(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 "Work materials ..."

"•'^-••iil 



Illlllf-Se '«^.MA^. 



OFFICE OF NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION 
DIVISION OF REVIEW 



HISTORY OF THE CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION 
for the 

SHIPBUILDING AND SHIPREPAIRING INDUSTRY 



WORK MATERIALS NO. 70 



Administrative Section 
March. 1936 



H I S T 11 Y 
01 the 

CODE 02 pai:r co;;p2iTiTioii 

for the 

s:nP3uiLDiiiCr Aim sHiprL:::PAiHiiTG iwdustey 

Ap^3roved Code ITo. 2 



Author: 

J. Ilevrton Faittelsey 



Robert C. Ayers 
Chief, Histories Unit 



J732 



This histoiy of the Code of Pair Conpetition for the ShiplDuil cling 
and Sliiprepairing industr^^ is raineographod in order to nalce available 
a snn-ole of the code histories prepared "by the Division of Revie'7. 
A sinilar service uill be rendered in connection vfith certain other 
code histories. 

lu order to get a conplete picture of national "."lecover;- Acriinis- 
tration iiaterials applicable to a ,;iven indv.stry, one nust visualize 
such 8. documented code history as this sujrported b^r the three voliunes 
of evidence vhich were sent to the President at the time the code was 
reconnended for his approval, plus any studies in this field either 
bj' the Division of Research and Planniiag or by the Division of Revievr 
of the rational Secoverjr Adjninis traction, plus the vast anount of ma- 
terial in ITationcJ. Zecovery Adninictration files which was developed 
in connection \7ith the formation and administration of the code. These 
constitute a veritable treasurj' of infonnation concerning the opera- 
tions and probloms of indxistrj-. 

Txiis Listor;- contains a documented acco-unt of the formation and 
administra-tion of the code; the definition of the industry and the 
principal products thereof; the classes of members in the industr;'-; an 
account of the sponsoring organizations, the conferences, negotiations 
aJid hearings which were held, and the activities in connection with 
obtaining approval of the code; the organization and operation of the 
code authority, the difficulties enco-ontered in the acb.-; in i strati on, 
the extent of compliance and non-compliance, a^id the general success 
or lacl: of success of the code; and an analysis of the operation of the 
code provisions dealing with wages, hours, trade practices, and other 
provisions. These and other matters are canvasned, not only in the 
terms of materials to be found in the files, but also in terms of ex- 
periences of the Division Ad:,iinistrators, Deputy Administrators, Assis- 
tant Deputy Administrators aiid others connected with the code formation 
and administration. 

At the bach of this historj'- will be found a brief statement of the 
studies and work undertalcen by the Division of Review. 



L. C. Karshall 
Director, Division of Review 

Ilarch 6, IS 36 



3752 -i- 



HI S T R. Y 
of the 
Code of Pair Coi:iijstition 
for the / 
SHIPBUILDING AND SHIP ESP AIRING INDUSTRY 



Approved Code No. 2 
Registry No. 140e/l/0l 



Approved July 25, 1933 
Effective August 5, 1933 



Compiled "by H. Kewton 'JThittelsey 
Assistant Deputy Section Director 



Reviewed ty 



_ „ 

A. Heath Cnthank, Director 
liaustry Section No. 2 



9732 -11-^ 



-ip.'^r 



TO: A. Eaath Cnthank 

director, Industry Section 2 

PEOi:: H. llev-rton Ti^iittelsey 

Assistant Deputy Section Director 

SUBJECT: History of the Code of ?air Competition for the 
Slaipliuilding and Shiprepairing Industry 



Herewith original and five copies of tne 
above history prepared in accordance T,7ith the revised 
model outline dated July 10, 1935. 

In my opinion this history adequately 
reflects the history of the code. 



H. NETTiop WHITTELSSY ( Signed) 
H. Ke;.'ton T^iittelsey ~~ 

Assistant Deputy Section Director 



Hevierred "by: 

E. H. SCKAJ]ITBR (Sign ed) 
E. H. Schaeffer 



j^p roved: 



A. Heath Gntl^nk 



9732 -iii~ 



riSFACE 



This rristor;- of the Couc of iVir Coi:netioion foi' the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairiiiti Industry certains to en Industr-'- Irwgely outside the 
tariff wall. The principal business of the rna.jor and mediuia size plants 
is ^he buildin^ and repair of Cormnorcial Ve;'.sels for dee;o sea trade, 
which uiust be sold to operators who are in direct competition with 'che 
raerchant fleets of the world. In this Goir;oetiti on, construction cost 
must be .-^nortized durin.j; the life of the vessels and at the sarae time 
there r.iust oe c;:rried the increased costs of o^'^emtion of American 
vessels. A lev of the majox' com-oa::.ies also build for the Fav^/. 

The History of this Code :'o. 2 and the Industry subject to it was 
predeter..iined 'oy two early events, i. e.; (l) There was substantirlly 
im"50sed on t'oe Industry uneconomic weekly houxs of 33 -oer wee'!: for 
i'aval \:orl: and c6 -oer vee]'. for CoLimerci:;l vrnrlz at the -nost-hearinc-, con- 
ferences, after reasonrble \/er-":ly hours of 40 per week had been de- 
termined in three days of he rinjs, {?.) a.-.d there r--re not submitted 
to the Administration, o;- the De'outy, the. Industry's Rules Pnd Rc- 
i-ulftions cjr;taining its Fair Trade Practice ••rrovisions, for ap-oroval 
and necessary modifications to make them enforceable, and consequently 
its Trade Practice -provisions failed of enforcement. 

Shipbuilding is not a continuoj.s "orocess, and it cannot be 
ori^anized cora-oletely on a fa.ctory production basis. Prior to July 1, 
19C" , the Industry worj'jecl on a 44 to 48 hour basis and t-^-ve the men 
a payroll on 37-Jy hours per week avera^ e. A 40 hour maximum average 
week would .;ive them about Z3 hcn-s • ler week try, but che Code 36 hours 
per week f-,ave them only j9 to 31 hour? lay. Due to the restricted 
weekly h'^iirs labor became restive, and v;a._ve scs.les were increased 
20.' to 40'^j and, t'nerefore, far beyon;! Code require-.ionts, until the 
scale as reported Hay 1935 by tlie Department of Labor was 75 cents 
avera-e oer hour for Shiy/ouildinj^, whereas General : '^mufacturing 
Industries averf>_,ed 57 cents -T.-r hou", a difference of 30,3. Even then, 
the jaens' average -parj of April 1935 was only 323.60, and in conseq^uence 
a major strike dcvelone'l. 

Peak em'ilornienc on ITaval contrr cts was seriously aelayed by the 
Code hours and eyamloyment on ne'j deep sea coimaercial contracts was 
substc-ntially barred lar^^ely <iue to the increased cost incident to the 
restricted hdrs. The Code acted to spread errrjolo^rment for a few months, 
but defe£ited the real increase of employment hoped for. The Government 
operated the '.■av^.'- yards on a 40 hour ner week basis because it would 
have required an increase of aooronriation to reduce to 36 hourrj per 
week, and drev? skilled raevi from the private ytirds. 

The Code ori,^inally ;:)rovided 32 hours for ITaval shinbuilding and 
36 houjcs for Commercial shi-fouildin^- with -)ermit to w irl; up to 40 hours 
on Shi'tirepairing, but the latter to be averai^ed over a six months' neriod 
at 36 hours. April ■?., 1934, Amendm-nt Vo. 3, I'pvpI Shi'^buildinc; was 
chan^'^d to 36 ho.-a-s. The Shi-ibuilders an'^lied to the Administrator 
for further relief of 40 hours p -r week, a conference was held on 

9732 -iv- 



May 7, 19c4, where all nr.rties of interest v/ere renresented, but no 
uocision v.as evtr leaiiered 'oy che Administrator, cilthou^.h over 90' • of 
N. H. A. Codes and Supplftment.-. -provided for 40 hours per week or "better. 

The TTashi}-! -ton viev o:," this Indus^Ty has boen lart-ely in error, 
whether judf.ed from open hefrin^^s, conferences, or conversations. Build- 
int; of Naval vessels is spoken of usually as the princi''->al and only 
business of the Industry. In fact, only 7 of the ?34 shi-ohuilding end 
repair comoanies h.a.ve contracts to build for the I'avy. The Industry 
in" 1919 employed L;87,44G, y-nd in 1927' err-)loyed 6?, 387, and in 1929 emr- 
ployed 55,069, mostly on conmercial phi:-ibuildine; and repair. The cm- 
■oloyment d-;rini-:; A-nril 1^.'?5 was 40,582 and included hardly more tlian 
one-ihird actuall;^'- ■.^orkinji on ITaval contr-'xts. 

The Fair Trade Practice Tirovisions incorporated in the Eules and 
Hee-uli ti ns were- seriou'^ly desired oy the Industry to correct certain 
bad -.iractices. Coj;3id--'rable effort was made at three meetin^-s of the 
Code Authority and tv/o hearin 'js (one an o^ien liearin^) to v^eriect these 
under the e,uida.nce of the Deouty, and they wer'^ finally a r^roved by the 
Code Authority October .?., 193r. They contained sorae provisions that 
should have been submitted as amendiiients and others that needed niodi- 
ficaticn to make them enforceable. Unfortunately, the Dcniuty did nob 
submit them to the Adi:..ni3tr^tion and the entire lot wont into discard, 
leaving the Industry without ar.;,'' adoqua.te "orovisicns. 

In Llarch 1934 wor]- on an Ainended Code to include suitable Labor 
and Fair Trr^de Practice provisions v/as be^-.un by the Shipbuilders, but 
it v.'as held up pending the decision on the aoplication for the 40 hour 
week. Every effort was made by those in chart,e of the Code to hxive the 
Amended Code suo.dtted, but without success in viev; of the indefinite 
situation x-e.,c.-.rdin_- the 40 hour weel: and the 30 hour lav; T)endint, in 
Consress. definite plans, however, v;ere under v/ay for a revised Code 
under the nronosed new T. ... a. la?/, ths.t was ex-pected to rectify the 
situation. 

The author's ey-oerience with the A'drainis uration of this Code was 
characterized by continuou.s iro.jlemr. of stays and exemptions which were 
for the most "oart the outcome of restricted hours, fui'ther, the unrest- 
ful labor situation made a.n Indu-^trial Relations Committee most nec- 
essary, which war; difficult to set un, but finally -irovea hi^ihly efficient 
as the Industry and Labor h'embers ^'orked exceedingly well together. 

The author jointed II. R. A. in April 1934 for work of administcr- 
ir.£, the Shipbuildinti and Shioreimirin.-; Code, :3oatbuildin^ and 3oatre- 
pairin^ Code, a;ia other Llarine Codes, under ;;r. J. B. Weaver, Deputy 
administrator, Division I. August 1, 1934, the Code was transferred 
to Division II, V.v. Barton W. ilurray, Division Ad^TJinistrator, with 
Colonel \i, W. Hote, Deputy of the Section, and the author was trans- 
ferred with the Code at the same tine. Both Mr. i.forray and Colonel 
Rose took considerable int'=-rest in this Code and its -u-oblcms. The 
author's )revioas trainin^:, was University of Hin- esota, and then Univ- 
ersity of Glasgow, C-las5,.ow, Scotland, for Faval Architecture, Bath Iron 
works, Bath, Maine, for 'oractical shipbuilding in the yard; Consolidated 
Shipbuildin,^' Company, Maryland Steel Comiany (Bethlehem Shipbuilding 



9732 



-V- 



Coh.panj,-), lMe'7 Yorl: Shi-obuildiiii' Gom;^an,y ir. ■.icsi^aii:;^;; follov/ed by a 
lon^ pei'iod in Hew Yorl: ar- the head of IToittolsey and r.-hittelsey, Faval 
ii-rcnitects and l.Irrine Fnt^ineors, rho act--^a for shinbuilders, owners, 
and financial inutitutions, 



la. 



Coirpiilnd by: 

H. ^^WHQ-J T;EIT?LLSZY (SJCTed ) 

H. rev^ton V'hittelse:'' 

Ar,sistant Do-outy Section Director 



9732 -vi- 



( 



HISTORY 
of the 
Code of Fair Competition 
for the 

SHIPBUILDIH& MB SHIPEEPAIHIIIG Ii:]DUSTRY 



-VI 1- 



9732 



TASLE 0? COlITT^l^S 



PAGE 



Title 

Letter of Transmittal 

Preface 

Code History 

Contents 

I . Genere.1 Information 

A, Definition of Industry 

E. Definition of Industrj'^ L'ember 

C. Statistics of the Industry 

II. History of Code PorTflula,tion 

A. Sponsoring Orgn.nization 

B. From Submission of Pirst Draft 

Code to Public H:ea.ring 

C. Public Hearin^'^s on Code 

D. Prom Public Hearing to Aporoval 

III. Code Administration 

A. Definitions. 

B, 1. Organization 

2. Personnel of Code Authority 

3. I.ieetings of Code Authoritj'- 

Au~ust 22, 1933 to Farch 5, 1934 

".larch 5, 1934 to August 20, 1935 

4. Agency of the Code Authority 

-viii- 

9732 



11 



111 



IV 



VI 1 



Vlll 



1 

4 
5 
6 



13 

16 
16 
56 



61 

64 
72 

74 

166 



PAGE 

C, Ijudgets and Basis of Assessment 189 

D. Administration of the Code 217 

1. Amend'nents 217 

2-3 Interpretptions, Sxerritions end Stays 252 

4 a Otlier Administrative Agencies 300 

4 b L'Voor Complaints Co'nmittees 

Industrial Relations Committee 308 

4 11-2 Industrial Relations Activities 370 

4 c By-Laws - Rules and Regulations 395 

IV. Operation of Code Provisions 424 

A. Definitions 424 

B. Uages 427 

C . Hours 438 

" Economic Effect 468 

D. Other Labor Provisions 482 

- 6. StriVe - NeT? York Shipbuilding Corooration 482 

E. Administrative Provisions 495 

P. Price and Accoionting Provisions 497 

G. Trade Pract ices 501 

H. Other Provisions 503 

V, Recommendations 504 

A. Undesirable or Unenforceable Provisions 504 



-iz- 



?732 



f 



PACrE 

3. Compliance rith Code. 507 

C. Limitai-ions on Prorl-uction 507 

D. Possible Code Consolida.tion3 507 

E^ Relations of Covern.'^.ent vith. Industry 507 

VI. A, Personnel 513 

B. Administration Member' s Report. 511 

Appendix - Bound in Separate Voliirae 

Index 



"X- 



9732 



INDEX 



-XI- 



3732 



il 



IIISEX 

PAGES 

Accounting and Price ?x"ovisions kSf 

Accoiintin,'; System 5OO 

Administration of Code 217 

Adniini stration LierVoGr ( s) 513 

Chan.<;es in 73 

Report 511 

Administrative Code Provisions U95 

Administrative Order '.'^jo, 209 

Termination of Parr^J-'P-pl^ 3 • 209 

Administrative Orders, List of Pa^e 3 of Contents - Appendix 

Administrative Orders, "Otliers" 209 

Effect of 209 

Administrative Price Policy' 5^0 

Ad-mini st rat ive Provisions ^95 

Advisory Boards 5^3 

Personnel 513 

Reports Set forth in III J) 2-3 252 

Agencies of Code Autliorit" I66 

Aides 513 

Amendments 217 

Apprentices and Learners 4S2 

Approval 

of Ly-La^s. 395 

of Code 59 

of Code Authorit" 73 

Appendix - Contents See Appendix 



-XI 1- 
9732 



IIUEX 

PAGES 

xissessinents 189-215 

ilethods of Collectio:i Igg 

Proportion Collected 209 

S'j.ccess or failure 2l6 

Voluntary or ilanclctory IS9 

Assist?jit Deputy Actiinictrators 513 

Association I3 

Officers of lU 

(See also "S:oonsorin{; Organization") 



Budgets 

As SalDnitted and Approved 189-200 

Periods Covered 3y 197-20S 

Budgets and Bases of Assessnent 1S9 

By-Laws (l^les a^nd Ee/p.il'tions) 395 

Approval Date 397 

Approval, Steps in Ootaining 397 



Capital, Agfiregate Invented 6 

Child Labor Provision kZ2 

Class A Trade Practices. 502 

Class 3 Trade Practices 502 

Classes of I ndustry Ilenoers 3^ 

Classification of Castoners 5^0 

Code Administration. 6U 

Ad.'aini strati on of the Code. 217 

Amendment s , 217 



-Xlll- 

9732 



IMSSX 

FAOES 

Code Aiilmini strati on (Continued) 

Budgets and Basis of Assessment IS9 

C-enerrl Preliuiiicry Discussion 6I 

Q-enerrJ. Success or Lr.ck of Saccess 62 

Organization. bU 

Heetings, ■bcf:i:min^' .'ai-gust 22, 1933 7^+ 

" " :.sxch j, 1S3U 

Code Approval 59 

Conditions in OvCor of 59 

Date of 59 

Code Authority 65 

Agencies I66 

As Industry-Croverninj; Body ISS 

Assessi.ient Collection ilotnods IS9 

By-la".7s, or Rules r,nd Regulp.tions 395 

Changes in 6S 

Date of Selection, end llethcd 6U 

Jield Orgcinizr.tion I66 

Financial Operrtions 2l6 

Personnel 65 

Protest 300 

PLecognition., d4 

Code Connittee 14 

Code Foriralstion 13 

Early Conferences r,nd Negotiations lU 

Hearings Id 

Officers, Code Co::::ittees, Interested Groups lU 

Code, Printed ( approved) Appendix A 

Code Provisions 

Changes IXiring Pinal Drafting 5^ 

Operation '^2h 

Undesirahle or Unonforceahle 50^ 

(See also "Operr.tion of Code Provisions") 

Code Revision (proposed) ■ 2U9 



-:civ- 
9732 



PA&HS 

Collection of Strtictics, U96 

Compli:->jicc 

Definitions ^4?^ 

Hours ^38 

Recoinr.endationc 5^7 

Trade Prr.ctices 5*^1 

Wages ^27 

Coraf)liance Eivisio.:, lle^^orts cf 

Ccncerns, ITumoer of o 

Conditions in Oruer of ^'.^proval 59 

Conf identipl Agency 4-9b 

Consolidations, Possiole Code 5^7 

Consuicers' Advi sory Ijoard 51^+ 

Reports Set forth III D 2-3 252 

Coopera.tives 5^1 

Cost System 500 



Definition of Incaistiv* ^ 

Adnendnents. . . . • 217 

Evolution ^ 

Operation ^2U 

Definition of Industry lleiYoer 5 

Deputy Administrators 5^3 

Differentials 

Price 501 

Wage ^27 



-XV- 

S732 



INDEX ;- 

PAGES 
Division Aaninistr-^tors 513 



Economic Effect of Hours U6g 

Emergency Price Basis 5OO 

Employees, A^:gregate ITui^iber of 6 

Executive Order 6205-3, Protests Piled Under 59 

Exemptions 263 

Explanations US2 

Factory 1i7age-Earners, ITanter of. 6 

Field Organization of Code Authority I66 

Final-Draft Code Appendix A 

Financial Operations of Code Authority 212-216 

" " Closing of 216 

First-Draft Code to Riljlic Hearing Appendix B 

General Information 1 

Handicapped Persons US2 

Hedge Clause 5^3 

Home Uorkers U22 



-XVI- 

9732 



IITDEX 



PAGES 



Hours Provisions U3S 

Compliance , 

Effect U39 

Economic effect on Comj.:ercial and Kaval Contrc?.cts U68 



Industrial Advisoiv Board 51^ 

Reports Set forth in III D 2-3 252 

Industrial Relations Conattee 3O8 

" " " Activities 370 

Industry'- 

Compliance 5^7 

Definition of, U 

Reaction to Code A;;^proval 59 

Statistics of 6 

Industry Member, Definition of 5 

Industry Members, Clr.sses of 6 

Insignia U3U 

Interpretations 252 

'• of Code A-ithority 25U 

Investigation of Records. ^95 



Labels 210 

Labor Advi sory Board 5^3 

Reports Set fortli in III D 2-3 252 

Labor Compla.int s Co-r-ittee ( s) 3^3 

Labor Conplaints 3S2-3S7 USO 



-XVI 1- 

3732 



o 



IIUBX 

PAGES 

Labor Provisions 

:.Ii scellaneoi^s. US2 

Posting U3U-U2I 

(See also "Hours" end "'Jages") 

Learners and Apprentices. US2 

Legal Divi si on 513 

Reports Set ."orth in III D 2-3 252 

Limitation on Proc.-action, Kachinery, Shifts, etc 5^^? 

Liquidated Damages. U96 



Iliscellaneous Labor Provisions US2 



Operation of Code Frovicions U2U 

Accounting rr.d Price U97 

Ad'"dnistrative ^95 

Definitions U2U 

Hours U3S 

Labor, other thrn Hoiirs p.nd Uages U22 

Trade Practices. 501 

T7ages H27 

Uneconomic effect of hour provisions U68 

Order of Ap:oroval 59 

Overlapping Definitions. ^425 

Overtime Pay U3U 



Peak Periods ^480 

Pablic Works Adiiinistrr.tion Contracts ^37 



-XVlll- 

3732 



PAGES 

Personnel 

Adjnini strati on. 513 

Code Authority 72 

Post-Hearing Conferences 5^ 

Posting cf Later Provisions ^3^ 

Pre-Hearing Conferences and negotiations l6 

Price and Accounting Provisions U57 

Price Basis, Eriergencj/. 5^0 

Price Differentials 501 

Price-Filing Ugg 

Price Policy, Adi.:inxstrative 500 

Primary Material Sources 3 

Principal Products t 5 

Printed Code and A:enc>.:ents .Appendix A 

Production Capacit;-, ^Iggregate 6 

Production, Linit.- tion On 50? 

Products Under Other Cof.es 5 

Proportion of Assess: .cnts Collected i . . . . i 209 

Protests Under E::ecutive Order 62O5-B 4 59 

" Of Code Authority. 300 

Putlic Hearing ( s) on Code I6 

Dates "... 16 

Personnel I6 

Results 56 



-XIX- 

5732 



INDEX 

PAGES 

Palilic Hearing ( s) to Ap;.orova.l 56 

Activities I>arin;^' Pinal Drafting of Code 56 

Assent of Ir.dustr;" to Code 59 

Changes in Code Provisions during Pinal Drrftin/; 57 

Fost~Hea.ring Conferences 5^+ 



Recommendations 50^+ 

Compliance \7ith Code 50? 

Limitation on Production, Machinery.', Sliifts, etc 5^7 

Possible Code Consolidations 5^7 

Undersirable or Unenforceable Provisions 50^ 

Relation of the Governr.ient to Industry 5^7 

References 3 

Reports of Advisory 3orrds...Set forth in III D 2-3 252 

Research and Planning Divi si on 513 

Reports 252 and 462 



Sale s 6 

Ships - Navy Contracts ^71 

Skilled Wages U29 

Sponsoring Organization ( s) 13 

Na.me , Age and Ob j active U20 

Officers, Code Coriuittees, Interested Groups..... lU 

Representativeness. iH 

Statistics of Industry 6 

Capital, Aggregate Invested 6 

Concerns, Eomber of _ 6 

Employees, AgCjrey.te Number of 6 

Sales 6 



-XX- 

3732 



Q 



ICTEX 

PA&ES 

Stays 263 

Stop~loGs Provisions. 5^0 

Strikes - New York Shipbuilding Corporation US2 

Termination of Paragrr-ph 3j Administrative Order X-35... 209 

Terms of Payment 500 

Tolerances USO 

Trade Association ( s) hZO 

Trade Practice CorrplrAnts Committee ( s) and Plan 300 

Trade Practices 

Class A 502 

Class B 502 

Undesirable or Unenforceable Provisions 504- 

Wage Differentials ^+32 

Wage s ^27 

Adjustment poove i;inir.Tam 432 

Industry Conplicuice H-2S 

Maladjustment Titli Other Industries ^3^+ 

Skilled >+29 

" Also Appendix 

Waiting Period ^+99 



-XXI- 

9732 



COlJTEhlS 

CI? 
APHSliDIX 

A - Code and Anondments 1, 3 nnd 3 

- 1 I'lotice of (>:) ■J0rtunit3'' to Pile OlDJoctions 

B ~ Revised Pro,:)Osed Code es submitted at close of oncn 
Hcra'irifj July 1 , IS 33 

- 1 Proposed Code na ori,;^i>inlly submitted July 10, 19,S3 

C - The Merchant M-rine by Honornble i.Iillrrd V. Cald'jell 

D - Letter July ,''■0, 1933, to ArtkLU' D. TJniteside from 

C. L, 3r.rdo, president of Ho" York Shipbuilding 
Corooratiou 

E - Letter June 24, 1935, to K, irev:ton Whittelsey, 

Assistant Deputy Administrr.tor, from H. Gerrish 
Smith, President Iiational Co-'oncil of Ai:ierican 
ShiiDbuilders 

P - Letter July 12, 1935, to ri» ile'.-ton IThittelsoy, 

Assistant De,7ut7 Adrainistrr tor, ProM Joseph S. 
IIcDonagh, Intern.-^ tional Brotherhood of Electrical 
Uori-cers 

- 1 Letter J^xL.y 11, 1935, to Joseph S, ilcDonagh, International 

Brotherhoou of Electrical Uorkers, fron John P. 
Prey, President I/Ietal Trades Department, American 
Pedera.tion of Labor 

G- - Ferguson Charts - 'Snroloyuent 

- 1 " " - Avera.'je Hates 

- 2 " " - TJeeliy TTage 

H - Members of the Indiistry 

I - Letter July 14, 1933, to Honoraaile Hu;":h S. Johnson, 

Administrator, from H. G-errish Smith and Jose;oh 
Haa,^', the Shipbuilders Committee rnd B-y-La-r-s for 
Administering the Shr:/D"'xilding Division as 
submitted with the Code 



9732 



-XXI 1- 



I - 1 :3y-Lna for Administering," the Shloljuildinc Division 

as revised kJ-gazt 14, 1S33, rad rntcr--)retr.tion 
llo, 1 - " Shi olmil dors" 

- 2 Intorprot-^.tion ITo. 2 - "Ship-ouildcrs" 

- 3 " :io. 3 - " 

- 4 " ITo. 4 - " 

- 5 " no. 5 - " 

- 6 " "-To. 6 - " 

- 7 » lie. 7 - " 

- $ n :Io. 3 - " 

- 9 " :io. 9 - " 

-10 " ITo. 10 - " 

-11 " llo. 11 - " 

-12 " 110.12 - " 

•13 " lIo,l-3 - " 

-14 " 110.14 - " 

-15 " IIo.lo - " 

J - B7-L; rs for Adninistering the Sliipre-oairins'? DiviEion as 

orisinall" suomitted '7ith the Code 

- 1 Bj-Lpjrs for Adiiincterinr; the Shiprepairin^j Division as 

revised Au£^st 14, 1933 

K - 1 Execvctive Order 2-1 - Aooroving Code 

- 1 A " " 2-lA- A-riOintin:;:; 4 nem'jer-, of Industr-/ 

CoLiriittee 

- 1 3 Administrative 2-13- Authorizing-; Code Authorit7 

- 2 Executive 2-2 - A;.-orovini,- Ai-iendnent Ijo, 1 



9732 -x::iii- 



K - 3 Administrative Order 2-3 - Sxtansion of 5 a of Code 

_ 4 » " 2-4 - Resignation of Administration 

Ileraber 

- 5 " " 3-5 - Ajpcintraeut Administration Member 
-6 " " 2-6 - Exemption - Jutton-Kolly 

- 7 II " 2-7 - " Uerrport ITe'vs Shiptu ilding 

and Dry Dock Company 

- 8 " " 2-8 - Ap-oointrnent Industry Ilembers t o 

Industrial Helations Committee 

-9 " " 2-9 - Approval of Amendment No, 2 

- 9A " " 2-9A- Authorization handle Labor 

CoiTijDlaints 

-10 " " 2-lC- A^provrl of Amendment No, 3 

-11 II " 2-11- ITotice of Opportunity to Pile 

Objections 

-12 " " 2-12- Arpointmont Labor Iferabers to 

Indiistrial Rclatiop.s Committee 

-12A " " 2-12A-Ai3:iointment Kembers Trade Practice 

Committee 

-13 " " 2-13 -Appointment Member to Industrial 

Relations Committee 

-14 " " 2-14 -Stay Part 3 (a) and (b) of Code 

for Trials 

-15 "• "• 2-15 -Danial of A.j lication of General 

Engineering ci Dry Dock Co, 
and others 

-16 " " 2-16 -Exemption IlanitoTroc Shipbuilding 

Corporation 

-17 " " 2-17 - Sxtonsion 3 (c) of Code 

-17A " " 2-17A- Authorizing Industrial Relations 

Committee 



9732 -x:civ- 



K - 17B Adminiytrrtive Orler 2-17B- A'athori-^in^ Industrial Helations 

Conraittee 

- IS " " 2-18 - Stry Z (r) r.nd (b) for Tri,",ls 

- 19 " " 2-19 - Exemption St, Louis Cnr Company 

- 20 " " 2-20 - E:ceTn,ition 4 (a) General 

Engineeriu;; and Dry Dock Co, 
pjid others 

- 21 " " 2-21 - A"athorizinj Industrial Relrtions 

Committee Independent of Code 
Authority, etc, 

- 21X " " 2-21X- Resignation of Adninistrntion 

Llemlier 

- 22 " " P'^32 - Authorizin,^ Industrial Relations 

Committee 

- 23 " I' 2-23 - Aoprovr.l Plan for Adjustment, 

Industrial Rels.tions Committee 

- 24 " " 2-24 - Extension 3 (c) of Code 

- 25 " " 2-25 - Exemption I.Iarictta. ila,nufacturing 

Company 

- 26 " " 2-26 - Appointment Adninistrrtion 

Hemher 

- 27 " " 2-27 - Interpretation 3 (c) of Code 

- 28 " " 2-28 - Exemption Ile^i^ort Hews Ship- 

building; and Dry Dock Co., 
Bethlehem Shiptuildirg Co., 
IIe\7 York S^iip'ouilding Corp. 

- 29 " " 2-29 - Exemption for Trials 

- 30 " " 2-30 - Resignation Janes Sx7an, Apn oint- 

ment Joseph ¥, Hart, Industrial 
Relvations Committee 

- 31 I' " 2-31 - Stay 3 (a) ajid (h) Emergency 

Tfork 



9732 -XXV- 



K - ?.? Ac'j-iiiis ur.-^.tive Order 2-52 - Dei;--i.v' reqinst for deleticn 

Timr; pnd one-hplf ^orovision 
fro>! E:;em;tior.s r.rLd Stn.ys 

i: - 33 " " 2-33 - E:-oinption 3 (r) l'e\' York Ship- 

"baildin,-- Cor'^. Electric 5on,t 
Co, , pjid Iicthlehe!!! Shipbuild- 
inj Corp, 

K - 54 " " 2-34 - St-jy 5 (a) anU ("b) Emergency Work 

L - Oi";r?;.iizr,tian Ch?a't 

M - Rules r;K'. Regulations 

II - Letter Aug-ast 14, 1955, to H. lle^.-.'tou Fnittelsey, Assistcnt 

Deputy Adn:ini3tr-jtor, from H. terriah Snith, Prer.ident 
Kationpl Council of American ShiolnaildGrs. 

K - 1 Letter August 20, 1955, to H. He ^ ton TJliittelsey, Assistmt 
De ..ut;/' Adrainistr^^tor, frora H» Gerriai S.iita, president 
llrtion^.l Council of Ax.iericrn Shiobuildors 

II - 2 YSov.e 

11 - Z Letter August 13, 1933, tc Arthur D, TTniteside, De-nuty 
Administrator, frci Ship"building Connittee 



:t - A 






- 


1 





- 


2 





- 


3 





, , 


4 



Letter Av.guKt 22, 1935,. to Eugh S. Johnson, Administrator, 
froii Shinbuilding Con:-nittee 



N - 5 Letter Se;otenbar 23, 1'j33, to Hugh 3, Johnson, Acijiinistrr.tor, 
frora Shi-ehuilO.ing Corimittee 

- Letter Pehruery 23, 1955, tc H. Helton Uliittelsey, Assistant 

De;rity Adriinistrr.tor, from C. C. luierr. Secretary - 
Treasurer of Code Authority 

Bill fDPm of Code Authority 

Budget " " 

Bill frori " " 

Bond 01 Treasiirer of Code Authority 



9732 -:onri- 



0-5 Letter Se-oter.iber 0, 19o5, to Ii» I'evton iniittolsoy, 

Assictrnt De-out','' Ac'uiinistrptor, fron .0. C. 
Knerr, Secretai"'" of Coue Aiitliorit:/ 

P - plan for Adjustment of Co nlr.iut:; Indu''-.tri;\l Helr.tions 

Corniaittee 

Q, - Annupl Re.TOrt A:iril 1935, llc.tion;,! Council of A.ierican 

Shi fuuildors 



q- 1 


3'alleti;i 317, 


I'atio 


iirl 


Council 


Q- 2 


" 3;:0, 


It 






Q- 3 


" 338, 


II 






q- 4 


" 339 , 


II 






Q- 5 


" 351 , 


It 






q- 5 


" 353, 


It 






q- 7 


" 5o5, 


II 






Q- 8 


" 385, 


11 






Q- 9 


" 38S , 


II 






Q, -10 


" 392, 


II 






Q-11 


" 410, 


II 






P. - 


" Protc 


,St3 - 


List of 


S - 


Address 07 H, 


Gerri 


sh 


Snith, Pre 



Anerican Shiptuildera, before the Americ-^n h'er- 
choJit, il&rine Conference 

S - 1 Letter Pehruaiy 12, 1934, to Alfred K« Eaag, Chief Division 

of Hesearch, U. S. Ship'oiiig Board Uureau, from 
P. C. G-renin.;, Director for I^urooe 

S - 2 Letter December 2, 1935, to H. Ilc'-ton ^Tliittelsej, Assintent 

De-jlty Directory, fro;.i E, Gerrish Snith, Presi- 
dent ITctional Council of A^nericrn Shipbuilders 



9732 



--—•rvii- 



T - Deir.indG o" the Industrial Union of I'arine p.nd Shipbuilding 

TTorkors of iL~,ci-ica, Local lio, 1, Cfjnden, N. J., 
April ISi'sS, 

T - 1 Letter April 9, 1935, to ilegoti- .tiur; Cor.TUttee, Industrij-.l 

Union of i.'p.rino rind Shijhuildin^ Uorkers of 
ATicricr., Locr.l ITo. 1, Canden, IT, J., fror. the 
Hot? York Shipouildi;v; Cor ■or-.tioni 

U - Letter Juiie 15, 1934, to J. 3. I7ea,ver, Deputy Adninistr-'^t or, 

from II. Gerrish Snith, President llrtional 
Council of American Shiol)uilders. 

V - Btilletin 415, national Cox\r).cil of Aaerican Shi':)'builders 

V - 1 Chart lio. 1, " " " " " 

V - 2 Chart IIo. 2, " " " " " 

V - 3 Chart lio, 3, " " " " " 

V - 4 Vfegc Rates in the Hamnton Roads District, 

V - 5 Statement Uarch 7, 1934, of ilatinnal Comicil of American 

Shi^ibuilders, 

V - 5 Letter liprch 9, 1934, of national Council of Ar.iericrn 

Shipbuilders, 

V - 7 Wage Rntcs -oaid on ?, U. A. Contracts, 



9732 



-XVI 11- 



-1- 

CHAPTTSP. I gqiSRAL I iJPQHI.'LATI OH 
HISTORY 
CODE or FAI11 COMPETITICU 
POP TKS 
SHIPBUILDING ASD SHIF3EPAi:JN5 ILDUSTPY 

I . General Infornpti on 

The Shi -;puilding and Shiprepairing Industry bailds E,nd repairs 
all types of metal Cornmercia.1 and Navs-1 vessels for deep sea. service and . 
for tays, harbors and rivers. The orincionl occupation of the Industry 
is Commercial T7orlc, but at times Uaval programs become an important item 
with certain of the major shipbuilding plants. 

The Industr;^/ enjoyed a voliime of $251,y48,000 in 1929 and in 
1931 $186,993,000, orincipally commercial ship-building and shiprepairing. 
In 1933 Comm,ercial shipbuilding almost ceased and the principal business 
was repair work. The total volume for that year was $92,596,000. For 
the year 1935, because of the large amount of work placed with the major 
shipyards for llaval programs let in August 1933 and August 1934, the 
volume is estimated to be $172,473,000. 

Employment for 1929 of wage earners was 55,089; in 1931 
45,262; in 1933 30,.885 and in 1935 40,582. The wages paid were 
$83,274,000; $62,023, CC'O; $33,890,000 and $49,368,000 estimated. 

The values added by the manufacturers for 1929 was 
$145,451,000, about 70^; for 1931 $114,671,000, about 61.5>S; for 

1933 $61,524,000, about 56. Sf^ and for 1935 $122,473,000, estimated about 
71Jo. The foregoing figures are taken from page 9 hereof. 

. While certain major shipbuilding plants, seven in all of the 
234 members of the Industry, have been benefited by the Naval shipbuilding 
programs, it is ouite evident that the Industry/ as a whole is suffering 
from lack of new. Cor-mercial shipbuildin.;^, and that there is a lack of 
employment of 20,000 men that were used in Commercial shipbuilding in 
the year 1929 and the years before. In f."ct in 1919 the Industry em- 
ployed 337,446, which was the high point of employment and 1921 106,445 
and 1923 62,287. Under healthy conditions the Industry should employ 
from 75,000 to 100,000 men, if the American Merchant Marine is to be 
adequately maintained for the benefit of our foreign commerce. The 
foregoing figures are found on page 6 hereof. 

In 1930 and 1931 there was 300,000 gross tons of ne-.7 Com- 
mercial shipbuilding construction in American ship-yards, whereas in 

1934 this type of construction dnpped to 20,103 gross tons, which 
would mean only two fair size cargo boats. Piarther while the ^''orld 
Commercial shipbuilding from 1930 to 1934 shra:i]-: 60vo, that of the 
United St-tes shrank 91,fc. (See p£..ge 11 hereof) 

The average life of a dee-i sea shi-o ir 20 vears. The pre- 
sent American merchaxit marine fleet is made up for tne most part of 
vessels built at the latter prrt of the Tiorld T7a.r period or shortly 
thereafter, and consequently about ZO^'o will be obsolete b^^ 1939; ^/S 
by 1940; 30-;^ by 1941 and SOf^j b- 1942. 
9732 



-2- 

If the average fleet required to maintain our present position is taken 
to consist of 5,000,000 gr. tons for foreign trade and 3,000,000 gr. tons 
for coast-'^ise trade, it would make a total of 5,000,000 gr. tons. To 
maintain the replacement of tais fleet over a period of 20 years, it 
would he necessar^'' to build 300,000 gr. tons per year. This figure has 
been put forvrard as a mininiim that should be biiilt. However, under such 
a scnedule the fleet would not be thoroughly modernized ^Jintil about 
1950. The author eptim-ter> from 450,000 to 500,000 gr. tons would have 
to be built per yerr v/ithin the next 6 -"-e. rs and then the regular main- 
tenance of 5fj or 300,000 gr. tons per jeav built thereafter. The cost of 
300,000 gr. tons "oer yerr is estimated to be $50,000,000 and 450,000 gr. 
tons per year v;ould cost approximately $75,000,000. The maintanence of 
a deep sea ship over its 20 vear life may be tahen to represent one-half 
the cost of the vessel. (See Exh. S, App:K.) 

The National Council of American Shipbuilders made a consid- 
erable stud.-"' of the distribiition of v/ages in shipbuilding. They found 
that approximately 40^ of the cost' of a ship '.rent to -.va-ge .earners and 
sa].arled employees v/ithin the shipyards and tha.t a further 40^^ went into 
the material processed for and used b.y the shipi^ard t'efore the shipyard { 
received it. Translating this percentage into practical figures, and invest- 
ment of $75,000,000 per year in new construction v/ould provide pay of 
$50,000,000 and employment for approximately 44,000 men; one-half within 
the shipjrards and one-half on the materials being processed for the ship- 
yards. Reference is made to address of H. G-erris Smith, President Nation- 
al Council of American Shipbuilders before the American Merchant Marine 
Conference, Fovembcr 18, 1935, Exh. S, Appx. 

American shipjr,. rds must pay reasonable American scale of 
wages to permit the scale of living usual in this country. The based 
skilled rate may be taken as S5f' per hour, which is much higher than 
the average of American manufacturers. At present the plants are work- 
ing on the uneconomic weeklj'' maximum hour of 35 hours per week, 'fhe x... 
British skilled rate is 60 shillings for 47 hours or the rouivalent of 
about 31^ per hour as of 1934, the lasb data available. (Ref. Exh.Q,- 
11). The German skilled rate basis as of 1934 was 72 pfennings or the /| 
equivalSnt of a.bout 18^ nev hour. The hours wcr:ed are from 48 to 56 in ^i 
German yards. (ref. U.S. Shipping Board E"di.' S-l) 

Translating the effect of the foregoing weekly hours and wage 
scales to an actual figure for cons ti'ij.ct ion, the author was reliably 
informed November 1935 as follows: On offers for a 13,500 D. 17. ton 
Diesel ta,nker the American figure was $125 per D. TY. ton, the German 
figure $52 D. ',7. ton and the English figure $52 per D'. ^. ton. far- 
ther or^ a $2,000,000 combination cargo ajid passenger vessel to be 
built in Am.erica,n ya.rds the figures to build in Germany were 'J:Q,'a and 
in English yards 4:2% cf the American figure. A ship usuallv measures 
less in 'gross tons than in Deadweight ton. 

In the oninion of the author t/.e foregoing figures of the 
American yards are 10;^ to 20> above I'hpt the-i- would be -ander normal 
working hours of 40 hours "osr -Tsek. further, this Industry needs the 
most elastic form of viee'xly hours in order to operate at the most 
economical point obtainable in iknerican shipyards T^hich must pay for 
American materials and American labor. 

9732 



As the Nav;"- is .the first line of defense so the Merchant Marine 

fleet is the necessary auxiliar-'-. In the v;a.r period we spent something 
over $3,000,000,000 to build tip the merchant fleet. It reqmred 420 ship 
nays for steel ships. There are in the Coastal shipjT.rds of the United 
States, which do not include the Great Lakes, 9o sliipbuilding "ays suit- 
able for the constraction of steel deep sea tonnage. Even v/ith the pre- 
sent Kaval program approaching its- peal: production, ha.TdJ.y half of these 
Ship r;a3''s are in use. The imoccupied v/ays should be filled i.Tith comm- 
ercial deep sea tonnage if the merchant fleet is to be maintained and not 
drop back to the dangerous por-ition of IS) 14. (See Exh. S-2, Appx) 

This History is compiled; from the records located as follo\7s: 

Printed Code and Amendments. Exhibit A 

Volumes I-II-III, Code Record Section. 

Volumes A and B, Code Hecord Section. 

Administrative Orders. Code Record Section, and 
Exhibit K. 

Deputy's files, T. R. A., Section 2. 

General Piles, I'. R. A. (Central Record Section) 

Research and Planning files, II. R. A. 

Legal Division andCompliance files, K. R. A. 

Advisory Boards' files, K. R. A. 

Government Agency reports. Deputy's Piles. 

Code Authority. lu'inutes - Deputy's files. 

Trade Association reportg. Deputy's files. 

national Labor Board. Deputy' s files 

Files of Industrial Relations Committee of the 
Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry-, now 
located in Section 2, Assistant Deputj''' s 
office, / 

Vol-omes I-II in the Code Record Section Safe, 
are bound together. ; 

Volume III, the open hearings of July 19, 20, and 
21, 1S35, are marked respectively Volumes I_II-III 
and the pages are consecutively numbered. However, 
the file in the Cod.e Record .Librar:/ is composed of 
the releases, and the page numbers do not coincide 
with the originals. in the Code Record Section Safe. 
The references in this liistor;^ refer to the file 
of the Code Record Library as these may be taken 
out and are open to all. - There is set forth here- 
after a table as a guide for comiDarative page 
n"arabers. 



9732 



„4- 

Voltune in - Hearings on July 19, 20, 21, 1933, Hearini^s 
______^____ o n Propo';ed Code 



Code Record Li'brar,'- 



Code Record 

Srfe 



Deputy' s Files 



J'oly 19 



Morning 


'Sec. 


I 


Sec. 


5 


Session 


t 


To 








IPa^e 
1 


1 


Page 


78 


Afternoon 


'S3C. 


5 


Sec. 


3 


Session 


! 


To 








'Page 


■79 


Page 


120 



Jtdy 20 

Morning 
Session 



Afternoon 
Session 



July 21 

Morning 
Session 



Pages 1 to lie 



Pages ill to 226 



Sec. 12 
To 
Page 121 

Sec. 15 

To 
Page 174 



Sec. 14 
Page 173 
Sec. 19 

I 

Page 244 



Pages 227 to 309 



Pages 310 to 411 



The Deputy' s 
files are the 
same as the Code 
Record Library, 
except for 
Sec. 1, which was 
tj-pev^ritten on 8 
pages instead of 
"being Sec. 1, 
which contains 
17 -rjT'ges. 



Sec. 101 Sec. 104 

To 
Pc.g-e 1000 Far:e 1057 



Pages 412 to 502 



The general siabjects of the Code s,s printed were not named as 
"sections" or "parts'', or in cxiy other way. As a result some amend- 
ments, exemptions, and official docioinents termed these subjects as 
"Sections" and others as "Parts". For instance, this difference is 
noted as between Amendment Ko. 1 and Amendment No. 3. and in many 
other official docaiaents. (Ref. Ei-diibit A, Appx.) 

A. Definition of the Industry 

The definition as of May 25, 1935, was as provided in Amendment 
No. 2, ap-oroved March 29, 1934, Administrative Order 2-9, signed by Hugh 
S. Johnson, which reads as follows: .(Ref. Code Record Secti6n and Exh. 
A, Appx.) 

"A. The term 'Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry' means: 

1. Th,? building, fabricating, repairing, reconstructing, re- 
modeling and assembling of all vessels and floating marine 
equipment except: 

(a) Wooden boa.ts and ves£;els and v/ooden floating marine 
ecuipment. 

(b) Pleasure boats and yachts, both wooden and/or metal 
up to and including one hundred and fifty (150) feet 
in length over all. 



9732 



— 5— 

2. The building TTi thin shipbuildinfi; ind shiprepairing plant? of 
mEcninery, eq-cipnent and other chip's parts." 

The definition originally subiaitted in the proposed Code of July 
10, 1933, paragraph 2 reads as follc's: (Ref. Volume A, Code Record 
Section and 3yJi. B 1, A^.-py.,) 

"The terras 'Shipbiulder' and ' Shiprepa.irer' , when used in thic 
Code, includes a person, partnership or coroorstion enga,:^ed in 
the business of building, fabricating, repairing, reconstruct- 
ing, remodeling, and a.ss'embling oceemgoing, harbor and inland 
water-wav vessels and floating marine eouiiiraent of every type 
above ten tons, including the biiilding r'ithin their plants of 
machinery, equipment and other ship's parts." 

The definition as submitted in the revised Code the la,^.t day of 
the open hearing, July 21, 1933, part 1 read the same as when original- 
ly siibmitted July 10, 1933. (Hef. Vol. Ill, Code Hecord Librarj'-, Page 
1022) 

The definition as provided in the Code a.pproved July 26, 1933, 
read the same as originally submitted July 10, 1933. (Ref. Vol. I 
Code Record Safe and Exii. A, ApTDx.) 

.The definition of tae Industr;,'- and the Members of the Industrj'- 
was contained in the one paragraph auoted from the Code as submitted 
July 10, 1S33, and as approved July 23, 1933. The definition of the 
Industry in this Provision '.7as by inference on!-"-. Horever, the 
situation v/as corrected in Amendment No. 2, heretofore quoted. 

1. Princi-pal "products . 

Naval vessels of t/ar, Atlantic liners suitable to convert to 
auxiliar]'' criisers in time of war, commercial passenger ships, com- 
mercial, cargo and passenger ships, commercial cargo ships (including 
tanhers) , steel bay, river, and hrrbor steamers and motor vessels, 
steel yachts above 150 feet, steel barges, steel car floats, steel 
lighters and steel dredges. 

2. Products also under other Codes 

Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing companies generallj'' confine 
their operations to vessel work, but occasionally take contracts that 
reauire the use of some of the large tools of the shipyards. 

B. Definition of the Industr"/ Member 

The definition as of Use-'- 26, 1935, '.vas as provided in Amendment 

No. 2, approved March 29, 1934, Administrative Order 2-9, signed by 

Hugh S. Jolinson, v;hich reads as follov/s: C^lef. Code Record Section 

and Exh. A, Aiapx-) 

/ 



9732 



-6- 

"B. The terra 'Member of the Industrj'-' means any person, 

partnership, corporation, association, trust, trustee, 

or receiver engr?.ged in the Shipbuilding and Shipre- 

pairing Industry,' either as an em-plojer or on his or its own 

behalf. 

The definition originell:,'' submitted in the proposed Code of July 10, 
1933, paragraph 2 reads as follous: (Ref . Volume A, Code Record Section 
and Exii. B 1, Apnx.)' 

"The terras 'Shipbuilder' and ' ShiprepairerJ ,T;h.en used in this Code, 
includes a person, partnership or corporation engaged in the bus- 
iness of building, fabricating, repairing, reconstructing, re- 
modeling, and assembling, oceangoing, harbor and inland water-way 
vessels and floating ma,rine equipment of every type above ten tons, 
including the building within their plants of machinery, eauipment, 
and other ship's parts." 

The definition as submitted in the revised Code the last day of 
the open hearing, July 21, 1933, part 1 read the same as when originally 
submitted July 10, 1933. (Ref. Vol. Ill, Code Record Librarjr, Page 
1022) 

The definition as provided in the Code approved July 26, 1933, read 
the same as originally submitted July 10, 1933. (Ref. Vol. I, Code 
Record Safe and Sxh. A, Appx.) 

The definition of the Industry and the Members of the Industry was 
contained in the one paragraph quoted from the Code as submitted July 10, 
1933, and as approved July 26, 1933. However, the situation was corrected 
in Amendment F.o. 2, heretofore quoted. 

1. Classes of Members 

The Code, Part 3 (a) and (b) and as amended April 2, 1934, Amend- 
ment No. 3, ('^ef. Exh. A, Appx.) differentiated as between Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing, in the Regulations of Hours of TTor'c. The Code Com- 
mittee also drew the same line in establishing their National, District, 
and Local Committees. Substantially all shiobmlding yards do both 
building and repair and many outright repair yards taice an occar.ional 
new vessel to build. Therefore, there was no definite line of demarca- 
tion. 

r , Statistics of the Industry 

(a) Total annual sales - $172,473,000 

(See page 9 ) 
("6) No. of concerns - 234 (Ref. letter of 
June 11, 1935, from C.C. I-Inerr, Secy., 
Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing 
Industry Committee, to 11. Newton 
Vhittelsey, Asst. Dep. Adnr. , in 
Deputy's I'^iles) 



9732 





(c) 




(d) 




(e) 




(f) 
(g) 


Year Month 





1933 - July 

1934 - January 

July 

1935 - January 

April 

July 

August 

September 

October 



-7~ 



Aggregate invented capital over $200,000,000 

(ief. Exh. S-2, Appx.) 

Aggregate production capacity est. 

$500,000,000 (See page 8 ) 

Aggregate number of employees and weekly 

payrolls are set forth belov?. ^ 

Net sales - $172,473,00 (See page 9 ) 

List of liembers of the Industry 

(See Exii. H, Appx.) 



Ivlumb er of Employees 

28,432 

35,034 
37,645 

57., 155 

40,582 
38,787 
39,385 
41,398 
43,411 



Weekly Pay Rolls 

$ 560v340 

745,654 
860,132 

869,414 

959,140 

918,918 

951,405 
1,014,832 
1,089,088 



(Ref. letters of June 11 and December 3, 1935, from Isador Uibin, 
Commissioner of Labor Statistics to H. Nevton TThlttelsey, Assistant 
Deputy Adrainistrator, Deouty's Files) 



.'Juabsr of Employees (continued) 



Year 



Number 



1914 
1919 
1921 
1923 
1925 
1927 
1929 
1931 



44, 481 
387,4-16 
106,445 
62,287 
50,224 
55,014 
55,089 
45,100 



Reference formal statement of Joseph S. McDonpgh, Page 4 
Volume B, Coie Record Section (from census of manufacturers). 



9732 



-8- 

Erapioyment and Pay Rolls of Employees Engaged in the Construction of 
Ifeval Vessels in Federal Kav}/ Yards 



Year 


Kuraber of 


Monthly 


and 


j'age Earners 


Pay Rolls 


i.i'onth 







1932 - July 255 $25,770 

1934 - January 2,593 278,434 

July 8,992 1,173,992 

1935 - January 11,691 1,815,099 

April 13,432 1,994,336 

July 19,988' 2,583,142 

August 21,953 2,939,253 

September 22,345 2,825,561 

October 24,590 3,571,806 

(Ref. letters of June 11 and December 3, 1935, from Isador Lubin, 
Commissioner of Labor St'tistics to H. Newton "iThittelsey, Assistant 
Deouty Administrator, Deputy's Files) 

This estimate bv the stithor of $500,000,000 aggregate capacity 
shown on pege 3 c is brsed on the following: 85,000 employment for 
the 93 steel coastal ways no;.' available is taken from the proportion 
of employment to the ways used in 1919, this is multiplied by the 
value of products ;oer employee ($4200.00), which gives $360,000,000 
(value of product). To this is sdded $90,000,000 current repair 
value (based on the 1933 figures), plus the G-reat Lakes capacity taken 
at $50,000,000 for the present equipment. .See page 9 hereof and 
exliibit S-2, and the remarks of the Chairman of the National Council 
of American Shipbuilders in Exhibit S-2. Under more normal conditions 
than held in 1919 there would be a larger proportion of passenger- 
freight tonnage built which would tend to substantially increase em- 
ployment per shipbuilding wpys used and therebjr tend to increase the 
foregoing estimate. 



9732 



-9- 







S 




CD 


P' 





:P'. 


P 




P 


P r 


E 


CD 












.^"^ • 






"^ 


* « 


h-J 


\-> 


(-' 


M 


P 
4 






^ ^ 


^ 


1—1 


w 





w 


^ 


W 


V£) 


VX) 


\D 


U3 








3 


en 


P 


CD 


CD 


CD 


>^^ 


'^ 


Vj~l 


ro 








hj i-i 


>i 





c+ 


H 


Hj 


H) 


Hj 


01 


o-i 


H 


VD 








H- H- 


H- 


M 


H- 


g 


CD 


<D 


CD 
















a 3 


3 


p; 


a 


i-i 


4 


hi 
















C^ 0*5 


CP? 


p- 

CD 


p 


P 


2 


CD 
3 


CD 
3 










5? ■ 






M M 


c+ 


en 


C 


c+ 











■P' 


VjJ 


4:^ 


>J1 


^ 






VO VO 


&"' 




P- 


CD 


CD 


CD 


CD 








U"l 


VJ1 




CD 


•^ VjJ ItD V_v| hj 


CD 


a* 




pj 










M 






CD 




M 


0) VJT 4 >-^J O 







0' 




M 


n 





VJ1 


OQ 


ro 









c+ 


H, H- f-d 


<! 


c+ 


^ 


U' 


U CD 


en 


CD 


01 


aj 


en 


(^ 


H 




^ 


M c+ 3 <rh M 


CD 


3^ 




■^^ 


CD © 


P 


3 


ro 


ui 


r\j 


U) 


P .. 




P 


CD :r o :3' h- 


V> 




c+ 




'^ P^ 


g- 


• S 










hj 




O 


O CP H- O i-i 


1^ • 


C/5 • 


3 


fi- • 


*»-v ■ 








3 




^ 


c+ tx:) Hj 


en 


3- 


CD 


3' 


<rhS 


4 


en 


0-' 








CD 




(^ 


CI> 3 fU (D -! 




H- 




CD 


^ 














►i 




H- 


P^ CD M O 


M 


•ri 


92 




-'rl 


b-i 













en 




3 


^ ,^ ^ ':! 


^0 


0' 


p! 


?•', 


w ^ 


P 


H3 














P 


H- ^ '=J f; :v 


,AJ 


p: 


c+ 


p 


0' 










-£«- 






c-^ 


3 !^ to - 


V-O 


H- 


3' 


ch 


hrj hi 


H- 


ta* 


4^ 


v^ 


a\ 


oa 






r.i M) 




M 





3' 


H- 


3 


P* 


V£) 


>^ 


i\3 


oa 








ct- <! O M -^ 


a . 


p^ 


^■i 


c 


H h^ 


«« 


ti 


»• 


w 










8? 


P 


H- 


• 


^i 


CD H 




P 


05 


QlI 


"b 


i\j 








H- c+ M. 


JT'j 


3 




« 


i53 J 





■' "') 


0-^ • 


Ch 


ro • 


-^ 


■ ^ 




9 


w 'd ►-; ci- r: 















"1 


CH 





0?. 


,pi' 


c^ ■ 




/—J 


>i CD M r 


H 








T'lc;' 


^J 


b 




M 


w 


\a 




f-J 


N- O 'Ci O 


'-O 


P 






h-J 




c+ 














CD 




c+ 


c+ (.'; p I-"" 


'^ 


»-; 






H- 


H- 


p 








c 





en 






O hi H- P 03 


M 


'^j 






M 


en 


>-i 


















O 


r. p "i o 












en 


CD 














Hj 


,;- ■-• 4 


c-t- 


in 






M 


H- 


4 

















CD £■ O 


3' 


3 






UD 





en 








-Cfl 






c1- 


en H- o o !-+> 


CD 


H- 






OJ 


3 


H 


'.Jl 


OJ 


—J 


OCl 






Ct) 


c+ CO "-J p; M 


*i 


'cJ 






»oi 


CD 







h-- 


rv) 


U1 


S 




o 


H- pr H- o 


CD 


>i 








•-J 


u 










p 




^ 


3 O - MO 




CD 










CD 





M 


VjJ 


oa 


ct en 




3 


SU 3 p. .+ 


^ 


W 






-e^)- 





'■d 





—J 


ro 


-F^ 


CD c-l- 




H- 


c+ ^ H- CD 


P 


P 






VD 


H) 


ci- 





r\j 


OQ 


oa 


>-> 


^ 


O 


CD c+ 3^' 3 pi 


en 


H- 






VJ1 




• 




*• 




•* 


H- 


>? 


P 


Q. t^ }-•■ jq 




►-S 






VJD 


t-< 
















P H3 


6 


M 


CD O • H- 





H- 






»• 


P 

















M 


w 




<:j' &■ o 3 





3 






M 


0" 


Hj 





p 


p . 


p 


tn 


CO 


^pj 


'^ ^. ti • 


3 


0>3 






• -FT 



















a 


.P^l '^" £i 


en 


• 









'-i 
















I 


p^ 


d- *=<; cfl c+ sj' 

ts- en t:.^ H- 










-Mj 


CO 




3 


^-^ 






-eft- 




<! 


to 


CD i-i CD W 

03 CD 


CD 











P 


3 
CD 


M 
—J 


'^O 




rv) 




^ 


H- 


?3 3 Hj ^ H- 


P3 








U 


<rt- 


»i 


ro 


ro 


0■^ 


M 


hj <1 


a 


H" 


fi pj M fs <n- 


0' 










H- 





** 




w 


«• 


hi p 


M 


<:+• CD ^i O 


M 








n 


CO 


CD 


r— ' 


CTi 


>^ 


oa 


M 




ro 


t-" c+ o tn ::! 


CD 








en 


trh 


»* 


-J 


<.£) 


V.O 


-P' 


& p; 





.-^ 


o U'' '^ • 










;j 


H- 




'^ 


CTi 


VjnI 


qa 


p; CD 


*=d 




i-j o o ca ■ 


•d 








.-^j 


ri 


' CO 


v' 


m' 


*•' 


w' 







^ 


• pj o 


P 








6 


en 


c+ 














c+ 


hd 


o 


I'S 


en 








i-j 


** 


p 








C 





en H, 


tij 


i-i 


O H- iri- 


en 












cl- 



















fr 




CD 

3 








^ 


P 


CI 


CD 










^ 


H- 


O H- cl- c-^ 


cr<3 








0-' 


0' 


rt- 















W 




CD 

7 








3 














-M- 




h3 
CO 


! ^ 


^' -^ " ^ 












tn 


M 




M 


M 


S'<! 




t CD 


05 o o 

P 4 H- 











3 


•^J 




l\) 


CT^ 


M 


-p- 


P P 




■ O 


p 








pi 





^ 


fV) 


(-' 


-pr 


Ol 


3 h-i 


W 


CD 


•-s ?r c+ < 


■-J 








M 


h-' 













p: p: 


h3 


W 


C CD J- 


0^ 








t-1- 


p. 


M 


V 


VJl 


o-^ 


-Pr- 


hij CD 





cn 


3 M 











H- 


CD 


p. 


--J 


ru 


-J 


Ol 


p 


• 


■. P 


£ • p; 










>Ti 


i-i 


CD 


V^ 


-(=■ 


M 


M 


IP- 




•-i 


^3- 


en 








M 




hi 


*• 




*• 


«* 


<r^ Clj 




■=< 


^ c+ 


3' 








H- 




M 


8 








(3 


pi p- 






H- O- ' 


h^ 








• CD 


a 










(^ 


l-i CD 




•-b-ri ti H, ■ 


*t:) 








P^ 


CD 


U 











Q 


CD pb 




o 


•i P 


g' 










'd 


CD 










>-i 




i-S 


00 ^d 












p; 


^ 


CD 








^=^ 




^ 


C - 


h- ' 










■^ 


c+ 










hb 




0) 


& 


P' 








VJl 




■^ 














<! 


cf 1 


H- 








rv) 


en 
















03 


;:- 


3 












en 














M 


w- c^ 
. en 


7*3 








CD 




^=J 








■eft- 


W hd -=5 




cn 


M 3" 










CD 


M 


H- 


-tf 


. '^ 


4f 


-p" 


B CD p 




!3' 


;::• 


P 




' 




• - ;^ 


CD 


. |_a 




•• 






n ►1 M 




H- 


^ H- 33 


en 








en 


en 


CD 


ro 





M 


m 


t-" ^ "^ 




'd 


cn- en 












• 


tn 


on 





ro 





C] CD 




...'> m 


P 


:^ 








•-^fc 




• 








■on 





■^ P 

CD (h 




• 


CT 


TO 








t-* 




















M 








P 






^^ — ^ 


•— ». 


^-% 


>— ^ 


pb CD Hj 






§ 


01 








g' 


M 

Qi 
CD 
1 









-£• 


fi- 


fi- 


^ H hd 
)^ p *-i 
■-^ hi 

5 ^ 

CD p: 
►^ 

d- 

en 





)752 



-10- 



O fei O M t- tH c^ t; ti^ 

CO o o CD pi P fi ED ^:i 

O <1 ci- tl Cf^ M ti ■■<! i-j 
...C+-»"<!CD • 



Jan. 
Fee. 
Liar. 


CD O 

o <! 

• • 


M 





OCDIlipii^iphciEU CDfU 
• c+«'^CD«f»«« 

VX) 



O 
d- 



(D 



4 

CD 

o 

^^. 

tri 

03 '. 
CT", 

o 
4 ■ 

Cfl 

pj . 

d- 
H- 

cn 

ch 

o 

CO 



O 

CD 

ju 
4 . 

c+: 

3 

CD 
c+ 
O 

o 
4 



OOOOH-'h-'h-'IAJMMOO 



h-'UDOUDOV^t-'r\3l-'OUj<X> 



vji 4r M ui v-^j cTv*-^ rv) ro O -t:" M 






ro'oi'oi— jvji cni\j— jui mvji— J 



v^ v,^ VaI V>J »^ -rr 4=" ^rrv^ Vjj v_m V-nJ 
-pr 4-rui fjA o'?. IX) rvi c oa cTi 01 ^J 



no M 'oi v^ v-O -p'vo -1=- ro "^ 0:1 —j 



ro Ji'-J H cri>^ CTv 03 o VJ1 rv) vji 



o 



(T\ M M 01 VX) 1-' ro (3>'01 no UD CTi 



CTv a> cr\ cTi cnvji ui >ai ^Ji oi cr\^Ji 
vji — 4 a^ CTii-' cTivji cr\ cr> OQ M vD 
M o> c?a Vjj lyjvi -p-vji vjj ro v-M ru 01 



■m- 
o 



^ji 01 vji UTOi vol 0"i utji >jn ^n vjn 

■ CTiVJi on vjl on >■ Ji VJi >-_■ 1 -fr-V/j v,.g \jj 

O -P" -prvjD -^ CPi O M M M (-"-^sl 



U1 vn Vjl vji ^ -p- .fr- 4=- 4:r ^ .p- ^r- 
ropoMi-'OirvJi-'runj'^^^-Niro 

O^*^ —J CTvVjJ -~J 01 O UD K) — J --I 



^ 






CD <1 
C/2 CD CD 

CD CD 



>Ti 



T> 



p 
H 



B^ 



fcd o 

(D t^j l-J 

,r'. ti M CO 

Hj CD O 



CD 



H- CD 

•ri -i 

M 
O 

CD CD 
ti CD 

CD 



< 

CD 



g 



g 



cn 



a) 






cn 






njrororvironj[\)rvitY)iAjroro 
vjjrviv^JroV/J^^rovjJMi-'MO 



rOI-'rOI-'MH-'Ml-'t-'Hh-'l-' 
OVJDOVDO<J05-J0a-^— JOQ-^ 



o ^i r>o CQ M -p" cTi— J cPi-J ro vjd 
ctv'^-ni m m vjj ro o o 01 cr\>oi >ji 



MMMMMMMMMMMI-' 
VD OQ VD 03 Oq Oq vn VX) U) '-.O V"> -^ 



^-^ ^X> V-NJ CTv-J VX) ^->J -P^-J CT> O -J 



--J -J 



M M M M M M (-' 
03 OQ 00 03 -J -J 



o■^vJ^ 



CPi cn 



~J CXI 



cnCQVji rovjivji ro oud 
MOi— JOl-'OJ--aocJ^ 



vx)>x) -p•c^^c7^oc«^-'OJ~~J cr\0 



^ 



f^ H- to 

J^ CD 

<-i 

CD M =<! 



CD 

CD 

£1 

CD 
CD. 



•-i 



9732 



2?.L6 



fi 






03 

CD 
-tJ 

OJ 

O 

> 

■H 
-P 

CJ 

o 
p< 
w 
o 

EH 



o 

B 

o 

EH 
CO 

W 
n 

EH 



C-H 
H 



Ph 



Pi 
PU 

n 

O 
n 

EH 

o 

p 

El 

to 

O 
O 



CO 
CO 

EH 



o 

EH 

f-i 
O 

•r-( 
PL, 

■iH 

C 

0) 

o 
pq 



>^ 


W 


rH 


C 


rH 


o 


trt 


r-i 


?S 




4J 


m 


C) 


m 


<4 


o 




!h 


CD 


r^ 


> 




r,i 


C 


W 


HH 


r-< 


CD 


C) 


U 


•H 


< 










t^ 


W 




(U 


«H 


Jh 


o 


^ 


w 


■H 


i-H 


(=q 


CD 


~-^ 



EH 
O 
E< 

O 
O 



a 



>: 



^1 

(D 
> 

o 



o 

EH 

m 
<n 
o 
;h 
cb 

o 
o 

rH 

<1H 

o 



•H 

(1) 
^1 
(is 



n 


CO 


M 


1-1 


f-i 


M 


»— 1 


<i! 




FH 


tn 


to 



m. r<~\ r^ CO 
C3^ r~— o O 



vD ui a! Cl^ 

CO C'"a r-H I — 









H o r- oj 
iH iS~-, (^ r— 



UD LOvVD CM 
CM O LfM^-^ 

KM-O oj c\: 



ir\ I — o o 

O MD CM O 



cr- ir'\ rH r'^ 
o"^. CM ro o 
cj-> to \c^.^ 

r-t H H H 



O Cj^O O 

O '^ CM to 
CM CM VD OJ 



a; H o^ r- 

rH H 



O 0■^ iH L^^ 
I — U) ,-± r^, 



• o CM u.> r— 
1^- I — : — I — 



o o o o 



0^>vD rH rH 

r~- M rH ir^ 

O CM t^ CM 

ct Vt ■> *\ 

H H rH rH 



o o o o 

LO CO I — UD 



r— rH ^ UD 
VX) OJ O to 
r-\ r-\ r-\ 



to r— -^ t~- 
Lr> o to I — 



I — VD CM r^ 



CM to r— r— 
ir> lr^,^" to 

J- MD rH CM 






rH LPi CTv r^ 
(\i\DyD r-{ 
to LC^ CJ^ rH 



LTNtO to O 



tO>>D VD O 
CTN r— ^- O 
O O O CM 



OJ t-- CA J- 
CM r'A^ O 
H rH rH rH 



O O O O 
I~— ^- I^ O 
UD ^-D cn O 



^ J- tc. r-- 



o O r— ir\ 

K^UD O rH 

en cr\ K\ CM 
to to O 1 — 

rH rH Ol rH 



^ O Cj^tO 

t — r-- Lr^ I — 

rH H rH rH 



ino O O 

rH^t CM J- 
rH CTN I^^- 

cu T-\ cr-^ 

ai OJ rH rH 



rH o r— cta 
to to CM Lr> 

r^ r-{ r-\ 



O to Lf^Lr^ 

>,£) cvi to r^ 

r— rH ru U3 

lr^ CJ o o 

r^ r-\ r-{ r-\ 



L^^ CM CO rH 



cr\U3 tou) 
to O r^ Lf^ 
^ J- to Ui 

r-— OJ ix^ O 
cT\ ci^ cTv cr. 



^OtOOLC^ HHtOrH- LT^OOO. LOLn OO 

yo^T) O r^ \sr\ LOv>^ to bo o r^ rH uj ir^ o rH 

rH ^ CM Ol C3^>--0 -=}■ C.^ to LO I— K^ UT, tO t^ L^ 



t — t — r~- 1 — 

^ ^i- r^ 1-^ 



tb O to CM 
to O <-D LP 

rH Lc. to a> 

K< J- O' O 
O O CM CM 
r-i r-\ r^ x-^ 



L^^^ r-i rH 
VO rH U)*-0 



rH I^^- to 

r--^ ro O^ rH 

CM CM rH OJ 



r*^ t -^ r-i O 

H rH H r-i 



O O VXD to 
rH rH 



CJ O^ O CV! 
IC^^- K^ CM 



rj rH O CTv 

to 0"\ CM t^ 

rH H 



K\ r^U3 OJ j-r^LTMO r^cji^r-- rHOJCMrH QOJ ^.^ 
o^c>l^a\ to'^i^LTN cn'^.r)-^ J-trM^-ir-, J-HCtltO 



J- OJ '^ to 

rH tj> rH O 

VJD r^. rH CTi 

r-\ r-i r-\ 



r^ m i^- O 
crMr> rH o 



CVI O to Lf> 

I — to r^. OJ 
r^ OJ OJ OJ 



CM r— h*^ rH 

m to o r^ 
CM OJ r<~- 1^ 



to to o cr> 



r— 1^3 t — r--^ 
O^ rH c^^ o 



h-^o^^ I — 
O V o U3 ^'^ 



ro r^ i-^N to 

O O O CJ 
[-- CM t^VJD 



tOtO^^r^ ^rHLTM^ 

c\' ro \r\ T~- K". to CJ o 
r-i O ^-^ ^''^ r-^ u \ cm r-\ 



CJ 00 OJ CJ 

OJ 1-^ rH r^ 
OJ OJ OJ CO 



cu 




+2 




nJ 


O (D O O 


(A 


1^ r^, r^ K> 




Cr^C^^ 0> CTi 




rH rH rH rH 



rH rH rH r— 
t--> O VD O 
OJ r<-\ a! OJ 



rH rH rH rH 

r^ r'~\ r^\ r<^ 

rH r-t rH rH 



i^D CJ ,:t CTv 
O VD CM U^ 
OJ rH r-i 



CJ CJ CJ CM 
f > r<^ h<-> r*^ 
en 0-\ CnC3^ 

r^ r-i r-i r-^ 



rH r^J- CJ 



K' , K~-. r-^ tc\ 
0"i CTi cr-, O". 

r-i r-i- r-i r-i 



r— h- OJ o 

OJ OJ CVJ cj 



^<~, r<~\ r-^. r<~\ 

rH r-l rH rH 



Cu 

M 
•H 



a) 

CO 



rH Ei:; 

X -H 

•H P, 

to ft 

•H 

CD ^ 

.■^ to 

Ch 
O O 
-P 

Jh 
C! CD 
O -P 

•H cn 

•H W 
rd CD 

•d Pi 

cO 

P! »• 

■H rcJ 

M O 
CD r-l 
•H V^ 

g 



CD 
O 

o 
u CO 

CD •-^ 



to 

CD 

ri 

rH 

o 

■H 



7j 
■p 

o 

EH 

t:! 

r-i 
^H 
O 

t2 



ID 
01 

to 

CD 



rH O O rH 

i-^ r^. K^ r^ 
• 
. CD -P • 
fn C Pi O 

cS pi ca 0) 
S >-3 to o 



rH O O rH 

r^ r^ K> r-^ 

• 

• (D +2 • 

fn SH Pi O 

CC pi O CD 

y 1-3 W O 



rH O O rH 

t^ r^ ro r<n 
• 
• -p • 

^H 5 Pi O 
ri p O CD 

g 1-3 w n 



rH O O rH- 

r'-\ t-O K^, l-^\ 

• 

. CD -P . 

f-i !=! p, O 

cS pi (D Q) 

t, ^-3 t« O 



.r-).Q,0 r-i 

• 
• CD -P • 
^H d Pi o 

c: pi a) CD 

s 1-3 CO n 



-IT- 



to 



irn 'H 



1 




Q) 




•P 




cri 


Pi 


Ss 


tiD 




•H 


Vl 


G) 



o u 



^^ 



Tb 






Q) 


t/1 


(1) 


•H 


iH 


J« 


U 


(J 


p 


U 


C/J 


rH 


erf 


w 


O 


o 


> 


> 


o 


















rl 


[,. 




u 


tj 




fcH 


•H 




S 


G) 




t,f> 




0) 


■H 


■=>! 


Pl 


(1) 




nH 


fH 


r: 


£■3 


O 


n 


> 


I'H 







(U 0) o 
f-i u rj 

O O in Q) 

PL, rQ EH ;:i 

r-l 
rj ^o > 

o a) 

O EH iH 

p! > 

t;D 

•rH 

O 

o 



en 
'Td 

O ^ 

o 

t1 PL, 

c 

O O 

EH^^ 

CM 
OJ 



+3 

o 



i^O -p 

•H o 

p; X 

o I 



n) 




tH 




tv, 




?-< 


CO 


r-H 


Cl 




fu 


rt 


iH 


y 


O 


•rH 


i^ 


(1) 




fn 




O 




I'l 




111 




s 




!-H 


C.) 


