conception or do you care what you are doing, you 
and those like you taking this position of not cooperating, and trying 
to obstruct the work of your Government to provide better unionism 
for the working people of this country ? 

Mr. Holt, I didn't get that. Did you ask a question? 

The Chairman. I asked it twice. I will ask this part of it again. 

Mr. Holt. I thought you made a statement. 

The Chairman. Do you have any conception or do you care about 
what you are doing and what others like you are doing to hurt union- 
ism in this country and the honest working people who pay their 
dues in good faith to unions with the expectation and hope of getting 
some benefit from it? 



3882 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Holt, Eespectfully, sir, I may be deprived of my rights if 
I should answer your question or statement, and I desire to stand 
upon my previous statement. 

The Chairman. You take the fifth amendment to that, also? 

Mr. Holt. Yes. 

The Chairman. All right. You may stand aside. 

Is there anything further this afternoon ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess until 10 o'clock 
tomorrow morning. 

(Whereupon, at 4 : 22 p. m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 
10 a. m., Tuesday, August 6, 1957.) 

(Memb-ers present at the taking of the recess: Senators McClellan, 
Mundt, and Curtis.) 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR 3IANAGEMENT FIELD 



TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 1957 

United States Senate, 
Select Committee on Improper 
Activities in the Labor or Management Field, 

Washington, D. C. 

The select committee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to Senate Resolu- 
tion 74, agreed to January 30, 1957, in the caucus room. Senate Office 
Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the select com- 
mittee) presiding. 

Present : Senators John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas ; Irving 
M. Ives, Republican, New York; Barry Goldwater, Republican, Ari- 
zona; Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota; Carl T. Curtis, 
Republican, Nebraska. 

Also present : Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel ; Paul J. Tierney, 
assistant counsel; Walter R. May, assistant counsel; Ruth Young 
Watt, chief clerk. 

(Members present at the convening of the session: Senators Mc- 
Clellan, Ives, Goldwater, and Curtis. ) 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

All right, Mr. Counsel, call your first witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, the first witness will be Mr. Stanley 
Lehrer, who is counsel for the Auto Glass Dealers, Inc., of Greater 
New York, and it will be in connection with the auto-dealers contract 
with one of the unions of Johnny Dio, and an arrangement made with 
Equitable Research, which was Johnny Dio's management consultant 
research firm. 

The Chairman. You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall 
give before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Lehrer. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF STANLEY LEHRER 

The Chairman. Will you state your name, your place of residence, 
and your business or occupation ? 

Mr. Lehrer. My name is Stanley Lehrer, I reside at 1321 East 
101st Street, Brooklyn, and I am an attorney at law. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Being an attorney at law, I assume that you waive the right of 
additional counsel ? 

Mr. Lehrer. I do, sir. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

3883 



3884 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Counsel, you may proceed. 

Mr, Kenxedy. Mr. Lelirer, you are retained by the Auto Glass 
Dealers Association? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kexxedy. And you have been with them for how long? 

Mr. Lehrer. Since approximately April or May of 1954. 

Mr. Kexxedy. Where did they operate, or where are their head- 
quarters^ 

?%Ir. Lehrer. Their headquarters are in New York City, an associa- 
tion comprising mem}>ers of that industry, located in the New York 
Cit}' meti'opolitan area. 

Mr. Kexxedy. How man}" members are there of the association? 

]\Ir. Lehrer. Approximately 140 or 150. 

Mr. Kexxedy. Could you tell us what the industry, the auto-glass 
industry is, and what you do, what these people do ? 

Mr. Lehrer. These people are the auto re]iairmen that replace auto- 
mobile glass, in automobiles, of course. 

Senator Curtis. Is it an association of management ? 

Mr. Lehrer. An association of management; that is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have there been attempts to organize or unionize 
these members of this association ? 

jMr. Lehrer. Prior to 1955, there had been very few attempts, going 
back over many years, of which I have very little personal knowledge. 

Ml'. Ki:xNEDY. For what reason hadn't there been attempts to or- 
ganize them? 

Mr, Lehrer. The auto-glass industry in Xew York City is com- 
])rised of approximately 200 shops. I guess at least 60 percent or 
mo]'e are 1-mon owner-operated shops. By 1-man owner-operated 
shops I also include the partnership where there are 2 owners that 
have no employees. 

Mr. Kexnedy. So there wouldn't be any reason, particularly, to 
organize them or unionize them ? 

Mr. T/EHRer. That is my feeling, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. For the most part, the people woi'k for themselves? 

IMr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. There wouldn't be any improvement in wages, ho\u"s, 
or conditions for these people ; is that right ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, in June or July of 1955, were you approached 
by several unions in an attempt to organize the shops ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Several of the employer shops of my client were ap- 
proached by local 227. I believe at that time it was UAW-AFL. 

Mr, Kennedy. Who were the officials of that? 

Mr. Lehrer. Harry Eeiss was president, and Arthur Santa Maria 
held an office. 

Mr, Kennedy, And David Consentino? 

Mr. Lehrer. Another office; yes, sir, 

Mr, Kex^nedy, At that same time, were you in June or July of 1955 
approached by other unions in an attempt to organize i 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Were you approached by local 5, by "Benny the 
Bug"? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy, He came in to try to organize ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3885 

Mr. Lehker. Correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you approached by 259 of the UAW-CIO '? 

Mr. Leiirer. Several of the shops of my client were so approached. 

Mr. Kennedy. The head of that local was Mickey Finn ? 

Mr. Lehrer. So I have lieard. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the effect of the attempted organization 
of these shops on the owners, on the shops themselves t 

Mr. Lehrer. Organizing- a one-man shop in that industr}" is no prob- 
lem to the union. The biggest weapon he has is the picket. In the 
auto-glass industry throughout the country in the past few years, since 
the advent of the curved windshield, the glass parts in the automobiles 
have meant that the auto-glass dealer, as such, must stock more and 
more glass. He cannot cut the glass, and he must order it. ^ly cl ients* 
shops in NeAv York City vrere not that financially able that they could 
stock glass to any large extent so that when an automobile came in for- 
repair he relies on the distributor and the warehouse to ship him that 
piece of glass the very same day within a few hours after he orders it. 

With the threat of })icketing, forgetting for the moment the retail 
trade tliat woukl not cross the picket line, there was the pi-oblem that 
he could not ^^\. deliveries by truckdrivers who would refuse to cross 
tlie picket line. This was the problem that presented itself to him 
in the summer of 1955. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were there actually pickets on shops that were self- 
owned '. 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes; to \\\\ knowledge there was. 

Mr. Kennedy. The i)ickets would be placed outside tlie slioj) where 
tlie mau was working by himself, and for himself? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the pickets Avould stop deliveries and pickui)s? 

Mr. Lehrer. I wouldn't know whether the pickets would stop the 
delivery. T do know it has been reported, or it had been reported to 
uie by the client that he couldn't get deliveries where truckmen re- 
fused to cross the picket line. 

Mr. Kennedy. Xow, did you have any conversations witli the offi- 
cials of any of these unions during this period ? 

]Mr. Leth?er. Yes: I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. With whom ? 

]Mr. Lehrer. Local 227. 

Mr. Kennedy. That would be Harry Reiss? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you finally decide as far as Harry Reiss, 
as far as 227 was concerned ? 

]Mr. Lehrer. Initially when there was picketing of some of the 
various shops, a general organization meeting of our employer organi- 
zation was called. This was during the time the picketing was going; 
on. ]Mr. Reiss had told several of the officers of the association that if 
tlie association would sign a recognition stipulation agreeing to recog- 
nize local 227 as the collective-bargaining agent he would call the 
pickets oft' during tlie time that the negotiations were in progress for 
a contract. 

A meeting was then called by the officers of the client, at which 
meeting the general body voted not to sign any stipulation of recogni- 
tion but instead to do all in their power to stave off any unionization 
dri^•e. 



3886 IMPROPER AcrrvmEis in the labor field 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ultimately change your minds about that ? 

Mr. Lehrer. We had to. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why ? Wli at occurred ? 

Mr. Lehrer. One of our shops, located in Brooklyn, was being 
picketed and being picketed quite heavily. This shop was more or 
less of a focal point in what we would term as automobile row. The 
auto glass dealer depends to a large extent on what we term a whole- 
sale trade. That is, jobs come in to him from the new-car dealer and 
the used-car dealer and the service station and the like. This particu- 
lar shop located in automobile row threatened, because he had no 
choice in the matter, unless the pickets were withdrawn he would have 
to capitulate and sign up with the union. In tliat event, the local 227 
would have a weapon that they didn't have before and they then could, 
by means of secondary boycott, if you will, of all of these new-car 
agencies, used-car agencies and the wholesale accounts, direct their 
work to a union shop. There was no union shop in the area at the 
time. 

With this particular shop threatening to capitulate — ^he had no 
choice in the matter — another meeting was called the very following 
week, 7 days later, at which time tlie general body of the association 
directed the executive board to enter into negotiations with local 227. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Now, prior to this time had you had a conversation 
with one of your members by the name of Louie Boyar ? 

Mr. Lehrer. I did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And had he telephoned you at one time when his 
shop was being picketed ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he tell you at that time? That is Mr. 
B-o-y-a-r, Louis Boyar. 

Mr. Lehrer. Mr. Boyar had been particularly heavy hit. Mr. 
Boyar owns a small shop in the East New York section of Brooklyn, 
a heavily populated area. Besides himself in the shop, he had two 
employees, and I might point out that that in New York City is con- 
sidered a big shop. 

He had been picketed for about 8 or 4 days. He was taking quite 
a bad beating from the picketing ; businesswise, that is. 

He called me up on Friday afternoon and asked me if I would meet 
him, to meet somebody that he tliought could possibly help him get 
the pickets off. He wouldn't tell me who the person was, or liow he 
got to him. 

, My initial reaction Avas I did not want to go at all. However, he 
pleaded with me and finally I went down at a prearranged appoint- 
ment that Boyar had made with this individual and we met this 
individual. 

Mr. Kennedy. Where did you meet the individual ? 

Mr. Lehrer. On the lower east side of Manliattan, in some candy 
store. 

Mr. Kennedy. "Wliat conversation took place ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Mr. Boyar did most of the talking, and Mr. Boyar 
outlined his problem to him, and the fact his business was taking a 
terrific beating, especially in July, which is a particularly busy sea- 
son for auto Qflass, and that he had been picketed for 3 or 4 or 5 days, 
or whatever the facts were. 



IMPROPElR ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3887 

Over my objection he proposed to this person that if he could, 
Boyar could possibly get together a number of the shops and per- 
haps make a payment of some sort to get the pickets off, and this 
person said he would see what he could do. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did this person say whom he would have to talk 
to to find out ? 

Mr. Lehrer. He mentioned the initials "J. D." and he said, "I will 
try and call J. D. and see what I can do." 

'Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand later on that he called "J. D." 
or did you hear from Mr. Boyar ? 

Mr. Lehrer. On Monday of the following week, and this had been 
a Friday, Mr, Boyar called me and told me that he had received a 
call, that nothing could be done. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you learn who you spoke with down at the 
restaurant on the east side of New York ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Mr. Boyar mentioned his name to me this morning 
as Mr. Stark. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know who Mr. Stark is ? 

Mr. Lehrer. I do not, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You never heard about that beyond that? 

Mr. Lehrer. That was the last I ever heard of that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Can you describe Mr. Stark to the committee? 

Mr. Lehrer. Mr. Stark was approximately 40 to 45 years old, short 
build, ruddy complexion. The most distinguishing feature about him 
was he looked like a prize fighter, pugnosed and cauliflower ears. 

Mr. Kennedy. Nothing ever occurred from that conversation? 

Mr. Lehrer. Nothing ever occurred to my knowledge. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you went back and decided or your association 
met again, and you decided to sign up with local 227; is that right? 

Mr. Lehrer. We decided to enter into negotiations with local 227. 

Mr. Kennedy. And did you enter into those negotiations? 

Mr. Lehrer. We did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And had you fairly well agreed on the terms of the 
contract ? 

Mr. Lehrer. I would say we had completed 80 or 90 percent of our 
negotiations. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, was there a question raised as to the 
question of jurisdictional picketing of your various shops, of another 
union coming in other than 227 and attempted to organize the shops? 

Mr, Lehrer. Yes; there was. 

:Mr. Kennedy. And was that raised with Mr. Harry Reiss? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes ; it was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Harry Reiss then indicate to you or did he 
say that it was impossible for him to do anything to prevent that kind 
of organizational picketing? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. He said he was the president of his 
own local, and he could only control his own local, and he could not 
exercise any control over any other locals. 

Mr. Kennedy. Rather than organizational picketing, it would be 
jurisdictional picketing? 

Mr. Lehrer. I would call it so. 

Mr. Kennedy. Other unions coming and trying to take the shop 
awav from 227; is that right? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is my belief. 



3888 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Did lie say that he would not be able to prevent that ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he at that time, Mr. Harry Reiss, suggest to you 
anybody that might be able to prevent that? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes. We were negotiating for this contract. Present 
at the negotiations at this time — these negotiation meetings were held 
in a shop, one of the members' shops that had been picketed — was the 
entire executive board, about 3 or 4 of the other shops that were not 
members of the executive board but members of the association, and 
perhaps 3 or 4 attorneys who represented various individual clients 
within the association. We had progressed for about an hour and 
a half to 2 hours on negotiations on the contract when one member of 
the executive board raised the question to Mr. Eeiss, "Well, what 
happens if we sign with you and some other locals along, as they have 
been coming along for the past 2 or 3 weeks, and starts to picket us?" 

That is when we got the response that I described before. 

Negotiations broke down at that point, and a period of about a half 
liour must have elapsed, and finally Mr. Reiss said, "Well, only one 
man can possibly help you in the city of New York in a problem of 
that type." He either mentioned the name "Equitable Research Asso- 
ciates Corp.," or "John Dioguardi," and I don't know which of the 
two names was mentioned first, and ultimately both were mentioned. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was it decided you would go and see Johnny Dio- 
guardi ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes, it was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you go and meet with him ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes ; we did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Representatives of the association and yourself ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have discussions with Johnny Dio as to 
whether he could prevent any jurisdictional picketing of the shops? 

Mr. Lehrer. We did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And did Mr. Dio tell you at that time that he could 
prevent that jurisdictional picketing? 

Mr. Lehrer. He did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And did he make a request, for those services, for a 
payment of some $2,500 ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there a question raised by you and your clients 
as to that amount, paying that amount ? 

Mr. Lehrer. There was, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, at this time, about 80 percent of the terms of 
the contract had been agreed to ; is that not right ? 

iVIr. Lehrer. I would say so ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So it wasn't really necessary to have Mr. Dio's as- 
sistance for the contract, but the assistance that was needed was to 
l)revent this jurisdictional picketing. 

Mr. Lehrer. Tliat is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. That might follow? 

Ml'. Lehrer. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy'. So you went to see Mr. Dio, and you had a discussion 
abf)ut tliat. Who made the appointment for you to see Dio? 

Mr. Lehrkr. Initially, I believe Mr. Reiss had made the appoint- 
luent for us. 1 do not know whether we kept the first appointment 



IMPROPER ACTWITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3889 

or whether it was a subsequent appointment that had been made. 
But if I recall, it was Mr. Reiss who had made the appointment. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you understood at that time that the charter 
for local 227 had been given to Mr. Reiss by Mr. Diogiiardi when he 
was in charge of operations in Xew York City? 

Mr. Leiirer. I did not know that, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did not know that ? 

Mr. Lehrer. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Dio did not indicate that to you in his 
conversation ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Xo. He did tell me during- the course of the conver- 
sation that at one time he had been the regional director of the UAW. 

Mr. Kennp:dy. Now, when he raised the question of the $2,500, and 
3'ou people felt that was high, were there negotiations back and forth 
as to how much you would pay ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell that to the committee ( 

Mr. Lehrer. Our association had and still has no treasury of any 
kind. The dues by the employers to this association were the startling 
figure of $3 per month per shop. I'Nlien he made the request of $2,500. 
of course, it was quite evident to the client that they could not pos- 
sibly get that kind of money. The executive board then met again 
and decided that it may come to pass that not everyone of the associa- 
tions would fall into the union, and some might escape, and some might 
joi]T other unions, and therefore, they should not be penalized. They 
felt that if that were the case some formula should be arrived at where 
only those who joined the union and had to engage Mr. Dioguardi's 
services would pay for the services proportionately. 

So a fornnila was reached that we woidd enter into a 8-year contract 
Avith Equitable Research Associates Corp.; that is, Mr. Dioguardi's 
outfit, and each member of our association who signed a union contract 
would pay to Equitable Research or actually he would pay it to the 
association who, in tui-n, would paj^ it to Equitable, the sum of $8.33 
per year for each employee in the union. That came to $25 for an 
employee over a o-j-ear period which was to be payable yearly. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you signed a contract with Equitable Research 
on that l)asis ^ 

Mr. Lehrer. We entered into a written contract to that effect. 

]Mr. Kennedy. Now, at the time that the written contract was 
entered into, was there further discussioji about him preventing any 
jurisdictional picketing of your vSho])S, and whether that should be 
written in? 

Mr. Lehrer. That conversation that 1 believe you are referring 
to occurred duriug the negotiations for that written contract. 

Mr. Kenxedv. Did Johnny Dio or his rei>resentatives, Noah 
Hi-aunstein 

M]-. Lehrer. Are you refeiring to his attorney, l*raunstein ( 

Mr. Kenxedv. Yes, the negotiations were carried out with the 
attorney, Noah Brannstein. 

Mr. Lehrer. The negotiations for the actual written contract weie 
made with Noah Brannstein. 

Mr. Kexnedy. This is the contract between the jissociation and 
E( n i. i t abl e Research ? 

SO.'ir'.O — .57 — i)t. 10 20 



3890 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedt. Tliere are two contracts we are talking about, one 
between 227 and the association, and the other between Equitable 
Research and the association ? 
Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, the contract between the Equitable Research 
and the association, those negotiations were carried out between the 
association and Dio and with Braunstein; is that correct? 
Mr. Lehrer. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. When the question was raised as to putting in the 
contract that Johnny Dio was going to guarantee that there would be 
no jurisdictional picketing, what was the reaction to that? 

Mr. Lehrer. I had asked to have it put in the contract, and that 
was the purpose that we have gone to Equitable in the first place. 
Brnunstein of course said that "No, we can't put that in the contract." 

We discussed it with Mr. Dioguardi, and he said, "You have got 
my word, and I will guarantee to you that you will never have any 
jurisdir+^ional dispute," and in fact we never did have any jurisdic- 
tional dispute. 

Mr. Kennedy. "Benny the Bug" never came back ? 

Mr, Lehrer. He never came back. 

Mr. Kennedy. Speaking of Benny the Bug, were yovi introduced 
to him as "Benny Ross" or were you introduced to him as "Benny the 
Bug"? 

Mr. Lehrer. Fortunately, T was not introduced to him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand his name to be Benny Ross? 

Mr, Lehrer. I had been told his name was "Benny the Bug," and 
I didn't know his name was Benny Ross. 

Mr. Kennedy, But he never reappeared after the contract was 
signed with Equitable Research? 

Mr, Lehrer. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Mickey Finn never reappeared ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct, 

Mr, Kennedy, And, in fact, you have had no i:)roblem with any 
other miion since this contract has been signed with Equitable 
Research ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Chairman, there is a copy of the contract that 
was signed. 

The Chairman. The Chair presents to you what purports to be a 
photostatic copy of the contract about which you have been testifying, 
dated August 18. 1955, between Equitable Research Associates, a cor- 
poration, and the Auto Glass Dealers Association, Inc, 

Will you please examine this document and state if you identify it? 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Lehrer. This is a photostatic copy of the contract dated 
August 18, 1955, between Equitable Research Associates and my client. 

The Chairman. That is the contract you have been talking about. 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

The Chairman. You have been testifying about that? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. It may be made exhibit No. 22. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 22" for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3891 

Mr. Kennedy. You went on and did sign another contract or signed 
a contract with local 227 ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Dio assist at the tail end in that, also? 

Mr. Leiirer. Well, Equitable Research had a representative at the 
next meeting with local 227, with the executive board of my client. 

Mr. Kennedy. The contract was ultimately signed in September? 

Mr. Lehrer. It was. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. And that contract, you will agree, was a sweet- 
heart contract ; is that right ? 