O 


pi 


^'■j 


rH 


fn 


G 







+-' 




^ 





in 

O p! 
O 

W p^ 

O O 

EH.^ 

C\J 

CVI 



bH 4^ 



EH 



c\; 




tJ 


4J 


fl 


^ 


O 


fa,r-i 



EH -H 

p, 

O 



O 



rH n 

if; A 

c P" 

•H O 

pi 

I 

CD 



^4 



c 


d 


Q) 


(1) 


H 


^^ 


c: 




o 





22,ic 



^J- OJVDtOO LTvKlMKD rM ir\0> 

rH r-* C\j (^ CTr^ O O en O t-- LOCO 
LO ti^ J- J- ro r<^jrf J- T'^ J r<^ r^ t-r^ 



• •••••••••••• 

tx^u? Lr^ LTi r^i CM ^ ro t^^ jt ir . lc^ 

l^o, t^r-N KVi r-r-, r^ hOi [v-y h^ r-^ |-<-\ K^, K^ P^ 



O LT. r-t O t'" rH 1^, r^ O rH O CPv r-i 
«•■••«•••■»•• 

rHrHOrH to tOCTibOtO cr. OOrH 

^^K^K^l^cuc^JC^JCMC^JOJ^■^^-^^^ 



ir\ LOVD rH 60 Ln^ ir\^D &0 CO 60 rH 

c^^ J- LO o^ rH r^ rH ii-N r— LT. LO CO r— 
cv! O '^ !rM~^, c\J CM ^- J- rH ^ r^ r^ 

cm" k'j cm" CA rH I — t^.^- OJ \n CM rH CM 

r-\ to r— o f^ Cii Lo r— LTN r^ to r— I — 

O r~- O^U5 0~\ CM rH ^ rH r~- t~l ,^- K^ 

cm ^ to o '-o to O K> ^'~^ O"^ to rH o~\ 
^ ^ t^jit t^\ r^^i- ^- J- r^ OJ OJ r-l 



t~-l^t0^jd-VX) CJMr\(\),^ r-l r~-UD 
vo to Q-^JT OJ Cj^^ O C^^ rH LC~\ O I — 
rH rH 1^ LOVjD LO.MD K.O ^O O f^ 0> O^ 

CMoTcMOJOJOJCMOJCMOJrH 



jd" vx> OJ to l-^VX) CM VX> r-t'^ OJ VO I-~- 

1^ LPi LT^ rH m Lf'N r^ Ol to to f-^ J" rH 

to I — vjD J- v>D r— ^ to LTi CM Lc^ bo ^r^ 
,-t 1^ ir! o H lr^ to J- o r^ t^^ oj 

CM ro r^-U3 OCMrHCMVD^T^rHL^^L^^ 

torHroHtotOrHC^-:d-cucr\Lr>cri 
rH t-^ OJ K^ CM ai cr\v£) CO r— Lf^ o to 

to to CT^ Cr\ 0"> rH CTi O O CTM — >-D LO 
H r-l rH 



ICMC^ O ir\ O r-i tJM — CA ^^^ rH ca b;; 

r— to LTMO JXJ- ^|- UA OJ OJ O r~,rj- LC-\ 

o o^ to r-{ CT^ o^ r— to rH to to uA r-- 
vo Lr^vD I — t^- r-- 1^ r— to m h<"^ oj cvj 

■0,9- 



^lr^Or^t— oocr>rH,zr^LrMr\ 

o^^ <D O r^v^ Lr> rH ,rt O rH 1^ OJ 

<y\ <y•^ cr\ c\i rH oj o oj'^ crMr^cJ^rH 
^cTvxT r-^ CO cr\ CA CTi 0■^ cavjd ^- oj r<^, 

■fO- 



rH CM t-^jt L^^V.O r~-^ CO 'TV O rH CM r^ 

rvi oi c\i cvj ai OJ CM o I OJ r^i 1^-, r^ ^~\ 

CA 0"^ CJ^ CA 0"^ CA (3^ CA CA CA a~\ .'.A O^ 
r-\r-\r-\r-irHr-ir-\r-i<-\r^r^rHr-t 



fj 
u 

a 
s 

o 
o 

o 

+3 

E! 

(D 

+3 
p, 

p^ 

R 

w 
-p 

Co 

•p 
to 

ca 
■p 

•H 



o 

Pi 

pi 

o 
to 



-gl- 



-15- 

1 1 . History of code forrn'olFtion . 

A. The snon<=oring organizations '7ere as follo'/s: 

1. Tlie national Coxticil of American Sl'iipbuilders , com-oosed of 
the najor shipl)mlding and shiprepairin^; yards of the co-antry, forned 
1921. A list of reoresentative nenbers included in the membership is 
contained in Volume A, pa^^e 1, filed in the Code Record Section. Ihe 
National Covjicil of American Shirjbailders claimed to include in its 
membership not less thaai 90^ of the productive shipbuilding capacitj'- of 
the shipyards situated on the Atlantic, Gulf and Pacific Coasts and ovm. 
a substantial percentage of the capacity of the shipropairing yards on 
those coasts; (Ref. Vol. Ill of Hearing July 19, 1933, page 12, filed in 
Code Record Library) and 

New York and New Jersey Dry Dock Association, formed 1906. A list 
■of representative members included in the membership is given on page 2, 
Volu.ie A, filed in Code Record Section; ajid 

Pacific Dry Dock Association, forned 1923, a list of whose represen- 
tative members is contained on pa.ge 2, Volume A, filed in Code Record Sec- 
tion. Pacific Coast Dry Doc): Association claimed to include in its members- 
ship companies that owned not less than 90^1 of the productive shipbuilding 
and shiprepairing capacity of the shipj'TTds situa.ted on the Pacific Coast. 
(Ref. page" 12, Vol. Ill of the Hearing July 19, 1933, filed in Code Record 
Library.) (Certain large shiiVoailding corporations are members of the 
National Covjicil of American Shipbuilders, such as the Pethlehem Shipbii.ild- 
ing Com-oany, Todd Shipb-oilding and Dry Dock Company, have plants on the 
Pacific Coast and are members of the Pacific Coast Dry Dock Association); 
and 

Tlie representative shipyards of the Gulf Coast, v/hich are likewise 
set forth on page 2, Volume A; and 

The shipbuilding and shiprepairing companies on the Great Lakes 
were represented during the drafting of the Code and e^ressed themselves 
as se^ g no objection to it; (Ref. page 3, Vol. A on file in Code Record 
Sec tic a) and. 

The shipbuilding and shiprepairing companies on the Mississippi 
River and its tributaries were represented during the preparation of the 
Code and the Code was submitted to their entire group June 29, 1933, at a 
meeting in Pittsburgh. Mr. H. G. Smith, was assured tlia.t the Code was 
in general satisfactory to them. (Ref. page 3, Vol. A on file in Code 
Record Section) 

The sponsoring authorities represented 80fo of the emplojTnent of the 
Industry over the past five years. (Ref, page 3, Vol, A on file in Code 
Record Svigtion) (it is pointed out that the 90^ productive capacity 
claimed by the National Council of Anerican Shipbuilders and also the 
Pacific Dry Dock Association had special reference to shipbuilding capa- 
city and its substantial percentage of shiprepairing capacity. However, 
there are large numbers of small shiprepairing yards, not members of any 
trade association, that it was impractical, in the time available, to 
bring into this matter. Therefore, representation of only 80fo of the 
Industrj^ as a whole was claimed. 

9732 



-14- 

ForimxLation code meetings - No definite information can be found in 
files, exce-ot for the meetinf, heretofore cited, n.t Pittsburgh on June 29, 
as to date, time and place of meetin.5 of the respective trade associations. 
It is Icnorm that r\,'cii meetings \r;ere held by the National Comcil of American 
Shipbuilders: the Uov? Yor:.i and li'ew Jersey Dry Dock Association, the Pacific 
Coast Dry Dock Association and others of interesto However, the authoriza- 
tion to present the Code consisted of individual letters from the major 
shipbuilding and shiprep:d ring companies of the country and, therefore, 
formal resolutions of authorization from these associations were not neces- 
sary, 

2. Officers, code committees, interested grourps. 

Tlie Code Committee consisted of H, C-errish Smith, President of the 
National Coioncil of ..\mf-'ic?n Shipbuilders, ?.oom 651, 11 Broadway, lien York; 
Joseph Hagg, Jr., President, Todd Dry Dock Engineering and Repairing Corp., 
Room 1100, 25 BroadvTay, K-nj Ycrr-k; Janes E. Barnes, Southern Building, 
Washington, D. C. 

Ihis Committee was duly authorised and submitted "oroof of authority 
by individual le-ctors frnm the ,..ajor shipbuilding and shiprerjairing com- 
panies, v.iiich are listel as fo'.l'.wsJ (Hef, Vol. II, Code Record Safe 
and page 1, Volo A.- Code P.ecord Section) 

Proofs of authority 

B. F. Campbdll, Assistant to the President, 

Alabama, Dry Dock 8c Shipbidlding Company 
W. S. llev/ell. President, 

Bath Iron Works Corporation 
S. V;. YJakeman, Vice-President, 

Bethlohem Shipbuilding Corporation, Ltd. 
L. Y, Spear, Vice-President, 

Electric Loo.t Company 
¥arren Johrcon, President, 

Johnson J.rcn Works, Dry. Dock and Shipbuilding Co. 
J. ¥att, Vi ce-?re.fdde:-.t & General Manager, 

KcnsingiGon Shipyard & Drydock Corporation 
H. F. Brow., President i Gereral Manager, 

Maryland D::y D^ck Corny any, Inc. 
Roger Willi ;ams. Vice-f resident , 

Kev.Yiort Hews Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Co, 

C. L. Bardo,' Preside?''!, ■ • 

The Hew York Shipbuilding Company 
C. S. Roger's, Vi^-'.c-Presic'entj 

Norfolk Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Coriooration 
C. Stewart Lee, '/ice-President, 

The Pusey Cc Jones Corporation .' 

Robert Haig. V'-O-President , 

Sun Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company 
John P. lucDonough,, V-ce Pre ;^i dent, 

Galvbston Dry Dock and Construction Company 



9732 



-15- 

Proofs of authority (Cont'd) 

Francis S. Bushey, President, 

New York and aTow Jersey Dry Dock Association 
John D. Heill^^, President, 

Todd Shipyards Corporation 
*J. H. Orndoff, President 

Federal Shipb^ailding and Dry Doclc Conpany 
, John T. Greajiy, Secretary, 

Pacific Coast Dry Dock Association 
Angus Marshall, President, 

Pennsylvania Shipyards, Inc. 
Jojnes C. Merrill, Vice-President L General Manager, 

Merrill, Stevens Dry Dock & Repair Corr:iany 



* Tliis letter is found in Volume II, Code Record Safe, but 
the name V7as omitted in the list given in Volume A. 



9732 



-16- 

B. Fron submission of first draft code to public h^pring. 

The Code was submitted "by the Codft Committ:e, July 10th, 1933, 
by letter addressed to Hon. H-'jgh S. Johnson, Administrator. (Ref. Vol. 
II, Code liecord Safe, and pages 1 to 6, Vol, A, filed in Code Record 
Section) 

1. Brief summaiy of conferences and negotiations. 

Uhile conferences were held no definite record can 
be found in the files. 

C. Pxiblic he rings on Code. 

r» Dates, major personnel; results. 

Public herrings on the Code began July 19, 1933 
and continued through the second and third day, July 20, 21. Deputy 
Administrator A. D. Tf/liiteside, rdth G-enera,l Hiigh S. Johnson, Adminis- 
trator, present, opened the he- rings at 10:30 a.m., July IS, 1833, in 
the Auditorium of the Department of Coaaerce Building, 'Ja-shington, D. C. 
(Ref. Vol. Ill, Code Record Spfe, numbered I, II and^III, and Vol. Ill, 
Code Record Librar]'- consisting of tiie releases on the hearing. Ref. 
hereinafter to these hearings are by page numbers from the Code Record 
Library file. Comparison table is hereinbefore set forth on page 2 of 
this History e^s bet\7een the file in the Code Record Safe and the Code 
Record Library) 

Spea;kers at the Hearings. (Ref. Vol. I, Code Record 
Safe) 

H. G. Smith, President of National Council of American Shipbuilders 

Homer T. Perguson, President of the ller.'port ¥.ers Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. 

Lawrence Y. Spear, Vice President, Electrical Loat Company 

W. H. G-erha-aser, President of the American Shipbuilding Co. representing 

the G-reat Lakes District 
Clinton L. Lardo, President of the ]<re\7 York Shipbuilding Co. 
Joseph A, Franklin, lietal Trades 
J. E. Davis, International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders 

and Helpers of America 
Charles 17. Uilkerson, International Holders Union of North America 
James S. lie Donough (See Joseph S. He Donagli) International Brotherhood 

of Electrical Workers 
M. F. Garrett, United Association of Journeymen, Plumbers & Steam- 
fitters of the United States &. Canada 
John P. Coyne, Vice-President, International Union of Operations 

Engineers 
Harry J. Carr, International Association of Machinists. 
John P. Frey, iletal Trades 
Thomas A. "ood, International Association of Bridge, Structural & 

Orna.nental Iron Workers 
Rear Admiral E. S. Land, (CC) U. S. 11., Chief Constructor of the Navy 
Captain H. L. Wynan, (CC) U. S. IT., From the Office d)f the Assistant 

Secretary of Navy 

9732 



-17- 

George E, PoT,'ers, Steel & Metal Workers Industrial Hnion 

Joseph V, '..."orosclii, President, Intern?,tional Hod C':.rriers Eldg. & 

Connon Laborers Union of North Ar.ierica 
T. F. Belincy, Acting President Pattern Makers League of North America 
J, W. Mullin, Rep. Labor, N.'Y. Shipbuilding Co., Camden 
W, G-. Mc Dcrnott, Chairman TTorkers Fore River Plant of Bethlehem 

Shipbuilding Corporation, Quincy, i.assachusetts 
Josiah T. llev/comb, Gulf Industries, Inc. 
Robert W. UcJ-o:ie, Galveston iry Doc;: & Construction Co. 

Hon. Millard P. Ccldv/ell, ?L':;"oresentr.tive in Congress from State of Florida 
John E. Croj-g, First Vice President, Clj'"de-i;allory Lines 
Roger B» Siox.all, A'.ierica.n Stez-unship Owners Association 
Joseph S. :"c Dona:~h, International Brotherhood of Electricrl Workers 
John A. lie I'pi-iara, Firemen £: Oilers 
Captain '.Tillir:;!--, (CC) U. S. IT., Navy Department 
Admiral Cone, I[. S. Shipping Board 
John ¥. Gr-jvy, Interno.tional Hod Carriers Bldg. c?-. Conmon Laborers Union 

of North Ij.'.erica 

Mr, TTnitesidc r, marked that there va.s one peculiar characteristic 
that he noted in the group covmected with shipbuilding in the prepara- 
tion of thr, Cot.e f..nd tht.t \7as, men who had been in industry all their 
lives and confined to a certain vie^.Tpoint have a difficult time in 
getting away from thos- conditions and seeing the- future and the rela- 
tionship v.dth c.\ch other and'vith related industries and the related 
standpoint. F-c^-ther, the Shiobuilciug ano. Shiprepairing Industry is o 
peculia.r in that it does not lend it^^elf to mass production. 

General Jomison remarked this he- ring has b-,corae something of sn 
emergency because of the sitoation created by the Naval program which 
is being dumped into the laps of the Shipbuilding Industry and which 
will result in activity very much gr^^ater than vras to be anticipated 
two or three noaths ajo, , 

Deputy TTniteside: First in order is to have a statement of the 
m^th'^d of procedure, which is directly following the lines which Mr. 
Donalc .ichoerg read at the Textile hearing. Mr, Ludlum read the 
stateiTjnt, Reference Volume III, n-ges 4-7 inclusive. 

Mr. H. Gerrish Smith, President, National Council of American 
Shipbuilders, presented and read the revised code and in the presentation 
made a general statement on American shipbuilding and shiprepairing of 
which the following is sji excerpt, :-.efcrences. Volume III, pages 8 to 22 
inclusive . 

"In the first place, shipbuil'ing is not a manufacturing industry 
within the usu'l definition of that term. Ships are not ;:ept in stock by 
shipbuildiU:'; cor.rarnies and, therefore, are not conmodities thrt are sold 
over the counter. The construction of a ship is alv?ays the subject of 
contract, .-ii". usuc-.lly it is designed for the specific se::^ice. The 
shipbuilding yaa-ds construct both raerchrnt vessels, n3,val vessels and 
other governL:ent vessels — the first for the transportation of persons 
and -commodities in domestic and foreign com;:ierce, and the others as one 
of the chief means of National defense. The construction of a ship is 
always, as I said, the subject of a contract, and usT.ially it is designed 
for a specific p^jjroose, and it is rare that a ship of BJiy size can be 

9732 



"13- 



constructed in less than a ye-.r, and if it is a complicated design and 
for passengers, it may take t\/o ye-.rs — if it is a Nax'al vessel, it ' 
will take tlu-ee or three and a half ye^.rs. 

"The tr::ai3po-i-taticn of passengers and comixodities in our foreign 
and domestic trade "by cur merchant snips is a public service upon which, 
in a large n3c,sv-.r3, the com lerce of the entire nation depends, and such 
ships are therefore charged irith a puhlic interest. 

"Americo,n shipyards eoulpped to huild merchant vessels are necessairy 
to estahlich and naintain a self-contained, adequate a.nd efficient mer- 
chant mari;ie, and their operation enables oior country to keep abreast of 
the develop;-.:ents of marine engineer:.-.:^ that is continuously in progress 
throughout the --ro^rld. Tioas, in the performance of this service, otir 
shipyards, li]:e o^ir mercii'~nt Bhips, perform a public service and are 
therefore charged with a public interest. 

. "Congress has recog;-'.ized the interest of the public in merchant 
ships and shipyards, Ly enacting 1b.\iZ under which compensation is paid 
to American ship o-,,ners for th.e carri ':?,'e of mail, and p. fiond has been 
created from v;hich loans are irade to such owners at a Io't rate of in- 
terest f or t he cons tn-.ct ion of ships. This legislation enables an Amer- 
ican ship owner to have his ships built in Ainerican -Shipyards, and to 
operate them in foreign trade in competiti"n with owners of ships con- 
structed at a far less cost in fonign shipyards, 

"I might sa,y that it is only by such means that they could build 
any Americrn. shipyards. (ships) 

"The ship reoairing industry performs a, function as essential in the 
shipping v:orld as that required of shipbuilding. It represents in the 
United States a capital investment in plnnt and equipment about eqi:ial in 
value to the ccpital expenditure to esi^ablish the shipbuilding industry, and 
requires, on an average, substantially the naiae r/jjnber of workmen as are 
employed in building merchant ^hips. Ship repairing yards ?.re equipped 
with dry docks cjid modern machinery manned with staffs of technical en- 
gineers ano. forces of experienced mechanics that raalce possible, the repair- 
ing or reconditioning of ships of all types with expedition and skill. 
These ship repairing yards sell only i- service', a service tha.t enables 
ships to sp.il on their schedrde time in the world •eommerce, and thereby 
these yards form an essential unit of our merchant marine. Substantially 
all of the work perfonned lij ship repairing ya.rds is emergency work, the 
time of performance of wjiich cannot be determined with the sajne percision 
as that of shipbuilding, and, as a consequence, the hours of work and the 
number of employees are not as stable in repairing ships as in building 
them. 

"Thus it a;ppears that shipbuilding, ship operating and ship repairing 
constitute the three units that make a complete... and self-sustained merchant 
marine and the operation of each unit is interde-oendent upon the others, 

"The United States by means of legislation has laid the foundation on 



9732 



-13- 

which our mcrchaiit marine has 'been cre':'.ted and it must te jealously- 
guarded against aiiy conditions that \7ill prevent its future development. 
Having this thcu-^ht in mind, fraaners of the code approached its propar- 
ation with a sincere desire to cooperate with yon in accomplishing the 
purposes of the Ifetional Industrial P.ecovery Act, but at the same time, 
they were apprehensive of the effect that any increase in the cost of 
building or repe.iring merchc.nt ships may have on our merchant marine. 

"A nei-chrjit ship has a life of ppproxiraately 20 years and the cost 
of its construction is a capital charge against the company that oper^.tes 
it. Consequently, its operation during the entire period of its service 
carries cha,rges for insurance, depreciation and interest on investment, 
which are determined by its first cost, and therefore any increase in 
such cost est3,blishes a permanent additional and continuing charge for 
operation cl-oring the period of its service. 

"Then rxi American-built ship engages in domestic trade, any addi- 
tional e:.p)ense of operation due to its cost of construction can only be 
absorbed Toy an increase in prssenger and freight rates which must be con- 
tinued thro-'jghout its entire life in order to preserve its earning capaxity. 

"And the methods of transportation are so numerous that a raise in 
these rates may seriously affect its competitive situation. 

"When an American-built ship engages in foreign trade, however, it 
competes with the vessels of foreign nations constructed and operated at 
less cost. It cannot increase its passenger fi,nd freight rates beyond those 
charged by foreign liner, without losing business, so that an increase in the 
.cost of construction of a nhin imposes a handic-p upon the ship owner in 
foreign tsade over which he has no control, and which continues for the 
life of the ship, 

"There are at the present time several hundred American vessels which 
were built in Ajnerican yards and are noT/ engaged in the foreign trade of 
the United States, 

'• .ose are la.rgely vessels built diiring the v.'ar time and some of them 
since. 

"Any increase in the cost of repairing them imposes an additional 
handicap on them while competing v.'ith foreign vessels. 

"If, during its operation, the National Industrial Recovery Act 
should impose e.ny substantial incret-ise in the cost of constructing merchant 
ships in domestic shipyards for our foreign trade, or substantially in- 
crease the cost of repairing them, it might result in a complete suspension 
of construction of ships for this trade and defer the making of necessary 
major repairs to or the reconditioning of, ships now in service. 

"All of these subjects involve seriously the maintena,nce and operation 
' cf our merclia.nt marine and, a.s I have already stated, they have been constant- 
ly before those who participated in the prepaxj. tion of the code. 



9732 



-20- 

"The "tonne^j^e of merchant ships in the course of construction is 
lower no'j th-ji at any other ti^ae duri?ig the past tun ye-.rs. 

"The industry is at an erctremely low ehh, "both in ship txiilding and 
in repair, Cn tlif repair sidru - it is affected "b^- the general conditions 
in shipping "hich have heen affected h]- the generally depressing con- 
ditions of 'bu.sinef53. And on the merchcnt side, the volume under v/ay 
is 'thorofore small » 

"The indu.stry fee].s that the vrage provisions in the code to increase 
minim-'Jiii VTa;-;6S rdll accon-plish the punoose of the Act vithout causing any 
substantial increas-.e in the cost oF co-.-^ctri-.cting a.nd repairing mercnant 
ships to a dngree that will work a hc^ii-'dshlp on AQ:erican owners. 

"Other conditions oi the code will not interfere with increasing 
employment, HoiTeveTj if ■'ra.-^fir. are increased beyond the provisions of the 
code, the t^iidency will be to decrea^.e th3 voluTe of merchant ship work, 
p.nd, thereby decrecvse rab'ier tha.n increase employ.nent. 

"The Code provides for a basic '.rorking week of 40 hours determined 
on an avera^ije tine of employment over a period of six months. The industry, 
5;iqT repairing in particular, is of a chara'-tsr i;7here there is a considerable 
amount of work of an e:r.;- :. genc;> or special type, on which only one shift caji 
work, and it is necessar;-,- either to i:o3:-k o-jdasionally for longer hours or 
to seriou-sly dela"' che progress of the \70rk as a whole. Tiile in general 
the hours per week \7ill not exceed 40, the code guarantees that over a 
period of six iionths the average employment per week per employee shall not 
exceed 40, 

"The proposed naval construction progrpB, as authorized by the Public 
Works Section of the National Industrial Recovery Act, \7ill provide at the 
peak of such construction (on the basis of forty hours a week) a volume of 
vrork for th3 ship-building yards that will require employment of worlnnen 
in private yards and navy yprds combined about fifteen (15) per cent in 
excess of that which ha.s prevailed at any time during the last ten (10) yerxs. 
"Tl:iis prograa of naval construction, hoi-ever, while benefiting the shipbiiilding 
yards will not be of any advantage to those yards engaged wholly in ship 
repairing, 

"The Dropedition with which -work on this naval program will be carried 
on depends upon the ability to prepare plans, order materials and carry 
out work in the mold loft and completion of this preliminary work determines 
the time when worlnnen can start upon the actual construction of the ship. 
We have, therefore, provided in the code tliat the limitation as to working 
hours on such preliminary work be waived for a period of six (6) months 
after the 3.\;-ard of a naval contract. 

"As affecting employment there is proba.bly no industry more general 
in its demands on other industries than shipbuilding. Approximate Ij"- one- 
half of the total cost of a ship is involved in the cost of the materials 
and equipment \xsed in its construction. 'Si^^Tf state and almost every 
industry contributes, directly or indirectly, to the prodTictibn of ma- 
terials used in shipbuilding. It gives, tlierefore, an extremely broad 
distribution of -..ork. 

97S2 



"And raay CTrtrllinent woulo. likewise broadly affect the i^.dustries of 
the entire ooujitry, 

"It is esti-..L-.ted that in the cost of a ship at least 85 per cent of 
it is exoended ~o\- lahor. 

"They do "oota shiphuilding and ship repairing in the same yard. 
Different shrcV.-.ilding ana ship repeiring yards aj-e located in the same 
commtinity. Thejr are located in the same community as naval yards and 
therefore are in competition with them in securiag labor, and all of 
those matters hrve to he taken into accoimt in establishing tne wages of 
the employment, ciid because of this vr-riety of work in the same yard, it 
is of course ii.voiacticable to have more than one scale of wages. It 
cannot be different for merchant wor^- than it is for government work, or 
for repairing a merchant ship without very seriously disturbing the or- 
ganization of the 7ard or affecting the cost of construction. 

"In determining the. minimum wage rates to be fixed by the Code, 
consideration has been given to the fact that substantial differences 
now exist in the minimum vjage rates paid in different districts of the 
United States, although the wage rates of skilled and semi-skilled labor 
in the various sections are reasonably uniform. 

"In establishing the miniratun wage for merchant shipbuilding, naval 
shipbuilding aiid for repair work in the same localities, your attention 
is directed to the fact that shipbuilding plants do both commercial and 
government work; they do both shipbuilding and ship repairing while sev- 
eral of the plants are essentially ship repairing also do some in ship- 
building; that shi'obuilding for naval and commercial v;ork and ship re- 
pairing are carried on in the same plant and that where this is not done 
shipbuilding and ship repairing plants exist in the same comra\inity; that 
there are in the scj^e communities government yards that do shipbuilding 
and ship repair!-'':; and that in establishing a minimua wage, therefore, 
it is very esseitiaj. that the rate of wages and the hours of labor in 
any shipyard nust be the same for both coraiiiercial and government work, 
and fnr" shipouilding and ship repairing; otherwise confusion, dissatis- 
factic .nd disintegration will prise among their working forces. 

"The code fi::es a minimum wage rate of 35 cents an hour in the 
South and 40 cents pn hour in the l^orth for labor, except for appren- 
tices, learners and casual ^nd incidental employees. The code provides 
that no minors shall be employed in the industry aftar the acceptance of 
this code, and provides that apprentices and learners siia.ll receive no 
less than the ;ainimuin wage after two years of employment. Casual and 
incidental enplo-ees in a shipyard osrforra a considera.ble amount of work 
of varied character and, in order that the code may fix definitely the 
number of s-^.ch employees and their cora^-iensation, it lorovides that they 
shall be -oaid not less than 80 per cent of the minimum wage of unskilled 
workmen with the understanding that the total number of them in any one 
calendar month shall not exceed eight per cent of the number of skilled 
and semi-skilled -.Torkmen during the same month. 

"Unskilled labor in the shipbuilding and ship repairing industries 
is almost wholl:" of the common labor type and is utilized only to a very 

9732 



— T'~ 



limited degree or. productive Fork. 

"The actuc.l -'orl: of nakiii;^ the repairs on ships and of building 
ships is carried or "by a great nuniher of trades Trhich exceed forty in 
well defined trr.des, and in vhich you might employ a fev? men in one and 
a great many in otlie-.s, f,nd they vary through various classes of skilled 
and semi-skilled trades. 

"In connection \7ith the code, your e.ttention is invited to the fact 
that there are long term contracts now hein^? performed in five of the 
shipyards of the United States for the construction of naval vessels. 
The unexpended "bplance of the estimated cost of these contracts a.mounted 
to approximately OlS.OOO.GOO on July 1st cf this year. Any increase in 
wages or increase in matprial prices resulting from the o'oeration of the 
National Industrial P.ecoverj'- Act will i-npcL e upon the "builders of these 
vessels a consider-hle ir.cvee.se in cost, for which some method of pro- 
tection for then should Le provided, cthe:"Tr/ise they will sustain a sub- 
stantial loss. 7e tirge the adrjinistrati.on to protect us against loss 
on these contracts and for this pxirpose have inserted a protective 
clause in the code similar to that included in the Textile Code covering 
the saiBe subject. 

"Some of these shi"os ^-'ere' contracted for last year and I think one 
or t?ro of then, as ■: ar back as 1931, may be a little farther back. They 
are long tiue contracts extending from beginning to end over a period of 
three years . I tld?ik one of the^i is three and a half and some of the 
others tvro and a half. 

"YJe have, therefore, '-written into the code \,'hich I h:,ve read, to the 
effect of a '.king far protection on those contracts, and we urge the ad- 
ministration to protect us against losses on them, and it is for that 
purpose ^'e have inserted the clause in the code. 

"The code also contains a paragraph stating tha.t it nill be con- 
sidered a violation of the code to make any mpterial increase in the 
plant capaxit"" of the induntrj- duri-g the life of the National Indus- 
trial Recovery Act. The reason for this is due t6 the excessive f ac- ' 
ilities no^'f e::istir.g in both the shipbuilding and ship repairing in- 
dustries, kr. C. L. Bardo, "oresident of the !:ew York Shipbuilding 
Company will present to yov. a statement upon this subject. 

"Mr. Ho:.ier L. Ferguson, "oresident of the UeFroort i'ev/s Shipbuilding 
and Dry Doc': Compcaay will discuss the sxibject of wages as provided in 
the code. 

"Mr. La'n-ence Y. Spear, vice president of the Electric Boat Com- 
pany will discu-ss the hours of em.ployment as provided in the code. 

"Mr. 17. H. Gerhauser, president of the Great Lakes Shipbuilding 
Company will rise discuss the question of hours as applicable to Great 
Lakes shipbtiilding and ship repairing yards. 

"Mr. John E. Craig, First Vice President of the Clyde-Mallory Lines, 
will speak on behalf of the American Steamship Owners Association." 

9732 



-23- 



i:r. Honer L. Terguson on iDehalf of. the HewDort Hews Shipbuilding 
and TJ^TD^F^^iJi^^^'R^erence, pa.,es 28 to 45. Hearing July 19, 193o, 
?iled in Coc-.e Zecord Section. Eriefs from his statenent. 

I Der to o-esent three cho,rts wnich have hean prepared froin data 
suhmitted^y ner.bers of the Industry who are grouped together under this 
proposed code. (See Exhibit G) 

The first chart shows that the e.plo^-ment in the ShiT^huilding and 
Shiiirenairing I-^dustry is approximately 50 to 52 per cent skilled, about 
30 'er-ceni^e>ni-s^.:illed and the balance unskilled -^-\20 per cent) 
The" employment cha^t irdicates that the peak of employment m the Ship- 
building Industry vo.s in 1S30. 

The second chart contains information regarding ^'^^^^^^ °^/^2f " 
ment and ave::..,e rrtes in ship yards. Chart ^^^f^ fe'd labor earned 
rate from 1928 to 1931 approximately 70 cents, skilled labor earned 
rate about 77 or 70 cents, falling off at the present time to c„ base 
rate of abo^ot 55 cents and earned rate of about 67 or b8 cents. ine 
base rate is the hourly rate, the earned rate is the rate the employee 
ifact^njpir, as a Jesuit of some form of piece work or its eauiva- 
lent.. 

. semi-skilled la^or base rate for the period ^^^^Hf^f^^^ "^^ 
a^T^roximatei^.- 48-^ cents and the earned rrte approximately 54 cents. 
Sreas tl' base \-at3 for the semi-skilled labor for tne six nonths just 
ended dropped to 44 cents and the earned rate to 47 cents. 

UnskiHec- Irhor 1928 to K31 base ratas slightly under 40 cents and 
the eS^f "ie ;bout 42^ cents. At the present time the ^skilled base 
rate is 36 cents rnd the earned rate is 38-3; cents. 

The last c:.art covers total earned weges. In 1926 f ^^^ff gj^^^. 

wa^e for rl^ ren v:-,s $29.65 per week; in 1927, $30. 8d. l^J'^f' |30-85. 

Ini929! $30.55; in 1930. $30.55; in 1931, $30.30. In 1932. .1,26.70, 

in 1935, $23.90. 



Tt shi^D yr-ds worked 45 rnd 44 hours a week and some ^^ses 48 
until Lst yeci .^len the ho.rs were cut by the leading ^^^J f ^f J^^ 
45 to 40 in order to spread emolojmient . Repair plants worked 48 hours 

per week. 

The minimum com^.;n labor rate of 30 cents per hour and th^ ^^0^°-: 
p^r week would be better for southern yards. Vage rates m tnis Indus 
try have only been cut 15 per cent . 

Kr. Lawrence Y. Spear , Vice President of the Electric Boat Company 
MHo urs of enplo-:eut". Re ference, hearing July 19, Page 46-56 inclusive 
Briefs from his statement. 

Em.lo^nnent in the Kavy yards aoid orivate ^^JP ^^il'^^iSf n '"''vnlS • ' 
ulants ^s. follows: In 1929, 69,589; in 1930, 75 182; ^ f 2^J;/°;^f,: 
in 1932 61 627. The "orivate yard figures are based upon average em 
iVy^^nt in steady employment. The Havy yard figures include every 

9732 



-24- 

name on the payrolls during the year. Consequently, these figm-es have 
to he adjusted when you come to comparin^^ who.t has happened with what 
will happen. For 1930 the adjusted figure is 69,830 vrhich is the neak 
year of peace time employment. 

Under the Act, operating on the 40 hour week "basis, employment will 
reach 80,700 for a peak year ^ch as the 1930 year of 69,830 (adjusted). 
The estimated spread of employment under the Act on a 40 hour has is will 
."be ahout 15 per cent. 

Ships are hiiilt and repaired hy individual efforts of the vrarlanen 
employed and not hy a mechanical manufa,cturing process. Men who name 
one trade can only "be employed economically in proportion to the joh and 
yard faqilities siid s pace on the ship available and strict relation to 
the progress made hy related trade. The greater part of the work must 
be carried on in open daylight hours and the v/hole Industry now operates 
8 to 9 hours a day. 

Returning to the matter as v/hat viould happen in the Industry if vre 
endeavor to operate it on less than a 40 hour week, such as a 30 hour 
week and use a, single shift of men, it v.'Ould increase the time to com- 
plete the contracts about one-third a'3 com-oa,red ?/ith the 40 hour week. 
Cost would be xmnecessarily increased since the grea,ter "oart of the over- 
head expense which constitutes 20 to 25 per cent of the total cost is 
proportionate to tim-e . We wo\ild then not be employing any more men. 
Therefore, v:hat I have to sayabo\it the 30 hour week is based upon the 
assumption that it must be a two shift operation insofar as practical in 
this Industry''. 

While theoretically a 30-hour v/eek might be based on six days of 
5 hours per da.y, it is believed that to attempt such operation would 
give rise to labor difficulties in shipbuilding, wnich is now operating 
on a 5-day I'eek. The 5-day operation would also run counter to the 
modern tendency which looks towards two days of rest per week. In pra.c- 
tice then, the 30-hour week would probably ha.ve to be based on a 6-ho\ir 
day for five days. A rest period must be lorovided for, assuming one-half 
hour rest 'oeriod in each shift, the plants woul'd be required to operate 
13 hours per day. These hours will be too long for the supervisory and 
other forces, therefore, these forces would have to be doubled. The 
supply of trained and experienced superintendents, foremen, etc. would 
be quite inadeo^uate. 

Again a certain amount of time in shipbuilding is necessarily lost 
in starting and stopping work. On an 8-hour day, this amounts to from 
8 to 12 per cent of the paid time and on a 6-hour day it would rise to 11 
to 17 per cent of the paid time. 

During eight months daylight would be insufficient for efficient op- 
eration on a 13-hour day. Shop work could be carried on by artificial 
light. However, in case of work on a ship proper, the use of artificia.l 
light is strictly limited. 

Many ixlividux.l operations in the industry cannot be completed with- 
in a 6-hour period. Normal efficiency requires that e.-.ch o-oera,tion should 

9732 



-25- 

"be carried thro^u:'!! to conclasion "by the individ'ual or gang starting it. 
'.Then v7or'c is txu'ned over to a new individiaal or gr.ng much time is lost 
on account oi clieclrin/^ required, which will invariable increase cost on 
account of increr.sed aiuo\mt of raid hi ura rcouired and the inevitable 
addition to spoiled work. 

There vail he an inadequate suooly of skilled and experienced Ituhor 
in ma.ny tildes :,nd the rusultinf dilution of labor, will necessarily 
again increase the number of hours recaiired. In the r/ar dilution of 
labor increp,sed the labor hours requi;.-ed by 50 to 100 per cent and it 
also increased the percentage of spoiled work. It is iinjjossible ,to for- 
see exactly rliat the combined effect of the pbove factors will be upon 
the number of productive labor hOTxrs req\iired. Estimates by competent 
and e xperie'iced :-en run from 20 to 50 per cent. For the purpose of this 
paper the r.i.ii":'.ui: figure of 20 per cent has been taken. Of the total 
labor involved, ahor.t &0 per cent is prodiK:tive and 20 per cent nonpro- 
ductive. In c. t'.o shift operation, the nonproductive labor \70\\ld have 
to be increased by at least 70 per cent. The total mininum increase in 
labor hours then becomes 30 per cent made up of 16 per cent "oroductive 
labor and 14- per cent nonproductive labor. 

A reduction in the nresent hours to 30 hours per week without re- 
duction in bryiiit;; -o-.^er of the labor involved, would necestiitate the 
following intcrer-ses in hourly wages: 

Priva.te shipbuilding, 35-1/3 per cent. 
Navy Ya-rds, 46— 2/ 3 oer cont. 
Private repair work, 60 per cent. 

Taking into accoiont both the increased pay hours reauired and the 
increase i:i hovxly rages, tae mininujn overall increase in the labor 
would be as follows: 

Private shipbv-ilding, 73.3 per cent. 
Navy YcA-ds, 90.6 per cent. 
Private repairs, 108.0 per cent. 

Ii order to determine the effect of increased labor costs on the 
total costs, it is first necessary to break: do'-n the costs into mater- 
ial, labor and other charges. The weighted average f or naval vessels 
will r-ur about 45 per cent material, 44 per cent labor and 10 per cent 
other charges. The other charges i-eferred to are depreciation, local 
taxes, plant insi^xaiace, rental, interest, etc. 

Eef erring to the Ilavy Department, the corresponding navy yard fig- 
ures are appr-'orriLia^tely 40 per cent material, 55 per cent labor and 4 
percent other charges. The weighted average cost brealidown is material 
43.8 per cent, labor 48.5 per cent, other charges 7.7 "oer cent. On this 
basis, the total labor cost involved by the naval work in question at 
present hoiu's and ■'.^ages '■ould be approximately $103,155,000 and the 
weighted a.verage increase cost would be 79.7 per cent or $86,199,035. 
As the appro:-i_-r,te total cost of the '^^ork at present wa^es a nd hours is 
$223,000,000, the 30-hour wec:"- would result in an increase in total 
cost of at loast 3G.7 per cent. 

9732 



-26- 

Analysis of the reports of the Paynaster General of the Navy for 
the fiscal yecjrz 1929 to 1932 indicates an areraje expendittire for Navy 
Yard lahor, exclv.sive of nev/ covistrr-ction, of $44,231,902, which includes 
all llavy Yarc.s except the %-an. i'.'ctory at ^«'a!--ihingtQn. Increasing this 
ty 90.6 per cent v-oii].d increase the annual cost vita the same vfork load 
hy $40,119,400, r-oioting in three years to $120,353,200. 

AvQra£:e nercha.nt shipoLiilc'ing costs hreal'dorn to 4-5 per cent mater- 
ial, 45 per cent lahor and 10 per cent other charges. Increasing the 
labor cost Dy 73.3 per cent, therefore, increases the total cost by 
33 per cent. 

Available data for the yep.rs 1931 end. 1332 indicate the folloi^ing 
approximate brea':do^n of rrivate rsoaii' costs, material 43 per cent, 
labor 47 per cent, other char.=:;es 10 per cent. On this basis, increasing 
the ls,bor cost c/ 108 per cent would increa.se the total cost of repairs 
by 50.4 per cent. It is the object of this "osper to set forth as briefly 
as possible the frets StipiDortin?^- the follof/inf?; statements. 

1. That the p^irposes of the IJational Recovery Act can and will be 
accomplished -oiader the Code. 

2. That a 30-hcur trenk is not "practical ?iid feasible". 

3. That the reduction in hours below 40 per week would not be in 
the public interest. 

While exact eiployment statistics are not available, the figures 
given belovf represent a close aoproxiraation to the truth: 



Private yards 

direct em-oloynent 

Navy Yards direct 

enrployment 
Total direct ein- 

ployment 

Allied Industry 
enployment 

Totals 



-27- 

TABLE I 

1928 1959 1930 1951 1952 

23550 3^250 34000 29250 21500 

41455 43339 :lll.82 41589 4-0127 

1^5003 n9589 75182 70839 <^1"^27 

.55253 .59151 .^902 .50213 52417 

120225 128740 139087 131052 114084 



American Shipbuilders estimate that one man is employed in the 
allied industries for each ;.ian cmploj/ed at the site. 

Haval construction, excluding all vessels more than ^O/o completed 
on June 1, 1933, the follov/ing men will "be required: 

2 Airplane carriers (nev/) 

8 Cruisers (5 ne;;) 

32 Leaders and destroyers (24 nevi) 

4 Submarines (nev.-) 

2 Gun 3oa,ts (nev;) 

Total 31,700 





800 


11 


P,00 


14 


700 


2 


000 


1 


^000 



9732 



-28" 

Mr. W .. H..,Jjerhau Ger, President of the rireat Lalces Shiptuildiiv?- 
and Repair Association and President of the American Shipbuilding 
Company. S-abject, hours as a,r)t)li cable to Great Laices Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepair Yards. Reference, hearin^i July 19, 19S5, pa.-es R^ to 
73 inclusive. Briefs from his statement. 

The Code as submitted provides for a uniform 40-hour v/eek appli- 
cable to all T/orl: with minimum v/ages of 35rf per hour in the South and 
45^ in the North. The purpose of this statement is to show the 
effect of these regulations on employment in the shipvards on the 
Great Lakes. 

There am but four shipyards of consequence on the Great Lakes 
and these four yards also are equipped with drydocks and extensive 
repair facilities. In addition, there are five large repair yards 
equipped with drydocks, and about twenty smaller repair plants having 
no drydocks, but equipped to execute various classes of minor ship 
repairs. Due to severe winters, the navi;;atin,'-- season on the 
Great Lakes is limited to about 7 months in the su-caer. Delays are 
costly and shipowners are obliged to limit repairs durint:; the operat- 
ing season to absolute emer; encies. 

In order that the time a daraac;ed vessel is in drydock may be 
reduced to the minimum, it has long been the practice on the Great 
Lakes to work 9 or 9-g hours a day, and up to a total of 52 hours a 
week. Daylight hours must be utilised and it is essential in many 
cases that the same man complete the particular job on wnich he is 
working. It is evident, therefore, that a reduction to 40 hours per 
week on emer.^-ency repairs will work a decided hardship on the customer, 
the ship owner, and will necessarily increase the cost of repairs and 
will not increase total employment, since employment results pri- 
marily from accident. Any reduction in the number of working, hours 
below 40 -oor week will still further a; gravate these conditions. 

Any large emploj'ment in the Industry on tne Great Lelces imist 
come from ne-;; construction. I believe it is conceded that a reduction 
in working hoxxrs to 40 per week will increase costs materially. The 
Lake Bulk Freight fleet now consists of 322 vessels of an average age 
of 24 years. 3y far the largest proportion of these ships v;ere built 
at prices very mach below even present da-^ costs. To increase costs 
by the fixing of a 40-hour work week will reduce the p:.ssibility of 
any new construction to a minimui-n and and reduction below the 40 hours 
will preclude all possibility of any construction i/hatever of LaJce 
vessels. Thus the very punoose of the Act, to incre-.se employment, 
is automaticallv^ defeated. 

The average employaent in the four ma/jor shipbuilding companies 
and five strictly repair yards was as follows: 

1923 2,r^S0 

1929 3,f^21 

1950 3,275 

1931 1,577 

1932 8B« 

1933 70fi 

9732 



_r>q_ 



ne would he perfectly v/illin.;; to work not in excess ox eigiit hours 
in the winter months with the privilege "f working 9 hours without 
llvTelt of overtine on repair -.vork in the ^n..er. 'ie .vxll worl: nine 
hours a day, a ^0-hour week, sca:vering our e.:inlo3n.-ent. 

Mr. John 3. Cr^aii,, First Vice-President of the Clyde-llallory Lines. 
qutie7t'~l^-'^r^^Stea.iiship 0^':ners Association. Reference, hearing 
July ll; f953, pages 74 to>L inclusive. Briefs from his statement. 

The American Steair.ship Association represents the owners of the 
.reater T)ortion of ocean-going .hips flying the A^aerican flag, ^oth in 
the domestic and in the foreign trades. Tne Association believes that 
the provision of Section 5 of the Code, reducing the honors of emplo - 
lent in Araerican shiwards to -.0 hours a week, constitutes as great a 
reduction from the present basis of employ-.ent as can wisely he made . 
and that a reduction to less than 40 hours a wee.c 'l^^^^ /f^'^'l'' .^^ 
decreasing emolo:,-:nent, rather than increasing it. tnus defeating the 
purpose of the National Industrial --.ecovery Act. 

It is widely recognized that one of the f^andamental causes of 
the depression has heen that in many lines of industry there nasheen 
durin/the last decade an unt^arallelled technological development, 
wSc^has tremendously increased the productivity of h-a:nan aW so 
that today many articles in general use, produced ^'V^^f ,,°i^f '.f. * 
can be made with only a small fraction of tne human labor ^mich wa^ 
necessary to make the saae articles in 1320. This development neces- 
sarilrinvolves a:.ong the workers employed in malcing these articles a 
cJiS in habits of occupation, and the obvious remedy at the moment 
is to shorten the hours of the wor-:ers. 

There has been no parallel in technological development in the 
.hiT)buildir.^ industry. "Zach ship is specially designed and specially 
coist^icted"^ aiid tnere is no such thing as quantity production of ships. 
I" rSrr;.airing of ships is an indivicoial problem in -en case. 

seldom repeated in identically the sa^me way. ^?5y-^^^^?;;^;tlt odav sub^ 
of the cost of a ship goes to pay labor, and a snip built today sub 
stantiallv the same n-omber of hours as one built m 19^0. There has 
therefore; in the course of the progress of ^V^l^^^^^^ ^"^' 
been no Problem of .iea being throvm out ox worK by tne use of new 
machines, as there has in nany oth^^r industries. 

The problem in the shipbuilding industry is to increase the 
number o/ships built and repaired. This can not be ^^^^^f ^^^jj "^;.. 
les= the shipping business itself is in a healthy condition, f^^^^^- 
in ;il its Phased is an cxtrei.ely competitive business, probably the 
most competitive in the world. The ship owner ^^^ ^f ^^^^ °" °^ 

shippers or passengers increased cost of construction or o^^rati^n, 
because any increase in freight or passenger raes ^^nas to divert 

traffic to other channels. This is especially ti-ae m tne forei,,n trade. 

At present in the American foreign trade approximately one- third 
of liie clr.o is carried by Araerican flag vessels and two-thirds is 
carried by foreign flag vessels. .4.ueri can flag ^^^f^^VelarJff of 
paired in the United States because there is a protective tariff of 
50 per cent, on ship repairs of American vessels maae abroaa. Foreign 

9732 



-30~ 

competitors, on the other hand, do tueir repairing abroad, where the 
costs are much cheaper. Any substantial increase in the American 
owners' cost of renairs simply means that American vessels will find it 
increasin^^ly difficult to compete in the foreign trade. This would 
not only result in mailing less work for the repair-yards in the United 
States, "but it would also result in decreasing emplojTnent of American 
seamen and of al] the multitude of American worlcr-.en in allied in- 
dustries which furrish siipolies and necessaries to American vessels, 
T/hich forelji;n vessels huy ahrcad. Aid the American exporter would 
have more and more to rely on foreigji tonnage to carry his goods to 
foreign markets, and the importer on foreign tonnage to bring his goods 
here. 

The importance of American flag vessels to our foreign trade has 
been em-ohasized by prominent statesmen from the earliest times, and the 
far-reaching consequences of a decline in American flag ships can not 
be denied. 

It is true that American flag ships engaged in foreign trade may 
bo constructed abroad, but surely it -would not serve the purposes of 
recovery to drive the American ^hip owners abroad for new construction. 

The whole raacter may, vie thir£:, be sumiTied up by saying that, in 
our judgment, the best method of increasing eiuployment is to encourage 
the construction and repair of many ships, rather tha.n to try to make 
work for many people out of the consti'uction and repair of a few ships. 

liLv..Q.:..Au^§il^i) Pi'esident, Kdw York Shipbuilding Company. Sub- 
ject, restriction of plant ca;nacity. ^.eference, hearing July 19, 1933, 
pa;Pes 83 to 85 inclucive. Briefs from his statement. 

"At the outbreal: of the war in April, 1917, there were in the 
United States 57 shipyards v/ith 1(^2 ship ways capable of building steel 
ships, and 24 yards v/ith ship v/ays capable of cousti-ucting wooden ships, 
both of 3500 tons dc?d weight, and over," ma'^ing fil shipyards 7/ith 234 
shiiobuilding v/ays. According to Mr. Pioz, on March 31, 1919, there 
were in existence '^7 steel shipyards with ^-20 ways, and 33 shii^yards 
for wooden or concrete ships, with 357 ways, or 150 shipyards with 777 
v/ays. 

There arc at the present time in the United States, in accordance 
with the figures of the IJational Council of American Shipbuilders, on 
the Atlantic, on the Pacific, and in the Great LaJ.ces 27 commercial 
plants, with lOo v/avs, capable of building steel ships. 

These shipbuilding facilities are com,-.i.ercial and do not include the 
Federal shipbuilding facilities in Navy Yards, which are equipped at the 
present time with lo building ways. This is important because these 
yards are in the nature of competitors with the commercial yards in the 
building of Federal ships, and to that extent add to the available com- 
mercial facilities. 

Reference is herev/ith made to Fxliibit 4, which enumerates ships of 
over 2400 gross tons built in American shipyards since 1923 for a ten 
year period, during v/hich time these Ariierican yards constructed ships to 

9732 



-31- 

the extent of 1,198,105 gross tons, an a.verage of 119,810 gross tons 
TDBT year. In thin period, 151 ships --lere "built rrith an average gross 
tonnage of 8,000. 

Shipljuildin ; ca'opcity will oe estimated on the "basis of the 
number of shipbuilding ways in existence at the present time, capable 
of being used for building ships of 3500 dead weight tons, or over. 
Nine months will be allotted to the period of the ship on the ways, 
and the average size of the ship will be assumed at 8,000 gross tons, 
the average of the 151 American seagoing ships built in the last ten 
years. 

On this basis, the shipbuilding capacity of existing shipyards for 
commercial ships is 15055,500 gross tons per annum, or ap;oroximately 
one hundred and thirty-five 8^000 gross ton ships, the average gross 
tons per ship for the past ten years. 

For the past ten yep.vs, including the .~reat stimulation in ship- 
building incident to the Jones-'Thite Act, there ^Ttas an a.verage annual 
building of comnercial ships of 120,000 gross tons, or less than one- 
eighth of the shipbuilding capacity of the country. 

It is impossible to foreca.st the future policy of the United 
States in connection vith an e:qpansion of its Merchant Marine, but irre- 
spective of this, it is at once seen that the shipbuilding capacity of 
existing facilities on the Atlantic Coast alone is far -greater than 
the demands upon them for shi"o'Laiilding in any one of the last ten 
years. 

Rear Admiral Z. S. Land . Chief, Bureau of Construction and Repair, 
U. S, iJavy, Subject, llavy Dep'\rtment. Reference, hearing July 19, 
1933,paies 97 to 102 inclusive. Briefs from his statement. 

The code as submitted by the shipbuilders, so far as it affects 
shipbuilding activities for the Navy Leoartment, is generally satis- 
factory. In connection ^.7ith the question of the 40-hour week 
as proposed by the Code, the Ifevy Department is of the opinion that 
this is required by the industry and that any re'duction in the working 
hours below this would interfere unduly with tlie proper prosecution of 
the naval building program, as veil as with the normal ship-repairing 
activities of the navy yards aiid urivate ship yards. At the present 
time the navy yards are on a, 44r-hour work week with 48 hours pay.- 
The Ila.vy Department feels, however, that it would be fair to reduce 
this to 40 hours work. 

There are a n^oiaber of vessels no^ under construction in govern- 
ment navy yards under s'oecific , appropriations, and the substitution 
of the 30-hour week for the -oresent 44-43 hour week would seriously 
increase the cost and delay the completion of these ships. The loss 
of four hours work per week involved' in Ihe reduction from 44 hours 
to 40 hours would not affect seriously the output and can be accepted. 
There are also --■ number of vessels under contract in private ship- 
yards which would be affected by the proposed code. 



9732 



-32- 

Studien hc.ve \ieen nade as to the effect on la"bor in the ship- 
"building industry of tne 40-hcur ^leek as conparod to the SO-hour week, 
and it is the conclusioii of the IIptj Departnant that the adoption of the 
30-hour week nould not Le in the interest of laoor and in view of the 
size end content of the nave.l shiptuildin./?; program, thrt the 40-hour 
week would not lead to unenplovincnt in shiijliuildin" trades. 

In other rrordsj practically all skilled artisans availahle in the 
shipbuilding trades ?70uld. l)e ahle to find employment on the 40-hour 
week basis. 

The National Industrial Recovery Act under the provisions of 
which this Code has "been formulated, provides, as a part of the policy, 
"to promote the fullest possible utilization of the present production 
capacity of industries," The existin.'^ shipbuilding facilities of the 
co-ontry no^v in opera.ting status are in excess of the requirements for 
new construction and projects contonpla.ted under the National Recovery 
Act, or for R.ny other prospective nev; construction. Sstablishraent 
of nevr facilities or reopening of those that have been closed over a per- 
iod of years will result in excess capacity and creating of new and very 
temporary labor markers le'adiog to later uneinployment a.nd unsatisfac- 
tory conditions. ■ The "lav/ DGnnrtmert is of the opinion that some pro- 
vision should be inolud--" J. in the Code such that it will a.void establish- 
ment of new shipbuildir^- yaxdr: , reopening of those long since inoipera- 
tive, or expansion of small yrrds and repair plants for shipbuilding pur- 
poses. This opinion is in direct accord with the Declaration of Policy 
of the national Industrial Recovery Act. 

Under the provisions of the Code the hours of work for draftsmen 
would not be limited to forty hours "oer week for the first six months. 
The program of new naval vessels caJ.ls for a very large amount of draft- 
ing work in the prepara.tion of designs and working plans and to permit 
preparation of lists of materials to be purchased, also to allow construc- 
tion work to proceed and emploj/Taent of labor to start. The mamber of 
trained draftsmen qualified for the preparation ofplans and designs for 
naval ships is very limited, and there is no scuvco of supply from which 
to recruit additional ones* It will -probably develop that limiting the 
hours of work of draftsmen to forty hours may le.ad to delays in start- 
ing actual shii3building operr^tions, , The IJavj'' Department is of the opin- 
ion that if pra.cticable to do so, the hours of eriployraent of draftsmen and 
other technicista should' be eicempted, at least tsnporarily, from the 
limitation. 

The total money ap )ropriated for the Ilavy Department for the fiscal 
year 1934 is in round ntuabers $3^9,000,000, 

This anount has been limited by the bureau of the Budget to a cash 
withdrawal during the fiscal year 1934 of $276,600,000. The difference 
between those two sums is $53,400,000, 

In vie" of the above drastic curtailments, it will be possible 
for the llavy Department to function during the fiscal year 1934 if our 
navy yard and naval station work is done on a 5-day 40-hour week, and 
it is on this basis that the actual anpropriations mo.de by the Congress 
were reduced by the Bureau of the Budget. Should the Na,vy Department 

9732 



be conroelled to '.7ork on mother "orsis, suoh as the 44-hour week (48 
hoiirs pay), or on a 3C-hour week "baais, it -^/ould be absolutely necessary 
to run a.' deficit or else seriously criT5"Dle the efficiency of the Navy. 

Attention is invited to the fact thrt navy yrrds are primarily 
repair yards for the na.intenaiace of the fleet. Any prguments presented 
by the shipbuilders operrtin;- repair yards are equally potent with re- 
gard to nav^/ yords in so far as rei^airin.':- vessels is concerned. 

The capacity of the shipbuilding industry in this country, includ- 
ing the IJav;'-- Yards, is acre aiaple to take ca.re of any existing or pros- 
pective ■'oro-crans. The llo.vy shi-obuilding, in my judgment, is the most 
difficult, intricate, conplicated tj''oe of shipbuilding th.at there is in 
the world. It requires aore erc^Derience, more technical engineering 
strffs and nore skill in design and construction than any other type of 
shipbaildinj in the world. :xherefore, the urogram upon which we base 
this is wha,t I caJ.1 the fourth -ooint -orograra of economy and efficiency. 
Pron the T,b.vj Department's "loint of view it is mach r.iore satisfactory 
to have these contracts -jlaced with frcilities that are far.iilia-r with the 
Navy Department work, ITa.vy De^^arty.ient classifications and so on. TTe 
think it is more strict aiid r.ore dif:?icult of accompli shnent than any 
other tjrpe of shi75building in the T-orld. On that basis I have no 
hesitancy is saying tha,t the present existing, growing shipbuilding 
facilities of the couiatry are -lore than am^Dle to take care of the llavy 
program, any prosiDCctive llav:/ )rogra;i and, so far as my own laiowledge 
goes, any Merchant I'arine pro';ran. 

Caotain PI. L. T7y]:ia n. U. S. llavy, from Assistant Secretary Roosevelt's 
office. Subject, statement for the Assistant Secretr^ry of the Havy, 
Reference, hearing July IS, 1935, 'X' :;e 102 to 105 inclusive. Briefs of 
his sta^tement. 

There has oeen allotted to the ITar/ Deoaa'tment from the Na.tiona.l 
Industrial Recovery Act the sum of $238,000,000 for the construction of 
ships. 

The building program under this allotment "orovides for the con- 
struction of 32 ships, 16 of which are tenatively alloca-ted to govern- 
ment navy yards aJid 15 to oriva.te shiobuilding "olants. 



9732 



-54" 

There is a provision in the Recovery Act reading as follows; 

"TITLE II - PU_.LIC WOPJ^S Al^D COIISTITJCTIOK PROJECTS. 

"Sec^ 205. All contrcicts let for construction projects 
and all loariti and grants parsunnt to this title shall contain 
such nrovisaons as are necessary to insure (1) that no convict 
labor shall "be employed on any each project; (2) that (except 
in execritive, adir^in.latrpj'ive aiid supervisory positions) , so 
far as practicahle and fee.sihle no individual directly employed 
on any such project shall he permittsd to v.orlc more than thirty 
hours in any one wopk; tha.t all t^npl.oj'-es shall he paid just aaid 
reasonable v;af:es which shoil he conpenoaticn sufficient to pro- 
vide, for the hoi:"^R cf labor as limited, a standard of living in 
decency and coafort, * * "'". 

At the present time the \7ork-v7eek in navy yards provides for 5-|- days, 
with 44 hours work and 43 houi s pay„ The proposal now has been made that 
this be altered to 30 hoars w-rk vath 30 hours pay; or in other words a 
reduction of 14 hours work szid 18 hours pa^'' per week. 

There are noi'f nav?J vessels under construction at government navy yards 
under specific appropriations jia.de by Congress* The estimates for these 
ships ojid the ccii.seqaer.t appro-oriations therefor, were based on a work 
week of 5-y- days wl bh 44 ho'ors work and 48 hours pay. 

It is certain that the substitation of the 30 hour week for the present 
44-48 hour week in navy yards v;ould very seriously increase the cost and 
delay the completion of all shi'os built in navy yards. 

According to the best information obtainable by the Navy Department, 
the building program of the Uavy, which includes 22 ships under the Re- 
covery Act J plus .'3 under the existing ITaval Appropriation Acts, or a total 
of 37 new vessels to be laid down dr-ring the fiscal year 1934, will absorb 
the normal ejioimt of labor employed xn the shipbuilding ind\istry (both 
government and iDrivate} . on the 44 hour week basis, and there may be an 
actual shortage of labor in certain trades. 

Thus, in so fax as the shi'Dbuilding industrj^ is concerned, the above 
mentioned objectives '<7ill be attained without application of the 30-hour 
week, 

Tlie Department does feel, hov;ever, that it \70uld be fair to reducn 
the present work week from 44 hours work with 48 hours pay, to 40 hours 
v7ork with 40 hours pay. In so far as the navy yards are concerned this v/ould 
cause a loss to labor of weekly pay amounting approximately to 16-2/3 per 
cent and would cause a loss of nominally 4 hours work per week to the 
government. 

As to the loss of 4 hours per week, this is not as serious as it 
might seem on its face, for as a matter of fact, the 4 hours put in on 
Saturday mornings actually results :n much less than that amount of 
really valuable labor, and it has even been estimated that on a basis of 
real value, only about 2 hours — or less — should be counted. 

9732 



-P5~ 

As to the loss in lioney to Ip'oor in the weekly pay envelopes, it is 
believed that a certain ^no^^nt of the loss of 8 hours pay, throxigh adopt- 
ing the 40 ho"ur week, could be absorbed by rerjrangeraent of vrage schedules, 
but if the 30 hour week sho'uld be adopted, it would be impossible to 
absorb the loss cf 18 honors vot week pay and keep .anyrrhere near within 
the aTiOunts authorized by Acts of Congress and allotments from the national 
Recovery Act, all of which siuas v/ere estimated on the basis of the longer 
week. 

Several ships are now under construction in navy ya.rds under naval 
aTj-croTDriations on the 44'-48 ho^jr week basis. If the work to be added 
under the Recovery Act should be on a 30 hour ?7eek basis, administrative 
difficulties and confu-picn would be bound to result, with attending in- 
crea:;ed costs and sericjs dela^rs; in other words, an impossible situation, 
which could only be net by: 

(a) Authorizing all v/ork both nresent and futiure on a 40 hour 
per week basis, or 

(b) By obtaining; increases in both aporonria.tions and allotments 
to talce care of additional costs so as to permit, of the adoption of 
the 30 ho"ar \7eek. 

Even if we co\J.d obtain the pdc'dtional fujids necessary we would be 
confronted with the- el^jmeat cf delay. Ihis might be met by working addi- 
tional shifts but the ^Department feels that it is not desirable to employ 
more than one shift in the construction of naval ships owing to the in- 
sufficient number of men available in certain of the skilled shipbuilding 
trades and to the character of the vorlz involved. 

In the opinion of the Havj' Department the adoption of the 30 houjr 
week wo"a].d aiot be to the best interests of labor engaged in the shipbuild- 
ing industry, in which there will be practically no unemployment after 
the "orograra gets under v;ay, as it would result in greatly reduced weekly 
wages for these men and women owing to the fact that it would be mani- 
festly impossible to absorb the loss of 13 hours pay per weeJc into the 
30 hour week, whereas the absorption of 8 hours into the 40 hour week 
would not present the same difficulties. 

To meet the situp.tion on a fair basis — fair to the taxpayerl^: fair 
to the laborer, fair to the Kavy which feels that the ships should be 
built as economically and as e::peditiouslj'' as possible, — it is believed 
that for the shipbuilding industry (including government yards) a five 
da.:/ week of 8 hours per day, or in other v/ords,. a 40 hour week with 40 
hours pay, be adopted. 

l.Ir» J. A. Franklin , In Behalf of the Metal Trades Department of the 
American Federation of Labor. Subject, Wage and Ho-or Provisions. Refer- 
ence, Hearing July 19, 1S35. Briefs from his statement. Pages 122 to 
133 inclusive. 

Ite Code of Fair Competition submitted July 12, 1935 by the Trade Asso« 
aiations in the Shipbuilding aiid Ship Repair Industry', and the revised code 
submitted yesterda.y, do not represent in ajiy v/ay the viev/s of the employees 

9732 



-36" 

as to what is fair labor conroetition and what are nonfair labor practices. 
The employees in the industry were entirely ignored by the framers of 
these codes. This, vie submit, is a violation of both the spirit and the 
letter of the National Industrial H^covery Act, ?nd I ap'oeaj? here as the 
representative of the org^jiizGd emploj'-ees :n the industry to present a 
code of fair labor corape tition \7hich properly represents the views of 
the workers in the industry. 

Tlie organizations which I represent are the followingJ 

Intei-national brotherhood of Blacksmiths, Drop Forges, 

lielpers of A;aerica 
International Brotherhood of Eoilermpkers, Iron Ship 

Builders and Helpers of i\inerica. 
International Ped-ra-icn of Technical Engineers, 

Architects and Eraftsmeno 
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers of America. 
International Union of Operating Fngineersc 
Internationg.l Broth ?rnood of Icu'tdry ilj.ployees. 
International Association of Bridge, Structural, and 

Grnanental Iron Workers- 
International Association of Machinists. 
Interna,tions.j. Union jf iuotal Polishers. 
International iwolda.s Unl ui of A'orth America. 
Union of Fire,nen & Ciler's. 
Pattern Maimers League of Ilorth America. 
United Associatioi'. cf JcifTneynen Plimbers and Steam 

.^'ittcrs of the United Sto,tes and Canada. 
Sheet lietal Workers Inteu-national Association. 

We submit the following labor code, end we ask that it be siibstituted 
for the entirely ixiadeq':i;,te, aiid in ncuy respects unfair and unjust labor 
provisions in the oro'oosed codes submitted b;/- the trade associations of 
the employers in the ship bmlding indiistry. 

1. ITo employee, except members of the supervisory staff shall be 
enroloyed in excess of thirty (30) hours or more than five (5) days in 
any one caJendar v/eek; nor more than six (6) hours in a,ny one day. 

2. No overtime shall be -oermittcd, except the maintenance and re- 
pair personnel, and then only in casas of extreme emergency. All time 
worked in excess of scheduled number of hours shall be paid for at not 
less than doable time. 

3. The minimum rate of pay for employees covered by this code shall 

be twenty-five (25) dollars per vveek. This minimum wage is to be guaranteed 
regardless of whether the employee's compensation is otherwise based on a 
time rate or upon a piece^vork performance. This i's to avoid frustration of 
the purpose of the code, by changing from hour or day rates to piece ¥;ork, 
premium or bonus systems of wage payment. The existing amoxmts by which 
wages in the higher-priced cla-^?es of workers exceed wages in the lowest 
paid classes shall be maintained; and the wage rates xmder the thirtj''- 
hour week shall be less than those paid for the regular full time weekly 
hours previously worked. 

9732 



-?7- 

4. Aiiy system of subcontracting work "b)/ vv'hich an employee "undertakes 
to do a piece of work at a specified price and engages other emploj'-ees to 
work for hin is considered an unfair practice and -orohibited by this code, 

5. Ko new apprentices sliall be employed in the industry until the 
existing surplus of unemployed labor has been absorbed in reasonable 
steady emploj^ento 

First as to the hours of labor. Our proposal for a thirty hour week 
is made necessarj'- and justified by both Title II and Title III of the 
Recoverjr Act. The construction of naval vessels authorized as part of 
the public works "orogran under Title II is vrork that will have to be done 
by tile shipbuilde-j's who are governed by this code. Section 206 of Title 
II, restricts the hours of labor on any sLich project to not :iiore than 
thirty hours in any one week. This thirt;'" hoior provision was enacted by 
Congress, and it is obviously impossible as well as "ondersirable for a 
code to ch.inge an act of Congress, The emplo^yers' proposal for a week 
of forty hours, if adopted would have the effect of repealing Section 206 
as enacted by Congress, so far as it applies to the hoiirs of labor in the 
construction of naval vessels. 

In addition to this compelling reason for a thirty hour week, there 
is the need for absorbing the lai-ge numbers of unemployed when, a forty 
hour w6ek, as the en-olO"'ers recomviend, wou].d leave without the employment 
and without the purchasing power which it is the object of Title I to pro~ 
vide. This is made evident by the sts.tistics of employment, pajrfolls aJid 
hours of labor in the shipbuilding industry which are available at the 
Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau, Apparently the employers 
gave little consideration to these facts, but merely proposed forty hours 
because this would malce but a slifht change in the working hours as they 
existed in 1929, 

TJe are not in accord with that view expressed by the employer, and 
as set forth in the code. We take it more or less as the stock argument 
that has been used in all of the history when the q'o.estion of reducing 
hours has been considered, and, in this case, the primary purpose of 
this act was to reduce the hours, increase employment and increase the 
purchasing i^ower"^ and, if that csmnot be accomplished, v.'e submit, Mr. 
Chairman, that the purpose of the act has failed and that is why we pro- 
pose the restrictions of the hours of labor to 30 hours, sJii we believe 
it is feasible ajid practical. We believe it is in accordance with the 
spirit of the act. In fact, it is a charge uoon the employers and 
employees to establish a 30-hour week, particularly in the construction of 
naval vessels. If it can be sho\7n that it is practical ajid feasible, and 
we maintain that it is practical end feasible, and it is for that reason 
we have set forth the statements we have contained in our submission in 
behalf of the 30-hour week. 

We propose a minimum wage of $25 a week because this is the least 
amount th^at meets the requirement of Section 206 of the Recovery Act, 
which stipulates "that all en:plo;'-ees shall be paid just and reasonable 
wages which shall be sufficient to provide for the hours as limited, a stan- 
dard of living in decency and comfort." 



9732 



-^58- 



OvL'r code provides next for ths prohioition of contracting "by em- 
ployees within the shipbuildin,^ pls.nts. Ttiis is an evil vfhich besets 
the shipbuilding industry cijac. '/hich is essentially a method of sweating 
later, The contracting worker ()ecoaes a sub-eniployer and therehy may 
avoid the wage provisions of any cede. He hecomes a profit maker "by 
sweating profits out cf the r.'j,gos of the employees whom he engages to 
Carry out his ccnT.ractn Every emploj-ee in a shipyard should he employed 
hy sjid receive his wages from the one employer who owns the yard. The 
failure of the employers to prohihit this unfair system of subcontract- 
ing in- their proposed code, illustrates v/ell the danger of accepting a 
code devised hy the buyers of le.bor v/ithout consulting the sellers. 

It is the avowed p-^rpose of these company union plans to deal only 
with such representati\es of the wa;5e-eai'ners as are the emplo3rees of 
the conpaxiy that sets iip the plpji. In oth(?r words the employers will 
not recognize or deal wi ih any representative chosen by the employees 
unless that representative is dependent on the employer for his living. 
And that, we submit, Mr. Chairm.an, is a strict violation of the Recovery 
Act, 

I.h-» J o hn Br Frey, Socretcry-Treastirer . Metal Trades Department, 
American Pederaticn of L',.tor» Wage and hour provisions. Reference, 
hearing July 20, 1933, ;oHges 159 to 161 inclusive. Briefs from his 
statement. 

The lavf of 1C52 provided that wages in Wavy yards should be based 
upon wages paid in the immediate vicinitj^ of the yard. 

Since 1920 the Ne-vy yard v/a^je schedules have been prepared by a 
Naval Wage Reviev/ Board, consisting of two representatives of the Navy 
and one nominated by the iUierican Federation of Labor before approval 
by the Secretary of the Navy. 

Some three months previous to the meeting of Sc?id board, the Navy 
Department authorizes the setting up in each ITayy yard, a yard wage board 
consisting exclusively cf commissioned officers of the Navy. Tlieir 
dxit-j is to make an inveatigaiion of establis'^iments employing mechaJiics 
such as are required in Navy yards, and to;:cTther the wage rates paid to 
such mechanics in private in'V:,?try whose skill, and the character of 
whose work is comparable to tiiat required of mechanics in navy j^ards. 

In each yard committees representing the employees, cooperate with 
the No.vy yard wage board. 

The result is that the data which the Navy yard wage board forwards 
to the Navy Department in Washington, is as representative wage data 
for comparable work in private industrj?-, which can be secured. 

It has never been the policy of the Navy Department to fix its 
wage schedule upon the highest rates paid for comparable work in private 
industry, but instead to take a,ll such rates and approximate what seems 
to be a reasonable average. 



9732 



-39- 

It is ho'.vever, a natter of official record in the files of the Havy 
De-Dartr.:ent that official representatives of the private shipyards lio.ve 
vir^orouslj'' opoosed aiiy advance in the navy yard wage schedules, holcinc 
that such ail increase would miike it more difficult for thera to retain 
conipetent nechanics at lower rates. 

At the last neeting of the Naw Wage Review Board, official repre- 
sentatives of the National Cormcil of American Shipbuilders appeared 
before the ITavy ?Jage Review Board with the assertion that to protect 
their own interests it '..-as necosspry for the Navy Department to reduce 
existing wa^^e schedules instead of increasing them, the argument presented 
beinc; that ^onless the n^val wage schedule was reduced it would \7orl: to 
the disadvantage of nri^ate shi oysjrds hy nt'Jking it more difficult for 
then to -orevent their existing wage rates from "being incrersed. 

Lr, Jo si ah To Newco Tih, General Counsel, Gulf Industries, Incorporated. 
Subject, wage and hour orovisions. Reference, hearing July 20, 1933, p 
pages 174 and 175 inclu.;lve. Briefs from his statei-^.ent. 

On reflection it seems to me best to su.bstitute this letter for a 
formal brief in regard to the proposed Clause 7 in the Shipbuilding and 
Repair Code, 

C-ulf Industries.. Inc. is the owner of valuable properties and water 
frontages in Pensacola; Florida, vjhich it intends to develop into modern 
shipyards of lowest production costso In furtherance of this purpose 
Gulf Industries, Inc. h?.s exocnded considerable smns of money and entered 
into ira-Qortpjit contracts, the terms of v.diich it must perform within a 
certain fixed Tsriod. If prevented from performing these contracts and 
raalcing the development the moneys already e::oended vfould be sacrificed 
and the properties of the Compan;- rendered substantially valueless; yet 
the Code contains in Clause 7 a provision sufojecting the Company to 
measiixes of a Tsenal character should it "oroceed with the development. 
Gulf Industries, Inc. cannot legally be der rived of its property rights 
by any such method; moreover we believe tnct the insertion of the proposed 
clause is contrary to the Nati onnl Recover:, Act itself , both as originally 
drawn ojid specifically as aiaended oy Congress in respect to monopolistic 
pra^ctices. 

Further, if this Clause 7 is permitted to remain in the Code, the 
South will be de jrived of its legitimate share of present and futiore 
shipb-cllding aaid this in defirnce of the fact that ships can be produced 
more economically, more exoeditiouslj'' and at less cost on the Giilf ths.n 
elsewhere in this country. 

The Birmingham, district is now in a desperate state of imemployment 
and is almost entirely dependent uoon the iron and steel industry. Hie 
building of a portion of the Navy program at Pensacola will greatly 
relieve the unemplo:>ment situa.tion in the contiguous districts, but this 
also the proposed Code •.•ould apparently prevent. 

Ue wish to add that we are in entire syiipathy with the efforts now 

being made by the Administration, b"- industry and labor to enter into 

agreement which will avoid unfair competitive practices in the future. 

On the other hand we do not believe tha,t the National Recovery Act 

sanctions or that any emergency requires this violation of o ur oroperty 

rights, 
3732 



-40" 

Clause 7 wa.s reintrocVuced ii^to the rhipbuildin":^ coc'.e after vi'e 
had "been inforneC. "by the Code's "iro^cnents that it had been elirninated. 
You kinaly informed us of this on T''iesday, the loth, but we did not 
secure a copy of the prcposed Code luitil yesterday. 

We ^.gain su,;,-;est withdrawal of Clause 7. Unless it is withdravm 
we request further o'o ortunity to be heard either tomori'ow or later if 
the hearin.j is to be recessed. 

Lr . J . U . Da vi s , AsGistc.nt President, International Brotherhood 
of Boilerrnahers, Iron Shi-pbuilders ;.uid Eelv)ers of Aiierica. Sxibject, 
wage and hour provisions. Reference, hearing July 30, 1933, parses 177 
to 132 inclusive. Briefs from his s catement . 

The Code bein._, considered does not orcviue for such untied action 
as uetwecn labor and mrna^^'smant . So far as we can learn, labor had 
no voice in its formation. 

V/e su^,.';est the Reco"v-err Administration provio.e in the code 
ap'proved for s':\ch conferences to assure united action as betv/een labor 
and iiianaf;ement, to estal^lish uviifor;a wa:,es and conditions for each 
employee classification en,e;a.2;ed in sl.ipouilc in;^ and ship repairs. 

Our experience teaches us, urleus such a provision is established 
in tliis code nobhin . v/ill havp been Con? to eliminate unfair con"oetitiTre 
practices. As those cir^ierences hrust first be eliminated before fair 
practices can prevail. 

Under the irovisions of t]-.e National Industrial Recovery Act, many 
shios are to be biiilt for the ^"nited States ifevy, bids are now being 
asked for b^^ the Nav^r Department. It is essential that action be taken 
to establish these uniform rates before the bids an-e submitted and the 
contracts let or awarded. 

The m-inivaii?. rate as sufM'ested in this code, is insufficient. As 
it would not provide adecuate "lurchanin" power nor permit of decent 
living standards. Presui.iin^ uhat the 30 hcur week will be established 
as provided under the act on ships to be built, the eai'nin^^;s would be 
only $10.50 per v;eek. T/e believe a weekly ninimura should be established" 
at.ip2j.00. Unless such a miniiaum weekly earnin , is provided for, the 
very purposes of the Act v/ill be destroyed. Any mininium wage less than 
$2j.00 will simply mean you have established a. share the work program. 
The rate suggested here is basec. on the average 1929 v/age . 

The provisions of this proposed code, intend to establish a dif- 
ferential as between the Korthern anu Sourthern section of the United 
States. This v;e feel is Uiicalled for and is not justified. Surely 
men employed in a southern State and required to perform the identical 
work are entitled to as much corn'oensation for their labor. 

I.'ian-y of the ship repair yards .now v/orl: what is called, the "Chain 
Gang System" v/hereby each employee is hii-ed anc. fired dail^-, requiring 
every man to form in line for each chift for ea^ch day's v/ork sectired. 
This has liad a tendency to ^^reatly lov/er the -ourchasin,, power of these 
workers, and has been the cause of much of the "Cu.t Throat Competition" 
mentioned. 

07^0 



-41- 

Under the pre sump^iion . this Bor.rd will ostablish v;ays and ineans to 
■provide a irdniimua for all clc.ssif ications we are listing and attachin/^ 
the cla-ssificatior?^ couiin,; "Oiic'er the oasic trades we represent in the 
shiphuilding industrv. 

Classifications : 

Shipfitter, boilei-iralxr , welder, (elecL.ric), welder ( ~as) , burner, 
loftsmen, larerout, riveter, chipoer and caalker, flange turner, driller, 
rig;;^-er, frejr.e bender, packer, ^^uncher, and shet.rer, erector, bolter-up, 
rc.jalator, helper, holder-on, heater, ax^prentices, drill press operators. 

Wo su£;3cst a weekly i.iinimuin rate for laechonic classifications of 
;43. per week. 

We su5,-:-,est a ininii.iu:.! of 33. -oer week for semi-skilled woi-kers and 
^30. for helpers and heaters. 

We further Eu-2.;;,est tccause of the many systems of piece work, pre- 
ni\im, bonus, and contrtict, that a guarantee of a.t least the v/eekly and/or 
daily rate be provided, and further that ell sach systems and rates be 
fixed to provide the avera£,e work.ian with a least 30 per cent over the 
basic wage. We believe further that all contracting or subletting of 
work in yards be diecor.tii-.ued. . 

Llr . Jose-vh C ■ laCDcna; ,h, on Selialf of International Brotherhood of 
Electrical Y/orkers. Subject, v/a;_.e aut. hour provisions. Reference, 
hearing July 20, 1333, pi/jes 138 to 133 inclu.sive. Briefs to Ms state- 
ment . 

This code has been quickly drawn by a self-elected group of power 
companies, mostly subsidiaries of steel and power corporations. 

The shi jbuilding and shiij repair industry is rightly regarded, how- 
ever, as a separate and individ^'oal industiy not only because of functional 
difference, but bec.usc, we Eniohatically coitend, this industry is 
touched with public si ,nif iccjice . This industry is not only an adjunct 
of copper and steel inc.ustries, but it is an iuportant arm of the federal 
governi-ient, either potential or actual with ouasi-public functions. This 
is sho'-.Ti by the output of the yards during the last 15 years. The output 
of 1919, the' year lollov/ing the world war, (it is plain that 1319, not 
1318, shows the lift in tonnage built inasnr.ich as the industry could not 
get underway for a full year follo'-.'ing entrance into the v/ar) is nearly 
10 times that of normal "/ears. 

Year Outlay 



to 



1919 $710,522,676 

1927 78,526,391 

1323 31,744,283 

(Census of lian-ofacturers 1929, page 1233) 



9732 



Due to the character of this inL.usi,ry, thereforp, it shoiild "be re;3;arded 
as forr.rin^, with the Unitec' States Tavy YErdn, rca integrated whole. 

Unf ortunp.tely the shipbn.il-'.in anc. shi-T re"oa,ir industry has had all 
the advantages of being a public utility with none of the disadvantages. 
Uniortunatel3r it has never felt the disciplining infl\ience of govei^nment 
':;uidance, and it has never set up standards of v;a;ges and v/orking condi- 
tions vrtiich the government yards erected. 

The proposed code spea^;s of only one type of lahor in its minimum 
wage section (Section 6), presui^iably i:uisl:illed or comiiion labor. V/e ask 
that the skilled ciaftsmen be disenga,,ed from this vague categoi-y. The 
skilled craftsman is ahr.'ilutely necessary to shipouilc'.ing — indeed in 
the case of the electrical craftsman, he is f imdamental . The modern 
ship is a floating 'oower house. It is inconceivahle that a worlanan of 
size and im;)ortance should he at.ked to consider a minimum wage, which 
would return v:por. a 30-hour v.-eek basis, the sum of ;10.50 per week. 

vTe believe that a just approach to these questions of proper 
classification, nar.immn hours, wa je scales, and kindred ma,tters, should 
be regarded to standards set,, up in the 'pvernment branch of the ship- 
building and ship re^Dair indiistry as those proper for the entire in- 
dustry, w'e therefore renuest that; 

1. MininTur.i wage for electricic«.ns be i^l.OO an hours, v;ith 65 cents 
for electrica,l hel-iers. 

2. That this scale become a flat rate for ship electricians 
throughout the entire industry. 

3. Then v;hen the v/oxk-wee]; is ciurtainled ouite properly to 30 
hours, that the vifaje rate become ;^1.G0 ,in. hour in order that the same 
pay for 30 hours as for -i-S hours be granted: This of course in keeping 
with the objectives of the Ht.ticnal Recoverj Act. 

4. In order to avoid abuse of the SO hour week principle, we 
request that the six-hour day of continous btrvice for .5 days be main- 
tained as basic, and that all overtime be abolished except in cases of 
emergencies. Fnen v/orked as emergency double pay shall be paid. 

Mr. John P. Coyne , Vice President, International Union of Operating 
Engineers, for LIr . John Possehl, Crsneral President, International Union 
of Operating Engineers. Subject, wa ,e and hour provisions. Reference, 
hearing July 20, 1933, pages 19d to 195 inclusive. T3riefs from his 
statement . 

The International Union of O'oeratin,: Engineers wishes to take 
exception to Article V of the code of fair competition and trade practice 
for the ship building and repairing industry as submitted July 12, 1933 ' 
as it pertains to the maximum hour provision under the national Indust- 
rial Recovery Act. ViTe also v.'ii:h to :)rotest the Drovisions for the 
minimum rate contained in Article VI of this code. The engineer as 
employed in this industry has several classifications, namely: Station- 
ary plant engineer, cornpressor plant en jineer, crane operator, dinlty 



9732 



-45- 

locoinotive en,^ineer, derrick eni;inepr, etc. The en£:ineer is necessarily 
a liiii,lily skilled woiL-krjaxi and cnl-'- becones proficient after many y.3ars 
of -practical experience and co:itimiOLis study. His duties are of such . 
a nature that upon his cfiiciciiy depends the successful operation of the 
entire industry and they rSijalate the production. 

It is our jvid.'X.aent from experience and ohservation that it is the 
intent and purpose of the national Industrial Hecovery Act to provide 
eraploynent for a greater nxLTioer of sk.illec'. worlnnen thoji are now employed. 
To this end v/e propose stikin:-, out the prevision for the 40 hour week 
and inserting- instead thereof a provision for a miidm-'om of 30 hours per 
week divided into o days of ' hours each with a px-ovision that if over- 
time work is permitted under the provisions .of the code that such over- 
time be paid for at the rate of double time. 

Mr. Thomas A- 'j'ood , representing the International Association of 
Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron V7qrkers. Subject, wa.^e and hour 
provisions. Reference, acarin^r; Jiily 20, 1933, pa^es 197 to 199 inclusive. 
Briefs from his statement. 

Oi-u- or£;r.ni?.e.tion ur;:es that a iv.iziinum work-week of 30 hours be sanc- 
tioned bu the National Eecover;^ Administration for both navy yards and 
private shipbuildin;:: concprns. j^s to wa.:es, we urge further that the 
existing hourly rates of '^ay be so increased as to yield the same 
weekly income for thirty honors as is now received for a longer work- 
v/eek. 

TJe are fully aware of the fact ;;hat the increase in ho-orly rates 
where .^overniaent or private shipyards have a forty-eight hour week will 
amount to 37 i nercent, but on the other hanc, we v/ish to point out to 
the Recovery Adiainistration that tiiis does not really represent a com- 
mensurate increase in labor cost. The orevailir.g rates of pay in the 
navy yards were established in the year 1938. Since that time there have 
been decided technolo ical ijAprovements in navy yard work and also in- 
creased meclianizrtion \;hich in large uteasure v/ill absorb any increase in 
labor costs arisin . from the hi; her hourly rates vfhich v:e advocate. 

As to conditions of ":)roduction in private shipbuilding plants, we 
request of the Recovery Administration that bct^ hours and rates be 
placed on. the level as navy yards, tlxat is, the 1923 full-time weekly 
earnings for navy yards x'or a thirty-hour VYork-week, in order that 
employees in private establish.iients may earn approximately a sufficient 
amount to maintain themselves and their fejnilies in reasonable health 
and decency . 

Mr. George I. Pov/ers , Representin , the Steel and Metal Workers' 
Industrial Union. Subject, wa-;e and hour -yrovisions. Reference, hearing 
July 20, 1933, pa_,es 211 to 212 inclusive. Briefs from, his statement. 

This is a proposed draft of a .code for drydock and shipyard workers. 

"1. A s^25 minirmam weekly wages for coi.i.ion labor, for a. 6-hour day, 
5-day v/eek, hours a.m. and p.m. to be specified. All hourly rates to be 
raised in the same oro'oortion as the increase in the coriTaon labor rate. 



9732 



-44- 



Time and one-half for all overtiuie. Llaxinmm v7orl"in£' week to be 40 
hours. Automatic v/a";e increases to ir;ept each rise .in the cost of living. 
Aholition of all pieceviorl: and', suh-contracting. 

"2. A ;';;uarantee of ^.:0 Vireeks Y/ork per year. All Y^orkers jjettin^s 
less than 40 weeks v;ork are to receive unenroloyinent insurance at the 
rate of full vace.s - the cost to "be ^aic^. eoj.ially "by the company and the 
Federal Government . " 

Mr . J . M. Mullin, on Behalf of Eniployees of the ITevv York Shipbuilding 
Coi.nany, Camden, Kcw Jersey, Subject, v^are and hour provisions. 
Reference, hearinij July 20, 1933, pages 21S to 21? inclusive. Briefs 
from his statement. 

I vnsh to anno'once at this time that the empjloyees of the New 
York Shipbuilding industry in Cai.iden, ITew Jersey, have gone on record 
as opposin;:, the 40 cent minimuin and are asking for a 50 cent minimum 
to be paid to acuiskilled labor. 

Inasraach as the v/orlaaen.of the Kew York Shipbiiildin;"; employees 
feel that our connany will rjet a fair proportion of Naval work that is to " 
be :jiven to private yardc, we, the em'oloyees of the New Y^rk Shipbuilding 
Company feel that a 40 hcxvc week will take cave of all uiiemployed in our 
district v/ho belong to the shipbuilding- industry. 

If sufficient work is awarded to our company, it is our belief that 
from 4500 to 5000 men can be added to our "payroll v/ithin the next year. 
We feel tlia^t a -1-0 hour v/eek is cin ideal workin'; week, and is the best 
that can be obtained for the interests of both labor and industry. 
Assuming that all the rn.ei7rployed belonging to the shipbuilding industry 
can be taken care of v/ith a 40 hour week, Y/e see no reason for a 
Shorter week. 

It is ovir understandin:i: that the code submitted by the shipbuilders 
calls for a minimiij rate of 4:0 cents per hour for unskilled - labor . We 
cannot help but feel that the rate c.ocs not provide a comfortable and 
decent living. Therefore, it is our desire to submit a minimum rate of 
50 cents an hour for your consideration. In August, 1932, the ship- 
builders saw fit to reduce all v/a^es throughout tiie yard that this re- 
duction should be restored under the nev/ deal. It is our intention to 
cooperate with the Goveriunent and industry in this .jreat program, however, 
we feel unless a substantial increase ia s^ranted to all employees it will 
be impossible for the Y/orkin^i; ^I'lan to meet the nev/ rise in the "orice of 
commodities. 

Mr. Charles W. Wilkerson . on Belialf of the International Molders 
Union of North America, Subject, wa:je and hour provisions. Reference, 
hearing July 20, 1953, pa^-es 217 and 220 inclusive. Briefs from his 
statement. 

Mr. Chainaan, this -pertains only to the .v.-iolders and core men. Of 
course we are asking for the higher v/age than the minimum .'of ..^25.00 a 
week. My statement is very short. 



9732 



-45- 

In ;,oinc over the code submitted to you by the Shipbuilders and 
Repair Industry, we find they have not placed in it the mininium wa:,es 
to be paid to holders and corei-iakers woi->inr; in this industry, and, 
as v;e understand the object of the law is to establish fair competition 
in the inc.ustry, and in order to accomplish this, we feel it is neces- 
sary to establish the same minimum rate of wages to be paid to the 
mechanics mal:inc the castings for the ships to be built in all ship 
plants anu for repairs for old ships, also that the -ourpose of the act 
is to pay a weekly wa;.,e so that the employees caai mrcbase as much as 
they could with u week's pay in the normcd years, from 1926 to 1929. 
Therefore, we bvlit?ve the wages for nolders anc. coremakers should be 
^j49 .4'-J: per week. 

■ Mr. T. F. Behney , on Behalf of Pattern llalrers Leariie of ilorth 
America. Subject, wa ,e and hour provisions. Reference, hearing July 
20, 1933, -oar.es 230 to 321 inclusive. 3riefs from his statement. 

T/e hereby su-mit for your ap iroval sug,'jes tions for ^-overning the 
pattern maliers trade insofar as it affects the shipbuilding and ship 
repair industry in the United States. T/e op-'Ose any differential in 
•rates as to the location of industry. We a«k that /ou make effective 
a rate of not le^js than ,;1.25 "oer hour for all journeymen pattern 
maimers; that the hours per day shall not be more than six, and the 
ho-urs per week not in excess of thirty. To insure against unneces- 
sary overtime, we ask tluit a vienalty of double time be imposed. 

lir. M. p. &arrett , Representing the United Association of 
Journeymen Pluiabers and Steam fitters of the United States and Canada. 
Subject, wage and ho\ir provisions. Reference, hearing July 20, 1933, 
page 221. Briefs from his statement. 

We oppose any differential in rates as to location of industry. 
We ask that you mal-e effective a rate of not less than :;;i.25 per hoior 
for all journey.aen plnmbers ana steam fitters, and a Tite of not less 
than 35^ per ho\ij: for all journeymen plwabers and steam fitters helpers. 
That the iklours per day shall not be more than 6, and the hours per week 
not in excess of 30. To in;?ure against unnecessary overtime, we aSk 
that a penalty of double time be innosed. 

Mr. Jolin F- McHamara , representing the International Brotherhood 
of Firemen & Oilers. Subject, wage and hour provisions. Reference, 
hearing July 20, 1933, page 222. Briefs from his statement. 

It is our judgment from experience and observation that the 
intent and purpose of the National Industrial Recovery Act is to pro- 
vide emraloyment for a greater n-uraber of skilled worlanen than are now 
employed. To this end we jrcpose to strike out the provisions for the 
40 hour week and to insert instead thereof a provision for a maximum 
30 hour week to be divided J days of 6 hours each v/ith the miniraom 
pay of not less tlian ^37.82 of water tenders, and of not less than 
iSb.OO for firemen and oilers, with the provision if overtime is per«» 
mitted under the provisions of this code that said overtime be paid for 
at the rate of double time. 



5732 



'^ -46- 

Mr. William G-. McDermot t, Ke-^respntin;-^ the Employees oi ?ore 
River Plant of the EetlileLem Corporation, Qjulncy, Mass. Subject, wai'^e 
g^ncL hop.r provisions. Reference, hearing- July 20, 1933, page 225. 
Briefs from his st;atement. 

The eOToloyees of Pore River Plant of the Bethlehem Shipbuilding 
Corporation, Quincy, Massachu-setts, represented here by the employees 
representative body, wish to submit their recoi-iiaendations relative to 
the shipbuilding code. 

1. This committee is in accord with the maximam hours submitted 
by the shipbuildin;j code, namely, 40 ho'ors per week, as we feel that in 
reducing oiir regailar 48 licur week to 40 hours per week it will soon 
absorb all shipyard workers that are now -unemployed in our district. 

2. That the 40 pent perhour minii.T'.mi based on 40 hour week we 
oppose for the foll'^wing reasons; 

That in order to line in comfort and decency as so stated in this 
Recovery Act, we feel that ,)16. per week is inadeouate. Prices of all 
conrnodities o.re increasing daily and edl other living expenses in propor«*' 
tion; for example, the average home for the v/orkin;; man 8>,nd his family 
in our district costs him approxii:iately ^'30 per month, or if he is 
purchasing a home through any bank, his ;oayments are generally predica- 
ted on the same amount monthly, plus tajxes, insurance, etc. 

We could offer fui-ther details substantiatin;:; our recommendation 
but we do not feel v;e should take Vcp too much of your comiaittee's 
valuable time. 

We reconuaend tliat the minimum rate paid to shipyard eiiployees be 
50 cents per hou.r, based on a 40 hour per week. 

Mr. John W. G-arvey on, behalf of Intornational Hod Carriers' 
Building and Coaimon Laborers' Union of America. Subject, wage and hour 
provisions. Reference, hearing July 20, 1935, page 224. Briefs from 
his statement. 

In place of Section 3 v;e propose the follov/ing provision: 

"No employee on an hourly rate aiay work in excess of thirty (30) 
hours a vi^eek, and there shall, be no overtime work except in an emergency 
measure. If any employee on an hour rate works in excess of the 
schedule six (o) hou.rs in any one day, the v\ra':,es paid will be at the 
rate of double time the regular hourly rate for such time as may be in 
excess of six (6) hours." 

The second objection we demand to make is against section 4, and in 
it's place we propose the following provision: 

"The minimura pay for laborer shall be at the rate of twenty-five 
(25) dollars per week for a thirty (30) hoiar week. 

(a) On and after the effective date of this code, employers shall 
not eniploy any minor under the age of sixteen (IG) years. 

9732 



-47- 

Mr H Geriish SirAth, President, national Council of Aiacrican 
Shi^D^ouTi7^^."~sirblTct, re^Dl:/ to ouesticns ashed hy the Chairman. 
Reference, hearinc July SQ-. 1953, p.v.es 22S to 232 inclusive. Brxefs 
from his stateivient . 

The T)resent rates in :5ostcn, tho oasic rate for coi-iaon later is 
3-- cents 'an hour; in ITew York, it is -^^0 cents; in northern Hew Jersey. 
55 cents, and phi lade l^v.da, 3^-: cents. 

in Baltimore they are now 35 cents; in Hampton Roads, they are 2-. 
cents; in New Orleans, 2^.- cents; Mooile 2-1- cents, anc^ Galveston. 32 
cents . 

"The ^resent camcity of active shipbuilding and ship repairing 
cou^aaiies of the United States as a vhole, is in excess of present or 
any"-orosoective needs. Therefore, it be considered a violation of this 
code" to Wee aiiy aiaterial increase in the plant capacitj^ of the In- 
dustry, such as new shops other than to replace existing shops new 
drydocks or new .marine railways or new shipways. curing the life o± 
the National .. Industrial Recovery Act." 

Deputy Whiteside . May I have your definition of "north and south" 
as you interpret it? 

Mr. Smith. South of Ilaryland and Texas, inclusive. 
De-Tuty Wliite-oide . That is all States south of Maryland? 
Ur. Sraith. Inclucdng Maryland to Texas, inclusive. 
De-Quty TTniteside , Runnin,:.; to the i.Iisaissiopi River?: 
:.Ir. Smith. Runiiinj to the ?do Grande. 

De-raty Whiteside . Then, airectly dov/n th- line of States west of 
the Liississippi throu'Ji Texas? 

Mr. Smith . Ho, sir, we have .x.de no attempt to define west of the 
Mississippi excepting Texas. 

Semty ■Whiteside . Eave you any su^-v.estion to rnaice re^^ardin^j the 
machinery to be set up to enforce the Code? 

Mr. Smith . Yes, sir. We propose the followinfj paragraph to be 
inserted in the Code; 

"The administration of this Code in the Shipbuilding and Ship 
Repairin- Industry will be undortai-en by committees elected by the 
Industry? co-ordinated by national Committee which will cooperate with 
the Administrator as a planr.in _, and fair practice a-ency for the 
industry." 



S732 



-43- 

Ur. F.o''oort V/ . Malone , Rcpresentiu" the G-alveston Drydock and 
Constriiction Coupany. Sii-'cject, Article 7 - Restriction of Kev/ Facili- 
ties. Reference, liearin'^ July 20, 1953, pages 234-2'_l inclusive. Briefs 
from his statement. 

Factiial data have "been presented to the Acjninistrator, explaining 
the heavy expanr.ion of both "builc.in; , ejid- repairia^ facilities, incident 
to the v/ar euer,2;ency, and explaining" chat notwithstanding a liiaterial 
contraction in the scope of such fc-Cilities betv/een the close of the war 
and the present tiae, due to the la.clv of need or deiiiand for them, those 
facilities which remain are far in excesr. of what na,y be conservatively 
estimated as the normal needs of the shipnn^-; industry under satisfactory 
shipping conditionc; it hein,;^ a selfevident fact, a,clinowled;';:ed in every 
quarter, that shipping today is in s-iich a slump as to be noT/here near .. 
nornal. Thus, the existin;;^' shi-)h^iildin:;; and shiprepairing facilities 
exceed normal requirements, and vastly exceed present reauiremcnts. 

Today there are 93,000 tons of dockin- capacity of coiTimercial docks 
in the Gulf, plus the 15,000 ton ITavy dry dock available in case of 
necessity. 

The dry docks a,re located as follows: 

Galveston 10,000 tons - 1 dock. 

Beauxaont 25000 tons - 1 Railv/ay. 

New Orleans 37,000 tons - /^ docks. 

Mobile 36,000 tons - ■!■ docks and 1 railway. 

Pensacola 5,000 tons - 1 dock 

Tampa 2,500 tons - 1 railway 

The above does not inclti.de an7,rthin,:.; of a capacity of less tlian 
2000 tons of v/hieh there a,re a lax-;i;e nuinber available for river and 
harbor craft. 

Statistics furnished by the o-oerators of these plants r'.isclose 
that the facilities were" oogupied ostly by ocean .•joinz vessels the 
following percentage of the total tim.. O-uring the last year: 

Galveston 51 Percent. 

New Orleans ID. 2 Percent. 

Mobile 33.1 Percent . 

Pensacola 20 Percent 

Beaumont, no data reouestcd. 

Tampa, no data requested. 



9732 



-49- 



i!r. Johji M- Tobin , Generpl Vice President, International Brother- 
hood of Blacksnichs, Drop Formers and Helpers. Subject, wage and hour 
provisions. Reference, heari:".;, Jul"/ 2^, 1953, pa^-cs ,2'i2-243 inclusive. 
Briefs froin his statement. 

Paragraph 5 of the Code .as proposed by the shipbuildin^-j and 
repair yards provides that no indivic.ual will be employed in excess of 
forty (40) hours in any one week. V/e urge that the words and fig:ures 
of forty (40) be chang-ed to the words and firrures of thirty (3) be- 
cause forty hours per week will not, according to out best .judgi.ient, 
based ur)on a general iTnowledge of the conditions in this industry 
reemploy the available blacksuiiths, forgers and anglesniiths ordinarily 
ciiiployed in this industry. 

V'e suggest that the following lan.gaajo be added to paragraph 5 — 
"that the miniLruin rate of pay for blacksmiths working on li,^,ht v/ork 
shall not be less tiian ;?42.?2 per week. The mininiuru rate of pay for 
blacksmiths' helpers working on ligixt work shall not be less than 
j29.76 per week. Ivlinirmua rate of pay for blacksmiths worlcing on heavy 
work shall not be less than $-l-5.57 "i.-.r week. ' The minimum rate of pay 
for helpers on heavy blacksmith fires shall not be less than J30.72 
per vfeek. 

The miniLTUxn ra.tes of loay for heavy forgers shall not be less than 
.^65.28 per v;eek. The uiniMUia rate of ■';)ay for helpers on heavy forging 
shall not be less thcji ,'.30.73 per week. 

Mr. A. 0. Wharton , Internation President by H. J. Carr, C-eneral 
Vice President, International Association of Machinists. Subject, 
wage and hoixr provisions, Reference, hearir. , July 21, 1953, pages 
1003 to 1004 inclusive. Briefs fror.i his statement. 

"Relative to p.aragra-)h 3 'of revised code, we urge that the v/ords 
and fig-ores 40 be changed to the words and figi.ircs 30, because 40 
hours per r^eek vcill not, accordin to o-it best judginent, based u:pon a 
general l3iowledge of the conditions in this industry, reenroloy the 
avail£.ble nvtraber of r.TachinistG ordinarily emr^Dloved in this industry. 

"Relative to oaragraph 4 of revised code: the proposed rates of 
3.5 cents per hour in the South and '--O cents per hour in the ITorth 
produces a ,;i'^-.00 and .15.00 per v/eek earning. 

"The common labor rate set b}' the Government in the shipyards 
operated bv the Govermnent ranges from 3C cents to 56 cents per ho^ur, 
oased of 48 hours per v/cek, v.'hich produces ,17.23 and ;^26.£8 per week 
respectively. 

"The minimum rate of pay for machinists shall be .^4-4-.lC per week. 

"The minimum rate of pay for machinist .ihelpers shall be J29.28 
oer week. 



9752 



-50- 

llr . H- G. Sraitli , President, iTational Council of American Shi o- 

ouilc'ers. Subject, Heply to ruestions asked by the Chairraaii. Reference, 
hearin;- July 21, 1935, -la^es 1007 to 1011 inclusive. Briefs from his 

statement . 

De' Tuty Vifhi t c s i cle . The first question is, '.7ore wages cut by the 
shipbuilders or ship repair concerns after ivlatch 1, 1S32?, 

Mr . Sini th . Yes. There had bo'-.-n a reduction of about 10 per cent, 
a little less in Eomc plants, and a little i.iore in one or two others, 
and one or two others that made no cuts at all. 

Deputy Vfhi t c s i de . That is, the wa;;,,,e rate was c\it on an avera.^e 
of approxii..atcly 10 per cent since Liarch 1, 1S32? 

Mr . Smi th . That is v\'hat the fi.^.ures sho¥\^. 

Deputy Whi t c s i de . T]ie next ..nuestion is, VJhat pcrcentace were 
wages cut between J:.jmary 1, 1923, and March 1, 1932? 

Mr . Smi th . There v/as s.li.iost no red.uction. I find one instance of 
r. five iDer cent reduction. 

De-Quty ViThi t e s i de . uliat increase -.7ould the -.:0 cent minimum wage 
show over the present va-zQ in the ITorth? That is, the present minimum 
wages in the ITorth. 

Mr. Smith . I quote the ■:)resent ba,cic rates irevailinr: in the north 
as follows: Boston, 34 cents; Hew York, --0 cents; northern New Jersey, 
S5 cents; f^niladelphia, 3^:- cents. 

Deputy Vfjii t c s i de . Arc you prepared to show a £iven estimate of the 
increase in the labor cost which woiilc result from the 30-hour week as 
against the -iO-hour week as it ap -lies to the craiser pi-ogrcaTi? 

Mr. Smith . Yes-, Those f i ^ires are already in the record in type 
in t*he statement mad.e by Mr. Spoar, but I have another estimate or 
sheet that v^as worked out last ni pit . In referring to Mr. Spear's 
figures, that shows a detailed ^1,000 ex lenditure on a 40-hour basis as 
compared with vfhat it would be in the shipyards on a 50-hour basis, 
assuming the sa^ne weekly wage. This sheet is. not ty-oewritten, but it 
uiay be so . 

Deputy 17hitesid.e . Are you prepared to offer it so it may be in 
the records this i.;ornin;';? 

Mr . Smi th . Y'es; I am. 

Deputy Whi t e s i de . It is quite important. 

Mr . Smi th . li 3h6ws';an increase in cost of approximately 59 per 
cent, so far as the shipyard work itself is concerned. 

Deputy V/liiteside . That is the direct labor increase? 



9732 



-51- 

Llr . Sr.ii th . :?hat is the diroct cost incree.se in the yard Ccae to the 
incrcas-j iu cirect lE.bor and increase in overhead. It does not talie 
into acco-ont the factors affected 'by increase in the cost of material 
and ec"aip..ier.t that wc iiave to tu:'. 

Ee'.iut^'- ffhi t G s i de ■ Mr . Sharp . 

Mr . Sharp . This is simply aji .-daptaLior. of the textile code 
provisions anc. the ordc;r effectuating then, subject to correction and 
discussion, just a sxig-^estion. 

To effectuate further the policies of the act, a. shipbuilding and 
ship repairing; industry conrnittoe is set .up to cooperate with the 
Adi?.inistrator as a .'laiininr. and fair •ors.ctice ar;ency before the ship-, 
building; cjid ship repairing; industry. This couiuttee shall consist 
of, I say five althou.l.i I do r.ot l-iov; how laany you want, five repre- 
sentatives of the industry, appointed by, and this is subject to 
correction aga-in, ap jointsd b--' the coiTidttee presentirip this code, and. 
three aerabers, withcat vote, a^: loiv.ted by the Presic.ent of the United 
States. 

Said coi-iniittee may, from tir.iG to tiiac, present to the President of 
the United States recoiuviend-atiors based on conditions in the industry as 
they may develop from time to time which vdll tend to effectuate the 
operation of the provisions of this code and the policy of the 
Hational Industrial Recovery Act. 

The textile code contains specific sug;2;sstions as to the tjrpe of 
recooraendations which are contemplated. You may first consider whether 
you want to m?J:e such GU;_,^estions in your code. 

Ac'-Bural Cone , Chairi:iaii of United States Ship dnjj Eoard. Subject, 
ShipbuildinjV facilities. Heference, hearing July 31, 1955, 1016 to 
1017 inclusive. Briefs from his statement. 

Admiral Cone ; Liy position v;ith reference to ship buildinp is that 
Vifhich I lia,ve as Chairrncin of the Shippinp Boai-d and as a member of the 
Board, in v/hich connection I have ha.d active charge of the constriiction 
loan f'und which has financed the builuin", up of the present modern 
merchant marine. I have been in close touch with the ship bui.loLing 
industry all of ir^/' life, and in the Ijavy I was Chief En _;ineer 25 years 
ago, and I lia^ve been in touch with those matters. I had an idea from 
the people who oppose this tlic.t I vas called down here to 5,ive my views 
on the general policy of ship h.ilcdn.'j yards in the eo\intry in the 
f utiire . 

Deputy TThiteside ; Have you any definite opinion to express on that 
point? 

Admiral Cone ; Yes, Sir. 

De )uty TTniteside; If you have, it would be helpful to me. 



)752 



-52" 

Adi.iiral Cone ; I think the ship buil.-in, Incaistry in the future 
will have to he expanded to provide for the merchant marine that this 
nation v;ill he.ve to liavc . 

Se'outy V/hitesidc ; You mean in the future? 

Adi.iiral Cone; Yes, sir, I i.iean in the future. I believe further 
from a _:eo^,ra_)hica.l and^ cliniatic, lahor and raw i-naterial sta^idpoint 
tha,t there sho'ild Ije more shiphuilding facilities on the ',ulf . 

De'iuty 7/hi t e s i dc ; Have v;e no adequate facilities there at the 
present time? 

Admiral Cone ; ?/e ha.ve no active ship hiiildin facilities on the 
jjUlf at the present time. 

De'outy VHii t c s i de ; In other v/ords, t:/::in;^; Key 'Jest as a point and 
running to Pancima, in that stretch of coast v/e do not have the ship 
buildin;-j yards v/hich yoii thin]-: should be available? 

Admiral Cone : \7e have no i-ctive shipbuilc.inj ya.rds in th^t area. 
'He have some repair yards there. \!c. have one or two shipbuilding 
yea'ds that were active •:urin tiie war out v/hich hLave since become dead. 

Deputy V/hi t e s i de ; V.'hat oiJect rould an imjcrtant increase in the 
cost of shipbuilv..inij_' have on the ai.ioiint of business that would be 
placed with the shi o yards? 

Admiral Cone : It \/oulc have aai immediate effect. The main burden 
thcut the A.iericrji shipbuilder operates \mu.er as compared ''dth his 
forei.'^n coi.ipetitor is the difrcrer.tial in ca'oital char^::es. It is almost 
all of the dixference as octv/een operat^n;; an Ai.terican vessel and a 
foreifji vessel. The higher that cont is the more the Ai:ieriC£di shi-j 
o'oerator is handicapped. And that runs usually a,bo"at 1:3 oer cent on 

the excess capital cost, or I'-l- or l.j :crc..nt .— 5oper cent for ainorti- 
zation, 6 per cent for interest a,nd 3 "ler cent average for insurance on 
that excess cost. 

i'.Ir . H. C-. Smith , President, national Cotuicil of American Ship- 
builders. Subject, Hevised Code. Reference heariU;;; July 21, 1933, 
pai^-es 1022 to ■3^02C . See Exhibit B. 

Ca'Ptain Henry Vfilliams , (CC) United States Navy. SvJbject, 
Laborers' Rates Per Week in llavy Yards. Reference, hearing; July 
21, 1933, Da^i'es 102'. to 1027 inclusive. Briefs from his statement. 



9732 



-53- 









Maxii.iiTj-n 






Hates 


[f per 






Per Er. 


week 
(<:8 hrs) 


Boston . 




.56 


26.38 


New York 




.56 


2C . o?- 


Phi lade 1: 


^•Mr 


.53 


25.4'. 


Norfolk 




AC 


22.08 


Charleston 


.3G 


17.23 



Ir.tei-Liediate 





Boston 


.51 


2-.:. •.-■8 


[^ 


New York 


.51 


24.-8 




Philadelphia 


.■v8 


23.04 




Norfolk 


.41 


19.58 




Charleston 


.31 


15.81 

■viinimi-uu 




Boston 


.40 


22.08 




New York 


.■-•6 


22.08 




Philadelphia 


.43 


20 . -34 


I 


Norfolk 


.35 


17.28 


Charleston 


.26 


12.48 



Less 


15; 


■J 


22 


.85 


22, 


.85 


21, 


.63 


13 


.77 


14, 


.09 



20.80 
20.80 
19.58 
16. C3 
13.44 

18.77 
18.77 
17.54 
14 . 69 
10.61 



Ca'Ttain Henry Williaias (CC) United States llavy. Subject, Increase 
cost as affected by waiV,e and ho"irs. Reference, hearing July 21, 1933, 
pa^2GS 1056 to 1057 inclusive. Briefs froia his statement. 

The esti»,iated cost of the Na.vy Building program is ,i238, 000,000. 
A rough estimate of the amount of ship^'ard and navy yard labor involved 
is SO per cent or ,j 142, 800,000. Assuming the same weekly rate of 
v/ages nov/ in force applied to a 30-ho\ir week, to detei'mine the total 
weekly Tfa:2;es to be paid, we should "nave appro".im£,tely a 60fj increase in 
labor rates for ITavy Yards and 33-1/5',^ increase fo.r private shipyards. 
(There would also be a decrease in effectiveness of labor which vail 
be ignored here). As an approzin:atcly eo^i-al portion of the v/ork is 
to be perfoi'Lied in private shipyards and navy yards, I will assume the 



9732 



-54- 

aver£ve:e increase in v.-jujcs to 'oe -15; or e. total increase in labor costs 
based on hourly rates of ,)64, .:^G0,000. 

lion. Iilillarc". Y . Calc'.vfell , Hembor of Conjress, Tliird Florida 
District. Subject, res urictin/^- extension of shipbuilC.in j facilities. 
Reference, liearinc Jxxlj 21, 1933, ;:)a--:,es 1030 to 1033 inclusive. Briefs 

from his statement. 

PuClatin^, to the proposed insertion in the Shi,) bull din;; sjid Re""iair 
Code of a clause nov.' niu.ibered 7 restricting or ;jreventin..3 extension of 
shipbui ldi-.\;: f aci li ties . 

The proponents of the Code r^:. present, accordin^i; to their ovm 
ste.tement, ap roximately 90^: of the shipbui Ic-in/-^ industry in the United 
States. To ^". very lar:e extent shipbiiil(.in - is confined to yards on 
the ITorth Atlrntic Coast at and Ijorth of Nevroort ITews. As has already 
been shown by evic.ence submitted hj other parties, these .^.roups are 
closely interconnected and are closely affiliated v/ith other industrial 
;::roups, particularly in the steel industry. It is acjuitted by the 
representatives of this group that their shipyards are incapable of 
competing with foreign shipyards, and that, as a conseouence, their 
yards are largely ,i.dle and practically dependent upon IJaval construction 
for renev/ed activity. 

The national Industrial Recovery Act specifically orovides tliat no 
provision of the industrial Codes shall be such as to permit or encourage 
monopolistic or unfair practices. The expressed object of the Act is to 
prevent unfair compctitivo practices and to increase employment. The 
Act includes certain specific provisions for the protection of labor and 
the im-)rovement of industrial conditions. The Act nowhere sug-ests the 
inclusion of the Code of any such -provision as Claiise 7, vihich, if 
adopted, v/ill defeat the very purpose of the law, as it proposes to 
prohibit the ex'icinsion or extension of shipbuilding facilities, thereby 
perpetuating the existin. ^ monopoly of the shipyards along the North 
Atlantic Coast. 

In fairness to the worhers ane. industrialists in ■'Southern States, 
this clause should be stric]:en from the Code, as t'lerc v^ould be no 
relief brought to the shipbuilding industry in the South Atlantic and 
Grulf States by adoption of the Code if this clause is contained therein. 

In substantiation of these statements an exhibit marked "Exhibit 
P" is submitted herewith. (See erhibit "C" attached). 



W,iereu5on, cvt 1:15 o'clock p.m., an adjournment was ta]-en, subject 
to notice. 



Volume B. contains letters and briefs, the substance of which has 
been incorporated in the foregoing subject ma,tter of the open hearings 
of July 19, 20, and 21. However, reference is iTiade to the letter of 



973^ 



-55" 
! ■■ . 

Mr. C L. Bardo, President of \tl\e "Jew York Ship'bixilc'.ini, ComDany, 
attaches hereto as Ijcliibit D, vdiicli replies to tho contention of the 
Hon. Willai-d F. Celo.well, Member oi Corgx-ess, Third Florida District, 
contained in Exhicit C attached. 

The ConsressiiUrA sot forth arftinnent to the effect that shi is could 
"be huilt in lar-.,c duplication. Kr. E. rdo cited the e:roerience of the 
y.evi Yorlc Shi-:)Ouildia.- Ccujany, v/hich contro-venes such a losnihility in 
peace tiuc. Of course, it is ■'jjiderstocd that ships v/ere duplicated 
in the War huildin-; period. 



9832 



II. Historv of Code formulation. 

a. From Ttjublic liparirig to a-riroval 

1. Suiimary of ;TOsb-hearinti conferences. 

There were thre=. conferences held by General Johnson, resulting 
in drastic reductions in the iiaxirauiu hour -irovisions of the Code from 
those finally submitterl with the revised Code, durinc^ the last day 
of the hearin^; r?.nd copy of which is attaclied hereto as Exhibit B. No 
record of these conferences could be found either in Code Record Sec- 
tion, or in any oth^r Files. The storj' ha.s been told and retold, how- 
ever, verbally. 

Mr. H. C-errish Smith, President of the National Council of 
American Shi'Vouilders, u;oon rf^quest, has ,iiven his version of these 
conferences as representing: Industry. (Hef. Exh. L, Appx. ) Mr, 
Joseph S. UcDona,;h, later a-Toointed to the Code Authority to re;)resent 
Labor, who was i^resent at these conferences, obtained from '!r. John P. 
Frey, President, Iletal Trades Department, American Federation of Labor, 
who was also ;-.resent at chese confere;ices, his version as representing 
Labor. (Rei, Exh. F and F 1, Ar^x. ) 

Mr. H. Gerrisii Siaith's ver-jion is as follov'S: 

" Satui'day, Jul.,-- 32nd : Two meetings v/ith 
General Johnson, one eX ?:00 ;"j.m. and the other at 
8:00 p.ra. At the first meetin^: che undersijined started 
to discuss the Code in a s^^eneral v/a^ feeling that the 
preliraina.ry period in Washington had been s-ient in ne- 
gotiation V/itn I.ir. l/hiteside and since the document had 
been corxjleted and conte.incd all of Mr. Whiteside's 
sut-,gesti "jns, that it was now practically an at^Teement. 
This idea was soon dispelled and the Shioouilders were 
informed that the meet int.; v'as en 'a question of hours and 
wat.:es and that the Shipbuilding, Industry was a typical 
one in which a shorter labor v;ee]c should immediately 
be put into effect, and intimated that his own experience 
in industry was such that he was perfectly familiar v;ith 
the situation. 

"The L.'ibor group was also present and they pro- 
posed six hours a day, thirty hours a \7eelc, and a min- 
imum of $25 per week. General Johnson figured this out 
at 83f^ an hour a.nd stated that it was impossible and 
that that proposition is just out. 

"He was of the o:oi:iio;i that the entire $238,000,000 
a-opropriated to build naval vessels v/as for contrrcts to 
be placed v;ith -irivi'te shi'oysirds, but he was informed 
that not more than §150,000,000 would be given to the 
private shi'iyards , the balance ^oing to i^avy Yards, and 
none of it ^,oing to the Shiprepairing plants. 



973? 



-57- 



"At the end of the period General Johnson wrote on a 
sheet of panor two', f i<^urps, one of o? hours a vjeek and the 
other a miniiiurn waj^e. I for.,et v'hether the latter v/as 
weekl'' or hourly. ' 

" Second ieetin,- At Go'clocl: ; The Shi- buildin.^ i.,rou--) still 
asked for tht^ 40 hour we^k v.'hich hc.d heen arrived at after 
very careful study and consideration and further stated that 
it \7as its belief that it would be aole to ermloy more rnen 
under this condition uha., on a o? hour basis. The builders 
of merch-.nt vessels scatec' at this neetin^5 that a Z2 hour 
week v.'ould be harinful to then in securing- commercial work 
and thrt the uneimloyment situation would be ire ter than if 
T/'orkinij, 'iO /'.ours. Meeting:, adjourned at 10:S0 ^.ra to meet 
again on July ?.Srd, at ?:00 p.m. 

" Suiad-ay, July ?5rd ; The s-j^e ,,rou-^ that net the Cxeneral on 
Saturday v/as folloT/ed uo on Sunday v/ith the group bein^ 
aui^mented by Mr. H. L. ?ei\iUson and Mr. C. L. 3ardo. The 
meetin^^ took -ilace in the General's sitting room at the 
Uardhan parJc Eotei r-t which tivae further ar,;u;-nert v/as made 
in favor of the 40 hour \.ee';, and the General finally 
reiterated that the facts meide no im'oression o'l him a.nd that 
nothiniii' wa;'. brought; forv/ard to alter his o-oinion that the 
Shi-->buildin . Indus cry v/a.s a tjr-)ical industry and should 
en^a^e on shorter wor/: hours. L; bor also attended this 
raeetiiij^ and iir. Froy, Labor lea.dcr, discussed Che 30 hour 
v/eei: for soKie ohree or foiu- ninutes. The General had 
another nieetm^ •lendint;, '-"-'■'-- closed 'ci-ie conference. As the 
Shi ^build'^rs v.ere' a.bout to leave, iir. Whiteside asked the 
vmdersi^ned to kee-"' our group together as he had a comiororaise 
arran^,;ement vhich he thought the General would acce^it. 

"After talkiu;^ with I'r. liThiteside for sOine time, the 
Industry finally a:-;reed to the 32 ho :y week for iLaval shi'o- 
buildinti '^■'■--^ 40 houTs per week, not to e:rceed 36 hours 
averaged over a six month's period, for merchant shipbuilding 
and shiprepairint,-. 

" Mond^^y. Jul:' ?4th ; The Shi'ibuilders worked vrith Iir. DuBrul, 
one of Mr. TThitesile's assistants, in rev/ritinj th.e Code, 
havin;^- in io the vreekly hour provisions as stated above. 
Several minor crian.jes were ina.de to meet the requirements of 
Mr. TThiteside. 

"They were finrlly a-oroved on the mornin. of July ?:6th, 
after wriich they were submitted by General Johnson to the 
President, a.nd v/ere a'Tiroved bv him some time th?t day." 

Mr. John P. Prey's v^^rsion is as follows: 

"I have, your request that I suroly i^oxx. with the state- 
ment relative to conferences held with General Ha^h S. John- 
son at the time when the Shi )buildin_. Code was under con- 
sideration. 



9732 



-58- 

"I have just .examined the minutes of the meetings under 
the auspices of the Metal Trrdes Department which took place 
during the letter nart of July 1935. 

"I find that there \:rs a special conference of Inter- 
national Representatives of metal trsides, held in the Depart- 
ment 's Head-'uarters on July .?2. At this meeting I informed 
the re^iresentatives that the meeting had hcen called unon the 
request of G-eneral Ea,,h S. Johnson, so that a comiiittee re- 
presentin, the Intern'i.tional L'nions affiliated v.'ith the Hetal 
j?rades Deimrtment could he apr)0inted to meet v/ith General 
Johnson and the coirunittee rcnresenting the shipbuilders. 

"At this mectin, it v;as announced the conference v;ould 
be held in General Johnson's office at 2 p.m. that day. The 
meetiub a-r-^ointed J. A. Franklin; J. S. lIcDonoufh; Fred 
Hewitt; Thomas Belxiiey; W. P. r.icGinn, and Jolin P. Prey as the 
committee. 

"That afternoon at 3 n.m. the above named comiaittee were 
present in General Johnso:i'G office. The comjnittee represent- 
in^ th'' shinbuilders were also present. 

"A leniChy discussion took nlace durin, vmich the 
representatives of shipbuilders and those of the Ifetal Trades 
Departrieut ex-jressed to General Johnson their views concern- 
in^. thf-^ labor provisiO;,s \'hich should be incorporated in the 
code. 

"This conference continued until the evenini^ v/ithout 
any detcrmina/tion bein^ reached. 17/_en the adjournment was 
taken it was ^.ith the understrndin^, that the conference would 
reconvene the follo\ ini_-, day, v/hich was Sunday, in General 
Johnson's apartment, The Uardiian Park Hotel. 

"This conference failed 'oo rea,ch any conclusion, and 
General Johnson declared the conference at an end. 

"Later in the day Genertil Johnson notified the committee 
representing the Lletal Trades Department, that after the con- 
ference had adjourned the shinbuilders had held a conference 
with him, at v/hich they had at^Teed to the incornoration in 
the code for their industry of certain labor provisions which 
had been ur^^ed by the resoresentativcs of the Metal Trades 
Department." 

2. Activities in obta.ininn,' a-p-^roval 

All activities of record in obtainincj anproval have 
been recited under previous title D, 1. 

Ui'. J . Lev/is Luchenbach, Industrial Adviser, aTiroved 
the form of Code by memorandum of July 26, 1933. (Reference 
Code Record Section, ap-orova.l of the Code Docket). 



9733 



-53- 

IJone of the ot'Ter .-advisor;,- ! boards made reconmiendations. 
(Heference Code History Folder", De-mty's Files) 

3. p- te of Approval 

Julj- '^6, 193o - Exec^itive Order ?-l (Peference Code 
Record Sectio-i) . 

4. Conditions in order of 8;.r-iroval; 
ir.du stry reaction. 



There v. err no conditions in the order of amroval. In- 
dustry vfas very ap'orehensive of increase of costs, nrobable 
loss of business, and delay in completing contracts due 
to the shorta(_;c of v/orlrin^ hours. 

The Shiibuilders resisted co the very end a reduction 
of Txiaxinura h-nirs "belcv/ 40 hours per v;eelr:» Tliey set forth 
in the he.arin-.s that a reduction to 50 hours per wee'r., or 
thereabouts v/a.s oconoriiically unsound fro;n the points of the 
incres-se of cost of coiistruction, and th? increase of em- 
ploynent. Subsequent histor;;/ of the Industry confirms their 
contentions as havin^ been substantially correct. They h; d 
to accept the 33 hx.rs ner \veel: for nrvo.l shipbuilding and 
55 hours per v/eeh for co!7i;aercial shinbuildint-, because of the 
proT)Osed openin_; of I'aval bids on July 36, 1933. 

Froi,--rscs under rxecutive Order l"o. 6?05-3 

Tiiere were ten protests or clai.ns of exemptions filed 
v/ithin the ten day period provided in the Executive Order. 
There is inserted in the apnendix, Exhibit R, a list entitled 
"Protests to be ta-cen up by the Shi:>ibuildint5, and Shiprepairing 
Industry Cor.-;ittce on Monday, Au^u^t ?8, 1932". Of this list 
ten were filed on or before August 15, and within the ten day 
period. 

These protests and/or requests are divided into throe 
classif ica.tions as follows: 

ITorth and South Ua^e Differential 

The Code as finally approved did not contain a dividing 
line as between the I'orth and South and the Code Authority 
only deterr;;ined a line as arjlied to the Atlantic Coast. ITo 
definite action v;as taken. 

3y-Lav/s 

Tiie 3--Laws, so-ccllcd, v.-ere in f-:ci: a plan for the 
District and Local Cora.uttees for both Shipbuilding and Ship- 
repairin^; and a comprehensive set of Fair Tr?de Practices 
which were dravrn with pjarticular reference to the Shiprepair- 
ing Industip/. The;' were the subject of the followint^: 

Ec-arin^ Held August 35, 1933 



9732 



-60- 

Code Authority Heetint, Se-jteraoer 6, 1933 
Code Authoritj iieetiiit. Septeraber 11, 1933 
Hearing Held Se itemlier 3G, 1933 
Code Authority lieetinj^, Se:otember 27, .1953 • • 

Code Authorit-'- Ileetinj;; October 2, 1933 

The title of these ny-Lax s v;as chc,n,ed to "Administra- 
tive Rules aad Re_,ulations" about September 6, 1933. During 
this tii.ie of com;irehensive discussions and hearir-^s, 
questions brought u- by the- ■iro-test«. and requests for exemp- 
tions were disnosed of. 

Labor 

Protest of the Tei".' Yorl: Shi' ibuildin^c Cor-ioration' s em- 
ployees a,_^ainst the reduction to the 33 hours per v/eck be- 
cause of the severe reduction in the pay envelopes. This 
matter \/as determined ^oy the Labor -irovisions of the Code. 

Protest of the em-iloyees of the American Shi'^builain^: 
Com;:iai\7. T^'his v/as determined by the Labor ^orovisions of the 
Code. 

Protests of employees of the Chicago Shipibuildin^ 
Connary a.na other Labor protests, corresTondence of vdiich 
cannot be located, all are believed to have been determined 
by the Labor provisions of the Code. 



9732 



-61- 



CHAPTER III - COPE ADI.IIIIST5ATI0N 

A. General Prelininarj- Discussion - The Code Authority ras orga- 
nized TTithout difficulty. The :.ilan for the election '.tcs set forth in 
a set of 3:'-LaT7s (later entitle! Bia.eG and 2e£u]l-ations) sutaitted rrith 
the Code and the election uas duly car?'ied out as set forth in this 
chapter under title B. Tiie field organization rras pnnptly set up as 
originally provided in the B;''-Lar.'s (later entitled :Rules and Reigula- 
tions) as pet forth hereinafter under title 3, 5 of this chapter. 

The Budget vas on a voluntary haais and financial matters of the 
Code Authority- nere handled in a very satisfactory manner. There nac 
no problen of collecting stifficient funds for the adrninistration of the 
Code and the expenses of the Code Authority and District and Local Con- 
mittees. The entire 3iid;:et xie..s woimd up in a husiness-like vraj after 
the ternination of the Code Authority. Certain proportions of the 
funds -'ere returned to nenhers of the industr;</- iron the halance that r?as 
left. This is set forth in detail --onder title C of this chapter. 

There vrere three ai".iendi3entR to the Code, i.e.; Amendment 1-Jo. 1, 
dated Cctoher 10, 1933, approvef", oy the Prerddent, which provided for 
six Industry meiihers and four ne:.ibers to he g-oijointed hy the President, 
thus exiending the provisions of the Code, which originally provided for 
five Industry nemhers and thre^;- nenbers to be appointed by the President 
(Hef. ExLi. A, Appx.); Ai.iendment ilo. 2, approved 'larch 29, 1934, by 
Hugh S. Joiinson, Administrator, modified the definition of the Industry.', 
T/hereby the provisions for certain snail vessels was done away with, in 
order that such vessels co-oJ-d be put under the Boatbuilding and Boat- 
repairing Inductrji- (lief. Exli. A, Appx.); Ar.iendnent ITo. 3 approved by 
Hugh 3. Johnson, Administrator, April 2, 1954, changed the hours for 
Naval shipbuilding from 32 to 36 hours per week to coincide with Code 
provisions for the building of commercial bessels. (Hef. E:di. A, Ap;ox. ) 
Eiis subject is full^' dealt with imder Chapter IV, C. Hours. 

There was only one interpretation during the life of the Code, 
which was with reference to Part 3 (c). This provision provided for an 
exemption of six months to penait emplojinent of employees for designing, 
etc., to exceed the majzimian weekly hours. The c[uestion arose as to 
whether the six months period shoiild be counted from the effective date 
of the Code, or from the talcing of the individual contracts. It was 
determined in Administrative Order 2-27, signed by Barton \I . Hurray, 
Division Administrator, that this period sho'old begin with the letting 
of each contract, as the object of the provision was to reduce the tine 
necessary before the actual start of construction. The Code Authority 
made a number of interpretations. This subject is dealt with in detail 
under title D 2 of this chapter. 

There were many requests for exei-iptions and stays due to the re- 
stricted maxim-Qji hour provisions of the Code and also due to the fact 
that the Code did not provide for emergency repadrs or trials of ves- 
sels and equipment. These exeM])tions and stays were renewed from time 



9732 



to time. All is set forth hereinafter in this cha-oter under D 3. 

The individual Industry raembers of the Code Authority viere named 
as the Trade Practice Complaints Coiiiraittee and, duly ao-proved as set 
forth in detail in this chanter under title B 4 (a). 

Labor 'became unrestful because their pay envelopes were reduced 
under the provisions of the Code, therefore, an Industrial Helj,tions 
Committee became very necessary. This Committee was set up and effec- 
tively functioned. It was conroosed of three Industry and three Labor 
members, who admirably worked together. This subject is found in detail 
in this chapter -onder title B 4. 

By-Laws (so-called) were submitted with the Code. These later were 
changed to the title of "Sules and Regulations". The first part of 
this instrument pertained princioally to the field organir^ation and its 
duties, the latter part pertained to Fair Trade Practice provisions. 
The members of the Code Authority and the Industry, under the guidance 
of the Deputy, worked seriously in perfecting these Rules and Regula- 
tions. They were the Tjrincipal subject of consideration in three Code 
Authority meetings and two hearings, one of which was an open hearing 
and were finally adopted October. 2, 1933, by the Code Authority. How- 
ever, the Fair Trade Practice provisions contained matter which should 
have been submitted as amendments to the Code and other provisions that 
should have been modified in order to make them pro-oerly enforceable. 
Unfortunately, the Deputy did not submit these Rules and Regulations 
tOv the Administration for approval and consequently the Fair Trade 
Pras.tice provisions soon were in discard, which left the Industry with- 
out proper provisions of this character. The subject is dealt vith in 
this chapter under title B 4 (c). 

The principal trade association v/as the National Council of Amer- 
ican:i Shipbuilders, which was formed in 1921, and continued active 
operation throughout the period of the Code and is still active. It 
was the principal proponent of the Code. It collected data of interest 
to the Industry, issued bulletins and in other, wavs was a hcnefit to 
the Industry, but did not undertake any actual work of Code Administra- 
tion. 

The Code was not a benefit to Industry or Labor in the opinion of 
the author. The restricted maximum weekly hours acted to iiicrease cost 
and "iar commercial contracts and thereby retard the normal increase of 
coraiiercial business incident to the improvement of "business conditions. 
Employment was not increased to the extent it might liave teen owing to 
these restricted hours, as peak emolo:/ment on Ifeval contracts was de- 
layed and the lack of new commercial business acted to more than off- 
set the slight increase of eraplo-yinent during the first few months of 
the Code. This subject is dealt with under Chanter IV, Operations of 
Code Provisions. Further, the losn of the Fair Trade practice provi- 
sions, contained in the Rules and Regulations, left the Industry with- 
out the principal benefit it ercpected under the Code. 



9732 



-63- 

Tlie CP'iQliance Division's F.uir.ary of connln.iiits is as fol?_ows: 

Labor Complp.ints Total docketed 145 

IiiTestig.-ted Comolaints adjusted 74 

Nuifiber violatioiis foand 42 

Bockkeenin.-^ rejections 12 

Compliance Division' or Regional Office 11 

On hand Hay 25, 1935 . 6 

Tra.'de practice Co;.volaiats doclreted 6 

Investigated comolaiats adjusted 3 

ilo violations found ,3 

This summarjr is dated June 3, 1935, and is located in Conoliance 
folder, Deputy's Files. 



9732 



-64- 



3, op::./-i:,^riov 



T'.c u- !.!'.: xor tl.c r.election of the Inc.ustrj'- l/ien'bers of the Ship- 
building and Ship rep o,i ring Industry Coianittee (Code AuthoritjO nas set 
forth in the "By-Laws (so-called) for adninisterinf^ and enforcing the 
Shipbuilding Division of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry" 
ajid the "By-La\7s (so-called) for administering and enforcing the Shipre- 
pairing Division of the Shipbuilding and Shipre]:r,iring Industry^" (Hef, 
Code ?:ecord Safe and E:dis, I and J Appx, ) 

The following is an errcerpt of a letter of Au^^ast 20, 1935, from 
H. Gerrish Smith, President of the national Covuicil of American Ship- 
builders, to H. ITer/ton Whittelsey, Assistant Dejiuty Director (Ref, Exh. 
W-1, Appx,). 

"I regret to inform you that there are no minutes of the meeting 
of the National Shipbuilders Administrative Committee and the 
Nr.tional Committee of Shiprepairers 'vhen these Committees elected 
the members of the Code Authority, as the election was done by 
corre^,pondence (letter ballot). The ballots are in the possession 
of the Secretary, 

"By-Lans, Immediately after the Code vras signed b;'- the President 
of the United States a meeting \Tas called of all shipbuilders and 
shiprepairers \7ho v.'ere proponents of the Code, the first meeting 
being held on August 1, 1933 for the discussion and formulation of 
final by-la;7s for the shipbiiilding and shiprepairing division, as 
some of the provisions contained in the original code nere deleted 
by the Administration from the Code iroper but it was understood 
the provisions could be incorporated in the by-laws, 

"Companies having representatives at the meeting of August 1st, 
were: 

Weirport ilev^s Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Companj'- 

The Pusey & Jones Corporation 

Alabama Dry Dock & Shipbuilding Company 

The L'aryland Dr;?- Dock Company 

Bethlehem Shipbuilding Coriporation, Ltd, 

Sun Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Company'- 

New York Shipbuilding Corporation 

Todd Shipjrards Coriooration 

Kensington Sliipj^ard & Dry Dock Corporation 

Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp, Ltd, (West Coast plants) 

New York & New Jersey Dry Dock Association 

National Co^ancil of American Shipbuilders 

"Tlie by-laws for both divisions v?ere gone over and after thorough 
discussion they were left with a drafting committee to smooth them 
up, Tlriis was done and on August 4th and 8th, at meetings of ship- 
builders and shiprepairers the by-laws were put in form for presen- 
tation to the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry on August 9th. 

"At meeting on August 9th, at which representatives of the follow- 
ing companies were present: 

9732 



-65- 

The MArylsjid Drj- Doclc Co:.\oa2.\j 

The Ri.sey & Jones Corporaoidn 

Alabaria. Dry Dock & Shipljuilding Company 

Bethlehem Sliipouilciinir Corporation 

Todd Shipyards Corporation 

S"an Shipbuilding & Drj' Dock Coiapany 

ITorfolk Shiphuildini^ & Dry Dock Comiiany 

Kensington Sliipyard & Diy Dock Corp, 

Nevroort Kews Shiphuilding & Dry Dock Co, 

Ira S. Bxishey & Sons 

National Council of American Shiuhuilders 

the hy^laws Tor both t>ie shipbuilding and shiprepairing divisions 
1.,'ere finally ironed out and adopted, and made effective at 12:01, 
August 14, 1933. 

"It; vas the belief of the proponents of the Code that the adoption 
of the by-laws was within their power. These by-laws were submitted 
to all neubers of the Industry prior to the election of a Code Author- 
ity." 

The By-Laws as revised by Industry'- and effective August 14, 1933, will 
be foijnd in the Appendix, Srdiibit I-l and J-1, respectively. 

The Shipbuilding Division By-Laws provided in part as follows: 

" SBGHSGATIOil 0? THE SHIPBUILDIUa IIIDUSTRY 

3, For the -ouriiose of adj.iinistering the Code the shipbuilders will 
be segregated, according to the location of their respective ship- 
yards, into the following major geogrsphica]. districts or groups: 

(a) Atlaaitic Coast 

. (b) G-ulf Coast 

(c) Pacific Coast 

(d) Great Lalces 

(e) liississippi and Tribtitar;'- Rivers 

(f) Other major grouns that may come under the Code 

ADklLIISTrATIO U 

4, The Code shall be cidninistered by a Comuittee of not less than 
nine (9) members; five (5) elected from the AtlaJitic Coast; one (l) 
from the Gulf Coast; one (l) from the Pacific Coat-t; one (l) from 
the Great Lalces aiid one (l) from each major group that may hereafter 
operate under this Code, The President of the National Council of 
American Shipbuilders will be ChairBian of the Connittee but without 
the right to vote. 

Each of the eight (s) members of the Committee elected from the 
Atlantic, G"alf, and Pacific Coasts end Grert Laices, shall be a 
representative of the Individual Ilembers of the National Council of 
American Shipbuilders or signators of this Code," 

The Shiprepairing Division By-Laws provided in part as follows: 



9732 



-66- 

"SEGBEGATIOII OF THE SHIPIGFAirJFC- IITJUSTEY 

2. (a) ~or t'le lour-nose of a.d'Tinistra.tion of the Code the ship- 
repairers mil "be segre.'^ated, according to the location of 
their respective shipyards, into the follo^'ing najor f^eo- 
graphical districts. 

(a) Atlantic Coast 
("b) Gulf Coast 

(c) Pacific Coast 

(d) C-reat Lakes 

(e) l,:ississip"oi P.iver and TrilDutaries 

(Id) The shipreiiairers on the Atlantic Coast "ill "be further 
segregated according; to the loc3,tion of their respective 
shipyards into the follor/ing local geographical areas: 

(a) IT err England 

("b) Hew York 

( c) Dela\7a.re River and Bay 

(c) Chesapeake Bay (d) 

(e) Hampton Roads, includirrg the South Atlantic Coast. 

(c) The shiprepairers on the Gulf Coast may "be segregated into 
such local area.s as they nay deter^iine to "be advisa"ble. 

(d) The shiprepairers on the Pacific Coast, on the Great 
Lai-es and on the Mississippi River and- Tri"butaries raa,y 
divide themselves into such local geographical areas as 
the district committee in each of these districts -decides 
to "be desira"ble for the purposes of these By-Laws. The 
local area divisions determined by them are to "be stipulated 
in their district By-La'^s provided, for hereinafter. 

6. As a neans of provid.ing an equitable renresentation on the Dis- 
trict Committee, as hereinafter provided, the -shiprepairers in each local 
area shall elect t^-'o representatives to serve as mem"bers of such District 
Committee on the follo"in;T "ba.sis: 

7. One representative vill "be elected "by a majority vote of the ship- 
repairers T'here each shiprepairer shall "be entitled to cast one vote. 

8. A second representative shall "be elected ''o-^/ the majorit;'' vote 
where each shiprepairer shall "be entitled to cast one vote for each fift3'' 
of the avera9-e workmen employed "by such shiprepairer on shin repair '"ork 
during the preceding twelve calendar months prior to such election. 

11. District Committees District Committees shall 
"be composed of two representatives elected "by the ship- 
reps-lrers in each local area. Each district committee 
shall elect a Chairman and Vice- Chairman and fucii other 
officers as it may deem necessary. 



9732 



13. The totp.l iirfjer' of the combined re-oresentatives 
on the District Co~inittees of the Gulf and pp.cific Coasts 
shal], not exceed the total nujiber of renrer.entatives on 
the District Connittee of the Atlantic Coa^t. 

15, The I'a.tional Committee shall he con-nosed of the 
Chaiiinan elected hy the respective District Coirriittees. 

16, The Vice Chairman of the District Conmittee shall 
act on the National Connittee as an alternate for the Chair- 
nan of ruch District Connittee in the event of the latter' s 
inability to serve. 

17, The Hrtional, Connittee shall have a Chairnan, vrho 
shs.ll be elected by a majority vote of th^? total niinber of 
menbers of the District Connittees. He shall not be ident- 
ified as an officer or employee of any partnership or co- 
rporation engaged in building or repairing vessels, nor shall 
he be entitled to vote." 

The Plan subnitted to the Adninistration by letter dated August 
IS, 1933, addressed to lir. Arthur D. Tifniteside and signed by the Committee 
representing the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing. Industry, K. Gerrish Smith 
and Joseph Eaag, Jr. (llef. E:di. TT-3, A-npy., ), The letter reads as follows: 

"T7ith reference to the aiDpointne it of a Ship- 
building and Shiyjrei^airing Industry Connittee, pro- 
vided for in Paragraph 8 (a) of the Shipbnilf^ing 
e.nd Shirsrepairing Code, it is proposed to elect this 
Connittee as fol^^ov's, viz: 

"1. An Adninir-trative Shipbuilring Committee 
for the administration of the Code has been elected 
'b-f the menbers of the Shipbuilding rnd Shiprepairing 
Industry who are engaged in building floating marine 
eouipnent. This Connittee consists of three reiore- 
sentatives' of the larger shipbuilding ya,rds on the 
Atlantic Coast, two from the sm.aller shipya.rds, one 
from the Gulf, one from the Pa.cific Coast, one from 
the Great La''es and a Chairman who is the President 
of the National Council of American Shipbuilders, 
nine menbers in all. 

"In carrying out the election of this Committee, 
consideration has been given to both large and small 
shipyards and those located in different geographical 
areas. '' • 

"2, A national Committee of Shiprepairers is in 
the process of. election, which will be composed of siz 
nenbers, one from the Atlantic Coa.st, one from the Gulf 
Coast, one from the Pacific Coast, one from the Great 
L-?""es, one from the '.'ississip-oi and tributary rivers and 
a Chairman '.without vote. 



9732 



-68- 

"The ITa-tional Comnittee is elected tiy the District 
Coi^mittee rrhich, in turn, are elected by local committees 
in the various local areas, therehj"- resulting in equitable 
representation. The various districts cover the entire 
Atlantic, Gulf and Pacific Coasts, Great LaJces and Hiss- 
Issiprii and tributary rivers. 

"The representation on this National ShipreiDair Com- 
mittee vil] therefore be six members, although for the "ore- 
sent it hiay consist of only five, due to the fact that the 
shipre^iairers on the Kississip'^i and tributary rivers have 
not yet set up their organizations. 

"The Administrr.tive Committee of Shipbuilders and the 
National Committee of Shiprepairers therefore equitably re- 
present all members of the industry in all -cjeo graphical 
loca.tions. These combined committees rill meet to elect the 
members of the committee called for under Section 8 (a) of 
the Code. Both Shipbuilders and Shiorepairers, large pnd 
small interests, ■'"ill be equitably represented on this com- 
mittee, giving such consideration as practicable to geo- 
graphical locations. 

"Ue trust that this method of election 'ill be satis- 
fa.ctory to the Administrator and in this connection request 
3/'our aiiproval. 

"Our telegram to you of Auci^ast 16, 1933, may be disre- 
garded. " 

Verbal approval of the method of election, set -forth in the forego- 
ing letter of August 18, was given and the Administration v.-as advised of 
the election of the Industry mem.bers of the Code Comm.ittee by letter dated 
August 22, 1933, addressed to the Hon. Hugh S. Johnson, Administrator, 
signed by fl. G. Smith and Joserih Hagg, Jr., for' the Shipbuilders. (Ref. 
Exh, 11-4, Aiopx.) This letter reads as follows: 

"In accordance with the authority given rae by you on 
Friday last for the election of a. Committee \ind.er Section 8 
(a) of the Shipbuildiag and Shiprepairing Code, this is to 
inform you that the following Committee has been elected, 
na.raely:- 

H. G. Smith,: ©resident. National Council of American 
Shipbuilders 

Joseph Hagg, Jr., President, Todd Dry Doch, ■ Engineer- 
ing & Repair Com. 

S. W. TJa^-eman, Vice Pres., Bethlehem Shipbuilding 
Cor:poration, Ltd. 

Roger WilTiams, Vice Pres., Newport News Ship- 
building and Dry Dod: Co, 

Roger Haig, Vice Pres., Siin Shipbuilding and Dry Doc]: 
Company 

W. K. Gerhauser,. President, Great La'-es Shipbuilding 
& Repair Association 

9732 



-69- 

"A" both Shipt'iil'i'era and Shiprepairers must "be represented 
on tliis co:.i"ittee, and as our fieof-TaiihicaT distribution is so 
great, ve are rsi-in^ your- -.aiToroval of a connittee of, six instead 
of five, '"ith a -^osTibln irxreaco later on to t,'\'-e care of re- 
■oresentation for the Iliiisissippi River pnd its Tributaries, 

"On tliis conmittee Kr. Josenh Haag, Jr. re-niesents tlie 
shiprer>airin5 interests on the Atlantic, ."Gulf and Pacific Coast, 
!!r. S, "J. Ur'^enan reprerents shipbuilding and shiprepairing 
interests oi. the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts, llr, Roger Williams 
renresents a shipj-ard engaged in both builc'ing and repairing 
merchant vessels and the buildin."' of naval vessels. Mr, Robert 
HaL'; is Vice President of a company engaged at the present time 
on raerclipnt building and repairs only. J'r. W. H. Gerhauser re- 
presents the Great La'-es* intererts T7hile Mr. H. G. Smith, one 
of the signers of this letter, represents shipbuilding and ship- 
rexiairing interests as a v.'hole through the national Council of 
American Shipbuilders. 

"This coinnittee is n-^'^-' ready to meet at short notice Fith 
the committee appointed by the President for the Consideration 
of cnj natters that you may •'•^ish to bring before it." 

Later at the request of Kr. William H. Davis a furtlier letter rras ad- 
dressed to General Jolinson, Adiinistrator, dated September 23, 1933, and 
signed by the Committee representing: the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing 
Industry, H. Gerrish Smith and Joseph Haag, Jr. (Ref. ESii. N-5, Appx. ) 
The letter r-3ads a-^, follows: 

"VJith reference to the a-ppointment of a Shipbuilding and 
Shi-ore-oairing I-^.dustry Committee, who, together t/ith the four 
Presidential ai?-oointees, are to form a Planning and Fair Practice. 
Agency, provided for in Paragraph 8 (a) of the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Code, as modified September 22, 1933, an Industry 
Committee has been elected by the folloT'ing method; viz, 

"(1) An Administrative Shipbuilding Committee for the 
administration of the Code has been elected by the members of 
the Shipbuilding and Shiprersairing Industi-y v/ho are engaged in 
building floating marine equipment. This Committee consists 
of three representatives of the larger shipbuilding yards on 
the Atlantic Coast, tr;o fmm the smaller shipyards, one from 
the Gulf Coast, one frim the Pacific Coast, one from the Great 
La"-es, rnd. a Chairman rho is the President of the "ational 
Council of American ShiiD builders. 

"In carrying out the election of this Com.mittee consider- 
ation T7as given to both lar-e and smell shipyards and those 
located, in d.ifferent geographical areas. 