Mr. Lehrer. I will agree it was a very favorable contract — to a 
one-man employer shop that had no need to join any union in the 
first place. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was a very soft contract? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do I understand you, you were unable to nego- 
tiate this contract between the union and your associates until after 
you had engaged the services of Equitable Research? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is not a correct statement. Senator. 

The Chairman. What is correct ? 

Mr. Lehrer. We had practically completed our negotiations and 
were about to sign it wlien the question of jurisdictional disputes 
arose. 

It was at that time that we went to Equitable Research and entered 
into the Equitable Research contract. 

The Chairman. In other words, when you reached a point in your 
negotiations with the union wliere the union could not give you pro- 
tection from raiding unions, and picketing that would have disrupted 
all of your agi-eement, it was suggested that you go to Johmiy Dio's 
group. 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

The Chairman. The Research Associates group and enter into a 
contract with him ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

The Chairman. That is for protection, and that is what it actually 
amounted to, was it not? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

The Chairman". There is no other word that I know to describe it ; 
do you ? 

Mr. Lehrer. No, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. After you had entered into that agree- 
ment for protection with the Dio group, then you concluded later, 
a little later, your negotiations with the union and signed this contract. 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Ives. May I ask a question there? 

I would like to ask the witness what these contracts cost. I think 
I understand what the contract cost between your association and 
the Dio outfit, but what did the contract with 22'7 cost you? 

Mr. Lehrer. I don't follow your question, Senator. 

Senator Ives. Wliat was paid for all of this business ? You had to 
pay something to join the union. 

Mr. Lehrer. Oh, I understand. I believe Mr. Kennedy has a chart 
that I have prepared, where initiation fees by the members into the 
union were listed. 



3892 IMPROPER ACTivrriES in the labor field 

Mr. Reiss had given an accelerated initiation fee by enii)loyees into 
the union and started at $10 a month, and 30 days hiter it went up to 
$15 and so on up the scale. 

I don't remember the exact figures. It is on that chart that Mr. 
Kennedy has. 

Senator Ives. Is the counsel going to present this chart? If you 
are going to present it, I will not ask these questions, because there is 
no point in bringing it out now. 

Mr. Kennedy. 1 s this what you are talking about ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Is tliar the letter from the union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. Lehrer. That explains the situation, Senator. 

Senator Ives. I will not ask the questions, then. 

The Chairman. In the meantime, I want to get this contract in. 
The Chair presents to you wdiat purports to be a photostatic copy 
of a contract dated tlie 1st day of September 1955, by and between 
Local Union 227, UAW-AFL, and the Auto Glass Dealers Associa- 
tion. 

Now, I will ask you to examine this photostatic copy and see if 
you identify it, and state if that is the contract between your asso- 
ciation and the union about which you have been testifying. 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Lehrer. This is a photostatic copy of the contract entered 
into by my client and local 227. 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit 23. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 23" for ref- 
erence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Tlie Chairman. Senator Ives was interrogating you about what 
was actually involved, what the union got out of it, and now I hand 
you what purports to be a photostatic copy of a letter dated Augast 
30, 1055, to Mr. Stanley Lehrer, Brooklyn, N. Y.. from Harry Reiss, 
president of local 227. 

I ask you to examine this photostatic copy and state if vou identifv 
it. 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Lehrer. This is a letter sent by the union whicli reflects the 
agreement with respect to initiation fees by employees into local 227. 

The Chairman. Will you read that letter into the record, sir? 

Mr. Lehrer. This letter is dated August 30, 1955, on the letter- 
head of Local 227, LTnited Auto Workers, New York City: 

At a meeting of the local executive board, the following program of initia- 
tion fees and dues- were resolved with regard to the Auto (ll;».ss Dealers 
Association employees. 

For the first .30 days after the effective date of the master (-(mtract, initia- 
tion fees shall l>e .$(:..3.". For the next 80 days, the initiation fee shall be .$10 
per member. 

After 00 days, fdllowing the effective date of the contract, the initiation fee 
shall lie $'jr> foi- iiii (employer member and .$.">() for an eiiiiiloyce meinher. 

At all times an employer member shall be a R card member of the nninn. 
Work permits in cdnformity with article II of the master contract f probationary 
period) shall be issued to employees in members' shops. This shall <'ost the 
pr<)l)ationr\ry member .S.". jter month and shall be apiilicable tn rh" initiation 
fee of .$."0 upon the completion of the probationary period. All those who are 
self-emi)loyed shall become members of the union on a R card basis. 

In any shop wliere there are 2 or more men. ] man will he reganlesl as the 
employer and not re([uired to join the union. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3893 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the witness a ques- 
tion in line with what he has just read, and in line with what has been 
said about the fees or whatever they are called in connection with 
your association and the Dio outfit. 

What is the combined cost to the members of the association? 

Mr. Lehrer. I do not understand your question. 

Senator Ives. Well, take an example of a member who has two 
employees, which would be fair, I think, and you say that is kind of 
large and one employee be more general. How much would it cost 
where the association is concerned and where the union is concerned ? 
Wliat is the total cost for him ? 

Mr. Lehrer. He had paid in actual fact for the two employees, a 
total of $80 to the association's special labor fund that we had set up. 
Of that $80, $50 of it was earmarked for Equitable Research pursuant 
to the contract with Equitable Research. The other $30 was retained 
by the association, and we still have that money in our association 
treasury so that when the 3-year contract with 227 expires, we had a 
war fund of some kind to see what we could do at that time, that we 
would not be caught short. 

Senator Ives. Wliat is that, the first year ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That was the total payment he made for the entire 
3-year contract, $80. 

Senator Ives. That is for 3 years? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is right. Now, if it was a shop that just had 
employees, where the boss did not have to join, it did not cost anything 
further. If it was a shop with two employees, it did not cost anything 
further. 

A more pointed question would be, How much did it cost the man 
who was self-employed and had no employees? He paid $40 into the 
association, $25 earmarked for Equitable and $15 earmarked for our 
emergency war fund. 

In addition, he paid an initiation fee, this self-employed owner, to 
the union in line with tlie schedule recited in that letter from local 227. 

Senator I\"es. That is the union vou are talking about there at the 
last? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes. 

Senator I^^s. What is the total? Take the employer with two 
employees and I asked you what would be the total. 

Mr. Lehrer. $80 would be the total. 

Senator Ives. That was for your association for 3 years ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

Senator Iv^s. How about the union. 

Mr. Lehrer. The man with two employees, the employees were 
required to pay the initiation fee. 

Senator Ives. What is the total? 

Mr. Lehrer. I don't follow you, Senator. 

Senator I\tes. What do the employees pay ? What is the total cost ? 

Assume yon liave two employees and they belong to the union. 
How much do the employees pay over a r3-year period ? They had the 
initiation fee, presumably ; that is one thing. There were 2 of them 
and they had 2 initiation fees and then they have their annual dues. 

Mr. Lehrer. Senator, whether I am confusing your question, I 
don't know. There are two things involved. There is that amount 



3894 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

that the employer, my client would pay, and there is that amount tiiat 
the union employee, the member of the union itself, would pay. 
Which are you referring to ? 

Senator Ites. I am referring to that now. 

Mr. Leiiker. The union employee ? 

Senator Ives. Yes, how much do they pay ? 

Mr. Lehrer. I believe the dues to the union were $4 per month and 
the initiation fee into the union was in line with that schedule pur- 
suant to that letter that I read before. 

Senator Ives. What would that be? You have 2 employees over 
a 3-year period, and you can figure that out. 

Mr. Lehrer. The employer paid $80, and the employee paid $6.35 
initiation into the union the first 30 days. 

Senator Ives. AVhat has the employer got to do with paying dues 
to the union ? 

Mr. I^EHRER. Nothing. 

Senator Ives. That is what I am trying to find out. I know what 
the employer paid. He paid $80 for 3 years ; is that right ? 

Mr, Lehrer. That is correct. 

Senator Ives. All right, now I am talking about the employees, and 
what do they pay ? 

Mr. Lehrer. $4 a month. 

Senator Ives. That is $48 plus the initiation fee. You have 3 years 
and that is $144. 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes. 

Senator Ives. Plus their initiation fees. 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

Senator Ives. It runs into quite a sizable amount before you get 
through. Wliat were their salaries ? 

Mr. Lehrer. The salaries in the New York area in the auto-glass 
shops range anywhere from $60 a week to approximately $120, It 
may vary, it may be higher in some instances and lower in some 
instances. 

Senator Ives. Did that have any bearing on the dues they paid? 

Mr. Lehrer. None whatsoever. 

Senator Curtis. Would the distinguished Senator from New York 
yield at this point? 

Senator Ives. Surely. 

Senator Curtis. Take the self-employed man who runs a one-man 
shop. He is the owner and with no employees. Wliat, if anything, 
would he have to pay to the union ? 

Mr. Lehrer. The initiation fee into the union, and the $4 a month 
dues for a B card. 

Senator Curtis. Even though he was an employer ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes. That is correct. 

Senator Curtis. So your one-man shop would have to pay to the 
union in 3 years roughly $150 ? 

Mr. Lehrer. $144 plus the initiation fee ; yes. 

Senator Curtis. And he would have to pay how much to the asso- 
ciation ? 

Mr. Lehrer. $40 once, to cover the 3-year period. 

Senator Curtis. Now, he pays that notwithstanding the fact that 
he is not an employee. 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. Senator. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3895 

Senator Curtis. I have been glancing at the National Labor Rela- 
tions Act, and here is the fundamental principle of it : 

Employees shall have the right to self-organization to form, join, or assist 
labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own 
choosing and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective 
bargaining or other mutual aid or protection. 

In other words, it is an employees' act, an act that grants certain 
rights and protections and immunities to employees. Here we have 
under the cloak of that, organizations going about making levies upon 
employers who have no employees. 

1 think if there were not crooks and hoodlums involved we have 
a practice and a situation at law which is not good. 

Senator Ives, were you through ? I shall yield back to you. 

Senator Ives. I was going to ask the witness why he did not take 
this thing to court. 

Mr. Lehrer. I am glad you asked that, Senator. As I stated be- 
fore. Senator, the worst thing this individual owner has to fear is the 
picket line. Under our New York State law, there are certain grounds 
on which we can get an injunction. 

Senator I^^s. You mean under the State labor relations act. I 
understand that and I realize what you are up against. 

Mr. Lehrer. And there is the time element. Senator. If I could 
be permitted to answer the distinguished Senator and yourself on the 
very problem, let us take every assumption in favor of the employer, 
the single entrepreneur, and give him the benefit of every doubt 
timewise. 

Assume that the Ace Glass Shop, a fictitious shop, opens up his store 
on a Monday morning and finds a picket line outside of his door. He 
calls his attorney up, and assume he is lucky enough to get his attor- 
ney in on a Monday morning, and explains the situation. 

By that I mean the attorney may not be engaged elsewhere and 
assume further that the attorney can lay aside everything else he has 
to do that day, and his stenographer can lay aside everything else she 
has got to do that day and prepare the rather long set of papers that 
are required to make an application to the supreme court for a tem- 
porary injunction. 

Giving him the benefit of every doubt, it is now 3 o'clock. The 
employer rushes down to the lawyer's office and signs the affidavit for 
the injmiction, and the attorney then, gi-anting him every assumption, 
and I am saying that repeatedly, runs into the court and finds a judge 
to sign the order to show cause. 

That means in effect, it is an order to the union, not to stop picket- 
ing, because temporai-y restraining orders are very difficult to get, 
but to show cause why an order should not be entered stopping the 
picketing. 

The judge signs this order on Monday and the earliest he could 
possibly make this returnable would be on a Thursday. Then he 
says in his order that a copy of this order be served upon the union 
before Wednesday, 12 noon. We have taken every assumption and 
we have our order on Monday afternoon signed. 

Now, go and find the union official. If it is summer time, they are 
in the country and they are elsewhere and they are at the beach and 
there is no one around the office. You can't serve the stenogi'apher 



3896 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

in the union office and you can't serve the picket. Our law does not 
permit that. 

Senator Ives. Wait a minute. You are talking about the State 
law'^ 

Mr. Lehrer. Ye.s, Senator. We must remember that my client 
here was involved with State and not Federal law in this particular 
instance. 

Senator Ives. I am trying to find out about the State law, because 
I am going to have something to say when you get through. 

Mr. Lehrer. Now, assume we are lucky enough and we serve a 
union official prior to Wednesday. In the meantime, the picket line 
is marcliing up and down. No deliveries have been made to this small 
auto-glass shop who is dependent upon deliveries and retad trade has 
bogged down. 

The union shops that are referring him work won't cross the picket 
line. Yet, the picket line is marching back and forth and it is now 
Wednesday. Thursday morning we appear in court. 

Nine out of 10 times the union attorney comes in and tells the 
judge, "I just received the papers and I have not had a chance to 
prepare a reply. I want an adjournment for a day or so." 

We are lucky and the judge says, "Argue the motion now and 
submit your papers t/omorrow." We argue our motion on Thursday. 
On Friday, if we are luclty, we get a decision. 

I then must prepare an order, have the court sign it and then find 
the union officials once again to serve it on, before picketing can be 
stopped. That is next Monday or Tuesday. 

In the interim, that shop has been picketed for 7 or 8 days. 

There are very, veiy few single-owner shops in New York City, 
that can withstand the financial strain of picketing for that long a 
time in New York City. 

Senator I\^s. May I ask you a question ? 

Have you any idea as to whether the State Labor Relations Act can 
be amended to help you in that respect ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes, Senator. 

Senator Ives. Have you prepared amendments for that purpose? 

Mr. Lehrer. No ; I have not. 

Senator Ives. I was in touch yesterday with the chairman of the 
Joint Legislative Committee on Industrial and Labor Conditions, and 
I urged him to consider amendments to that act to enable the State 
to help you people cope with this kind of a situation. Of course, I 
do not know what their program is for the present year, and they may 
not be able to get to it, and I hope they are. 

But in the meantime, I would suggest that you yourself prepare 
amendments and get ready to be heard on the slibject about which you 
are talking. 

Mr. Lehrer. Would this committee care to hear a recommendation 
I have on that line ? 

Senator Ives. This committee has nothing to do with it. You are 
talking about a State Labor Relations Act which we have nothing to 
do with at all. I am talking about what you can do in the State of 
New York. 

Mr. Lehrer. I appreciate your suggestion. 

Senator Ives. I am trying to give you a helpful suggestion. I think 
that is where your remedy lies. 



IMPROPER ACTrV'ITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3897 

Mr. Lehrer. I would like the opportunity to answer Senator Cur- 
tis' question. 

Senator Curtis. I wish to proceed further when Senator Ives is 
through. 

Mr. Lehrer. I wanted to answer your remarks a few moments ago. 

I don't know whether you were directing your excerpts from the 
National Labor Relations Act at my client or at the union. I am 
inclined to think that perhaps you were a little severe with the client. 

Senator Curtis. Oh, no. 

Mr. Lehrer. We had no choice in the matter, Senator. 

Senator Curtis. I understand that. I merely wish the record to 
show how far a minority in the labor movement has gone from the 
original concept of the law that gives employees the right to meet 
and organize to better themselves. 

Mr. Lehrer. I just hope you weren't implying that my client here 
was doing it. We were talking about these figures. That is not the 
fact. 

Senator Curtis. I was talking about the responsibility of Congress 
for permitting such things to happen. 

I w^ant to ask you a question, and I am going to confine these ques- 
tions to that 60 percent of your members that you represent who con- 
stitute self-employed people without employees. That was correct, 
was it, about 60 percent ? 

Mr. Lehrer. I could say so, sir. 

Senator Curtis. What would happen if one of those self-employed 
men with no employees said, "I am going to resist the union and I am 
going to resist all of the efforts of my associate self-employed people 
to pacify tliem in any way" ? 

What would happen to him ? 

Mr. Lehrer. I think that I outlined that to you a few moments 
ago. 

Senator Curtis. But briefly, just what would happen to him? 

Mr. Lehrer. I would guess he would be out of business within a 
short period of time. 

Senator Curtis. Would anything else happen to him? Suppose 
he happens to be an individual who financially could stand it for a 
little while. What else would happen to him ? 

jSIr. Lehrer. I was directing my remarks strictly from the financial 
point of view in what he would lose in terms of immediate money, 
from business loss, and from wholesale accounts that he would lose 
and perhaps take years to win back. Our field is very highly competi- 
tive in New York City. 

Senator Curtis. Well, we will not go into the question of whether 
or not he would suffer threats 

Mr. Lehrer. Is that what you are driving at? T couldn't possibly 
answer that question, and I don't know. 

Senator Curtis. But he would be out of business. 

Mr. Lehrer. I would think so, sir. 

Senator Curits. So here we have people using an act written for 
employees, making a levy on someone that is not an employee and has 
no employees, saying, "You go out of business or you deal with us." 

That is what it amounts to, does it not ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes. 



3898 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Curtis. Now, do you think that general practice lias any 
effect upon the trend toward monopoly, and the driving out of 
business of small-business men? I am not confining my question to 
the auto glass people. 

Mr, Lehrer. I couldn't possibly render an opinion, a curbstone 
opinion so fast, Senator, on a subject of that nature. 

Senator Curtis. Most of these people are small-business people. 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes, Senator. 

Senator Curtis. It does add to their burdens and worries and 
problems in maintaining themselves as small business. 

Mr. Lehrer. Very much so. 

Senator Curtis. And it adds costs at a time when they have many 
lawful requirements to meet in taxes, permits, licenses, rents, and 
increasing costs, and so on ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes ; that is correct. Senator. 

Senator Curtis. I do not expect you to provide an answer for this 
committee, but I do want to raise for the record this proposition: 
That is the legal situation which we permit here not only drives 
small-business men out of business, but it prohibits a lot of other 
people from becoming owners and operators. It is destroying one of 
the things that makes our economy go, the desire of people who 
work to go into business for themselves, and thus they make oppor- 
tunities for other people coming along and seeking jobs. 

I want to say you have been a good witness here. Sometimes it is 
said that a lawyer is a poor witness. You have provided good evi- 
dence to the contrary. 

(At this point. Senator Mundt entered the hearing room.) 

The Chairman. I would like to have you follow me for just a mo- 
ment. I think the record is clear but let us take the one man, the self- 
employed person, and find out what he had to pay under the two 
contracts. 

First, he paid $40 to your association. 

Mr. Lehrer. That is right. That is correct. 

The Chairman. Fifteen dollars of that, however, was set aside for 
a war chest, or whatever you term it. 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

The Chairman. But he paid that, and he had to pay that because 
of these conditions, that $15. 

Mr. Lehrer. I am sorry, I couldn't hear the last part of your 
question. 

The Chairman. He had to pay $15, although it did not go to these 
people. 

Mr. Lehrer. We still have that money in a trust fund. 

The Chairman. But he had to pay it. That is the only reason for 
paying it into the association — for protection. 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

The Chairman. So he pays first the $40 to the association. Next 
he has to pay $6.35 if he comes in within the first 30 days. 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

The Chairman. Tliat is an initiation fee to the union. That makes 
$46.35 initially. 

Then for 3 years he pays $48 a year dues, or $144. 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3899 

The Chairman. That makes a total of $190.35, the very minimum 
that he has to pay for the 3-year protection. 

Mr. Lehrer. Providing of course he came within that first 3-month 
period. 

The Chairman. I am talking about that. 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes. 

The Chairman. Now, the others have to pay more ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. But that is the minimum under the contract that 
anyone got by with, under the two contracts ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is right. 

The Chairman. I think the record is clear. 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Lehrer, do you represent any other em- 
ployer associations? 

Mr. Lehrer. Do I represent any other employer associations ? 

Senator Goldwater. Yes. 

Mr. Lehrer. I do, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Which one. 

Mr. Lehrer. I represent a National Auto & Plate Glass Dealers 
Associaiton, having nothing to do with the New York association, 
and with no union affiliations whatsoever. 

Senator Goldwater. How about New York City itself; do you 
represent any others ? 

Mr. Lehrer. No, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Have you ever had to, in connection with your 
work with that national organization, enter into any negotiations 
with Johnny Dio ? 

Mr. Lehrer. No, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Now, Mr. Lehrer, when you were before the 
grand jury, you identified Harry Reiss as the person who recommended 
that you see Johnny Dio, and the Equitable Eesearch Corp.? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Now immediately after you received the sub- 
pena to appear before the New York County grand jury, did you meet 
with Johnny Dio in a restaurant? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. In New York City ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes, sir; I did, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Did he suggest at that time any direction that 
your testimony might take ? 