"(2) A national Committee of Shiprepairers has been el- 
ected and. is composed, of six members; one from the Atlrntic 
Coast, one fr-^m the Gulf Coast, one from the Pacific Coast, 
one from the Great Eal-es, one from the Kississi-opi and Tri- 
butary Rivers, and. a Chairman rithout vote. 

9732 



-70- 

"Tlie I'ational Coranittee is elected by the District Con- 
nittees rrliich in turn are elected by local Comiiittees in the 
various local areas, tliereby resulting: in equitable represent- 
ation. The various Districts cover the entire Atlantic , Gulf 
and Pacific Coasts, Great Lakes and Mississippi and Tributary 
Rivers. 

"The Administrative Connittee of Shipbuilders and the 
National Cornmittee of Ship repairers, therefore, eqxiitably re- 
present all members of the Industry in all f^eos;rg,phical loca- 
tions. These coinbined Com^iittees have met and elected the 
lenbers nf the Conimittee called for under Para:^raph 8 (a) of 
the Code as folloirs: 

H, G. Smith, president, National Council of Anerican Ship- 
builders. 

Joseph Haag, Jr., President, Todd Dry Dock, Enf^ineering & 
Repair Corporation 

S. 1. riakeman, Vice President, Bethlehem Shipbuilding 
Corporation, Ltd, 

Roger Uilliams, Vice President, ITerfport Te^^s Shi-':)buildi?ig 
and Dry Dock Company 

Robert Haig, Vice President, Sun Shipbuilding and Drj' Dock 
Company 

W. H. Gerhauser, President, Great Lokes Shipbuilding & 
Repair Association 

"TJe hereby request "/our approval of this method of 
election and the members of the Industry so elected." 

All members of the Shipbuilding a-nd Shiprepairing Industry Committee 
(Code Authoritjrjj were recognirred by the Administrator, Hugh S. Johnson, 
on September 23,, 1933, by letter addressed to H. Gerrish Smith, President, 
national Council of American Shipbuilders (Reft Exh, K-IB, Appx. ) . The 
letter reads as follor/s: 

"The amend'-ent of Section (a) of Paragraph 8 of the Code 
. of Pair Competition of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing In- 
dustry having been a-oproved by Executive Order of the President 
of the Unitec" States under drte of September 22, 1S33, to read 
as folloT's: 

'(a) To effectuate further the policies of the 
Act, a Shipbuilding a,nd- Shiprepairing Industry Com- 
mittee is hereby designated to cooperate rdth the 
Administrator as a Planning and Pair Practice agency 
for the shipbuilding and shiprepairing industry. 
This Committee shall consist of representatives of 
tlie Ship Builders and Ship Repairers in puch number 
not }ess than six as the Administrator in his dis- 
cretion may from time to time determine, elected by 
a fair method of selection to be ap-'roved ^y the 
Administrator, and four members without vote appoint- 
ed' by^the President of the United States. Such agency 

9732 



-71^^ 



raaj'' fro'i ti>-e to tine present to the Administrator 
recomr^enclations based on conditions in their in- 
duct rj^ as they may develop from tine to tine rhich 
will tend to effectuate the provisions of the Code 
and the policies of the ITation??! Industrial Hecovery 
Act.' 

and the iollor;ir,g,^naned -entlenen havin^^ been elected by a fair method of 
selection approved by the Acljninistrator: 

H. G. Smith Chairman 

Joseph Haag, Jr., Pres., Todd Dry Doc]r, Engineering & Repair 

Corporation 
S. V, Tfelcenan, Vice Presi6.ent, Bethlehem Shipbuilding 

Corporation, Ltd. 
Roger TTillians, Vice President, Uer.'port iler's Shipbuilding and 

Dry Dock Company 
Robert Haig, Vice President, Sun Shipbuilding and Dry Dock 

Conp?-ny 
\i, H. G-erhauser, President, Great La':es Shipbuilding and 

Repair Association 

the election of those six gentlemen is hereby approved. 

"Under date of September 22, 1S55, the President has appointed the 
follotring four members of the Code Co^riittee ^'ithout vote: 



Robert L. Ha.gue 

Joseph S. i.IcDonagh 
TTilliam H. Davis 

Capt. Henr;- L. "Tillians 



- Industrial and Consumer Advisory 

Capacity 

- Labor Advisory Capacity 

- national Recoverj?- Administration 

Representative 

- Pro^odsed by the Secretary of the 

iTavy 



Very truly yours, 



/g/ Hu-?:h S. Johnson 

HUGH S. JOHIISON 

ADiilinSTRATOR" 



APPROVAL EECOLHElffiED: 



/s/ TTillian E. Davis 
TflLLIAi.I H. DAVIS 
DZPU7Y ADillillSTEATOR" 



S732 



-73- 

2. Personnel of coc^e authority; naies, ad- 
dresses, conpany, association or group 
affiliation, f:;eorrar)hical or other repre- 
sentation, nestings. 



Industry MemTjers 



H. aerrish Smith, Presioent 

national Council of American Shiphuilders 

11 Broadway • ' ' ' ' 

Hew York, ITer? York 

Roger TTilliams, Vice President 

ITevroort Y<exis ShiTituilding and Dry Dock Conpany, 

Approx. $16', 000, 000 (Ref. Hoody) 
llorfolk, Virginia 

S. W. TIal'eman, Vice President 

Bethlehem Shiphuilding Corporation, Ltd., Est. 

$30,000,000 (No report availahle) Sulisiduary 
of Bethlehem Steel Corp. 
25 Broadwaj'- 

New York, New York (Member National Council of 
: American Shipbuilders and 

Pacific Dry Dock Association) 

Joseph liaag, Jr. , President 

Todd Dry Dock Engineering and Repair Corporation, Ltd. , 
Suhsiduary of Todd Shipyards Com., Approx. 

$20,800,000 (Ref. lloody) 

25 Broadway 

New York, New York (Keraher National Cou.ncil of 

American ShipbuiD.ders, Pacific 
Coast Dry Dock Association and 
of the Gulf Coast Group) 

Robert Haig, Vice President 

Sun Shii:)building. and Dr^,' Dock Company, Approx. $6,000,000 

(Ref. I'oody) 
Chester, Pennsylvania (liember National Council of American 

Shii^builders) 

IT. H. Gerhauser, President 

American Shipbuilding Company, Ap'-^irox. $8,390,000 

(Ref. I.:oody) 
Cleveland, Ohio (Member National Council of 

American Shipbuilders and Great 

Lakes Association) 



9732 



Presidential A-o-.'oiiitees - Executive Order 2-lA, Ser)tenber 9, 1933, 

(Ref* Code Record Section -nd Exl:i. K-IA) 

Jope^h S. ncDona{:^h (Representiiif; La"bor 
Interr.atinnal Brotlierho -^d of Electrical "orlrers 
1200 fifteenth Street,- Horthr-est 
• TTashin.-ton, D. C. 

Captain ilenry L. Uilliams (CC) U.S. 11. (Repre- • 

sentins Secretary of Nav;','-) 
Ilavj'- Department 
Washington, D. C. 

W. E. Davis (ll. R. A. Representative) 

Washington, Di C. , 

Rooert L. Hagac (Representing Consumers) 
Vice President, Standard Ship-oing Company 
26 BroadT7ay 
Kew Yorh, Y.ev York 

3. Chan^^es in Code Authority'' 

TJillian H. Davis, Ac>ninistration lienher to the Shipbuilding and Ship- 
repairing Induntr^,'- Cor.iinittee resigned and his resignation was made effec- 
tive February 16, 1934. (Ref. Adiainistrative Order 2-4, Peh. 16, 1934, 
signed Hugh S. Jolinson, on file Code Record Section, Deputy's files, and 
Exli. K-4, Appx.) i:r, Davis \7as assigned other duties in IT.R.A. , "being 
succeeded by J. 3. ¥ea,ver. Deputy Adriinistrator, for the Shipning Section 
of Division I, to \-hich this Code v/as assigned, 

Arba B, iiarvin v.'as appointed Adninistration Fenber to the Shipbuild- 
ing and Shiprepairing Industry Connittee February 15, 1934. (Ref. Adjnin- 
istrative Order 2-5, Feb. 16, 1934, signed Hugh S. Johnson, on file Code 
Record Section, Deputy's files, and Exh. K-5, Appx.) 

Resi.gnatioR of Arba B. Iiarvin as Adrainistration Menber October 27, 
1934. (Ref. Orcer 2-21X, on file Code Record Section, Deputy's files, a.nd 
Sxh. K-21X, A-o-o:m. ) i;r, Iiarvin resigned in order that the policy of full 
time Adninistration Ilember could be :\BAe effective on this Code. 

Francis E. Lee, Assistant Deiouty Adriinistrator for N. R. A., appointed 
November 27, 1934, Adxiinistration Member to succeed Arba B. Marvin, who 
resigned. (Ref. Administrative Order 2-25, signed W.- A, Harriman, on file 
Code Record Section, Deputy's files, and Exh. K-26, Appx.) 

The Code .'.uthority Ind.ustry members rrere selected from- the leading men 
of the Industry and each individual ras of long experience and of proven 
executive ajility in manage-ient operations of their res"oective shipbuilding 
plants over a tern of years. Also the four members ap-oointed bjr the Pre- 
sident were of high calibre and lent valuable asristance in their advisor3'' 
capacities. The Chairman of the Code Authority, who was also the President 
of the national Council of American Shrobuilders for a term of years, was 
particularl;- well aua.lified by his long contact with the Industry _and his 



9752 



-74- 

experience in ship'bui"' oing natters. The Secretary alr,o ^-as the Secretary 
of the "National Council of Anorican SiiipbuiXders and consequently '-'ell 
versed in shrohuilding affairs. , . 

I.'eetings of the Code' Authority are listed ^elotr. 



Au£:ust 22, 1933 
Au,^st 28, 1933 
Septe'-^ber 6, 1933 
Septerilier 11, -1933 
Septenher 27, 1933 
October 2, 1933 
Octo^jer 9, 1933 ■ 
October 25, 1933 
October 30, 1933 
llovenber 8, 1933 
Janunry 4, 1934 
February 14, 1934 
Ilarch 2, 1934 
'larch 15, 1934 
A-nril 24, 1934 
Septeraber 12, 1934 
December 20, 1934 
January 17, 1935 
February 21, 1935 
liarch 21, 1935 
■Anril 26, 1935 
Auf,ust 20, 1935 



11 Broadway, 
W. H. Davis' 
11 Broadnay, 
11 Broadray, 
17. H. Davis' 
11 Broadv^a'^r, 
11 Broad'Tay, 
11 Broadi,7aj'-, 
11 Broadway, 
11 Broadr-ay, 
TT. H. Davis' 
11 Broadway, 
11 Broadway, 
11 Broadway, 
11 Broadway, 
11 Broadway, 
11 Broadway, 
11 Broadway, 
11 Broadway, 
11 Broadway, 
11 Broadway, 
11 Broadv/ay, 



Kew York 
Office, TTash. 
rew York 
re^- York 
Office, T7ash. 
i"ew York 
rew York 
ITew York 
Hew York 
Ner' York 
Office, TTash. 
Tew Y'ork 
raw York 
I"ew York 
Hew York 
Few York 
I^ew York 
ITevr York 
ITew York 
He'-' York 
ITew Y'ork 
Fe'.v Y'ork 



The Minutes of these neetings are in the Deputy's files. 



9732 



Minutes of ^^'eetings. Briefs and Excerpts 

AUGUST 22, 1933, IJEETING HELD AT 11 BROADWAY, NEW YORK CITY, AT 
10:30 A.M. Briefs and excerpts from K'inutes. (Ref. Deputy's Files in 
Sec-. 2) . 

There'were present, representing the Industry, Messrs. Robert Haig, 
Roger Williams, Joseph Haag, Jr., A. B. Homer - representing S. W. Wakc- 
man, H. G. Smith, and C. C. Knerr (Acting Secretary). Mr. ¥. H. 
Gerhauser ipas absent. 

Mr. Robert Kaig was asked to act as Temporary Chairman. This he 
agreed to do and thereupon asked for nomination for Chairman. 

Mr. Roger Williams nominated H. G. Smiith and A. B. Homer seconded 
the nomination. There being no further nominations, a vote was called 
and Mr. H. G. Smith was ^jxianimously elected Chairman of the Code 
Committee. 

The Chairm.an then outlined briefly the visit he and Mr. Joseph 'Hrriag 
had with the NRA office in Washington last Friday. He stated that the 
question of election, of comiraittees under both sets of by-lav;s was ' 
discussed with Mr. Farnsworth and Mr. Whiteside and upon request a 
supplemental letter was written stating how the elections had been 
conducted, which letter was approved by them. 

Mr. Smiith reported his telephone conversation with Mr. Farnsworth 
yesterday and 'stated that Mr. Farnsworth had told him that a Mr. Davis, 
one of the Deputy Commissioners, has been assigned to the' administra- 
tion of the shipbuilding and shiprepairing code. Mr. Davis was in- 
troduced to Mr. Staith over the phone and stated that the. recommenda- 
tions for the Presiden' s Committee of Three had gone in and they were 
awaiting approval of same, which he anticipated would be very prompt. 
He informed Mr. Smith that he thought it advisable to have a meeting 
of the Code Committee at the earlist practicable date in order to take 
up matters now pending. A m^eeting was set for Monday morning August 28, 
1933 at 10 a.m. in the offices of the NRA. 

Mr. Sm.ith stated that in the talk he and Mr. Haag had with Mr. 
Farnsworth, the objections set forth by the Administrator were minor 
ones and that the tiio principal objections were; 1. "A violation of 
the by-laws shall be considered a violation of the code". 2. The 
10,000 limit on time and m.aterial work. 

Question arose as to classification of vessels owned by the 
Shipping Board and it v/as decided that these vessels should be classed 
as merchant vessels and come under the code. 

Mr. Smith reported that the Brewer Dry Dock had filed a protest 
with the AdmanistrafOr^n the shiprepairing by-laws. 

The committee had before it request for exceptions from the West 
Coast and certain East Coast yards wherein they requested that they be 
permitted to operate their yards without putting in the wage increase 

9732 



~76~ 

called for in the code "because of the fact that they had maintained 
their wage schedules at high rates during the depression. This is a 
matter which will he taken up in Washington on Monday next. 

Frotest hy the Steamship Owners against the "by-laws-will be one' .•' 
of the questions' tc'be takfen up with the Adm.inistrator on Monday next. 

Protest from Condenser Service & Engineering Company, paragraph 
34 and 35 of the Shiprepairing By-laws, will, "be ' taken up with the 
Administrator on Monday next. ' .. 

Memorandum for Mr. Korndorff calling attention to the proposal to 
"be incorporated in the Steamship Owners' Code a clause prohibiting 
construction of new merchant tonnage during the life of the Recovery 
Act will be discussed cnrefully when their code comes up for a hearing. 

Letter of Augusl; 18th froffi the Maryland Dry Dqck Companj'^ asking 
interpretation of "casual and incidental labor" vms discussed and_ 
while it was thought the yard should use its own judgment as the code 
was very clear on this, Mr. Smith will talk the matter over with 
Mr. Brown. 

AUGUST 28, 1933, MEETING HELD AT WASHINGTON , D. C. , AT 10:00 
A.M. Briefs and excerpts from. Minutes. (Ref. Deputy's Files in 
Sec. 2) . 

This meeting was termied a hearing, although only members i.of Itite 
Shipbuilding and Shipreijairing Industry Committee (Code Committee), 
were present. • -There were present, representing the Industry, Messrs. 
H. Gerrish Sm.it'h', Chairman; Roger Williams; 'E. M. Secrest, Secretary 
of Great Lakes' Shipbuilding and Repair Association; Joseph Hang, Jr.; 
Robert Haig, and 3. "W. Wa'keman represented by A. B. Homer ;^ representing 
the Administration, J . S. McDonagh; R. L. Hague, and Captain Henry 
Williams. • 

It was conducted by Mr. William H. Davis, Deputy. Mr. H. Gerrish 
Smith was duly elected Chairman of the Code Committee and Mr. C. C. 
Kneer was elected Secretary and Treasurer. . . , . 

Extended consideration was given the By-Laws, (so-called) of _ the 
"Shiprepairing Division of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry",- 
and the By-Laws, (so-called) of the "Shipbuilding Division of the Ship- 
building and Shiprepairing Industry" which were submitted with the Code. 
(Ref. "Volume- II ,■ Code Record Section and Exh. I and J respectively, 
ApTiiX . ) 

It was agreed on Mr. Davis' suggestion to rename these By-Laws 
"Rules and Regu.lations" , for the administration of the Code for the 
Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry. It was also agreed that the 
Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing By-Laws should be combined into one 
instrum.ent and the administrative provisions of the By-Laws segregated . 
from the other part pertaining to Fair Trade Practices. 



9732 



-77- 



Application was received from a number of shiprepairing yards for 
exemption from Section 4 (t) of the Code, wherein it required the employer 
to pay for 36 hoiirs of work, the equivalent of what was paid for forty 
hours of work prior to July 1, 1933. The matter was thoroughly dinonQcod 
and conclusion arrived at as per the following excerpts: 

Deputy Davis: Why is not this the action for this committee to take 
— to sa.v that these requests are so wide spread that, to grant them all, 
Vi'ould be a yielding of the whole effect of the code in that regard and 
that cannot be done; that the Committee is willing to consider very 
special cases of hardship but could not make' a ruling that will exempt 
the whole shiprepairing industry, in effect, from, the provisions of the 
second sentence of paragraph 4(b), because, gentlem,en, if we start 
giving exceptions to the Code at this early stage, we will not have any 
Code left in a month from now. 

■ • Shall we take that action? 

J/r.. lAcDonagh: I think it is possible, before we open this thing 
up, that it will lead into a general wage discussion and .there arc many^ 
many raifiifications to this thing here and if you start breaking this 
thing down — and I think you have some information on that from the 
American Federation of Labor to the effect that that will have some 
effect on the Navy Department wage scale — if you are thinking of 
doing that I would like to have some of our people study it and present 
their views. 

Deputy Davis: Without having any views at all on the detailed 
merits of it, I am sure if we tacitly said, without doing irreparable 
injury, we should stick to our code and get it working once before 
making exceptions at. the outset. ■ 

Captain Williams; It seems to m.e in the shiprepairing industry 
there are very few mechanics who get the full 40"hour v/eek or even 36 
hours' work a v/eek. 

Iv!r . Smith: That is true. 

Kt . Roger Williams: I move, Mr. Chairman, that no exception be 
m.ade in favor of these applicants for extensions in the Code, from 
paragraph 4 (b>) . 

Deputy Davis: Any objection? 

¥r. Smith: I will second it. 

Deputy Davis: That motion is carried. Now, that takes care of 
those things. 

(Assistant Deputy Director's note: The particular provision of Section 
.4 (b) of the Code referred to, proved to be very unfair in its appli- 
cation to a rroiTiber of s'';all plants that had maintained wage schedules 
.of 1929. It was particularly hard on the Pacific Coast yards, which 

9732 • ■ ' • ' 



-■,- b- 



ty ais;reement with the Unions hrd rraintained the, scale of 1929, through 
the depression and up to the tlTie of the approval of the Code. During 
this period the mnjcr shjpya-^.i; of the Atljcitic Coast, also the Union 
Iron Works of San ^ti'rancibco and others had reduced wage scales l&fo or 
thereabouts- The Code in regard to these, had "the effect of restoring 
the wage scales. Howe^rer, in the case of ?.0 rep'air plants of the San 
Francisco Bay area and other repair plants in the Portland Oregon, and 
Seattle District, v,'hich had not redu.ced wa^e scales, this provision of 
the Code had the effect of increasing their wage scales at least 11'^ 
above the 1929 rate. This subject will be set forth in more detail 
hereafter; in the History.) 

SEPTEMBER 6, 1933, MEETING HELD AT 11 BROADWAY, NEW YORK CITY, 
AT 10:30 A. M. For the purpose of discussing Arlministrat ive Rules and 
Regulations established by the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry 
Committee. Briefs and Excerpts from Iv^inutes (Ref. Deputy's Files, Sec. 2). 

There were present, representing the Industry, Messrs. H. G. Smith, 
Chairman of the Code Committee; C. C. ICnei'r, Secretary-Treasurer of the 
Code Committee; W. H. Gerhousur, Fresidsnt of the Great Lakes Ship- 
building and Repair' Association ; S. W. Wakeman, Vice-President Bethlehem 
Shipbuilding Corporation: Rogs^ Williams, Vice-President Newport News 
Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Company: C. S. Petersen, Assistant to the Vice- 
President of the Nevrport News Shipbuilding and Drydock Company; Robert 
Haig, Vice-President Sun Shipbuilding? & Drydock Company; Joseph Haag, Jr., 
President Todd Drydock & Engineering Com^pany, representing the Admini- 
stration, Captain Henry Williams, U. S. N. and Mr. Robert Hague, President 
Standard Shipping Company, Consumer Representatives, Messrs. Joseph S. 
McDonagh, Labor Representative of the International Brotherhood of Electri- 
cal Workers; W. H. Davis, Deputy Administrator NRA; G. H, Shields III, 
Assistant Deputy Administrator NRA. 

Mr. Smith: Mr. Davis, I assume you will act as Chairman of this 
meeting the same as you did in iJrshington? 

Mr. Davis: I promdsed in Washington that I would do something in 
the way of getting up a revised form of rules and regulations for this 
industry, - I am using that term in place of "By-laws'', because there, 
has been so much ccnfusicn in the use of the word "By-laws" , between by- 
laws of the Association and by-laws of the Committee, that I thought it 
would be advisable to drop it in this connection and I have tried to 
do that . 

I told you in Vfashington that we would try to work the thing out. in 
two groups of regulations, one purely administrative, and the other 
regulations which really amiount to interpretations of or modifications 
of the Code. 

While we went over these proposed by-laws in Washington at 'our meet- 
ing, I am obliged to confess that v;hen I attempted to revise them, a great 
many questions came up concerning which I was not sure that I -understood 
their purpose, that is, of the administrative regulations, so what I have 

9732 



-79" 

drawn up here, we will go over, I think perhaps as we did in Washington, 
by reading the whole thing over first and coming "back to it for dis- 
cussion, paragraph by paragraph. Whether I have correctly interpreted 
the purpose, I don't know, "but if I have not, we will try to work it out. 

If , everybody a-^rees, we will just read the whole thing over, end to 
end. These are only the administrative rules, and I .have included in 
them ns a subject for consideration, both the shipbun Iding .and ship- 
repairing plans, so we could see it all at once. 

"The Ship Building and Ship Repairing Industry Committee (heroin-. 
after referred to as the Code Committee) having been elected by the ship 
builders and ship repairers and appointed by the President of the United' 
States in accordance with sub-paragraph (a) as amended September, 1933," 

I have drawn up an amendm.ent of Paragraph 8 for six members of the 
industry and four aTTOintees of the President, as we agreed to do, but 
that has not as yet been signed by the President, who has not yet returned 
to W-Ashington, but I assume it will be signed some time in September. 

The Hules and Regulations as drafted by lv':r. W. H. Davis from the 
By-Laws -fs originally _ submitted are set forth in the- KUnutes of this 
meeting, beginning on page three. (Ref. Deputy's Files). 

The sections and paragraphs were read one by one and discussed 
extensively, all of vfhich is contained in the 130 pages of the transcript. 
No finite conclusions were made, as the work consisted principally of 
pre-oaration of these Hules and Reriulations for an open hearing, which 
was later held on September 26. A Sub-committee was appointed to redraft 
the Hules and. Regulations. A further meeting was neld on the same sub- 
ject September 11, 1933. 

SEFTSIviSR 11, 1533, MEETII;G HELD 11 BROADWAY, NEW YORK CITY, AT 
10:30 A. M. Briefs and excerpts from I^iinutes (Hef. Deputy's Files, 
Sec, 2) . 

There were present, representing the Industry, Messrs. H. G. Smith, 
Chairman of the Code Committee; C. C. Knerr , Secretary-Treasurer of the 
Code Committee; W. K. G-erhauser; President of the Great Lakes Shipbuild- ■' 
ing & Repair Association; S. W. Wakeman, Vico-President , Bethlehem Ship- 
biiilding Corp.; C. S. Petersen, Assistant to the Vice-President of the 
NeT.Tort News Shipbuilding & Drydock Co.; Robert Haig, Vice President, 
Sun Shipbuilding & Drydock Co.; Joseph Haig, '''r.. President, Todd Dry- 
dock & Engineering Co., representing the Administration, Capt. Henry 
Williams, U. S. N. , Robert Hague, President, Standard Shipping Company, • 
Consumer Representatives; Joseph S. KcDonagh, Labor Representative of 
the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers; W. H. Davis ,■ Deputy 
Administrator Nra. 

The Sub-Com.m.ittee, appointed at a previous meeting, redrafted the 
Rules and Regulations and they were submitted to this m.eeting. A very 
thorough discussion ensued, which is set forth in the transcript of 98 
pages. The Rules and Regulations were agreed to in final form in pre- 
paration for the open hearing that followed September 26, 1933. 

9732 



-sc- 



SEPTEMBER 27, 1933. MEETIHa HELD IK THE OFFICE OF W. F. DAVIS, 
NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMJnSTRATTON.WkSKIlIJTCN, D. C, at 2:00..P.M.. 
Briefs and excerpts from Mirmtes ' (deference: Deputy's Files, Section 2) 

There were present Messrs. H. &. Srnith, Chairman, S. W. Wakeman, 
Joseph Haag, Jr., Robert Haig, W* H.: Davis, Henry Williams, J. S. McDonagh, 
R. L. Hague, G. H. Shields, C. Winship, and C. C. Knerr , Secretary. 
Mr. Roger Williams was absent. - 

The purpose of the meeting was- to go over the testimony presented 
at the Public Hearing on Tuesday, September 26, 1933 on the Proposed 
Rules and Regulations for admir. isterinp^"- the Shipbuilding and Shiprepair- 
ing Code . ' 

The Chairman explained to the Committee the importance of having 
the Rules and Regulations put in final form at the earliest practicable 
date and that it was the' desire of the elected representatives of the 
Committee and of the Board of Directors of the National Coiincil of 
American Shipbuilders that Deputy Administrator Davis seoure an Executive 
Approval of same, as this action would tend to stabilize the industry. 

The Committee also went on record, tnnt immediately after the Rules 
and Regulations are in final shp.pe, that they should be sent out to the 
Industry with an announcement that said Rules and Regulations have been 
approved by the Code Com.mittee and are effective as of the date of 
Release. 

There was discussion as to the method to be adopted to handle labor 
difficulties arising in the industry. Mr. S. f. Wakeman described in 
detail the method apjjlicable to his plants for handling disputes arising 
locally. 

W. H. Davis explained conditions- iphich may probably have, to, be met 
if disputes arise under the Public V-'orks Progr;am. 'Circulars Nos, 1 and 51 
of the Federal Emergency Admiini strati on of Public Works (Rules Prescribed 
by the President) and any plan formulated should have these circulars in 
mind. 

Mr. Davis also suggested a Shipbuilding Conciliation Board to which 
the employees of the, yards would elect their own representatives. 

The conclusion reached was that the industry members of the Code 
Committee should submit a plan for handling labor problems. 

Mr. S. W. l!fakeman was assigned a Committee of one to draw up a plan 
for the handling of Labor Problems and to report back at next Code Com- 
mittee meeting. 

The Committee then began the consideration of the Rules and Regula- 
tions together with testimony presented on September 26, 1933. 

The Rules and Regialations are to be rewritten, incorporating therein 
the suggested changes and then sent out to the Industry as being the 

9732 



51- 



Rules and Zlegulritions adopted "by the Code Conmittee. 

Overtim e 

The pnjTTient of overtime nfter eight hours work and T)ayment of over- 
time pfter 12 noon on Snturdays was discussed. The Code very clearly 
states that a rate of "not less than 1^ times the regularly hourly ratcc, 
but otherwise according to the prevailing custom of the port" shall be 
paid. 

It was Mr. Davis' opinion that the Code is clear that the plant must 
pay 1^ times for overtime beyond 8 hours and it is felt that if there is 
no uniformity in a "port" that the real intention was that the prevailing 
practice in each plant v-'ould be applicable. So far as overtime on Sat- 
urday's is concerned, however, this is somewhat uncertain as any decision 
on this matter must take into account not only past practice but any 
change in conditions brought about by shorter hours under the Code Re- 
quirements • On this latter matter Mr. WakemaJi is to prepare a statement 
of fact. The Code Committee did not go on record as rendering any de- 
cision upon either of these matters. 

Committee adjourned at 5:30 to meet again at 10:30 A.M. Monday 
October 2, 1933. 

OCTOBER 2, 1933. MEETING HELD IN THE OFFICES OP THE NATIONAL 

COUNCIL OF A!.;ERICAN SHIFiSUILDERS, 11 BROADWAY, NEW YORK CITY, AT 11:00 

A.M. Briefs and excerpts from minutes (Reference: Deputy's files, 
Section 2) 

There were present Messrs. H. G. Smith, Chairman, W. H. Gerhauser, 
Joseph. Haag, Jr., Rob-jrt Haig, S. W. Wakem.an, Cf.rl E. Petersen (repre- 
senting Roger Williams), W. H. Davis, R. L. Hague, J. S. McDonagh, 
Captain Henry Williamis, G. H. Shields, and C. C. Knerr, Secretary. 

The Code Comnittee considered further the Rules and Regulations as 
proposed by the Code Com'iittee with such changes as made as a result of 
the Public Hepring in Washington on September 26th. 

Mr. Smith raised the question as to the propriety of having the 
Rules and Regulations apr^roved by the President of the United States so 
as to become the "law of the land". Mr. D^vis reported that he had taken 
this m.atter up with Colonel Lea and that it was thought that the Code 
Comrr.ittee had sufficient p0T;er under the code to enforce the Rules and 
Regulations as written and that. the approval of our Rules and Regulations 
would establish a precedent. Mr. Davis was of the opinion, however, that 
if the Rules and Regulations were found to be unenforceable that he would 
again take the matter up with the Administrator to have them, approved by 
Executive Order. 

Mr. Davis then sugsested that 'the Rules and Regulations be signed 
by each member of the Code Committee and this was agreed to. 

The Rules and Regulations (Reference: Exhibit "L", Appendix ) 



9732 



promulgated under the authority of the Code Committee v/ere then read and 
upon motion ty Joseph Kang, seconded by P-obert H;iig, the following resolu- 
tion was adopted: 

RESOLVED: That these Rules and Sef-nilations having 
been discussed and agreed upon are tnereby adopted. 

A vote was taken by the Code Committee and all ansv/ered in the' 
affirmative . 

A poll was then taken of the Presidential Appointees and they approved 
of the Rules and Regulations as adopted. 

As Paragraph 8 (a) of the Code provided for a Code Committee . consis- 
ting of five (5) Industry Members and three (S) members to be appointed 
by the President and rs the increase in this Committee to six (6) Industry 
Members and four (4) appointed by tne President was not approved until 
September 2?,, 1933 it was moved by Mr. Robert Haig, seconded by W. H. 
Gerhauser that a resolution confirming all of the previous acts of the 
Comm.ittee be ratified ^nd thereupon it was 

RESOLVED: That all of the acts and things heretofore 
done by the group constituting the code committee, 
pending the formal apriroval of the election of the 
industry members and the aprjointment by the President 
of the United States of four representative members, 
are hereby ratified and confirmed. 

A roll call was taken rnd all answered in the affirmative. 

The mem.bers of the Code Committee were handed a chart showing the 
organization of Shipbuilding -'nd Shiprepairing Industry Committees for 
operation under the Code dated September 21, 1933. (Reference: 
Exhibit "L", Appendix) 

On motion of t-.r . S. W. W-keman, seconded by Mr. Joseph Haag and 
unanimously carried it was: 

RESOLVED: That the Committees appointed or elected 
and set up on the chr.rt dated September 21, 1935 
and attached hereto be ratified and confirmed." 

Mr. Shields read a letter from, the Seattle-Portland Chamber of 
Commerce (letter in Mr. Shields' possession) requesting exemption from 
paragraph 4 (b) of the Code for certain yards in that area. As other 
districts have asked for the same exomption ana -is such request has been 
disapproved on miction of Mr. Joseph Hnag, seconded by S. W. Wakeman, the 
request for exemiption was denied. 



9732 



h83" 

0CT0B3H 9, 1933. MEETIKCr PELD IN THE OFFICES OF THE NATIONAL 
COUNCIL 0? A^IEHICAN SHIPBUILDERS AT 10:45 A. il. Briefs and excerpts 
from Minutes (Reference: Deputy's Files, Section 2) 

There v^ere present Messrs. H. G. Smith, Chairman, T;. H.' G-erhauser, 
Roger Williams, Robert Hai^, TT. H. Davis, A. 3. Homer (representing 
S. W. ^akeraan) , Captain Henry "Williams, G. H.. Sheilds III, R.L. Hague, 
and C, C, Knerr, Secret: ry. Messrs. Joseph Haag, Jr., and J. S. 
McDonagh were absent. 

The Secretary'- announced that A. B. Homer vjas present today re- 
presenting S. TT. '-''akeman. 

North and South Dividinf?: Line 

Mr. Davis asked the status of this subject and it vxas announced that 
the Chairman was gettin.g data together and the subject vras left open to be 
discussed at a future, meeting. - . . 

"JTatchmen' s Force' 

The question of hours of labor for ■vvatclimen v^ras discussed and 
Mr. Davis agreed to take in hand the vri.ting. of -sorae- -c-lause to cover this 
class of '.7orkra*en for consideration at a subsequent Code Committee 
meeting. 

Protection for Handling Labor Disputes 

This question V7as discussed at length as to t^hat kind of an or- 
ganization should be set up to handle disputes within' the industry. The 
Code Committee' 'has 'before it, at the present time, two suggestions from 
members of the industr'^ and one suggestion from Mr. Joseph Franklin. 
The various ^lans will be considered and discussed at a later meeting. 

Col-'jmbia River Shipbuilders and Shipre-oairers Association 

This association asked exemption from putting in the wage increases 
required under' the shipbuilders code. Exemptions from various sections of 
the country had been previously requested and had been denied and it was 
felt by the code committee tha't the request from this association should 
also be denied and the Chairman was inr.'tructed to so inform them. 

The Chairman was also instructed to v/rite to C. T. 7iley, Chair- 
man of the Seattle District, informing him that the request had been 
denied but that he. should investigate the matter further as to feasi- 
bility of grajitihg them ah exem'otion, and transmit his recommendations 
to the Code Committee. 

Portland Shipbuilding Co. . -. ■ 

Erickson and Klep 

Astoria Marine Construction Co « ' ' . ' • 

This wa's a request similar to the Col-umbia River Shipbuilders' and 
Shiprepairers Association and it /./as moved that the same action be taken 
in regard to' this request. 

9732 



That is, corainon lafcor must be paid not less than forty~five cents an 
hout and all lahor in the higher "brackets not less than 11-1/9 percent 
increase over the rates -prevailing before the Code nent into effect. 

TTages - Charleston, Brunswick. Sa vannah and Jacksonville 

The Chairman reported the complaint by T7. A. Calvin, dated September 
14th with reference to rates of pay for shipbuilding employees in Chax'les- 
ton, Brunsv/ick, Savannah and Jacksonville. It wp.s stated that shortly 
after the shipbuilders code v/as put into effect a question arose in .ne 
South Atlantic Section of the countr-'-, as vrell as from various other 
sections of the country, with reference to rates of pay in their respect- 
ive localities, and the Code Committee ruled that no exceptions could be 
granted. 

It was moved that I;Ir. Smith advise Mr. Calvin of this decision and 
that the rates prescribed by the Code should be put into effect. 

Overtime Pay for Saturday Af t e moons 



Labor Complaint He: United Dvy Docks & 
Todd Dry Docks, Hew York Area 



Mr. W. A, Calvin in a letter dated September 19th complained that 
the aforesaid tjlants were employing their men more than the hours called 
for by the code and further a complaint was filed that certain men were 
in the employ of both companies. 

Marietta Manufacturing Company 

The Chairman announced he had forwa,rded the telegram of September 
25th from C, L. Jarrett charging that this company was violating code 
provisions and paying a minimum v/age of twenty-five cents per hour, 
eight hours per da^r, seven days per v.'eek and that he had received a lett- 
er of October 5th from the company informing him that the charge was true, 
but that they rrere fulfilling a contract on which bids were opened on April 
6th and that the work carried no profit and that the contract provided for 
work on SundajT's and Holidays and tliat it carries liquidated damages of 
$1,000 per day for non-deliverer. The committee considered the circumstances 
and it was the opinion of the code committee tli^t the companj'- was in an 
unfortunate situation, but that the code had to be comiplicd witji. 



OCTOBER 25, 1933. IvIESTIIvTG HELD IK THE OEPICES OP THE MTIONAL COUNCIL 

, AT 35 00 P. M. 
Files, Section 2) 



OP AJvIERICAN SHIPBUILDERS m ill 3R0ADV;AY,MEU YORK CITY,, AT 3;00 P. M. 
Briefs and excerpts from Minutes (Referemie: Deputj'-'s 



There were present Messrs. H. G. Smith, Clialrraan, W, H. Oerhauser, 
Robert Haig, A. B. Homer (representing S. W. 7akeraan) , Roger Williams, 
Joseph Haag, Jr., C. 17. V.'iley (by invitation), T7. H. Davis, Captain 
Henry T7illiams, R. L. Hague, G-. H. Shields III, J. S. McDonagh, and C.C. 
Knerr, Secretary. 

The Secretary aitvised the Committee that A. B. Homer was representing 
S. W, Walceman. 
9732 






Erev.-er Dry Dock C omp any 



i.'r. Smith "t;roii£;ht to t'ae attention of the Cnnmiittee the fact tmt 
the Brewer "Jry Dock Company., a plant of consideraole size in the 1-Tev/ 
York Area, filed rrter- v;hich v/ere telieved to te so lo^v tlx't they, are 
in violation of the code as being "Oslov; reasonaole cost," He stated 
that the rates are Icv/cr tiU^n the rates in effect oefore the code was 
signed, since '"hich time there has been an. advance in v/pges of at least 
17 ■_-'er cent in Rew York, 

Mr, Davis cotimenteo. tlip.t the Coranittee is confronted with a ques- 
tinn of .fact and th':'t it woxild he in order for the Comnittcc to ask 
the lire'.ver Corapany for a statement of fact, v/hich statcnent should he 
certified to oy a Certified Puhlic Accoiontant and thereupon the follow- 
ing resolution was proposed by Roger 'Williams and seconded by A.E, 
HoLier anc read as follows: 

Wlr^lBEAS ; The Brewer Dry Dock Company has filed with the 
Code Coiruiiittee , u.ider the -Trovisions of Section 2 of Fara- 
j.raph VIII of the Rules and Regulations , a-^-Troved and ef- 
fective October 2, 1335, schedules 

I'TQTff, T:-:ER"".F0R E , E'n I? RT;SDL7EI): Tiiat a subcommittee of the 
Code Goniiittee be a^v oiatcd to investigate these schedules, 
wita authority/ to C'ernrand a.id procure from the •Corapcny an 
immediate report n:rx: r'etailed statement of account, under 
oath, s.nd sup-orte; b;/ a pv/orn statement 'by a Certified 
Public Accoijiitant , . f rom the boo.'.s of the Company, showing 
the Company's cost of direct labor and cost of materials, 
if any, .anc- omcu -'.n njnount oi overhead as has been included 
by the. Brewer Dry Dock Conioany in establishing the sche- 
dules referred to, together v.''ith detailed statement, unaer 
oath, and su orte." by .a sworn statement by a Certified 
Public Accouritant, of n.ctual overhead expense a,nd volume 
of business from tne books of the Cora"any over a period of 
tiie -oast two years, and such specific information as the 
subcomruttee m. .y deem necessary, or the Brewer Drj'' Dock 
Compan3' iiia.y c'eem advisable;' and with povrer to fix the time 
vhen such reports shall be submitted 'hy the Brewer Drj^ 
Dock Company to the subcommittee. 

AliZ 33 IT F3 .T"-ZR RESOU-rp^D; That the subcommittee si^all 
render its re-oort, 3/fter investigation, to the Code Com- 
mittee not l---ter thiin Monday, I-ovemocr 6, 19S3, 

7?ork of Subcormittee of Three 
Appointed by "_!ational Labor Roard 

Both :ir. Smith and Mr. Dpvis outlined the work which h.ad been 
done by the Committee of Three i;-i rega,rd to securing information on 
hours and wr^es in the shipyards in order to rmZie a report, to the 
Rational Lr'-bor Board.- 

An unsatisf ctory condition exists Y^nereby: 



973S 



-85- 

1. Government norli performed under the code on 
basis of 3.3 Iiqijjts c. ■'■Teelc "^nd 

LJ. Work ;,jerfor::ed in 'J-vy Yards on entirely 
d i i' f e r e n c ho lar s ancl. 

3, Worl: ^^erforraed laider the P. ?/. A. on a still 
different "basis of hours anc, v/ai^es. 

Statement hy Mr, Davis to the effect th^t unifornity of practice 
as to vrorlrin;;^ hours is iraporta.nc not only in the shipbuilding industry 
itself but vdth some other incustries ^as nade to the Code Comnittee, 
v/ho concurred in this opinion. The Corjnittee of Tliree is preparing a 
report which it is hoped to submit to the '.'ational Labor Board by 
November 1st, 

Hr. Davis reported thpt he hoped to have a report in such shape 
so as to be submitted to the llationa.l Labor Board by the first of 
November in conformance vdth the agreement he h-'.d riven to the erriploy- 
ees' representatives. 'Ae was also of the opinion that a Public Hear- 
ing should be held before the ilational Labor Board as to hours of work 
and v/a!-,es paid and thst the com;olainants be notified of the date and 
invited to a-^-ear and present their cases and thrt industry could also 
appear if they so choose, 

Laobor ?,e -'resenta.tion 

The question w.:,s also discussed as to how labor should be reipre- 
sented in the administration of labor disputes ari-ing under the code 
and as several other plans had been previously suggested, Hr. J. S. 
IIcDon3.gh presented the following as anothe r method of procedxire. 

"Por the purpose of dealing vrith all questions and com- 
plaints arising out of 1-bor conditions in the shipbuild- 
ing and shiprepair yards, there shall be established a 
Kational Committee consisting of seven; one to be ap- 
pointed by the Administrator of the IT.H.A.; three to be 
selected by the shipbuilders and the shiprepairers ; and 
three to be selected by the Metal Trades Department of 
the A.F. of L. with the aiiprova.l of the President of tne 
American Federation of Lfibor. Such National Committee 
shall have authority to take up and dispose of all labor 
questions coming to it from the employers or employees 
of any shipbuilding or shiprepair yard, or from any of 
the divisions and sub-divisions into v/hich the ship- 
building and shiprepa.iriag industry may be divided," 

This matter is to be taken under a,dvi3ement. 

OCTOBER 30, 1933. ilEETIi-G HELD III T.-T. 0"''ICES 07 THE HATIOITAL 
COUl^CIL OP Aiv'ERICAN SHIPBUILDERS AT 11 BROADWAY, HEW YORK CITY, AT 
10:30 A.M. Briefs and excerpts from Minutes (Deput;''G Piles, Section 
2) 

There v/ere -nresent Messrs. H. G-. Smith, Chiirrnan, Robert Haig, 

9732 



.r.67- 

'.". K. Gerhauser, ,.. 3. Homer (representing S. W. Wakeman), Joseph Haag, 
Jr., "■. 11. Javis, Ca-itain Henry '',iFilli?ms , 3.. L. Haii,ue , J. S. I'cDonagh, 
G. H. Shields III, and C. C. linerr, '.'-ecretary. Mr. Roger 'S'illiams v;as 
absent, 

Coniicittee of Tnree 

Appointed hy the :'ction--.l l£;,"bor. Boaa-d 

The work of this corimittee v/as again discussed owing to the close- 
ness of the date on -.'hich a reyort to the !'J";tional Labor Board v/as 
promised to the employees of certain complaining yards, Iluch time was 
given to the .nethod to oe adopted to hear the coiipl .inants before the 
Labor Board after tne report jx?,s been submitted by the Conimittee of 
Tlxree. It lias been sug^^ested that a representative of the employees 
from each yard should a.ttend, 

1. Hev^rescnting non-unionized '.nPDloyees 

2, 5.epresenting.u)iionized employees. 

The plan v/as discarded as it v^as the opinion of the Committee that 
the men v;ho originally ma.de the corajDlaints should be the ones to speak 
on the subject v/hich they had presented to the Administration. 

hr. Davis stated th t Ih". Jolm Trey ha^-d gone abroad but that he 
had left a letter covering his thoughts and tlia.t he (Mr. Davis) would 
write up the report in collaboration \dth Mr. Smith and present same 
to the H0,tional Labor Board by November Ist after vAich a date would 
be set for the he '.ring. 

Stateaients were made by memV^ers of the code cormittee setting 
forth the necessity of hciving longer hours for both naval and commer- 
cial work and further th t the wor?,: performed under PWA contracts 
should be -oe'rformed under the same hours o/nd labor rates as provided 
for in the code. 

Delinouency in Filing Schedules 

The Chainnan directed the attention of the Code Committee to the 
fact that many shiprepair ya.rds , self-repairers a.nd non-drydock repair- 
ers have failed to file, the schedules called for in the Rules and Regu- 
iations. . 

Brewer Dry Dock Company ' ■ ■ 

I.:r, Davis reported tliat Hr. Sauer iiad carried on after his meet- 
ing here in i'^ev; York v/ith Ilessrs., Haig and Williams and stated that 
Brewer Drydock, while desiring to furnish the reports requested by the Code 
Committee at -its last meeting, nesitated on furnishing the information 
desired to the sub-conimittee Y.'hich is called for in the Resolution. 
They prefer to give it to Mr. Davis, Deputy Aojr.inistrator. The action 
taken by Brevrer was understood by the Code Cominittee but it was felt 
nevertheless tha.t the Coce Committee should '^r-.ve the information but 
tlmt it would have to be kept confidential within the membership of 
the Committee and therefore Mr. Davis suggested that a m.eeting be held 
with j:r. GrjTiies and Mr. Sauer on the following day 7/ith a view to 

9732 



-88- 

determining when and hov; the . inform?;,tion v?oiild "be f-urnished, 

Ilmergency IVork 

Tlie Chairman ag?dn trought to the attention of the Code Committee 
a request from the McDona-gh Iron '/forks, Galveston, for an exemption 
for Tror?:in£- men over forty hours. They stated they" had endeavored to 
obtain additional vorlanen hut failed, and hence worked the men in ex- 
cess of Code requirements. I.ir, Gerhauser cited a similar instance "by 
Chicci£0 Shiphuild-ing Company. 

After thoro-ugh discussion as to the possioility of. yards ahusing 
this privilege, it ?;as agreed th ,t a form shoiild he dravm up embodying 
thereon general regulations to cover emergency work, this form reqiiir- 
ing certification from the managers of the pla,nt , and emphasizing the 
absolute necessity of reporting on vior]z done \mder emergency conditions 
- pointing out tlu'.t failure tq report is a violation of the Code and 
subjecting the violator to a penalty of $500,00. 

The form is to be dravm up and submitted to the Code Committee 
for approval. 

U nited- Enrineerin;: Company, San Fr8.ncisc o, Cal . 

Exemption, Paragraph 4 (b) of the Code ■ 

The Ciiairman brought to the attention of the Committee a request 
from United Engineering Company for exemption to Paragraph 4 (b) of 
the Code, stating that their rates had not been decreased during the 
depression, and that if the increase prescribed hy the Code is man- 
datory upon their plant and existing differential betvreen their plant 
and other plants in the San Francisco district will be increased. 

In order to intelligently examine this matter, request was made 
through the Pacific Coast Dry Dock Association for wage scales to be 
submitted by all yards in the district. Upon receijiit of these viage 
schedules the matter will be presented again to the Code Committee for 
determination. 

United States Structura l Steel C omp.any , ' 
I' iera-phis, Tenn. and East St. Lo uis, Mo. 



Dry Dock Gangs - Emergency Vifo rk 

m,uestion arose s.s to exemption for men empioj^ed in operating 
docks, due to unusua.1 conditions, such as change of tides - exception- 
alljr short intervals for boat to leave dock betv/een regular hours and 
overtime hours, etc. 

The working of this class of e:TOloyees is to be treated the same 
as other "emergency work", and must be reported to the Code Committee. 

Dry Doc k Rates . City of Portland, Oregon 
9732 



Johnson and Cochr^-,n, Korfolk District 



G'oarantee Men 

The Chi.iman re-oorted he had circularized a n-umbcr of the plJ^nts 
as to their interpretation of the vords, "gtnrantee men", and the 
follov.'ini^ was read into the r:pp,rd; 

"It is oxir under standing that 'guarantee men' as used., 
therein refers to men eiiTTloyed on or ahout a vessel as 
a consequence of an unexpired guaranty or 'warranty, such 
men's services "being engaged exclusively on the equip- 
ment or apparatus to ?/hich the gxuiranty applies. 

"In the general sense the term, 'g-uarantee men' has been 
usually used to refer to those men accompanying and acting 
as advisory engineers on board a vessel on which certain ^ 
equipment is still subject to an unexpired guaranty. Since 
such men are usually considered by the Industry as being in 
the saiiie catagory as ship's personnel, we believe tha.t the in- 
tent of the Rules and Hegulations was to provide for a situ- 
ation v'laerein an omier might 'oe compelled to carry out re- 
pairs to the ship's equipment with labor employed, by the 
guarantor by reason of the guaranty being subject to the 
provision that re2:>a,irs, if any, during the period of the 
gua.ranty, be perform.ed bj' the guarantor esclusively," 

T'nc matttjr will be gone over and smoothed up, to be presented at 
the next meeting of the Code Committee for adoption as an interpre- 
tation, and sent to vll members of the iJational ■ Shiprepairing Committee, 
Shipbuilders Administrative ComiTiittee, and Local Area Chairmen for dis- 
tribution to the yards. 

Unearned Discount 



In view of the Code and the ~.ules and Regula.tions saying nothing 
to the contr.ary, and in the a,tsence of a credit bureau, it was felt 
that a two percent - thirty days discount v/as permissible at this time. 
The establis_"jiient oi credit terms will be taken in hand as soon as a 
credit committee has been appointed, 

".'aiving of .32-ho-'ar ?eek for 48 '-Tours fo r 
Pattern I.iahers on ilaval 7/ork 

The Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, in a letter dated October 
23, 1933, requesting permission of the Code Comj.iittee to work pattern- 
makers 48 ho'ors per week on naval work, in accordance with Section 3 
(d) of the Code, all ?i?ith the object of proceeding rapidly ?/ith the 
pattern v/ork in order to speed up v/orl: in the other departments in the 
yard . 



9732 



Before grajiting the reojaest, the Bethlehem Coriroany is to precent 
1 furtner statement to the Code Coinmittee for revieA^ at its next meet- 
ing, a.s to the numDer of pat ternmalrers involved. If -oossible , the 
statement is to jr^ive a pictvire of aov such exemption viovIll aj^ply to 
the other yards 'lo'inj^; "a^.val work. 

Repairs to Lit;:ht Shi^:^ Jo. 86 



Interpretp^tion of "Da:/ " 

Second Para/;raph, Section o-A (l) of the Code 

Mr. L. R. Lvciila:p asked for a:: iutei-pretation of T/liat constitutes 
a day. As the hoiir of startin. varies in 6.ifferent plrmts, not only 
in the various districts hut in the same localities, it v:as felt tlia.t 
in the aosence of 'imif ormity no definite interpretation v/ill he made 
at this time, hut if the question arises - to inform them to qo ahead 
and aoide h;/" wliat they .ha.d teen doin/-^ in the i^ast, until definite de- 
cision is made. 

Standard Forma o f Reports . 

The Ciiairman reported that the coiTimittee appointed to consider 
the stands,rd forms for re-portin£; shiprepairing and shipouilding statis- 
tics vfas proceeding with their work and had accomplished something, 
but was not ready to meke a report, 

Firms not in.. Business of Making Repairs , 
"but who Occasionally Perform Such ^ otI: 



Self-Repa ir ers (Z -.ilroad and S_tcaraj;^hi|-i Lines) 

Attention was also ciirected to certain steamship companies and 
railroads having shops c.oing rep?.iring to floating equipment. It was 
felt tiic't all sho^Ts doing repairing to floating marine equipment vrould 
come under the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Code; a,nd investigation 
is to "be :nade to get a proper definition of the meaning of the phrase 
in the Code - "engaged in the "btisiness of huilding, fa"bricating *****" 
to see whefner it covers such inde-,>endent companies, and if it does 
they will he req\iested to file letters of compliance. 



?732 



-91- 

NOVEI£B?R 8, 1935. MEETIIIG HELD III THE OEPICES OF THE NATIONAL 
COUi\rCIL OF .W^CRICAN SHIPBUILDERS, 11 BROADWAY, HE:/ YORK CITY, AT 10:30 
A.I'. Briefs and excernts from Uinutes (Reference: Deputy's Files, 
Section 2) 

There were loresent Messrs. H, G. Smith, Chairman V. H. Gerhauser, 
A. 3. Homer, S. U. Wakeraan, Robert Haig, Joseph Haag, Jr., Roger Williams, 
Cantain Henry 'Williams, R. L. Hague, C. H. Winship, G. H. Shields III, 
»'. H. Davis, J. S. McDonagh, and C. C. Knerr, Secretary. 

Committee of Three 

(Appointed hy National Labor Bo^rd to Consider Wages and Hour 
Problems) ■ • ■ 

The report of this committee has teen filed with the National 
Labor Board, After considerable discussion Mr, Davis said he would 
arrange to hold a meeting in his office at 8 p.m, Monday, November 13, 
1933 with the National Labor Board; the employees who made original 
labor complaints, members of the Code Committee and other shipbuilders 
interested. This meeting is to deal 'Tith the necessity of having longer 
hours for both naval and commercial work in order that the weekly earn- 
ings of the men may be increased and a uniformity of hours to apply to 
all shipbuilding and shiprepair work, 

Delinqiiency in Filing Schedules 

This matter was discussed ;^t the October 30th meeting of the Code 
Committee and as conditions have not changed in the meantime it was 
felt that some method should be adopted whereby such firms as have not 
filed schedules could be brought in line. It was suggested that a 
telegram should be sent out over the signature of W. H. Davis, Deputy 
Administrator. Thereupon the following telegram was drafted and sent to 
the seventeen local districts set up to administer the shiprepairijig 
section of the Rules and Regulations. 

"It is compulsory that every member of the ship repairing 
industry file not later than November sixteenth with 
the Code Committee the schedule or schedules called for 
by Section VIII of the Rules and Regulations stop You 
are charged with full responsibility for getting these 
schedules in your district stop Please repeat this 
telegram to every member in your district and report 
delinquents imraedintel?/ to me sending copy of report 
to Chairman of Code Committee," 

Method of Handling Labor Disputes 

Mr. Davis called the attention of the Code Committee to the lack 
of a committee within the industry to settle labor disputes. He cited 
the method adopted in the Bituminous Coal Code as being an example of 
what another industry has done. 



9732 



-92- 

The Clmirmar. rerainded 'ilr. Davis that tr.-o .lernbera of the Code Com- 
raittee had filed sUt-gested -ola.n.u and that a --ilan v;as on record presented 
by Mr. McDonat.h urA b" f'lr; J. A. ?rrn;i;lin and that thr industr- had 
this matter oontinvially in mini but t.i date had coiAe to no agreement 
as to v/hether a.T,y _)lan would be suitable. The matter is still o-oen 
and havini- the consideration b;;' the " ir.dustr" neiiibers of the Code 
Committee. 

i.Ir. Davis stat^-d that any ■)lan adopted v/ould have to heve the 
a;Tiroval of C-eneral Hu:.-,h S. Johnson. 

Research L Planuin,^ Re- 'orts 



IToith and South 

The question of the dividin.. line for the shi"'buildin_; industry 
between the h'orth and South v/as brought uo and iir. Smith directed tlic 
a-ttention of the Administrator to the dividing- line 'established in the 
Retail Code. T]-;e matter is left over for a subsequent meetin^;. 

Emflr^ ^ ^ncy Work 

The Code CormTiittee for several ::ieRtin,;s v/as confronted v/ ith re- 
quests from shi'^building and shi irenairin . firms aslcin^^ for exemptions 
in hours worhed due to emer^'enGy i.vorlr. It '.vas felt by the Committee 
that some lettei' of instruction should be sent cue ' coverint'jC this class 
of v/orl: and therupon the Chairirirn offered a. draft of letter and form 
for ar.Tiroval. The letter r.'fis .^one over <".nd the following was adopted: 

"The>r6 hr ye .come before the. Code Cormuittee numerous 
. reouests for a.pr)roval of ejnerj,ency wor]: in excess of 
the maximujn nmiber of worJcin.^ hours "~ier week pre- 
scribed in the Code of ?Rir Com^ietition and Trade Prac- 
tice for' the Shi-Vouildin.. a.vA Shi;"irepairin,_ Industry 
in tlie United States. 

"The Code Coininittee has not .-.ranted any .eneral 
aiiproval of emer,,ency v'ork, and v/ill not do so. 
Por the tiv.ie beint,, the Code Coimaittec v.'ill con- 
sider soecial cases of emergency work, a.nd will 
a-jprove them v;here t'le facts jiistif- such action. 
It must be realizpd, however, that unless the re-' 
quests for F-:orovrl of 'emergency v/orl: are strictly 
liraited to unescapable emergencies the purpose of 
tne plan v/hich the Code Committee is now ado;::)tiniS 
will be defeated, ana it will become impossible to 
introduce, aiiy flexibilit, ■ into the a'rolicatiov of- 
these .provisions of the Code. 

""Jver; i.iei.iber of the Indus'try is therefore urged 
to c'vnfine the emer^-ency work s trice ""y to the min- 
im'om ii:-.iit-i, and is required, in the event of 

3732 



e 



-95- 

emergency worl:, to submit a \7ee]:ly statement on the nt- 
tached loim. Tliis statement is to show the mamber of hours 
.v/orked per man in excess of the weekly limit, the necessity 
therefor, ana other information requested on the form, over 
the signature of an executive officer of your plant. This 
statement must also be duly notarized." 

The fox-ra -..ill be i^.-inted and 'sent out to all Local Area Chair- 
raen, (See Sxliibit " '", Appendix, Interpretation rlo. 2) 

Mr. Homer moved the adoption of the form and letter and the ■ 
motion was unanimously ^ppi-oved. 

United Engineering Com^^any 

The Code Committee had before it the request of the United Engin- 
eering Conrjany for exemi:)tion of clause 4 (b) of the Code. This matter 
was carried over from a previous meeting but in the meantime an inves- 
tigation was made of this natter by cormTiuni eating v.'ith the West Coast. 
The committee was in possession of the wage schedixles adopted by various 
plants on the VJest Coast which reflected that most of the companies had 
complied with the code in establishing the rates called for under the 
code. The United Engineering Conpany re;oort shovred that no increase 
had been granted ever what had existed before the code become effective. 
It was the opinion of the Board that this company should be notified 
to comply with the. code and that the Code Couimittee cannot reconsider 
the subject - even a request for an exemption Uiiless they bring them- 
selves into compliance with the code and in the event they do not do so 
within ten days that the matter sh:^uld be turned over to the Administra- 
tor. Mr. ¥akeman mo.ved and Mr. Gerliauser seconded that such action be 
taken. It was passed unanimously. - ■- — -■'■■ 

G'aa.rantee Men 

(See Exhibit "I-l", Ap^iendix, Intrepretation llo. l) 



International Brotherhood of Boiler Workers, Iron Shipbuilders , 
Welders and Helpers 



Self He-oairers 

(Haiiroads £ Steamship Lines) 



Casual and Incide .tal Labor 



973:: 



-94- 



JMUARY 4, 1034, J^EZTIKG HELD lil OFFICE OF V7. K. DAVIS, 
DEPU'lT ALMli;iS'xBA'j.'OR, NATIONAL RECOVSSY ADiaillSTMTION, WASHINGTON, 
D. C, at 10:00 A. M. Briefs and excerpts from Llinutes (Reference: 
Deputy's Files, Section 2) 

There v/ere present Messrs H. G. Smith, Chairman, Robert Kaig, 
Roger Williams, Joseph Ilaag, Jr., W. H. Gerhauser, S. ?/. Walceman, 
A. B. Homer, W. H. Davis, Capt. Heniy Williams, E. L. Ife,giie, J. S. 
McDonagh, George H. Shields III, F. C. YJaldron, C. C. Knerr, Sec- 
retary. 

Flan for Distriaution of Expense for Ac'iministration of the Code 

Tho Cliairman presented a plan for prorating cost of adininister- 
ing the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairin;^" Code v»hich plan had b een previous- 
ly aiscussed ?i.nd approved by the Industry Members of the Code Committee. 
Mr. Davis stated that if the plan I'lS-d been so approved he thought the 
administration ';?ould approve same subject tj adjustment of coraplaints 
that may come in from individual shipyards. Therefore, the plan dated 
January 4, 1934, attached hereto, vas adopted. (Reference: Page 89 
hereof. 

Interpretation by Code Committee in connection vith negotiated p rice 
above $3500. and $7500 . (Rales and Regulations - Section VIII, Para- 
graph (d) last sentence), 

(See Exhibit "1-4", Ap;:)endix, Interpretation No. 4) 



Approval of Interpretation as to those' who come under the Code 
(See Exhibit "1-5", Appendix, Interpretation No. 5) 



Interpretation - Marietta Ifenufacturing Coiiroany in letter of December 29, 
1933 asked for ruling as to whether ma.chinery built in a shipyard shop 
for another shrobuilder under the code or not, 

(See Exhibit "I.-6", Appendix, Interpretation No. 6) 



Repairs to p-umns & Dredge Equipment 

(See Exhibit "1-14", A'opendix, Interpretation No. 14) 



Interpretation - Section VIII, Paragraph (i) 

(See Exiiibit "I-. 7", Appendix, Inter;oretation No. 7) 



Certificates of Ccmolianco regarding Subcontract Work 

(See Exhibit "1-8", Appendix, Intei-p rotation No. 8) 



9732 



-95- 



Interp retati on - Section VIII, Paraji-raoh (i) 

•(Sec Exhibit "1-9", iVnjsndix, Intci-prctation Ho. 9) 



LujED Sum Price s 

Unit F rice 3 - Section VIII, Paragraphs (c), (d) C^ (c), 
Separate Prices - Hv.les and Rogv.lations 

(ScG I^xhiliit "I-S", Appendix, Intcrprctatiou Ho. 3) 



Pailroad Shipreoair Plants Repairin;-; Their Ovm 3]quipment 

(Sec 3xiii"bit "1-13", Appendix, Interpretation Ho. 13) 



Port ni Portland Fates 



Hcrreshoff Manufacturinr Comijany 



Coicplaint of Suretea, Boiler Works 

Under date of Gctohcr 13th the International Protherhood of 
Boiler Maimers, Iron Ship BLiilders, Welders and Helpers complained to 
General Johnson that the Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation refused 
to permit the Sare.r3. Boiler Works to finish vrork on the "President 
Pierce" while the vessel -.vas in the yard of the Bethlehem Shipbuilding 
Company and that furthermore the Bethlehem Company performed the work 
on the boilers originally contracted for vjith the Zureka Boiler Works. 

Tnis item was referred to the Cimirman of the Pacific Coast Dis- 
trict, and the report received thereon indicated that the 3uroka em- 
ployees were refused admittance to the decks but th^t the Bethlehem 
employees did not comnlete the work commenced by employees of the 
Eureka Boiler 'Jorks but that such work was cornpleted by the Eureka 
Boiler Works after the vessel left the plant of the Bethlehem 
Company. 

Hewpcrt Hews SMobuilding: '?c Dry Sock Company 
(AIHCPAPT CAFJIIEF. -„ "EAHGIS" ) 

The Chairman reported he had received a letter dated December 21st 
from the Howport Hews Shipbuilding &. Dry Dock Cornpany stating that the 
contract iime of deliver^'- of the aircraft carrier "Panger" is Ivky 1, 
1934 and that owing to the operation of the Code, which reduced the 
number of working hours per week, tne vessel cannot be delivered on 
time and requests tliat. an exception be made in connection with the 
work on this vessel in the number of hours of employment per week, 

9732 



-96-.. 



making the limit for cmr/loyces nn an hourly rat-3 forty-four hours 
instead of thirty-t-,vo, effective xmtil tho completion of the vessel. 

Ro,;;er V/illiaras informod tho Comraittee timt the niatter of delivery 
is noT' 'before tho SeOi'0-+'ary of tho Ifevy and tiiat oenclng a determination 
"by him as to the effective date of delivery this matter can he held in 
abeyance. 

Credit Terms 

The Ciiairman reported the resii-lts of a Committee meeting held 
in New York to consider credit tenns as provided for under the Rules 
and Regulations. As this is a question w hich involves the entire in- 
dustry'' upon motion of Rcgsr Williams, seconded hy S. :u Wakcmian, it was 
resolved that the Secretary he instructed to circularize the industry 
to ohtain the views with respect to the credit terms nromulgatod and 
that heforc action is taken hy the Code Comiiittce ti"iat it "be dis- 
cussed with the Steamship Ovmers. 

Ijmcrgency Work 

The Chairman reported v;e li£\d received from firms located in 
various sections of the country nimcrous reports on emergency work 
requiring hours of lahnr per week in excess of those provided hy the 
Code and that the necessity for such overtime hs,s hee-.i certified to 
"before a ITotary Puhlic hy an official of each comoany in question. 
After discussion Mr. Roger Willigms moved and Mr. Robert Haig seconded 
that : 

The reports listed on the st3te;iient dated Januaiv 4, 1934 
covering emergency v.'ork be laid on the table for future 
consideration. 

Code - Paragraph 3 (c) 

Members of tho Code Committee stated that the provisions of para- 
grap.h 3_.(jc); of the Code will Syroire on Robruar;^ 6th -^nd inasmuch as 
the stage of conTOletion of the plans, ordering materials, etc., was 
such that it would rea_ixire an extension of this exception to permit 
the orderly flow of materials into the yard, tae following resolution 
was moved by Roger Willioms seconded by S, W. Wgkeman, and carried: 

Tliat it is necessary to the pi'ogrcss of preliminary work 
on new naval contracts, upon which the rapid employment 
of men in the construction of these vessels depends, 
tliat there should be a further extension for a period 
of six months of Paragraph 3 (c). Regulation of Hours 
of Work in the Code of 5'air Conrpctition -and Trade Prac- 
.tice for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry. 

Code - Paragra'oh 5 (a) Overtime 

(See Exhibit "l-ll". Appendix, Interpretation ITo. ll) 



The labor rcproscntatives of the Code Committee presented a 



9732 



-97- 



letter at tiiis tii.ie I'elatiiig to overtime in v/hicli it was claimod that 
overtime siioiilc "be ;;^Daid on conunercial v/ork after thirty-six hours a 
vreek. The m-ittor ',ms discussed gad llr. D:,vis, Deputy Administrator, 
gave the follovin.- intenrotation, namely: 

"That Gvertine is ::ot to te paid for the four 
hours in excess of the 36 hours in any one week 
"btit if> onl;," to Tdo paid for hours in excess of 
eight hours in any one day." 

This intei^Dretation was adopted vcoon motion hy Soger Williams, 
seconded l)y 3o"bert Kaig. 

General Ship and Zn;"ino '^orks 

The Clairman re-oorted tliat the General Shri and 3ngine Works did 
not respond to the request of the Atlantic Coast District Chairman for 
certain papers pertaining to their "bid on Lightship #86. 

Code - Paragraph 4 (Ij) ",7agc Increases 

Certain shiprepair plants in the San Prancisco district have re- 
fused to put into effect the v;age increases prcscrihed by the Ship- 
building and Shiprcps-iring code because of the fact tlmt the prevailing 
wages in those plants '^rior to the code v;ere already in excess of the 
wages applying to other plants in the district since the adoption of 
the code. Tvro requests for exemption by these plajits lig.ve been denied 
by the code com'Tiittee and these plants have not yet comolied v;ith the 
code. 

The mptter was thoroughly discussed, but there was no decision as 
to wliat action is to be taken at the present time except to receive 
informa.tion as to detailed wage schees (schedules) in San Francisco 
District. Part of this information is alroac'y available v^^ith the Code 
Committee. 

Shi-Q-Qing Board Vessels under Private Q-oeration 

(Sec Exhibit "I-IO", A-rpendix, Interpretation No. 10) 



Harbor Hates 

The classification of Harbor Craft vessels was discussed and 
it was considered tliat this is a matter that should be settled by the 
national Shiprepairers' Committee. Papers were referred back to this 
Committee. 

Eules and Regulations, Section VIII . Paragraph 2 (c) 

On bids for repairs to Barge Socony 219 "Jakobson cj Peterson" 
and "LlcWilliams" companies submitted firm bids on job amounting to 
less than $2500. and on Tug Socony 18, "United Dr;,' Docks Inc;.", "Union 



9732 



-98- 



Engineerins Conpany" ?nd "Atlantic 3asin Iron Works" sutraitted firrn 
liid-on job under $2500. and en S/S Antietp,m the Sun Shipbuilding 
& Dry Dock Company submitted a, firm hid on joh amounting to less 
tlian $7500. These firms were cited to the Code Committee as violating 
the ahovG section of the Sales and Hegulations, In several instances 
the repairer has ac'oiowledged violation and lia.s stated that same have 
"been committed in error. 

The Code Committee ruled that as this is the first instance 
of such violation in each case tliat no further action would he taken 
by the Committee upon these specific violations 'hut th?.t a repetition 
of a violation under this section would subject the repairer to 
liability of a penalty and that these particular yards should be so 
informed. 

Hules and Hegiilations , Section VIII, Para^'raph Z (c) 

(See Exhibit "L-12", Appendix, Interpretation ITo. 12) 



J. Larson , V/est Hew Brighton, S. I. 

The Cl:iairma.n reported that the Hew York ajid Hew Jersey Dry Dock 
Association load protested to the Code Committee that 

1. Bates filed by J. Larson were brilow reasonable 
cost. 

2. That same had not been certified 

3. Tliat J. Larsen had not submitted billing rates 
for use of dry doclcs and lEa.rine railv^ays. 

The committee was in commuaiication v/ith J, Larson both by letter 
and telephone and to date J. Larsen has refused to submit any information 
to the Committee. 

Before taking any action as to rates being below reasonable cost 
it is necessary tliat such rates be submitted over the certification 
of the ship repair yard in question. 

Tentative Plan for Handling Labor Disputes 
Readjustment of Ho\irs, Wagner Committee 

A tentative plan for a Lahor Committee within the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Industry T;as discussed for sometime with Mr. Shields 
and later with Mr. Davis.. There was also discussion with Mr, Davis 
as to the pending report of the National Labor Board upon the question 
of uniform hours in the performance of all vvork in thf Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing industry. Mr. Davis informed the Committee that it 
was anticipated that the report of the National labor Board would 
recommend 40 hours a week for the industry but tliat such a recommenda- 
tion would bo contingent upon acceptance by the industry of some plan 
for the handling of labor disputes a.nd complaints. Without commitment 
by the members of the Committee at the meeting there was lengtliy 

9732 



discussion of the tentative plr.n which devolopcd the desirability 
of some' changes.' Hr. Davis offered to x^ewrito the plau to provide 
for such ckarii^es and to send the revised plan directly to the 
raembers of the Code Committee for their further consideration in 
order that the Shipbuilding' and Shiprenairing Indaistr;,^ might consider 
such revised nlan and decide u-oon tiie action they would take regarding 
it. 



9732 



100 

PE3EUAHY 14, 1334. ME^^TIITa HZLD AT 11 BROAIilAY , IJEYT YOK;: CITY, AT 
10:15 A. U. Jiriefs and excerj-jts from Linutes (pLeference: Deputy's Files, 
Section 2) 

There rrere present, reioresenting the Industr;^, :;es3rs. H. G. Smith, 
Chairi.aii, ilo,3er T7illiai/is, Hooert Haig, S. ^. Wakerarn, W. K. Gerhauser, 
Joseph Haag, Jr. There Tere present, representing the Adnini strati on, 
I^essrs. R. L. rlag-ae, Captain Eenry WilliaEs, (*) Arba B. Marvin, 
G. il. Shields III, and C. C. Knerr, Secretary, i.a'. J. S. McDonagh was 
absent. 

The Chaii'n.-an e::plt.ined in considerable detail to the members of the 
Shipbuilding and Shipi-epairing Industiy its status r/ith respect to the 
setting up of committees to deal uith Trade Practice Complaints and 
La,bor Coraplaints as provided for in the iianual for Adjustment Complaints, 
Btilletin #7, issued by the IJntional Recover;'- Administration. 

i.Jr. T/. H. Davis, under da,te of February 1st, nrote a letter to the 
Chairman of the Code Com.mittee, stressing the importance of imnediateljr 
fon.iing an a^jpropriate comviittee to haridle labor complaints, as in the 
absence of such a committee the KRA nould be compelled to defer such 
questions as do arise to the State Director of the National Emergency 
Council. Thereupon the Code Committee took imder consideration the 
formation of committees to hendle Trade Practice Complaints and Labor 
Complaints. 

i.iinutes, Code Committee i . Ioeti ng 

After disciiesion, uoon m.otion hy s. W. Wa2:eman, seconded by Robert 
Haig ar.d unanimouslj'' carried the following resolution was adopted: 

Tliat a Trade Practice- Complaints Committee be organized 
and set up to be comprised of the six Industry ilembers 
and the Administration L'enber of the Code Authority. 

Therefore, the members constituting this Committee are: 

H. G. Smith, President, lla.tional Couiicil of American Shipbuilders 
Roger YJilliams, Vice President, Newport Hews Sliipbuilding and Dry Dock 

Cor.pany 
Robert Haig, Vice President, Sun Shipbuilding c; Dry Dock Company 
S. V. WaJccman, Vice President, Bethfelhem Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Company 
W. K. Gerhauser, President, American Shipbuilding Company 
Joseph Haag, Jr., president, Todd Dry Dock Engineering &. Repair Co. 
Arba 3. Iia.rvin, Adjiinistration I.icmber of Code Authority 

v/ithout vote but with veto, 
subject to review by IJRA. 

In order to further the '.:ork of the Trodc Practice Committee the 
Code Authority passed a resolution that: 



(*) To represent the Administrator in place of 7. H. Davis. 



9732 



The Trade Pric'ice CoTTolnints Comnittee be authorized to 
pet vi^o division,"!, -erion.-!!, o- local Industrial Adjustment 
Aj^oncies or use existing H'-itional District and Local Area 
Conmitteos or>ranized and fiinctionin.'r tmder the ShipoxiildiniS 
a:ic Shi-orcirj-iring Industrj' Code. 

Committee to Consider Lrbor CoraiDlaints 



: inutes, Code C onnit tee ^'eetin ig; 

It \^as the opinion of the Code Authorif' that a committee should 
be organized to handle Iribor complaints and upon motion oy W. H. Gerhauser, 
seconded oy S. W. "iialcemRn, it ''^as resolved: 

Th;it a Cou'iittee of Tnree be set up as a Labor Complaints 
Committee -nd that Roger w'illinms, Vice President, Newport Nens 
Ship-L)uilding a Dry Dock Company is nominated as the Industrial 
Member of tnis Connittee, and that Joseph S. McDonagh is 
recommended as a second laemuer of the committee. 

New York Local Area Orj:2;''nization 



Hinutes, Code Com nitte e Meeting 

"Tha,t the Chairman of the Code Committee be authorized to en- 
dorse the letter of the Ne'-^oort "Tews Shipbuildin;'; and Dry Dock 
Company of December 21, 1933, asking for an opportunity to 
'"ork 44 hours a week on such trades as necessary for the comple- 
tion of tho Aircraft Carrier RAKG-ER within the contract time." 

•.Test Coast P.e.-u-j s t for Sxcoption to §?500 - $7500 
Limitation in Bi edin g 

The Chairnrji '^eportcd that the shiprepairers on the '.I'est Coast 
desire permission to quote foreign ship o'"/ners a' firm price irrespective 
of the Rules ■'"nd P.efTals.tions '-'hen reauostid to do so ':'hen the ship is 
not in port, r-s inauility to bid v/ill, in their opinion, divert the 
^'ork to British Columbir- rs must of the vessels in question touch all 
ports on the uest Coast from San Pedro to Vancouvt^r. 

The Code Conmittee thoroughly considered' this situation and after 
discussion '" .s of the opinion tnat no e-^ception could be granted and 
that the yards on tne '/est Coast must adhere to the Shipbuilding Code 
and Rules and Regulations for its administr/ition with respect to bidding 
under Section VIII, Paragraph (c) of the Rules pnd Regul'^tions. 

General Coniorences of Code A uthori ty a n d Code Committees '.Washington 

'."arch 5-^8. 1934 

9732 



"102- 

This matter -vas discussed and unon motion of Roger Williams, 
seconded "by S. VJ. Wakeman, it "?as moved that the 'Chairman "be authorized 
to drai; uv a report on the condition of the industry and include there- 
in the request for the same hours for the Shit)t)uilding and Ship-repair- 
ing yards as e^n'oly to Navy yards arid that the Chairman should be 
accompanied by at least t'','o members of the Code Committee to attend the 
conference and in addition -enuest p'irmission for time to srseak at the 
conference on oehalf of the Industry. 

Committee of Three on Shipbuilding 

The Chairrapin reported the status of the report to be submitted 
by the Wagner Committee on the renuest of the ShiiDbuilding and Ship- 
repairing Industry for longer hours than those called for under the 
Code, It is luiderstood the recommendption now -orovides for a uniform 
36 hours per week for both naval and commercial work with a special 
provision for 44 hours 'oer week maximum on repair work with a.n average 
of 36 hours over a six montns pel-iod. It is understood that the pbove 
recoramendfn tion is now before the President for pction. 

Defintion for Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Code 

The l^TEA has before it a proposed Code for the Boatbuilding and 
Boatrepairing Industry. The definition for boatbuilding and boatrepair- 
ing is such that it is in conflict with the definition for shipbuild- 
ing and ship-^ePairing and therefore it is important that a new 
definition should be arrived at to shc^? mo^-e clearly the line of 
demarcation oetween the two codes. Questionnaires have been submitted 
to the Industry and f-rora' an analysis of same, definition has been 
arrived at which is in close agreement between the proponents of the 
two codes and administration. 

Tvhilo the proposed definition for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepair- 
ing Indiistry is not as yet entirely satisfactory to all members it was 
nevertheless resolved: ' ' 

trhat authority is given to the Cnairraan of the Code Committee 
to submit a proposed df'fintion for Shipbuilding and Shiprepair- 
ing to meet as closely rs possible the objections that have 
been offered by various members of the Industry. 

MARCH 2, 1934. ^ffiETITTG HELD AT 11 BPOAD^'AY, HEW YO^Y. CITY, AT 
2:15 P. M. Briefs and e"cerpts from minutes (Reference: Deputy's Piles, 
Soction 2) 

There were present, representing the Industry, Messrs. H. G-. Smith, 
Chairman, Roger Vallians, W. K. Gerhauser, Joseph Haag, Jr., 
Robert Haig, and S. W. Tifakeman; representing the Administration, Messrs. 
A. B. Marvin and Henry V,'illiaras nnd C. C. Knerr, Secretary-TT-easurer , 
Messrs. J. S. McDonagh and R. L. Hague wore abs'^:'nt, Mr. P. T. Keresey 
(Chairman's Stpff) was also present. 

Industrial Relations Board ■ • 

The Chairman reported thr. t he was in receipt of a letter dated 

9732 



February 21, 1934 from J. B. eaver, Deputy A', ministrator, Shiuoing 
Section, vith reference to setting iin '-ithin the riduntry of a 
Com<nittee :^or the handlinr; of l^bor disputes to be kno^-'n as the 
"Industrial Relations Board". The Administrator su;';gests that this 
Board should consist of six nenibers; three to oe ap"(^oirJted oy the Ad- 
ministrator fro'i nominations by the Lrbor Advisor'- Board and three to 
be apnointed by the Code Authority to represent Industry, and a seventh 
nenber to be appointed uy the other six neinbers. 

The contents of this letter '."are dispussed at length, and upon 
motion by I'r. Rooert Haig, seconded b^ ilr, W. H. Gerhauser the follow- 
inf': resoltuion r-'s offered and adopted: 

"That the Industry set up an Industrial Relations Conmittee 
consi^tin.-: of thro>- rep-^esentat ives of Industry, three 
representatives of Labor, and a seventh '■■,ember to be selected 
by the other six, --ith the understanding' tnat if this 
Comnittee is set up, th.-t the lou^-;er hours and other provi- 
sions of th.; report o-^ tlie Fational LPobor Board concerning 
hours and 'vrges -elatin;^ to tne Industry be promptly approved 
by such governmental agency '-s necessar:'' to make it effective, 
and with th.i further provision t'lat the Labor Members of the 
Conmittes be properly representative of the employees engaged 
in the Indiistry-,. and 

"Provided furtaer, that the plan of on-i'-anization of such • 
a Committee be sunst ant tally along the lines of 'a plan -Iready 
prepared by tne Industry and commented upon by I/ir. W. H. 
Davis and Tvhich is in general satisfactory to the Industry." 

Revision of Rules and P-egtilations and Code 

The Chairman "eported that a meeting v^'as huld in thu morning ^rith 
members of the Shipjuildini^; a-nd Shiprepairing Industry and the members 
had adopted certain resolutions with the suggestion that they be 
presented to the Code Authorit2^ for action. These resolutions v:ere as 
follows: 

Resoluti on Po . 1 

"That action be taken instituting lump sum bidding on the 
Atlantic Coast on steamship v/ork on a basis of Labor, Material 
and seventy-five percent Overhead on Direct Labor, as a mini- 
mum price, plus Drydocking, to- go into ef-^'ect promptly and 
remain effective imtil such time p,s the Code Committee decides 
other'-'ise. ", 

Re solution Ho. 2 

"That the limitations 'in bidding sho-m in the Rules and 
Regulations under Section VIII, second paragraph of 2 (c) be 
increased. " 

Resolution No. 3 

"That the thirty day -jrovision as to filing of rates be 
9732 



-104- 

eliminated ■f-ora Section VIII, Paragrauh 2 (a)." 

There '^ere referred to the Code Authority the above three 
resolutions, in connection nith the Rules and Regulations and Paragraph 
7 (a) of the Code. Action uoon these matters -'as taken 'by the follow- 
ing resolutipn offered by Roger Williams and seconded by ■,;. H. Gerhauser, 
and unanimously carried: 

"".■K3HSAS The Rules ?nd Regulations for the Administration 
of the Code of Fair, Competition and Trade Practice for the 
ShiTDbuilding and Shiprcpairing Industry in the United States 
have been violated v,'ith such freouency as to be detrimental 
to the Industry; and 

"WHEREAS There has been no conclusive action taken by an 
enforcement authority; and 

"■ifflEF;EAS The Code Committee has been informed by the 
National Comoliance Director that the Rules and Regulations 
are unenforceable and otherwise defective in many resT^ects; 
and 

"WHEREAS There seems to be a general demand within the 
Industry for modifications and improvements 

"THE-EEORE, BE IT .RESOLVED: That the Shipbuilding and ShiiD- 
repairing Code be re-written with a view to including there- 
in all necessary and proper features for its administration, 
regulation and enforcement; and 

"3E IT EIRTHER R'^SOLVED: That the re-writing of the Code be 
postponed until immediately following the first meeting of 
the Code Committee following the general meeting of all Code 
Authorities called by the Administrator in Washington, 
commencing March 5, 1934," 

Trial Trip Cre-rs 

The Chairmn -eported that the following letter under date of 
February 14th had been received from the Mew York Shipbuilding Corpora- 
tion: 

"We have transferred twenty-three. (23) men from an hourly 
rate to a weekly rate to form a crew for continuous operation 
and tests on the Cruiser TUSCALOOSA, as necessarj'-. ■ As operat- 
ing Parts are finished this crew will be added to unc -r the 
same arrangement. This .has oeen done with the full consent 
of each individual man, all of whom have agreed, and their rate 
is based on some margin above the hourly rate multiplied by 
fifty-six (56) hours. 

"It is expected that these men will work 56 hours oer week. 
It is impossible to do anything else because qualified men can 
not be obtained. This will be a nucleus of the crew which 
will take the TUSCALOOSA on both the Builder's trial and the 

9732 



'Preliminary Official Trial." 

The letter '-'-s d iocu<:;sed .-ina s the reniiest vrs reasonable in 
that it is wholly iiaprrcticaole to carry on trial trixis '^ith the 
coranlicated character of a naval vessel except by a minimum change in 
the o"ocrating crerrs, upon motion by Hobert Haig, seconded by W, ;/. 
Gerhaiiser it '"'as resolved and carried 

"That exception may be made in the number of hours of 
employment for employees of shipbuilders or shiprepairers 
engaged in the conduct of preliminary and official trial 
trips incident to the completion of ""ork on a vessel." 

Extension of Provisions of Section. Sub-Section (c) of Cod e 

For the record the Secretary read the Administrative Order 2-3 
dated February 1, 1934 extending the provisions of Section 3, Sub- 
section (c) of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Code ivhich is as 
folloT;7s: 

Executive Order ITo, 2-1 A. 
Paragraph 8, Suo-Seetion (a) of Code 

The Secretary rer^d Executive Order No. 2-1 A, dated September 9, 
1933, nhich is as follows: 

"I have appointed the following-named persons as members of 
the Ship Buildin^-- and Ship Repairing Industry Committee to be 
established ps a Planning and -Fair Practice agency under 
Paragraph (S), Section (a), as amended, in the Code of Fair 
Competition of the Ship Building and Ship Repairing Industry. 

Robert L. Ha.^e - Industrial and Consumer 

Advisory Capacity 

Joseph A. I'cDonagh ^ - Labor Advisory Cppacity 

William H. Davis - National Recovery Admin- 

istration Representative 

Capt, Henry Vfilliams - Proposed by the Secretary 

of the Wav;;'' 

"Please communicate these appointments to the persons named, 

"Very truly yours, 

"F?.AtJi:LIN D. ROOSEVELT" 

Lightship Fo. 36 - Genrral Shi p & En^:ine Works 



Unit Prices - Government Work - Interpretation Vo» 5 
9732 



"106- 

The Chairman reported his conferences '--^ith Officers of the War 
DeiDartraent in regard to the Arrajr's request for imit iDrices on "bids 
coverin^i^ repairs to equipment owned and operated by the (Quartermaster 
Cor-os and United States Army En,<;ineers. It vps learned that the Army- 
could not change its present practice v.'ithout reference to the 
Comptroller G-eneral, and therefore, .the Array promised to refer the 
Code Authority's courolaint to the CotTotroller G-eneral of the United 
States for a rulin^^. 

The Chairman of the Code Authority further reported that consider- 
able difficulty '7as "bein^ encountered in enforcing its Interpretation 
Mo. 3 or/ing to the insistence of the Army on having unit ririces 
furnished and in view of the A^my referring the matter for decision to 
the Comptroller General, the Chairma,n renorted that he hnd sent the 
following teleg:,Ti;ii to all ■ Local Area Chairmen and District Committee 
Chairmen; , ■ 

"Reference to Internretation iT\].mber three submission unit 
prices stor) It is necessary to sus^oend this "orovision as 
regards Government '"ork for the time being Dending settle-, 
raent the matter between governmental dexiartments and 
Comptroller General stoT) You riP.y therefore submit bids in 
, accordance with sioecif ications furnished stop Notify, all 
firms your district stou Telegram sent, to all local area 
chairmen and district chairmen." 

Upon motion by Robert Haig, seconded by ff. H. G-erhauser the 
action of the Chairman Wn.s ratified. 

Conflicting Code Provisions , ; 

The Chairma^n reuorted. that a hardshiiD was being v/orked on certain 
members of the Industry due to the difference of hours and wages 
provided in other Codes in manufacturing materials which are a.lso 
built in shipbuilding and shiprepairing yards _when bids^are asked from 
firms operating iinder different Codes. 

Executive Order of February 8, 1934 Relative to Rules and Regulations 
for Posting or Sis-playing Provisions of Codes 

The Chairman reported that the Code Authority had received 
between meetings the above Executive Order and Rules 3.nd Regulations, 
■Drer)q.red by the Administrator, setting forth the. necessary provisions 
to carry out the -our-ooses and intent of said Executive Order. In 
comx)liance with this Order and Rules and Regulations, Bulletin No. 1, 
a co-oy of which is attached, was issued. 

The Chairman called tne attention of the Code Committee to the 
above Executive Order and Rules and Ref'alations governing the posting 
of labor -orovisions and stated tha,t additional p-'-inted instructions 
in conijec^ioij. 'yith -this matter are e.T.pec-ted fr9n^ the Administrator's 
Office within a few days, at which tine the members of the Industry 
will be informed as, to what document?; must be r)0sted. _ , , ■ . 

MARCH 15, 1934, MEETIiTG HELD AT 11 BROAD'/AY, NEW YORK CITY, AT 
9732 



-107- 

3:00 P. H. Brief n and cxcernts from Minutes (Reference: Deputy's 
Files, Section ) 

There were -orescnt, rcTiresent ing the Industry, I.i-^ssrs. K. Gerrish 
Smith, ChairrasJi, Roger Uillians, ',1, H. G-erhauser, Joseph Haag, Jr., 
and Robert Ef\ig; renresentin*-; the Administration, Kesyrs. Arba B. 
Mprvin, Rooert L. Hague, Qp.rjtain Honry Vifilliams, and J. S. McDonagh, 
Mr. S. ^7. Wakeraaji '7as absent. Others present v;ere J, B. Weaver, 
Deputy Administrator, G. H. Shields III, Assistant Deputy Adminis- 
trator, W, M. Lnu^rhton, and P. T. Keresey, ChaiT"man's Staff. 

Ot)enin^-: of a Bank Account 

The treasurer announced that it -r/ould be necessary to authorize 
some depositary for the mopies received in connection with the 
opera.tions of tiie Shipbuilding and Shiprenairing Code and thereupon on 
notion of Roger \/illiams,' seconded by ¥. H. Gerhauser, it was 

PJSSOL\'ED: Th.i.t ;in account or accounts be opened for and in 
the nane of this Association with THE NATIONAL 
CITY 3AHK, 26 Broadray, and that the said Bank is 
hereby authorized to nay or otherwise honor any 
chocks, drafts, or other orders issued from time 
to tine' for debit to said accoi.mt or accounts when 
si^yied in any manner in the name' or on behalf of 
this Associp tion 'oy 

H. Gerrish Smith, Chairman, and 
C. C. I'nerr, Treasurer, jointly 

either in an' official capacity or otherwise, 
inclusive of any such favor of any said person(s), 
and that the said account or a.ccounts be reconciled 
from time to time by said person(s), or his or 
their designees. 

Administrative Orders 

Pe: Resignation o"^ Tf. ?". Davis as Administrator's Representative 

The Clmirman read the following order to the Committee: 



9732 



-108- 

HE3IGNATI0H 0? ADMIKISTilATION i/HI.iBZH OF T'lE 
SHIPBUILDING ASD allPlaSPAIJlING INDUSTRY :0;ii.lITT3E 
70'R T;iE SHIPBUILDING AND SiilPiGPAIxlING INDUSTRY 
ORDER NO. 2-4 



Re: Appointment of Arba B. I/iarvin as Administrator's representative 

The Chairman read the above order which is as follows: 

ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 2-5 
APPOINTiffiNT OF SUCCESSOR ADMINISTRATION l/iELfflER 
3;.IPBUILDING AND SlIIPREPAIRING INDUSTRY COi/MITTEE FOR 
TI-IE SiilPBUILDING AND SiIIPREPAlRING INDUSTRY 

New York Local Area CoiUTiittee 

The Chairman read to the Committee 'a letter received from the 
New York Local Area Cliairman dated llarcOi IQth, 1934 in which was set 
forth the reorganized committee in compliance with- a plan approved by 
the Code Committee at its meetini^- on March 2, 1934. 

"The CoraiTiittee is 'composed o'f the representatives of tlie 
following named associations. 

Joseph Hagg Jr. , Todd Dry Dock, Engineering and 
.. ' Repair Co. 

Francis 3. Bushey, Ira 3. Busi.ey and Sons, Inc. 
LeRoy .V. Caddell, Caddell Dry Dock and Repair C^. 
Irving D. Jalcobson, Jakobson and Peterson 
Charles 3. Hallock, United Dry Docks Inc. 
Representatives of NE/^ YORK AI^ID NET/ JERSEY 

DRY DOCK ASSOCIATION 

George E. Monroe, .fyjuo Engineerin.^ Co. 
John J. Alexander, Alexander, Reid and Co. 
Joan K. Ceilings, Turbine Engineering Co. 

Representatives of INDEPEIJDENT 3. IPREPAIRERS' 

ASSOCIATION 

Andrew Baxter, Jr., Federal Composition and Paint Co. 
Representative of tiie MARINS PAINTERS' ASSOCIATION 

At the meeting held on March 5th the Committee elected the follow- 
ing officers. 

Joseph Ilaag, Jr. , Cliairman 

George E. Monroe, Vice Cliairman 

Joseph Haag, Jr. , Treasurer 

LeRoy I. Caddell, Secretary 



9732 



-109- 

On motion di 7. "I. 5er.iauser, seconded by Roger Villiams, the set 
up of tlie Cciffinittee ^,s sliov/n above Vi'as approved. '.Tliile tlie Local Area 
Com.nittee aslced approval by tlie NH4, I.'Ir. liields informed tie Code 
Authority this was unnscessary. 

L'.ghtship y86 - General Sliip and Sii,"jine lorks 

At the Code Coninittee meeting- October 30th i/ir. 3.iields presented a 

complaint filed by I. L. Snow and Gompaiiy on bid of G-eneral 3"aip and 

Engine '^Torks submitted on repairs to Ligntship ii^SG, charging that the 
bid submitted was below cost. 

• Estimates v/ere furnished by t.ie other bidders on this job but the 
General SLiip and Engine Jorks failed to furnish the information. 

T-ie CTiiairraan reported to the Code Committee that all papers con- 
cerning tlie bids on Lii^itsiiip -}36 under contract to be repaired by the 
General Ship and Engine 7orks had been submitted to the Assist.?jit Deputy 
Administrator on January 15, 1934 and that no information of any kind 
up to date ha^- been received on t.iis complaint. 

Mr. Sliields reported thr.t tiis protest was now in the Compliance 
Division but as the contract is bet\'7efcin a government depsxtment and a 
private contractor it has been referred to Comptroller General licCarl 
for a ruling. Previously the Comptroller General had ruled that a 
firm did not have to be a member of a Code to be eligible to receive a 
government contract but that t.ey must, however, r'.fter receiving a con- 
tract, comply wit., the Code pertaining to the Industry. 

Revision of I^iles and Re "..ul at ions and Code 

The Chairman reported tiat the Code Co!;i;nittee had passed a resolu- 
tion on March 3nd laying on the table certain res:;lutions oertaining to 
c-ianges in tie Rules and Regulations and the Code. Tlie tliree resolu- 
tions were taken off the table and discussed. Tlie resolutions are as 
follows: 

Resolution #1 - "That action be taken instituting lump sum 

bidding on the Atlantic Coast on Steamship 
work on a basis of Labor, Material and 
seventy-five percent Ovemead on Direct 
Labor, as a minimwn price, plus Drydocking, 
to go into effect promptly and remain 
effective until sue.', time as the Code Com- 
mittee decides otherwise. 

Resolution #2 - Tliat the limitations in bidding shovm in 

t.ie Rales and Reg'alations under Section VIII, 
second paragraph of 2(c) be increased. 

Resolution 7r3 - T-iat t-ie t.irty day provision as to filing 

of re.tes be eliminated from Section VIII, 
Paragraph 2 ( a) . 



9732 



-no- 
Mr. H. L. "agu-e, tlie consumers' representative, stated tliat if sucli 
resolutions were passed on to tlie Adiiiinistration in tiie ao-ence of liis 
liaving statistical data, especially on Resolution -^1 , 'le, as a consumer, 
would have to object to t'ae formula set-up. Lir. 'lague stated tliat since 
tue operation of the Oode "lis hill for repairs ranged from 15 to 20 
percent higher. 

Mr, J. B. Weaver was of the opinion t'..iat the code should be amended 
and rewritten as tiiere are a lot of loose ends which could be rectified 
when the code was being redrafted. Mr. Rcger jTilliams in spealcing of 
the resolutions was of the opinion that no action be taken on them but 
p<"ick to the provisions of the'code until the code is rewritten and that 
i» should be rewritten immediately. 

Mr. Gernauser suggested that a subcommittee of the 3ode Committee 
be appointed to amend the code and he tiierefore made the following 
motion: 

"That tlie Ciiairman be- empowered to appoint a coraiTiittee 
to work with the Administra.tion representatives in re- 
drafting the code, taking into account the three resolu- 
tions tabled at the meeting of March 2nd. , together with 
all the matters which have been discussed from time to 
time and v^nicn should be considered in connection with' 
redrafting t.ae code and further that the Chairman be 
authorized to employ Counsel if found necessary." 

Motion was seconded by Roger Williams and carried and the Chairman 
announced he would make these appointments promptly. 

R h-les and Regula.ti^ns , Section VIII, Paragraph 2. 

The CoiTiraittee again took u;o discussion of Resolution -'fS tabled at 
the Code Meeting of March 2nd, and after di ?ci4.ssi jn, Mr. Roger Williams 
moved, seconded by Mr. Robert haig: . 

That the thirty (30) days notice requirement for the 
filing of sc-iedules of Billing Ra.tes ■;xnder Section VIII, 
Paragraph 2 of the Rales and Re^^ulations be rescinded. 

All members voted in favor of tnis resolution and the industry 
will be notified accordingly. 



Industrial Relations Committe e 

The Cuairman called to the attention of the Committee a letter 
dated Marcn 10th from J. B. Weaver, Deputy Adjninistrator, in response 
to a letter of March 2nd, 1934, from tae C'de Coa.httee, relative to 
the set-up of an Industrial Relations Coinmittee. Taese letters were 
as follows: 



9732 



-Ill" 

March 2nd, 1934. 



"Dear Sir; 

T-ie Code Authority of t.ie Shiphuildin^ and Shiprepairing Industry 
at a meeting held this day, by magority vote, passed the following reso- 
lution: 

'That the Industry set up an Industrial Relations CoiTOnittee con- 
sistinj: of t'lree re jresentatives of Industry, three, representa- 
tives of Labor, and a seventh member to be selected by the 
otner six, vvith t^ie understandint^ that if this Com-uittee is set 
up, that the loni2:er hours and other provisions of the report 
of the National Labor Board concerning hours' and wages relating 
to the Industry be promptly approved oy such governinental agency 
as necessary to make it effective, and with the further provi- 
sioi t-iat the Labor Members of the Cominittee be properly repre- 
sentative of the employees en_,aged in the Industry, and 

Provided furtiier, t.iat the plan of organization of such a 
ComiTiittee be substantially along the lines of a plan already 
prepared by the Industry and commented upon by Mr. 1. H. Davis 
and whicxi is in general satisfactory to the Industry.' 

Under the conditions outlined, the Code Authority is prepared to 
appoint the Industry membe.rs of the Comnittee. 

Sometime ago the Industry outlined a proposed plan for the considera- 
tion of Labor Disputes riich plan was submitted to and commented upon by 
Ut. W. '". Davis. A revised i^lan to provide for a Coimnittee of Seven 
instead of a Cominittee of Three will be along the lines of the previous 
plan and is being prepared and will be submitted to you v/ithin a very 
fe'.v days. 



Very truly yours, 
(Signed) II. G. Smith, 

Chairman. " 



9732 



-nn" 



7ASHir&TCi;, D/'Tr 

' ■ i.?rch IC, 1934. 

Ivlr. H. Gerrish Smith, Clisirmpai 

Shipbuilding ant? Shioreoriring Code Coinnittee, 

11 Broadway, • ' 

New York, il. Y. 

Dear Mr. Smith: 

The Labor Advisor]'- Board has refused to recommend the aT)pointment 
of a man to re-oresent labor on the Labor Complaints Committee for the 
Shipbuilding and Shi-oreoairing Industni^. Their position is based on the 
fact that an Inoustrial Relations Board has been discusred and a Resolu- 
tion has been pa.i-'jed authorizing such a Board snd that th.e^'' believe 
this Board should be definitely established before they take action on 
the Gom-^laints Comrr.i ttee. In vie^- of the i^rovisos attached to your Re- 
solution authoriiiing end Industrial Relations Bo.-rd, the Labor Advisonr 
Borrd feels thf t imdue obstrcles rre being placed before the setting up 
of tiii s Board. 

I find their refusal to a.p;ooint a man to the Labor Complaints Com- 
mittee indefensible. Hovsve'r, I co pgree 'dtli them th->t the provisos 
attached to the Industrial Relations Board set-up are out of ordier. I 
went to take this op;oortunity to inform the Code Authority tha.t until 
such time as this Board is established, v/ithout strings attached in the 
form of MrovisoF, and enporerec to handle not onl^j- labor disputes but . 
also broe.d labor Questions withoat rest:^iction, this office' v/ill not 
consider petitions for exceptions, eremptions, etc. jTurthermore , it 
cannot be expected that the Recover^'- Adjninistration v.'ill amend the Code 
in order to clear up tlie hour question without such a Board being es- 
tablished althouijh it is agreed that the question 'Till not be turned 
over to this Board for settlement but rather 'that we will press for a 
decision from the iva,tional Laoor Board and a subseauent amendment of the 
Code independent of this Board once it is osta,blished.. 

Serious doubt has been raised in my mind as to the truly representa- 
tive character of tho existing Code Authority''. This is evidenced not 
only by the fact that there is no representa.tion from the shore shops on 
the Code Authorit-^- but also from the fact that following a conference of 
the members of the Industry located in and around^ New York at which some 
immediate amendments were decided upon, the Code Authority determined to 
delay action. Farthermore, the representation of the Gulf and Pacific 
Coasts would not appear to me to be entirely satisfactory. The men on 
the Code Authority representing these Districts do so by virtue of the 
fact that plants subsidiary to their ma.in plants are located in these 
districts. 

It may be, of course, that it is impossible for members on the 
Pacific and Gulf Coasts to attend meetings of the Code Authority. If 
this is the case it vail perha.ps be desirable to decentralize in some 

9732 



-US- 



manner snd five more loc£.>l autonomy to tli.^ different regions. 

In concrasion it is my -ancierrtanding that a meeting of the Code 
Authority will be called iminediatly now that the conferences are com- 
rjleted here, to outline a plan of procedure. It seems desirable either 
that the meeting be held here or thr.t I come to I'ei.' York for it inasmuch 
as I believe it would oe mutuall"' beneficial if I could attend that 
meeting in orc'er that the Indastr^r and m^'self maj' be perfectly clea.r on 
pur future course of action. 

Yours very truly, 
(Signed) J. B. Weaver 

Deputy Administrator. 

The Chairman took exception to fae language used in the second 
paragraph of the letter. 

Mr. "eayer eivolained iiis position in connection '.Tith reouest of the 
industr^'- for a longer 'vork i^eek . and stated that the lOA and -oeonle con- 
nected -'ith it did not have tlie -jO'ver to push through decisions of the 
National Labor Board. He ur^ed th-it the industry'- set up a Board that 
CcJi act on exemotlonc, vage. rates, etc., and that a resolution should 
be adopted somewhat alon~ the lines passed on Mrrch 2nd but v.'ithout any 
limiting restriction. 

Ro,:-er '.Villiains asked l/lr. T7eaver if ^''e set up this Board today 
without an}'- strings attached to it vould it remove the difficulty in 
getting a decent break on hours for the rest of the industr^"-, i.e. 
straight 3o-hour reek for our industry and smooth it out for exceptions 
to the working hours and v/hich v/ill "oermit Tei-'port News to finish the 
"Ranger" which the government wants. Lir. J. B. T'eaver re-olled "It will.' 

There was further discussion of the need for an Industrial Rela- 
tions Committee with comm.ents by i/ir. Robert Hai", J. B. 'Teaver and the 
Chairman. 

On motion of i.h'. Robert Hsig, seconded by Roger 'Tilliams, the fol- 
lowing resolution ?'as rerd and adopted: 

"There shall be constituted by appointment of the Ad- 
ministrator for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry 
an Industrial Relations Committee, to be comriosed of seven 
(7) members: three (3) to be nomin-ted by the Code Author- 
ity to represent the emplo^-ers, three (L.) to be nominated 
by the Labor Advisor;- Board of the National Recover?/ Admin- 
istration to proDerly represent the employees in the indus- 
try, and one (l) to be selectee by the other six. " 

Mr. Jos. Eaag Jr. was recorded a.s not voting, as the New York and 
ioew Jersey Ei^.' Dock Association were not willing to vote in favor of an 
Industrial Relations Committee -'ithout -oassing upon the 'olan finally 
set up for such a Committee. 

As the original resolution provides for three industry'' members, Mr. 

9732 



-114- 



Hoger T/illiarns made a motion 

That the Chairman of the Code Autaority be cuthorizec' to 
to nominate the throe Indv^stry Leraber-j of the Industrial 
Relations Comrnitiee. ■ 

Motion r,'L.p seconded by Llr. ~i . H. Gerharaser. The vote vas a.s follons: 
Messrs. Jerha.user, TTillir^ras, Smith and Hri™ in the affirmrtive. Mr. Jos. 
Eaa^';: Jr. recorded as "not voting". 

Intertiretation - Thether a shio ormer is entitled to re-place materials 
supplied by ei shiprepairer rrther than pay for such materials on the 
basis prescribed by the Hules and. Re^^Llations. 



The above question ^'as submittec to the Deputv Administrator under 
date of liarch 9th, and -nicer date of llsrch 13th, Geo. H. Shields, As- 
sistant Deputy Administrator informed the Code Committee as follows: 

"Mr. Weaver is of the definite opinion that the tnaterial in 
question should be charf^ed for on the basis of the Rules and 
Regulations and does not feel that a yard is compelled to ac- 
cept replacements." 

Overtime - Interpretation relative to pa'jTner.t of Overtime after 12 
o'clock l.Iidnight. 



Interpretation - Permission tovork men additional hours on Commercial 
Tork after '.'orkii'i=2: 32 hours on i aval ".'or]:. 



General ShippinrT Cocie 

"I'.ir. '.'.'eaver has asked me to inform you that ship companies, 
if emploj'-ing rer:\ilar land, crei.'s for m.'iintenance and repair, 
will have to abide 'q--'- the hourr and v.axes of the Shipbuild- 
ing and Shiprepairing Code, but that m.aintenance men at sea 
will be ^u.ided accordin.j to the clau'^e in the General Ship- 
ping Code. " 

!Durable Goods Committee 

RESOLViD, That the Chairman of the Code Authority is hereby . 
a.uthorized to cO;:tribute up to $500. tov/ard the expenses 
of the DURA:';ls: GOODS C0i:iJTTE3 appointed at the reouest of 
General Johnson diiring the meetings of Code Authorities and 
Code Committees in TTashington r'arch 5 - 8, 1934, to investi- 
gate and report on conditions in the DURABLE CrOODS IIvODUSTRY. 

9732 



-11 r>- 



APRIL 24, 1934. liEETIlC- HELD AT 11 BROADWAY, 
IJEl YORK CITY, AT 3:15 P. M. Briefs and excerpts from Minutes 
(Eeferencc: Deputy's liles, Section 2) 

Tlipre wore present, representing the Industry, 
Messrs. H. &. Smith, Chairman, Roger Williai"ns, Joseph Haag, Jr., 
W. H. Gerhauser, S. W. Walzeman; representing the Adjninistration, 
Hessrs. A. 3. Marvin, R. L. HagTie, J. S. McDonafh, 'and Captain 
Henry 'vVillians, pIso G. C. Knerr, Secretary. Others present were 
Messrs. H. N. r.iittelsey, Assistant Deputy Administrator, and 
P. T. Keresey, Chairman's Staff. 

Mr. 'Vhittelsey, Assistant Deputy Administrator, v/as in- 
troduced by the Chairman to the members of the Code Authority, 
The Chairman stated that Mr. Fnittelsey was representing 
I.'r. J. 3. Weaver and asked if he had any messa^^e for the Code 
Authority from llr. Weaver. Mr. Miittelsey replied that he had 
none. 

The Code Authority then froceedea to talcc in hand the matters 
appearing on the ai^enda. . , 

Administrative Order #3-11. Aaendraent STo. 3, Hours in the Code 

The Secretary reported that he was in receipt of a certified 
copy of Administrative Order #2-11 covering a modification of the 
Code in regard to hours of worlc. This mod-ification was covered in 
Code Authority Bulletin 5, dated April Ifith, -copy attached, which 
was sent to all interested, parties through the Local Area 'Chairmen. 

;^;dmin^i_s_tr^Ea^i^ve_Order_jt^^^ - posting Labor Provisions 

The Secretary reported that he was in receipt of a certi- 
fied copy of Administrative Order #X-7, dated February 28, 1934, 
v/ith regard to regulations governing the posting of labor pro- 
visions of Codes of Fair Corn-petition. 

4^Sillij-tJl§ii.''{.§._0?l4^J^^lii " Statistical Reports from members 

of Industries. 

The Secretar.y reported that he was in receipt of a certi- 
fied copy of Adrainistrative Order #X-10 requiring certain sta- 
tistical reports from members of industries subject to Codes of 
Fair Com.petition 



J732 



-116- 



Adinini.strative Order #2-fi - Application of JuttO'ii-Kelly Co. 

The Secretary reported he war- in receipt of a certi- 
fied copy of Administrative Order #2-*^, approving applica- 
tion of Jutton-Kelly Company for exemption from the provi- 
sions of Article 3, Section (b) of the Code. of Fair Compe- 
tition for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry, ap- 
proved by the Administrator on March 1, 1934, 

Administrative Order #2-7 - Approving Application of Ne\Tport 

News S/3 & D/D Co. for exception 
from the provisions of Article 3, 
Section (h) of the Code. 

The Secretary reported he was? in receipt of a certified 
copy of Administrative Order #2-7 approving the application 
of the Jlev.port News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company for ex- 
ception from provisions of Article 3, Section (b) of the code. 
This order was covered in Code Authority 3-u.lletin No. 4, dated 
March 23rd, copy attached, and it was sent to all interested 
parties through the Local Area Chairmen. 

li?.9J!iLiZs^rier_#'Tf^4n - Re: Government Contracts 

The Secretary reported he was in receipt of a certified 
copy of Executive Order No, f^n4^ concerning Government Contracts, 
and contracts involving the use of Government funds. This order 
was covered hy Code Authority Bulletin No. 3, dated March 19, 1934, 
copy attached, and it wa,G sent to all interested parties through the 
local area chairmen.' 

E xecutive O r der #fifi32 - Creation of National Review Board 

The Secretary reported he was in receipt of a certified 
copy of Order #fi'^32 covering the creation of the National Review 
Board. This order was covered in Code Authority Bulletin No, 4, 
dated March 23, 1934, copy attached, and it was sent to all in- 
terested parties through the Local Area Chs.irracn. 

Exe cutive Order ^fi^Qi^-F - Re: Interpretation and Application 

of Certain Provisions of Codes as they 
may affect Handicapped Workers. 

The Secretary reported he was in receipt of a certified 
copy of Executive Order #fi'^0'^-F prescribin;?; rules and regulations 
for the interpretation and aprilication of certain labor provisions 
of codes as they may affect handicapped workers. This Order v/as 
covered in Code Authority Bulletin No. 4, dated March 23, 1934, 



9732 



-117- 



copy attached, and it was sent to all inlierested parties through 
Local Area Chairmen. 

Exc cuti vc .Or c.qr No... .'^^1 2- A ) He: iTational Labor Board ; 

The Secretary reported he v/as in receipt of a certified copy 
of Executive Order No. o580, dated February 1, 19S4 conferring; ad- 
ditional duties u-Dcn the National Labor 'Board, and Ixccutive Order 
No. oftl2-^, dated February 23, 1934, amending Executive Order No. ^580. 
These two Orders were covered as Items* 3" and 5 in Code Authority Bul- 
letin No. 4, copy attached, and distributed to all interested parties 
through the Local Area Chairmen. 

1^2il'^:tiX3 _2^lder JTo.__n5S(>;.A - Dol elation of Authority by the 

President to the Administrator 
for Industrial Recovery. 

The Secretary reported he was in 'receipt cf a certified copy 
of Executive Order No. ■■^•>'o90-A, relative to -delegation of authority 
to the Administrator for Industrial Pecovery to prescribe rules and 
regulations governing amendments, modifications, exceptions, etc., 
to approve codec. This order v/as covered as Item 3, in Code Author- 
ity Bulletin No. 4, copy attached a,nd sent to all interested parties 
through the Local Area Chairmen. 

AuthQ r_i_7^a tioji__fQ r J2odc_ Authority to Handle Labor ^omjolai n t s 
en 5c f er encc .anc__Ls,b_o_r.,i)i_spv-te_s 

The Chairman roaa a letter dated March 30th, 1934 from 
Mr. K. M. Sim-Dson, Division Administrator to Mr. E. Gerrish Smith, 
Chairman of the Code Authority, which read as follov/s: 

"Dear 'At. Smith: 

You are hereby granted authorization to 
handle labor complaints on reference, and labor 
disputes for a period of sixty days- from date 
hereof. 

Within said time there shall be presented 
a, complete plan of procedure for handling such 
complaints and disputes to the U.H.A. for exami- . 
nation and approva.1 by the Administrator. 

Very tnjly yours, 

X. M. Sim.pson, 



Division Administrator 



II 



A cop:/- of the com-nronication was ordered to be sent to the 
Industrial Relations Coiamittee and the original placed on file. 



9732 



-118- 



Budget for Code Authority 

The Chairman rf the Code Authority reported that at the 
January 4th meeting of the Code Authority a budget was adopted 
totalling $28,500 f*r expenses of the National Organization and 
that in the meantime the expenses of the Atlantic and Gulf Coast 
District Committees had baen reported as 38,470 and the expenses 
of the Atlantic Coast and G-ulf Coast Local Area Committees were 
$fi,511 or a grand total of $43,481, and that up to April 23rd 
the Code Authority was in receipt of funds to the extent of 
$21,584. 

The Chairman f\irther rep(<*rted that the National Council 
of American Shipbuilders had made expenditures from its own 
funds far the carrying on of Code Authority work and that up 
to and including March 31, 1934 had expended a total of $14,27f^.l5 
which amount, together v/ith the amounts set up by the District 
and Local Area Committees should be reimbursed. 

In view of the funds in hand being insufficient to pay all 
amounts reauested some method of proper allocation must be de- 
termined upon and upon motion by Mr. W. H. Gerhauser, seconded 
by Mr. Joseph Haag, the following resolution was adopted; 

RESOLVED: That a Committee '•f Two be appointed by the 
Chairman to audit the bill of the National Council of 
American Shipbuilders; and 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the committee be and 
is hereby empowered to determine the distribution of 
funds in hand at this time. 

The Chairman in accordance with the ab^ve rcsoliition 
thereupon appointed Mr, Robert Haig and Mr, Roger Williams to 
act as this Committee of tv/o. 

In dustrial Relations Co mmit tee 

Thn Chairman reported that between meetings he had nomi- 
nated Messrs. L. Y. Spear, G, H. Bates and J. B. Woodward as 
the three members to represent the employers on the Industrial 
Relations Committee uf the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Code, 

After the cfficial appointment by the Administrator, 
Mr. G. H, Bates submitted hie resignation as a member and therf!- 
upnn the Chairman nominated Mr. James Swan. 



9732 



~iiy-« 



U^jcn raoticn of :.;r. S. T. ¥rJ:.onsn, seconded by 
Hr, W. H. Gerhauper the action of the Chairman in the 
selection and nominr tion of the appointees was confirmed, 

T'hc Sucrotary then read the certified Adjninistrative 
Orders Nog. S-8 and 2-13 coveriu£ the appointment of the three 
industry nJcmlicrG of the Industrial Relations Coiarjittec wliich 
reads as follows: 

Location o/_ .'"If f i.ce ^of .Ii?-A''-i?..t'li5!:l. ■g-^latAo.n.s.^Comqi^ttec 

PJ3S0LV3D: Th?.t it is the desire a.nd wish of the 
Code Authoriti^ that the work of the Code Authority 
he centra-lizcd, and therefore the headquarters of 
the Industrial delations Cora.iiittee should oe es- 
tablished in the offices of the Code Authority at 
Eleven- Broad.way, JTcav York City. 

This motion vas seconded hy 'i/lr. W. H. G-crhauser and carried. 

^_ge_ S qu al i z a t i o n 

■The Codo Authoi'ity rueried Mr. McDonagh as to v/hat was 
meant hy "wage standaraization" as it was unaware of any refer- 
ence to the Industrial Relations Committee of a study on "Wage 
Standardiz8.tion". 

It developed that the reference to "v/aje standrruization" 
was tho fifth finding in the report of the I'lational Labor Board 
to the Executive Council in regard to rages and hours of employ- 
ment in the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry which find- 
ing reads as follows: 

"5. That a Board unon which employees and em- 
j.'loycrs are eoually represented be estab- 
lished to study wage problems which arise 
from the establishment of the thirty-six 
(3^) hour week provided for in Sections 1 
and 2 hereof, a.nd that it shall be a function 
of this 3',ard to equalize by negotiation any 
unfair competitive inequalities in the v/age 
rates that may exist as a result of the past 
application in the Industry cf the wage and 
hour provisions of the Code 'plus the present 
application of the hours and wage rates pro- 
vided for in Sections 1, 2 and 4 hereof. 



9733 



-120- 



If or when tliere is set up in the Industry 
an Industrial Relations Board approveci "by the 
national Recovery Administration the foregoing 
duty and functions shall devolve upon that 3oard. " 

Budget _f o^_I ndus t i2^al_3 el_ay^q ns___C£im:^^ 

The President then offerea for aiscussion the "budget 
prepared by the Industrial Relations Coinmittee in the amount 
of ^32,000. The tentative figures as reported a,re as follows: 

Executive Secretary S5,000,"'0 
Stenographer i- Ixle Clcr^-: 1,800.00 
Office :-:ent (TTashington, D. C. ) 1,000.00 
Telephone, -oostLV^e, stationery etc. 1,200.00 
Kliscellaneous expense of investi- 
gations, etc. 2,000.00 
' Stenographic and office expense, 
and rent for seven rerional com- 
mittees. ^.2l,poo.oq_^ 

' T'^TAL: 'zi2^666".66"" 

The Code AuthGrit7 in rcviewin.. the budget, item Toy item, 
was of the opinion that the seven regional conmittees could for 
the time being be eliminated and,, therefore, the 321,000 set up 
in the "budget for this activity was eliminated from the discus- 
sion. 

In view of the O-ecision to eliminate the seven regional 
offices and the establishment of the office in New York instead 
of Washington the following resolution A^as offered by 
Mr. 'i7. H. C-erhauser, seconded by Mr. Roger Williams, and 
adopted; 

PJSSOLVEr: That there be advanced from the assess- 
ments already made o3,000 to defray the expenses of 
the Industrial Relations Committee, it being under- 
stood, however, that a "budget covering the expenses 
of this Committee Y/ould be set up for approval by the 
Code Authority; and 

3-^ IT FURTHZR RESOLV^JD: Tiiat the Industrial Relations 
Comnittee be and it is hereby authorized to expend such 
sums as may be necessary for the employment of an Execu- 
tive Secretary £vnd the defrayment of head office expenses 
and the traveling ex-oenses of all members of the Coinmit- 
tee including the alternate members. 



3732 



=^:tSi^ 



The Ciiairnan presentC''l for discussion the -'3:,-Lovs of the 
Industrial Relations Coirxnittee ado"oted by the Committee on 
March 28, 1934. 'These hy-laivs were laid over by the Code Au- 
thority awaiting a further report from the Industrial Relations 
Commit toe. 

Strilce Situation ,?„t J"'.l.'.yitL^°i. JlS^l X9.^K .5.^'-AP-!i?iiA'l\^ .Comoan^ 

The Cj.airnan read a letter dated April 34L-th from 
Mr. C. L. Bardo, President of the }lev} York Ship'ouilding Company, 
officially re'iiestin." tiie Code Authority to request the Indus- 
trial Relations ComiiiittGe to take jurisdiction of the labor dis- 
pute nov/ existent at his olant. 

The aduvisability of referring this labor dispute to the re- 
cently created Indu'itrial ?x-lations Coi.nmittee was discussed and 
the conclusion reached wa.s that this Coirtaittee was entirely capa- 
ble of handli.if: it and, thereupon, Mr. S. W. V/aKreman moved: 

"That the strike situation nt the IJew York Ship- 
building Company'' 's plant at Camden, "'I. o. be placed 
in the hands of the Industrial Relations Committee 
for immediate settlement." 

Motion v;as seconded b'>'' lir. Roger 'Tilliams and unanimously 
carried, 

I.ir, J. S. !/cDonag-h raised the oucstinn as to why this .nat- 
tcr should be referred to the Industrial Relations Committee in- 
asmuch as the national Labor 3oard v/as authorized to handle it 
by reference from the Industrial Relations Coi.iiTiittee. Fu.rther- 
more, he stated the Committee was not properly set up to handle 
this cucstion -jnd he wishe;' tn be recorded, as the Labor Repre- 
sentative on the Code Auth;jrity, as bein^, opposed to the adoption 
of the aDove recoltition, 

f'r, Wakemif'Xi asked -iir, KcDona^^ih to define "not i^roperly set 
up-" and }'r, j.IcDonagh replied: 

"Tilers is only one reason in not being properly set up is 
because the office is not set up in ¥asnington." 

As the Code Authority did not consider this a valid reason, 
Mr, Ro^er "Williams then offered the following resolution: 



)752 



-122- 



E2S0LVED: That the Chairman "be authorized to 
telet-j;raph the National Labor Board as follov/s: 

"Nev/ York Ship biiil din;; Cnirrpany has rcouested 
Code Authority,' of Shiribuilding and Sniprepair- 
in;?; Indus-try t-* asic Indu? trial Rcla.tions Cora- 
mittee set up oy the Industry tn take jurisdic- 
tion 'if lahor c'isputc now existent at the plant 
nf the aoove c-^^ipany r.top Code Authority passed 
resolution t'-icar that strike? situation at New York 
Shipbuilding plant be placed in the ha,nds of In- 
dustrial Relations Coiiurdttcc of the Shipbuilding 
and Shi-orepairing Industry f^^r settlement." 

The moti'sn v/as seconded by Mr, Robert Haig and carried. 

CQ-tJ^.s -^Mo.di f i^c a t i on - Longer l^orking Hours 

Tiie Code Authority, crignizant nf the hardship involved in 
the Industry due to the shorter v/eek under the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Code than in the majority of the approved codes 
passed the f ollov/in.^; resolution offered by Mr. S. T. lakeman, 
seconded by Mr. Roger ^Tilliarns: 

"R3S0LVEB THAT, 7r^{EHEAS: Enroloyment in the private 
shipyards of the United State? is "limited to thirty- 
six hours a v;eek on inerchant shipb^^ilding and on 
naval coiistruction; v/hile employ.ncnt in goveriunent 
navj.- yaras on nov/ naval construction is limited to 
forty hours a v/cek; 

WHEREAS: 3y reason '^f their shorter hours of em- 
ployment private shipyards are placed in an unfa- 
vorable competitive condition with government nav;.'- 
yardus, so th'-^.t in man- instances employees of pri- 
vate shipyards are leaving their employment and are 
seeking eupl'i":!cnt in .yovernmcnt navy yards, v/ith 
the result that such private shipyards find it dif- 
ficult t'^ secure and maintain adequate numbers of 
skilled mechanics and are confronted v;ith unrest 
and dissatisfaction among their employees - a con- 
dition that is largely responsiole for the present 
strike in the shitjyard of the Hew Y^rk Shipbuilding 
Company; 

WKEI'iEAS: because of the restriction of employment 
in shipreriairing ya.rds to an average of thirty-six 
hours a woe: ever a p'^riod of six months v/ith a maxi- 
niam of onlv forty hours in any one week and because 
of the intermittent character of the work performed 
by them the a.vers.ge hours of employment in such yards 
is less than thirty hours a v/eek v/ith the result that 
the same unrest and dissatiofaction prevails among 
their employees as in the private shipbuilding yards; and 

0732 ( 



-IS?- 



THEHSAS: Records shov; that more tha,n ninety 
percent of all cooes un-^ler tho 'J?J^ are on an 
e'nplo:,Tnent oasis of fortj' hours a weeli or over 
includin;^, substantially all of tlie cocoes re-^.u- 
latinf industries that are cOi.TOetitive nith the 
character of v/oric perfornied in private shipyards. 

TH::~'m;~037:., 2^0*7 B"i' it laSQFrD: IL is the opinion 
of the C:^de Authority for the Shipbuilding ana 
Shiprepairing Industry that the stabilization of 
the Industry, the elimination therefrom of xmfair 
competitive practices and the maintenance of har- 
Kionious relations betv.-een management and employ- 
ees, recuires the establishment of forty hours a 
week of eraployiiient throughout the shipbuilding 
br;;,nch of the jsindustry and a-n average of forty 
hours £i v;ee:.c over a, six months period ¥/ith suffi- 
cient leeAvay to penr-it a ma;:iraujn of forty-ei^i-ht 
hours of em^loy:nent in ar^ one week for the ship- 
repairin^; branch. The Code Authority recoianends 
im-uediate epioro-vil of the above changes in hours 
for the Shipbuilding ^-nd Shiprepairing Industry." 

The above resolution was una.niraously adopted. 

Thereupon IJr. Roger Willis.ms moved and Mr. 7J. H. Gerhauser 
seconded that: 

"The fore;;oing resolution be transmitted by the 
Chairman of the Code Authority to the Deputy Ad- 
ministrator with a reouest for imiaediate action," 

Resolution y/3.s unanimously carried. 

Pa_rai?:raph 3 .(_cl.q.f ..Code, - Turther Extension 

The Code Co:-ni.iittce discussed the present status of plan 
work, ordering of material, etc., for the nev/ navy ;orogram and 
it bein^ found necessary to the nrogress of preliminary work upon 
which the rapid employment of men in the construction of these 
vessels depends that there should be a further extension of para- 
graph 3 (c) .and thereupon I'r. .Roger 'r7iliiaras offereu the follow- 
ing Resolution: 

"That it is necessary to the progress of preliminary 
work on new naval contracts, UT3on v.hich the rapid em- 
ployment of men in the constnj.ction of these vessels 
deuends, that there shoulo. be a further extension from 
and after Hay 5, 1934 for a period of six months of 
paragraph 5 (c), regulation of hours of v/ork in the 
code of fair cora-netition and trade practice for the 
shipbuilding and shiprcpa,iring industry*" 



?732 



-124- 



The motion 7/as seconded by Mr, S, ".'. Wa.ceman and unani- 
mously carried, 

'L^A^^. .P.^.?;Q.tA<^® poj^Pt'iJT.^.?, J^.oJi'li 't t e. e 

The Chairman a.nnounced that pursuant to authority contained 
in a letter of April 4, Ido^: from K. M. Simpson, The Trade Practice 
Complaints CcTinittee ?/as duly organized today but at the present 
time has no report to mal-ie to the Code Authority. 

Mr. Marvin drev/ the attention of the Code Autiiority to a let- 
ter dated April 12, 1934 from K, M. Siupson relative to an Inter- 
Industry Practice Relationship Committee to oe appointed to meet 
with similar Trade Practice Committees under sach other codes as 
experience proves to be suf ficientl;/ related to require coordina- 
tion for the purpose of formul.cting fair trade practices between 
such related codes. 

Upon motion of Mr. S, W. Wakeman and seconded liy Mr. Roger 
Williams the Trade Practice Complaints Comi.iittee of the Shipbuilding 
and 3hipreps,iring Industry was desi-jnated as the Committee to meet 
v.'ith such other Committees as outlined above. 

Stratus of A^.?. yi^L®^_^^'l^SjSi\^A1:.°.^§..S£.t?£tA.Y.?. JiQZ^"i^ 

The Chairm£.n reported tnat the Code Authority is in receipt 
of a communication from a shiprepairing firm as to the status of 
the Rules and Hcir'alations and recuesting an interpretation as to 
"whether failure to com-ply v/ith the re-'uirements of the Rules and 
Regulations incapacitates yards in this area from bidding on any 
Y/orlc covered by Bulletin >Io, 3, Executive Order IIo. '^!^^_ft, issued 
from yo-'or office under date of March 19th, 193^^, so long; as they 
fail to live up to the Rules? If they bid on such v;ork are they 
liable to fine and imprisonment?" 

In viev.' of the action of the Trade Practice Complaints Com- 
mittee- in referring to the Co ce .Authority the ouestion as to the 
legality of the Rules and Regialations anc the by-laws previously 
adopted for the industry' and which committee asked the Code Au- 
thority to secure a ruling from the Adininistrator as to their le- 
gality, the following resolution was offered by Mr. S. 'u. Wa'ceman 
and seconded by Mr. Robert Haig. 

"That action on this particular request for inter- 
pretation be deferred pending ruling as to the le- 
gality of the Rules and Regulations and By-Laws and 
be it further resolved that the inouirer should be 
c« informeci." 

The motion v;as carried. 



5732 



-125- 



The Gi.airman iiiforace' the Code Authority that he wn.s in re- 
ceipt of a letter from the Ingalls Iron iTorks dated April 3, 1934, 
reruestin,:,. authority to wor'c forty hours a weelc on four barges under 
construction in their yard nt Decatur, Alabama for the account of 
the Tennessee Valley Authority. 

Tlie Chairman reported that, no response had been received from 
the ISIA in connection v/ith our letter of February 14th, wherein it 
was requested that a La.bor Cor..plaints Committee be appointed and in 
the same letter the Industry, nominated its members. The Chairman 
informed the members of the_ Code Authority that this matter vras pend- 
ing in view of the formation of the Industrial Relations Committee. 

^T.iill -.'^J.ij?- .Q.^Lej'L?. 

Tlie Chairman informed the Code Authority that he was in re- 
ceipt of the following letter from the Industrial Eelations Commit- 
tee dated April .2; l9o---: ., • . , 

"deferring to the reruest for exemptions to the Code 
to cover testing and trial trips, referred to this 
Committee for action, this Committee, after due con- 
sideretion, has unanimously adopted the following reg'a- 
lation as an exemption to the Cod^,: 

'In testing installations, machinery and equi-o- 
ment for ships, doc3c trials, and sea trials to 
demonstrate satisfactory 'operation or contract- 
ual roruirements, code hours may only be exceeded . 
by employees on an hourly rate, v/here it is im- 
practicable to do the v/ork with safety or to the 
satisfaction of the customer's inspectors by the 
emplojTnent of addition.al men, provided that this 

exemption must not be used for tne purpose of dfe- -- • 

creasing cmploynent, or for reclassifying cmploj^- 
ees at a lower rate. 

'If an employee on an hourly .rate works in ex- 
cess of eight (8) hours in any one (l) day, the 
wage paid '.Till be at the rate of not less than 
one and one-half (l^) times the regular hourly 
rate, but ottierv/ise according to the prev§,il- 
ing custom in each port, for such time as may be 
in excesr, of ei^ht (8) hours. 



9732 



-126- 



'In every cs.se where code hours are ex- 
ceeded hereunder the employer shall re- 
port on a form to be stipulated by this 
committee, all the facts and circumstances 
of the case - and if the Committee shall 
find that conditions hereof have been vio- 
lated it shall report the employer as a 
violator of the code.'...." 

?9:£§-'[li'^.?!.®9:Se, San Francisco Bay Area 

The Bhairman reported the status of the request of certain 
yards in the San Francisco Bay Area for an exemption from the labor 
provisions of Section 4 (b) of the Code. At a previous Cnde Au- 
thority meeting this request had been denied. The matter was, hov/- 
ever, referred by the N31A. to the Industrial Relations Committee and 
under date of April 3rd the Industrial Relations Committee, informed 
the Code Authority as follows: 

"At the meeting of this Committee on yesterday, 

the petition of certain shiprepair shops in the 

San Francisco Bay Area, represented by Mr. Harrison S. 

Robinson of Oakland, California, for exemption from 

the labor provisions embodied in Section 4 (b) of the 

Code, was considered, 

"It T/as the unanimous decision of this Committee 
that the increases in wage rates under this sec- 
tion of the code are mandatory and that no exemp- 
tion is therefore in order. 

"Will you please keep this Committee informed of 
any steps that are taken by the Code Authority in 
connection herewith." 

E mergency Work 

Mr, Smith brought to the attention of the Code Authority 
the large number of notarized reports covering emergency work per- 
formed in a great number of plants. It appeared from the text of 
the reports that a large number of them, while of an emergency na- 
ture were more of an emergency to satisfy the requests of the con- 
suner, rather than actual emergencies in the industry itself. 

The members rf the Code Authority were of the opinion that the 
matter should be restated to the Industry and thereupon Mr» Robert 
Haig, offered the following resolution^ 

RESOLVED: That the Code Authority hereby authorizes 
its Chairman to bring to the attention of the Indus- 
try any cases which appear t«^ be excessive hours of 
work and that the Industry must in the future confine 
its emergency work to actual emergencies in the industry 
itself. 

The motion was carried, 
9732 



33PT3i,iB23 12, 1934, iffiSTOG WLL aT 11 B.^omVAY, NET YC3K CITY 
3ecUon°^t""' "^""^''^'^ '''"'^ Excer;its from Minutes. (Hef. Deputy's Files, 

C^.aiJ;'rV'-' P^"^^"^' i^epresentins tie Industry, Messrs. 'T. Gerrish 3mitl^ 
Cnairman, W. ... Geraauser, 3oger lillia.ns, JoseiDli "laa^, jr. and 

^' "''Tv' ^®^^^^-^^^i^- 3. I. .Vakeman; representing the Ac^uninistration 
..essrs Arba B. I.iarvin, J. 3. i/IcDonaga. Capt. -enry Tillia.ns. and 
C. C. Knerr, Secretary-Treasurer, Those absent were Mes^^rs 
S. w. iaiceman, Hcbert Tlai^ and Robert L. Hague. Others T^re?ent were 
Colonel ,v. .7. Rose, Deputy Adimnistrator, Mr. H. Newton Xiittelsey. 
Assistant De.-aty Administrator and Mr. L. C. 3rown. 

Financial Statement 

Tne financial stntements for tlie montas of April, May, June, July 
and Aue^ast, on motion oi Mr. .--..raer, seconded by Mr. liUiains, were 
approved and made a part of tuo official minutes. 

Industrial Relations Com-dttee 

_ Inasmuch as Colonel Rose nad bat recently been assigned as De-mty 
Adimnistrator tc aandle tlie SaipDuilding and Sliiprepairing Code, the 
uaairman outlined briefly the entire history of the Industrial Relations 
Committee m connection with its set-up by Resolution of the Code Auth- 
ority on March 13, 1054; tie plan dated March 16, 1934 and submitted on 
tae same date for its operation; the appointment of members to the 
Committee and subsequent events. The first plan submitted by the Indus- 
try on March 15th, for some reason, had never been transmitted by the 
Deputy Administrator to the Industrial Relations Committee, so that 
tiere was seme delay on procedure until the olan which had been jointly 
prepared by tne Industry and our Depity Administrator received the com- 
ments of tne Industrial Relations Committee. It was approved by the 
Coramttee on June ?lst with some changes. All o:' the caanges were not 
acceptable tc the Industry but with a very few changes the plan was re- 
turned to N.R.A. by the Industry with letters from the Code Authority 
dated June 26ta and 29th, togetaer with a letter from a sub-comni ttee of 
tae Industry to the Code Authority dated June 27th. No further comments 
were received from N.R.A. until July 27th at waich time Mr. -. Newton 
Whittelsey submitted anc.ther plm different fro.i the ^olans of June 21st 
and 27th. 

Subsequent events were as follows :- 

On July 27th a hearing was granted labor by Senator Walsh, Chair- 
man of the Senate Comaittee on 3duc;-.tijn and Labor. At ta.is hearing 
Labor alleged labor abuses in tae private shipbuilding industry. On 
August 2nd, Senator '.valsa addressed a letter to the Secretary of the 
Navy calling attention to the statements made by Labor representatives 
at tae hearing on July 27th. In tais letter Senator lalsh suggests 
taat suiamary actions be taicen ^oy tae Navy Department to clarify the 
wage rates and working conditions under which tae shipbuilding program 
is to be carried out before tae letting of the next contracts? ' 

In the morning of August 9th, a meeting was held in the offices 
9752 



.138- 



a 



of tlie Assistant Secretary of t^-ie Kavy, 8.t v.uica there were ^resent; 

As'-istant, Secretary ci.nd lils staff of Bareau Officers 
?presentativos of t--OSi: 
in L'aval construction 



Hepresentativos of t.-ose -irivate s/iiolDuilders en jaged 



The Assistant Secretary of the Navy w,as infirrned tift t-ie industry 
knew of nc abuses in tne private sliipbuildin;^,' in-lustry an I that there 
was no reason whatever for delayin^^ the opening of bida or ti^. plo-cing^ 
of contracts for new naval constiruction. 

The morning .neetinj; was followed by a raeetin^, in the afternoon at 
wuiC'i t'lere were ;^jresent: 

Assistant Secretary of tie SFavy ajid his staff 

Tv;o representatives from tne S_iipbuilding Industry 

-tepresentatives of lT.il. A. 

A representative from tlie Depart^nent of La.bor 

At this rneetin-^ a proposed 3xecutive Crder, prepared by the Depart- 
ment of Labor was presented to the effect that there should be a 
special board appointed to reviev; shipbuilding wagos and working condi- 
tions under P,7A appropriations as applicable to naval vessels — those 
now under construction an-i those' for wl.icii contracts '//ere to be placed. 
This meetin_, was adjourned without any final action but the same parties 
reconvened tne following morninj, August 10th, together with repre- 
sentatives of Labor. The proposed Executive Order vi/a' thoroughly dis- 
cussed and the Industry iiembers present pointed out that the President 
of the United States by letter dated Uarch 27th had directed all work 
on Ctovernment contracts for s/ii-^building and shiprepairing to be per- 
formed uniler the provisions of the Snipbuilding and Shiprepairing Code. 
As a result of the discussion it was decided at this meeting that there 
shoul I be a joint ineetin "^ on the following day, August llt.i, of the: 

llavy Department officials 
Department of Labor; and 

II. R. A. 

Such a meetin-, was ..leld and it was decided that instead of the 
special committee discussed tne day previous, that t"ie Industrial Rela- 
tions Committee saould proceed under its present set-up but under an 
Adrainistrative Order v^iiich. would orovide for its financing by !'RA with 
offices in Washington and witli six (6) meinuers inptea,d of seven (7). 

In connection wit., taese meetings the following letter was 
addressed to tiie Assistant Secretary of tne Navy by the President of 
the National Ctmncil of American Snipbuilders, under date of August 10, 
1934: 

"With reference to tne conference of yosterday morning in 
youT' of f ice as between the private s^iipbuilders engaged in 
naval work and yourself and tne further conference in the 
afternoon with lAr. Battle of the Departnent of Labor, and 
the furtner conference tliis morning, 



-129" 

I wisli to .:iai:e tae following statement on be-ialf of the private 
s/ii"'builders: 

Tile siibjects lisciassad at our conference were tie following: 

1 - A letter submitted 07 Senator lals'n presentint.; 

certain statement <5 made by Labor before his Com- 
mittee at a hearing on Jul/ 37, wi.ich statements 
alleged labor abuses in the Private Saipbuilding 
Indastry. 

2 - An Induitricl .Ijlations Oon;nittee in the iii'o- 

building Industry set up in connection with its 
code of fair c-i.a-:)etition. 

3 - A propc©! Executive Order presented by iir. 3attle 

wl.ich would provide for setting up a Naval SSiip- 
building Wr.ge Board to deal witxi wages and hours 
under Title II of tae national Industrial Re- 
covery Act and of Title II of t-ie Emergency Appro- 
priation Act for tiie fiscal /ear 1935. 

Tnese tliree subjects have been enumerated in the order in which 
they arose for discussion , but it is necessary to fir-t discuss briefly 
the proposed Executive Crder prepared by the Department of Labor. Tliis 
Order, if issued, would give financial control over the expenditures 
of fvmds for new naval vessels, bids for wnich are scheduled to be 
opened en Augiist 15. 

I call your attention to the fact tha,t it is necessary in the con- 
duct of work in a private shipyard to conduct tJiis work on a uniform 
basis of hours and wages if v/ork is to be performed in an orderly 
manner and expeditiously. The proposed Naval Shipbuilding lage Board 
would have jurisdiction over hours and wages that might be wholly 
different from tliose prevailing under the Code and might result in a 
wage and hour c-.nditian that would preclude the possibility of secur- 
ing any commercial ?/ork. 

?urthermcre, sucii jurisdiction would apply only during the ex- 
penditure of the particular funds appropriated for this Fiscal Year, 
while future funds for t le completion of the contracts would probably 
be under Increase of the llavy Appropriations. 

By order 01 t.ie President of t.ie United States all work' in t'He 
private siiipyards, with the exception of a few early contracts placed 
under P'.7A funds, is now being carried :n under a Cods of trade practice 
and fair competition applicable to all work in process. 

"It is necessary in connection with new contracts for na,val 
vessels t.iat tae same condition as to "hours of labor, wages 
and working conditions snould apply for all work underway 
in a snipyard, whether Government work or commercial work, 
and regardless of the appropriation under whicl; such v.'ork 
is oerformed. 



9732 



If this condition is made to apply, then the only other 
problem referred to in Senator Walsh's letter as needing 
considera.ticn and v/hic'.i was very freely discussed with 
you is that of en Indus '..rial xlelatijis Convnittee. From 
the s-catemeuts made dj'' the I','e:.i'08rs of t-".e Industry at 
the .neetinj yeaterday, I helieve you fully understand the 
difficulties confronting the Inlustry in setting u"t an 
Industrial P.eiatii-ns Committee of seven; three of whom 
are Industry Members , three of whom are Labor Members , 
and the seventh of whom is to be an impartial member, 
and for tne reasons stated to you we do not believe that 
this bi-partisan committee will ever function satisfac- 
torily and tl'j.3 Industry, has, taersfore, su^^^ested to 
you, and ur^^ently renuests, that t.ils comiMittee should 
be made up of not more than tiioe disinterested members 
to be created by Presidential Order. ,7itu this in mind 
we ask you to request tlie .Pre'-ident to extend the duties 
of the national Steel Labor Relations Board to cover 
dispvites and complaints arisinj^ in t.^e Sliipbuil linj In- 
dustry, the extent of the responsibilities of this 
Board for the SIiipbuildln-:5 Industry to be tiie same as 
those prescribed by tlie President for t--ie Steel Indtistry. 

/Ye believe tliat tue two dofinite sugi;estions made herein 
will fully dispose of ti.e problems involved in the dis- 
cussions in your office tuis mornint^." 

On August 15th G-eneral Jcmson issued an Administrative Order which 
has not as ?/et been received by tne Code Authority alt.aougli an unsigned 
copy has been received -.TiLich it is presuined is correct reading, as 
follows: (llote: The following is an excerpt of Administrative Order 
2-21, dated August 15.) 

"NOI, THSfffiPOfvS, I, Hugh S. Johnson, by vi'rtue of authority 
vested in me, do h.ereby order that my previous orders of 
March 26, 1934, and Ar.ril 4, 1934, whereby I appointed the 
Industry and Employee Members, respectively, of the Indus- 
trial Relations Committee for tie Snipbuilding and 3}.iipre- 
pairing Industry, be a^'nended by omitting the provision re- 
quiring the selection by the Industrial Relations Cormittee 
of a seventh (7txi) member. 

It is furtlier ordered that the Industrial Relations Com- 
mittee be and is .xereby made independent of and not sub- 
ject to the Jurisdiction of the Sliiobuilding a,nd S'aipre- 
pairing Indiistry Com"nittee hereinabove referred to. 

It is furtner ordered t.aat the National Recovery Admin- 
istration shall set aside a reasonable portion of the 
fixnds allotted to it to cover tne Committee's office ex- 
penses, traveling and sabsistence expenses of each, of 
its members Wxien on official business in ci/nnection with 
tiie perfonnance of nis duties as a, member of the said 

9732 



vxir\,- 

Cominittee, and funds for tlie payment of sucli secretarial, 
clerical and teclmical assistance as tlie Conmiittee may re- 
oaire in t.-e performance of itt- duties. In addition to 
the aJove, ea.cb. /nernber of tlie Jo'.nmittee shall 'oe entitled 
to a per diera of fifteen Dollars ($15.00) for eac^. day of 
actual attendance at any and all :.ieetin^;s of the Oonamittee 
and when on official "business for the said Committee, from 
tlie time of departure to tae time of retxirn; provided, 
aov7ever, tiiat any financial c oiiorai t trnen 1 3 made by the Com- 
mittee saall be subject to the fiscal re^^pilations of the 
National- Recovery Administration; ajid provided further, 
t-iat before any expenses incurred by t..ie Co.iimittee or any 
of its members are paid by the National Recovery Admin- 
istration vouc.iers t.ierefor snail be duly authenticated 
by the Secretary of the Comnittee and suall be subject to 
revievj and disapproval by txie National Recovery Adminis- 
tration." 

********** 

"Undttr dato of July 27th an Administrative Order cover- 
ing 'Labor Complaints And Disputes' was issued by the N.R.A. 
and in connection with this subject the Chairman aslced to 
:iave inscribed in the minutes a copy of Ac''-ministrative 
Order No. X-69." 

At the renUGst of Colonel Rose the Code Authority will submit to 
hira a statement coverin^q, the views of the Code Autnority as to the plan 
of procedure forwarded by N3A to the Industrial Relations GomiTiittee 
dated August 28th. 

Payment of Expenditures Incurred by July lleeting of I.R.C . 

The 3ecret-^,ry v;as in receipt of bills from the three Industry 
Members of t.;e Industria.1 Relations Committee cover in/-; traveling ex- 
penses in ccnnectiou wit'.', the work of tie GoiTimittee and upon motion of 
1. 'i. Ger.iauser, seconded by A. 3. "lomer, their .Dayment was approved. 

Amendment to Code to ProviJ.e for t'le Levy of Assessments 

It was decided that t.'e Code Authority would net present an amend- 
ment to the Code, at ti.is time, to pr jvi le for the levying of assess- 
ments for carrying on the worh of th.e Code Authority and its District 
eind Local Area Cliai'rmen, but for tie time beinvj would rely uioon volun- 
tary contribations. 

Approval of B^adget 

A budget of expenses for tie vjeriod July 1, 1934 to June 16,1935, 
was presented and Mr. Gerhauser offered the following resolution: 

223CLVSD: Tliat in connection with tie Code Budget 
for the Sliipbuilding and Sliiprepairing Industry 
for t.ie period July 1, 1934 to June 16, 1935, that 
the assessment be on tiie basis of total man-hours 
(bot-i direct and. indirect work) worked over a tv;enty- 

9732 



six week period (October 1, 1933 to i.Ierch 31,1934) 
and that tne assessrr.ent to be levied s-iall be for 
a six montiis period, July 1, 1934 to December 51,1934. 
Rate per man-ajiir for a six montlis period not to ex- 
ceed .0.0014 wi oh a miniiTTJjn billinj^- of )3.00 vsr 
plant for a six mont.a;j period. 

Ur. G-erliauser moved its adoption, seconded by Joseph 'Taag, Jr. , and 
carried. 

Tlie budget on m.otion of Mr. J. '1. Geruauser, seconded by 
Mr. Joseph 'laag, Jr., was approved and made a part of the minutes. 

Approximately one-naif is to be raised, payable i.omediately, and 
adjustment will be made in second half of fiscal year for any surplus 
fund received ovex" and above anticipated receipts. 

The Code Authority also approved tne period of April 1, 1934 to 
September 30, 1934 a.3 t-ie period to secure man-hour data for the assess- 
ment to be levied on January 1, 1935. 

Durable Goods Industries JoiTimittee 

Tlie Cl:iairman reported that the Durable Goods Industries Committee 
had requested an additional contribution from Code Authorities to pay 
bills already incurred and that a sun 'of .^300 is being asked from a 
considerable number .-f Code Authorities. It is the intention of the 
Durable Goods Indi\s tries Com-nittee to refund all monies received over 
and above the sum needed. On motion of Mr. Gerhauser, seconded by 
Mr. Homer, the additional contribiition of ."^300 was authorized. 

Definition of Term " Em.ergency " 

The Chairman wrote a letter dated June 13th to the N.R.A. reouest- 
ing that the Code be amended to includs this definition. (Copy of 
letter has been sent to the Code Comi-nittee; 3iip'builders Administrative" 
Comniittee; Shiprei^airers National Gomnittee and all Local Area Chairmen.) 
In tlie meantime, a request was made by the Code Authority to have the 
papers in connection with this amendment held up by K.H.A. until further 
advised by the Industry. The Code Authority at its meeting today de- 
cided that its request for the Emergency Definition should be laid on 
the table. 

Possible Conflict Between the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing 
Code and the Supplementary Codes for th e Const ruction Industry . 

Under date of August 21st the Chairman addressed a letter to 
Major George L. Berry with reference to tlie possible conflicts between 
the provisions of the Construction Code and the Sliipbuilding and Sliip- 
repairing Code. Under date of August 24th, Major Berry informed tlie 
Code Authority that si.nilar que-3tions aad been raised by others to 
such an extent that it was reco,gnized that a hearing would have to be 
held to develop the necessary facts upon which to base a detenninative 
ruling and that the Code Authority' s name iiad been placed on the mail- 
ing list to receive a copy of notice of any hearing to be held. 