Mr. Lehrer. No. Tliere was a very brief conversation with re- 
spect to something involved in my testimony to the effect that when 
I met him that day on some matter concerning this contract, he asked 
me, or said to me,*"You don't recall who recommended me," or some- 
thing to that effect. I just initially said, "I don't remember," and 
that dropped the conversation. 

Senator Goldwater. But you subsequently definitely identified 
Eeiss as the man who sent you there? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Now, at any time during your contacts with 
Johnny Dio were you threatened ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Never, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Either by him or by others? 



3900 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN; THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Lehrer. Never, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. In view of the fact that you have given some 
rather strong testimony before the grand jury and before this com- 
mittee, strong I would say against the activities of Mr, Dio, do you 
feel any danger today in testifying as you have ? 

Mr. Lehrer. I do not, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. No threats have been made against you? 

Mr. Lehrer. No, sir. The problem I have presented here, Senator, 
is not only confined to Equitable Research, but it is confined through- 
out this country to the small-business man. I wanted the opportunity 
to answer the Senator before, that I feel that certain innuendos have 
arisen from these committee hearings where small-business men are 
beginning to appear that all they seem to do is enter into collusive 
contracts with unions, which is not the fact. For every union con- 
tract entered into by a small-business man that you may term collu- 
sive, there are many many legitimate contracts. I feel that the small- 
business men should be protected to that sense, and should not be 
brought to his knees by the threat of picketing, and the threat that 
he may be entering into a collusive contract. 

Senator Goldwater. Now, you have outlined a situation that exists 
in New York, and we know it exists in other communities around the 
country, and as you suggested it exists to a somewhat limited extent. 

But here just 2 or 3 days ago, or possibly the last part of last week, 
a statement was made by one of the teamster heads, a man with am- 
bition, to the effect he was going to try to bring all transportation in 
this country under the domination of his union. 

Now, it is not very difficult for us to understand what would happen 
if that man or any one man in this country held in his hands the 
transportation of the United States. 

What you have described as happening in New York from rackets, 
and picketing of one-man shops, could happen across the length and 
breadth of this land. To me it is one of the most dangerous state- 
ments that has been made by a union leader, a union leader either 
responsible or irresponsible, because there isn't a small business in 
America nor many large ones that today with the margin of profits 
being what they are, and with taxes being what they are, could survive 
a teamster effort to deny him either transportation into his shop or 
from his shop. 

I think what you have pointed up, and very clearly pointed up, 
as existing in New York, can serve as a warning to the people of this 
country of what will happen when one man — I don't care whether 
his name is Jimmy Hoffa or Walter Reuther, or Joe Smith — has in his 
hands or acquires the power to say to the business people of this coun- 
try and to the public of this countrj^ "You cannot move goods in and 
out of your sho]) and you cannot even travel to and from the cities 
where you want to travel." 

I take this opportunity to say what I said because you are the first 
one to my mind to give us a graphic example of how picketing and 
the pressure behind it works, and the answer to Senator Curtis' ques- 
tion, how it is almost impossible to obtain relief in time under our laws 
today. 

I think that there was a time when a businessman could last a month, 
or 2, or 6 months, but he can't do it today with the profits being what, 
they are. 



IMPROPER ACTrvrriES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3901 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. I hope the people of this country take heed, 
because the handwriting is on the wall, and the hand is moving the 
chalk even further. I hope they will wake up to the evidence which 
is being presented before this committee daily, that power is the evil 
that confronts the future of the unions of this country. 

I liope they take heed, too, and do not allow this power to accrue in 
one man's hands. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. A bit ago I quoted from the National Labor Rela- 
tions Act concerning the basic rights of individual employees. 

This is not a question, Mr. Witness. 

I merely also want to read into the record at this point from section 
8(b) (4) (A). It provides: 

It shall be an unfair labor practice for a labor organisation or its agent 

and then coming down to that section 

forcing or requiring any employer or self-employed person to join any labor or 
employee organization. 

The whole activity engaged in by these alleged union agents was 
basically unlawful. 

(At this point. Senator McClellan withdi-ew from the liearing 
room. ) 

Senator Ives. Go ahead, Mr. Counsel. 

Mr. Kennedy. On the payments to P^quitable Research, I would 
like to get that into the record, Mr. Lehrer. On October 19, 1955, you 
sent a check to Mr. Noah Braunstein ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes, that is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then on December 7, 1955, and on January 19, 
195H. There were three cliecks, the first one on October 19, 1955, for 
$499.80, the second oue on December 7, 1955, for $199.92, and the third 
one on January 19, 1956, for $108.29. 

Senator Ives. I want to hand the witness photostatic copies of the 
three checks referred to by the counsel, and letters accompanying them, 
which indicate what they are. I would like to have you identify 
them, if you will, please. 

(Document handed to witness.) 

Mr. Kennedy. That makes a total of $808.01. 

Mr. Lehrer. Do you just want me to identify them as being the 
checks ? 

Senator Ives. That is right. 

Mr. Lehrer. They are the payments made by my client pursuant to 
the Equitable contract to Equitable Research Association Corp. 

Senator Ives. That applies to all three '? 

Mr. Lehrer. I am sorry, Senator? 

Senator Ives. That applies to all three })ayments? 

Mr. Lehri5r. All three payments; yes. 

Senator I^•ES. Those will be exhibit 24 A, B, and C. 

(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibit 24 A, B, and C" 
for reference and will be found in the appendix on pp. H985-8990.) 

Mr. Kennedy. That was for the first year of a H-year contract? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 



3902 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. What were the arrangements? When the contract 
was signed, were all of the shops brought in, all of the glass shops in 
on this contract ? 

Mr. Lehrer. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. There were some that were not signed ? 

Mr, Lehrer. I would say about one-third of the membership of the 
client ultimately came into the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Reiss want all of the shops in the union ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Apparently he must have. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, just answer the question. Did he want all the 
shops ? 

Mr. Lehrer. I don't follow your question. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he ask you for a list of all the shops ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes. He asked us for a list and we refused him. 

Mr. Kennedy. You refused to turn over the list ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. So it was up to him to find the other shops ; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Under the contract arrangements with Dio, his pay- 
ment or his fee would depend on how many people local 227 signed 
up ; is that right ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. If they signed up more, if they got the rest of the 
shops, his fee would get that much greater ; is that right ? 

Mr. Lehrer. It was a contingent arrangement, that is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. This $808 was for the first year ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any payment made in the second year ? 

Mr. Lehrer. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what reason ? 

Mr. Lehrer. The second payment became due somewhere around 
September of 1956. At that time, Mr. Dioguardi was under indict- 
ment, under several indictments in New York, and the client voted to 
disaffirm the contract and make no further payments. 

Mr. Kennedy. And so no payments have been made ? 

Mr. Lehrer. And no payments have been made. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you urge the membership, or did the association 
urge the membership, to join the union back in 1955 ? 

Mr. Lehrer. They did not. 

Senator Curtis. What was that last question, Mr. Counsel ? 

Mr. Kennedy. I tried to find out whether the association urged its 
membership to sign up with the union, gettting in with the union at 
that time. 

You say they did not ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Well, we had sent the communication out regarding 
the contract and what was involved. Otlier than that, there was no 
urging that I know of by any member of tlie client to join the union. 

Senator Curtis. I want to ask a question in that connection. Inso- 
far as you know, did the union ever seek out the employees and advise 
them of their desire to organize and the benefits that might come to 
them? 

(At this point Senator McClellan entered the hearing room.) 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3903 

Mr. Lehrer. There were several shops that I had been told about 
that the union had gone in and signed the employees, yes. There 
were several shops. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Lehrer, I have in my hand what purports to be 
a notice of the Auto Dealers Association, Inc., dated September 6, 
1955, and headed "Please read carefully. Indifference will cost you 
money" and again '"Please read carefully," signed by Frank Lurrey, 
president, Stanley Lehrer, counsel, and Morris S. Gorman, executive 
secretary. 

I would like to hand you this copy and see if you can identif}^ it. 

(Document handed to witness.) 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes, I recall this letter. Senator. 

Senator Ives. That would indicate, would it not, that your associa- 
tion rather urged the members to join? 

Mr. Lehrer. No, Senator, for this reason. We have a meeting of 
our association, as in any organization, and attendance is a problem. 
It is up to the officials of the association to do what they can to in- 
crease attendance. We had a provision in the contract with 227 that 
called for lower initiation fee if they joined within 30 days. The 
executive board felt that this must be pointedly called to the attention 
of many members who never come to meetings and who are not ap- 
prised of what is going on. If it weren't done that way, then 3 or 4 
months later Reiss would walk into their shops and demand a $50 
initiation fee, wlien, had they been informed as this letter, which you 
just showed me, they could have paid $6.35. 

This is the extent that I can recall of any communication going out 
to the client with respect to the very problem you are now raising. 

Senator Ives. That will be exhibit No. 25. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could I read it into the record ? 

Senator Ives. Yes. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit 25," and follows.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Dated September 6, 1955. 

Please Read Carefully 

Indifference Will Cost You Money 

Please Read Carefully 

At the regular body meeting of September 1, your association ratified and ap- 
proved a master union contract with local 227, UAW-AFL. This contract be- 
came operative as of Septemlier 1, 1955, and is now available to all members of 
the association in good standing. 

In order to take advantage of the most favorable terms contained in this 
master agreement, you are required to come within its provisions no later tlian 
September 30. This is of utmost importance as you can save considerable money 
by prompt action. 

Accordingly, please phone the association office as soon as possible, and make 
the necessary arrangements. Evening appointments will be made if required. 
To the many shops who have already com)ilied, be advised that any further 
inquiries are also to be directed to the association office. 
Very truly yours, 

Frank Lurrey, President. 
Stanley Lehrer, Counsel. 
Morris S. Gorman, Executive Secretary. 

That is on the stationery of the Auto Glass Dealers Association, 
Inc. 

So there was some urging to come in within the provisions of the 
contract ? 



3904 IMPROPER ACTIVrriDS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr, Ijehrer. As I stated before, I don't call it an urging. I just 
call that a method of communicating with the type of membership that 
generally takes no notice of what is in a meeting announcement. 

Senator Ives. It occurs to me, Mr. Counsel, that that notice can be 
taken either way. 

Mr. Kennedy. Under the provisions of the contract, it provided 
what we have described as a soft contract, and provided for a 48-hour 
week, did it not? 

Mr. Leiirer. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And 6 holidays for the year? 

Mr. Lehrer. I recall that being correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And there wouldn't be any vacation until after the 
individual had been employed for a year, and then there would be 
1 week's vacation ? 

Mr. Lehrer. If that is what the contract has. I believe you are 
stating it correctly. 

Mr. Kennedy. And there were also no minimum wage provisions? 

Mr. Lehrer. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And there were also no welfare fund provisions ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any advantage for the employee? I un- 
derstand they are 1-man shops or a lot of them are l-maii shops, but 
was there any advantage for the employee in this contract? 

Mr. Lehrer. Well, the only benefit the employee got from tlie con- 
tract was a $2 a week raise the first year, a $2 a week raise the second 
year, and a $2 a week raise the third year. 

Mr. Kennedy. Beyond that there was really no advantage? 

Mr. Lehrer. None, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And those are the raises that would ordinarily be 
granted by the association anyway ? 

Mr. Lehrer. I couldn't possibly answer whether or not an employer 
would give an employee a raise. 

Mr. Kennedy. Ordinarily, from your experience, wouldn't that be 
the raise that would be normal ? 

Mr. Lehrer. The labor problem with respect to the auto-glass shops 
in New York City is such that very few employees stay too long. 
They go into business for themselves. 

Mr. Kennedy. So that wouldn't be any advantage. So the associa- 
tion iuem]:)ers were paying $190 over a o-year period almost as a trib- 
ute or almost as an extortion brouglit about by local 227 and l)v the 
Equitable Research of Johnny Dio ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Lettrer. If you are asking me to term it "extortion,'' T think 
you are putting it a little unfairly to me. 

Mr. Kennedy. How would you describe this payment of $190 over 
a 8-year |)eriod when there was no advantage at all for the employees, 
and that at least .^O percent of those who signed up were 1-nian shoj^s? 

Mr. Lehrer. In the most favorable term tliat I can })ut it for my 
client, I would say it was the penalty for lack of proper legislation to 
avoid this very situation. 

Mr. Kennedy. It is a penalty for your client ? 

Mr. Lehrer. I say putting it in the most favora})le lifi:ht to the 
client, I say that tliis was a penalty for the lack of proper legislation 
to protect and tivoid a situation such as this. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3905 

The Chaikman. Do you feel that legislation is needed ? 

Mr. Lehrer. I do, sir. 

The Chairman. Have you any recommendations you would care 
to submit ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Senator Ives has already asked me that. 

The Chairman. That pertains to the New York law ? 

Mr, Lehrer. That is correct. 

The Chairman. I am speaking of the Federal statutes. 

Mr. Lehrer. Only insofar — 1 don't know how many of my clients 
would be engaged in interstate commerce that would come under 
Federal law. 

The Chairman. You have given no thought to that ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Well, the same thought would go so far as a State act 
is concerned as to a Federal act. I feel that the power of picketing 
has been abused insofar as the small-business man is concerned. I 
feel rather than put the burden of proof on a small-business employer 
as to why the picketing should be stopped, I believe a union should 
make application to a proper administrative tribunal for a permit to 
do picketing on notice to the employer, so that they can argue it out 
before picketing starts and before irreparable damage occurs, whether 
it is on a State, National, or Federal level being immaterial at the 
present moment. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Mr. Kennedy. What it got doAvn to in fact Avas the $190 was being 
paid over the 3-year period to ))revent other unions from coming in 
and causing a jurisdictional problem? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is not so, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. AVhat was it? 

Mr. Lehrer. Of the $190, $141 was what we discussed before, the 
actual payment of $4 a month dues to local 227. 

Mr. Kennedy. There was no advantage in that. 

Mr. Lehrer. The jurisdictional question you are referring to re- 
quired the payment of $2.5 to Equitable Research. 

Mr. Kennedy. We discussed the fact that out of the $111, there was 
no advantage to anyone for that. So that had to be paid for the 
same reason that the payment Avas made to Equitable Eesearch. 

Mr. Lehrer. $111 was not ])aid to Equitable Research. 

Mr. Kennedy. $114 was paid to 227, is that correct? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. There was no advantage to anyone, to any employee, 
for the payment to 227, is that correct ? 

Mr. Lehrer. There was no advantage for any employer to pay to 
227. 

Mr. Kennedy. There was also no advantage to any employee be- 
cause of the terms of the contract. There was no advantage for 
anyone? 

Mr. Lehrer. They got a $6 raise over the o-year period. Whether 
you want to term it an advantage or not, I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have already said that the employees wouldn't 
stay there that long, Mr. Lehrer, and it would probabl}^ be that they 
would give that kind of a raise anyway. So it really wasn't any advan- 
tage for the employee, and certainly no advantage for the employer. 

89330— 5,7— pt. 10 21 



3906 IMPROPER ACnVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The money was being paid to 227 and to Equitable Research to 
prevent other unions from coming in and causing difficulty. 

Mr. Lehrer. I repeat, of that money only $25 can be applied to the 
jurisdictional question. If we had wanted to sign the contract with 
local 227, there wouldn't be the need for that additional $25 or $40 
payment for jurisdiction. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would they have signed the contract with local 227 
if there couldn't have been this guaranty from Equitable Research that 
there would be no jurisdictional picketing? 

Mr. Lehrer. Mr. Kennedy, I cannot answer a hypotlietical question. 

Mr. Kennedy. It is not hypothetical, because you had a meeting on 
it, JSIr. lehrer, in which you discussed this, and were about to sign 
with Harry Reiss, and the membership raised the question as to 
whether he could guarantee there would be no jurisdictional problem. 

Mr. Lehrer. You will recall I told you that the negotiations had 
broken down with 227 on the jurisdictional question. The jurisdic- 
tional question having been resolved, we then signed with 227. I do 
not know what would have happened had the jurisdictional question 
not been resolved. 

Mr. Kennedy. But at least the negotiations broke down until that 
guaranty was given by Johnny Dioguardi ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct. 

The Chapman. I have just one question. Counsel was interro- 
gating you about benefits, if any, under this contract for the employee. 
You pointed out that all j^ou could say is that they got a $6-a-week 
raise over a 3-year period. 

Mr. Lehrer. And it might conceivably bring some vacation bene- 
fits that he might not have had. I don't know, truthfully, though. 

The Chairman. We can agree on this, can we not, that any benefits 
to the employee were quite negligible? 

Mr. Lehrer. I will agree to that. Senator. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were there efforts made by the union during the 
period of 1956, to lower the workweek from a 48-hour workweek to 
a 40-hour workweek ? 

Mr. Lehrer. In 1956 ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. Lehrer. I believe, and I am very vague in recollection now, 
that we had received a communication from the union that they 
wanted to renegotiate the contract with respect to the workweek. I 
am a little vague on this. I believe that was the communication we 
had. A telephone call was made to Equitable Research and that was 
the last we ever heard of that. 

Mr, Kennedy. Did you talk to Johnny Dioguardi on that ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Whether I spoke to Mr. Braunstein or Mr. Dioguardi, 
I do not remember. 

Mr. Kennedy. But on the initial request to enter into iiegotiations 
to lower the workweek from 48 hours to 40 hours, you then made a 
call to Equitable Research and there was no more heard from Harry 
Reiss or anyone from 227 on that? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is right. The contract was a 3-year contract and 
did not call for any renegotiations of any type during the term of 
the contract. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3907 

The Chairman. I hand you a photostatic copy of what apparently 
is a carbon copy of a letter, together with some attachments. I ask 
you to examine them and state if you identify them. 

( Document handed to witness. ) 

The Chairman. Would you state what it is, please? 

Mr. Lehrer. This letter was mailed by me on behalf of the client 
after a meeting of the executive board. The meeting had been called 
and one of the items of business was a letter we had received from the 
union to the effect that they wanted to renegotiate the contract. Do 
you have that letter ? 

The Chairman. I believe I have it. I present to you another 
photostatic copy of an original letter to you, or to your association 
that you represent, and I ask you to examine it and state if you 
identify it. 

(Document handed to witness.) 

The Chairman. If you will identify that, state what it is. 

Mr. Lerher. This is a letter dated May 11, 1956, from the union to 
the association. 

Do you want me to read this letter ? 

The Chairman. That letter may be made exhibit 26, the one you 
are now testifying about. 

Go ahead. 

Mr. Lehrer. This letter, in effect — well, it is a letter addressed to 
the association. 

Please be advised that pursuant to the instructions of our members who 
are employees of your members, we desire to enter into further negotiations 
with you with particuilar respect to the question of reducing the hours of work 
to 40 hours per week. We should appreciate your arranging for such nego- 
tiations with us for a date prior to June 1, 1956. 

The Chairman. By whom is that letter signed? 

Mr. Lehrer. The letter has been signed Local 227, by Arthur Santa 
Maria, secretary-treasurer. 

The Chairman. That is made exhibit 26. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit 26," for reference 
and will be found in the appendix on p. 3991.) 

The Chairman. Now your reply thereto that you testified about a 
moment ago. 

Mr. Lehrer. The reply to that was dated May 22, 1956. 

Local 227, UAW. 

Gentlemen, in reply to your letter of May 11, please be advised that I have 
been instructed by my client, the Auto Dealers Association, to inform you 
that they will not consider entering into any negotiations at the present time 
with regard to reducing the workweek to 40 hours. 

That is signed by myself. 

The Chairman. That letter may be made exhibit 27. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit 27," for refer- 
ence and will be found in the appendix on p. 3992.) 

The Chairman. In the meantime, what had transpired after you 
received the letter that has been made exhibit No. 26 ? 

Mr. Lehrer. A meeting 

The Chairman. That is, in between the time that you replied. 

Mr. Lehrer, A meeting was held by the executive board of my 
client, at which time that May 11 letter from the union to the client 
was read, and they decided that they were not going to renegotiate, 



3908 IMPROPER ACTIVrriEiS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

and instructed me to put in on record that we will not renegotiate. 
Simultaneously with my mailing of the letter to go on record that we 
were not going to renegotiate, I placed a call on behalf of the client to 
either Mr. Braunstein or Mr. Dioguardi informing him of the 
situation, and that is the last we heard of it. 

The Chairman. After you got your message to Dioguardi, you 
never lieard any more of it 'i 

Mr. Lehrer. No ; we never did. 

The Chairman. That was part of the protection you were paying 
for? 

Mr. Lehrer. The contract called for the labor-relations consultant 
between the union and the association. I read it as such and I used 
that provision in that Equitable contract as such. 

The Chairman. You used it as a protection ? 

Mr. Lehrer. That is correct, sir. 

The Chairman. Senator Gokhvater ? 

Senator Goldwater, Mr. Lehrer, before the association signed the 
agreement with 227, wliat other locals had been trying to organize 
this particular industry ? 

Mr. Lehrer. The other locals were local No. 5, local 2;^0, local 259, 
and 1 or 2 others. 

Senator Goldwater. 210, 211? 

Mr. Lehrer. I couldn't say definitely yes or no, Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. Why did the negotiations with those other 
locals fail? 

Mr. Lehkek. There were no negotiations with the other locals. 
After 227 started picketing some of the shops, some shops they would 
picket, and some shops their organizer would just stop in and talk to 
the people involved and leave with no picketing. Thereafter, some 
of these other locals that we have mentioned here would come around 
with the same story. They actually never did any picketing that I 
know of personally, or never contacted anybodj^ officially in the asso- 
ciation to enter into any negotiations. 

Senator Goldwater. "When you went to this research organization 
of Mr. Dio's, would it not have been possible to have signed up with 
one of these other locals and avoided the necessity of doing business 
with that firm? 

Mr. Lehrer. We would have that fear, Senator, that if we signed 
with local X that locals A, B, C, and I), would come along and say 
"We were here first. Why did you sign up with local X when we 
were here first?" 

Senator Goldwater. Well, they were not actually there first; were 
they ? 

Mr. Lehrer. Tliat was the very crux of the ]:)roblem. They were 
not actualh^ there first, and that was why local 227 was the local with 
whom Ave contracted. 

Senator Goldwater. But these other locals did attempt, and they 
made some etl'orts to organize the industry ^ 

Mr. Lehrer. Yes; they did. 

Senator (toldwater. And do you feel that if you had signed witli 
any one of those in order to keep from doing business Avith Mr. Dio, 
that you would still be in trouble ? Is that it ? 

Mr. Lehrer. I felt that Avay at that time, yes. Senator. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3909 

Senator Goldwater. Just one moment, Mr. Chairman. 

What would the central council have said about an outside organ- 
ization like Mr. Dio's research association moving into the field of a 
union if you had already signed with, say, local 5, which just comes 
to my sight ? 

Mr. Leiirer. Not only don't I know much about the central council, 
I couldn't possibly answer what they would say, nor do I know any 
remedy that was afforded to us through that. 

Senator Goedwater. Are there any other examples that come to your 
mind that are similar to this, where the fear of Mr. Dio's organization 
prevented an association from signing with some other local ? 

Mr. Leiirer. I know of no other examples, Senator. 

Senator Goldwai-er. This is the only one. 

If you had to do it over again, would you do it the way you did it 
or M'ould you go back to one of the other locals ? 

Mr. Lehrer. It wasn't a question of going back to the other locals ; 
227 had most of the shops in tlie sense that they had been picketing 
most of them. One of the feelings that I didn't mention before that 
we had at the time was that if we were going to sign with a union, 
we would prefer to have one industrywide. We were looking ahead 
3 years lience, that if we had to put up a fight, we would only be fight- 
ing 1 union and not 6 or 7. If I had it to do all over again, I don't 
know. 

Senator Goldwater. Would it not have been just as easy to have 
fought, say, 259? 

Mr. Leiirer, We wanted to fight. We wanted to fight very badly. 
We held a special meeting and everybody got up and made pretty 
speeches about fighting. But fighting lasted 3 or 4 days when they 
were picketed, and that ended the fighting. 

Senator Goldwater. Tliat is all I have, Mr. Chairman. 

The Ciiair3l\n. Are there any further questions? 

If not, thank you verj^ much, jNIr. Lehrer. 

Mr. Louis Boyar. 

(Members present at this point: Senators McClellan, Ives, Gold- 
water, Mundt, and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. Will you be sworn, please ? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. BoYAR. I do. 

(At this point. Senator Curtis withdrew from the hearing room.) 

TESTIMONY OF LOUIS BOYAR 

The Chairman. Mr, Boyar, will you state your name, your place 
of residence, and your business or occupation, please, sir ? 

Mr. BoYAR. My name is Louis Boyar. I live at 5514 Kings High- 
way, Brooklyn. 

The CiTAiRJMAN. Would you pull the microphone closer to you, 
please ? 

Mr. BoYAR. I have an auto glass shop on the East New York section, 
in Brooklyn. 

The Chairman. How long have you been in that business? 

Mr. BoYAR. About 17 years. 



3910 IMPROPER ACnVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The CHAiRMAisr, Seventeen years ? 

Mr. BoYAR. Yes. 

The Chairman. Have you talked to members of the staff of the 
committee and know generally the line of interrogation to expect ? 

Mr. BoYAR. About what ? 

The Chairman. Have you talked to members of the staff about 
your testimony ? 

Mr. BoYAR, Yes, I did. 

The Chairman. Have you elected to waive counsel? You do not 
care to have counsel present to advise you while you testify ? 

Mr. BoYAR. I don't really know. I guess I don't need a counsel. 

The Chairman. You guess you do not need counsel? 

Mr. BoYAR. Yes. 

The Chairman. If at any time you think you do, advise the Chair. 

Mr. Counsel, proceed. 

Mr. IVENNEDY. I just havc a few questions of Mr. Boyar, Mr. 
Chairman. 

You run and own a glass shop in New York City; is that right? 

Mr. BoYAR. Correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. During 1955, did pickets come to your shop ? 

Mr. BoYAR. They did. 

The Chairman. Speak up, please. 

Mr. BoYAR. They did. 

(At this point, Senator Goldwater withdrew from the hearing 
room. ) 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the first thing you heard from the pickets ? 
Who did you first talk to ? 

Mr. BoYAR. I didn't speak to anybody at the time. They just came 
in and they picketed me. 

Mr. Kennedy. They picketed you ? 

Mr. BoYAR. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had they discussed the matter with your employees 
prior to that time ? 

Mr. BoYAR. No ; they didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat did you do ? What steps did you take ? 

Mr. Boyar. There was nothing I could do. I asked them why they 
were picketing. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wlio did you ask ? 

Mr. BoYAR. I think it was Reiss, at the time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Harry Reiss ? 

Mr. BoYAR. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. "\^niat did he say ? 

Mr. BoYAR. He said, "We want to unionize your shop." 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you say ? 

Mr. BoYAR. I said, "I guess you will have to ask the men whether 
they want to unionize." 

Senator Mundt. Do I understand that before they came up to you 
at all you looked out your window and saw pickets ? 

Mr. BoYAR. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. And no one discussed membership at all, with 
either you or your employees ? 

Mr. BoYAR. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Did the pickets carry signs ? 

Mr. BoYAR. They did. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3911 

Senator Mundt. Before they had inquired whether you would join 
the union ? 

Mr. BoYAR, That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You suggested to Harry Reiss that he see the 
employees ? 

Mr. BoYAR. That is right ; after hours. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he talk to the employees? 

Mr. BoYAR. He did. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did they decide? 

Mr. BoYAR. Well, they were undecided. The first day they didn't 
know what to do. 

Mr. Kennedy. But they didn't decide to join the union? 

Mr. BoYAR. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. They did not decide? 

Mr. BoYAR. No ; they didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. The following day, were there pickets outside? 

Mr. BoYAR. Yes ; there were. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was this hampering your business ? 

Mr. BoYAR. It certainly was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they continue all that day ? 

Mr. BoYAR. They did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And did the members of your plant, your employees, 
decide to join the union then ? 

Mr. BoYAR. No; they didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. And did the picketing continue the following day? 

Mr. BoYAR. They did. 

Mr. Kennedy. During this period of time, did you have any con- 
versation with anyone regarding what steps could be taken ? 

Mr. BoYAR. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate that to the committee? 

Mr. BoYAR. Someone stopped off and dropped a card off and asked 
me to get ahold of someone, or that they will get in touch with me, 
in reference to the pickets, to get the pickets off the 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Someone stopped off and dropped a card? 

Mr. BoYAR. Off at my place. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who is someone? 

Mr. BoYAR. I don't know. I remember the first name only. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the first name ? 

Mr. BoYAR. Milton or Milty. 

Mr. Kennedy. Milty came by and dropped the card off? 

Mr. BoYAR. That is right, and asked if I would be interested in 
taking the pickets off. I said, "I certainly would." I said, "What 
am I supposed to do?" He said, "I will have somebody call you." 

I got a call that afternoon, and they told us to meet them some- 
where on the East Side. I spoke to my counselor from the associa- 
tion, and he was against meeting this fellow to talk about the meet- 
ing. He came down to the East Side 

(At this point. Senator Ives withdrew from the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. You decided to go anyway, with your counsel ? 

Mr. BoYAR. I finally had my counsel come along. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is Mr. Lehrer? 

Mr. BoYAR. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know who you were going to meet ? 

Mr. BoYAR. No ; I didn't. 



3912 IMPROPER ACTIVITIEIS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. You just had a card from somebody you didn't know 
who had a card and wlio said if you want to get the pickets off, come 
down and meet tliis fellow you don't know, on the east side ? 

Mr. BoYAR. That is right. I was desperate at the time, because it 
was the third day at my shop, and it really hurt m}^ business. I 
asked this fellow what he coulcl do, when we did meet him. I sug- 
gested raising $5,000 if the members of the association would be willing 
to go along witli it, if it could be straightened out. He said 

Mr. Kennedy. You said, "If you could get the membership to go 
along, that you could raise $5,000, if he could get the pickets off"? 

Mr. BoYAR. If the members would go along. He said he would 
let me know. 

Mr. Kennedy. "\'^niat else did he say? Did he say he would have 
to see or talk to anyone? 

Mr. BoYAR. Yes; he said he had to speak to "J. D." 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he give his first name ? 

Mr. BoYAR. No; the second name. 

IVIr. Kennedy. Did he give the second name ? 

Mr. BoYAR. Yes ; the second name was Stark. 

Mr. Kennedy, You say you talked to this man who identified him- 
self, the one you were talking to, at this restaurant on the east side. 
He identified himself as Stark? 

Mr. BoYAR. Tliat is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You talked about the fact that you could perhaps 
get him $5,000 to get the pickets taken off ; is that right ? 

Mr. BoYAR. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he say to you at that time what he would have 
to do or who he would have to see ? 

Mr. BoYAR. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he say ? 

Mr, BoYAR. He said he would have to meet J. D. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he give you the first name? 

Mr. BoYAR. I tliink he said Johnny D. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know who Johnny D. was at that time! 

Mr. BoYAR. No; I didn't. At the time, I didn't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. What happened then ? 

Mr. BoYAR. He said he would call us the following day and let us 
know as to what they spoke about. I got a call the next morning and 
he said, "There is nothing you can do. You better join the union." 

The Chair]\ian. Will you pull the microphone up to you a little 
closer or speak a little louder? Your voice is not coming over very 
well. 

Mr. Kennedy. So arrangements then were made to join the union; 
is that right, by the association ? 

Mr. BoYAR. Yes ; by the association. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, when it broke down as to whether the 
union could guarantee against other unions coming in and picketing, 
the association retained the services of Equitable Research? 

Mr, BoYAR. That I don't know anything about. 

Mr, Kennedy. You were not involved? 

Mr. Boyar. No ; I wasn't. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3913 

Mr. Kennedy. This individual that you met at the restaurant on 
the East Side called and said Johnny D. couldn't do anything about it 
then ? 

Mr. BoYAR. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions ? 

If not, thank you, sir. 

May I ask you, first, how many employees do you have ? 

Mr. BoYAR. Two emplo3^ees. 

The Chairman. You have two? 

Mr. BoYAR. Yes. 

The Chairman. Is that an average shop, your size? 

Mr. BoYAR. Yes. 

The Chairman. That is about an average size? 

Mr. BoYAR. Yes. 

The Chairman. Thank you. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out some back- 
ground on this, that Johnny Dioguardi was the regional director 
of the UAW-AFL in New York City. As such, he sponsored Con- 
sentino and Santa Maria when they received their charter. Then he 
allegedly left the labor union and set up this Equitable Research. 

When 227 went in and attempted to picket these glass shops, Johnny 
Dio had this close relationship between himself, David Consentino, 
Arthur Santa Maria, and Reiss. 

The Chairman. He placed them in business, in fact. 

(At this point. Senator Curtis withdrew from the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. We see the situation wliere, after the nego- 
tiations started, Harry Reiss told the representatives of the glass 
shops that he could not guarantee against jurisdictional picketing, 
but Harry Reiss suggested Johnny Dio as somebody who could guar- 
antee that. They went and made this arrangement with Johnny Dio 
and Equitable Research and paid him what would amount to more 
than $2,500 for the 3-year period, but with the understanding that 
as Harry Reiss and 227 were able to get more of the workers into the 
union, that Johnny Dio, speaking for Equitable Research, would re- 
ceive a greater amount of money. 

So there was this close relationsliip during this period of time be- 
tween Equitable Research and some of these unions. We are going to 
go into this matter to some extent a little further at a later time. 

The Chairman. All right. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now we have another situation, another employer 
who was a]:)proached by one of these unions. We are now going to 
try to develop wliat steps he took in order to keep the union away. 
For that reason, we are calling Mr. Louis Pope. 

(Present at this point in the proceedings: Senators McClellan and 
Mundt.) 

The Chairman. Mr. Pope, come forward, please. 

Will you be sworn, please ? 

Do you solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select conunittee sliall be the truth, the wliole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Pope. I do, sir. 



3914 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

TESTIMONY OF LOUIS POPE, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
NOEMAN TUKK 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation. 

Mr. Pope. My name is Louis Pope, P-o-p-e, and I reside at 1292 
Westchester Avenue, Bronx, New York City. I am the coowner of 
a collision automotive repair shop, and at present the president of 
the Auto Body Repairmen's Association of New York City. 

The Chairman. You have counsel present to represent you? 

Mr. Pope. I do. 

The Chairman. Counsel, will you identify yourself for the rec- 
ord, please? 

Mr. Turk. I am Norman Turk, of 50 Court Street, Brooklyn, 
N. Y., associated with the firm of Dubow, Turk & Roberts. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

You may proceed. Counsel. 

Mr. Ivennedy. You are a member of an auto body repair shop asso- 
ciation, are you, Mr. Pope ? 

Mr. Pope. Yes, sir ; I am, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are one of the founders of it, are you ? 

Mr. Pope. Yes, sir ; I am. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you are also an officer of it ? 

Mr. Pope. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell the committee the circumstances 
under which it was founded ? 

Mr. Pope. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. First, give us how many members there are, and what 
area. 

Mr. Pope. We started out in 1955 with a membership of 38, and 
to date I think we have approximately 350 members. 

The Chairiman. How many ? 

Mr. Pope. 350. These shops are self -manned, mainly, occasionally 
with a partner, and in, I should say unusual cases, they have 2 to 4 
men to assist. The averatre shop is a two-man shop. 

The Chairman. Frequently they are partners ? 

Mr. Pope. Yes, sir. 

Since the year of 1950, the insurance companies, from which we 
derive approximately 80 percent of our work, liave fixed a price be- 
tween a dollar figure of $4 to $4.50 an hour. That is labor. During 
these years living costs have soared, and with that the increase of 
labor costs have gone up. We have abided by that to a point where 
today we pay a man an average of $3 to $3.50 an hour, and give him 
a week's vacation yearly. He has sick benefits which are based on 
his relationship with the shop owner, unlimited. In many, many 
cases, if a man is sick 2 or 3 weeks, this man's pay is brought home to 
his house and his wife is taken care of as human beings should be. 

In short, our industry has been pressed, pressed for cash, to a point 
where shops have been going out of business steadily ; not because of 
the fact that they didn't have enough work, but because the profit 
in the work was not there. 

So we banded together in 1956. We obtained a charter from the 
State of New York as an association as a whole. We had been 
working a year before that, trying to group the members before that. 



IMPROPER ACTIVmES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3915 

In 1956, 1 think sometime around June, rumors had it through the 
Bronx area that there was a drive going on by several locals, a good 
many locals, 1 should say, to unionize this industry, regardless of 

Senator Mundt. Up until this time, Mr. Pope, had all your em- 
ployees been nonunion men? 

Mr. Pope. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mtjndt. Completely nonimion? 

Mr. Pope. This industry hasn't been able to afford unions. 

In any case, in June, rumors had it that the industry was being 
organized, and the newspapers were blaring about the type of unions 
that were doing the organizing. We had had experience throughout 
related industries, and calls kept coming in. Men were frantic. They 
wanted an emergency meeting, and it was held. At this emergency 
meeting, they wanted to know what could be clone about a form of 
union that could very well mean the end of our industry in the city 
of New York because we could not raise our form of income. We 
cannot raise it, for the simple reason that it has been set, and it has 
been that way for 12 years. It is a very, very competitive field and 
we cannot go anywhere for the additional dollar. 

At that particular meeting, it was decided that as far as we were 
concerned, the union was out, for the time being. We couldn't afford 
it. It was too rich for our blood. 

What to do about it, we didn't know. We didn't have any profes- 
sional organizers or anybody to give us the assistance we needed. 

So we formed a committee, and the committee went out into the 
field to ask people that were connected witli labor what could be done 
in a case of this kind, not unionwise, but how to stay out of the union. 

Senator Mundt. Let me ask you what created all of the excitement ? 
Was it just a few stories in the newspapers or had there been actual 
attempts to organize you ? 

Mr. Pope. Some shops had been accosted. They would not go into 
the shop to speak to the men. They would speak to the owners of the 
shops. 

Senator Mundt. Give me an illustration of what you have in mind. 

Mr. Pope. I can't speak of anything concrete myself, but I can tell 
you what was reported to me. 

Senator Mundt. Give us an illustration of the kind of situation 
some of your members reported. 

Mr. Pope. It is very simple. If I am paying a man $3 an hour and 
I am receiving $4 back, and with this dollar pay my overhead, such 
as rents, electricity, taxes, et cetera, I cannot go any further. 

Senator Mundt. I understand the problem, but you said that some 
of your members had been accosted. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Senator Mundt. Let me get the picture to you, Mr. Pope. Have 
you got it now ? 

Mr. Pope. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. All right, good. 

Mr. Pope. I have been called or had been called by several shops 
that had been spoken to by organizers. Not one, but several. They 
would have 3 cards from 3 different locals, confusing as all could be. 
Each and every one had a different proposition, not to the man but to 
the owner. 



3916 IMPROPER ACTIVITIE'S EST THE LABOR FIELD 

In short, it appeared to me and it appeared to everybody else on our 
executive committee, that this was something that we just did not 
want and could not afford. 

I keep repeating that because I have checks to show that on dues of 
$15 for 3 months, $5 per month, checks have come back marked in- 
sufficient funds. So the industry is in bad shape. They decided to 
fight this, but how ? 

The second meeting gave us the answer, we thought. Men came 
back that had been assigned to this committee with the answer that 
we could form our own local, and such we did, if you want to call a 
couple of printed cards and an investment of approximately $70 
forming a local. 

This was done in order to leave cards at the shops so that when a 
proposition was offered that this shop owner could say, "I am already 
negotiating with 101-A, or 101-B, or 101-C, whatever it may be." 

As fate would have it, shortly after we got into all of this, the 
Federal Senate committee, this committee here, came into the site 
of New York and did its work, did such a good job that we never 
had a chance to fully find out whether our efforts at stopping that 
union or unions from taking over this industry were successful or 
not. That is the story. 

Organizing of all shops stopped immediately. It gave us a breather 
and it gave us a little time to think. That is where we stand today. 

The Chairman. Is this one of your notices that you put out, one of 
the signs that you use ? Is that one of the signs that you use for this 
independent union ? 

Mr. Pope. I have never used that, but they had those printed. They 
were never put out. They never had a chance to hit the street. 

The Chairman. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. Pope. They never had a chance to have them put in the shop, 
to my knowledge. 

The Chairman. What about these cards that you had printed. Was 
this one of them ? 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

The Chairman. What does it say ? 

Mr. Pope. That says, "Independent Auto Workers Union Local 
101-A," and it gives an address of 363 East 149th Street. 