9732 



Administrative Orders 

The following AiLr-inistrative Orders vifere read rjid placed in tlie 
record for tlie information of tlae Jode Autiiority: 

A33 i.IINI JT JIATIVE o:iD:-:H ;i o. 2-9 
(llarc. 29, 1934) 

Anen.iment To Code Of Fair Comoetition j'or Tie 
Siipbuildin^ And S^iiprepairing Industry 

ADljiIl-:i3T?ATIVS 0,^33 ^D. -J-1 4 
( April 37, 1934) 

Stay Of The Provisions of Part 3, 
oections jr..) and (o) 

-15 



(Lay 1, 1934) 
Denial of application of General Enj^lneering 
and Dry Deck Company, (and others)* ***-•* 

ADUIIIISTP.ATIVS 03D1.R ]^0 . ^-16 
(hv-vy- 4, 1934) 
Approval of application of iianitowoc SldpTjuilding 

■ADl.;iITIST 2AT I ?3 03I>1,R DIP, j-17 
(:;ay^4, 1934) 

Extending Provisions of Section 3, Sub- Section (c) 
of the Code of Pair Competition for the Sliip- 
"building .-aid S^:iiorepairin;r Industry 

ADl.JI'ISTRATITP 03D:1 ]^-. :>-13 
(j-one ^0, 1934) 

Further 5t-\y of t-ie Provisions of Part 3, 
Sections (a) and (b) 

AD...n:i3T.l4TI\r5: ORDSR ro. 3-19 
(June 33, 1934) 

Granting application of St. Louis Car Company, St. Louis, 
Missouri, ******** 



9732 



-1 r,^— 



ADIiBTIST^ATIVE GRDE?. NO 



{Jo-ly 5, 193") 

Granting aoplicrticn of ilie CTener"J. Hn-'^ineering anl Dry 
Dock 3'^mpany, (<and ot'iers) ********* 



Sxecutive Orders 

Ko. 6710 - AiTiendinsnt of ilxecutive Order To. 5334 of October 33, 1933. 
Prescribing H'lles and 3fcg'.uation^. Under the ;;;i?.tional In- 
di:.strial ileco'.'ery Act (Application of Cede Provisions in 
Toiivn of <;,500 or less population). 

(inccrpc rated in Bulletin No. 5 
dated JiOne lltn) 

No. 6711 - Prescribing a Hegulation Pro^iibiting DisTiissal of ;?]rr/ployees 
for Peocrtinj- Alleged Violations of Codes of Fair Competi- 
tion. 

(incorporated in Bulletin No. 6 
dated Jane lltli) 

No. 6673 - iiiciking Provision for a Clause in Codes of Fair Competition 
Helatin^^ to Collection of Expenses of Code Administration. 

(incorporated in Bulletin No. 6 
dated J^one lltii) 



No. 6750 - Prsscribing H'J.les and P.egulations for the Interpretation and 
-C Application of Certa,in Labor Provisions of Codes of Fair 

Competition as They May Al'fect Apprentice Training Programs 
in Industry. (This Sxecutive Order was sent to each member 
of the Code Ccninittee; 5..ii prepairers. "ational Committee; 
Shipbuilders Adrainistrative Co3L:iittee; and all Local Area 
ChairmeiT, under date of July 17, l'-)34 and copy of same is 
made part of the official minutes.) 

No. 6763 - Creation of the National Labor Relations Board. (This Execu- 
tive Order was sent to each member of the Code Committee; 
Shipbuilders Adrainifitrative Comiuittee; Sliiprepalrers 
National CoiBmittee; and all Local Area Chairmen, under date 
of July 30, 1934, and copy of same is made part of the 
official i.iinutes.) 

No. 6767 - He; Permitting up to 15 jercent Reduction in Filed Prices to 
any Agency or Instrumentality of the United Stat-^a, or Any 
State, Itonicipal, or Other Public Autnority. (Under date of 
August 16, 1934, a letter was addressed to the Industry which 
specifically showed that t..ic 15 p;ircent reduction does not 
apply to the filed rates with tne Shipbuilding and Shipre- 
pairing Code Autnority. The letter is as follows: 



9732 



-135- 

"In connection \7ith Executive Order No. 6767, dated 
J-oJie 29, this office made a s-o'ecific request for information 
r.s the applicability of this ordsr to shipbuilding and ship- 
repairinj; sjid T/e'liave received the following information from 
the legal department of the KH4: 

'Executive Order I'o. 6767 applies only to Ijids 

made to Governmental a-^encies hy Members of the 

Industry suhjcct to Codes v/hich provide for . 

open f ilin.j. ' ■ . . " • 

Administrative Order jlo. X-13 : Code Blue Ea^^le negpilr/^ji ons 

Secretary reported that all members of the Industry have been 
furnished a L;lue Ea^rle a.nd report made thereon to the Insignia Section 
under c.,".te of AU(;i-ust 10, 1934. 

Executive Orc.er V.o. 6590-1; Post ine; T erms of Code 
Administrative Order 'Jo. X-7; posting Terms of Labor Provisions 

SecretaiT reported that all memb;;rs of the Industry have been 
furnished r-ith the Official Copy of the- Labor Provisions in QU?Jitities 
as reauested oy the firms'' engaged in Shipbuilding or Shiprepairing, 

Administrative Order Ho. X-7? ; S xemptian of Ce rtg.i_n 
Em-Qloyers in Tovrns of Leas than 2,500 popul-'.tion 
(See E::ecutive Order ITo. S710) 

A copy of this Administrative Order was sent to the Code Committee; 
Shipbuilders Administrative Committee; Shiprepairers National Committee; 
and all Local Area Chairman, loiider'.date of August 15, 1934, together 
with a copy of a statement b" the Aominlstrator e:-:plaining Executive 
Order ITo. 5710. The statement by the' Adiainistrator specifically states 
that the Shipbuilding sJid Shiprep airing firms are not exempted by the 
Order. Copy of order attached as a pairt of the records. 

Office Order No. 105) Creating Industrial Appeals Board, duties. 
Office hemo. No. 273) purooses. etc. of Industrial Appeals Eaord. 

Copies of this order and memorandum were forv;arded to the Code 
Comiiittea; Shipbuilders Administrative Committee; Shiprepairers National 
Committee; rnd all Local Area Chairmen, "onder date of August 15, 1934, 
and copies are att^.ched q,s ' a pai'i-t of the records. 



9732 



DLCSMBER 20,' 1934, IISETIl^G HCLD ^TH BROADT'AY, im\J YORX ClTf , AT 
10:15 A. 1,1. BRIEFS A.TD EXCERPTS EROii HIITUTES. (REEEREilCE: DSPUTI'S 
PILES, SSCTIOIT 2.) 

There -'ere present, rer)resentin-" the Industry, Messrs. H. Gerrish 
Smith, Ghairraan, ¥. H. Gerhauser, Joseph Haag, Jr., and Roger TJilliaras; 
reoresenting the Administration Hessrs. P. E. Lee, Captain Henry Uilliajns 
and J. S. McDonagh, Those ahsent nere Ilessrs. Rohert Haig, R, L, H.'^gue 
and S. W, Walceraan. Others present nere H. Het'-'on Whittelsey, Assistant 
Deputy Administrator and A. B. Homer, 

The financial statements for the months of September, Octoher jijid 
ilovember on motion of T7. H. Gerhauser, seconded hy Ro^-jer TTilliams '7ere 
ap Droved and ma,de a part of the official Minutes. 

Administrative Orders 

The following Administrative Orders i-'ere read and 'ilaced in record 
for the information of the Code Authority: 

ORDER 
.,, CODE OP PAIR COLiPETITION 
POR THE 
SHIPBUILDIIIG AiiD SHIPREPAIRIxJG IiJ)U3TRY 
ORDEIa KO. 2-21 

ORDER 

CODE OP PAIR COiiPETITIOil 

POR THE 

SHIPBlTILDIilG AID SHIPREPAIRIlG IlIDUSTRY 

2-22 

Said Industrial Relations Committee he, and it is hereby offi- 
cially authorized to proceed r'ith the ho,ndling of lal^or com- 
plaints and labor disputes arising under the Code for such 
Industry, pursuant to the a-o iroved olan of -procedure. 

ilATIOIAL liiDTTSTRIAL RECOVERY BOARD 

/s/ 17. A. HARIilMAI^" 
Administrative Officer 



9732 



OPDER NO. 2-23 

co:-!]: oi' PAn coiipstitioii 

POR 
SIIIP3UILDi:7C> Aia SHIPESPAIRIIIG liJDUSTRY 

Approval of Plan For Adjustment of L.-^lDor Convolaints £c Disputes 

OHDZH NO. 2-24 
CODE OV PAI2 COMPSTITICN 
POH THE 
SHIPBUILDING- AlID SKIPEEPaIIUNC- i:mUSTRY 

Granting Farther Extension of Provisions of Section 3, Sut- 

Section (c)« 

OHDini NO. 2-25 
CODE OP PAIR 'COlffETITIOir 
FOR TEE 
SHIPBUILDIIIG M-D SHIP2EPAIRING IIIDUSTRY 

EXEIvIPTION 
NATI ONAL RECOVERY ADI -INI STRAT X ON 

Granting Application of i marietta Manufacturing Cojapany, Point 
Pleasant, TTest Virginia, for a Tenporary E.xeni':tion from the 
Provisions of Prrt 3, Paragra^oh (a), of the Code of Prir Com- 
pe'titicn for the Shi-ouuilding and Shipre^Dairing Industry'-, as 
amended. ' ' ' 

OFJ}ER 
NO. 2-25 
CODE or FAIR C0I3'ETITI01T 
FOR TP3 
SHIPBUILDIL'G At© SHIPRSPAIRING IlfDUSTRY 

AP?OIKTMEi[T O:-' ADLIINI STRATI ON lEi.SSR 
OP THE PIuUrNING AiZ) FAIR PR.VCTICE 
aGEI.'CY 



9732 



-138- 

VHEHEAS, Arl)a B. liarvin, "iTho pursuant to srid -jrovision of 
said Code, was on Pebraa.ry 16th appointed Adiainistrr.tive 
Member for said Shipbuilding pnd Shiprepairing Industry Com- 
mittee for p.c.icl Industry has submitted his resignation for such 
Administrative Member, rrhich resignation has been .accepted; 

NOW, THEIlEPOHE, pursuant to the authority vested in the 
National Industrial Recovery Board by the Executive Order of 
September 27, 19o4, and otherwise, it is hereby ordered that 
Francis E. Lee, Assistant Deouty Administrator for national 
Recovery Adiainistration, be and he is hereby ap'oointed and 
constituted as Administrative Member without vote to said 
Shipbuilding; and Shiprepairing Industry Committee for said 
Industry to serve during the pier sure of the ITati' ^lal Indus- 
trial Recovery Borrd. 

OJlDiilB. IJO. 2-27 
CODE or FAIR COiTETITION 
FOR THE 
SHIP3UILDI1TG AID SHIPEEPAIRIIfO IIIDUSTRY 

NATIONAL REC0\1;RY ADMINISTRATION 

NAI/E 07 CODE: Shi-obuilding and Shipre^airing Industry, 
CODE NO, 2 

APPLICANT: Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee, 
11 Broadway, New York, Ji. Y. 

QUESTION: In Sub-Section (c) of Section 3 of the Code, 
does the six months' period begin on the ef- 
fective date of the Code or on the date the 
order is placed for each new ship? 

INTERPRETATION: The six months' exception permitted under 
Sub-Section (c) of Section 3 of the Code of 
Fair Competition for the Shipbuilding pjid 
Shiprepairing Industry begins on the date the 
order is placed for each new ship. 

***** >|t ******)):***** l(( 

Draftsmen and Mold-Loftmen 

The Assistant Deputy Administrator, by letter of December 6th, 
informed the Code Authority that in the event interoretntion of Sec- 
tion 3 (c) as to vrarJcing certain emoloyees on ne^,' shiij construction 
being favorable it would be necessary for the Code Authority to pass 
a resolution aooroving epch case for epch shipyard that will be permitted 
to work under the excention and in view of such inter'oretation (2-27) 
being favorable thereuoon on motion of T7, H. Gerhauser, seconded by 
Roger Williams the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 



9732 



^139- 



T7HZKEAS7 certain rinval contrr.cts vrere r.rrardet', in Av.^Gt 1934 to: 

Bethlehem Shipbiiildin.^ Corp. Ltd, (Quincy, i.I?s3,) 

Electric Boat Com-onny 

United Shiphuilding & Dry Dock CorT). 

Federal Ship'builc'in/:; li Dry Dock Co, 

ller? York Shi'iLuildin ; Corporr.tion. 

NeiT^ort ilens Shipbuilding & Dr-' Dock Co. 

TJHEESAS, such contrpcts -.-ere allocated to the above shipyards as 
f ollovs: 



Number 
CL-46 

CIr-47 

DD-380 
DD-S82 
DD-331 
DD-3S3 
DD-384 
DD-385 
SS-176 
SS-177 
SS-173 
TJHEREAS , ■ 



TT-^e of Vessel 

Li,-;ht Cniiser 
II II 

Destroj'er 
II 
It 
II 
II 
II 

Submarine 
II 

II 
Section 3 (c) 



Shjioyp.rd 

lien York Shipbuilding Corp, 

llevroort liens S/3 & D/D Co, 

Bethlehem Shiphuilding Corr). 
II . " n II 

Federal S/3 & D/D Co, 
II II II II II 

United S/B & D/D Co. 
II II II II II 

Electric Boat Cora^anj'' 
II II II 



" " " , and 

of the Code for the Shipbuilding and Ship- 



repairing Industry orovio.ea for the follo-dng exceptions: 

"For a periou. of si:: (6) nonths exception nay be nade in the 
number of hours of en^loynent for the employees of the Shi'p- 
builders engaged in designing, engineering i'lid in raoldloft 
and order departments rnd such others rs are necessary for 
the preparation of plans and ordering of materials to str^rt 
work on nev ship, .cons tnj.ction, but in no event shall the num- 
ber of hours \7orked be in excess of forty-eight (48) hours 
per r'eek, s.nd in no case cr class of cases not a.ioproved by the 
Planning and Fair Prpctice Committee provided for in Sec- 
tion (3)" , and 

TTHEI-vEAS, The Code Authority is in receipt of Administrative Order 
Ho, 2-27 dated December 13, 1934, rhich reads as follorrs: 

QJESTIO:.: In Sub-Secticn (c) of Section 3 of the Code, does the 
six months -jeriod be ;in on the effective date of the Code or on the date 
the order is pl.^ced for each ner; shi"n7 

I1JTSP.PPJETATI'"'": The six months' e::ception Ternitted under Sub- 
Section (c) of Section 3 of the Code of Fair Competition for the Ship- 
building e-jid Shiprepairing Industry begins on the date the order is 
Dlaced for each ne^ shii?" . 



9732 



-140- 



NOW, TffiCEEFOEE, 3S IT EI^SCLVED: That the above shipyards are 
granted the privilege of '■'orking s.ll trades eniunerated in Section 3 
(c) of the Code for a rieriod of six (5) months fron the date of the 
contracts on the ebove named vessel's. 

As to a further extension for draftsmen and loftsmen as regards to 
contracts older thaji six months, this matter is still in the hands of 
HEA and it is anticipated that action will "be taken at an early date. 

Trial Tri-ps 

Administrative Order 2-18 granting exception of Part 3, Sections 
a and b coverin,;; employees in testing installations, machinery and 
equipment for ships etc. , expires on December 27, 1934, and ina-smuch 
as a continuation of this exception is necessary, upon motion of Mr. \J, 
H. Gerhauser, seconded by ROti'er Williams, the following resolution was 
adopted: 

WHEREAS, the exception granted by Administrative Order llo, 
2-18, staying the provisions of Part 3, Sections (a) and 
(b) of the Code of Fair Competition for the Shipbuilding 
and Shipreriairing Industry, covering employees in testing 
installations, machinery, and equipment for shi;os, dock 
trials and sea trials to demonstrate satisfactory opera- 
tion or contractual requirements where it is impracticable 
to do the work with sa,fety or to the satisfaction of the 
customer's inspectors by the employment of additional men, 
expires on December 27, 1934; and, 

WKEEEAS, the same conditions aiToly at this tine as when 
Administrative Orders llo, 2-14 and 2-18 were issued; 

BE IT RESOLVED, by the Code Authority that the Administra- 
tor further stay the provisions of Part -3, Sections (a) 
and (b) until June 16, 1935. 

Galveston Area 

(Resignation of Chairman and Secretary) 

(Election of llew Officers) 

The Chairman reported that the Secretary of the Code Authority 
is in receipt of a letter dated December 26th from Mr. R« C. Johnson, 
former chairman of the Galveston area in regard to change of officers 
in the Galveston area. 

:4c af! 34e * >)« If' 3^ * ^ >S itc 

Administrative Order X-11 9 

(Prescribed Rules and Regulations for. tho Protection of Funds 

Received by the Code Authority) 



9732 



-l'il-« 



The Chairman reported thp.t p.ll conditions required by this order 
can be net hy the Codo Authority ?_nd that in the meantime a bond in the 
amo-ont of $10,000 hp.d b«.;en tpi:en out to cover the Treasurer, the bond 
being olaced '-ith tl:e United Str.tes Guarantee Companj'-, a copy of ^.^hich 
will be nailed to the Assistmt Deyiuty Adiiinistrptor, 



* Ji: ********* * 



Validity of Rules an.d He^rulations 

The Chairman reed into the record a letter dated lioveraber ISth 
from Mr. H. If. TTliittelse ;■' covering exchan£;e of telegrams bet'/een the 
Galveston area and hUA in connection with the validity of the Rules 
and Regulations. The Chairman at this point referred also to a letter 
dated May 13, 1934 fron ilr. TThittelsey therein the validity of the 
Rules and Regulations ^-'a.s coninented upon by Assistant Counsel of IIRA 
and the Code Authority at this time endea,vored to learn from Mr. 
Whittelsey the legality of the Rules and Regiilatio:is adopted October 
2, 1933 as on the date of their adoption the Chrirman s'-^ecif ically 
asked Mr. U. H. Davis, De'outy Administrator at that time, as to the 
propriety of havin,;; the Rides and Regulations approved by the President 
of the United States so as to become "the law of the land" to which Mr. 
Davis stated that he ha.d taken the matter up with Colonel Lea and it 
was thought the Code Authority ha.d sufficient loower und.er the codo 
to enforce the Rules a.nd RegxLla.tions as written and that the approval of 
our Rules and Regulations '-ould establish a precedent. 

This matter of the contents of the Rules and Regu.lations '-'ill be 
studied by the Committee n.cting on code revision and nothing will be 
done at the -oresent to h-ve them approved by the Administration as 
originally written. 

By-Laws - (Code Authority 

(Trade Pr; ctice Corrolaints Committee 

The Chairm.ari re-oortea th-t Mr. H. ITewton Whittelsey had forwarded 
to the ChairmaJi of the Code Authority proposed by-laws covering the opera- 
tion of the Code Authority a3ad also for the operation of the Tra,de 
Practice Complaints Committee ajid upon motion by Mr. A. B. Homer, sec- 
onded by Mr. Roger Tilliams, both subjects -rere to be referred to the 
Committee on Code Revision for study and re jort thereon. 

Revision of Shiobuildin-- and Shi-ore-oairin>-: Code 

The Chairman re-oorted that the Committee a'opointed to consider code 
revision is still working on revision of the code but that the matter 
would be taken up with a vie^- to having it in such she.pe that it can be 
printed at aai early date and sent out to the industry for suggestions 
before submission to IIRA for hearing. The Chairman informed Mr, 
Whittelsey that the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry has not 
accepted the revised definition for shipbuilding and shipre-oairing. 



9732 



-143- 



S tan d ards of Health and Safety 

The Chairnan directed the attontion of the Code Authority to a 
letter from llr. 1', llewton ¥hittclsey dated Decenher 12th in connection 
with the adoption of clauses in the Code to cover Stajidards of Safety 
f,nd health. Before adoptin ; such provisions, the Chairman asked the 
Assistant Deputy Administrator to forward to him such standards as al- 
ready have "been adopted by other code autbrities and incorporated in 
their codes so that the na.tter could he considered hy the Coda Author- 
ity and the Code ?Levision Cormittee. 

Emergency Work 

The Chairman rcoorted that the Code Authority is in receipt of a 
great number of reoorts coverinj; eniertjency vrork under the shipbuilding 
and shiprepairing code. The Code Authority under date of June 13th had 
submitted an amendment to the Code but it -was withdrawn ss it could not, 
at that time, bo acted u jon i-^ithout a public hearing. Nothing has been 
done in connection vith the pressing of this amendment since that date. 
The Chairman did, however, agree to send I,Ir, Whittelsey a memorandum on 
emergency work and this will be done '/ithin a, day or two. 



973^ 



-143" 

JAIUARY 17, 1935, I.ErTirG HELD AT 11 BnOAWAY, 7171 YO^i CITY, At 
10:15 A. i.. Sriefs atid ey:cerptz iron ;;inutps. (?.ef. Deputy's Files 
in Sec. 2) . 

There -.-ere present, represent in;.: the Industrjr, Messrs. H. Gerrirh 
Snith, Chairiian, S. TI. TTaicenan, Robert Tlaig, iRoger Williais, TJ.H.Ger- 
hauser; representing the Adj^iinirrtration, Tessrs. Trancis E. Lee, 
Captain Henrj'- Millions, J. S. "i.cDona;rb, C. G. Knerr, Secretarj'-Treasurer. 
Others present rere Colonel \J. TJ. Zose, I)ep\ity Adiiinistrator, :.;r. H. 
Ks'Tton TTaittelsej'-, Assistant Depatj- Adrainistrator, ;;r. L. Y. Spear. 
Those absent rere ' r. Joseph Ha^g, Jr. and Lr. R. L. Ka^oie. 

Financial Str.tev.ents 

The financial statements for the --lonth of December, 1934, on notion 
of i.r. W. H. Gorhauser, seconded b3^ l.r. Roger Williairis vere approved and 
made a part of the official minutes. 

Adninistrative Orders 

The follo'ving Adninistrative Orders veve read and placed in the 
record for the inf ori.iat ion of the Code Authority: 

Order 
TTo.2- 28 

CODE or PAIR COITSTITIOH 
TOk 'the 
SHIPrjILDIlT-AITD SIIIPREPAIRIIIG INDUSTRY 

Den^-in,'^ 31an':et Extension of Section 5, Subsection (c) of the Code 
and Granting Extension thereof rrith limitations and conditions to the 
ITeTi-port i'evTs Shipbuilding and Dry Dock ComiDany, the Bethlehem Shipbuild- 
ing Cornoration and the ITevr Yorh ShiiDbuilding Corporation. 

ORDER 
ITo. 2-29 

CODE or FAIR COIPETITIOK 
SHIPBUILDIIIG A."D SHIPHEPAIRIilG INDUSTRY 
AS Ai.ElIDED 

C-r?jiting Further E::emption iron Provisions of Part 3, Sections (a) 
and (b), of Employees Engaged in Testing Installations, hachinei-y and 
Equipment for Ships, Doch Trials and Sea Trials. 



5732 



Indt istr ial 2elatiQn s C or.inittee 

Tlie CliaimrJi reoorted that "betutien nestings a letter "ballot hai 
been tjurei:. of tiie Indxiptrj' Lsmliers of tlie Code Authority relative to the 
nojiin'^.tion of Tr. Joseph YT. Hart, as an industry liemher to represent en- 
plovers on. the Co:.inittee, to siicceed hr. Jaiies Svr;m, resigned, a:id the 
Chairnpn therefore as]':ed for ratification of the lollovring resolution 
rrhich had "been previoxislv sent to h.R.A. \inder date of December 28,1934. 
The resol-ation reads as follo-7s: 

"T]HEf:EAS on I.iarch 15, 1^3'±, the Shipbuilding and Shiprepair- 
ing Industr^;^ Coanittee passed the fcllovriug resolution: 

'There shall be constituted b3' appointment of the 
Acaiinistrator for the Shipbuilding an-d Sliiprepairing 
Industry axi Industrial delations Cour.ittee to be coii- 
posed of seven (7) ■.leribers: three (3) to be nominated 
by the Code Authorit3?' to represent the employers. 
Three (o) to be norainatcd bj- the Labor Advisoiy Board 
of the llationa". Recover;- Administration to properly 
represent the employees in the Industr^r, and one (l) 
to be selected by the other si::.' ; 

"AI'D "IIEHMS, Jan.es Svan, who pursuant to the -iDrovisions of 
se.id resolution, T?ar; on April 6, 1C34, appointed a member to 
represent employers on the Industrial Itelations Committee of 
said Industry, has submitted his resi;:^ation as of January 14, 
183§, 

"■JOTJ, THEZSFOrj, 3S IT PSSOLVED: Tliat hr. Joseph y. Hart is 
hereb:/ nominated bv the Code Authority as an Industry"- hember to 
represent erai^loyers on the Industrial Hela,tions Committee as 
of Januar;,' 1-1, 1S35 to tahe the place of L'r. Janes Swan, 
resi|.'3ied" 
Overt r le I-eyond Weekly Ho urs 

The Chairman reported that since receipt' of Administrative Orders 2- 
28 aiid 2-29 therein \7a.s embodied the fol].o\;ing proviso: 

"Provided ho'jever, that if an employee on an hourly rate works 
in excess of eight (S) hou.rs in any one day or in excess of 
thirty-six (36) hours in pny one vjcelz he shall be paid at the 
rate of at leo.st one and one-half (iv) times his reg-alar hourly 
rate for overtime so '■Torked; hovrever, in the compxitation of 
pay v/hen such an employee \70rl:s during any one reek overtime 
in excess of both eight (8) hours per day and thirty-si" (36) 
hours per reel:, the overtime pay shall not be compounded by 
addition of both dally raid i/eckly overtime, but the employee 
shall be paid either the sum of the overtime pay eacned dur- 
ing the overtime da^'s or the ovcrtire pay earned during the 
overtime ree':, whichever is the higher for said week." 

he had received a.dvicc from raer.bers of the Industry protesting overtime 
payment beyond vreekly hours nnd that the proviso vras in direct conflict 
with Section 3 (b) of the Code whereby employees on ship repairing are 

9732 



-145- 

TDemitted to ATork 40 hours a week with an average of 36 hourr> over a six 
months' period. 

The Chairman referred to interpretation given by i.r. TJ. K. Da-iis, 
our Deputy Administrator at the ti'ie and incorporated in the ninutes of 
the Code Authority of January 4, 1934 which reads 

"That overtime is not to he paid for the four hours in excess 
of the 36 hours in any one week hut is only to he paid for 
hours in excess of eight hours in any one day." 

and this interpretation was released to the Industry as Interpretation 
Ho. 11, dated January 4, 1934. 

:.:essrs. Berhauser, Walcenan, Haig and YJilliams further au^nnented the 
statement hy citing specific instances to show the inpracticahility of 
the order as it related to the shipbuildin:': and shiprepairing industrj?-. 

The Industry Lemhers of the Code Authority protested the above ral- 
in2 by IT.H.A. 

Both Colonel Hose, Deputy Ad'Tinistrator, (ind H. Nev/ton Uliittelsey, 
Assistant Deputy Administrator said that the natter could be referred 
back to i'.?L.A. for reconsideration and therefore the following resolu- 
tion was offered by Kr. Roger Willians, seconded by hr. Robert Haig, and 
carried: 

"Tihereas in Adjninistrative Orders 

llos. 2-5 
2-16 
2-19 
2-25 
■ • • 2-23 
2-29 

"II. H. A. have directed that overtime be paid beyond weeklj' 
hours as well as beyond daily hours the Code Authority pro- 
tests this ruling as not being ■.•ithin the reajairements of 
the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Code, and further has 
never been a practice of the Industry and therefore is un- 
acceptable to it; and 

"■;SI:?:EF0ZE, be it resolved, That the Code Authority directs 
its Chairman to address a letter to I''.R.A. asking that this 
requirement be stricken fron the aforesaid Administrative 
Orders. " 

Revision of Code 

Adoption of Ey-Laws-Code Autiiority 

Adoption of By-Laws - Trade Practice Complaints Committee 

Validity of Rules and Re-^ulations 



)732 



-l-:-6~ 

The Ch?.irmaJi of the Code Authority re;oorted that "both Colonel Rose, 
Deputy Adninistrator, and IJr. H. ITevton V/liittelsey, Assistant Deputy 
Adiainistratoi- had urged, a revision of the Shiphuilding and Shiprepairing ' 
Code and that the natter had haen, disciissed "by the Chairman at some 
length \7ith Loth the Deiraty azid Assistant Deputjr Administrators. It was 
requested that Colonel. 5ose might state to the Code Authority his rea- 
sons for feeling: that the Code should he revised at the present tine. 

Colonel Rose ntated tnct since the adoption of the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Code, i7hich nas Code No. 2, that many provisions had been 
adopted by U.S.A. -iThich it was felt should be in all codes and that fur- 
thermore the present Code was l3,cl:ing in certain provisions to take care 
of cases that had arisen and that it is his belief Code Revision would 
be of benefit to the Industry. He stated he did not want the Industry 
to think he was attenpting to coerce it in, any manner by pressing for 
Code Revision and thereupon gave the following examples of what the Code 
does not now provide for and which in his opinion should be incorporated 
in a revised Code. 

1. The definitions are inadequate. It h^s been suggested 
thsut there be a Havnl Shipbrdlding Code, a Commercial 
Shipbuilding Code, and a Shiprepairing Code. Also that 
the Code oj ~ht to be modified with respect to the boat 
building Code v.here there is conflict. 

2. Question of hours of work in connection with draftsmen 
and mold loftsmen, where v>ey is in excess of $35.00 a 
week. 

3. Question of hours for clerical staff. 

4. Provisions for emergency I'ork. 

5. Provision of testing installations and trial trips, etc. 

6. Hours of \7atchm.en and firemen. 

7. Clause to prevent employees from exceeding maximum hours 
by working for tv.'o employers. 

8. Lack of Regional and Divisional Code Authorities. 

9. Present Code Authority represents Naval builders 
only. 

10. Absence of Pair Trade Practices. 

In the discussion of these matters it v/as pointed out that the pre- 
sent Code Authority does not represent Naval shipbuilders only as only 
two of the members of the Code Authority are builders of naval vessels 
and that through the Committee set up under the Rules and Regulations 
which were developed in connection with the Code that all geographical 
districts on the coasts of the United States and on the Great Lal^es are 
represented. 



9732 



-147" 

This led to a discussion of the Ziules and .ietJu.lationr> adoi^ted 
October 2nd, 1933. 

l.;r. Uliittelsey stated that these Cornnittees are not recognized hy 
N.R.A. The Code Authority argued that thej- should be reco^Tiized by 
II. 2. A. because the Rules and Regulations had been developed in coopera- 
tion nith : r. TTilliam H. Davis, our Deputy Administrator at the trie and 
that they had been approved bj'' hin. 

Colonel Rose stated tha.t he V7as unaware of this fact and he felt 
tha.t the matter should be referred to hin by letter in order that he 
might definitely ascertain as to whether the Roles and Regulations have 
a legal stajading or not. It v/as pointed out to Colonel Rose that the 
Rules and Regulations had certain fair trade practices incorporated in 
theyj and that although the natter had been previously subnitted to II. R. A. 
for a ruling as to legal itj^ that it vas felt the natter had never been 
definitely disposed of. 

The Chairiiian vras directed to subnit this natter to the Deputy Ad- 
ministrator for action. 

Section 5 (c) Of The Code - Draft snen and ilold Loftsnen 

Paragraph 3 (c) of the Code rith reference to the enplojaient of 
draftsmen and loftsnen contain the following phrase at the end of the 
paragraph : 

"aiid in no case or class of cases not approved b;'' the Plan- 
ning and Fair Practice Comnittee provided for in Section (8)." 

In vievf of the wording it nas deei-ned advisable that the Code Auth- 
orit;"- should approve of longer hours for both draftsmen aaid nold lofts- 
men that had been working under this provision of the Code and thereupon 
passed the following resolution offered by i.r. S. T7. Wakeraan, seconded 
by ;;r. Roger TJillians: 

"TTHERSAS, the Assistant Deputy Atoinistrator, by letter of 
December 6, 1934, infomed the Code Ai\thority that in the in- 
terpretation of Section 3'(c) as to working certain employees 
on new ship construction it would be necessarj'' for the Code 
Authoritj;- to pass a resolution approving each case for each 
shipyard that would be pemitted to worl: under the exception, 
and 

"¥?ISREAS, an examination of the previous minutes of the Code 
Authority fails to disclose such.reo^^uest by any prior Admin- 
istrator or Deputy Administrator on prior exceptions, and 

"TflEREAS, certain Kaval contracts were awarded in August 1333, 
to: 

Hew York Shipbuilding Corporation 

Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. , Ltd. 
United Dry Docks, Inc. 

8732 



-11:8- 

3?th Iron 7for]'5 Cor^'ioration 

Pederal Shipouiloinc £-. Dtj Dock Co. 

Electric 3oat Conpany 

re'.-riort i>Ie\ s Siiip'buildin..3 P.- Dr-j Boch Co. 

-and Co:inercial Contrr.ctG in J-ujie 1933 to Ilerrjort Hers Sliip- 
■buildin:^ and Diy Dock (lov'-Tcxiir , aiid in Janurry 1334 to V.e\i 
York Shipbuilding Corporetion, ':ni on i-lovenber Ic, 1933 to 
United Dry Docks, Inc., 

"WiEHEAS, such contracts ucre alloca,ted to the above shipyards 
as follovs: 

Ilnj'-iber Tyne of Vessel Shipyard 

DD 356-39 Destro^^ers lle.v York Shipbuilding Corporation 

DD 360-3 Destroyers Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp., Ltd. 

DD- 364-5 Destroyers United Di-y Dock, Inc. 

DD- 365-7 Destroyers Bath Iron Uorks Corporation 

DD- 368-9 Destroyers federal Shipbuilding & S/D Co. 

SS 174-5 Subnarines Llectric Boat Conpany 

CV 5-6 Aircraft Carriers Ijevroort Ile'.-'s S/B & D/'D 

CA 44 Heavy Cruiser Bethlehem Shi^Dbuilding Corp. 

CL 42-43 Li;-:;ht Cruisers ■Terr York' Shipbuildint-; Corp. 

2 Carro Vessels 

for A. H, Bull kerport Ileus S/3 & D/D Co. 

2 Gil ta:;kers for 
Standard Va,cu''jm 

Transportation Co.i'oiJew Yhrk Shipbuilding Corp. 

3 iiotor Tankers 
for Socony- Vacuum 

Oil Co. United Dry Docks, Inc. 

"WHEZSAS, Section 3 (c) of the Code for the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Industry provides for the follorring exception: 

'For a period of skit (6) nonths exception nay be 
made in the ntij.-iber of hours of employnent for the 
employees of the shipbuilders ejjgagftd in decsi^ning 
engineering and in mold <sroft and order departments 
and such others as are necessary for the prepara- 

.tion of plajis and ordering of materials to start 
work on new ship construction, but in no event 
shall the number of hours vjorked be in excess of 
forty-eight (43) hours per week, and in no case 
or class of cases not approved by the Planning 
and Fair Practice Committee provided for in Sec- 
tion (8). ' 

"TJHEPJEAS, the above shipyards 'jere granted privilege by the 
Administrator of working certain trades enumerated in Sec- 
tion 3 (c) of the Code 



9732 



-149- 



ITo . of 
Drier- 

3y Adninistrative Order 2-3 ret.S, 1S34 to i.'ay 5, 1934 

. S-17 liay 5, 1934 to Kov.3, 1954 
2-24 ITov. 5,1934 to Dec. 5, 1934 

and 

"TniIl?XAS, the Industry r/as notified 'hy tele^rans, "bulletins 
and circular letters as fol.lo-s: 

1st Extension - Circular letter of 2/2/o4 and TulZetin 

I'D. 2 of 2/19/34 
2nd Extension - Telegram of Lay 3, 1954 and Circular 

Letter of i>,y 3, 1934 
5rd Extenrion - Telegram to seven yards of ITov. 8,1934 

and Circular Letter of IIov.27, 1934 

"31 IT PJESOLVED, That the Planning and lair Practice Coranittee 
ijrovided for In Section (8) of the Shipbuilding and Shipre- 
pa.iring Code, approves such cxeuption in each of the above- 
naned cases." 

Section Z (c) Oi the Code - Draftsnen and Loftsnen 

By Ad'ilnistrative Order 2-28 the plants of the Bethlehem Ship- 
building Corporation, Ltd., (Quincy, liass.), lie V7 York Shipbuilding 
Corporation and the lle-nort llerrs Shipbuilding and Drj' Bock Conpany 
were granted j)ernission to '-ork longer hours on certa.in contracts, i.ir. 
Whittelsey asked the ratification of the Order by the Code Authority' so 
that these plants could be privileged to '.7ork certain classes of labor 
longer hou.rs. 

The Code Aiithority apr)roycd the irorking of longer hours at these 
pl?n.ts bu.t restricted its approval of the order (2-28) by the follow- 
ing resolution offered by kr. Roger Uillians, seconded by kr. T7. H. 
G-erhauser. and carried: 

"RESOLVED, That the Code Authority approves Order 2-28 
granting longer hours of work of draftsnen a,nd mold 

loftsmen at the plants of the lien York Shipbuilding 
Corp., ilevTport ITerrs Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Co. and 
the i<iuincy Plant of the Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corpora- 
tion, Ltd. , except as to the provision for the poyraent 
of overtir.-.e beyond thirty-six (36) hours." 

Emergency TTork 



The Chairman reported that -onder date of Jonua;:y 9, 1935, kr. H. 
Herrton ^littelsey had written a letter to the Code Authority stating: 

"It is understood that necessary emergency repairs to vessels 
have been made over a long period of years in energenc3'" 



9732 



-150- 

situations 'jhere'by a danger or menace to the safety of 
a vessel, life or property existed; or where a delay 
^70^^1d have '-'orhed an undue hardship on an ormer. 

"Ho\7ever, i-^hen the raaxirauii hour provisions of the Code 
are exceeded in '-rorkin;:; under such eneri^encies, special 
exemption from the raaxinxin hour "orovisions of the Code 
must he obtained either hy an anendnent to the Code or 
hy an exemption of a temporar;^ nature. 

"The Code has not been amended to permit work beyond the 
naxim-om hours of the Code in emergencies, nor has any 
exemption been requested or granted. The sunendnent re- 
quested on June 13, 1S34, was withdrawn. 

"Therefore, there exists no authorization for any ship- 
buil din/5 OJ" ship repairing yard to work in excess of the 
maximum hour provisions of the Code on emergencies sjid 
any yard so working would lay itself open to a charge of 
violation of the Code, even if it does file a report with 
the Shipbuilding jnd Shiprejiairing Indiistry Committee." 

The Ghairriian reported that all yards have been submitting weekly 
reports covering emergency viork in accordance with action tal:en bj"- the 
Code Authority with the Icnowledge and advice of its Deputy Administrator 
under date of November 16, 1933 and that the various unite of the in- 
dustry have been submitting their reports in accordance with the action 
taken at that meeting which reports show the reason for working overtime 
and are duly noto.ri^ied over the signature of an official of the Company. 

The Industry under date of Jtuie 13, 1934 presented a pi-oposed 
amendment to the Code to cover a definition of "emergency work" but 
in vie-' of other matters that vrere liadcrstood might be tal-cen up at the 
same time the Industry requested that the proposed amendment be held 
up. 

The Code Authority again discussed the cue;:tion of amending the 
present Code to cover emergency work and the following resolution was 
offered by I'r. Roger 7illiams, seconded by ;:r. Hobert Haig, and carried: 

"KESOLVED, That the Code Authority authorize its Chairman 
to clarify with 11. R. A. the situation with respect to emergen- 
cy work and to request approval of such definition of emer- 
gency work for the shipbuilding and shiprepairing industry 
as necessary to clarify this matter; and 

"EZSOLVED, That the following is adopted as a definition of 
emergency work: 

'The term "emergency" means that a sit-aatlon 
whereby a danger, or m.enace to the safety of a 
vessel, life or ijroperty exists; or where a delay 
would work an undue hardshi;p on an omer or con- 
tractor. ' 

9732 



.■ -151- 

"And that to each of the ParafTaphs 3 (a) and 3 (b) of 
the Code there be added the follov,'ing TrordG: 

'The above limitation of hours, in any one 
TTeelc shall not apply to er.ier^ency worl:' 

"AND SE IT FtJPJHEP. xffiSOLVED, That pendin,^: the adoption of 
the amendjnent by II.R.A. that a temporary exemption be 
granted for emergency rork by "/.R.A. to the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Indut'try." 

L abor Advisory IDoard 

The Chainian reported that the Code Authority was in receipt of a 
communication fro:;i L'r. Solomon .Barkin, Assistant Executive Director of 
the Labor Advisory Board dated Janua:^ 10, 1935, requesting certain 
information as to the advantages viiich have accraed to the Code Author- 
itj'- from the presence of a labor representative on the Code Authority. 

On motion duly Seconded and carried the letter vras ordered to be 
laid on the table. 

Audit Of Accounts 

The Chairman reported that under Administrative Order X-119 Pre- 
scribing Pules and Regulations for the protection of funds i-eceived by 
Code Authorities it would be necessary that the accounts of the Code 
Authority be audited. On motion of V.r. S- TL ¥aJ:eman, seconded by 
"ur. 7. H. Gerhauser and dul^' carried, permission ras granted to employ 
a Certified public Accovjitant to audit the books of the Code Authority. 

Bond 



The Chairman reported that a bond had been talzen out by the Treas- 
urer and photostatic copy had been sent to T.R.A. but that 11. R. A. had 
written the folloring letter dated January 8, 1534 in connection 
therev.'ith: 

"The photostatic copy of your bond in the amoutit of 

$10,000, written by the United States Gua,rantee Company, 

has been duly submitted with ny recommendations and has 
been accepted as sufficient in amount. 

"However, the Code Authority Account Section points out 
that if any other officers of your Code Authority are 
empowered to draw upon the f-unds of the Code Authority, 
those officers or employees should be bonded. 

"/s/ H. liewton Whittelsey 
"As::isi.ant Deputy Administrator 
"Division 2, Section D, Group 3" 

As checks, in order to be negotiable, must be signed by the Chair- 
man in addition to the signature of the Treasurer, question arose as 

9732 



-152- 



to necessity of a bond to cover the co-signer. Colonel Rose stated 
that in vievj of the fact that checks require both the signature of the 
Treasurer and the Chairman, and since the Treasurer is bonded, in his 
opinion I'.R.A. nould not require an additional bond, but that he rrould 
talce the matter in hand vilth a vie^-- to having a prompt decision ren- 
dered by N. E. A. 



3732 



-153-*- 
Shipbuilding and Shiprcpairing Industry 

FEBRUARY 21, 1935. IviEETIlIO HELD AT 11 BROADWAY, KEff YORK CITY, 
AT 10:15 A.M. Briefs and cxerpts from Minutes (Reference: Deputy's 
Piles, Section 2). 

There were present, renrcsentins the Industry, Messrs. H. Gerrish Smith, 
Ch-airman, S. W. Tfalceman, Joseph Haag, Jr., Roger Williams, W. H. Gerhauser; 
representing the Adniini strati on, Messrs. H. Tewton Whittelsey, Assistant 
Deputy Administrator, Francis Lee, Administration Representative, 
J.^S. McDonagh, Captain Henry Williams, C C. Kncrr, Secretary-Treasurer, 
Messrs. Rohert Haig and R. L. Hague were absent. 

Financial Statements 

The financial statements for the rao:^th of January 1935, on motion 
of Mr. S, W, Wakcman, seconded by Mr. W. H. Gerhauser were approved and 
made a part of the official minutes. 

Administrative Orders 

The following Administrative Orders were read and placed in the 
record for the information of the Code Authority: 

ORDER NO. 2-30 
CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION 
FOR THE^ 
SHIP:3UILDING AND SHIPREPAIRING INDUSTRY 

Acceptance of the Resignation of James Sv/an and the Appointment of 
JoscT)h W. Hart as a Member of the Industrial Relations Committee. 



ORDER NO. 2-31 
CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION 
FOR THE 
SHIPBUILDING AND SHIPREPAIRING INDUSTRY 

Granting application for partial stay of the maximum hours provisions 
of the Code of Fair Competition for the Shipbuilding and Shiprcpairing 
Industry, contained in Part 3, Paragraphs (a) and (b), to permit 
emergency work. 

Executive Orler No. 69 49 (Non-Waiver 
cff Constitutio nal Rig hts in Con nection 
T^ith Codes of Fair Competition )_ 



Rules and ReJ:ulations 

The Chairman reported that the subject of the Rules and Regu- 
lations, discussed at the previous mectin,;- of the Code Authority, had 

9732 



-154- 

again teor. submitted to IIBA for a ruling as to whether they are valid 
or not "but that u;o to date no final action had been taken although it 
is understood that the matter is under consideration by HEIA.. 

Overtime in Excess of 36 Hoii-rs , ' 

As discussed at the previous meeting of the Code Authority, a 
statement was submitted to MA under date of January 28th, protesting 
against the imposition of overtime on weekly hours in view of the fact 
that overtime is s^oecif ically covered in the code as applying to daily 
hours only and thjat tho requirement, for overtime beyond weekly hours as 
well is outside the provisions of tho code. This matter is being 
followed up with a view to elimination of overtime beyond weekly hours. 

Emergency Work 

There was presented to the Code Authority an order 2-31, appearing 
on pages 4 and 5 of the minutes, received this day, granting a sixty 
(60) day stay on emergency work but stipulating the payment of overtime 
beyond weekly hours as vvell as daily hours and also requiring that 
reports of emergency work be submitted to the Industrial Relations 
Committee within five (5) days after the end of the week in which such 
emergency work is performed. This ma,tter was discussed at length at the 
meeting and both of these provisions were protested and the Chairman of 
the Code Authority was directed to proceed in accordance with the follow^ 
ing resolution offered by W. H. Gerhauser, seconded by Roger Williams, 
and carried: 

"THE CODE AUTHORITY RESOLVES: That the 
Chairman of the Code Authority be di- 
rected to protest to IffiA. the Adminis- 
trative Order No. 2-31 in its present 
form as being opposed to the payment of ■ 
overtime beyond the maximum hours of 
the Code, and as opposed to the provi- 
sion of the Order requiring weekly re- 
ports of overtime performed' to be re- 
ported to the Industrial Relations Com- 
mittee unless such reports are the re- 
sult of a complaint filed in regard 
thereto: and, 

"FURTHER: That the Chairman be di- 
rected to communicate with NRA and re- 
quest an opportunity for the Code 
Authority to appear before the National 
Industrial Recovery Board and present 
its point of view regarding these 
matters. " 

Captain Henry Williams renresenting the Ylavy D^wartment on the 
Code Authority stated tiiat a ruling had been nvado by the Comptroller 
General to the effect that overtime on work performed in government 
establishments was on a basis of weekly hours only and does not apply 
to daily hours, that is, to the effect that tho overtime applies on 

9732 



. -155- 

only one basis of hours' and not on two which is the condition now pre- 
vailing in thd shipbuildin.2 industry but which would be changed by the 
requirement of Order 2-31. 

It was also stated by raembers of the ividustry at the meeting that 
the overtime provision would increase the cost of reppirs and add to 
the tendency to the' repair of vessels in foreign -"lorts to the dis- 
advantage of American industry and American labor. 

Re-Qort of ChairiTian on Hearings - 
I' T. R. A. on Employment 

The Chairm-an retjorted briefly on the hearings held by IHA from 
.January 30th' to February 3nd, on the subject of employment and in- 
formed the raembers that a brief statement on this had already been 
sent to them. 

Auditor's Report 

-The Chairman presented for record in the minutes of the meeting, 
the Certified Public Accountant's report of code expenditures from the 
inception, of . the Code to December 31, 1934. Instructions were di- 
rected to forward tlirec copies to iffiA in accordance v/ith their request. 

Resolution Re Working of Draftsmen on New 
Construction. (Para. 3 (c) of the code). 

The following resolution with reference to working of draftsmen 
on new ship construction was offered by'W. H. Gerhauser, seconded by 
S. W. Wakeman, and carried: ' . 

."WHEREAS, certain Naval contracts were awarded in August 1934 to: 

Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp., Ltd., 
(Q,uincy, Mass. ) 
. ' Electric Boat Company 

New York Shipbuilding Corp. 

WHEREAS, such contracts were awarded to the above shipyards 
as follows: 

No. T?rpe of Vessel YARD 

CL-Ce Light Cruiser New York Shipbuilding Corp. 

•-DD-380 Destroyer Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. Ltd. 
DD-382 " " 

S3-176 Submarine ' Electric Boat Company 
SS-177 " " 

SS-178 It r II 

WHEREAS, Section 3 (c) of the Code for the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Industry provides for the following exemption: 

"For a period of six- (6) months exception raay be 
made in the number of hours of employment for the 

9732 



-156- 

employees of the Shipbuilders engaged in designing, 
engineering and in mold-loft and order departments 
and such others as are necessary f(tr the preparation 
of plans and ordering; of materials to start work on 
new ship construction, but in no event shall the 
number of hours worked be in excess of forty-eight 
(48) hours per week, and in no case or class of 
cases not approved by the Pla-.ning and Fair Practice 
Committee provided for in Section (8)". 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that it is necessary to the progress of 
preliminary work on the aforesaid naval contracts, upon which the 
rapid employment of men in the construction of these vessels depends, 
that there should be a further extension from and after February 1935, 
for a period of four (4) months, of Paragraph 3 (c). Regulation of 
Hours of Work in the Code of Fair Competition and Trade Practice for 
the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry; 

MB BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if the Navy Department by virtue 
of changes on CL-46 determine that such changes as arc made to CL-46 
are applicable to CL-42 and CL-43 that the same exemption may be 
granted in the preparation of plans and mold-l«ft work on these two 
hulls, CL-42 and CL-43." 

Resolution will be forwarded to NRA for action. 

Definition of the Word "Emergency " 

The wording of the term "emergency" as contained in the temporary 
Stay granted by HRA (Order No. 2-31 ) was considered and on motion of 
S. W, Wakeman, seconded by W. H. Gerhauscr, was adopted. This defi- 
nition is in lieu of that adopted at the meeting on January 17th, and 
reads as follows: 

"The term 'emergency' mean's that- situation involving 
danger or menace to the safety of a vessel, to life, 
or to property, or v;hcn a delay would work an undue 
hardship on the owner or the shippers or the passengers 
through loss of use of a vessel for prompt loading or 
discharge or prompt and safe carriage of cargo or 
passengers to destination," 

Additional Regulation - PWA Work 

The Chairman called the attention of the members to a joint reso- 
lution of the Treasury Department and the Department of the Interior 
with relation to the expenditure of Public Works Funds wherein each 
contractor and subcontractor engaged in the construction, prosecution 
or completion of any building or work of the United States or of any 
building or work financed in whole or in part by loans or grants from 
the United States or in the repair thereof is required each week to 
furnish an affidavit with respect to the wages paid to each employee 
during the proceeding week. He informed the meeting that a protest 
had been filed under date of February 16, 1935, with Mr. Ickes, on 
this subject. 

9732 



-157- 

LIARCH 21, 1935. MEETING HELD AT 11 BROADWAY, I^TEW YORi: CITY, AT 
3:00 P. M. Briefs and exerpts from Minutes (Reference: Deputy's Files, 
Section 2) 

There were present, representinc^ the Industry, Messrs. H. Gerrish Smith, 
Chairman, Joseph Haag, Jr., Roger Williams, W. H. Gerhauser, S. W. Wakeman, 
and Robert Haig, representinji the Administration, H. Newton Wliittelsey, 
Assistant Deputy Administrator, Francis Lee, Administration Re|)rescntative, 
J. S. McDonaeh, and Captain Henry Williams, and C C. Kncrr, Secretary- 
Treasurer. Mr. R. L. Ha^ue was ah sent. 

Financial Statements 

The financial statements for the month of Fabruary on motion of 
S. W. Wakeman, seconded by W. H. Gerliauser were approved and made a part 
of the minutes. 

protest on Time and a Half Provision Beyond Weekly Hours 

The Chairman called attention to the Code Authority's letter of 
February 21st on this matter and to the fact that no action had yet been 
taken upon it. He informed the Code Authority tliat Mr. Joseph Haag, Jr., 
W. E. Gerhauser and himself had anpcared before representatives of the 
U.I.R.A. on March 6th and liad presented both a written and an oral pro- 
test against the imposition of overtime on a dual basis, as overtime is 
already provided for in the Code beyond daily hours. (Copy of written 
protest is made a part of the minutes.) 

Mr. Whittelsey informed the Committee that he anticipated action 
UTion this matter in the near future as the papers are in such shape as 
to be forwarded to the National Industrial Recovery Board within a few 
days. 

The Industry-Members of the Committee complained of the great 
length of time taJzcn on matters submitted to NRA and asked for in- 
formation as to the routine throur!;h which an item such as the above 
had to pass before final approval, and it was reported to be as follows: 

The above case was forwarded to the Industrial Relations Committee, 
Research and Planning Division, Industrial Advisory Board, Consumers 
Advisory Board, the Labor Advisory Board and the Legal Division. 

Each one of the above groups submit its recommendations. Upon 
returi to the Assistant Deputy Administrator a memorandum is prepared 
by him forwarded to the Deputy Administrator, '. examined by his Aide and 
if the Deputy Administrator concurs he signs it. It then goes to the 
Code Assistant of the Division Administrator, examined by him and if 
satisfactory to the Division Adrrdnistrator he signs it. 

It goes from him to the Review Division, v.-hich is an independent 
body and hias the right to reverse the decision. All shipbuilding matters _.■: 
go through both the Assistant Head of Review and the Head of the Review 
Division. When passed upon by the Review Division it goes to the 
Administrative Officer. of NRA whose signature upon it is final. 



9732 



-158- 

The Industrial Relations CominitteG consists of six members, 
Research and Planning about eight, Industrial Adyisor.y Board about 
the sane n'juiber. Consumers about the same number, Labor six or seven, 
and the Lethal Division two. 

Rules and Regulations 

Mr. TiTlii tt el s ey , stated that his report upon this matter could be 
expected in the very near future as he is in receipt of^ corajnents from 
various e,roups to v/hom this matter lias been submitted. 

Extension of Section 5 (c) of the Code 

It was the sentiment of the Code Authority that a resolution be 
passed setting forth the delay in the construction of naval vessels 
caused by the length of time required in secioring action by KRA on pro- 
posed extension of exception Section 3 (c) and that such resolution be 
forwarded to those shipbuilders interested in connection v/ith claims 
for extension of time on naval contracts where delay has been caused by 
reasons beyond the shipbuilders' control. 

Aiiiendment to Code to Cover Emerr;encies 

At the request of Mr. T^hittelsey the following resolution was • 
imssed as to a definition of the word "emergency" under the Code which 
definition supersedes the proposed definition passed by the Code 
Authority on Januar:' 17, 1935 and February 21, 1935. 

"RESOLVED, That the following is adopted as a 
definition of emergency work: - ■■ 

'The term "emergency" means that . . 
situation involving danger or menace 
to the safety of a vessel, to life, 
or to property, or where a delay 
would V¥ork an undue hardship on the 
owner or the shippers or the 
passengers through loss of use of a 
vessel for prompt loading or dis- 
charge op prompt and safe carriage 
of cargo or passengers to destina- 
tion; and 

"FURTHER, BE IT RESOLAffiD, That to each of the 
paragraphs 3 (a) and 3 (b) of the Code there 
be added the following vrords: 

'The above limitation of maximum 
weekly hours in any one week shall 
not a-">ply to emergency work, ' " 

Mr. Whittelsey informed the Committee that he anticipated early 
action upon: this matter of emergency work. ■ • 

.It was pointed out, however, that this matter had been referred 
9732 



•• -159- 

to KEA by letter of January 17th and that a temporary stay of sixty days 
granted under date of Pehruary 19, 1935 (Administrative Order No. 2-31) 
contained provisions as to overtime that made it unacceptable to the 
industry. Early action upon this matter was requested. 

Overtime in the Mobile Area 

Having been requested by IISA to give its interpretation of the term 
"day" as used in the Code the matter was discussed and the following 
resolution was moved by Mr. Gcrhauser and seconded- by Mr. Williams, and 
unanimously carried: 

"RESOLVED, That it is the sense of the Code 
Authority that the 'day' referred to in the 
Code means 'Cn.lcndar Day'." 



T 



lO-^oT^^ '^^^ ^^?^* ''■'^^'^■I^^'^' --^^LD AT 11 BROADWAY. !TEW YORK CITY, AT 
Pii;s. SecUofs)" ^^-^^^.^.^^^^l'^^ ^^-'^ '^'^-^ (Reference: LepUty-s 

q^ifL^^^n'"^''^''^ present, re:oresentine the Industry, Messrs. H. Gerrish 
rrprese.U-r~T' ^^^-.''^^^l--^ ' ^°^ert Haig, and' Joseph I^ag Jr" 
representing tae Administration, Messrs. Prancis E. Lee, R. L E^Ae 
Eaptain rienry .rn 11,^^3 ^^^ C. C. Knerr, Secretary-Treas^e; Others' 

Mes!;s r\7 SnT' ^"^^.r^^^^^^ Relations Committee. Those absent were 
Messrs. S. W. Wakeman, W. H. Gerhauser and- J. S. McDonagh. 

Financial StatpniPntc, 

Eoherr^H-J^'''^''''''^^%^''i'T*' ^°'' ^^' "°^*^ °^ '^^^^^^ °^ "^°tion of 
mrt of T^' '-"^°^'^^^ ^y J°^eP^ H^-^-ag. Jr. v,e're approved and made a 
pai L 01 tne minutes. 

Administrative Orders 

recorr?n^°^^°"'''^' ^^^^^^^i^^^^i^^ Orders were read and placed in the 
record for tne iniormation of the Code Authority: 

ORDER NO. 2-32 
CODE 0? FAIR COMPETITION 
SHIPBUILDING AND SKIPREPAIRING INDUSTRY 

?or1eLtioTn' °' ^!-.SMpbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee 
tainini to t^ provisions in Exemptions and Partial Stays granted, .^e 
111 hot f f ^^^^^™^^t *-^t at least time and one-half be paid for 

c ipor^ed'in Ad '"■ TT °' ''" """'"^ ^'^^^^^^ ^°-^ °^ "- Code in! 
2-S anl 2 'l ^^'""^'''^^^'^'^ OrdersNos. 2-6, 2-16, 2-19. 2-25. 2-28, 



73 er- 



* i|t !'! Jlc =!: :!: ^- ,■< ^ ^ 5), ^ 



CR^ER NO. 2-33 

CODE OP PAIR COIvIPETITION 

SHIP^UIL!.ING AITL SHIPREPAIRING INDUSTRY 

buiMJ^f Exemption from Part 3 (a) of the Code to the New York Ship- 
bSidx'^S Corporation. Electric Boat Company and the Bethlehem Ship! 

o?^the CoL^^^^'^'^r' '' ^"'™'' ciesigners to exceed the maxim-.m hours 
of tne Code on certain i^aval shipbuilding designs. 



* « * ))! ^:: sK * * * * * * 



(^) Dual Overtime Provisions 

^2) Appeal From Der.i ^ jon Administrative Order 2 -52 

(3) Resolution re: Staying Reouest Por Action On 
™gMmgnt_Coveri: .ig Definition Of "Entergency " 

(4) Resolution Of Confirmation Of Request Tor 
9732 



-.161- 

Turther Stay To Fernit "Saerffency V/or3c " 

Hesol-ution i'o. 1 — noved by Mr, Ro;;;,er Villinins, seconded "by Mr, 
Joseph ria.a.Q, Jr. ?.nc. carried: 

"WHZ?J]AS, ?lie -preparatio:: of plaii? in conneckion with the 'building 
of naval vessels and pr.rticulcrly tho prompt prep^,ration of plans r?- 
-sulting fron clianges is i-iecescary to the expeditious construction of 
naval vessels and the carryin^j; out of chvnges at the plants of con- 
tractors constructing naval vessels; and 

"WHERMS, The working of longer hours per weeh if. essential to the 
preparation oi' such plans and in the laying dovm of vork in the mold 
loft to exi^edite the work of construction and maintenance of emplojonent; 
and 

"'.VHEHEAS, There has heen presented to ll.R.A. hythe Code Authority 
under date of Febriiary 7, 19S5, e. request to extend the period of exemp- 
tion provided in Section 3 (c) of the Code; a,nd 

"WHEBEAS, This action taken by letter of February 7, 1935, was 
ratified by i ormal" resolution of the Code Authority at its meeting on 
February 21, 1935; and 

"'.7HEREAS, The Code Authority has been unable to obtain sanction to this 
extension' without the imposition by IT.R.A. of dual overtime provisions 
in the determination of overtime on a vreekly basis as v.'ell as on a 
daily basis, v;hichever is tiie greater; and 

"WHEREAS, The overtime consideration cannot be accepted -by the 
Industry as it v;ould establish a precedent foreign to overtime practice 
of the Industry; 

"BE IT RESOLVED, That the tardy action of ll.R.A. and its 
final refusal to grant relief to the contractors from 
the unacceptable- dual overtime provision, is equivalent 
to comielling them to perform all v.'ork v/ithin the limit- 
ations of the regular Code hours, v,-hich may occasion 
delay, due to causes beyond the control of the contractor 

•■ and without his negligence, in the completion of naval 
vessels now under construction," 

In connection with the above resolution it was felt by the In- 
dustrial Members of the Code Authority that it might be well to con- 
eider delays on other requests for exejiptions .with the view of sub- 
mitting a broader resolution than the above, ?/hich matter vdll be 
taken in hand. 

Resolution Ho, 2 — moved by Mr, Roger Williams, seconded by 
Mr, Robert Haig, and carried: 

"3E IT RESOLVED, That the Action of tne Chairman taken by 
letter of April 8, 1935, informing LIRA that the Code Author- 
ity exxiccts to a:-ipeal directly to the Industrial Ap'ieals 
Board tne provision ct>ntained in Administrative Order 2-32 
be and is hereby ratified and directs the Ciiairman to pre- 

9732 



-162- 

pare an appeal and upon conrtTletion to file vjith and a-o^ear 'before the 
Industrial Appeals Board," 

Resolution No. 3 — Moved "oy Mr, Joseph H?xig, Jr., seconded by 
Mr. Roger V/illiEiras, and carried: 

"RESOLVED, TImt the action take;: 'by the Cliairman in his 
letter of April 8, 1935, staying the request for oxtion 
on the amendment to the Code to cover the definition of 
the v.'ord 'emergency' covered in the Code Authority's letter 
of March 28, 193D, be and is hereby ratified," 

Resolution ITo, 4 — moved by Mr, Roger Williams, seconded by 
Mr, Joseph Haag, Jr., and carried: 

"RESOLVED, That the action of the Chairman taken by his 
letter of April G, 1935, requesting tiiat a further stay 
of the maximum hour provisions of the Code of Fa,ir Com- 
petition for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Inaustry 
contained in Part 3, Para^^^.raphs (a) and (b), be granted 
to June 16, 1935, be and is hereby ratified." 

August 20, 1935, Meeting of the Industry Members of the Code 
Authority called for the nojrpose of closing up its affairs, v/as held 
on Tuesday, Aug-ust 20, 1935, at 10:30 A. M. in the office of the 
National Council of American Shipbuilders, 11 Broadv/ay, Nevj York, New 
York. (Ref. Minutes, Deputy's files) 



There were present the following: 

Roger ViJilliams 

S. W. Wakeman 

W. H. Gerhauser 

Josei:-.h Haag, Jr, 

Robert :"aig 

H, Gerrish Smith 

C. C. Knerr, Secretary 

Excerpts of the Minutes are as follows: 

" Reading of Mi nut es 

"The reading of the minutes of the 
meeting held on April 26, 1935, ?/as dis- 
pensed with and approved as they had been 
previously submitted to each member of the 
Code Authority." 

" financial Sta.t ements 

"The financial st8,tercents for the 
months of April, May, June and July v;ere 
approved and amde a- y,>art of ' the minutes." 



9732 



-IBS'* 

" Liq'aic'.ation of Code !Fu nds 

"The Caaiman recorded tiiat after 
all disbtirsenent (for ?.ll areas) iiad 'been made, 
a balance of $15,382.27 rp:p.ained -unexpended, 

"There was also disc"'.ission as to the 
disposition of the files n,nd records of the 
Code Authority and District and Local Areas, 
and it v;as the opinion t^iat these records 
sho\ild be placed, "onder the jtirisdiction of 
the !I;itional Coimcil of American ShiTibiiilders li' 

"The balance of $13,582.27 as matheraat- 
ically c-dciilated would be equivalent to a refund 
of $0.185S97 on the dollar and the following 
le\;ter, to be addressed to those nierribers of the 
industry who contributed to the expense of adjninis- 
tering the code, v;as a^-reed u^^on as covering the 
disposition of coth moneys and records," 

" ' (jame of Individual Firm 
to be Inserted) 

Gentlem.en: 

"The Industry Members for tne Ship- 
building and Shiprepairing Industry- that 
were represented on the -Code Authorit,]/ 
for the Code of Fair Competition and Trade 
Practice ;i?.ve held no i.ieetin;;;^s since April 
ue, 1935 uiitil Augu.st 20, 1935, on which 
date a meeting \'as held to consider o.nd 
recomoTiend action as to the disposition of 
the files and records, and the liquidation 
of moneys obtained fror-; code assessments 
and nov; on iia-jid. 

"There is attached hereto a definite 
statement of receij^ts and ex-Tenditures for 
the period July 26, 1933 to June 16, 1935* 
The receipts from assessments and. from the 
liquidation of furnit"are and fixtui-es 
totaled $72,071.41 and the total exp'endit- 
ures were $58,639, 14 » leaving a balance for 
distribution of $13,332,27 or $0.185997 for 
every dollar received. Your proportion 
would be $ , 

"It is believed th t ali of those who 
contributed to the administration of the Code 
will be satisfied upon an inspection of the 
financial sto,tements that strict economy v/as 
exercised in the administration of the funds 
by the Ood.e Authority, the District and the 



9732 



--1G4- 

LocF.l Lrea Cnr.nittGes — -ra nco;:.o:.ij* 

tiiat could only have "been ootained 

Cy mo^'zinrj; v,sq of existirit; organizations 
r.'ithin t.ip industry* 

"It is ^Ut.gfcsted tnat tlie industry 
assent to tlij disposition of the file ?,nd 
records and the distribution of uneiiiOended 
funds cts- follows: 

1. That the Hc=.tional Ccuiicil of 
jlmerican Shi'o Guilders "be as- 
signed to ta're ca,re of such 
files and records as it is im- 
portant to preserve. 

2. That tne TanecjiJended balance of 
individufi.l or corporate volun- 
tary" contrih'iti.Tns to the ad- 
;;iinistr3.tion of the Code (that is , 
$0.185997 for every dollar re- 
ceived) be assigned to txie .'ation- 
al Council of American Shipbuild.- 
ers to be expended in trade asso- 
ciation activities for the ship- 
building and shipre'oairing industry 
as the 1:^- tionn-1 Council of American 
Shipbuilders rn.-.;y deem just anu proper, 

3. Tliat if thj individoa-l or corporate 
contributor is not s".tisfied to dis- 
tribute the bt^laiice on hand 3.s 
sUf;,gested above tlia.t a checl: be made "^ 
out ^.n ru.j.iled to him or it in an 
amouiit '■•nich sliall oqu.al txie balance 
of his contribution remaining in the 
fund, 

"Please note tiiu attaxhed tv;o forra 
letters - 'Form Ho. 1 assenting to itcra£( 
l-Ios. 1 and 2 above, £ind Porm ilo. 2 assent.i'hg 
to items ITos. 1 .and. .'5 above, v/hich are sent 
to you for you_r convenience in. ■■ asDOnding to 
the above recor.Tinenda.tions, It v/ill be ap- 
preciated if you will fill out i^roraptly the 
one ■■0 v;hich you agree and retxirn it to this 
office, 

• "In order to facilitate a prompt closing 
oixt of the wor:': of the Code Authority it will 
be assiimcd th:\z if a reply to ou:r letter is 
iiOt reC' ivod on/or before .September 15, 1935 
f'.v9.i^ you assent on your part to the Form 
Le t te"r- Ha, _ 1- a£.at to you. 



97S2 



-165- 

"There ic enclosed for your con- 
venience a self-a.i-dressed, Gtamped en- 
velope for your reply. 

Very truly yours, 

C. C. Knerr, 
Sccrotary '" 

"la view of t.ie f:.ct th?.t thir. is 
the last i.ieeting to dispose of all mp.tters 
relating to the adninistration of the Code 
and tl'L^'t it '."'as called for the purpose of 
cl-osin^: up the affairs of the Code Author- 
ity the minutes are hereby ap'oToved and 
signed hy the Industry flemhers of the Code 
Authority, 

"/s/ Ro'^er V'illiams 

"/s/ S. '.7. Wakernan 

"/s/ n. H. Gerhauser 

"/s/ Joseph Ea.a.ci, Jr. 

"/s/ Robert Haig 



"ATTEST 

"/g/ C. C . Knerr 

Secretary" 



" /s / II . G-errish Smith 



;732 



-5-66" 



4, Agencies of the Code Authority 

(a) Local. See Tield Organization 

(h) CoTnpli;ince. See Field Organization 

(c) Statistical. See Field Organization 

5, Field Organization 

The plan for the ITation-il Committees, District Committees and 
Local Area Committees was first suonitted as part of the "By-Lai^rs (so- 
called) for administering and enforcing the Shipbuilding Division of 
the Shiphuildin • and Shiprepairing Industry" and the "By-Laws (so- 
called) for adxiinistering and enforcing the Shiprepairing Division 
of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry". (Ref. Vol. II, Code 
Record Safe and £xh. I and Exh. J Appx, ) 

The original 3y-Lpws as submitted were modified and approved 
by Industry as per the following excerpt from letter of August 20, 1955 
from H, Gerrish Smith, President of the National Council of American 
Shipbuilders to K. Kewton Whittelsey, Assistpjit Deputy Administrator, 

(Ref. £xh. N-l, Appx.) 

"(c) Bv-La\7s, Immediately after the Code was signed 
by the President of the United States a meeting was 
called of all shipbuilders and shiprepairers who 
vrere proponents of the Code, the first meeting being 
held on August 1, 1935 for the discussion and formula- 
tion of final by-laws for the shipbuilding and ship- 
repairing division, as some of the provisions contained 
in the original code jrere deleted by the Administration 
from the Code proper b\it it was understood the pro- 
visions could be incorporated in the by-laws, 

"Companies having representatives at the meeting of 
August 1st, were: 

Wevrport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Com^^any 

The Pusey & Jones Corporation 

Alabama Dry Dock & Shipbuilding Compaiiy 

The J,;aryland Dr^/ Dock Company 

Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, Ltd. 

Sun Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Company 

New York Shipbuilding Corporation 

Todd Shipyards Corporation 

Kensington Shipyard 5: Dry Dock Corporation 

Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. Ltd. (West 

Ccnst plants) 
New York &. New Jersey Dry Doik Association 
National Council of Aaeric^n Shipbuilders 

"The by-laws for both divisions ^'ere gone over and 
after thorough discussion they were left with a drafting 
committee to smooth them up. This was done and on 

9732 



-167- 



August 4th and 8th, at meetings of ahipbuilders and 
shiprepairers the ty-laivs were put in form for pre- 
sentation to the Shiphailding and Shiprepairing 
Industry on August 9th, 

"At the meeting on August 9th, at which representatives 
of the following conpanies were present: 

The Maryland Drj Dock Company 

The Pusey £c Jones Corporation 

Alabama Dry Dock & Shipbuilding Company 

Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation 

Todd Shipyards Corporation 

Sun ShiiDbuilding « Dry Dock Company 

Norfolk Shipb-oilding & Dry Dock Company 

Kensington Shipyard & Dry Dock Corjj, 

NeiTport News Shipbuilding ci Dry Dock Co, 

Ira S, Bushey & Sons 

National Council of Anerican Shipbuilders 

the by-la77S for both the shipbuilding and shiprepairing 
divisions were finally ironed out and adopted and made 
effective at 12:01, August 14, _ 1933. 

'"It was the belief of the proponents of the Code that 
the adoption of the by-laws was within their power. 
These by-laws were submitted to all members of the 
Industry prior to the election of a Code Authority, 

"The first meeting with the 'Deputy Administrator was 
.on August 28, 1935, at which meeting much time was devoted 
to going over the by-laws (effective on August 14th) to 
see if they constituted in any wy an amendment to the 
Code. (See II. E, A. Release No. 540 of August 28, 1933), 

"The meetings held on September 6th and 11th were devoted 
almost entirely to getting the by-laws in some form which 
would be acceptable to Mr, Davis, and after a public 
hearing held on Tuesday, September 26th, the Rules and 
Regulations dated October 2, 1935, supplanted the original 
bjr-laws of August 14, 1933, 

"Znswering your specific question -under (c), the by-laws 
were not put in force by the Code Authority but were 
adopted by the Industry as shoT-Tn above. " 

The By-Laws as revised by Industry, effective August 14, 1933, 
were the subject of a hearing August £3, 1933, (?.ef. Code Record 
Section). It was determined to chaage the title from By-Laws to 
Rules and Regulations, 



9732 



-168- 



The Eules and Regulations were the principal subject of con- 
sideration in meetings of the Shipbuilding Industry Committees (Code . 
Authority) held September 6, 1933 and September 11, 1933, (Ref. 
Minutes, Deputy's Files), They were further the subject of the 
hearing of September 26, 1933, (Ref» Code Record Section) and 
meetings of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee 
(Code Authority) held September 27, 1933, and October 2, 1933. They 
were finally ^proved by the Committee at the October 2, meeting, 
(Eef, Minutes, Deputy's Files) of vihich the following is an erccerpt: 

"lir. Smith raised the question as to the propriety of 
having the Rules and. Regulations approved by the President 
of the United States so as to become the "law of the land", 
Mr, David reported that he had taken this matter up w.;th 
Colonel Lea and that it was thought, that the Cod* Comiiittee 
had sufficient power under the code to enforce the Rules 
and Regulations as written and that the approval of our 
Rules and Regulations would establish a precedaat. Mr, 
Davis was of the opinion, however, that if the RuLes and. 
Regulations were found to be unenforceable that he wfWild.' 
again take the matter up with the Adraini-st-rator to 
have them approved by Executive Order, 

"Mr, David then suggested that the Rules and R©gulati^i>«' 
be signed by earh member of the Code Commi-iTtee and this 
was agreed "t«, 

"The Rules .and Regulations (Ref, £xh. L, Appx, ) -promxi^sted: 
under the authority of the C'*de Committee were then read 
and upon motion by Joseph Haag, seconded by Robert Halg, 
the f ollowing^ resolution was adopted: 

'RESOIYEB: That these Rules and Regulations 
having been discussed and agreed lopon are 
thereby adopted. ' 

A. v«te was talcen by the Code Committee and. all answered 
in the affirmative, 

■"A poll was then tjicen ef the Presidential Appointseo and 
they approved of the Rules and Regulations as adopted," 

It is the opinion of the Assistant Deputy (the author) that 
the foregoing recounted a,dvice was one of the' two basic unfort-unate 
incidents thai lead to the difficultistj of the Industry under the 
Code and the administration of it. As later history proved, this 
instrument should have been, immediately submitted to the Administrater 
for approval. 