The Chairman. Whose address is that? 

Mr. Pope. That was the address of an insurance agent with whom 
we were pretty friendly. It was a mailing address. 

The Chairman. Then you had some little stickers put out, did 
you, "Independent Auto Workers" ? 

Mr. Pope. Senator, those stickers were made by the men who were 
designated to do that job. I don't have any personal knowledge of 
those. I did see them previous to this. They were shown to me. 
They were ordered by the association's representative. 

The Chairman. The union-shop sign will be made exhibit 28 and 
the card will be made exhibit 29. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 28" for ref- 
erence and will be found in the appendix on p. 3993.) 

Mr. Kennedy. We have some other cards here. The telephone 
number is Mott Haven 52433. Is there such a number ? 

Mr. Pope. I am not familiar with that number. 



EMPROPER ACTIVrriES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3917 

Is it on the same card I just looked at ? 

The Chairman. I think it is. 

Mr. Pope. It is the same card, then it is a telephone number that 
is part of the business belonging to this insurance agent. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have here the Independent Auto Workers Union 
Local 101-A. That is the local that you formed, is it? 

Mr. Pope. Mr. Kennedy, that local never took effect. 

Mr. Kennedy. No ; but that is the one you printed the cards for. 

Mr. Pope. That is a fictitious piece of paperwork that you see there, 
that we used in order to forestall the overtaking of an industry that 
could not afford 

Mr. Kennedy. I understand. It says, "Alfred Naft, Business Rep- 
resentative." 

Mr. Pope. I don't have any knowledge of Alfred Naft, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he exist? 

Mr. Pope. Possibly. I don't know him. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was tlie business representative of the Independ- 
ent Auto Workers Union, Local 101-A. 

Mr. Pope. I have no personal knowledge of it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Jack Sicari is here. 

Mr. Pope. I do know him. 

Mr. Kennedy. AVlio is he ? 

Mr. Pope. Jack Sicari was a fellow Avho was a carpenter by trade 
who was paid by tlie week to go out and distribute those cards amongst 
the body repairmen. 

Mr. Kennedy. To make it appear that it was legitimate ? 

Mr. Pope. I don't think 

Mr. Kennedy. I am just trying to get the picture. 

Mr. Pope. The picture is that we would leave those cards and if a 
guy came in, he would say, "I have been speaking with this guy," 
and that would forestall any further danger. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have as the president of the union, Charles 
DiSilvio. 

Mr. Pope. He was formerly the vice president of the association and 
he was the only nonworking committeeman who was assigned that 
job. He resigned as vice presedent and took over the presidency of the 
so-called union ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that a promotion ? 

INIr. Pope. Well, I think to date they had about $90 in that fund 
for printing and such. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could we have these made exhibits ? 

This one has James Dodge. Do you know who he is ? 

Mr. Pope. James Dodge is fictitious. 

The Chairman. After exhibit 29-A we will have exhibits 29-B, 
C, andD. 

Mr. Kennedy. James Dodge on exhibit 29 is fictitious ? 

Mr. Pope. Yes. I know he is fictitious. 

The Chairman. Those cards may be added as A. B, and C. 

(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibits Nos. 29-A, 
29-B, 29-C, and 29-T)'" for reference and will be found in the appen- 
dix on p. 3994.) 

The Chairman. Did you form a contract ? 

Mr. Pope. I didn't have anything to do with the preparing of the 
printing. I recommended that they go down to a chap who made a 



3918 IMPROPER ACTIVnTElS EST THE LABOR FIELD 

lot of that printing, and he made a package deal for them. That 
contract that you show may be part of his normal procedure. It may 
be a duplicate of some other contract. I don't know. 

The Chairman. It says Independent Auto Workers Union, Local 
101-A. 

Mr. Pope. I believe it is a standard form with the heading of 101 
on there. 

The Chairman. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. Pope. I believe that that contract that you have there is a stand- 
ard form contract used by the average printer who does printing for 
these. 

The Chairman. It may be, but in whatever form it is you had it 
printed for your union ? 

Mr. Pope. That is right ; yes, sir. 

The Chairman. This you do identify? 

Mr. Pope. I had no personal knowledge of that myself; I didn't 
take that out and have it done. 

(Documents were handed to the witness.) 

The Chairman. Did you ever see the contract? 

Mr. Pope. One time. Mr. Bob Dunne showed me this contract. 

The Chairman. I will let you look at that and see if that looks like 
the one you saw. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Pope. Senator, the only time I saw this contract was when Mr. 
Dunne showed me this. 

The Chairman. That is all right. I just wondered, for purposes 
of the record, if you had seen that before and if you identify it. 

Mr. Pope. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit 30 for reference. It 
need not be printed in the record. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 30" for ref- 
erence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Kennedy. After you did this, after you took these steps, you 
found that no one came around or you did not have as much trouble? 

Mr. Pope. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So it was successful ? 

Mr. Pope. I like to believe that the newspapers and the publicity 
that this committee got for the work that it was doing was responsible 
for that, because I don't believe that these cards would have stopped. 

It was an effort we made and a weak effort, but it was actually the 
strengtli of the truth that did the job. 

The Chairman. It was a successful effort, though weak? 

Mr. Pope. With a little bit of help from the Senate committee ; yes, 
sir. 

Senator IMundt. How long had this operation been functioning be- 
fore our committee got into business? 

Mr. Pope. I don't believe it was in effect more than about 2 weeks. 
I don't tliink the cards were dry yet. 

Senator Mundt. It w\as an ingeniuos idea, whoever had it. One 
paper union fighting another and you won. 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions ? 
If there are no other questions, thank you very much. 
Senator Mundt. You had better get that idea copyrighted. 
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Pope. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3919 

The committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock. 

(Whereupon, at 12 noon, the hearing in the above-entitled matter 
was recessed to reconvene at 2 p. m., of the same day.) 

(Members of the select committee present at the taking of the 
recess: Senators McClellan and Mundt.) 

AFTERNOON SESSION 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

(Members of the select committee present: Senators McClellan and 
Ives.) 

The Chairman. Before calling the next witness, the chief counsel 
has a brief background statement to make, so as to give us some guid- 
ance as we proceed for tlie rest of the afternoon. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, the second witness w411 be Mr. Max 
Chester. We had a tape recording of a conversation that he had with 
an employer when we started our hearing last week. 

The first witness is an employer with whom Max Chester has had 
some negotiations. 

I would like to give a little bit of background on Max Chester. He 
came into the labor union movement, or at least became of interest to 
us when he became a member and officer of Local 496 of the Interna- 
tional Chemical Workers Union. At that time, that time, the Inter- 
national Chemical Workers Union Local 496 was headed by Reiss and 
Consentino who later became officers of Local 227 of the UAW. 

At that time, Reiss and Consentino became involved in an extortion, 
so the International Chemical Workers lifted their charter. Reiss, 
Consentino, and Max Chester then all went over to local 227 of the 
UAW, one of the locals set up by Johnny Dio in New York City. 
There Max Chester once again was accused of taking a bribe. This 
upset Mr. Reiss and Mr. Consentino and Mr. Santa Maria, and they 
kicked Max Chester out of the local. 

So Max Chester then went over to local 405, and he became business 
manager, vice president, and secretary-treasurer of local 405 of the 
retail clerks. 

Local 405, Mr. Chairman, we will show later on, was controlled by 
Mr. Tony "Ducks" Corallo, and so Max Chester went from a Dio- 
controlled local into a Tony Ducks-controlled local. 

As such, in the retail clerks, he was indicted for his activities in 
the retail clerks on some 9 or 10 charges of taking money, extortion. 
He pleaded guilty to the eighth count. The other counts involved 
taking $1,000 from Louis Artists Materials Co., Manhattan ; $700 from 
Earnest Slongo Distribution Co., Inc. ; $2,250 from New York Quilt- 
ing Novelty Co. ; $2,000 from Gustave, Inc. ; $1,250 from Flerigrip 
Co. ; $250 from Shoreham Manufacturing Co., Inc. ; $250 from Wads- 
worth 50 and lO^i Stores, Inc. ; $400 from Preco Photo Products, Inc. ; 
$250 from Ace Looseleaf Co., Inc. ; $335 from Lansley Fastener, Inc. ; 
and $300 from Arnold Originals. 

He pleaded guilty to one of those charges, and he was convicted. 
But prior to being sentenced. Max Chester was indicted again in con- 
nection with receiving a bribe, with Sam Goldstein and Johnny Dio- 
guardi. He was just convicted on that count last week, and he is yet 
to be sentenced. 



3920 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

As I say, lie will be the second witness, but I thought it was impor- 
tant to have a little bit of his background prior to our first witness, 
an employer coming and testifying as to his connection and his asso- 
ciations with Mr. Chester. 

The Chairman. Call the witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. The employer is Mr. Paul Claude, wdio is president 
of Paragon Brass Products, Inc. He is the first witness. 

The Chairman. Mr. Claude, will you come around, please ? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Claude. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF PAUL CLAUDE, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, 
KUBIN R. KAUFFMAN 

The Chairman. Mr. Claude, state your name, your place of resi- 
dence, and your business or occupation, please, sir, 

Mr. Claude. My name is Paul Claude. I live in Flushing, N. Y., 
and I have a machine shop in Brooklyn, Greenpoint section. 

The Chairman. How long have you been in that business, Mr. 
Claude? 

Mr. Claude. Eight years. 

The Chairman. You have counsel present to represent you? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Counsel, will you please identify yourself for the 
record ? 

Mr. Kauffman. My name is Rubin R. Kauffman, attorney at law 
in the State of New York. My office is at 855 Avenue of the Americas, 
New York City, and I have represented Mr. Claude since approxi- 
mately 1953. 

The Chairman. You may proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. What sort of work does your shop do ? 

Mr. Claude. I manufacture plumbing supplies. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many employees do you have ? 

Mr. Claude. At present I have 15. 

Mr. Kennedy. Most of them are Puerto Rican, are they, the ma- 
jority? 

Mr. Claude. About 50 percent. 

Mr. Kennedy. And now during 1954, were you approached by Mr. 
Max Chester ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you approached at that time in connection 
with the unionizing of your shop ? 

Mr. Claude. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. AYould you describe to the committee what hap- 
pened when you first met Mr. Max Chester ? 

Mr. Claude. Mr. Chester came to the door and said he was going to 
unionize my shop. He wanted $2,000 to give me a contract that I 
can live with. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just explain, where were you at the time ? 

Mr. Claude. I was working on a machine, and he just walked into 
the shop. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he say to you ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3921 

Mr. Claude. He said, "I am going to unionize your shop." I asked 
each of my men whetlier they knew anything about it, and they knew 
nothing about it, my own men. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tell us more about the first conversation that you 
had with him. He walks in the door, and he says, "I am going to 
unionize your shop," and so what did you say? You were surprised? 

Mr. Claude. I said, '"I have no objection, if it is proper." I mean 
if the union is a decent union, I have no objection whatsoever. 

Well, he said, "If you will give me $2,000, 1 will give you a contract 
that you can live with." 

The Chairman. Those were his words, that he would give you a 
contract you could live with ? 

Mr. Claude. That is right. I said, "I haven't got $2,000," which 
was the truth. So he said, "Well, it is goins: to be difficult." 

He took out ]:>encil and paper, and he figured out that with a con- 
tract that I couldn't live with. I would probably go out of business. 

The Chairman. Did he indicate to you or use those words, he could 
probably put you out of business? 

Mr. Claude. Yes. 

The Chairman. He told you that? 

JNIr. Claude. Yes. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, may I raise a question there. 

Did you not think it was rather peculiai- tliat he should demand 
$2,000 of you ? 

Mr. Claude. Extremely peculiar. 

Senator Ives. What did you do about it? 

Mr. Claude. I got panicky and I didn't know what to do. 

Senator Ives. Did you consult with law authorities? 

Mr. Claude. I immediately called up the police. 

Senator Ives. I did not mean to get ahead of j'ou. 

Mr. Kennedy. "V^Hiat did he do to you when you came into the shop? 
Just relax and tell the story as you told it before. What did he do to 
you Avhen he came into the shop? 

Mr. Claude. Well, he was not alone. He had a few men with him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just tell the story easily to us. 

Mr. Claude. I am trying to. It isn'teasy, and for you it may be but 
]iot for me. 

I said, "I haven't got the $2,000." He said, "In that case, I am going 
to pull a strike on you." So one at a time he got ahold of my men and 
made them sign the cards. 

Mr. Kennedy. Prior to that time, did he back you against the wall, 
or were you standing there, or what? 

Mr. Claude. No; there was no physical violence involved. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he go through how much the contract would 
cost ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, he figured out with pencil and paper, over a 2- 
year period, a contract would cost me $12,000. At that time I had only 
eight men. 

Mr. Kennedy. So what did you say to that? He said, if you pay 
the $2,000 now vou would save vourself 



89330 — 57— pt. 10- 



3922 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LiABOR FIEIiD 

Mr. Clatjde. I could save myself $10,000 and I should be very grate- 
ful, he told me, that he is giving me $10,000. I immediately called the 
local police. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was it the first visit that you called the local police ? 

Mr. Claude. Right away, immediately. 

The Chairman. Just a moment. Was that after they left ? 

Mr. Claude. After they left. 

The Chairman. You did not call while they were there? 

Mr. Claude. I would say not. I see you appreciate the situation. 

The Chairman. I appreciate it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Go on. 

Mr. Claude. I called the police, and the captain. It was the next 
morning. They were there when he came down. And he walked 
over to them and they showed him credentials that they belonged to 
a legitimate union, local 405, Retail Clerks of America. 

Mr. Kennedy. So what did he say to you ? 

Mr. Claude. The captain came inside, and maybe I am getting ahead 
of myself. The captain came down, after they pulled the strike, and 
I didn't mention that, that they pulled the men out. He did pull the 
men out. 

The Chairman. That day ? 

Mr. Claude. Not the very first day. But several days after that he 
hung around. 

Mr. Kennedy. Let us go back to the original conversation now. 

Mr. Claude. I am a little wrong on the sequence. 

Mr. Kennedy. He came into your shop and he had two men with 
him? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he said, "I am going to unionize your shop." 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then he figured out it would cost you $12,000 
if he unionized your shop and he would let you off with $2,000 ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. If you gave him $2,000 you would have a contract 
you could live with. 

Mr. Claude. Yes, if I gave him $2,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. You said you did not have $2,000. 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you say to him at that time, "I will give you 
what I have" ? 

Mr. Claude. I told him, "I will give you $100 a week if you will 
let me alone, and we will sign a contract and I will pay you off at $100 
a week." 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he say about that ? 

Mr. Claude. He said, "That is out of the question." 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time did he say anything about what cute 
children he had ? 

Mr. Claude. He always inquired about my children's health, con- 
stantly. Every second sentence was, "How are your children?" and 
"How are your children?" 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he ask anything or say anything about what 
could happen to children ? 

Mr. Claude. Of course. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3923 

Mr. Kennedy. Just tell me. I want you to tell the whole conver- 
sation. What did he say would happen to children ? 

Mr. Claude. The conversation was always about the health of my 
children. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat did he say? 

Mr. Claude. He spoke mostly about his own, how he loves his own 
children. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat would he say about his? 

Mr. Claude. How dangerous it is for children to play in the street. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he say could happen to children who 
played in the street? 

Mr. Claude. lie said a number of things, they can be run over, and 
things like that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would he ask how your children were ? 

Mr. Claude. And he always asked how my children were, and at 
the moment I am scared for my children. 

Mr. Kennedy. At this moment you are ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. As you testify? 

Mr. CiAUDE. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, he would say, "I love my children, but it is 
terrible what can happen to them if they play in the streets and they 
can get hit by a car." 

Mr. Claude. I was subjected to that kind of psychology and it 
worked on me, believe me it did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then he would ask the health of your children ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Right after he described what could happen? 

Mr. Claude. Pie never told me. 

Mr. Kennedy. He just told you these stories about what could 
happen to children? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. After he told you about that at that point you said, 
well, that you would pay him $100 a week. 

Mr. CiiAUDE, He refused to accept that offer. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there anything else that occurred during that 
conversation ? 

Mr. Claude. At this moment, I don't recall. 

Mr. Kennedy. After they left, you called the police, did you? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the policeman came down ? 

Mr. Claude. That's right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he said to you at that time, "It is a legitimate 
labor organization." 

Mr. Claude. That is right, and he said, the local captain said, "You 
have got to make a deal with them. You have to make some kind of a 
deal with them because they are legitimate." 

Mr. Kennedy. He said that it is a legitimate labor organization. 

The Chairman. In other words, the police that you called down 
advised you to make some kind of a deal with them ? 

Mr. Claude. Absolutely. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, may I interrupt there with a ques- 
tion? 



3924 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Claude. They probalil}' referred to a contract with them, the 
captain must have referred that 1 should sign a contract, some kind 
of a contract with them. 

The Chairman. Sign some kind of contract ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. .Vre you going to follow that up witli what he did as 
far as the law enforcement authorities are concerned ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. Thank you. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then, the following day, did he come back again? 

Mr. Claude. lie came back for 2 or 3 days with the same demands, 
"Well, are you going to pny me?" "Well, are you going to pay me?" 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you frightened at that time at all ? 

Mr. Claude. I was scared to death. 

Mr. Kennj:dy. And you are frightened at this time, also, when you 
testify. 

Mr. Claude. Of course. 

Mr. Kennedy. For wliat reason ? 

Mr. Claude. Well, tliere are well known characters around the city 
of New York. 

Ml'. Kennedy. Who are they ? 

Mr. Claude. Max Chester, and I have made inquiry through sev- 
eral friends that are unionized to find out who this man is. Word 
was passed to me, "Watch yourself." That is all I can tell you. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you liad some further conversations with him at 
tliat time? 

Mr. Claltde. Yes, sir; and it was always with the arm around my 
shoulder like this [witness indicating], you know, and "You have got 
to pay us off because you are mine." Those were his words, "and I 
own you." "No matter where you are going to move, you are mine." 

Finally, one morning he saw that I wouldn't pay off and as I had 
lunch, and he pulled the men out. Now my men tell me, and I wasn't 
])resent, that two uniformed police came into the shop and told the 
men to go out. 

There I am a little at a loss and I couldn't understand it and I, to 
this day, don't miderstand it. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you came back fi-om lunch, you found your 
men were out ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And picketing? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you know the names of the policemen? 

Mr. Claude. I don't. I didn't see him, and I wasn't present. 

Tlie Chairman. Do you know the name of the first policeman that 
told you to make a deal? 

Mr. Claude. Well, the local captain, and I think he is still captain 
in my precinct. 

The Chairman. What is his name ? 

Mr. Claitde. I wouldn't recall, sir. 

The Chairman. All right, proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, again, let us go back just a little bit. Prior 
to this time, there had been pickets on your shop, even prior to the 
time that 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3925 

Mr. Claude. Prior to this time there were pickets, but complete 
strangers. 

Mr. Kennedy. People not associated with yoiir plant at all? 

Mr. Claude. That is right. 

Mr. Kenne:dt. Now, during this time when you went out to hmch 
and when you came back everybody wtus out in the street and during 
this period of time had your employees been approached? 

Mr. Claude. They had been approached, and they had been made 
to sign cards. 

Mr. Kennedy. As related to you, how did he go about making them 
sign cards? 

Mr. Claude. Well, the employees leported to me. They are very 
loyal to me because I treated them well and each one came to me 
and he said, "This morning I was approached by two men in the 
candy store on the way over and they put a card in front of me and 
they said 'Sign,' " and they signed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did they sign. Explain that. 

Mr. Claude. Tliey are unskilled labor. 

Mr. Kennedy. They were Puerto Rican, were they ? 

Mr. Claude. They were Puerto Rican. 

Mr. Kennedy. And people who had not been in this countiy very 
long? 

Mr. Cl^vude. Possibly; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And so what do you think the psychology of it was, 
as 3^ou understand your employees, of them signing it? 

Mr. Clai'de. How can I say why they signed ? I can only give you 
an opinion. They were afraid. 

Mr. Kennedy. l^Hiat was your opinion? 

Mr. Claude. They were afraid not to sign it. They were afraid 
of physical violence. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then we come up to the time that you went 
out to lunch and you came back and all of your employees were in 
the street. 

Mr. Claude. Outside. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they reported to you that the policeman had 
told them to go out there and picket ? 

Mr. Claude. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Or told them to go out of the shop ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they were picketing? 