Both the By-Laws (so-called) and the Rul«s and Regulations 
consisted, in fact, of t¥if0 parts. The first part pertained to the 
National, District and Local Area Committees and their functions, and 
the second .part -to Trade Practices, The later .history of the R-oles 

9732 



-169- 



and Fvegulations is hereinafter set forth under Title III - Code 
Administration, sub-title C. - 5y-La'7s, prge 454 hereof. The 
'first part, tein^ lar^jely adrai:iistrative, was generally within 
the authoritj'- of the Code Autnority, even thou/;h not formally 
e.pproved, and the respective Committees were duly 3et up and 
functioned durintt^ the period of the life of the Code, 

The following is rn excerpt of tlie "Sy-Laws (so-called) for ad- 
ministering and enforcing the Shi2:5 0uilding Division of the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Industry, a,s originally submitted with the Code 
(Ref. Vol, II, Code Record Snfe and Exh» I, Appx. ) , which pertains to 
these Committees and their functions: 

"S£&R£GATIO:; OF THE SHIPB'TILPIIJCr IITOUST RY 

2, For the puroose of pd:.iinistration of the Code 
the shipbuilders vill be segregated, according to 
the location of thpir respective shipyards, into the 
following najor geographic districts: 

(a) Atlantic Coast 

(b) Gulf Coast 

(c) Pacific Coast 

"ad;.:ijis tr ation 

3, The Code shall be administered by a Coirrnittee 
of eight (8) members; five (5) elected from the 
Atlantic Coast; one (l) from the G-ulf Coast and 
one (l) from the Pacific Coast and a Ciiairman who 
will be the President of the National Council of 
American Shipbuilders without the right to vote, 
ilach of the seven (7) members of the Commi'ttee 
elected from the Atlantic, G-ulf and Pacific Coasts 
shall be a representative of the Individual Members 
of the National Council of AmeriCcin SliipbuilderS 

or signators of this Code, 

4, The Atlantic Coast members of the Committee will 
be elected in the following manner: 

(a) The President of the National Council of Americ'^Ji 
Shipbuilders shall appoint a nomin3,ting corani.ttee 
consisting of three members representative of the 
shipbuilding industry. This Committee shall promptly 
prepare two ballots, 

(1) The first ballot will consist of four (4) candidates 
chosen to represent shipyards employing less than an 
average of l,nno men for the preceding t'-'el^^e (12) months, 

(2) The second ballot will consist of si- (6) csjididates 
chosen to represent shipyards emplo-^in? m.ore than 1,000 
men for the preceding twelve (12) ^nonths. 



9732 



-17l- 



(b) Ar'ditional n<?jnes may "be placed on tne b-llots 

on written petition of npt less than six (5) siiiiDyrir ds, 

(c) From the first h-llot t'^o (2) re-oresentatives 
will "be elected by a n'.jority vote of the shipbuilders, 
where each .shipbuilc.er shall be entitled to cast 

one vote for e-ich of t^/o representatives, 

(d) From the second ballot three (Z) representatives 
will be elected by a majority vote of the shit)builders 
ivhere each shijcibuilder shall be entitled to cast one 
vote for each of thre-^ representatives for eaxh l,nnr) 
average worlcinen employed by such shioyrd on shipbuilding 
work d'orin,:;^ the preceding t-.7elve (12) months prior to 
such election, 

(e) Alternates will be selected by the principal to 
substitute for him in his absence. 

(f) Gulf and Pacific Coast representatives and alternates 
will be elected by their respective groups, 

(g) The Vice President of the iJational Coijjicil of 
American Shipbuilders will serve as .alternate for the 
ChairrarrL, 

5, In the event of a complaint by a shipbuilder that 
can not be amicably adjusted by the Committee, then 
such shipbuilder shall have the right to appeal through 
the Chairmmi to the Administration of the National 
Industrial Recovery Act, The Chairman shall present 
the subject in dispute to the Ad:ministrator and shall 
provide an opportunity for the dissenting shi-pbuilder 
to be heard- ^t the s.ame time, 

6. The Comnittee shall hear all complaints and consider 
proposals for amendments to the Code or exceptions thereto. 
The Chairm.an shall perform the service of liaison officer 
with such officers as may be appointed by the President 

of the United States to effectuate the ]oolicy of the 
National Industrial Recovery Act, " 

The following is an excerpt of the "By-LaA7S (so-called) for 
acministering and enforcing the Shiprepairing Division of the Ship- 
building and Shirepairing Industry" as originally submitted with the 
Code (Ref, Vol, II Code Record Safe and Exh, J, Appx,), "^hich pertains 
to these Committees and their functions: 

"SEGRiLGATIOH OF TEE SHIPP.gPAlRIHG- IIPUSTR Y 

2, For the purpose of administration of thp Code the 
shiprepairers will I^p segregatedj according to the location 
of their respective shipyards, into the following major 



9732 



>-171- 



geographical districts, 

(a) Atlantic Coast 

(b) Gulf Coast 

(c) Pacific Coast 

3, The shiprepairers on the Atlantic Coast will he 
further sef'-:;;re:>T^.ted according to the location of their 
respective shipyards into the folloi7ini^ local geographical 
districts: 

(a) Ne\T Snfland 

(b) Nei.7 York 

(c) Dela^^are River and Bay 

(d) Chesapeake Say 

(e) Harroton P.oads, inc lading the 

Sov..th Atlantic Coast, 

4, ShiTorepairers \7hos8 yards are sitaated on each of 
the Gulf Coast and Pacific Coast will he segregated 
into such local districts as they may determine to 

be advisable, 

"AJHIiaSTRATIO II • ■ ' ' 

5, The' Code shall be administered by the organisation 
of the following named Committees: 

(1) Local Committees 
(Z) District Coij.mittees 
(3) National Committee 

6, Local Committees , The shiprepairers in each local 
district shall organize a Local Committee with a 
Chairman ajid a Vice-Chairman, and such otlier officers 
as they may deem necessary, 

7, Each Local Committee shall be responsible for the 
enforcement of the Code, insofar as practicable, in 
its local district, 

3, As a means of providing an equitable representation 
on the District Committee, as hereinrfter provided, the 
shiprepairers in each local district shall elect two 
representatives to serve as members of such District 
Committee on the following basis: 

9. One representative will be elected by a majority 
vote of the shiprep?,ir<"-rs where each shiorepairer shall 
be entitled to cast one vote, 

10, A second representative shall be elected by a 
majority vote where each shi'orer^airer shall be entitled 

9732 



-173- 



19, The National Committee shpll h.^ve a Chairman, '.7ho 
shall he elected by a majority vote of the total nunhe r 
of memhers of the District Committees. He sh-^ll not he 
identified as an officer or employee of any partnership 
or corporation en^^aged in building or repairint-; vessels, 
nor shall he be entitled to vote, 

20, ■ The National Committee shall act and consult with 
its Chairman on subjects of national scope, including 
the hearing and ar'-justment of complaints and the con- 
sideration of proposals as to ths aiiiendment of the code 
or exceptions thereto. The chairman sliall perform the 
service of contact officer with such officers as may be 
appointed by the President to effectuate the policy of 
the •^National Industrial Recovery Act." 

21, If rjiy Local Committee shall refer to the Chairman 
any subject for his advice eJid action, which, in his 
judgment, is properly a subject for consideration by 

a District Committee, he shall refer the subject to 

such District Committee for its action and recommendation," 

The folloy;ing is an excerpt of the Eiiles and Regulations as 
ppproved by the Shipbuilding and Sliiprepairing Industry Committee 
(Code Committee) October 2, 1933 (Ref. Exh, M Appx, ) , which pertains 
to these Committees and their functions: 

"I, SEGRSGATIOII OF THE SHIPHUILDIilG lilDUSTRY 

For the porpose of administering the code, the ship- 
builders will be segregated, according to the location 
of their respective shipyards, into the following major 
geographicfi^l districts or groups: 

(a) Atlantic Coast 

(b) G-uli Coast 

(c) Pacific Coast 

(d) Great Lakes 

(e) ' Mississippi and Tributary Fivers 

(f) Other major groups that msi'- come 

under the Code. 

"II. SIfIP-:?UIJJ)IHG COMMITTEE 

1, To assist the Code Committee in the administration of 
the code there shall be elected, in the manner directed 
by the Code Committee, a Shipbuilding Committee of not 
less than nine (9) members, of which until otherwise 
determined by the Code CoD.mittee, five (5) shall be 
elected from the Atlantic Coast; one (1) frxm the Gulf 
Coast; one (l) from the Pacific Coast; one (l) from the 
Great Lakes, and one (l) from the k'jssissippi ai-id 
tributary rivers. The President of tne national Council 

9732 



■ 174- 



of American Shiptuilders shall "be Chairman of the 
Shiphuilding ComTiittee, tut without the right to vote. 
The Vice-President of the National Council of American 
Shipbuilders shall serve as alternate for the Chairman. 

2, It sliall he the duty of the Shiphuilding Comnittee 
to ohtain from employers and deliver to the Code Com- 
mittee such reports in respect to wages, hours of lahor, 
conditions of enplo^yrnent, nujnber of employees, and other 
matters pertaining thereto as nay he necessary, or as 
may he reauired hy the Code Committee to keep the Code 
Committee informed as to the operation and ohservance of 
the code by the shiphuilding industry; and to malce 
recommendations to Code Comnittee \7ith respect to de- 
sirable or prooosed modifications of, additions to, or 
exceptions from the code, and to receive, to consider 
and to atterrot to adjust all complpints (except labor 
complaints) with respect to the operation and observance 
of the code, 

3, It shall be the duty of the Shipbuilding Committee, 
with respect to all infractions and evasions of the code 
within its knowledge, to notify the member or members 

of the industry involved in such infractions or evasions 
to the end that such member or members shall promptly 
desist therefrom, 3Jid in case of raiy such infraction or 
evasion persisted in after such notice, the Shipbuilding 
Committee shall promptly bring such infraction or evasion 
and the proceedings of tne Shipbuilding Committee in 
connection therewith together with any views or documents 
that such member or members may care to submit, to the 
attention of the Code Committee, 

4, In the event that any complaint cannot be amicably 
adjusted by the Shipbii.ilding Committee, then the com- 
plainant shall have the right to appeal to the Code 
Committeel and the Shipbuilding Committee through its 
Chairman, shall present to the Code Committee the matter 
in dispute and the proceedings of the Shipbiailding Com-' 
mittee in connection there .dth, together with any views 
or docToments tlia.t the interested party or parties shall 
care to submit, and the Code Committee will provide an 
oiTDortunity for all interested parties to be heard, 

"III, SEC-REGATION OF THE SHIPHEPAIRIMG INDUSTRY 

For the purjDOse of administration of the Code the ship- 
repairers will be segregated, according to the location 
of their respective shipyards, into the following major 
geographic districts: 

(a) Atlantic Coast 

(b) Gulf Coast 

S732 



-175- 



(c) Pacific Coast 

(d) Great Lakes 

(e) Mississippi Hiver and Tritutr^ries. 

The shiprepairers on the Atlantic Coast i.Yill be further 
segregated according to the location of their respective 
shipyards iiito t'.ie follovdng gFOgraphical areas: 

(a) Hew Englnnd 

(b) IJerr York 

(c) Delav;are River and Bay 

(d) Chesa,peai::e Baj/" 

(e) H.onipton Roads, including the South 

Atlantic Coast 

The shipreoairers on the G-ulf Coast, may be segregated into 
such local areas as they may determine to be advisable. 

The shiprepairers on the Pacific Coast, on the Great Lakefe 
and on the Mississippi River .and Tributaries may be 
segregated into such local geographical areas as the 
district committee in each of these districts decides 
to be^ desirable. 

"IV. LOCAL SHIPRJiPAlRIi'IG COM.IITTEES 

The shiprepairers in each loca.l area shall organize a 

Local Committee with a Chairman and a Vice- Chairman and such 

other officers as they deem necessai'y. 

1. It shall be the duty of each Local Shiprepairing Committee 
to receive, to consider, and to attempt to adjust all com- 
plaints (sxceijt labor complaints) as to the operation and 
observance of the code arising '.vithin its local area. In 

the event that any complaint cannot be ajnicably adjusted 
by the Local Shiprepairing Committee, then the complainant 
shall have the right to appeal to the Code Comnittee, and 
the Local Shiprepairing Committee through its Chairman, 
shall present to the Code Committee, the matter in dispute 
and the proceedings of the local shiprepairing committee 
in connection therewith, together with such views or 
documents as the interested party or parties may care 
to submit, and the Code Committee will provide an oppor- 
tunity for all interested parties to be heard, 

2, It shall be the duty of each local shiprepairing 
committee, with respect to a,ll iixfractions gjid evasions 
of the code within its knowledge, to notify the member or 
members of the industry involved in such infraction or 
evasion to the end that si^ch member or. members shall 
promptly desist therefrom and in case of aiv/ such infrac- 
tion or evasion persi::ted in after such notice, the 

9732 



-176- 



local shiprepairing coinnittee shall promptly tring such 
infraction or evasion, and the proceedings of the local 
shiprepairing coinnittee in connection therewith, together 
with any views or documents that such member or nemlDers 
ma;^'- care to submit, to the attention of the Code Committee. 

3, It shall he the duty of each loc^l shiprepairing 
committee to coooerate with its district shi-oreoairlng 
committee, the National Shiprepairing Committee and the 
Code Committee when called upon to do so, ;:ind each local 
shiprepairing committee shall he free at oL 1 times to 
suggest to its district committee or to the Hat innal 
Committee or to the Code Committee, pny modifications 
of, additions to, or exceptions from the code, tha.t may 
seem to it desirahle. 

"V. DISTRICT SHIPREPAiniNG COLl'IITTSES 

1, Each of the geographical districts into V7hich the 
industry is segregated shall ha.ve a District Shiprepairing 
Committee, Unless and auitil otherwise provided by the 
Code Committee two members of the District Committee 
shall be elected for each local area in that district 

by the shiprepairers in that local area; provided, 

however, thfi the total number of representatives on 

the district committees of the Gulf Coast aid of the 

Pacific Coast coinbined, shall not exceed the total 

n-omber of representatives on the district committee, 

of the Atlantic Coa.st; jmd no shiprepairer shall 

have more than one representative on any district committee, 

nor shall a, shiprepairer have more than two representatives 

on all the dM-rict committees combined, 

2, Each district committee shall elect a chairman 
and a vice-chairman, and, such other officers as it 
may deem necessary, 

3, Each district committee shall have, with respect 
to matters affecting generally the shiprepairers in 
such district, the duties that are set forth in Section 
IV above for local committees with respect to local 

mat ters. 

"VI, ITATIOIJAL SHIPREPAIRING COLOilTTEE 

1. The National Shiprepa,iring Committee shall be 
composed of the chairman of all the district ship- 
repairing committees,, sad. the vice-chairman of each 
district committee shall act as alternate for the 
chairman of that district committee, Ulie chairman 
of the National Committee shall be ele.cted by a 
majority vote of the whole number of members of the 



9732 



-177" 

district committees. He shall not be identified as an officer or 
employee of any partnership or corporation engaged in building or 
repairing vessels, nor shall he be entitled to vote^: 

2. The National Committee shall act and consult with its chair- 
man on subjects of national scope, -including": the hearing and ad- 
justment of complaints, (except labor complaints) the reporting 
and adjusting of infractions and evasions of the code, and the 
consideration of proposed or desirable amendments of, additions 
to, and exceptions from the code, and the chairman shall report 

to the Code Committee all such amendments, additions or exceptions 
as are approved by the National Committee. 

3. In the event that any complaint cannot be amicably adjusted 
by the National Co-nmittee, then the complaint shall have the 

.right to appeal to the Code Committee, and the National Committee, 
through its chairman, shall present to the Code Committee the 
matter in dispute, and the proceedings of the National Committee 
in connection therev^ith, together vdth such views or documents 
as the party or parties in interest shall care to submit, and the 
Code Committee will provide an opportunity for all interested 
parties to be heard. 

4. If any local committee shall refer to the National Committee 
any subject for its advice and action which, in the judgment of 
the National Committee, is properly a subject for consideration 
by a district comm.ittee, the National Committee shall refer the 
subject to such district committee for its action or recommenda- 
tion. 

5. The local shiprepairing committees and the district ship- 
repairing committees may prepare and submit to the Code Committee 
such additional rules and regulations as they may deem appropriate 
to deal with purely local problems in the local areas, and with 
district problems in the. districts. But no such rule or regula- 
tion shall become effective until it has been expressly approved 
in writing by the Code Committee." 

These Committees were duly selected as set forth in a chart dated 
September 22, 1933 (Ref. Exh. L Appx.) and were approved October 2, 1933, 
by the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee (Code Committee) 
(3ef. Minutes, Deputy's files) by the following resolution: 

"The members of the Code Committee were handed a chart show- 
ing the organization of Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry 
Committees for operation under the Code dated September 21, 1933. 
(Ref. Exh. L, Appx.) 

"On motion of I='r. S. W. Wakeman, seconded by Mr. Joseph Haag 
and unanimously carried it was: 

'RESOLVED: That the Commdttees appointed or elected and set 
up on the chart dated September 21, 1933 and attached hereto 
be ratified and confirmed.'" 

9732 



-178- 

The subject Committees as set forth on. the chart are as follows: 

SHIPB UILDERS ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE 
(As Provided By Paragraph 4 of The Shipbuilding By-Laws) 
CHAIHJ/AN - K.G.SMTH - Pres. National Council of Araer. Shipbldrs. 
SECRETARY - C.C.KNERR - Sec. National Council of Amer . Shipbldrs. 
ATLANTIC COAST 1.C.L.3AHD0 _ Pres. New York Shipbuilding Co. 

2.H. L.FERGUSON - Pres. Newport News S/b & D/D Co. 
3. W.S. NEWELL - Pres. Bath Iron Works Corp. 
4. J. W. POWELL - Pres. United Dry Docks, Inc. 
5.S.W.WAKEi^:AN - Vice Pres. Bethleham S/B Corp. Ltd. 

GULF COAST ■ D.R.DUNLAF-Pres. Alabama D/D & S/B Co. 

(ALTERNATE-ANGUS ^.ARSHALL-Pres . Pa. Shipyards, Inc. 

PACIFIC COAST A.S.GUFr:-.Gen. Mg'r. Union Plant, Bethlehem S/B Corp. 

GREAT LAI>:ES W.H.GERHAUSER-Pres. American S/B Co. 

SHIP P.EPAIR3RS NATIONAL COML^ITTEE 
(As Provided By Paragraph 15 of The Ship Repairing By-Laws) 
CHAIPJAAN (Temporary) H.G.SMITH PRES. National Council of Amer. Shipbldrs. 
SECRETARY (Temporary) C.C.KNERR SEC. National Council of Amer, Shipbldrs. 
ATLAlvTTIC COAST JOSEPH HAAG.JR. PRES. Todd D/F Eng. & Repair Corp. 
GULF COAST D.R.DUNLAP, PRES. Alabama D/D & S/B Co. 
PACIFIC COAST C.W.WILEY, PRES. Todd D/D Inc., Seattle, Wash. 
GREAT LAKES W.H. GEREAUSER, PRES. American S/B Co. 

ATLAI'JTIC COAST DISTRICT ( SHI PREP AIRERS ) 
CHAIRMAN - JOSEPH HAAG.JR., Pres. Todd D/D Eng. & Repair Corp. N..Y. 
VICE CHAIRMAN - ROBERT HAIG, Vice Pres. Sun S/B & D/D Co. 
SEC. & TEEAS. 
NEW ENGLA^TD A. B. HOMER, Manager of Sales, Bethlehem S/B Corp. 

W.S.NOLAl^T, Sec. Quincy D/D & Yacht Corp. 
NEW YORK JOSEPH HAAG.JR., Pres. Todd D/D Eng. & Repair Corp. 

F.S.BUSHEY, Pres. Ira Bushey & Sons, Inc. 
DEL. RIVER & BAY ROBERT HAIG, Vice Pres. Sun S/B & D/D Co. 

A.J.SPEIGEL HALTER, Vice Pres. & Wks . Mgr. Pusey & Jones Corp. 
CHESAPEAKE BAY H.M.ADDISON, Pres. Spedden S/B Co. 

H.F.BROWN, Pres. Maryland D/D Co. 
HAMPTON ROADS H.K.PEEBLES, Mgr . of Repair Dept., Newport News S/B & D/D Co. 
& SOUTH ATLAlNfTIC C.S.ROGERS, Vice Pres. & Genl Mgr. Norfolk S/B & D/D Co. 



9732 



-179- 



lUJJ IL:C^^3 ABSA ( SlIIPlffPAIIliJES) 
CHAI21IAN 

G.G.STE33INS Gen. i.igr. Boston Plant Bethlehem s/U Corp., Ltd. 
VICE CHMPi^UiW 

J.P.AaHIKGDAlE Prcs. L'.or.toii Engineering Co. 
SEC. & THEAS. 

H.W.BLAMEY AssU. To Gen Ilgr. Bethlehem S/S Corp. 
COLO.ilTTEEIiEN 

P.C.GaTCOIvIBS Jigr. I. L, Snow Co. 

E.B.TTriEELLR Shipbuilding hgr. Electric Boat Co, 

J.P.UC1«EH1\;EY Vice Pros, Cro^7ninshielcL S/B. Co, 

M.T. GREEN Pros. Fdchr.:.-cL T. Green Co. 

M.J.KEMEDY Pres. Quincj'- E/B & Yacht Corp. 

C.J.BONOVAN Pres, & C-en. llgr. The ■Marine Co. 

KD" YOPjr AREA ■ ( SHIPREPAIHET.S) 
CHAIKIAN 

JOSEPH HAAG, J?.. Pres. Todd B/B Eng. & Repair Corp.. 
VICE CHAimiAN 

F.S.3USHEY Pres. Iri^ Bushey & Sons, Inc. 

SEC. & TREAS. 

11. Y. & K. J. BEY BOCi: ASS^IJ. ■ ' 

C01,Q.:iTTEEl,ZEN 

JOSEPH HAAG, JR. Pres. Todd b/B Eng. & Repair Corp. , 
GEORGE H. BATES Vice Pres, United Bry Bocks, Inc. 
G. P. FISCHER Trer.n» Bre-r/er B/B Co. 

L.W.CABBELL Sec.~Treac. Caddell B/B &' Repair Co. 

BRUCE SCRIIaGIO'jS. : Gen. ilgr. Consolidated s/B Go, 
P. S. BUSHEY Pres, Ira Bushey & Sons, Inc. 

BELATTARE RIVER & BAY. AREA ( SHIPREPAIPJ^E S) 
CHAIHi'lAN 

JOHK '.7ATT Vice Pres. Cz Gen. Mgr. Kensington Shipyb., £: B/B Corp. 
VICE CHAIRi/lAK 

R.L.BURZE Vice Pres, am s/3 & B/B Co.. 
SEC. & TREAS. 

W.F.EBBLEMAl^ Sec. 8-. Tren.s. ilathis Yacht Bldg. Co, 
COmnTTEElSN . . . 

W.W.ROBIKSOH Pres-. Jolm E. Mathis Co. . . 

S.H.BECOURSEY Pres. Tioga Engineers, Inc. . , 

J.FRAIIKEL Mgr. Gen. Engineering Wks. 
S.SOECKER Vice Pres, Hoecker S/B Co.. 



3732 



-18C- 



ch::sa?:].:s 3ay aijea ( shifi:^pmi!ZI: s) 

CHAIffi.'lAN 

H.Ii.ADDI'SOK 'Pres. S-oecXen S/B Co, 

VICE CHAIEiViAU 

E.I7.3AIITH0L0W Sec. 3ooz 3'ros,, Inc. 

SEC. ft T]REAS. 

H.M. AUDI SON Pres. Spcddcn S/B Co. ' .- 

COillHTTESIvIEH 

H.E. BROWN Fres. iira-ylcnc'. D/D Co'. ... 

C.3,LYKCH Pres. Obreclit-Lynch Corp. 

J. M. WILLIS Gun. Urv, 3et:ileliera S/3 Corp.,' 3.'^ltir.ore 

H.;l.FT01T liO:DS C: so. ATLAI-ITIC ( SHIP^ZP.aniS S) 
CHAIHviAN 

K.K. PEEBLES lii-r. of ?.e-x-ir Dept. Ne\Tport l\Ie^,7s S/3 Cc D/D Co. 
VICE CKAIK.iAK, lT011TI-:nr.lT A2IJA 

C.S.ROGERS Vice Pres. 6 Gen. Ligr. Norfolk S/3 ft D/D Co. 
VICE CFiAIRivlAN, SOUlliEiai ^JT^A ' ■ ' , 

J.C.t'ERRILL Gen. lijr, llerrill Stevens D/D Co. 
SECRETARY 

O.A.BLOXOF- Pres. Soutliern Shipyard Corp. 
TREASUPlSR • ■ • . ■ , 

G.O.BROLrGrlTON Gen. Ilgr. Old Dominion Marine Rail'jay Corp, 
COlIiilTTES i/iEN • ■ ■ 

C.S.S01:'KIN Vice Pres. Charleston D/d & Mach'y. Co, 
B.O.COLOMA Vice Pros. Colonna' s Shipyard, Inc. 

GUlr COAST DISTRICT ( SHI PREP AIBER ^) 
CHAIRliAN ■ • ■ ■ 

D.R.DMLAP ■ Pres. Alaoar.a E/D & S/B Co. 
VICE CHAIPiiAH 

R.O. GRAVES Gen. ll.^v, Galveston D/D & Construction Co. 
SEC. & TREaS. 

B.P.CAl.iPBELL Alabcoa D/3 ft S/3 Co. ■ 
TAIIPA M. 0.. ^iY Pres. 3a-.-ooro Marine Ways' Co., St. Petersburg 

i.IAX KREIiER Sec. ft Treas. Tarapa S/B & En. ;rg. Co. 
PEHSACOLA J.C.DUirHii: pres. Bruce D/D Go. 

T . J . SHEPJ LAIT St. Andre-7S Bay Foundry ft Mach. Co. 
MOBILE B.R.EmiLAP Pres. Alaoama D/d & S/B Co. 

A.C.DEYO Vice Pres. Todd s/B & D/D Co. Uohile 

NEW ORLEANS S.V.LulSSIMINI Gulf Eng. Service ft Specialty Co. 

F.3.HESLEY Vice Pres. Todd Eng., D/D ft Repair Co. 

N' Orleans 
TE^wlS R.O.GRAVES Gen. Kgr. Galveston n/l> ft ConstiTiction Go. 
J.HAlilLTON i'lLL Pres. Steamship Supply Co. 



9732 



-I SI- 



TU JA AllD '.TEST COAST 0? 
SOv-.:,. TLOrJDA ABSA ( s-iiP?j:PAi:-Sis ) 

CHAlHilAU 

C.J.HYIR, Frcs. Taupe, llr.rine Co. 

VICE CHAlBi.lAi'J 

H.A.VAlQOHl^SUl.l, Pres, 71r., Ilacli. & Sng'r'g. Co. 

SEC. & THEAS. 

L.B.POSTOIT, Mgr, nivcr Ileif-hts Boat Yd. 

• PZITS-XOLA APEA CSHIPHZPAIHSIIS) 

CHAIHi.IAK 

J.C.DUI^IIIAM, Pres, Bruce D/D Co. 

VICE CliAIK/Ltd^T 

R.V.CO'"'LEY, Pres, Peas:, cola Tool & Supply Co. 

SEC. & THEAS. 

EDl'IUND POX, Bruce d/D Co. 

LiOBILE ;^-^l ( SHIPaSPAll-iERS) 

CHAlEi.U^U 

L.R.DUlTxAP, Pres, Alc.oc::c. D/D & S/3 Co. 

VICE CHAIEi'EEH 

T.J.BEi3)ER, Pres. Benc.er "elding & Mach. Co. 

H.C.i.'iUHHAivi, Pres. Liurnrji' S/B' Co. 

SEC. & TRSAS. ■ 

C.A.BAUIIHAUER, Pres. piioeni::' Brass Foundry & Hacv. -Wlcs. 

ITZ- OPXIAHS AREA ( SHIPREPAIRERS) 
(jiL OP LA. EXCEPT LAICE CTiaS) 

CKAIPIiAlT c/-. -< 

^APJSw JOHKSON, Pres. Jolmson Iron !Yks. D/D & S/ jj uo. 

VICE CHAimiAN 

P.J.RICHARDSON, Sec. C: Treas. Union Iron I7ks. 

SEC. & TREAS. 

R.J.V^raERWEl^IDE, Vice Pres. Todd Eng. , D/D & REPAIR CO. 

T E:-.AS AREA (SHIPREPAIP-ISRS) 
(lirCLllJlLIG LAKE CHaF^ES, LA.)" 

CHAIRI'IAH 

J. HAIIILTON KILLS, Pres. Steamship Supply Co. 

VICE CHAlRi/LAK 

RATMOin) JOHNSON, Sec. IxDonough Iroii Wks. 

SZCPZTARY 

T7-.;.30LLER, JR., Gclveston D/D & Const. Co. 



3732 



-132- 



PACIFIC COAST DISTRICT ( SHIF.-ffipaJE EnsI 
CHAIEiAN 

C.W.WILEY, Pres. lo-'.C- -j/'J Inc, , Seattle, Wash. 
VICE CHAim/!M 
SEC. ec TEEAS. 
SA1\I DIEGO 

Sja PEDRO 

& LONG BEACH 

LOS AI\TGELES, JAS.G.CPjlIG, JR., Pres. Craig S/B Co. 

HARBOR GEO.A.APiiES, Pres. C-en, Eng. & D/d Co. 

SAN PRAirciSCO, J.A.iXOPJ], Pres. Moore D/D Co. 

BAY A.S.GUi::!!, Gen. Mgr. Bethlehem s/B Coro. 

PORTLAiro & W.G.E.SLITE, Smith Iron Wlcs. 

COLOIiBiA RIVER r.T.CASLY,. Pres. Commercial Iron TP:3. 

PUGET SOmiD 

SAJ' DIEGO AREA ( SHI PREP AIRERS) 
CHAIPJ'IAN 

G.E.CAi'IPBELL, Cam-o^oell Liach. Co. 

VICE CHAIEIvlAN 

D.B.JOIffiSON, San Diego Ilcrine Const. Co. 

SEC. & TREAS. 

H.C.MARSHALL, San Diego i'-rine Const. Co. 

SAN PEDRO & LOHG BEACH ( SHIPREPAIRZRS) 

1\'0 APPOINTEES 

LOS AlIGELES HARBOR (SHIPREPAIRERS) 
CHAIRMAN ~ 

JAS. G.CRAIG, JR., Pres. Craig S/B Co. 
VICE CIlAIK/iAM 

MAX WARNER, Uhlin Llachine Wl:s. 
SEC. & TREAS. 

COMMITTEEIviEN 

THOS.EORSTER, Gen. Sapt. San Pedro Wl^s., Bethlehei.i s/B Corp. 

L.J.REIFHARDT, Comptroller Los Angeles S/B & D/l, Co. 

WALTER RICHARDS, Wilmington Iron Wlcs. 

JAS. G.CRAIG, JR., Pres. Craig S/B Co. 

nA:^ WARNER, Uhlin Machine Wl:s. 



9732 



-183- 



SAii ~!ru:icisco bay (shifrefaifi:rs) 

CHillRI-IM 

J.T.GZEANY, Bethlehen S/3 Corp. 

VICE CHAIRI'IAI^' 

ROBERT CHRISTY, United Enc;tr»g. Wlcs. 

SEC. & TREAS. 

IJAURICE ASHER, Sec. Pr.cific Coast D/D Ass'n. 

COIO'IITTEEISK 

HUGH BROM, 3ro-m 3ror,. TelCing Co. 

FRA1-3C POX, Chief Engineer C-cnl. Engrg. & D/D Co. 

P.A.COXOII, Moore d/D Co. 

J.T.GREAFY, Bethlehem S/3 Coit). 

ROBERT CHRISTY, United Engrg. ITlcs. 

PORTLAIH) i: COLOLOIA RIVER ( SHIF?J:?AIRIT.S) 
CHAIRJ.IAK 

W.G.E. SMITH, Smith Iron '..Irs. 
VICE CHAim.'IAl\" 

L.R.HUSSA, Altina Engine & Ilach. Wks. 
SEC. & TREAS. 
T.L.HA1.T1\TIEG, Sec. Steel Tr^il: & Pipe Co. 

C-F-EAT LAKES SHIF3UILDIITG 
AI'TO FZFAIF ASSOCIATION ( SHIFlgPAIREES) 
FRESIFEiTT 

W.K.GERHAUSER, Fres. A;:ei-icc-.n S/B Co. 
VICE FRES. 

JOmi T.^BSTER, Vice Fres. C-r. Lakes Eng. Wks. 
SEC. & TPJEAS. 
G.C.SHEIDLER 
DIPJ]CTORS 

JOHi; T.WEBSTER, Vice pres, Gr. Lalces Engineering Tll:s, 
CHAS.C.WSST, Fres, Lajiitoroc S/E Corp. 
J. BURTON AYERS, Sec. & Asct. Treas. Toledo S/B Co. 
H.J.DEFOE, Managing Pr.rtner Lefoe Boat & Motor "^is, 
F.F.RAMAHAN, Gen. Kr-nr^ger 3--tffalo Marine Const, Corp, 
J.A.ROGAK, Fres. Cal-Jiaet Shipyard & D/F Co. 
W.H.GERHAUSER, Fres. Anericr^n S/B Co. 

FUG-ET SCm-ID (SHIPREFAIRERS) 
SEATTLE 

CVjilRiJ^ - C.W.7ILEY, Fres. Todd D/F Inc. 
VICE CI-alRI'AII - OTIS CUTTIITG 
SEC. & TREAS. - S.A.GRIFFITHS 
CO;a.:iTTESl,iEll - T.TT.SIIITH 
P.E.VIITOT 
EVERETT 

CHAIRIIAIm - H.L.DURHAi.!, Fres. Everett Marine Ways Inc. 
VI CE CHAI Hl'Jd^ - G . FI ilGLER 
SEC. & TREAS. - W.SijUALS 
DISTRICT REFRESEIITATI^'ES ~ G.W.irOl.lAW, Fres. Ba/side Iron Wlcs. 

H.L.DURHA1.I 
TACOMA 
BELLI NGEAM 
Glf^YS HARBOR 
5732 



-164- 



IIISSISSIPPI RIYER DISTRICT ( SIIIPIICPAIHEIIS) ' ' 

The Conmittee for the Llisnissippi Hiver rjid Tributaries was never 
appointed or elected, and the District and Local Area Coinmittees were 
not continued after ua;'- 25, 1935 (Ref. letter Sept. 3, 1935, from 
C. C. Knerr, Secret -,ry of the National Cotmcil of iijierican Shipbuilders 
to H. NcAvton '"'hittelGey, Asst. Deputy, in Deputy's files), which reads 
as follows: 

"With reference to your letter of Aufcust 3l3t requesting in- 
formation r.s to the committee for the .ilississippi Eiver and 
Tributaries, a com littee for this section of the country was 
never ?.ppointod or elected. We did, ho'^ever, have a very 
close connection with Mr. V. B. Edwards, Vice President of 
the Drr,vo Contrrx.ting Company, Pitt sour ^,-h. Pa,, vyho sent out 
inforrap.tion from time to time, hut in most cases the Code 
Authority sent the information directl;^ to the yards located 
on the Rivers, 

"In reply to the questions asked in the last parai-rraph of 
your letter, this is to inform you that the District and 
Locp.1 Committees have not functioned since Ivlay ?.S, 1935* 
The staff of the National Council of American Shipbuilders 
is '.;ell acrtiainted with almost all of the members of the 
various District and Local Committees and as occa.sion arises 
we will probably contact them for such inforr.ation as we de- 
sire to secure with reference to conditions, in the shipbuild- ■ 
ing and shiprepairing industry." 

The chaj>/^'es in these Committees are set forth in letter of August 
^3, 1935 to H. IJoT'ton IThittelsey, Assistant Deputy Director, from 
C. C. Knerr, SccrctcMy of the National Council of American Shipbuilders 
(Ref. Exh. Ir-1 Appx.), which rea,ds fis follows! 

"I have your letter of , August 28 requec:ting additional inform- 
ation in connection with chart covering the organization of 
the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Indi^strj'' for Operation under 
the Code. There were two cht-.nges froii the original chart which 
are as follows: 

New York Local Area 

Chrirr.r2i 

Joseph Hac^, Jr. -Todd D/D. Eng. & Rpr. Corp. 
Vice Chairmaji 

Geo. D. Monroe, - Wymo Engine ering Co. 
Treasurer 

Joseph Hacag, Jr. - Todd D/D. Eng, Cz Rpr. Corp. 
Secretrry 

L, W. Caddcll - Caddell Dry Docl: & Rejoair 



9732 



-165- 



f 



CoiJinitteer'cn ! 

Joseph iIao<:;, Jr. - Todd D/D, Er.;^. f: Hpr, Corp. ' 

P. S. 3i.ishc7, - Ira S. Bushey & Sons ! 

L. TT. Cr-dc.ell - Cp.ddell Dry Doclc & Repair j 

I. L. Jvlzonzo-i - Jalco'bson & Peterson j 

C. 3. Hrllocl- — United Dry Docks, Inc. _ . j. 

Geo. E, Ilonroc - TTyno Enfaneering Co. j 

J. J. Ale:::iider - Alexander, Reid -T: Co. I 

J. K. Collir^-s - Turbine Engine crinf; Co. _ .. ;. 
AndrevT 3r:::l;cr, Jr. - Eederpl Composition 

& Paint 

"The aoovo o:rficers were elected 'under a plcvn approved 

hy the Cof.e Ar.tliority at its meetinf- of Llarch I5, 193^* 

(see pa^'-es 3 ^' ^ o^ minutes). . ,.. _, ;, 

"Texas Locrl ^rea 

"On December ZG, I93U, the- Texas Loc?JL Area reported 

that new officers '.7ere elected in tlia.t Area and that 

R. C Johjison and TTilliam Zoller, Jr. resigned as Chair- I' 

man and Secreta,r2,', respectively; and tliat E. D. Purse, 

of the Kno'.vles Iron Works was named Chairnan and S. H. 

Kemp, of the IZnov;les Iron T7orks, was np.ned Secretary, 

so that the. officers will read as follows: 

Chair-'.an 

E, J, Parse - Knbwles Iron Works 
Vice Chciri'.rA 

Caas. Petrie - Petrie & Companj'- 

S. K. Xe::p — Knowles Iron ^orks 

(See minutes of December 20, 193"+. P^-S^ 11)" ;• 

a. O'oeration anc". Acco:'.i3lj.shncnts . 

Functions and operations yf the National, District and Local Com- 
mittees are hereinbefore set forth on pages ISJ "to 193 inclusive. 1 

The accompli slinent of these Coninittees outside of the election of 
the Code Authority, which has heretofore, been recounted, consisted 
principally of the activities f>f the Local Area Com::ittees. All were 
active in their respective zones on matters of Trade Practice, compli- 
ance with the Code a,nd the' like. They kept their own records and only 
reported to the Code Authority on matters that could not be locally ad- 
justed. Such subjects vrere reflected in the ueetint;; of January U, of 
the Code Authority wherein a considerable number of interpretations on 
the Rules and ae-gult,t ions were made. (Ref. Minutes, Deputy's Files and 
Interpretations under title D, 2 of this chapter). On- this subject the 
President of the ITational Council of American Shipbuilders, who was the 
Chairman of the Code Authority, was addressed as follows: 

9732 



"185- 



"Septenber 7, I933 

"Mr. H. G-errisli S"dth, President 
National Co^aiicil of Ai.ierican ShipQuilders 
11 Broadway 
New York, Nov; Yorl: 

He: Code History - Sliipbuilding and 
Shiprepo.iring Industry - 
Operation and Accomplishments 
of the District and Local Axea 
Cort-iittees 

"Dear Mr, Sr^lth 

"Under date of August 12, I asked for infornation on 
the ahove matter, as well as certain other information. 
However, I hrve co;'-pleted this part of the History in 
rather good fom e:;ceptin,g for this iten of "operation and 
accompli shr.ient s" • 

"As these Co:xdttees only reported throufjh the Nation- 
al ComTiittoes to the Code Authority and ?.s I tic^re no record 
of such reports in the file, the only thing I can do under 
the circumstrjices is to surmise on this suhject. I believe 
it will be better to obtain the inforraa.tion from you on the 
matter and hope ■'•ou will kindly give me a reasonably good 
picture of the ^opcr;^tion and accomplishments* of these 
District a,nd Local Area Com'iittees. 

"Thanlcing you and Mr. Knerr for your previous help 
given in writin--; this History, I am 

"Yours ver;' traly, 

"/s/ H. Newton TThittelsey 

H. Newton Whittelsey 
"HN¥:jwc Assistrjit Deputy Director" 

No formal re-^ly was made. However, the author was informed that 
the situation was sttb st ant i ally as recounted in the preceding paragraph. 
No definite records of the actions of these Local end. District Com- 
mittees can be found in the records other tlian h^a already been re- 
counted. The shipbuilders did not show a disposition to maJce available 
such records as there r.ay be in the file of the Code Authority. However, 
in the author' s opinion their actions v/ere of only local character and 
necessarily of short ^ration as the Trade Practice provisions of the 
Rules and Re^rulations went into discard within si:: or eight months, as 
is set forth unt.er title D, U (c) of this chapter. 



9732 



-187- 

1-^ ■ 

6 . Discussion of Q-o crn ti on of the CocL e Authority . 

Aftef the approvc-l of oiie CO'^'c •T-u.."'.^'- :"it. 1'"";", no time was lost in 
the selection -of the CoJ;c >athovil\7 a.l it ,.ro ..-tl;' held its first meet- 
ing Augast 22, 1S35» -I" ■-■-el-'., •■.uri:!.; the t-.;«j:rfc;,--tv;o rionths life of the 
Code, twertty-t'7o -^fcetiiV-c, v;hicu r/ere^con-^ .cted in a serious and "busi- 
nesslike naniier. Heferk:.ce is ■r;,de to list of r.ncl e::ccrpts from Minutes 
of meetings hereinoefor-e set forth on pa^jes S] e. to l'(G d inclusive. 

There were two na-Jor problems that confronted this Code Authority, 
namely those of the restricted maz-cim-ura hours as provided in the Code 
and that of adequate Pair Trcade Practice provisions, which were not in- 
cluded in the Code, After the effective date of the Code, the Industry 
soon found itself in difficulties owing to the restricted weekly hours. 
Consequently the Code Av.thority made efforts to have the sane increased. 
As a result the President requested the Nationo2 Lr-hor Board to investi- 
gate the subject in the Pall of 1933* This Bo?.rd appointed a subcom- 
mittee, which made a thorough study and the Board latter reported to the 
President in March lS3'-l-j which resulted in an anencaient. No. 3» April 2, 
193^1 approved by Hugh S» Johnson, Administrator, to the Code whereby 
the maximum weekly hoiirs for Naval shipbuilding were increased from 32 
to 36 hours per week to coincide with the Code provisions for Commercial 
shipbuilding, (Ref, Chapter IV, Hours) 

Amendment No, 3 or.l-j provided partial relief, therefore, the Code 
Authority made a request of the Administrator for UO hours per week for 
the Industry and appeared at a hearing conducted "oj the Administrator 
on May 7f 193^» IJ'o decision was rendered by the Administrator. Con- 
sequently the Industry?- continued under the 3S hour provision. (Ref, 
Chapter IV, Hours) 

The restricted r.rr:i:.:an hours made necessary a.pplication for a n-um- 
bei* of exemptions and stcys. It was necessar;'- that the Code Authority 
apply for exemptions on energency repair work, cud. exemptions to permit 
trial trips, dock tric^ls, etc. Certain shipbuilcang companies found 
themselves in difficulties due to the shortage of l?,bor of certain kinds 
in Completing contracts and the Code Authority requested exemptions for 
them. (Ref. title D of this chapter.) 

The Minutes clearly show very serious thought was given to the 
problem of Pair Trade Practice provisions. Attention is called to meet- 
ing of January U, 193^> 'There a series of carefully considered inter- 
pretations, pertaining to the Fair Trade Practice part of the Rules and 
Regulations, were made. The subject is full;"" set forth in title D, c, 
of this chapter. 

In March 193^ the Code Authority determined to write an amended 
Code as a proper solution of the difficulty with Trade Practice pro- 
visions; also to contain suitable maximum hour provisions for the 
Industry, as set forth in title D, 1, of this chapter. In the opinion 
of the author the mended Code should hpve been submitted during the 
Pall of 193^> as it is believed the Industry woi:J.d have been materially 
benefited by the provisions that probably would hc.ve been granted by 

9732 



-168- 



N. R. A. . 

The only discrininr.tion of record was in rego.rd to the San Francis- 
co small plants and other concerns on the Pacific Co?,st which had not 
reduced wage rates durinfj the Depression, as set forth in title D, 3, 
of this chapter. In -ihe opinion of the author^ the Code Authority 
should have requested ercenption from or an anenccient to the Code to re- 
lieve the unfair operc.tion of Section k (fc) in these instances. In 
general, the records shov; that the Code Authoritj^ sincerely and without 
stint of work tried to {govern as V7ell as possilDle the Industry under 
the Code, and at all tines it advocated strict conpliance. 



9732 



-189- 



C. Budget and Basis of Assessment 

The Budgets were on a voluntary basis of a*sessment. It was 
the subject of discussion at the meeting of the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Industry Committee (Code Committee^ on Se'^tembor 12, 
1934. The following is an excerpt from the Minutes, page 9 (Rcf, 
Deputy's files) . ■ • 

" Amendment to Code To Provide For The Levy of Assess - 
ments 

It i.7as decided that the Code Authority v^rould 
not present an amendment to the Code, at this 
time, to provide for the loT^'ing of assessments 
for carrying on the work of the Code Authority 
and its District and Local Area Chairmen, but 
for the time being would rely upon voluntary con- 
tributions. " 

The budgetary periods were fro.r. Jxily 1933 to July 1, 1934, and 
from July 1, 1934, to June 16, 1935. 

The National Coioncil of American Shipbuilders advanced the 
necessary Code Committee funds until the Committee was in funds 
of its o\7n. (Ref. Ejdi. 0-5, Appx. ) 

1. Budgets as submitted and a^oproved 

The Budget for July 1935 to July 1, 1934, was not submitted 
to the Administration as the basis of assessment was voluntary, how- 
ever, the books were duly audited as of December 31, 1934, and the 
report of the auditor was submitted as will be set forth in detail 
with references. 

January 4, 1934, at a meeting of the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Industry Committee (Code Committee) the following ac- 
tion was taken. (Hef« Page 1, Minutes January 4, 1934, Deputy's 
files) 

J*Pl3n for Distribution of Expense for Administration of the 
Code 

The Chairman presented a plan for prorating 
cost of administering the ■ Shipbuilding and Suipre-oair- 
ing Code which plan liad been previously discussed and 
approved by the Industry Lfembers of the Code Committee. 
Mr. Davis stated that if the plan liad been so approved 
he thought the adminiscration would approve same subject 
to adjustment of complaints tliat cone in from individijal 
shipyards. Therefore, the plan dated January 4, 1934, 
attached hereto, was adopted." 

"PLAL: for PROPATIITG COST OF ADMIUISTSRIITG 

TH3 SHIPBUILDING AIID SKIPR^PAIRIITG C0D3 

January 4, 1934 
9732 



-190- 

"'Irformation has "been collected as to the 
employment in the various local areas during 
the past few months and while this eraploj-ment , 
fluctuates to a considerable deeree it shows 
that the distribiition of ex-jenne, tased on 
employment, sljould he es follo\;s: 

Atlantic Coast 56,,j 

Gulf Coast 13;j 

Pacific Coas'ti^ 13,; 

GSat Lslces • 3';'' 

loa', 

"No percentage is submitted as yet for the 
yards on the Great Kivers although some of the 
smaller ones are operating under the Code. Others, 
such as barge builders and subsidiaries of the 
Steel plants, are waiting the oiitcome of the Plate 
Fabricators Code. Vrhcn the status of the Hiver 
Yards is clearly defined a prorata share of the ex- 
pense of administration oi the code will be allocated 
to them. 

"Up to date no part of the cost of administering 
the National Council of American Shipbtiilders has 
been charged against the Shipbuilding and Sliip- 
repairing code, although the headqua.rters of the 
Code Committee, the Shipbuilders Administrative 
Committee and the Shiprepairers national Coraraittce 
are in the offices of the National Council of Ameri- 
can Shipbuilders, and much of the time and facilities 
of the National Council of American Sliipbuilders have 
been devoted to tho administration of the Snipbuilders and 
Shiprepairers Coda in esta"fclisaing the cost of administer- 
ing the Code. From Jane 1st to December -^-Ist, 1933 the 
National Council hns expended approximately $7,000 
directly chargeablo to the Code. This figure is in- 
cluded in the ■p2Q,BrjO. Frjra January 1, 1934 to July 1, 
1934 approximately twenty-five percent of the cost of 
operating tiie National Coimcil will bo charged as a 
proper expense against tne administration of the Code, 
This particular charge amounts to $5,500 and a total 
billing of $28,500. 

"On this basic, tho prorata distribution to the various 
districts will bo as follows: 

Atlantic Coast .018,800 

Gulf Coast 3,700 

Pacific Coast 3,700 

Great Lakes ."^.SOO 

$ 33 , 500 
"To the amount allocated to each District Committee should 

9732 



~191- 



"be added the anticipated expense of the District 
Committee for the period in question. 

"The allocation of the exi^ense to each local area 
on the Atlantic Coast, where the errnTloyraent returns 
are fairly complete, is as follovrs 

ITew Sngland 15.6,; 

Hew York .37.7 

Delaware River 25.3 

Chesapealce , 10.9 

Hampton Roads 22.6 

"The C-ulf District, pacific District and Great I^kes 
District each should allocate its prorat? sliare to 
its local areas, based on einployment in such areas, 
as the information at present available to the Code 
Committee is not sufficient to permit of allocation 
to the local areas in those districts. 

"To cover the expenses of the Code Committee, 
Shipbuilding Administrative Committee and the Sliip- 
repairint; National Committee the Treasurer of each 
of these committees \7ill render one bill to cover 
the cost to the res'oective District Com.iittee Chair- 
men. District Chairmen v;ill render bills, to local 
area chairmen separately to cover the cost of the 
Code Committee, Shipbuilding Aciministrative Committee 
and Shiprepairing National Committee as one item and 
the cost of administering the District Committee office 
as a second item. 

"Local Area Committees in collecting funds in their 
respective areas for the Code Coimnittee and District 
Committee should add such exoenses as are necessary 
for the administration of the Code in such local 
areas. Zach Local Ai-ea Committee should render 
bills to its yards and shiprepairers in its area. 

"Local Area Chairmen .will make payment directly 
to the Treasurer of the Code Committee to cover 
the expenses of Code Committee, Shipbuilding Adminis- 
trative Committee and Shiprepairing llations.l Committee 
and another ":)ayment to the District Chairman to cover 
its expenses. 

"A list of the yards in each local area, together 
with reported era^oloyraent figures, is enclosed here- 
with." 

In accordance with the foregoing plan the Industry was duly billed 
on a basis of $1.20 per man employed, on the bill form Exhibit 0-1, 
Appendix. The total billing was $61,652. (Rcf. 3xh. 0-5, Appx. , letter 

9732 



—1 <^-'?^ 



to H. Newton Whittelsey, Agsictant Deputy Administrator from C. C. 
Kncrr, Secy.-Treas. of Katl, Coiiiicil of Ainerican Sni-o'builclers, 
Sept. 5, 1935) ' ' ' 

Iferch 15, 1934, the Code Conrr.ittee a^i.thorir'.ed the opening 
of tlie bank acco'unt. (?.ef« i-ioie 1 j.iniites, Deputy's files) 

"Opening of a Bank AccQimt 

The treasiirer announced that it woxild "be necessary 
to authorize some depositary for the monies received 
in connection with the operations ox the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Code and thereupon on motion of 
Roger ^jlilliams, seconded by W. H. Gerliauser, it T7as 

"RESOLVED: That an account or accounts be 

opened for and in the name of this 
Association v;ith THE llATIOML CITY 
MMC, 26 Broadway, and that the said 
Banlc is hereby authorized to pay or 
otkerwise honor any chocks, drafts, 
or other orders is'sued from time to 
time for debit to said account or 
accounts when signed in any manner 
• in the name or on behalf of this 
Association by 

H. Gerrish Smith, Chairman, and 
C, C. Knerr, Treasurer, jointly 

either in an official capacity or 
other/.'ise, inclusive of any such in 
■favor of any said person(s), and 
that the said account or accoiojits 
be reconciled from tiuie to time by 
said person(s) , or his or their 
designees." 

In accordance with the foregoing, the banlc account was opened 
April 4, 1934, with the National City Bank of New Ygrk in the name 
of the Shipbuilding and Ship repairing Code Committee (Ref. letter 
Feb. 23, 1935, from C. C. Knerr, See re tar;/-Trca surer to H. Newton 
'jThittelsey, Assistant Deputy Administrator, E:ch. 0, Appx.) 

April 24, 1934, the Code Committee received from the Chairman 
a^ report and took action as per the following excerpt from the 
Minutes. (Rcf. Minutes, page 5,'Depiity's files). 

"Budget for Code Authority 

The Chairman of the Code Authority reported tliat 
at the January 4th mooting of the Code Authority a ■ 
budget was adopted totalling $28,500 for expenses 
of the National Organization and that in the meantime 
the expenses of the Atlantic and Gulf Coast District 

9732 ' ■ ■ ■ ' 



-195- 



Committeos liad "been reported as $8,470 and 
the e.^enses of the Atlantic Coast and Gulf 
Coast Local Area Committees were $6,511 or a 
grand total of $43,481, and that up to 
April 2ord the Code Authority was in receipt 
of funds to the extent of $21,584, 

"The Chairman further reported tliat the 
National Council of American Shiptuildcrs had 
made expenditures from its own funds for the 
carrying on of Code Authority work and that up to 
and including March 31, 1934 had expended a total 
of $14,276.15 V7hich amount, together with the 
amounts set up by the District and Local Area 
Committees should be reimbursed. 

"In view of the funds in hand being insufficient 
to pay all amounts requested some method of proper 
allocation must be determined upon and upon motion 
• by Mr. V/. H. Gerhauser, seconded by Mr. Joseph Haag, 
the following resolution was adopted: 

"RSSOLVSD: That a Committee of Two be appointed 
by the Chairman to audit tho bill of the Nation- 
al Council of American Shipbuilders; and 

"S3 IT yUSTHZH RES0LV3D: That the committee be 
and is hereby empowered to determine the distribution 6f 
funds in hand at this time. 

"The Chairman in accordance with the ab^ve resolution 
thereupon appointed Mr. Robert Haig and Mr. Roger 
Williams to act as this Committo© of two," 

Also tho Biidgct for the Industrial Stslations Committee was 
considered and acted on at the same meeting as per the following 
excorpt: (Ref. Minutes, page 9, Deputy's files) 

" 3udp:et for Industrial Relations Comidttoe 
The President then offered for discussion 
the budget prepared by the Industrial Relations 
Comraittee in the amount of $32,000. The 
tentative figures as reported are as follows: 

Zxecutive Secretary $5,000.00 
Stenographer & File Clerk 1,800.00 
Office Rent (Washington, D. C. )l, 000. 00 
Teloplione, postage, station- 

crJ^ etc. 1,200,00 

Liiscellaneous expense of 

investigations, etc. 2,000.00 
Stenographic and Office 

expense, and rent for 

seven regional committce s21,000»00 



9732 



TOTAL: $32,000.00 



*-1 C't^ 



"There wr.s nucli discussion as to hov/ to raise 
this money and pre su+x^stion- was s.dvanced that . ' 
a special essessnent "be niade..pn the Industry' to 
carry on the activities of the, Industrial Rela- 
tions Cornraittee, "but it v/as "believed that a 
special assessment could not ho, levied at this 
time and that it should come out of tJie general 
funds of the Code Authority. 

"The Code Authority/' in reviewing the budget, 
item by item, was of the opinion that the 
seven region-al committees could for the time 
being be eliminated and, therefore, the $21,000 
set up in the budget for this activity was 
eliminated from the discussion. 

"In view of the decision to eliminate the 
seven regional offices and the establisliment 
of the office in Hew Yoi-k instead of Washington 
the follcv;ing resolution was offered by Mr. W. H. 
Gerhauser, seconded by Mr. Hoger V/illiams, and 
adopted: 

"ESSGLVED: That there bo advanced from 
the assessments already made $3,000 to 
defray the e;coenses of the Industrial 
Relations Committee, it being understood, 
however, tiia.t a budget covering the ex- :• 
. .. , penses of this Corai-nittee would be sot 
up for approval by the Code Authority; 
and 

■' ■ "B3 IT*rURTH3R RESOLVED: Tim t .the Indus- 
trial Relations Committee be and is 
hereby autnorizcd to expend such sums 
as may hs ncccssa.ry for the employment 
of an Executive Secretary and the defray- 
ment of head office expenses and the 
traveling exrpenses of all members of the 
Committee including the alternate 
members. " 

September 12, 1334, the Code Authority (Shipbuilding and 
Ship repairing Industry Committee) aiToroved the financial statements 
for the months of April, May, June, July and August. (Ref. page 1, 
Minutes, Deputy's files) 

At the same meeting the new Budget was approved for the period 
July 1, 1934, "to June 16, 1935, as per the following excerpt : (Ref . 
Minutes, page 11, Deputy's files) 

"Approval of Budget 

A budget of e:rpcnses for the period July 1, 1934 
to June 16, 1935, was presented and Mr. Gerhauser 

9732 



—1 on_ 



offered the followiriit; resolution: 

" H3S0LVEI): Tliat in connection vfith the Code 
Budget for the Shiplauilding and Shipre-oair- 
in.e, Industr;;/ for the period July 1, 1934 to 
June 16, 1935, tliat the assessment te on the 
"basis of total man-hours (both direct and 
indirect, ^'ork) worked over a twenty-six v/eck 
period (October 1, 1933 to Ivlarch 31, 1934) 
and that the assessment to be levied sha.ll be 
for a six months period, July 1, 1934 to 
December 31, 1934. Hate per man-hour for a 
six months -loriod not to exceed $.0014 with 
a minimum billing of $5.00 per plant for a 
six mionths period, 

"Ur. Gerhauser moved its adoption, seconded 
by Joseph Hagg, Jr., and carried. 

"The budget on motion of Mr. Vj'. H. GerlTauser, 
seconded by Mr. Joseph Ilagg, Jr., was approved 
and made a part of the minutes, 

"Ar)proximately one-half is to be raised, 
payable iminediatcly and adjustment v^ill bo 
made in second half of fiscal year for any 
surplus funds received over and above 
anticipated receipts. 

"The Code Authority also approved the period 
of April 1, 1:34 to September 30, 1934 as the 
period to secure man-hour data for the assess- 
ment to be levied on Janua.ry 1, 1935," 

The Budget as approved is shown as Exhibit 0-2 Ap":iendix 
from which the recapitulation is as follows: 



(See next page) 



9732 



22,^6 



o to 


o 


r-n 


o o o o 


O O lH 


Lr^ 


o r-o O'O o 


r- o 


o r- 


o 


r— 


O O CTx O 


r— o rv' 


to 


O ^D O O O O 


MD 1^ 


• • 


* 


• 


■ • • • 


• • w 


• 


• *•■•• 


• • 


o r- 


o 


h- 


O O rH O 


-:!- O t-- 


t-^ 


O CM O O O C 


C\J ^ 


O OJ 


f-l 


H , 


CM o ro LO 


60 iH O 


o 


w ir\ ir\0 O r^ 


iH ir^ 


o to 


I-+ 


fr> 


O rH O UD 


t-— O I — 


t^ 


rH ?\J LT^ O K> CM 


ir\ r— 


UD^ 


in 


Lr> 


J- K-, 


^ rH OJ 


U5 


UJ J- r^ iH 


lr^ t— 




r-i 


0.) 






<-\ 




r-i LO 


-&D- 




■c;> 






•€0- 




■C/J- -&9- 



C! o 
n o 



to 
r-— 

r— 

CM 
rH 

■ee- 



to 



CM 
LO. 



■ca- 



~oO 



to 



t^ 



1^ I-- 



-ee- 



U3 



C\J 

o 



t-- o 

CM ^ 

o o 

CM 



crt 




(D 


ri 


^H 


fl) 


<aj 


S 




Jh 


rH 


■H 


crt 


CTi 


o 


r-' 


C5 


t.) 


H^ 





<JD 



8 


O 

o 


O 
o 


O 

O 


O O 


o o o 


o 
o 


O O O 
• O O O 


o 
o 


88 


o 
o 
to 


o 

rH 


o 

rH 


O 
O 

CM 


,H O 

o 


J- O K- 
CM rH K 
r^ rH 


o 

rH 


o o o 

to inLfN 


o 

IT 


o o 

to o^ 


-OT- 


• ^'- 




1-H 


rH 


t^\ r-i 


■ifi- 






rH r<~\ 

r-i 

-e/3--©3- 



CH 



g 



O C 



OT a 

•H ^ 

PI o 



O 
O 

CD 
O 



■eel 



o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


O 


o o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o o 




• 


* 


• 


• 


• 


• • 


o 


o 


o 


o 


^^ 


o 


o o 


r-1 


a! 


^ 


v,o 


o 


CM 


o o 


UJ 


J- 


ji- 


CM 


o 

rH 


■«/> 


cm" 



■m- 



o, 
o 



o 



o 
o 


O 
O 


■ 


• 


o 
to 

rH 


o 
o 
c^^ 


•« 


•» 


-68- ■««- 



fe 






HH O 






S Eh 






R 






<il^ 






r^ 




>; 


rt CTi 




+= 


O rH 




•H 


Fr 


(U 


M 


M 


■ri 


O 


&]^ 


o 

C3 


5J 


i25 >H 




ri 


M fc3 




^ 


l-^g 






w 






o 






Ph o 






O M 






Ph 






EH M 






H fM 






cb 






e p^ 







ffl § 



o o 


O 


O 


o o o o 


o o o 


o 


o o o o o o 


o o 


o o 


■ O 


o 


<D <D O O 


o o o 


o 


o o o o o o 


o o 


• • 


• 


• 


• • • • ' 


• » • 


• 


• • • • • • 


• • 


o o 


o 


o 


o o o o 


o o o 


o 


o o o o o o 


o o 


o o 


o 


o 


o o o o 


o o o 


o 


o o o o o o 


o o 


O LT^ 


o 


LO, 


^ rH ir^uD 


CM O LI"' 


K^ 


O O LO O K^O 


to MD 


VD rH 


rH 

H 


to 

rH 


CJ rH 


H rH 


r^ 


r--^ rj r^ r-i 




■to- 




•to- 






■c/> 




•CO- -co- 



u 

Q) 
O 
•H 

«H 
tH 

o 

o 



w 

!h Q) 



^r^ 

o 

•H 

u 

o 

rH 

o 





•H 


(D +3 


r-i 


w 






-P 


fn -H 


Q) 


p 1 


p 






EH ^ 


CJ 


(J 


rH 




O 


1 o 


C! 


^ 


<V 




CD 


U -P 


pi 


;-^i 


w 




K 


O 


lu 






W 


ri fj 


O 


!H 




m 




-P -^ 




f<fl 




M 


Vi 


a 


rH 


o 




l-H 


fl) 


1^ 0) 


Ci 


a 




(^ 


•H 


O 'Tj 


f (1 


i) 




•=^ 


a 


0) o 


(U 


■p 




i-i 


o 


CO o 


M 


t/j 





I 



o 

El 








<D 




4^ EH 


I'-l 


.C 


in 


tQcS 




•H 


r^ 


Hi 2 


f4 


o3 o 

. .5 



o C 

n (1) 

o 



I EH 



!H 
(U 
. . fJ 
O O 
E -H 
P, 4J 
•rH lu 
fj H-3 

cr'c/3 
W - 

Q 
(D 'f) 
O r^, 
•H -1^ 
'+H 'n 

ttH o 

o m 



•H 

o 

C 



Pi 
O rH 

•H nj 

<H O 
O EH 



w 

•H 

rH M 

Pi C 

•H 

• H 



en 


^ 




o 

0) 





• • 


C 




« 


rH 
r-i 





•H 
H 
rH 


O 


I-] 


0) 


CJ 


•"S 


> 


« 


f^ 


nJ 



• H 


w 






fn 


(B 






O 


(M 






^ 


!>5 






+J 


o 






■H 


rH W 






<^ 


U QJ 









W Fr 






rrl 








o 


ca CO 






o 


4J 


VI 




tn 


S S 


(I) 


0) 
C) 


fn 


n -p 


1^ 


n 


C) 


M p! 




a 


,o 


•H d 


r-i 


Ph 




cti b 


Ci 


:^ 



n3 
-p 
o 

EH 






0) ^ o fcx) tn 

rl S O O 0) P! 



EH 



w 

CD 
•H 

o 

Pi 

CD 
b!) 
C 

•H 

p; 

O 

<; 1-1 n o 



EH 

o 

EH 

I 



-9GI- 



The Industry \7as billed for the first hr.lf of the period in accord- 
ance V7ith the foregoing; on Bill form E::hioit 0-3 Appendix in the total 
amount for the period Jvly 1, 1934 to December 31, 1S34,' of $40,724.96. 
(Ref. Exh. 0-5, Appx.) 

December 20, 1934, the Code Authorit"' approved the fiaancial state- 
ments for the ::o:>ith3 of Septenber, October, pnd Kovember. ' (Ref. Minutes, 
pe^e 1, Deputy's files) 

At the s.-::e i.'.eatini?; A''irainistri.tive Order #119 was the subject of 
consideration r.s per the e-ccerot from the Kinutes (Ref, Minutes, page 12, 
Deputy's files) r-.s follows: 

"Adtiinistrrtive Order X-119 



(prescribed P.ules and '.'-eguD-ations for the Protection of 



"-iJuic.s P.eceived By Code Authority) 



"The Chaii'^nan reported that all conditions required by 
this order can be met by the code authorit;" and that in the 
meantime a bond in the amount of $10,000 had been taken out 
to cover the Trea.surer, the bond beins^ 'olaced with the United 
States Gria.rcjntee Company, a copy of '•/hich ^'ill be mailed to the 
Assistojit Deput3'' Administrator." ' 

January 17, 1S35, the Code Authority approved the financial state- 
ment for December 1934. (Ref. Kinutes, pture 1, Deputy's files) 

At the sciie meeting the audit, of the. accounts was authorized as 
per excerpt fro.: liinutes (Ref. Ii'inutes, pae:e 14, Deputy's files) as 
follows: 

"Audit of Accounts 

The Chairman rs'oorted that under Administretive Order 
X-119 Prescribing Rules and Rerjulations for the protection of 
funds received by Code Av.thorities it v?ould be necessary that 
the accou:its of the Code Authority be audited. On motion of 
It. S. 7. HaJremoji,. seconded by Vx . 1 . H. Gerhauser and duly 
carried, permission, was granted to employ a Certified Ptiblic 
Accountcat to. audit the books of the Code Authority." -" 

The bo:-id v.t.s also the subject of consideration as per the following 
excerpt fro:: the lanutes (Ref. Ps^e 14-15 Kinutes, Deputy's files) as 
follows; 

"Bond ' ■ 

The ChairmsJi reported that a bond ha.d been ta,ken out 
by the Trc asvjrer and photostatic copy had been sent to IT.R.A. 
but that IT.R.A. had v-ritten the following letter dated Janu- 
ary 8, 1954 in connection thereivith: 

■*The photostatic copy of yoior bond in the aciount 
of S10,000, written by the United States C--aarantee 
ComprJiy has been duJi.y subaiitted with my recommendations 
and ha.s been accepted as sufficient in amount. 

9732 



-193- 

'Honever, the Code Authority Accoimt Section points 
out, that if any other officers of your Code Authority 
are empowered to draw upon the funds of the Code Au- 
thority, those officers or employees should "be "bonded. 

'/s/ H.llewton TThittelsey 
'Assistant Deputy Administr^.tor 
. ■ , 'Division 2, Section D, Group 3' 

"As checks, in order to "be negotiable, must be signed "by the 
Clir.iruan in addition to the signature of the Treasurer, Question 
?.rose as to necessity of a "bond to cover the consigner. Colonel 
?.ose stated that in vie\7 of the fact that checks require "both 
the signature of the Treasurer and the Chairman, and since the 
Treasiijrer is "bonded, in his opinion K.R.A. would not require an 
additional "bond, but that he would take the matter in hand with 
r view to having a prompt decision rendered "by N.E.A." 

The photostatic copy of the bond was duly submitted by letter of 
Decenbcr 29, 1934, from C. C. Knerr, Secretary of the Code Authority, 
to H. ilewton ".Tiittelsey, Assistant Deputy Administrator. (Ref . Budget, 
Deputy's files) The bond was written by the United States Guarantee 
Company, ilo. 1033039, da.ted Decen er 11, 1934, in the ajnount of $10,000 
on Clifford Charles Knerr, principal, the Secretary-Treasurer of the 
Code Authority for the period of one year. (Hef. Exh. 0-4, A^opx.) 

The copy of the bond was duly submitted to J. D. Kershner, Code 
Authority Accounts Section and l^r , Kershner replied by memorand-um dated 
January 7, 1935, to the same effect as hereinbefore quoted from the 
Minutes of January 17, 1955. (ref. Deputy's files) 

JGJau8.ry 25, 1935, the Assistant Deputy addressed Mr. Kershner as 
follov/s: 

"SUBJECT: Bond of the Treasurer of the Shipbuilding and Ship- 
re-cairing Industry Corar.iittee 

"Reference is made to your memorandum of January 7 and to the 
first prragraph thereof. Please be advised that funds from the bank 
account of this Code Authority are withdrawn on two signature checks, 
that is the signature of the Treasurer sjid Chairman, respectively. 
The Treasurer is bonded. This appears sufficient. Do you concur in 
the matter." 

Upon receipt of the memorand-um, Kr. Kershner concujrred and 
initialed the blue copy, which is filed in the Deputy's files. Mr. 'I. 
Gerris'u Suith, Chairman of the Code Authority, was accordingly advised 
by letter the _ same date by the Assistant Deputy. (Ref. ludget folder, 
Depu.ty«s files) 

February 21, 1935, the Code Authority approved the January, 195:5, 
financial statement. (Ref. Kinutes, 'i^ge 1, Deputy's files) 

At the same meeting the certified public accountant's report v/as 



J732 



-199- 

presented r.s per tlie excerpt of the Kinutes (Kef. i'inuteg, page 8, Dep- 
uty's files) r.s follo\7S: 

"Auditor's ?:e"oort 

The Chr.ir:'-ra presenteu for record in the rninutes of the meet- 
ing, the Certified Public Accountant's reoort of code expenditures 
from the inception of the code to Decemter 31, 1S34-. Instructions 
were directed to forward three c o-jies to K.R.A. in accordance v/ith 
their recuest." 

By letter 'r^'ch 1, 1935, the Auditor's reoort vras submitted os 
follov7s: (Zef. Budget, De'outy's files) 

"Mr. H. JTarton Uhittelsey, 
Assist. Iieputy Administrator, 
National Recovery Administration, 
Room 4040, Conr.ierce Building, 
Washington, D. C. 

"Dear :.r. '.Tnittelsey: 

In compliance with Admininstro,tive Order X--119, dated 
Decemher 5, 1934, the books of the Code Authority for the 
Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry vrere audited, as of 
December 51, 1934 by Alvin H. Fo'toII and Company, and ve 
are pleased to send vou herewith three copies of the report 
of the Auditor. 

"Very truly yours, 

"/s/ C. C. Knerr 
"Secretary-Treasii.rer" 

March S, 1S35, by memorandum to Code Authorities' Accounts Section 
from the As^istrat Deputy, the audit of accounts was submitted in accord- 
ance with office nenorandum 324 and 325. (Ref , Budget folder, Deputy's 
files) 

March 7, ISLo, letter to H. G-errish Smith, Chairman of Code Auth- 
ority request v/as Liade for assessment forms or notices sent to Industry 
members, in accordance with office me lorandum 323. In reply to the 
foregoing the Assistant Deputy received the billing forms and the Bud- 
get (Ref. S:di. 0-1, 0-2, 0-3, Appx.) forwarded same ;■ arch 14, 1935, to 
the Code Authorities Accounts Section. 

March 21, 1935, the Code Authority approved the financial state- 
ment for February 1935. (Ref. Minutes, page 1, Deputy's files) 

April 25, 1935, the financial statement for March, 1935, was 
approved by the Code Authority. (Ref. Minutes, page 1, Deputy's files) 

April 25, 1935, the Budget for period July 1, 1934, to June 16, 
1935, for the ri-iount of $57,754.30, (Ref. Exii. 0-2, Appx.) was tenta- 
tively approved by letter, (Ref. Budget folder, Deputy's files) as 

9732 



follows: 

"Mr. C. C. liierr, SRcr-tsxy, 

Shipbuilding and Shipre-oairing 

Code Aut:iorit7 

Room 681, 11 Broadway, . . 

New Yo:^:-, 11. Y. . '. ,' • 

"Dear Sir: 

This is to rdvise that p\u'suant to p.uthority vested in the 
National Industrial Recovery Poard, "by Executive Order No. 5859, 
and otherwise, the budget of e3ti:iiated expenses of Code Adminis- 
tration for the current fiscal -neriod ending June 16, 1935, in 
the total rvioiint of $57,754.30, the original of which is on file 
with the national Recovery Ac'jninistration, submitted in compliance 
with Ac"j:;inistrative Order No. X-15o, d^.ted February 26, 1935, is 
hereby tentatively ap'oroved. 

"This tentrtive approvrl, ho'-rever, is subject to final approval, 
withdrairal or modification by the National Industrial Recovery 
Board upo:i full consideration and review of said budget. 

"NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL HECOVZr.Y lOARD 

By:. 

Hiram S . ErcTn 
Assistant to the Administrative Officer" 

The Auditor'^: report previously referred to T;as entitled: 

AUDIT OF AGGOUITTS 

OP. 

SHIPBUILDING A-ND SHIPRSFAIHIrlG 'll-DUSTHY 

CODE GOI^T'ITTEE 

JULY 1933 TO DECEi'-IBER 31, 1C34 

Alvin M. Powell & Company 
50 Church Street 
New York, N. Y. 

The docuijent is a complete audit and reoort of the financial oper- 
ation of the Code Authority for the period named. Unfortunately the 
sheet size is too large to bind in the appendix. It is filed in the 
Budget folder, Depu.ty':s files. The following a,re ^excerpts, which set 
forth the essential information: 

" AFFIDAVIT 
"I soleonlj'' swear that the audit of the books and accounts of the 

9732 



Shipbuilding- rjid Shiprepairinr Industry Code Committee, reported on 
herein, vras AcCe "cy ::e or by my employees under my direction in con- 
formity as ne-rly as possible in the circumstances -ith the i' Inst rxict ions 
to Auditors of Books and Acco^ints o" Code Authorities', and that I am 
qualified to audit the said Code Authority as a "competent, independent 
auditor' as defined by the National Iiecovery Admini3tr::.tion in its Ad- 
ministrative Order ilo . X-119, dated December 5, 1534. 