Mr. Claude. Yes sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you do then ? 

Mr. Claude. I closed the shop. I paid the men off and I just went 
away. I was closed for 7 weeks. 

The Chairman. How many men did you have at that time? 

Mr. Claude. Eight men. 

The Chairman. Eight employees? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. Claude a 
question. 

What borough do you live in ? 

Mr. Claude. I live in Flushing. 

Senator Ives. That is Queens? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 



3926 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Ives. And that is where your business is? 

Mr. Claude. No ; my business is in Brooklyn. 

Senator Ives. This occurred in Brooklyn, then ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. This is Kings County? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ives. Did you go to the district attorney at Kings County 
on this ? 

Mr. Claude. No. 

Senator Ives. Why not? 

Mr. Claude. I really should have but I didn't. 

Senator Ives. You certainly should have. With your police in- 
volved the way they were, you certainly should have done it. 

Mr. Claude. Max Chester told me, "I advise you not to. I advise 
you not to go to the district attorney." 

Senator Ives. "What reason did he give you ? 

Mr. Claude. That's all. You don't have to give no more reason. 

Senator Ives. You were not scared of him, were you ? 

Mr. Claude. I didn't think that he would write out the reasons. 
He won't. It is easy now for me, even, to evaluate this whole thing, 
but at that time I wasn't rational, perhaps. I was in a state of mind 
that perhaps did not reason properly. 

Senator Ives. In other w^ords, you were terrified at the time? 

Mr. Claude. That is right. 

Senator Ives. Thank you. 

Mr. lO.NNEDY. During this period of time, every time you saw Max 
Chester, he asked you again how your children's health was, did 
he not ? 

Mr. Claude. He always does that. 

Mr. Kennedy. He Avas very interested? 

Mr. Claude. Very much interested in my children's health. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you went away, and you closed your shop up, 
and you went away for 7 weeks ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did you come back to your shop ? Why did 
you open it up again ? 

]\Ir. Claude. About 6 weeks after that, I began to get phone calls 
from my own men telling me that they have no money to live on, 
and they would like to go back to work. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat had they been promised, or what had they 
been told ? 

Mr. Claude. When they went on strike, they were promised $25 a 
week for the duration of the strike. But from what the men reported 
to me, they got tlie $25 the first week, and the second week only 1 or 2 
men got $25, and after that, nothing. He disappeared and he didn't 
come down and they picketed all by themselves, and they were aban- 
doned by the union. 

Mr. Kennedy'. So you came back and opened up your shop? 

Mr. Claude. I opened up, and I called my men, and I said, "Look, 
fellows, if you want to open up, this is a free country. We can work 
if we want to." 

So we opened up, and we started to work. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EN THE LABOR FIELD 3927 

The very next day after the shop was opened, Mr. Chester came 
to the door. He said, "What is going on here? What is this?" He 
said, "I am going to close you down unless you sign a contract imme- 
diately with me." 

1 said, "All right; I am ready to sign a contract. But $2,000 is 
out." 

Well, he said, "I will forfeit the $2,000. I lost money on this deal, 
and it cost me $430 to feed these men and give them $25 a week, and 
I am losing $430. You give me the $430 that I spent, and I will give 
you a contract, and we'll be friends." 

I said, "I haven't got $430. After 7 weeks of strike, I am lucky 
to have pocket money." 

So he said, "Well, you must have a few dollars in the bank," And 
I said, "All right ; I can give you half of it right now." 

So I gave him $215, and I promised him the balance in the near 
future, when I have it. 

With this $215 we sat down in the restaurant and we signed the 
contract. 

Mr. lO^NNEDY. The same day you gave him the initial payment of 
$215, you signed a contract; is that right? 

IMr. Claude. That is right, and you have a copy of it there. 

The Chairman. This is a copy of the contract. 

The Chair presents to you what purports to be a photostatic copy of 
the contract to which you have referred in your testimony. 

Will you examine it and state if you identify it as such. 

(A document was handed to the witness:) 

Mr. Claude. This is a photostatic copy of the original contract. 

The Chairman. It may be made exhibit No. 31. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 31" for 
reference and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

(At this point. Senators Mundt and Curtis entered the hearing 
room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. This was 405 of the retail clerks ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, as we will bring out later, at that 
period of time, and since that period of time, 405 of the retail clerks 
has been controlled by Tony Ducks Corallo, and prior to this, of 
course, Max Chester as I said originally, had come out of 227, which 
was Dio's local. 

Now, you signed that contract, and was there any improvement in 
conditions, working conditions, wages, or hours for the workers, for 
the employees, than what you had for them already ? 

Mr. Claude. The contract calls for two 5-cent increases during the 
year, but otherwise than that, I always took care of my men previously. 

Mr. Kennedy. You would have given them that increase ? 

Mr. Claude. I would have given them that anyway. 

Mr. Kennedy. So really, there was no improvement for the em- 
ployees, by signing this contract ; is that right ? 

Mr. Claude. No ; there was nothing there, that they would not have 
gotten anyhow. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you gave him $215 on September 27, 1954. 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you give him another $215 the following month ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes ; you have the checks there. 



3928 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kp:nnedy. Just explain to the committee, you promised to give 
him $430 when you had the original conversation, and you didn't have 
much money with you. 

Mr. Claude. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you wrote out a check for $215 ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you went down and cashed it ? 

Mr. Claude. He came with me every time I cashed a check for him. 

Mr. Kennedy. This was the first check ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir; and lie always came to the bank with me. 

Mr. Kennedy. As the teller handed the money to you 

Mr. Claude. He took the money right then and there. 

Mr. Kennedy. Even before it got into your hands ? 

Mr. Claude. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then he left ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

The Chairjnean. The Chair presents to you— — - 

Mr. Kennedy. Following that, on October 18^ 1954, you gave him 
another $215 ? 

Mr. Claude. That is right ; that is to clean up this original agree- 
ment. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went down and you went through the same 
procedure? 

Mr. Claude. Yes; he comes, and we write out a check and he comes 
with me to the bank and he takes the money that comes over the teller's 
window. 

Mr. Kennedy. On November 1, 1954, you gave him another $200 ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. In cash? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the reason for that? 

Mr. Ci^uDE. Well, he asked for Christmas money. 

Mr. Kennedy. On November 1 he came and asked for Christmas 
money ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he say to you at that time ? 

Mr. Claude. Well, he said, "I have got to take care of the boys. He 
has a lot of boys to take care of himself, and it is not all for me, you 
know, and I have got to split this several ways." 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he say this was the usual procedure? 

Mr. Claude. This is the usual procedure around Christmas. You 
have to take care of the boys. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you point out to him it was only November 1 ? 

Mr. Claude. Well, he said, "It is close to Christmas, close enough 
to (yhristmas." 

Mr. Kennedy. And you went and cashed another check and gave 
it to him? 

Mr. (3i^uDE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then aid he come to you in February of 1955 and 
ask you to cash a check for him, on February 9, 1955 ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes ; he had a check, I think, issued by an attorney of 
his. 

Mr. Kennedy. The check was made out to Emanuel Kessler ? 



IMPROPER ACTIA'ITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3929 

Mr. Ci^\UDE. You have the check, I think. I don't know who it 
Mas made out to. It is a cash check. We have it here, for $220, and 
he asked me to cash it. 

The Chairman. Just before we proceed with that check, the Chair 
presents to you here the 3 checks that you previously testified to 
dated September 27, 195-t, October 18, 1954, and November 1, 1954, 
in the amounts of $215, $215, and $200, respectively. 

I ])resent to you what purports to be those original checks and I ask 
you to examine them and identify them, if you will. 

(The docmnents were handed to the witness.) 

Mr. (^LAiTi)E. Those are the checks. 

The Chairman. Are those the checks? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

The Chx^irman. Then those tliree checks may be made exhibits 32A, 
B, andC. 

(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibits o2A, 32B, and 
32C," for reference and will be found in the appendix on pp. 3995- 
3997.) 

The Chairman. Now you may proceed with the check you were 
discussing when the Chair interrupted vou. 

Mr. Kennedy. We have the 3 checks of $215, $215, and $200. 

Now, coming to February 9, 1955, did you know Max Chester by any 
other name? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, he called himself also, Emanuel Kessler. 

Mr. Kennedy. And did he come in or did Mr. Chester come in on 
February 9, 1955, and want vou to cash a check for $220 for him? 

Mr. Claude. That's rightl 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you cash that check for him? 

Mr. Claude. Yes. This check was made out by Mr. Gilman, who 
is a labor consultant in New York. 

Mr. Kennedy. And it was made out to cash ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Is that the check you cashed, the one you hold in 
your hand? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, a $220 check. I went to the bank and I got cash. 

Let me see, did I do that? I just deposited this check, and give him 
$220. I don't remember whether I made a check out for $220 and got 
money out and deposited this one. Anyway, I gave liim $220 for this 
check. 

Mr. Kennedy. He either got $220 on that check in cash or by your 
check to him ? 

Mr. Claude, ^o; by my check he didn't get it. He never would 
accept checks. 

]\Ir. Kennedy. You gave him cash ? 

Mr. Claude. He gets cash. I was wondering how I got the cash at 
that time, whether I got it from the bank a single check, or I might 
have got it included in the payroll. 

Mr. Kennedy. He certainly got the cash ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman, xlll right. That check may be made exhibit No. 33. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 33" for refer- 
ence and will be found in the appendix on p. 3998.) 

Mr. Kennedy. You took this Gilman check, from Gilman Asso- 
ciates, who is a labor consultant in New York, and you took this check 
down and deposited it in your bank account, did you not ? 



3930 IMPROPER ACTIVrTIEIS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat happened ? 

Mr. Claude. The check bounced. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you were out $220 ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. I deposited the thing twice. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you decide to do then ? 

Mr. Claude. My banker advised me. He said, "Redeposit it, and it 
maybe just caught him short one time or another." 

Mr. Kennedy. At tliat time, did you go down and speak to your 
attorney and decide to report this to the district attorney? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, after the second bounce I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. After it bounced the second time ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. We first wrote a letter to Mr. Oilman and 
asked him to make good the check. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he tell you ? 

Mr. Claude. I don't know. 

Mr. Kauffman. Mr. Oilman spoke to me, and I am not testifying. 

The Chairman. You did not yourself talk to Mr. Oilman? 

Mr. Claude. No, sir. 

The Chairman. The witness did not? 

Mr. Claude. No. 

The Chairman. Did you have your attorney talk to him ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Wliat did your attorney report to you that he said? 

Mr. Claude. That he hasn't got the money. 

The Chairman. You were unable to get money out of him by con- 
tacting him ? 

Mr. Claude. That is right. 

The Chairman. All right. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he also relate to you that Max Chester wasn't 
supposed to cash this check, and he was supposed to keep the check ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes. They put a few words in front of each other, 
but I didn't get the money. 

Mr. Kennedy. So did you decide to go down and see the district 
attorney ? 

Mr. Claude. Let me see. That is when we went to the district 
attorney. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you discussed this $220 check, this Oilman check 
and in the course of the conversation you also told them about the 
other money that you have been paying to Max Chester ? 

Mr. Claude. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you came back, and did Max Chester also 
known to you as Emanuel Kessler, come to see you again ? 

Mr. Claude. Well, he came several times after that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he discuss with you the Oilman check for $220 ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes. He said, "I know that check bounced." He said, 
"If you cash a $130 check for me now, which I need very badly, I will 
give you four $55 checks predated, and you won't be out any money. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, he came to you and he said, "I know the $220 
check bounced, but I want to make that good to you. I will give you 
four $55 checks, and we will date them up." 

Mr. Claude. "And you cash a check for $130 for me." 

Mr. Kennedy. As long as you could cash that check ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3931 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you cash that check ? 

Mr. Claude. I cashed the $130. I gave him $130. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you deposited the $130 check in your bank 
account ? 

Mr. Claude. No, he gave me the $130 check, and he gave me four 
$55 checks. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you gave him $130 ? 

Mr. Claude. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. What happened to the $130 check ? 

Mr. Claude. Well, it bounced. They all bounced. 

The Chairman. Just one moment. When you gave him the $130 
to cash his check, did you issue a check of your own for cash and get 
the money? 

Mr. Claude. Well, yes, that is the only way I can get my money. 

The Chairman. I understand. 

The Chair presents to you a check dated April 1, 1955, made out 
to cash in the amount of $130, signed by you and I will ask you if 
from the proceeds of that check, you got the cash to cash his $130 
check. 

Mr. Claude. Yes, that is the check. 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit No. 34. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 34" for refer- 
ence and will be found in the appendix on p. 3999.) 

The Chairman. At the same time he gave you four $55 checks ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Postdated, is that correct? 

Mr. Claude. That is correct. 

The Chairman. One was dated April 6, 6 days later, another April 
13, and another dated April 20, and another dated April 27. 

In other words, he gave you 4 checks, maturing 1 week, 2 weeks, 
3 weeks and 4 weeks from that date, each in the amount of $55 ? 

Mr. Claude. Yes. He also gave me the $130 check. 

The Chairman. I am not sure we have that one. 

Mr. Kauffman. There is another check for $130, made by Mr. 
Kessler in the folder. 

The Chairman. At the time you cashed your check for $130, you 
gave him the money for his $130 check, is that correct? 

Mr. Claude. That is correct. 

The Chairman. I present to you here what purports to be that orig- 
inal check which he gave you on April 7 for $130. Will you examine 
it and identify it, please? 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Claude. It is dated April 7, but he gave it to me April 1. 

The Chairman. That is a postdated check, too ? 

Mr. Claude. That is right. 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit No. 35. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 35" for refer- 
ence and will be found in the appendix on p. 4000.) 

The Chairjvian. Now, the Chair presents to you the four $55 checks 
about which you have testified. I ask you to examine those checks 
and see if you identify them as the original checks which he gave you. 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir ; those are the checks. 

The Chairman. They may be made exhibit No. 36-A, B, C, and D. 

(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibits Nos. 36-A, 



3932 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

through 36-D'' for reference and will be found in the appendix on 
pp. 4001-4004.) 

The Chairman. As I understood your testimony up to now, you 
have never received that $220 and you did not get the money on those 
checks and you did not get the money on the other checks. 

Mr. Claude. There is no money coming back, ever. It is a one- 
w^ay street. 

The Chairmax. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. The total then, of the money that you had given him 
through these checks, was $215, $215, $200, $130; the $220 making a 
total of $860. 

Mr. Claude. That's it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you give him any other mone}^ during this 
period of time '( 

Mr. Claude. Well, at one time I specifically remember he came 
around and asked for $200 and he came around with another man by 
the name of Foster. He said they had to have $200 and they will 
give it back to me within a week, "I must have it." 

So at that time I gave him $200 in cash. I had it in my pocket. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you give him other cash periodically ? 

Mr. Claude. Several times he came in, but I have no record of that 
at all. 

Mr. Kennedy. But periodically, every several weeks, he would come 
in and ask you. 

Mr. Claude. I estimated a total of $1,400 is what it cost me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Altogether about $1,400 ? 

Mr, Claude. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. At these weekly visits, or biweekly visits, would he 
continuously ask about how your children were ? 

Mr. Claltde. That is the first question he would ask, "How is the 
family?" and "How is your wife?" and "How are your children? 
Here, give me the money." 

Mr, Kennedy. After he asked you about your children, he would 
ask you for the money ? 

Mr. Claude. That is the procedure. 

Senator Mundt. Did he ever make any payments back at all? 

Mr. Claude. You must be joking. Senator. 

Senator Mundt. Xot a penny ? 

Mr. Claude. No. 

The Chairman. During this time, were your employees paying 
dues to the union ? 

Mr. Claude, Yes ; 75 cents a week. 

The Chairman. Seventy-five cents a week? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. That is about $3 per month ? 

Mr. Claude. That is right. 

The Chairman. That is what they were paying? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir : the contract calls for it. 

The Chairman. Did your employees pay those dues, or did you pay 
it for them? 

Mr. Claude. The employees paid it. 

The Chairman. A'\niom did they pay it to ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3933 

Mr. Claude. I took it out of their wages. According to the con- 
tract we have a checkoti' and I mailed it in to the local 405. 

The Chairman. That money was in addition to $1,400 that you 
t^-stified about 'i 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. The dues that you collected ? 

Mr. Claude. Oh, yes, it was separate checks, new checks. 

Mr. Kennedy. On these $55 checks, they were retuinecl to you with 
the notification that the account had been closed; is that right? 

Mr. Claude. I only deposited three. The fourth one was a waste 
of time after the three others bounced on the same bank. I only de- 
posited the first, second, and third, and I didn't bother anymore. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then the account was nonexistent ; is that right ? 

Mr. Claude. There was no account there. 

IMr. Kennedy. There was no account on the bank in which the 
checks were written ? 

Mr. (Claude. It was marked "account closed." 

Mr. Kennedy. There was no account at that time? 

Mr. Claitde. Not at tliat time; no. 

Senator Mundt. What about your experiences with the district at- 
torney? You said you went down to see him about this one check 
that bounced. 

Mr, Claude. Well, if I recall correctly, in addition to that I got a 
subpena from the district attorney, a grand jury subpena, from 
Assistant District Attorney Burns. I went down to see him and he 
subpenaed my books. I went down to see him with the accountant. 
He took a look at all of these checks and things and he looked over 
the books and he wanted to get the goods on some of these men. 

I told him exactly what I have told you here now, word by word 
cind no difi'erence. 

Senator Mundt. When you went to the district attorney, you went 
down there at the request of the district attorney i 

Mr. Claude. Yes, 

Senator Mundt. I gathered the impression you went down to try 
to have him return the money. 

Mr, Kauffman, We first went to the district attorney on the basis 
of the $220 check. At the private hearing with the district attorney, 
all of these facts came out, and subsequently a grand jui'}' subpena was 
served and we formally testified before the grand jury. 

Senator Mundt. I understand. In the meantime the district at- 
torney could do nothing to help collect the money. 

Mr. Claude. He had done nothing ; he told me that he had several 
cases against these men ahead of me and the time would come and he 
would handle it properly. 

Senator Mundt. He had other people that he was mistreating the 
same way he was mistreating you apparently. 

Mr. Claude. I am sorry. I didn't hear you. 

Senator Mundt. The district attorney told you there were other 
fellows in the same predicament with you i 

Mr. Claude. Well, this union organized 60 shops. There nmst have 
been others ahead of me. 

Mr. Kennedy. In explanation of that, your shop is over in Brook- 
lyn ; is that correct? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 



3934 IMPROPER ACTIVrTIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. And the district attorney you went to visit was in 
Manhattan ? 

Mr. Claude. That is right. 

]Mr. Kennedy. And so it was a matter that would be taken up over 
in Brooklyn, that is No. 1. 

No. 2, this man Max Chester was indicted on maybe 8 or 9 or 10 dif- 
ferent counts for extortions from other employers. The district at- 
torney in Manhattan, under Frank Hogan, has been interested in Max 
Chester for a number of years, as well as almost every other individual 
that we have appearing before our committee. 

Senator Mundt. He apparently recognized this as part of a pattern 
of a shakedown rather than just a private transaction. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct, and they have been interested and 
they have been working on this for a number of years up in the dis- 
trict attorney's office. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Claude, I was delayed in getting here, and so 
I will be very brief and I hope I do not touch on anythmg that is al- 
ready in the record. 

Did your employees prefer this union as their bargaining agent? 

Mr. Claude. They knew nothing about unions one way or the other. 

Senator Curtis. They did not on their part select this particular 
union ? 

Mr. Claude. Definitely not. 

Senator Curtis. Now, the contract does prescribe a union shop, does 
it not? 

Mr. Claude. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. In other words, they had to remain members of the 
union to hold their jobs, did they not ? 

Mr. Claude. That is correct. 

Senator Curtis. And had they learned of the corruption of these 
running the union, they could not have stopped paying dues without 
losing their jobs, could they ? 

Mr. Claude. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? 

Mr. Claude, I think I express the sentiments of each member of 
the committee, and we are very grateful to you for coming here to 
testify frankly and freely, and honestly about these transactions. 

Such testimony is helpful and it is quite a contrast to these char- 
acters that come in and take the fifth amendment. We are hopeful 
that many others will follow your example and help us, the Congress 
and those elements and organizations and authorities in the labor 
movement that want to clean up this racketeering and these improper 
practices in unionism. 

However, it may be necessary to have further testimony from you 
and I am not going to discharge you from the committee, but order 
that you remain under the same subpena, under recognizance to return 
and testify upon reasonable notice whenever the committee may desire 
further testimony from you. 

Mr. Claude. For that I am grateful. 

The Chairman. Well, you are under subpena and you remain under 
subpena and if anybody undertakes to molest you or interfere with 
you in any way or if anyone undertakes to molest you or threaten you 
or intimidate you in any way, regarding your testimony here, you or 



IMPROPER ACTIVmES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3935 

any member of your family, I ask that you report it at once to this 
committee. We Tvill see what we can do about it. 

Mr. Claude. Thank you. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much again, and you may stand 
aside. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Max Chester. 

The Chairman. Mr. Chester, will you stand and be sworn, please ? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Chester. I do, sir. 

TESTIMONY OF MAX CHESTER, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, 
JACOB M. MANDELBAUM 

The Chairman. Please state your name and your place of residence 
and your business or occupation. 

Mr. Chester. My name is Max Chester. As to the rest, I respect- 
fully decline to answer on the grounds that to do so may tend to 
incriminate me. 

The Chairman. The Chair asks you again the question, to request 
that you state your present address and your occupation or business. 

Mr. Chester. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
ground to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Well, now it might, if I understand the facts cor- 
rectly. Your present address, I believe, is in jail, is that right? 

Mr. Chester. Sir, I respectfully decline to answer that on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. I did not intend to elicit that information. I 
assumed that you have a residence address somewhere. That is all 
the Chair was asking you for. 

Mr. Chester. Again, may I say this. Senator, I respectfully decline 
to answer this on the ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Well, I believe we will just try it out. I do not 
think a man has a right in this country to refuse to give his address. 
So, with the permission of the committee, the Chair is going to order 
and direct you to give your residential address. 

I want your residence, where you live, and not your temporary 
abode ; but what you regard as your residence. 

Mr. Cin':sTER. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer that on 
the ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Do you have a family ? 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer that on 
the ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. With the permission of the committee, the Chair 
orders and directs you to answer the two questions, what your resi- 
dential address is and also, whether you have a family. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Senator Mundt. The witness is getting advice from somebody, and 
T would like to have him identified. Is he an attorney, and would he 
give his name and address for the record? 

The CiiAiRiNiAN. The Chair would do that in a moment. I have 
ahvays proceeded to determine the address of the witness before I 



3936 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

recognized counsel. If I cannot get that address, then we will proceed 
to other matters. 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I answered that question before. 

The Chairman. Well, I have ordered you to answer it and you did 
not answer it before. You declined to answer it before, and now 
I am ordering and directing you to answer it. 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Will you answer this one: Do you have a lawyer 
present to represent you? 

Mr. Chester. Yes; I have. 

The Chairman. Does that incriminate you ? 

All right, Mr. Lawyer, you may identify yourself for the record. 

Mr. Mandelbaum. Jacob M. Mandelbaum, attorney at law, 111 
Broadway, New York City. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much sir. 

All right, Mr. Counsel, you may proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. The records that we have 

The CHAffiMAN. I wish to direct counsel, and I wish to say for my 
colleagues on the committee, that I would like to have this witness 
asked every question pertinent to the preceding testimony and I want 
him to either answer or to sit here in public view before this committee 
and take the lifth amendment under statements that to truthfully 
answer it may tend to incriminate him and I want him asked every- 
thing about it. 

Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Fii'st, Mr. Chairman, we have information regarding 
Mr. Chester's background prior and during his time in the labor- 
union movement. 

No. 1, that he has a criminal record beginning in 1937, consisting 
of some 9 arrests and convictions. 

Is that correct? 

Mr. Chester. Sir; I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was convicted in 1936 for bookmaking, and in 
1938 for robbeiy, for which he received a suspended sentence of 5 
years, approximately. 

In 1948, for attempted petty larceny, for which he was fined $75, 
in 1950 for bookmaking, in 195G for extortion. He is awaiting 
sentence. 

In 1957 for receiving a bribe, together with Johnny Dioguardi and 
Sam Goldstein, is that correct? 

Mr. CirESTER. Sir; I respectfully decline to ansAver on the ground 
that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. A conviction in 1956 for extortion was for extorting 
$2,000 from Alex Wallau, Jr., to keep Wallau's slipper shop non- 
union and that was the conversation in connection with that con- 
viction, the conversation we heard last week. 

The Chairman. Proceed to ask him about each incident and let 
us find out if lie answers. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was indicted for receiving $1,000 from Louis 
Artists Materials Co. in Manhattan, by the district attorney's oiiice, 
Mr. Hoiran. 



IMPROPER ACnvrriES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3937 

He was indicted up there by the grand jury for receiving $1,000 
from I^uis Artists Materials Co., is that correct? 

Mr. Chester. Sir, I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. $700 from Earnest Longo Distributing Co., $2,250 
from New York Quilting Novelty Co., $2,000 from Gustave, Inc., 
and $1,250 from Flexigrip, and $250 from Shoreham Manufacturing 
Co., Inc., $250 from Wadsworth Five & Ten Cent Stores, Inc., and 
$400 from Photo Products Co., and $250 from Ace Looseleaf Co., Inc., 
and $335 from Lane Slide Easterner, Inc., and $300 from Arnold 
Originals. 

Could you make any comment on that ? 

Mr. Chester. Sir, I respectfully decline to answer on the gi'ound 
that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, our records that we have showed 
that he started in the labor movement with local 496 of the Inter- 
national (^hemical AVorkers and that that charter was lifted by the 
chemical workers because of an extortion on the part of two of its 
officials. Is that correct 'i 

Mr, Chester. Sir, I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that to do so many tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. What does the i-ecord show, I will ask counsel, 
as to when he entei-ed the labor movement ^ 

]\[r. Kennedy. The earliest we have is back in the early 1950*8. 
That is when he was with 490 of the International Chemical Workers. 

The Chairman. Is that when you first entered the labor movement ? 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Have all of these offenses been committed since 
you entered the labor movement? 

Mr, Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on 
the gi'ound that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Did you ever do an honest thing to help honest 
laboring union people in your life? 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The CiiairMzVN. It would be a good time to tell it if you ever did. 
If you can name one good thing that you ever did to help unionism, 
or help honest working people, now^ is a great opportunity for you, 
sir, to state what it is, and wdiat you did. 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. In other words, in incriminates you if you ever 
did something good? 

Let us have order. 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator 



The Chairman. This is pretty serious business. 

Mr. Chester. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that 
to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chester, why did you enter the labor-union 
field? 

S0330 — 57— pt. 10 23 



3938 IMPROPER AcrrviTiES m the labor field 

Mr. Chester, Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chester, the witness, Paul Claude, testified 
that you expressed an interest in his wife and children. What was 
your interest in his wife and children ? 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. Do you have a defense to the transactions testified 
to by the witness, Mr. Paul Claude ? 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. I do not believe you have been indicted for those 
offenses yet ; have you ? 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I 

The Chairman. Well, have you ? 

Mr. Chester. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that 
to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. According to our records, you have not. So they 
are not included in your convictions. 

Senator Ives ? 

Senator Ives. I would like to carry on this Paul Claude business 
a little further. 

You were in the room here, were you not, Mr. Chester, when the 
testimony of Mr. Claude was given ? 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Ives. Do you mean to tell me it is going to incriminate 
you to tell us whether or not you were in this room ? That is all I am 
asking you. 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, this witness is making a mockery of 
this whole business. In my judgment he is in contempt of the whole 
Senate, the way he is acting. 

The Chairman. Let the Chair make this observation : I do not deny 
the right of any witness under the Constitution to take the fifth 
amendment if he honestly believes that a truthful answ^er to the ques- 
tions asked him might tend to incriminate him. 

I think anyone can draw a conclusion as to while innocence is 
presumed that innocence in a criminal trial should always prevail 
until the charge is proven and the defendant is found guilty. 

But this is not a criminal proceeding. This is an investigation to 
determine what kind of practices are going on in the labor-management 
relations field. We are trying to ascertain those that are improper, 
those that are criminal or improper, and that should receive the at- 
tention of the Congress in the nature of remedial legislation. 

So tlie Avitness is not on trial, but he invokes the fifth amendment. 
In most instances, he may have a right to do so under the Constitu- 
tion and he may have a right in each instance that he has invoked it. 

But I do not concede that because the Constitution gives a man the 
right to invoke the fifth amendment that this committee cannot draw 
inferences from that character of cooperation the committee seeks in 
trying to render a service to this Government and to the people of this 
country. 



IMPROPER ACTIVmES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3939 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask you a question on 
that. By what possible process of the imagination can this witness 
get the idea that it is going to incriminate him if he tells us whether 
or not he w^as in this room when the last witness testified ? 

The Chairman. Well, the Chair agrees with you. There is abso- 
lutely none. But I would not be sure how the Supreme Court would 
interpret it. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman, I would like to find out. I think 
we have a responsibility to put cases like this squarely up to the Court 
and let the Court assume the responsibility for any ruling it ^yants ta 
make. Obviously, if we are going to have an official investigation, 
we have to have some kind of basis of procedure. 

The Chairman. Let the Chair make this observation, gentlemen. 
Any question that the witness refuses to answer, if we are going to 
proceed for contempt before this committee, the question must be per- 
tinent to this inquiry. Bear that in mind. 

So we ask questions simply as background information often, to put 
the witness in the proper perspective, so we may weigh his testimony. 

Any number of these questions have been of that nature. And 
many of them have been pertinent. 

At any time any member of the committee feels that the Chair 
should order the witness to answer the question, if they will so advise 
the Chair, we will proceed accordingly. 

Proceed. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, I certainly think my question of the 
witness as to whether or not he was in the room when the last witness 
testified is pertinent to the inquiry. I think it has a strong bearing on 
it, on what 1 was going to ask him. 

The Chairman. Ask the question again and the Chair will order and 
direct him to answer it. 

Senator Ives. I will ask you again. Were you in the room, Mr. 
Chester, when the last witness, to wit, Mr. Paul Claude, was testifying 
this afternoon ? 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Without objection from the members of the com- 
mittee, the Chair orders and directs the witness to answer the ques- 
tion. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that 
to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Gentlemen, proceed. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, I have two more questions I would 
like to ask the witness. 

The Chairman. Senator Ives. 

Senator Ives. I anticipate the same type of answer, but, neverthe- 
less, they are pertinent and I want to ask them. 

Mr. Chester, when were you initiated into local 405, Retail Clerks 
International Union? 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Repeat the question. 

The Chair is going to order and direct you to answer. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chester 



3940 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIEIiD 

The Chairman. May I ask the committee if it is the will of the com- 
mittee that the Chair proceed the order and direct the witness to 
answer all pertinent questions that may be propounded to him. 

All right, that will be the action taken by the Chair. 

Proceed. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chester, when were you initiated into local 405, 
Retail Clerks International Union? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. The Chair asks you one other question: Do you 
honestly believe that if you gave a truthful answer to that question, 
that a truthful answer under oath might tend to incriminate you? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. The Chair orders and directs you to answer the 
last question the Chair asked you. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. The Chair now^ orders and directs you to answer 
the question of Senator Ives. 

Do you wish to repeat it. Senator ? 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chester, when were you initiated into Local 405 
of the Retail Clerks International Union ? 

The Chairman. You are ordered and directed to answer that ques- 
tion. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Proceed with the next question. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chester, for what period of time have you paid 
dues in Local 405, Retail Clerks International Union ? 

(The witness conferred with liis counsel.) 

ISIr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. The Chair orders and directs you to answer that 
question. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chesitsr. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Let us proceed. 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chester, when were you suspended from Local 
405 of the International Union of Retail Clerks? 

Mr. Chester. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You are ordered and directed to answer tlie ques- 
tion. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so mav tend to incriminate me. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3941 

Senator Ives. Mr. Chester, were you at any time an officer, organ- 
izer, or business agent for Local 405 of the Ketail Clerks Interna- 
tional Union ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You are ordered and directed to answer the ques- 
tion. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. Mr. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Tlie Chairman. The Chair would like to ask chief counsel a ques- 
tion. 

I do not recall, but is tliis witness presently a member or an officer 
in any union? 

Mr. IvENNEDY. At tlie beginning of this year, the first few months 
of this year, the International Union of Retail Clerks lifted the char- 
ter of tliis and certain other of the retail clerks unions in New York 
City. 

The Chairman. What position did this witness occupy at that 
time? 

Mr. Kennedy. He was business manager, vice president, and presi- 
dent, all at the same time. 

No; he was business manager, vice president, and secretary-treas- 
urer. 

The Chairman. Of what? 

Mr. Kennedy. Of 405, retail clerks. 

Tlie Chairman. Up until some time this year when he was ousted 
by the international union lifting tlie charter of that local? 

INIr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. As I say, that is one of the local unions. 

The Chairman. Do 3^011 want to deny that statement? Do you 
want to correct any part of it ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. I respectfully decline to answer on the groimd that 
to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Then we must assume that you don't want to make 
any correction of the statement. 

Mr. Chester. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground tliact to do so ma}^ tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, tliat was at various times that he 
was business manager. He didn't hold those offices all at one time. 
That 405 is, as I say, a union about w^liich we will have further testi- 
mony later. Prior to coming into 405 of the retail clerks, he was in 
227 of the UAW-AFL, which is on the chart here. That local was 
controlled by Johnny Dio. 

I am wondering how you got into that local, under what circum- 
stances. 

Mr. Chester. Sir, I resijectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you talk to Dio about becoming a member of 
that union ? 



3942 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Chester. Sir, I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. The Chair will ask you again: Do you honestly 
believe that a truthful answer to the question counsel has just asked 
you, that a truthful answer thereto under oath might tend to incrimi- 
nate you ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. Sir, I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Cpiairman. I believe, in some instances, you might have a per- 
fect legal right to invoke the fifth amendment without being in con- 
tempt of this committee, but I challenge the right of anyone to invoke 
the fifth amendment without he can state that he honestly believes that 
a truthful answer to the question might tend to incriminate him. 

Therefore, I am propounding that question to you. Do you honestly 
believe that a truthful answer to those questions under oath might 
tend to incriminate you ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that 
to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You are ordered and directed to answer that 
question. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that to 
do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Counsel. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Tony "Ducks" Corallo ? 

Mr. Chester. Sir, I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, once again this takes on significance 
because of the fact that Dio controlled local 227 and "Ducks" con- 
trolled local 405, and they combined together their activities during 
December of 1955 and January and February of 1956, in efforts to 
bring about the election of John O'Rourke as president of the team- 
sters in New York City. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chester, have you ever used the name of Mr. 
Emanuel Kessler ? 

Mr. Chester. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Mundt. Would you deny that you have ever signed your- 
self as Emanuel Kessler ? 

Mr. Chester. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman, I would like to have the witness 
examine the handwriting at the bottom of that contract and tell us 
whether or not that is his handwriting. 

There is the signature of Emanuel Kessler there, with some notations 
in pen and ink. 

The Chairman. Would you recognize your own handwriting ? 
(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to mcriminate me. 

The Chairman. I want to show you what purports to be your hand- 
writing on this contract that has been made exhibit 31 to the testi- 



IMPROPER ACTIVrnES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3943 

mony in these hearings, and I ask you to examine it, look at it, and state 
whether that is your handwriting and whether this is your signature 
on that contract. 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Chester. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. It does not embarrass you for me to show it to you; 
does it ? 

JVI^r. Chester. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. We have some testimony here that you were very 
anxious to find out what the health was of Mr. Claude's children. 
Is that true ? 

Mr. Chester. Senator, sir, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. I^nnedy. Have you always been interested in children ? 

Mr. Chester. Sir, I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. He said that during the same period of time that 
you would ask about his children, you would tell what could happen 
to little children, about cars coming along and hitting them in the 
street. Then you would bring up the question of getting some money 
from him, some cash from him. 

Was there any connection between your love of little children and 
your desire to have cash ? 

Mr. Chester. Sir, I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

The Chairman. Take those checks, Mrs. Watt, please, and lay 
them in front of this witness. Let us take the first three which have 
been made an exhibit. What is the number of the exhibit you are 
now presenting? 

Mrs. Watt. No. 32. 

The Chairman. I present to you a series of three checks, exhibit 
No. 32. What is the amount of each one? The first 2 are $215 and 
the third one that you are looking at is in the amount of $200. 

(Documents were handed to the witness.) 

The Chairman. According to the testimony of the preceding wit- 
ness, Mr. Paul Claude, he states that he went to the bank and cashed 
these checks, that you went with him, and that he gave you the money 
for each one of them, that it was money that you demanded in con- 
nection with unionizing his shop. 

Is that the truth, or is it a lie ? 

Mr. Chester. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Did you get the money from those checks ? 

Mr. Chester. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Did it incriminate you when you got the money? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Show him those hot checks that bounced. 



3944 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Give me the number of the exhibit. 

Mrs. Watt. The four, Senator? 

The Chairman. Yes ; the 4 hot checks, $55 each. 

Mrs. Watt. 36A, B, C, and D. 

The Chairman. I now present to you four checks that have been 
made exhibit 36A, B, C, and D. I will ask you whose signature is on 
those checks. 

(Documents were handed to the witness.) 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. Senator, I respectfully decline to answer on the 
ground that to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. What is your name? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Chester. My name is Max Chester. 

The Chairman. Look at those checks and see whose name signed 
them. Can you read? 

Mr. Chester. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that to 
do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Read the name of the signer of those checks. What 
is the name ? 

Mr. Chester. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that 
to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You are ordered and directed to read the names 
on those four checks. 

Mr. Chester. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that 
to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You may do that. The name Max Chester is there ; 
is it not ? 

Mr. Chester. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that 
to do so may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Take the exhibits away. 

Proceed with the questioning. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am finished with this man. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions from any member 
of the committee? 

The Chair orders and directs that you remain under the same sub- 
pena that you appeared under here today. Your further testimony 
may be needed by this committee. In the meantime, you are ordered 
to return, upon reasonable notice. Do you accept that recognizance 
and agree to reappear and further testify before the committee upon 
reasonable notice? 

Mr. Mandelbaum. May I state to you, Mr. Chairman, that this wit- 
ness is here under control, pursuant to direction of Judge Muller. 
Upon his return to New York, he is required to present himself to the 
city prison within 24 hours after liis engagement here terminates. 

Tlie Chairman. All right. This order holds whenever he regains 
his freedom, even out on bond. Of course, if he is in jail, if he is in 
the penitentiary, he couldn't comply, and, therefore, he would not be 
in contempt of the committee, as you and I will agree as lawyers. 

Mr. Mandelbaum. Thank you, sir. 

The Chairman. You may stand aside. 

The committee will take a 5-minute recess. 
(Thereupon, a brief recess was taken.) 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3945 

(Select committee members present at the taking of the recess were : 
Senators McCleHan, Ives, Mmidt, and Curtis.) 

(Members present at the convening of the session after the recess: 
Senators McClelLan and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. Tlie committee will come to order. 

Judge Harold Krieger, come forward, please. 

Will you be sworn, please 'i 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Krieger. I do, sir. 

TESTIMONY OF HAROLD KRIEGER 

The Chairman. Tlie Chair wishes to announce that Judge Krieger 
is actually being called out of order in order to accommodate him. He 
has a legal matter somewhere else tomorrow. 

We are doing this. Judge, to accommodate you. 

Would you please give your name, your place of residence, and 
business or occupation ? 

Mr. Krieger. Harold Krieger, residence 833 Fairmont Avenue, 
Jersey City, N. J., and I am an attorney of that State. I am a lawyer. 

The Chairman. I called you judge. I seemed to have the impres- 
sion that you have served as a judge at some time. 

Mr, Krieger. Yes, that is true, sir. 

The Chairman. We will continue to recognize that fact. 

Mr. Krieger. Thank you, sir. 

The Chairman. Of course, being an attorney, you waive the right 
of counsel, I assume ? 

Mr. Krieger. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Kennedy, you may proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you also work for one of tlie city governments 
in New Jersey, did you ? 

Mr. Krieger. I did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Where did you work? 

Mr. Krieger. I was an assistant corporation counsel of the city. 

Mr. Kennedy. What city? 

Mr. Krieger. Jersey City. 

Mr. Kennedy. Jersey City? 

Mr. Krieger. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. When did vou have that position ? 

Mr. Krieger. 1949 to 1955. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you are a judge now or were a judge? 

Mr. Krieger. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are a judge now? 

Mr. Krieger. Well, I still have a term to run. 

Mr. Kennedy. What kind of a judge? 

Mr. Krieger. Municipal court. 

]\Ir. Kennedy. Judge Krieger, you laiow Mr. Johnny Dioguardi ? 

INIr. Krieger. I know him like I know a lot of other people. He 
was an international representative for the UAW. He was regional 
director for that organization when I met him. 

Mr. Kennedy. What were the circumstances under which you met 
him« 



3946 IMPROPER ACTIVITIHS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Krieger. I can't recall. It may have been some affair or some- 
place, I saw him around, and he was identified as being regional di- 
rector for the UAW. That goes back a number of years ago, or 
some time ago anyway. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had some connection with the granting of the 
charter to local 355 of the UAW? 

Mr. Krieger. Well, I don't think I had a connection with the 
granting of it; 355 had applied for a charter and it was granted to 
them. They had organized a group of workers, some two-hundred- 
odd workers, I think it was, and they applied for a charter, and they 
secured a charter, 

Mr. Kennedy. That is not the complete story, is it, Mr. Krieger, 
as far as you know ? 

Mr. Krieger. What do you mean that is not the complete story? 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, I am asking you for your knowledge about 
it. Is that the end of it? 

Mr. Krieger. My knowledge is the fact that two of the individuals 
who were organizing certain workers in a shop had succeeded in 
organizing a couple of hundred workers, and they had come in, and 
said they wanted to apply for a charter. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who did they come in to ? 

Mr. Krieger. They came in to see me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did they come in to see you, Harold Krieger, 
over in Jersey City ? 

Mr. Krieger. Because I represented several organizations, and they 
knew of me, I assume. 

Mr. Kennedy. How would they know of you? How would two 
people who wanted to get a charter from the UAW-AFL come to 
Jersey City to see Harold Krieger ? 

Mr. Krieger. I can't answer as to why they would come to me. I 
can say that they did come to me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you not surprised when they walked in the 
door? 

Mr. Krieger. You are not surprised when anyone comes in to talk 
to you about a matter. I think one of them was an organizer for some 
other union before he organized these workers. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you not think the proper procedure for them 
would have been to write a letter to the international or go see Johnny 
Dioguardi ? Why would they come over to Jersey City to see Harold 
Krieger to get a charter? 

Mr. Krieger. I don't know of any particular reason, other than 
one of the individuals, I think, was an organizer for some other union. 
He may have known of me. I don't recall knowing him, but he may 
have known me. He came in to see whether or not I would assist 
him in drafting his papers. Also, at that particular time, he was 
in the midst of organizing a shop. As I indicated to you, he wanted 
to apply for a certification for the employees, and file 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat shop was it? 

Mr. Krieger. This goes back about 3 years ago, 4 years ago. Some 
Roto shop ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Roto-Broil? 

Mr. Krieger. Roto-Broil shop. 

Senator Curtis. In what State was that shop ? 

Mr. Krieger. That was in New York. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3947 

Senator Cuims, Are you licensed to practice in New York? 

Mr, Krieger. I am admitted in the eastern district and admitted in 
the southern district of New York, both of those districts. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand at that same time there were 
two unions in Koto-Broil that were trying to get certification? 

Mr. Krieger. During the hearing 

Mr. Kennedy. Wait a minute. You are moving ahead. 

Did you understand when they came over to see you ? 

Mr. Krieger. I don't know if I knew at that time or if they knew 
at that time that there was any union in there at that moment. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you ever done any work for Roto-Broil? 

Mr. Krieger. No, I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Mr. Zwillman from New Jersey? 

Mr. Krieger. Well, I know a lot of people, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am asking if you know him. 

Mr. Krieger. I have met him, too. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he have an interest in Roto-Broil ? 

Mr. Krieger. Not that I know of. I have no knowledge of it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you think it possible that he might have? 

Mr. Krieger. I have no knowledge. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he ever speak to you about it ? 

Mr. Krieger. He never spoke to me about it, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He never spoke to you ? 

Mr. Krieger. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he ever speak to you about the granting of this 
charter ? 

Mr. Krieger. No, sir ; he never spoke to me about it at all. 

Mr. Kennedy. These two individuals came over to see you. Can 
you give us their names ? 

Mr. Krieger. One was Tolkow, and if my recollection serves me 
right, the other individual's name was Mas, M-a-s-s, I think. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is Benny Mas ? 

Mr. Krieger. Benny was the first name. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was a Puerto Rican friend of Tolkow? 

Mr. Krieger. I don't know if he was a Puerto Rican or not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know anything about Tolkow's background ? 

Mr. Krieger. I said I understood he was an organizer for some 
other union. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand he had been in the Communist 
Party ? 

Mr. Krieger. No, sir, I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you go into that at all ? 

Mr. Krieger. He never mentioned that at all, and I never had the 
occasion to ask him, because if my recollection serves me right, he 
filed — I can't say that he did file an affidavit. I don't know. I as- 
sumed he filed a non-Communist affidavit. 

Mr. Kennedy. With whom ? 

Mr. Krieger. With the Government. I assume so. 

Mr. Kennedy. When he came over to see you, did you then go to 
Mr. Johnny Dioguardi about the charter? 

Mr. Krieger. To my recollection, a letter was sent to the office 
requesting an application. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you vouch for these two individuals ? 



3948 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Krieger. Well, I don't think it was a question of voiichino;. I 
didn't vouch for anyone. I sent in the information that they had 
given me to send in, together with a list of names, and I think there 
were some twenty or some odd names of people that they had organized, 
and the application was made for them. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you take an interest in it after that ? 

Mr. Krieger. I represented them for a very short time after that, 
and then I had disassociated myself completely. 

]\Ir. Kennedy. Were you paid a fee by them ? 

Mr. Krieger. Well, frankly, I don't think they ever paid me. They 
owed me some money or they were in bad financial circumstances and 
hadn't paid any fees up to then nor since then. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you not have any idea as to why they came over 
to see you in Jersey City ? 

Mr. Krieger. Not offhand, no. A lot of people come in for you to 
represent that you have not met before and may have been recom- 
mended to you. 

The Chairman. VHao recommended these people to you or vou to 
them? 

Mr. Krieger. I don't recall oft'hand if there was a recommendation, 
because I don't recall them mentioning anybody sending them in or 
reconmiending them specifically. You see, this goes back, Senator, 
about 4 years ago. 

The Chairman. I understand. 

Did you do this legal work for them ? 

Mr. Krieger. I represented them in this National Labor Relations 
Board hearing proceeding. 

The Chairman. And you got no fee ? 

Mr. Krieger. They were to pay a fee, and they claimed that they 
were financially embarrassed, and that the organizers had not received 
any salaries, or were not receiving any salaries, and if I would bear 
with them, and I said I would. 

Tlie Chairman. I do not challenge your statement, but I do say it 
is most unusual a lawyer representing strangers without a fee. 

Mr. Krieger. Senator, that happens sometimes, and, frankly, that 
is wlw I didn't continue to represent them, because I wasn't getting 
paid any moneys, and they were taking up some time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could he identify this document J 

The Chairman. The Chair presents to you a labor organization reg- 
istration form under Public Law lOl- 80th Congress, regarding Amal- 
gamated Local 355. It is dated December 28, 1953. I will ask you 
to examine this document, this photostatic copy of the original, and 
also examine attached to it a photostatic copy of a letter dated De- 
cember 23, 1953, addressed to the Bureau of Labor Standards. The 
letter purports to be signed by you. 

Would you examine the two ? Examine the form first and the letter 
second, and state whether you identify them. 

]\Ir. Krieger. Well, it is a letter on my stationery, but I don't think 
that this is my signature on it. It may have been someone in the office 
who would sign the letter, one of my staff who signed the letter. It 
is forwarding a registration form to the Department of Labor. 

The Chairman. Do you recognize the form? Was that document 
prepared in your office by you ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3949 

Mr. Krieger. I assume tliat it was, Senator; I assume that it was. 
I have no present recollection, but I assume that it was. It is a photo- 
static copy of a letter on my stationery, though the signature, as I indi- 
cated before, was not mine. 

The Chairmax. I believe you would know that. Is it your signa- 
ture ? 

Mr. Krieger. No ; it is not, sir. Definitely, I don't recognize it as 
being mine. I can show you my signature and this. 

Tliere would seem to be a dilfereuce, unless it has changed to that 
extent. 

Tlie Chairman. The form may be made exhibit No. 37 and the letter 
will be made exhibit Xo. 37-A. 

(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibits 37 and 37-A" 
for reference and will be fomid in the appendix on pp. 40()r)-4007.) 

The Chairman. I Avill ask you to look at the form and see what 
address, permanent address, you gave to that local that that form 
applies to. 

Mr. Krieger. Senator, the addi-ess is indicated as my address of 
my office. Might I say this: That it is not unusual when a new local 
starts, and they haven't got any office facilities, that you permit them 
to use, for the purpose of mailing, your addi-ess, so that the communi- 
cations can be addressed to you. 

The Chairman. I thought maybe that Avould recall a little more 
the transaction. 

Mr. Krie<u-:r. Xo. As I s;nd Itefore, I doiTt doubt the fact that this 
was prepared in the office, and I don't d( ubt the fact that it was signed 
in my office, and the fact that one of my statl' wrote my name upon it, 
upon sending the form out. 

The (^iiAiRMAN. Proceed. 

Mr. Kenn?:dy. What did you do when they came over there? Did 
3^ou get in touch with Johnny Dio at that time? 

Mv. Krieger. My recollection was that there was a reference made 
to send this to the regional office and he was in charge of the regional 
office, and that a request was made for an application and the applica- 
tion was completed and returned. 

Now, whether it \\"as returned to the regional oflice or to the principal 
office, I cannot recall. 

The Chairman. Had it gone to the regional office, it would have 
gone to Dio? 

Mr. Krieger. I assume so, because he was the regional director. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did 3^011 know he was regional director? 

Mr. Krieger. It was common knowledge. It was common knowl- 
edge. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was Dio during this period of time a client of yours? 

Ml'. Krieger. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you doing any work for him? 

Mr. Krieger. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did .you afterward do any work for him? 

Mr. Krieger. I don't recall ever representing him, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you represent any of his other unions ? 

Mr. Krieger. I recall representing another local union, I think, in 
some labor relations board hearings. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was local 224 that you represented ? 



3950 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Krieger. I think it was local 224. The fact is I don't think I 
handled the matter personally. I think one of my associates in the 
office handled the matter. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Dio refer them to you ? 

Mr. Krieger. Not that I recall, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did you happen to come to represent them? 

Mr. Krieger. My recollection was that there was a council at the 
time, and they were part of the council, local 224, and I assume that 
they may have known that I was handling this case with this Koto- 
Broil before the board, and they came in and asked if I would handle 
that matter, which I did. By the way, they paid the fee. 

Mr. Kennedy. Thej^ did pay. Did you get a fee for that? 

Mr. Krieger. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any connection with 355 after that, 
after going through the sending of their application into Johnny Dio? 

Mr. Krieger. As I said, I handled the matter before the National 
Labor Relations Board for them. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know where the money to start their union 
came from ? 

Mr. Krieger. I don't follow you, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. When they started their union, local 355, they de- 
posited some money in the bank. Do you know where that money 
came from ? 

Mr. Krieger. No ; I wouldn't know, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You haven't any idea of that ? 

Mr. Krieger. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Tolkow have some money at that time, 
enough money to start the union ? 

Mr. Krieger. I don't know. If he did, he didn't mention it to me. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had no connection with it after that? 

Mr. Krieger. No, sir; they had then went out of the organization 
or something. I don't know what happened. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have no explanation as to why they came over 
to see you? 

Mr. Krieger. I don't know offliand if they were recommended or 
came in on their own volition or someone mentioned it. I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. You got in touch with Dio to get them a charter or 
did you get in touch with the international ? 

Mr. Krieger. I said my recollection was that we wrote a letter to 
either the regional office or the main office, and I don't recall which 
it was, in which we requested a charter. We sent in the applications 

that they had, that these boys had from these employees 

Mr. Kennedy. And you didn't know anything about their back- 
ground, yet you did all of this work for them ? 

Mr. Krieger. I didn't know anything about their background, no, 
but frankly they appeared to be very honest and sincere in their 
efforts, and conscientious in what they were doing. 

The fact is, if I recall correctly, Mr. Washburn, who was the inter- 
national president, gave them a special letter telling them how pleased 
he was in the work they were doing, and that he had found that they 
weren't connected with this Mr. Dioguardi. 

Mr. Kennedy. But originally, when they came in, you didn't know 
where they came from, you knew nothing about them, according to 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 3951 

your testimony, and yet you went and obtained a charter for them 
from Johnny Dioguardi ? 

Mr. Krieger. When you say I obtained, I didn't obtain it. It was 
granted to them. 

Mr. Kennedy. Through your efforts. 

Mr. Krieger. I don't think it was through my efforts. They had 
organized the people. They organized some 200 people. 

Mr. Ivennedy. If that was true, they could go to Johnny Dio them- 
selves. 

Mr. Krieger. No doubt they could have. Without a question of 
doubt they could have done that. But they merely wanted some assist- 
ance. They also had the situation where they were going to file for 
certification for these employees who they had organized. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know any of the officials from Roto-Broil ? 

Mr. Krieger. No, excepting an individual that I met during the 
hearings. 

Mr. Kennedy. You don't know Irving Jacobsen ? 

Mr. Krieger. I Avouldn't know the name, sir. I met a man during 
the hearings. He appeared as one of the owners or the owner of 
Roto-Broil. In fact, I saw him here for the first time since the day 
of the hearing 4 years ago. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Albert Klinghoffer ? 

Mr. Krieger. The name doesn't mean a thing to me, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know him ? 

Mr. Krieger. I don't know him. I may know the individual if I 
saw him. He may have appeared at the hearing, if that is an indi- 
vidual with the company. I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever discuss the contract with Roto-Broil ? 

Mr. Krieger. Never discussed the contract, never negotiated the 
contract, never had anything to do with it. I understand there was 
another attorney that represented that local 355 after that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat was your position when Tolkow and Mas came 
over to see you ? Were you just a private attorney ? 

Mr. Krieger. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you working for the city at that time ? 

Mr. Krieger. Yes, sir ; I was. 

The Chairman. Did you receive a letter in — when was the appli- 
cation made'^ 

Mr. Kennedy. December 31, 1953, is when the charter was issued. 

The Chairman. December 31, 1953 ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is right. 

The Chairman. Did you, then, within 3 or 4 months thereafter, 
receive notice that that charter was cancelled ? 

Mr. Krieger. Yes. There was a letter sent by Mr. Washburn, as I 
indicated before, and he had made an investigation. After he had 
made an investigation, he reinstated the charter immediately. In 
fact, a definite representation was made that these boys of 355 were 
not a part of any other organization, and he had investigated and 
found that Mr. Dioguardi was not in control of that local union. He 
so stated in a letter, after his own personal investigation. 

Frankly, Senator 

The Chairman. So stated to you ? 

Mr. Krieger. So stated in a letter. 

The Chairman. To whom ? 



3952 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kriecjer. To the local. 

The CiiAiRMAx. Did you receive a copy of that letter ? 

Mr. Krieger. I received a copy, I don't think from Mr. Washburn. 
I think I got it from the local union. That is my best recollection. 

The Chairman. I see Mr. Washburn apparently wrote you, and if 
there is anything wiong with this you can correct it, personally on 
April 22, 195-1:, in which he said : 

Enclosed is copy of the letter addressed to .Joliimy Dioguardi which is self- 
explanatory — 

and he asks you if you are still connected in any way with Local 355, 
UAW-AFL. 

You are herewith requested to return to nie immediately the charter, supplies, 
and any other documents with respect to said Local S.jS, UAW-AFL. 

Did you reply to that letter ? 

Mr. Krieger. Yes, sir ; I am quite certain I did. 

The Chairman. You received it and you replied to it ? 

Mr. Krieger. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. At that time, did you have anv connection with 
355? 

Mr. Krieger. At that time, they had come in — I received the letter 
directly, I think that is my recollection, I received the letter. I think 
that they may have also received a letter. 

A reply was sent to Mr. Washburn stating that there was no con- 
nection in any res]>ect as far as control over 355, that there was an 
independent local union as far as any relationship with Mr. Dioguardi 
was concerned, excepting Mr. Dioguardi was the T AW I'epresentatiA'e 
at the time. 

Mr. Washburn came into New York, if my recollection serves me 
right, and he made an investigation. After his investigation, he wrote 
a letter in which he reinstated tlie charter. I think that was one of 
the only charters that was reinstated at the time. 

The Chairman. If Dioguardi was the regional director, then he 
would have some connection with it ; would he not ? 

Mr. Krieger. Well, I assume that he would have connection only 
insofar as he was in charge of the area for the international. As far 
as the internal aft'airs of a local union, I assume that an international 
has a right to send in a representative to watch the progress of a local 
union, and to detei'mine what progress it has made. I assume in that 
respect he would have that ty])e of a connection. 

The Chairman. I would assume, and the record here probably dis- 
closes, that at tliat time, April 22, 1054, Dioguardi was the regional 
director, and that is why you sent a letter to him. 

Mr. Krieger. I think he was. 

Prior to that time, I think he had been removed by Mr. Washburn^ 
if my recollection serves me right. 

Mr. Kennedy. I think, if I may say so, it is a little confused. In 
the first place, Mr. Washburn did not reinstate the charter of local 
355. That charter was reinstated by the action of the international 
executive board. 

Mr. Krie(;er. Well, when I say Mr. Washburn, I assume that he had 
recommended to the international executive board because, ]\Ir. Ken- 
nedy, I think, if you will check, you will find that Mr. Washburn 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3953 

personally wrote a letter in which he reinstated the charter as presi- 
dent. That is my recollection. 

]\Ir. Kennedy. He lifted the charter. The board overrnled him and 
he resigned. The board was the one that overruled him and reinstated 
the charter. I think you are mixed up on the letters, too. 

Mr. Krieger. Mr. Kennedy, I think you will find that 35.5 was the 
only local that was reinstated by him. 

]\Ir. Kennedy. Mr. "Washburn did write a letter. He wrote a letter 
on May 6, 1954, and he wrote a letter about a union in which he said 
rmion affairs were in good condition. But that letter was in connec- 
tion with local 224, which you represented, not local o55. 

Mr. Krieger. 355, too, I am quite certain, Mr. Kennedy, you will 
find that he personally reinstated it after the investigation. That is 
my best recollection. 

Ml'. Kennedy. Your recollection is not in accordance with the docu- 
ments. 

Mr. Krieger. Well, I will check. 

The Chairman. You may check it. 

According to our records here, and I think I can state to you this 
was taken from the files of the union, the internatioiuxl union; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Dunne. That is correct. 

The Chairman. A copy of a letter we obtained from there, dated 
May 6, refers only to local 224. 

Mr. Kennedy. Here is the action from a document. 

The Chairman. Has this been introduced in evidence ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is from the international. 

The Chairman. This is not evidence in the file yet. It has not 
been placed in the record, but I can say to you, just for your guidance, 
that these are from the files of the international union. 

Mr. Krieger. Well, Senator, I don't know whether this will help 
or not, but I find a letter that is not dated, but it is addressed to Amal- 
gamated Local No. 355, UAW-AFL. "Dear Sir and Brothers.'- 

Mr. Kennedy. What is the address? 

Mr. Krieger. It says "Copy" across it. Whether I received this 
from Tolkow, that he made a copy of what he received, I don't recall. 
It says : 

Upon investigation I have found tliat local 3r)5 has had no connection with 
Johnny Dioguardi or his organization. My investigation also shovFS that the lo- 
cal union and its leaders are doing a commendable job of organizing legitimate la- 
bor organization. 

In view of the above, I am hereby reinstating the charter of Local ;^.")5, UAW- 
AFL, and sincerely hope that the present campaigns will be successful, and 
l)Iease be assured that your endeavors has the complete support of the interna- 
tional union. 

Fraternally yours, 

Lester Washburn, 
Interna t iona I P res id en t . 

The Chairman. What date is that ? 

Mr. Krie(;er. As I said before, it doesn't appear to have a date on 
it, sir. 

The Chairman. If you had it, they must have the original. 

Mr. Krieger. I assume that the international union has the orig- 
inal. 

The Chairman. To whom is it addressed? 

S!t:{3U— 57— i)t. 10 24 



3954 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Krieger. It is addressed to the local union. 

The Chairman. And it did not