"/s/ Alvin M. Powell" 

"SWOM TO LEFCZC '.E 
THIS 9th DAY 
OF FEBRUARY, 1935 
/s/ Isabelle 1-lose 

Notary Public, Yev; York. County No . 15;3 
New Yor:: Recister's No. 5R73 
■ Commission er^ires March 30, 1935" 



9732 



-203- 

ASSESSMENTS RECEIVABLE 
December 31, 1934 
Shipbuilding '^nd Shiprepp, iririiE: Industry Code Comn^.ittee 



TOTAL CHAR&ES VAPE 

Period July 1933 to July 1, 1934 $61,652.00 
Period July l.to Dec 31, 1934 40.724.96 

TOTAL ASSESSNiENTS MADE TC DEC. 31, 1934: - $102,376.96 

LESS CREDITS 

For .Adjustments Account of Cnncellations 
Period July 1933 to Dec. 31, 1934 26,085.25 

Account of Collections received 
Period July 1933 to Dec. 31, 1934. ,69.978.26 

TOTAL CREDITS: $ 96,063.51 

BALAITOE OF ASSESSMENTS RECEIVABLE AT 

DEC. 31, 1934 $ 6.313.45 



9732 



-204- 

STATEIiElTT OF IITCOi'iE EXPSHSES AITJ BUDGET COI''iP.\F:ISOH 
Period - July 1933 to December 31, 1934 
ShipbuildinjS; and Sfaiprepairinp: Industry Code Committee 

Ac tual 
INCOIvlE 

Assessments applicable to the period due and collected $69,978.26 
Sale of • copies of ]3y-Lai:7.s- for administering code 15.00 

TOTAL INCOl.ffl: 569,991.26 



EXFEKDITURES " :' -.. 
A. Salaries 

Chief Executive's Office Schedule ttI ,rf; 6,874.99 

Clerical Employees Schedule #2 9,203.60 

■ .. TOTAL ^SALARIES: • , . ' ?^16.078.59 

3. Office Expenses 

Occupancy (Rent) t 2,331.05 

Telephone and Telegraph ■ ' ' ' 1,761.14 

Postage • 846.62 

Stationery Cc Supplies 806.39 

Printing & llimeographing 1,414.44 

Reporting- Services , etc. • 243.09 

i iscellaneous Expenses 1, 117.47 

TOTAL OFFICE EXPEIISES: 

C Traveling Ei^n^enses 

EmiDloyee Traveling Schedule #3 

TOTAL TRAVELIlTGr EXPEI'TSSS: 

D. General Expenses 

Committee Expenses Schedule 7f4 '^. 2,378.60 
P. R. Harris, Consulting Eng. 
(Survey and report on Present 
Shiribuilding and Shiprepairing 
Facilities in the United States) 5,000.00 

TOTAL GEl\r;RAL EXPENSES: $ 5.578.r-0 



i 


8,520.20 


? 


3.022.25 


1 


3.022.25 



E. Otner Special Outlay 

District Office Expenses Exhibit "C" ^ 1,500.00 
Local Office Ex-oenses Exhibit "D" 4,858.41 

TOTAL OTHSR SPECIAL OUTLAY: 

TOTAL SXPEIIDITIPJIS - 

SURPLUS PROi; 0PE1RA.TI0ITS - 



$ 


6, 


,358. 


,41 




339 , 


,358. 


,05 


f*;50 , 


,635. 


,21 



9752 



-205- 

RECEIPTS OV ASSESSIRFTS BY TRADE AREAS 
Period - July 1933 To December- 31, 1934 • 

ShJ-pbuildin^ And Shiprepairin^ Industry Code Committee 

ATLANTIC COAST DISTRICT 

New England Local Area* ., , S 8,239,41 

New York " " - 12,666.60 

Delaware River & Bay Local A^ea 13,737.85 

ChesatJeake Bay " " 6,045.50 

Hampton Roads " " 12.125.85 

TOTAL: $52,863.21 

GULF COAST DISTRICT 

85.00 

110.55 
3,245.25 
2,277.75 

855.00 



Tampa Local 


Area 


Pensacola 


II 


11 


MoDile 


II 


II 


New Orleans 


II 


ti 


Texas 


II 


11 


• TOTAL: 






PACIFIC COAST 







$ 6,573.55 



San Diego Local Area — (*) 

Los Angeles " " ' 968.80 

San Francisco " " 3,505,45 

Portland " " 55.00 

Seattle " " 1.643.85 

TOTAL: $ 6,178.10 

GREAT LAKES DISTRICT 

— • * 

Great Lakes Local Area ^ 5,308.00 
TOTAL: . . S 3,508.00 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER DISTRICT 

l.'issi3sixi"oi Local Area 1,055.40 

TOTAL: ^ 1,055.40 

TOTAL RECEIPTS BY TRADE AREAS; $69.978.26 



(*) No collections received. Total charges of $350.00 made for 
San Diego Local Area charged off oy cpncellations as same was 
reported by Code Authority Secretary and Treasurer as being 
uncollectible. 

9752 



-206r 

- I'iASTEE SHEET - 

DISTHIBTJTIOK 0? ESTII.iATED EXPENSES OP ADMINISTRATION OF CODE 

OF FAIR COMPETITION AM) TR/J)S PRACJICE FOR THE 

SHIPBUILDING AMD SHIFREPAIRING INDUSTRY UP TO JULY 1, 1934 





Expense Of 




Exi:)ense Of 


Expense Of 






National 




District 


Lo 


cal Area 


Total 


Local Areas 


Organization 




Committees 


Conmittees 


Expenses 


New England 


$ 2,930.00 


$ 


1,170.00 


$ 


750.00 


$ 4,850.00 


New York 


5', 2 10. 00 




2,077.50 


4 


,293.00 


11,580.50 


Delaware River 














and Bay- 


4,360.00 




1,740.00 




200,00 


6 , 300. 00 


Chesapeake Bay 


2,050.00 




817.50 




450.00 


3,317.50 


Hampton Roads & 














South Atlantic 


4,250.00 
.T$18.800.00 


i 


1,695.00 


^ 


600.00 
.293.00 


6.545.00 


TOTAL ATLANTIC COAS 


7,500.00 


*32,593.00 


Tampa & West Coast 














of South Florida 


111.00 




29.20 




13.02 


153.22 


Pensacola 


259.00 




67.90 




20.00 


347.90 


Mobile 


1,430.00 




388.00 




60.00 


1,923.00 


New Orleans 


1,073.00 




281.00 






1,354.00 


Texas 


777.00 


— 


203.90 




125.00 


1,105.90 


TOTAL GULF COAST: 


S 3,700.00 


1 


970.00 


* 


218.02 


^ 4.808.02 


San Diego 








San Pedro and 


, 












Long Beach 














Los Angeles 














San Francisco 














Portland & Columbia 














River 






• 








Puget Sound 














TOTAL PACIFIC COAST 


:$ 3,700.00 
$ 2,300.00 
























Great Lalces 





(Omit) 


( 


Omit) 


$ 2.300.00 


GROSS TOTAL: 


$28,500.00 


$ 


8,470.00 


$6, 


511.02 


$43,481.02 



9732 



-207- 

STATElvIF.liT OF GE:"ERA.L ILIFOrvILA-TIOI" 

I December 31, 1934 

ShipbTuilding; And Shiprcpniring: Industi-y Code Conimittoc 

Executive Secretary-Treasurer, ':0T'- 
I.;r. C. C. Kncrr, 11 Broadway, llcvj York, H. Y. 

AddrcslSs'l. 9f Hcf;ional Offices 
Atlantic Coast District 

Cliairiiir.n, Joseph Haag, Jr. Rotins Dry Lock &. Repair Co., 

BrookljTi, Kcr; York, 
Gulf Coast District 

D. R.Dunl;:^, Alab,-..ia S/B <=■ D/D Co., Mobile, Ala. 
pacific Coast District, 

C. W. Wiley, Todd Seattle Dry Docks Inc., Seattle, Wash. 
Great lakes District 

\1. H. C-erha,user, Great Lakes S/B & Repair Association, 

Clcvclmd, Ohio 
Mississippi River District (llo office established.) 

5udg;ct Period 

1st Period, July 1933 to July 1, 1934 (See Exhibit "J" attached, 
for amount of budget.) 

2nd Period, July 1, 1934 to Ju:ic 16, 1935. One half of the 2nd 
period to be raised to cover cr^cnditures six months period July 
to December 1934 . (See E::hibit "K" attached for rinount of bud- 
get v.-) 

Rate, of Assessment 

1st -criod, based mon rate of $1.20 per employee with $50. and 
$25.' minimum. See Exhibit "P" , Receipts af Assessments by 
Classification wherein is shown a detail of assessment distribu- 
tion according to mtes and are.^s. 

2nd -oeriod, $.0014 per T^r.n hour vdth $5. minimma. See Exhibit 
"F" for detail of assessment distribution, according to rates 
and area,s. 

Audit Period 

July 1933 to Dv^cember 31, 1934 

ITumber of Enroloyees at end of}-oeriod 

Administrative - Chief Executive Officer 1 

__Se_c_retary-Tria.asui'ej*- ■'^' 

Clerical (Some part time) 8 

^^- Total Erriployees 10 



9732 



-2DB-, 



Officer Under Bond 

3. G. Xnerr, Secretary-Treasurer 
Aino-ont of 3ond - $10,000.00 



Accounts ?eceiva'ble of $5,313.45 r.p"03aring on Balance Sheet ex- 
pected to produce ap"oroximptely one-third (l/3) of total or $2,104.45 
per estimate of the Secretary-Treasurer. 

Lease nov; in force e::;oires April 1, 1^3^^ but can be terr.iinated at 
anytime on 50 dcvs' notice. ■_ 

Asressraents pa^'ments voluntar*/- and no bud.^et v;as submitted to 
KRA for approval except co'ov wgs furnished to i'Ra for their information. 

Uo prepaid assessments appear in collections. All assessments 
appearing ns collected in audit "oeriod cover period from Jul'' 1933 to 
December 31, 1934. 

Ko fif^ures a.-opee.r in the books at December 31, 1934 for accrued 
expenses. Auditors have been rdvised by the Secretar^'-Treasurer that 
all bills received at December 31, 1934 have bean entered on the books; 
also thot tue accrued pa.yroll at December 31, 1934 '■'ould only approxi- 
mate $22.00. Bills received from tne He'.' York Local Area r/hich appear 
in the distribution of er-.pensec onl-''- cover period to October 31, 1934. 
Bill to Dec'-mber 31, 1934 has not been ciibmitted by such local area at 
date of audit. Sv.ca c\i^T<-e together v?ith distribution to be received 
from the other Local Areas and Regional Offices vill aiopea-r in distri- 
bution of expencitures in the next accoimting. 

STA'I^MSI^T 0? GSICRAL I1IF031LA.TICIT 



December 31, 1934 

Shi^jQ^uldin- spd Shiore^iairint Industr:/- Code Committee 

Cancellations and ciaa,r^"e off of assessments totaling $26,085.25 during 
the -neriod covered by this audit have been authorized by the Secretary- 
Treasurer, Mr. C. C. Knerr. The following strtement signed by the said 
Mr. Knerr ^fas submitted to the auditors: 

"$25,085.25 T.'as either cancelled or adjusted by direction of 
the Treasurer becf.use of 

1. Found firms were imder Small Boat Code. 

2. Advised hy Local Area Chairmen that firms were under other 
Industrial Codes and not lUider the Shipbuilding and Ship- 
repairing Code. 

3. Adjustments due to billing being rendered on imcomplete 
inf ormr'tion at time of billing. 

4. Due to t.ccounts being uncollectible 

5. Firms discontinued ousiness 

(Signed) C. C. Knerr 
Dated: Jan. 31, 1935 Secretary-Treasurer 

9732 ; 



On page 5 of "Instructions to Auditors" is the recuest to furnish 
a statement of Income and Expenses end Budget Comparison sliovring the 
income and expenses synchronizing- in statement-form v/ith the p-ovisions 
of the Budg-et. Explanatory note on ZJxhioit "3" attached hereto, refers 
to this Exhibit "M", Statement of C-eneral Informa.tion to the effect 
that the auditors are vjiable \,o set up proper budi^et comparison in ad- 
cordance xrith the reouest on page 3 of "Instructions to Auditors". The 
Committee in preparing its first bud-get for the period to July 1, 1934 
did not show a detailed classification of e>rpendi ture s , onlv an esti- 
mate of expenses of administering the code segrega,ted as to National 
Orgamzation, District Committees and Local Area Committees. In the 
second budget for oeriod - Julj'- 1, 1934 to June 15, 1935 detailed in- 
formation \7as prepared to shovif budget expenditures for all depa.rtments. 
For the reason that Exliibit "B", attached hereto, calls for a detailed 
distribution of all actual e:qjenses paid, it is impossible to show cor- 
responding budget comparison r-s proper detail distribution is onlv avail- 
able for the second budget period. Hov/ever copies of the two budgets 
are attached hereto. 



2 . Termination of Para..sra'oh III of ."j ii.'.i r trat ipn ■lQi';^-e;r_Z>-_36 . 

No recuest was made by the Code Authority for such termination- 

3. Effect of othor Administrative Orders 

The Code Authority abided by all Administrative Orders that 
applied to a vol"'intary contribution basis. 

4. Income from Labels 
I'o labels were used. 

5. Fro-Qortion of Assessments collected 

Soference is -nade to letter September 5, 1935, as follov/s: 
(Hef. Exh. 0-5, Ampx.) 

"Mr, H. ITewton V.'hi ttelso^.-, 

Assistant deputy Administrator, National Recovery Administration 

1320 G Street, 

Washington, 3. C. 

Re: History Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry 
Code - Budgets 



9732 



"Deaj- Mr. Whittelsey: 

In resoonse to your latter of Sa-ntsmlier 3rd, relative 
to infcrrnation concerning; billings and budt^ets: 

"(a) The Uational Co^incil of American Shipbuilders 
did advance the f'lnds for administering the code up to the 
tii:ie the industry was hilled, hased upon the authority of 
the resolution and pirn of Januarjr 4, 1934. 

"(h) 1. Practically^ all hills for the first budget 
period was sent out under date of March 20, 1934, with a. 
few a.cditional billings up to and including May 1, 1934. 

2, Billirgs for the second budget period were 
made on October 1, 1934, 

"(c) Prom a ca.refail reading of the minutes of January 
4, 1934 you v/ill note that the plan of that cate ?/as adopted 
by the Code Committee and wa.s not merely an understanding 
among the members attending the meeting. In reading the plan 
for prorating the cost of n.dmiRi storing the code I direct 
your attention to the folloi"'inr: 

'From Januar;;' 1, 1934 to July 1, 1934, approxi- 
mately tv;enty-five percnet of the cost of operating the 
National Council will becha.rged as a "oroper exioense against 
the administration of the Code.' 

"The budget for the year July 1, 1934 to June 15, 
1935 provided for the twenty-five percent of sala.ries and ex- 
penses incurred by the I.'a.tional Council. 

(ilote: For j'-our information, the national Coijoicil of 
American Shipbuilders did not bill the Code Authority for 
twenty-five percent of its actual expenses, but eliminated 
all items that referred strictly to National Co-oncil business, 
such as, membershi;o dues in the Chamber of Commerce of the 
United States; expense of holding annual meetings of Council; 
traveling expenses incurred other than on code work; cost of 
la" books; capital charges, furniture and fixtures; postage, 
and other miscellaneous charges of a character which we felt 
had been incurred directly for the benefit of the National 
Coujicil. ) 



Amount Amount 

Period Billed Collected 

"(d) July 1933 to July 1, 1934 ' $61,552.00 $34,423.00 

& 

"(e) July 1, 1934 to December 31, 1934 40.724.96 37.525.41 

Totals: $102,376.96 $71,948.41 

"(f) No bills were rendered for the third budget period 
covering Januarj^ 1, 1935 to June 16, 1935. 

"TiTith best regards, I am , i „ „ ^^ 

'r,rt~ri Yours vert truly, /s/ C.C.Knerr 

9732 Secretary" 



-■211- 



It should be noted that trio ano-unt collected given e.s $71,948.41. 
differs from the Auditor's report of rjnount collocted to DeccralDer 31, 
1934, set forth in the forGi2;oimg statement of income cx;::)ense as 
$69,991.26. The difference of $1,957.15 v/as received subsequent to 
Dcccmbur '^1, 1934, ot-t. of the $6,313.45 (asS(jS9nents hilled and not 
realised) set forth in the Balance Sheet hereinbefore. 

In considering proportion collected due account must he t^-^hen of 
adjustricnts set forth in statcnent of General Information of $25,085.25, 

Therefore, after ;-djiist:"Cuts , the accounts stand os follows: 

Total -^jnount 'Ldllcl $102,376,96 

Less adjustments 26,085.25 

Adjusted iMnount hilled 76,291.71 

Total pjnount received 71,948.41 

Proportion collected after 
adjustments related to the 
.amounts hilled 94^ 

The iDroportion with relation to the Budgets and after adjustments 
is as follov7s: 

Budget July 1933 to July 1, 1934 $43,481.00 
" July 1, 1934 to June 16, 1935, 57,754,50 

$101,235,30 
Less adjustments 26,085.25 

575,150.05 

Total amount received .^71.948.41 

Proportion collected after 
adjustments v/ith relation 
to the Budgets 

a. Discussion of Difficulties Involved 

'Fac Ind.ustry financed itself on a voluntary hasis with marked 
success as shcvn by the surplus account, of $30,533,21 and receivable of 
$6,315,45 and payable of only $2, 194, 00* as of December 31, 1934 as 
hereinbefore set forth. 

The adjustments v/erc made necessary by ^. ciia.nge in "Definitions" 
Nvhereby smaller vessels v/ere put under the Code for the Boatbuilding 
and Boatrepairing Iiadustry, 



9752 



-212- 

6 . Financial 0-ocr-T,tions of Code Authorit y ir. Relation to its 
other Operations 

The foregoin^s shows , th-.t the Code Authority adeq^.iatoly provided 
for the entire field or.vanization as ?/ell as proper offices for itself 
\7ith ample help, and nan-' gee' b;;- avi efficient Chairman and the Secretary- 
Treasurer. All a-.^'\car te h-:.V'~ "been sxifficicntly compensated* 

7. Closing oi the i'iaor.cip.l Operations of the Code Autho rit y 

Aiigust 30, 193u, c.t a mectin.; of the Industry Hemhers of the 
Code Authority, preparation was made for closing t ic financial operr- 
tions of the Code Authority. '£of, lanutes Deputy's files) Excer] ts 
of the i/iinutes are as follows: 

"Liquidation o. Code Fund s 

"The Chair^nan recorded thrt after all disbursements (for all 
areas) had ocen made, a b-, lance of $13,382.27 remained unexpended. 

"There was also discussion as to the disposition of the files 
and records of the Coue Axithority and District and Local Areas, 
and it was the opinion that these records should he placed under 
the jurisdiction of the l^iational Council of American Shipbuilders, 

"The balrncc of $13,382o27 as mathematically calcula,ted vjould 
be eq.mvalent to a refund of $0.185997 on the dollar and the fol- 
lowing letter, to be addressed to those members of the industry 
v/ho contributed to tac exrrense of administering the code, v/as 
agreed upon as covering the dippostion of both moneys and records, 

" ' (iTame of Individual Firm to be" Inserted) 

Gentlemen: 

"The Industry f.Lmbcrs for the Shipbuilding and Shiprcpairing 
Industry that v.-ere represented on the Code Authority for the Code 
of Fair Coni-oetition ^ind Trade Practice imve held no m.eetings since 
April 25, 1935 until August 20, 1935, on which date a meeting was 
held to consider and recommend action as to the disposition of the 
files ajid records, and the liqiiidation of moneys obtained from code 
assessments and now on Iir.nd. 

"There is attached hereto a definite statement of receijits 
... ..:-;onditiu:es for the period July 26, 1933 to Juiic 15, 1935. 
The receipts from assessments and from the liquida.tion of furniture 
and fixt-ixes totaled $72,071.41 and the total expenditures were 
$58,589.14, le;iving a balance for distribution of $13,382.27 or 
$0.185997 for every dollar received. Your proportion would be 



"It is b.lievcd th-.t ■■.11 od those who contributed to the Ad- 
ministration of tile Code will be s...tisficd upon an inspection of 
the fina-.icial statemonts that strict economy was exercised in the 
administration of the fimds bv the Code Authority, the District 



9732 



and the Local Area Comiaittces — an economy tiv.t could only 

kave been o"btp.ined by making, use of existing organizations v;ith- 

in the industry. 

"It is suggested that the industry r..ssent to the disposition 
of the files and records and the distribution of uiiexijended funds 
?,s folloT/s; 

1. T'aat the National Co-jncil of j\rr.erican Shrpbuilders 
be assigned to t:il:e care of such files ?nd record.s as it is 
impoi'tant to preserve, 

Z, That tl;e imex.^onded balance of individ-i:u.cl or cor- 
porate voluntary contributions to t?ne administration of the 
Code (tha.t is $0,155997 for every dollar received) be assigned 
to the 'la.tional Council of A^-ierican Shipbuilders to be ex- 
pended in trade association activities for the shipbuilding 
and shiprepairing industry as the J-tional Council of American 
Shipbuilders may deem just and proper, 

3, Tliat if the individuiil or corporate contributor is 
not sa,tisfied to distribute the br lance on hand as suggested 
above that a check be. rna.de out and mailed to him or it in an 
gjnount v/Mch sliall equal the ba.lance of his contribution re- 
maining in the fund, 

"Please note the atta.ched two form letters - Form V,o. 1 assenting 
to items llos, 1 o.nd 2 above, and Form ilo, 2 assenting to items ITos, 1 
and 3 above, which are sent to you for yo'^ir convenience in responding 
to the aoove recoirimendations. It will be avpreciated if you vdll fill 
out promptly the one to which you agree and return it "o this office, 

"In order to facilitate a prompt closing out of the v;ork of the 
Coda Authority it v/ill be assuincd tliat if a reply to our letter is 
not received on or before Se-otcmber 15, 1935 that you assent on your 
part to the Form Letter Bo, 1 sent to you, 

"There is enclosed for your convenience a self-addressed, st-riped 
envelope for your reply. 

Very t^'ulj'' yours, 

% 

C. C. ICnerr, 
Secretary. '" 



?732 



"214- 



SHIPSUILDIl'G Ai'ID SHIPRZPAIRIl'G INDUST:^! CODi: COblllTTEE 

11 BROAD' :AY 

net: yoric 

STAT-SII?,HT OF IirCOiiE* Al^D EXPEL^DITURSS* (JULY 1955 TO JUIIE 
16, 1955) AED AMOUNT OF CASH ON EAST), AUGUST 20. 1955 

INC 01.13 ; 

Assessments (Jul]'- 1953 to June 16, 1935 - Exhibit "A") $71,948.41 
Sale of By-Lavs . 13.00 

Proceeds from Sale of Furniture & Fixtures 110.00 

TOTAL INCOJ.IE: $72,071.41 

EXFEiroiTURES ; 

Salaries $31,767.52 

Office Expense 

Rent $4,477.80 

Stationery & Supplies 2,197.96 

Printing & L'imeograpMng 1,882.98 

Telephone & Telegraph 3,548.05 

liiscellaneous Expense - 263.60 

Postage ^ 2,139.53 

Reporting Service 306.22 

Luncheons 576.29 15,192.43 

Traveling Expense 4,591.33 

General Expense 

Industrial Relations Committee $2,378.60 
F. R. Harris - Consulting Engineer 
( Surve'"- of Shipbuilding & Ship- 
repairing Industry'' in connection 
with preparation of Code) 3,000.00 
Audit of Accounts Certified 

Public Accouiitant ■ , 300.00 

Contribution to Durable Goods 

Industries Committee 800.00 

Prentice-Hall Service 60.00 

Bond for Treasurer 25.00 6,563.30 

Furniture & Fixtures Purchased 574.26 

TOTAL EXPENDITURES: 58.589.14 

SURPLUS CASH IN BANK: . $13,382.27 

(*) - Covers all National, District & Local Committees 
9732 



I 



-215- 

Si^^TLLElTT OF i:"CQ![E 3Y LGCAi. .ASLAS jU'D EXPSIIPITUHLS 
OP ALL C0:ii;I?T£3S 
(Exhibit "A", referred to in the fore^iOixig re- 
port 01 income and Ix lenditures) 

¥.0. of Income froin E:qTcnded by 

Firms Assess.Tients Coimnittee 



3i".i;obuillin^, & Shi-oreoairinti 
Code Authority 

Atlantic Coast District 



• $43.114. 77 



District Comnittoe 

'Jew England Local Area 
ITew York Local Area 
Delav/are Hiver Local Area 
Chesaper]ce Bay Local Area, 
Hampton Roads Local Area 

Total 

Gulf Coast District 

District Comiriittee 

Tanroa Local Area 
Pensiicola Local Area 
Mobile Local Area 
iJe^.- Orle^ais Local Area' 
Texas Local Area. 

Total: 
P&cific Coast District 



Los Angeles Local Area 8 
San Francisco (District &. Local 

Area) 20 
Portland Local Area 3 

Seattle (District £■ Local Area ) 20 







$1,524.52 


13 


$8,910.06 


. 326.73 


97 


13,165.65 


6, 938. .63 


14 


13,797.40 


99.89 


14 


6,090.40 


438.51 


31 


12.262.35 


569.33 


159 


$54,225.86 


$9,997.51 



3? 



Total: 
Great Lakes District 

District & Local Area 

Mississj-Q-Qi River District 

District J; Local Area 

GMI;D TOTAL: 



51 



45 



299 



$6.638.00 



$968.80 

3,627.60 

60.00 

1, 749.65 

$6.406.05 



$5.C23.10 



$1.055.40 



$71.948.41 



$417.46 



4 


$90.00 


$15.00 


4 


110.55 


20.00 


11 


■ 3,299.70 


70.04 


12 


2,282.75 


291.24 


6 


855.00 


106.81 



$920.55 



None 

$2,803.32 
ITone 
335.25 

$3.138.57 



$1.493.14 



$ 24.50 



$58.689.14 



9732 



-216- 

In accordance \,'ith the action of the Indust^r/ Menbers of the Code 
Authority Au^st 20, 1935, the financial pffairc -Tore closed ac per 
the follovrin.-^ letter: (Ref. Deputy's Piles) 

"September 23, 1935 

"Mr. H. Newton TThittelsey 
Assistajit Deputy Director 
ITatirnal Recovery Administration 
Conecticut Avenue & "L" Street 
Wpshingtoii, D, C. 

"Dear Mr. Wliittelsey: 

"I have your letter of Septeraher 19 and just as same was received 
I was on the verge of sending the information to 37OU as agreed upon when 
in yoirr office Isst Tuesday. 

"I am pleased to enclose herewith 9 copies of a letter sent to 
all members who had contributed to the supTjort of the Code Authority 
from its inception. The letter is in accordance with the action 
taken by the Industry Members at its meeting on August 20. I auto- 
matically extended the time in which to receive letters back from 
September 15, 1935 to September 23, 1935 and I am "^leased to inform you 
that the-accounts are now balanced and that all fiinds have been distri- 
buted. 

"If there is any additional information needed in connection with 
an interiretation of these letters, please do not hesitate to caJ-l upon 
me. 

"Very truly yours, 



"/s/ C. C, Knerr 
Secretary" 



9732 



-217- 



D. Administr-^tion of the Code 

1. .^.Tiendments 

Amendment No . 1 was approved by the President October 10, 1933, 
(deference: Code Record Section and Amendment No. 1, Exhibit A, Appendix, 
also Deputy's Files.) 

The Code ns approved July 26, 1933, provided in Section 8 (a) 
r-.s follov's: 

"To effectuate f-orther the policies of the Act, 
a Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee 
is hereby designated to cooperate with the administra- 
tor as a planning and fair practice agency for the 
shipbuilding --.nd shiprepairing industry. This com- 
mittee shall consist of five representatives of the 
shipbuilders and ship repairers elected by a fair 
method of selection, to be approved by the Adminis- 
trator and three members without vote appointed by 
the President of the United States. Such agency 
may from time to time present to the administrator 
recommendations bosed on conditions in their industry 
as they may develop from, time to time T^'hich v-zill tend 
to effectu.ite the operation of the provisions of this 
code and the policy of the National Industrial Recovery 
Act." 

Amendm.ent IIo . 1 provided that Section 8 (a) be amended to read 
as follows: 

"To effectuate fijrther the policies of the Act, a 
Ship Building and Ship Repairing Industry Committee 
is hereby designated to cooperate with the Adminis- 
trator as a Planning and Fair Practice agency for 
the ship building and ship repairing industry. This 
Committee shall consist of representatives of the 
Ship Builders and Ship Repairers in such number not 
less than six as the Administrator in his discretion 
ma^v' from time to time determine, elected by a fair 
method of selection to be ap'oroved by the Administrator, 
and four mem^bers without vote appointed by the Fresi- 
dent of the United States. Such agency may from time 
to time present to the Administrator recommendations 
based on conditions in their industry as they may 
develop from time to time ^^-hich will tend to effectu- 
ate the operation of the provisions of this Code and 
the policy of the National Industrial Recovery Act." 

iiTilliam H. Davis, Deputy Administrator, by memorandum of Septem- 
ber 18, 1933 (Reference: Volumes I, II, Code Record Section and Deputy's 
Files) pointed out that 



9732 



-218- 



"The Shipbuilders .',nd Shiprepnirers stpte that 
since totli of them must be represented on this 
committee, and as the peofraphical distribution 
is so great, they feel that a committee of six 
instead of five is necessary, liith a possible 
increase later, on to take care of representation 
for the Mississippi River and its Tributaries. 

"The Secretary of the Navy has sugisested that 
since the operation of the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Code will have an important 
bearing on the Naval Shipbuilding Program, it 
is desirable that the Navy Department be repre- 
sented on the Committee, thereby necessitating 
an additional Presidential appointee to represent 
• him on this Committee. 

"I recommend that you approve such amendment." 

The letter to the President from Hugh S. Johnson, Administrator, 
of August 30, 1933, (Reference: Volume II, Code Record Section, Deputy's 
Files, and Amendment No. 1, Exhibit "A", Appendix) contained the following: 

"Under the Code of Fair Competition of the Ship Building 
and Ship Repairing Industry, as approved by you on July 
26, 1933, the Industry has asked for an Industry Commit- 
tee having six representatives of the Ship Builders 
and Ship Repairers instead of five as provided for 
by the Code. The Secretary of the Navy has asked for 
representation on the Industry Committee." 

There were no hearings or notice of opportunities to be heard. 
The Consumers Advisory Board and Labor Advisory Board approved, and the 
Legal Division approved as to form. 

Amendment No. 2 was approved by Hugh S. Johnson, Administrator, 
March 29, 1934, (Reference: Code Record Section, Amendment Folder, 
Deputy's Files and Amendment No. 2, Exhibit "A", Appendix). This amend- 
ment pertained to Definitions. 

The Code as approved July 26, 1933, read as follows: 

"1— -DEFINITIONS OF TERMS 

"The terms 'shipbuilder' and ' siiiprepairer ' , when 
used in this code, includes a person, partnership, 
or corporation engaged in the business of building, 
fabricating, repairing, reconstructing, remodeling, 
and assembling oceangoing, harbor and inland water-way 
vessels, and floating marine equipment of every type 
above ten tons, including the building within their 
plants of machinery, equipment,, and other ship's parts." 



9732 



-219- 

Amendment lio, 2 provided ps follows: 

"1. 'DEFINITIOK OF TERMS 

"A. The Term ' Shipb-aildirif? and 3hiprepFiir„ 
ing Industry' means: 

"1. The "building, fabricating, repairing, 
reconstructing, remodeling and assembling 
o'f all vessels and floating marine equips 
ment except: 

"(a) V,'ooden boats and vessels and wooden 
floating marine equipment. 

"(b) Pleasure boats and yachts, both wooden 

nnd/or metal up to and including one hundred 
and fifty ( 150) feet in length over nil. 

"2. The building within shipbuilaing and ship- 
repairing plants of machinery, equipment and 
other ship's parts. 

"B. The term 'Member of the Industry' means any 
person, partnership, corporation, association, 
trust, trustee, or receiver engaged in the Ship- 
building and Shiprepairing Industry'-, either as 
an employer or on his or its own behalf." 

The report to the President of V.aTch. 29, 1934 from Hugh S. 
Johnson, Administrator, (Reference: Volume II, Code Record Section, 
and Deputy's Files and Amendment ITo. 2, Exhibit "A", Appendix) contained 
the following: 

"Since the effective date of the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Code, August 5, 1933, it has 
developed that the definition was too inclusive 
and covered too wide a scope of operations inasmuch 
as it brought within the scope of the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Code practically the entire 
operations of the smaller Boatbuilding and Boat- 
repairing Industry, vmose activities and conditions 
are of sufficiently different character to warrant 
a separate code. The specific amendment proposed 
by the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry and 
as- amended at the hearing is as follows: 

'The terms "shipbuilder" and " shiprepairer" , 
when used in this Code, include a person, 
partnership, or corporation engaged in the 
business of building, fabricating, repairing, 
reconstructing, remodeling, and assembling 
oceangoing, harbor and inland water-way vessels, 
and floating marine equipment of every t,'/pe, except 



-220- 



"A. Steel pleasure craft and steel yachts 
of 125' or under in length overall. 

"B. Wooden fishing schooners 50' or under 
in length overall, wooden trawlers 50' or 
under in length overall, and wooden haroor 
tugs 50' or under in length overall. 

"C. All other wooden commercial vessels 75' 
or under in length. 

'The terms " shipouilder" and "ship- 
repairer" also include the building 
within their plants of machinery, 
equipment and other ship's parts.' 

"The facts brought to light in this hearing 
revealed that a further modification of the 
amendment was necessary. The following defini- 
tion for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing 
Industry has resulted from the reconvening of 
the hearing in the Deputy's office on March 21, 
1934: 

'A. The term "Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Industry" means! 

"1. The building, fabricating, 
repairing, reconstructing, remodeling 
and assembling of all vessels and floating 
marine equipment except: 

'(a) Wooden boats and vessels 
and wooden floating marine 
equipment . 

'(b) Pleasure boats and yachts, 
both wooden and/or metal up to and 
including one hundred and fifty (150) 
feet in length overall.' 

"2. The building within shipbuilding 
and shiprepairing plants of machinery, 
equipment and other ship's parts." 

'B. The term "Member of the Industry 
means any person, partnership, corporation, 
association, trust, trustee or receiver 
engaged in the Shipbuilding and Shiprepair- 
ing Industry, either as an employer or on 
his or its own beh-.lf . ' " 



9732 



321- 



The Public Hearing (Reference: Code Record Section nnd Deputy's 
Files) was conducted on March 20, 1934, at Washington in the Pan American 
Room, Mayflower Hotel, Deputy Administrator, J. B. Weaver, presiding, 
Assistant Deputy Administrator G. H. Shields III and F. C. Waldron, 
Aide, present. There were present also: 

Of the Industrial Advisory Board: 

E. L. Fries- 
Of the Labor Advisory Board: 

Herman Brunck; J. S. McDonough. 
Of the Consumers' advisory Board: 

W. H. Edmonds. 
Of the Planning and Research Division: 

W. Cross. 
Of the Legal Division: 

Julian Johnson. 

Witnesses heard were: 

Mr. James A. FennjTmcker , 

National Council of American Shipbuilders. 
Mr. H. F. Morse. 
Mr. Henry B. Nevins, 

Representing the National Association of 

Yacht Yards. 
Mr. A. E. Luders, 

Representing the National Association of 

Engine and Boat Manufacturers. 

Mr. James A. Fennypacker , representing the National Council of 
American Shipbuilders (the proponents of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepair- 
ing C ode) read a statement (Reference: Fa^^^ 3, transcript of Hearing, 
Code Record Section and Deputy's Files) setting forth the shipbuilders' 
viewpoint of the change in definitions as proposed by the shipbuilders 
aS r ecounted hereinbefore in the excerpt from the report to the President. 
This statement was signed by H. Gerrish Smith, President of the National 
Council of American Shipbuilders, dated March 19, 1934, and addressed to 
J. B. Weaver, Deputy Administrator. 5here was included in the statement 
the r e turn from questionnaires that v;ere sent to shipyards and boatyards. 
Replies were received from 22 shipyards and 25 boatyards. 

Mr. H. F. Morse . President of the National Association of 
Boatbuilders and Repairers (the proponents of the Code for tra Boat- 
building and Boatrepairing Industry) read a statement (Reference: 
beginning page 16 of the transcript of the hearing, Code Record Section 
m d Deputy's Files) in which the following points were made; that of 
336 motor vessels built, 213 were built in boat yards and 90 built in 
shipyards, the balance being built by the Government. ' These vessels 
being between 100 and 150 feet long; that below 100 feet in length there 
were 332 vessels built, of -.-hich almost 100^ were built in boatyards. 

That the shipbuilders' statement was based on returns from 
only 22 shipyards and 25 boatyards, whereas in the United States there 



9732 



-232- 



were approximately 3000 boatyards and appro::iraately 66 shipyards, mem- 
bers of the National Coiincil of Snipbuilders . He requested that all 
wooden "boafbuildinfc and repair v/ork of any size, both commercial and 
yacht work, should be placed within the definition of the Boatbuilding 
Code and excepted in the definition of the Shipbuilding Code. (Author's 
note: - There were 232 tliipyards assented to or signed letters of com- 
pliance to the Shipbuilding Code.) 

Mr. Hen r y B . Nevins, representing the National Association of 
Yacht Yards, testified as to the substantial difference between ships 
and yachts and between chipbuilding and yacht building. He submitted 
considerable data to prove that yachts up to 150 feet were for the most 
part built and repaired in boatbuilding yards and made a plea for the 
definition that had be^n made a part of the proposed Code for the Boat- 
building and Bostr.-jpaj ving Industry to be set forth in the definition of 
the Shipbuilding Industry as ez-cept-^d. (Reference: beginning page 25, 
transcript of Hearing, Cede Hecord Section and Deputj'-' s Files) 

Mr. A. E. Luders, representing the National Association of 
Engine and Boat Manufacturers, stated that the opinion of the Association 
he represented was that the de^narcation (between the Shipbuilding and 
the proposed Boatbuilding Code) as proposed by the Boatbuilders and 
Repairers was a fair, ecuitable and proper definition. (Reference: 
beginning page 36, Transcript of Hearing, Code Record Section and Deputy's 
Files) 

The reconvened hearing in the Deputy's office on March 21, 1934, 
cited in the report to the President hereinbefore set forth, the parties 
of interest arrived at the agreement on the definitions that were approved 
for this amendment (no transcript or other record can be located of these 
proceedings in the Code Record Section, Central Files, or the Deputy's 
Files) 

Amendment No. 3 was approved by Hugh'S. Johnson, Administrator, 
April 2, 1934 (Reference: Volumes I, II, Code Record Section, Deputy's 
Files, and Amendment No. 3, Exhibit "A", Appendix). It was recommended 
for approval by K. M. Simpson, Division Administrator. 

The Code as approved July 26, 1933, provided as follows: 

"3 — Regulations of Hours of Work 

"(a) Merchant Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing — 

No employee on an hour rate may work in excess 

of an average of thirty-six (36) hours per week, 

based upon a six (6) m.onths' period; nor more 

than forty (40) hours dui-ing any one week. If 

any employee on an hourly rate works in excess 

of eight (8) hours in any one day, the wage paid 

will be the rate of not less than one and one-half 

di) times the regular hourly rate, but othervase 

according to the pro-vailing custom in each port, 

for such time as may be in excess of eight (8) hours. 



9732 






"(b) Shipbuildine:; for the United States Government. 
— No employee on nn hourly rate may work in excess 
of thirty-tvv'O (32) hours per week. If any employee 
on an hourly rate works in excess of eight (8) hours 
in any one day, the wage paid will be at the rate of 
not less than one and one-rhalf (l^) times the regular 
hourly rate, but otherwise according to the prevail- 
ing custom in each port, for such time as may be in 
excess of eight (8) hours." 

"4 — Minimum Wage Rates 



"(b) The amount of differences existing prior to 
July 1, 1933, between the wage rates paid various 
classes of employees receiving more than the estab- 
lished minimum wage shall not be decreased. In no 
event shall any employer pay an employee a wage 
rate which will yield a less wage for a work week 
of thirty-six (36) hours than such employee was 
receiving for the same class of work for a forty 
(40) hour week prior to July 1, 1935. It is under- 
stood that there shall be no difference between 
hourly wage rates on commercial work and on naval 
work, for the same class of labor, in the same 
e s t abl i shment . " 

Amendment No. 3 provided as follows: 

Fart 3, Paragraph (a) is modified to read: 

"Shipbuilding No employee on an hourly rate shall 

be permitted to work more than thirty-six (36) hours 
per v/eek. If an employee on an hourly rate works in 
excess of eight (8) hoiu's in any one day, the wage 
paid will be at the rate of not less than one and 
one-half ( I-5) times the regular hourly rate, but 
otherwise according to the prevailing custom in 
each port, for such time as may be in excess of 
eight (s) hours." 

Part 3, Paragraph (b) is deleted and a new Paragraph 
(b) is added, as follows: 

"Shiprepairing. — No employee on an hourly rate shall 
be permitted to work more than thirty-six (36) hours 
per v^eek averaged over a period of six (6) months, 
nor more than forty (40) hours during any one week. 
If an employee on an hourly rate works in excess of 
eight (8) hours in any one day, the wage paid will be 
at the rate of not less than one and one-half ( 1-^) 
times the regular hourly rate, but otherwise according 
to the prevailing custom in each port, for such time 
as may be in excess of eight (8) hours." 



9732 



-^1-.~ 



Fart 4, Paragraph (b) , is modified to read as 
follows: 

"The amount of differences existing prior to 
July 1, 2935, between the wage rates paid var- 
ious classes of employees receiving more than 
the es':ahlished minirjom wage shall not he de- 
creased. In no event shall any employer pay 
an emplo2/ee a viage rate vaiich will yield a less 
wage for a work week of thirty-six (36) hours 
than such employee was receiving for the same 
class of work for a forty (40) hour week prior 
to July 1, 1933." 

Provided, howAver, that the hourly wage rates 
now prevaiiirii-; :n private yards shall not be 
reduced because of the increase in ho\irs, ex- 
cept rates resulting from the application of 
Public Works Administration Bulletin No. 51 



9732 



-225- 



The re-oort to the President fron Hu^h S. Johnson, Administrator, of 
April 2, 1934, contained the follordng: 

"Sir: This is a re-:iort on the anendnent to the Code of 
Pair Cora-oetition for the Shiptuilding rjid Shiprepairing 
Industr]'' sjid on the recora lendrtions nade thereon hy the 
Kationo.1 Lahor Board to the national Snergency Cottncil 
on Ilarch 22, 1954. 

"The arnendnent follows the reconnendaticnr. of the National 
Lal3or Board :;7hich was transnitted hy it to the national 
Emergency Council on March 22, 1934, and ap;n-oved "oy 
you on l.Iarch 27, 1934," 

The report on the Amendnent, ilarch 30,1934, to Hugh S, Johnson, 
Administrator, from J. 3. TTeaver, Deputy Adr.iinistrator (Heference: 
Volume II, Code Record Section and Deputy's Piles) contained the 
following: 

"This is a report on the araendiaent to the Code of Pair 
Competition for the Shipbuilding ?-id Shrorepairing In- 
dustry and on the recomKenda,tion3 nade thereon oy the 
National Labor Board to the lle-tional Emergenc;' Council 
on March 22,1954. 

"The following exhibits are included or attached: 

Legal Division's approval 

Original letter of transnitt'^1 fron Industr-'- 
Notice of opoortunity to file objections 
Code to which ajnendrient is bei .^: raade 
Transcript of the herring held before the 
National Labor 3oard 

"The other exhibits ordinaril"'- included are not ^jresent 
in this case due to the f-ct th-t no hearii^g has been 
held before the ITrtio-rial Recovery Aririiiistrr-tion on 
this oinendment. 

"The amendnent concerns the revision of the hour clauses 
now obtaining in the Code of Pair Conoetition for the 
Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry-, arid follows 
paragraph three of the recorxiendatioas uaie by the Na,- 
tional Lrbor Board to the National 3nergency Council on 
March 22, 1934, a:ad en .•-roved by the President on Ilarch 
27, 1934." 



9732 



The reconnendation (Reference: VoltUiie II, Code Record Section 
and Deputy's Files) of the national Labor Board ttss as folloi-'s: 

"RECOiniEilDAIIOiJS TO IIH I^^SOUTIVE COIfilCIL 3Y THE 

KATIChiil LA301-: 30AID Oil EliPLOYEll RELATIOIIS III 

THE SHIpgUIIiDIlia AIED Si'IPEEPAIRIIJG IjDUSTRY 

"Pursuant to the reqti.est of President Pranld.in D. Roosevelt that 
the National Labor Soard study the relationship 'betTTeen the Navy Yards 
and private shi-obuildiag concerns in re:^ard to va^ges, hours of eimloy- 
raent a^ad similar matters, the Borrd makes the recomendations embodied 
in this report. 

"On Se-otember 22, 1933, a Sub-conmittee was appointed by the 
Chairman of this Board as a fact-finding body to determine the exact vre^ 
vailing conditions uith rogard to this question. This Sub-committee re- 
ported back to the Board on llovember 1, 1333, embodying in its report 
(copy attached) substantially all the necess' ry facts regarding the pre- 
vailing situation. 

"FollO',7ing receipt of cms reiDort a conference uas held under the 
auspices of the Board -yad- presided over by the Chairiiria of the fact- 
finding Sub-comnittee, on ilovenber 13, 1933. At this conference all 
interested pp.rties were re-oresented» 

"On December 5, 1933, a public hearing \7as held before the national 
Labor Board follo'iing its acceptance of the facts established by the 
Sub-committee report. In addition to the evidence sup-^lied by this re- 
port, Tvitnesses nere herrd fro:i all parties in interest nho requested to 
be heard. 

"i'llIDIliGS 

"The Board finds, on the basis of all evidence submitted for 
their consideration, that a worJc vreei: of thirby (30) hours and the 
Public 7orks Administration scale of •r.'ages is not practicable and 
feasible in the Shipbuilding n.nd Shi-)re;oa,iring Industry. 

"The Board recoianends in the light of this finding: 

"1. That a thirty-si:-: (33) hour v;eek be estab- 
lished in the Industry for all shipbuilding. 

"2. That for all shiprepairing an average of 
thirty-six (36) hours per i7eek over a six 
months' ;oeriod be established, and tha.t 
the maximum hours in any one Feek be estab- 
lished at forty (40) hours. 



9732 



-^27- 

"3« That the desirability of iiniforn hours in 
the shipyards and in the Navy^^JCards 'je re- 
cognized, and in the event that stteh equal- 
ization is not hroughc ahout \7ithin a per- 
iod of six months from the date hereof, 
the Administrator of the Industrial Recovery 
Act shR.ll review the question of t^eelcly 
hours in the shipyards. 

"4, That the hourly -.-^age rates now •:)revailing 
in private yards shall not he reduced he- 
cause of the increase in hours, (except 
rates resulting frou the p.-plication of 
P. ¥. A. Bulletin llo. 51), 

"5. That a Board UTon v/hich employees and em- 
ployers are equally represented he estph- 
lished to study wpge prohlems uhich arise 
from the estahlishraents of the thirty-six 
(3S) hour vreeh provided for in Sections 1 
and 2 hereof, and that it shall he a func- 
tion of this Board to equalize hy negotia- 
tion any unfair competitive inequalities 
in wage ra,tes that ncy exist as a result 
of the past application in thu Industry of 
the wage ajid hour 'orovisions of the Code 
plus the present application of the hours 
and T??.ge rates "orovided for in Sections 1, 
2, and 4 hereof. 

"If or when there is set up in the Industry an Industrial Rela- 
tions Board aporoved hy the national Recovery Administration the 
foregoing duty and functions shall devolve upon that Board." 

The reference to the Rihlic Works Administration work week of 
thirty (30) hours and scale of '-ages was hroutght ahout, "because a con- 
siderable portion of the Haval "building prograra was to be paid for 
out of P. W, A. funds. P. ¥. A. issued the wage and. hour provisions 
referred to in the report of the National Labor Board. 

The letter from the President was as follov.'s: 

the; miiTZ house 

17ASHI"JGT0iI. 

March 27, 1934, 

"Honorable Harold L. Ickes, Adninistrptor 

"Federal Emergency' Administration of Public T/orks 
"Washington, D. C. 



9732 



_OOp„ 



"Ily dear l.Ir. Secretary: 

"I hp.ve toury r"T3rovod the recornnenda.tion presented to- me by the 
Uational Lc-bor Bcarci, -■■urcuaut to L^y request thrt the;"- study the rela- 
tionship hetwsen the ITavy Yards and privete shiphuildin.'^ concerns in 
regard to ^•JP■^es, hours of employment, and sinilar matters. 

"Administrator Huf-h S. Johnson has been directed by me to effect 
the ajnendment of the:' Shi-obuildir^:^ rnd Shipropairing Code in accord^Jice 
with the findin^-s and reoornmen'dp.tions of the Hational. Labor- "Board. 

"TJlien these p.iendraents a.re made and bscone effective, yon c-'re 
directed to adjust the Public 'Jords Atoi hi strati on scale of ^-'-^ es, 
hoxirs of eimloyment, 'ar-d siinilar matr.ers no'-' prevailing for ship- 
building a,n:l shiprepairing, to correspond rrith the Shipbuilding pjid 
Shiproioairing Code as aMended. 

"Very sincerely yo-ars, 

"/s/ "JHiiinCLIIi D. HOOSE'/ELT 
"President." 

The Notice of Oo-)ortunity to file Objections uas duly issued 
April 4, 1954 (Reference: Lrciiibit "A-1", Append!::) . 

Legal Division apiaroved. (Hefere'^ce: Volxim'e II, Code Record 
Section) 

"If this situation requires inMedi;ite change, the Legal 
Division -oasnes the ;:!rocedure and doc^anients involved. There 
is a danger that ttr are too for on the negative side of 
Constitutional requirements as to due process, but ue may 
be sustained, h.- ving jrovided a rule to oho--' Cr-use. 

"/s/ ikn.us P07 Shannon , Jr. 

"A:igus Roy Shannon, Jr. 
"At^sistant Counsel." 

a. Effect on the indxistry 

Amendiaent ITo. 1 . wliich pertained to increasing the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepa iring Indu';try Connittec from an Indiistry neinbershi-o of five 
to six and froii the representatives ao jointed by the President of three 
to four, had the effect of enabling rdded reoresentation by the ship- 
repairers and the effect of enabling the Secretary of the Wavy to have 
a representative on this Code Aithority. 

Amendment ITo. 2 , irhich -ocrtained to the definitions, hp.d the effect 
of releasing from the -)rooosed loatbuilding and loatrepairing Code a. 
class of relatively small vessels, that 'vere not for the most loart built 
by the shipyards, and that were in fact built by boutyfirds. This change 



9732 



-229- 

in definitions had little effect on shiptuildin;::; production and na.s 
■beneficipl as it released a nuij'ber of 'boafbuilding concerns v^hose prac- 
tice V7as considerably different than a truly shipbuilding^ and ship- 
repairing ;olan» 

Amendment ITo. 3 , had the follovanfi effect: 

(a) IThereas the raaxiraum neelcLy hours for shipbuilding 
for the United States Governr,ient had been 32 hours per 
week it was changed to 36. This made for better operation 
in those yards which were building vessels for the United 
States Governr-.ent and also comnercial work, which had been 

■ granted 35 hours under the Code as approved. 

(b) The amendment as written for shipbuilding withdrew 
from Commercial shipbuilding, the flexability originally 
incorporated in Section 3 (a) of the Code, quote, "no 
employee on an hourly ra,te rasy -'ork in excess of an 
average of 35 hoiirs per rreek, ba^-.ed -apon a six months' 

period, nor more than 40 hours during any one week." 

(c) By the direction of the Pr.sident in the letter 
hereinbefore set forth, the Riblic Uorks Adrnini^.tra- 
tion modified Bulletin 51 by the addition of Section 
55 to the Bulletin. This section provides that "on 
all ship-building and shi;>-repairing -:;rojects for which 
invitations for bids for contra.cts are issued after 
July 1, 1934, the sca.le of wo.ges and hours of em-iloy- 
raent shall be determined by the Code of Fair Comi^eti- 
tion for Ship Building and Ship Repairing Industries. 
Therefore, on such contrp.cts, articles 11 (b) and 18 of 
Form ITo, P. W. A. 51 shall not be in effect." 

(d) The aaendment to Part 4 (b), which eliminated the 
provision, that there be no difference in hourly rates 

on commercial work and llavaJ. work had little effect, as it 
is the practice with the private shipbuilding yards to 
pay the same for the sajne cla.ss of i/ork on either Com- 
mercial or ITaval shi"obuilding. 

b. Critical discussion of value of amendments, including un- 
a'D'oroved ajnendments 

Amendment ITo. 1. Tliere is no criticism of this amendment. 

Amendment ITo. 2. It is noted that in the hea.ring en this amend- 
ment, steel cora:iercial vessels of the sma.ller sizes ''ere not given con- 
sideration, T/hereas many boatbuildin.-; and ooatrepairing plants have 
facilities for and do build and repair such vessels. 

The Code Authority for the Boatbuilding aiid 3oatrepa.iring Industry 
soon learned that the smaller steel commercial vessels shoixld have been 
included in their definition and excepted from the definition of the 
shipbuilders. An amendment was submitted to the Administration by the 

9732 



-230- ■ 

National Code Authority for the BoatDuilding and Boatrepairing Industry 
together rrith other amendments not concerned with definitions (Re- 
ference:' Amendment Folder, Bo,Tt"building ana 3oa,trepairing Industry, 
Deputy's Tiles). This piaendraont was suhmitted when such matters were 
"being held ;oending their incorporation in a revised Code to conform 
with the expected new KHjl Law, Further the shiphuilders had 'been 
working on an amended Code for a confiderahle time which, also had heen 
held pending the enactment of the e:.-''ected Law. This matter of de- 
finitions wp,s, therefore, to he adjusted "between the two industries in 
the proposed revised Coc.ss. 

Amendiiient IJo . 3. Tnile the provisions of this amendment, where"by 
the np^ciuum hourly week on ship"building for the United States Govern- 
ment was changed from 32 to 36 hours, had the effect of simplifying 
the operations of the yards and giving the men larger pay envelopes, 
it fell short of adequate reasona"ble honors for this Industry. Under 
the 36 hoxir provision the avera^ge hours worked "by the men was only 
30.5, whereas the average hours worked in all Industries was 35.2 (Re- 
ference: Konthly Lahor Review, Vol-ume 40, llo . 3, March 1935, pages 756 
and 757) . 

[Moreover the Navy yards which operated under a 40 hour per week 
"basis had the effect of drawing skilled men from the private ship- 
"building plants. The res-ult of these restricted hours was reflected 
in the applications for many exeaptions from the maximun hour provisions 
of the Code. 



9732 



6' 



-231- 

Unaoprcved Anendments 

(1) Smerfiency 7ork . - It was not provided for in the Code. On 
October 30, 1953 the Code Authority took action as per the excerpt from 
Uinutes as follows: 

"The Chairman a^^ain brou.,5-it to the attention oi the Code 
Coi-nmittee a request froin the 'JcDona^.! Iron 'lorks, 
Galveston, for an exemption for working men over forty 
hours. They stated they had endeavored to obtain addi- 
tional workmen but failed, and hence worked the men in 
excess of Code requirements. Mr. (Jerhauser cited a 
si ailar instance by Cliica^o S-iipbuildin^ Com^xiny. 

"After thorough discussion as to the possibility of yards 
abusing this privilege, it was agreed that a form should 
be dravm up embodying t/^ereon general regulations to 
cover emergency work, this forn requiring certification 
from the managers of the plap.t, and eiinhr.sizing the 
absolute necessity of reporting on work done under emer- 
gency conditions - pointing out that failure to report 
is a violation of the Code and subjecting the violator 
to a penalty of poOO.OO. 

"Tlie form is to be drawn up axii submitted to t-ie Code 
ComiTiittee for approval." 

November 16, 1933. In acccriaiice wit/i tne foregoing the Code 
Authority issued Interpretation ilo. 3 (deference: Sxiibit 1-3, Appendix) 
as follov>fs: 

lUTEZPEJlTATIOl^ KG. 2 
Shipbuilders and Sliiprepairers Code, 
Paragraph 3 (a) (l) 
Paragraph 3 (b) (l) 

TO: CODS COi/u.lITTES 

SHIPBUILDIrlS ADjIII'ISTPATIVE COI-ilHTTES 
SriPPJSFAIiERS i:aTI:1'IAL C0i.i..-ITT3E 

ALL LOCAL AISA C0Aia-.3i: (Please see that a co-oy of 
this Haling is distributed to each meT.ber of the 
Industry in your Area. ) , 

C-entlemen: 

There have come before the Code Co.umittee nuiierous requests for 
approval of Emergency 7ork in excess of the. ;;iaximuin number of working 
hours r)er week prescribed in the Code of Fair Competition and Trade 
Practice for the Sliipbuildin^ and Shiprepairing Indu'itry in the United 
States. 

The Code Committee has not granted any general approval of Emer- 
gency '.York, and will not do so. lov the time being, the Code Cormnittee 
will consider special cases of Ihiergency lork, and will approve them 
where the facts justify such action. It mrast be realized, however, t.iat 

9732 



unless tlie requests for ar-iroval of Eiaergenc;/ '.Tork are strictly limited 
to actual emergencies t.'.e pur_Jose of tl\e plan wiiici the Code Cominittee 
is now adopting will "be defeated, and it will become impossible to in- 
troduce any flexibility into t'A : application of these provisions of tLie 
Code. 

Every member of t^ie Industi-y must confine the Emergency "York 
strictly to the mini;TiUjT:i limits, and is required, in the event of Emer- 
gency 'ilorlz to submit a statement witnin the week the work is performed 
on the attached form. This statement is to show the nuiiiber of hours 
worked per man in excess of the ?;eekly limit, the necessity therefor, 
and otiier information requested on tie form, over the signature of an 
executive officer of your plant. This statement raList also be duly 
notarized. 

Please be guided accordingly. 

Very traly yours, 

II. Ct. Smith, C"na.irman. 

A saiTiple of the statement form, just referred to, made by the 
Bet"xalehem Shipbuilding Corporation is 3"hown in E:diibit I-3A, Appendix. 

Request for air.endment to the Code should have been immediately made 
after the .meeting of October 50, l?3o, in the opinion of the Author. 
Althougli t-ie Deputy Ad.i-iinL;=:.tr;;tor, .7. ;.!. Davis, and Geo. h. Sliields III, 
Assistant Deputy Aiainistrator, \.'ere present accorling to the minutes, 
t^iere a;opears to be no record o\ either malcin. , svicli a suggestion. 
Apparently t.ie Code Authority understood such actiji within its pov;ers 
although the Code, Section 3 (d), provided as follov/s: 

"(li) It is contemplated that from time to 

time supplementary ;orovisi:.ns of tiis code or additional 
codes will be sabmitted for tlie ap srcval of -t-ie President 
to prevent unfair competition in price and otlier unfair 
and destructive competitive practices and to effectuate 
tlie otner purposes and policies of Title I of the 
National Indastrial Recovery Act consistent wit"-i the 
provisions t.iereof." 

January 4, 1934. Tne Code Authority received a report as follows 
(Reference: i.iinutes, page 3, Deputy's Files). 

" EiTiergency Work 

"T"ae Chairman reported we had received from firms 
located in various sections of the co^antry numerous 
reports on emergency work requiring Jiours of labor 
per week in excess of those provided by the Code and 
■ that t:ie necessity for such overtime had been certi- 
fied to before a Notary Public by an official of 
each company in question. After discussion Mr. Roger 
Williams moved and V.r. Robert Haig seconded that: 



97 3S 



-233- 

"The re_5orts listed on txie statement 
dated January 4, 1954 covering emer- 
gency work be laid on tae ts^ole for 
future consideration." 

. 1933. Tlie Code Autliority passed a resolution providing 
for tlie re-writing of the Code (iReference: page 5, i.Iinutas, Deputy' s 
Files) 

April ^A, 1954. Tlie Code Authority again acted on "21-nergency Jork" 
(Hefjrence: .linutes, pa.ge 16 and 17, De Taty' s .Tiles). 

"T.ie members of tie Code Aufciority were of tl..e opinion 
that the matter should be restated tc t.'.e Industry ojid 
th-ereupon Mr. Robert 'laig, offered tie following 
resolution. 

'333CLVZD: Tliat the Code Authority lereby 
authorizes its Chainnan to bring to t;.e 
attention of the Industry pjid cases which 
appear tc be excessive h-ur? of work ejid 
that the Industry nust in tie fiitare con- 
fine its e.'nergency work to actual e..iergenG:.es 
in tiie industry itGelf.' 

"The motion was carried." 

During tiis period and for sc.ne montis thereafter a sub-co..i:dttee 
of the Code Authority were re-v/ritin^ the Code pre-^- ratory to sub'.aission , 
which was to provide suitable cla^ises to cover t^is "Snergency ,7ork." 

J'one 13, 1934. The Code Authority .aade ap;olication for the aiaen 1- 
ment by letter to J. 3. '.Teaver, Deputy Administrator, from >I. 3errish 
Smith, J-iairman of the Code Authoritj,'", (Reference: Deputy's ~'iles) of 
whicli the following is excerpted: 

"A modification of the present Code provisions to 
allow greater leeway per week on emergency work is 
necessary. As explained to General Jolinson at our 
meeting with him on May 7ti, we are continual ly 
receiving reports from sliip-repair yards of the 
necessity for exceeding the forty ..our limitation 
in order to accomplish emergency work. 

"As you will appreciate, sl-ips t^at are on reg'o.lar 
sailing schedules must be repaired on time or else 
tiey are delayed in sailing. 

"As previouslj'' explained tc you because of the 
li.uitation in Y/eekly hours employees in shiprepair- 
ing are not averaging thirty hours a week tirougli- 
out the industry. 

"Under tie circuiastances, a modification of the 
weekly provision relating to shiprepairing is very 



97 32 



essential, and it is reco.-iiiiended t-ia.t as applyin_ to 'botli 
siApbuildin^, and saip-repaArin^ tne follov/in:,, definition 
"be accei^ted for an emergency: 

' Tlie term "emergency" means that situation 
where"b/ a danger, or menace to tlie safety 
of a vessel, life or property exists; cr, 
wliere a delaj'' would work an undue liar d ship 
on an o?mer or contractor.' 

"Now follow with the tY/o definitions of hours for the Siip- 
building and Sliiprepairing w^L-ich have not been changed and 
add a third paragraph so that the three paragraphs will 
read as follows: 

"Tile above limitation of hours in any one week shall not 
apply to emergency work." 

Tlie amendment was wit...draYm as per letter Jvjie 38, 1934 to 
". G-. Smith, Chairman of tlie Code Authority, from H. Kev;ton ITnittelsey, 
Assistant Deputy Administrator, (.Reference: Deputy's Files) which is 
as follows: 

"Tnis is to a.cknowle l,:e you;; lon^^' distance telephone call of 
yssterday afterno.:n, June 37, in reply to my letter of 
J\ane 25, witi regard to the Amendment pertaining to tne 
Emergency clause that y'ju requested in your letter of 
June 13. 

"I understood from you as follows: if it developed that 
an open hearing must be held on the Application, you at 
the present time, did not desire to have us proceed 
wita tne matter, for the general reason that an amended 
Code is in formulation and Wxien it is up for considera- 
tion then tiiS open .learing will be condacted.- 

"I informed you in tne teleph-,ne conver&a,tion that the 
mL\ltigraphed copies of t^ie original letters of Jione 13 
were sent without our knowledge to the Administration, 
and in the usual course had been distributed to the 
various Advisory Committees or Boards; and that I had 
heard the Application for tiis Aneninent should be the 
subject of an open liearing. 

"In accordance with your v/ish, the preparation of the 
papers for the .Amendinent was stopped, and will not be 
proceeded with ^ontil v/e are in receipt of a further 
request. 

"Please accept this as a reply to you on the same sub- 
ject of June 27 letter." 

Following this period the proposed amended Code ¥/as expected from 
month to month, finally December 14, 1934, thete was a letter sent to 
E. G. Siiiith, Chairman of the Code Authority, from •!. Newton Tnittelsey, 



9732 



-255- 

Assistant Deputy Administrator. (Reference: Deputy' s Files) Tnis letter 
• set forth tae circumstances and asked tne following: 

"'iVill you please give ne or point out in the record the 
authority on whica the Siiipbuilding and S'liprepairing 
Industry have teen working in excess of the maximum 
hours of the Code in Emergencies?" 

In reply December 21, 1934 letter to 'I. Newton Whittelsey, Assist- 
and Deputy Admnistrator, from II. G-errish Smith, Cliairrnan of the Code 
Authority, (Reference: Deputy's Files) there was attached a memorandxixn 
setting forth the shipbuilders contention for longer hours, but no 
legal basis for Emergency '.fork beyond the m£:,ximuj.i weelcly hours of the 
Code. 

January 9, 1925. Letter to Z, Gerrish Sriiith, diairmaxi of the Code 
Authority, from II. Newton Hiittelsey, Assistant Deputy Administrator, 
(Reference: Deputy^ s Files) approved by memorandu;n to I'.ie author from 
T. R. Vaug].ian, Assistant Counsel, by r.oward Ralph, Assi-tant Counsel, 
.(Reference: Deputy's Files). The subject letter read as follows: 

"Dear l,Ir. Smith: 

"■Reference is made to ycur letter of December 21, in 
reply to my letter of December 14 with regard to the 
above subject. Particular note has been talcen of 
your memorandum on emergency work, dated December 19, 

'attached to your letter. 

"Examination has been made also of the Minutes of 
the meetings listed in your memoraadum and also 
Bulletin llo. 2, which pertains to this matter. 

"It is understood tliat necessary emergency repairs 

to vessels Iiave been made over a long period of 

years in emergency situations whereby a danger 

or menace to- the safety of a vessel, life or proper- 
' ty existed; or where a delay wciild hav© worked 

an undue hardship on an owner. 

•Tlowever, when the maximum hour provisions of the 
Code are exceeded in working under such emer- 
gencies, special exemption from the maximum hour 
provisions of the Code must be obtained eitl:ier 
by an amendment to the Code or by an exemption 
of ^ temporary nature. 

"The Code has not been ai'nended to permit work 

••bbyond the maximam hours of the Code in emer- 
gencies, nor has any exe:Trption been requested 
orgranted^ The amendment, requested Jxme 13, 
1934, was withdrawn. 

"Therefore, there exists no autliorization for 
any shipbuilding or shiprepairing yard to woris: . 



9732 



-see- 
in excess of the iTaximTi" licur provisiDns cf the Code 
on emergencies and any .yard so v/^rkin;; would lay it- 
self open to a char-i^e ol 'riolal.ion of tne Code, even 
if it does file a report i.7ith the Sliiphuilding and 
Shdprepairin-!? Industry Co .iTiittee. 

"It is understood tiat suitehle err.ergency provisions 
are heing incorporated in the proposed amended Code, 
which is to oe th^e subject of consideration at your 
meeting of Jp.nuary 17. If this amended Code is 
submitted to the ,'/h;iinistration , I believe due 
consideration would be given to a renuoest for ex- 
emption from tne maximuiii hour provisions of the Code 
in emergency repairs of ships for a period not ex- 
ceeding three months, which shoxild be sufficient for 
the consideration and approval cf the new amended 
Code. 

"The subject is recommended for your careful atten- 
tion. Kindly acknovifiedge. " 

January 17, 1935, heetmg of tne Code Authority. Tne foregoing 
letter was read (Heference: pa.ge 12, iiiinutes, Deouty' s Files) and the 
follov/ing resolution was passed: 

"HS30LTSD, That the Code- Author! tv authorize its 
Chshrman to clp.rify with N.xl.A. the situation with 
respect to emergency work and to renuest approval 
of such definition of eaiergency v/ork for the ship- 
building and sliiprepairing industry as necessary to 
clarify this matter; and 

"H3S0LV3D, That the following is adopted as a defi- 
nition of emergency work: 

'The term "emergency" means that 
situation whereby a danger, or 
menace to t]ie safety of a vessel,- 
life or property exists; or, v/here 
a delay would v.ork an undue- hard- 
ship on an owner or contractor.' . 

"And that to each of the Paragraphs 3 (a) and 3 (b) 
of the Code there be added the following v;ords: 

'The above limitation of hours in 
any one week shall not ap-ply to 
emergency work.' 

"AND BE IT FUxRThSH SSOLVSD, That pending tne adop- 
tion of the amendment by h..^.A. that a temporary 
exemption be granted for emGrii-,ency work by N.H.A. 
to the Siiphailding aaid SJdprepairing Industry." 

Application for the teraporctry exemption was duly received and 



9732 



— oO f — 

Administrative Order 2-31, February 19, 1955, signed by I. A. Ilarriman, 
Executive Officer, was issued as a stay of Sections (a) and (b) of tlie 
Code. Tliere developed considerable controversy over the v/ording of 
the term "Emergency Work" within the Administration, which resulted in 
a better definition and one well suited to sniprepairing cjid shipping. 

Hie Code Authority at its meeting of February 21, 1955 adopted 
the new definition (Preference: pa^e 9, l/iinutes. Deputy's Files) as per 
the following excerpt from the minutes: 

"Definition of the '.7ori "Emergency " 

The working of the term ' emergency' as contained in the temporary 
stay granted by iJIlA (Order No. 3-31) was considered and on motion of 
S. I. lalceman, seconded by 1. K. Gerhauser, -was ado':ited. Tliis defini- 
tion is in lieu of that adopted at t]:e ineetinj; on January 17th, and 
reads as follows: 

'The term "emergency" means that situation 
involving danger or menace to the safety 
of a vessel, to life, or to property, or 
wien a delay would work an undue hards. lip 
on the owner or the shippers or t'le 
passengers through loss of use of a vesyel 
for prompt loading or discharge or prompt 
and safe carriii_:;e of cargo or passengers 
to destination.' 

Ttie situation became involved owing to tie resistance of the Code 
Authority to provisions in exemptions and stays, whic!i required over- 
time be paid beyond the maxiimara weekly hours of the code, whic.i was 
interjected into the letters from the Code Authority on the amend_aent; 
consequently, the author sent the following letter dated l.ferch 30, 19 35 
to C. C. Knerr, Secretary of the Code Authority (Reference: Deputy's 
Files) 

"Dear l/Ir. Knerr: 

"Referring to my telephone conversation with you to the effect 
tha.t it is advisable to pass a new resolution of request for tiis a- 
mend^nent and thus consolidate the two previous resolutions pertain- 
ing to the matter. 

"Tlie resolution should clearly state the T/ording that you desire 
to obtain in the Code and not be involved in other matter such as con- 
tained in the letter of January 17. Tlie definition, of course, should 
follow the corrected wording passed at the last meeting. 

"It has been advisable to hold this .natter until a decision could 
be obtained on tie protest against time and one-half provision. Tlie 
subject is now in Review and goes direct to tlie National Industrial 
Recovery Board for final determination of tliat Board., whidi I hope can 
be obtained next week. Tlierefore, v/e are almost in a position to 
start aliead with this amendment. You understand if the Board denies 
the protest tliat any amendjiient pertaining to emergency work must in- 



9732 



elude tlie prnvisijn for time anl ".ne-lislf in excess of tlie maxi^ifuin hours 
of tie Code. 

"I hope to "be a,t year .iipe\:ine, toiT.orrow. 

"Very tidily yours, 

"H. Kewton V/liittelsey, 
"Ansistant Deputy Adininistrator 
"Squiixnent Divi si on . " 

The nev/ resolution was passed at the ineeting of th.e Code Authority 
March 21, 1035 (Reference: pa^-=: 3, Llinutes, Deputy's Files) and formal 
letter of application for the Amendment was received "by letter dated 
March 23, 19Z5 to li. ITewton "Jnittelsey, Assistant Deputy Adjuinistrator, 
from IT. Gerrish SiTiith, Chairman of the Cole Authority (Reference: 
Deputy's Files). Tne letter re-d as follows: 

"The Code Authority at its neeting in t'lis office on 
Liarch 21st, 1934 passed tiie followin;;; resolution: 

'ZESOLVHD, That the following- is adopted as 
a definition of emergency work: 

"The tenn ' em.ergency' means that 
situation involvin-; dan^^er or 
menace to t'ne safety of a vessel, 
to life, or to property, or wiaen a 
delay would v/ork an undue "Hard- 
ship on tie owner or tie shippers 
or the passengers through loss of 
use of a vessel for prompt loading 
or discharge or prompt and safe 
carriage of cargo or passengers to 
destination: and 

'FU3T:-:.i;R, be it is solved. That to each of the 
paragraphs 3 (a) and 3 ("b) of tie Code 
tiere be added the following words: 

"The ahove limitation of ma,ximura 
weekly hours in any one v/eek 
shall not apply to emergency work."' 

"It is requested that tiis definition may he placed 
before the proper autiorities in ITRA for their con- 
sideration and that the definition may be adopted 
as an aiTiend.nent to the code. Early action is re- 
quested. " 

Administrative Order 2-32, March 21, 1935, signed by ',?. A. "larriman. 
Executive Officer, denied tie request of the shipbuilders for the dele- 
tion from Exemptions and Stays, the provision that overtime be paid be- 
yond the maxiinum weekly hours of the code, and consenuently tiis subject 
involved the amendiaent. April 5, 1935, a letter to II. Gerrisli Smith, 
Chairman of txie Code Authority, from h. llewton Jnittelsey, Assistant 

9732 



Deputy Administrator, (Reference: Ds'puty' s Piles) -.vns as follows: 

"Dear Mr. Smith: 

"Mr. J . W. Hc.rt, one of tlie Indastry .nembers of t.ie 
Industrial Relations Conadttee for your Industry, 
has just infonaed me tar_t your Sliiphuilding and Sliip- 
repairinj^ Industry Committee proposes to exercise 
its right to appeal from Administrative Order 2-33, 
pertaining to the payment of time and one-half be- 
yond weekly hours, to the Appeal r, Board and tnat 
you are raaicing preparations for such an appeal. 

"In view of this situation, and in order to keep 
matters clarified, I would suggest the ■fallowing; 

"(a) A letter advisinz that you intend to tcC:e such 
an appeal. 

"(b) A letter requesting the "ational Recovery Ad- 
ministration to withiiold action on the proposed amend- 
ment pertaining to emer.?ency Y/ork pending the deci- 
sion of the Appeals Board for the reason that such 
decision is necessary as a proper guide in the deter- 
mination of the final fonn of the proposed aaendment. 

"(c) A letter re.-^ueiting extenaicn of the partial 
stay, Administrative Order 2-31, until such time as 
the amendment is approved and citing tliat you intend 
to take an appeal of 3-Z-3 and :iave made reouest for 
witliholding action on the proposed amendment iintil 
the decision of the Appeals Board." 

Tile a-'iendment was withdrawn and. extension of partial stay (Admin- 
istrative Order 2-31) v;as requested in letter dated April 8, 1935 to 
E. Hewton Tnittelsoy, Assistant Deputy Administrator, from 
H. Gerrish Smith, Chairman of the Cole Authority, (Reference: Deputy's 
Files) which read as follows: 

"Subject: Emergency VYork. 

"Ref . A. Code Authority' s letter to H. H. "ji/liittelsey 
dated March 28, 1935. 

"Ref. 3. H. K. Wliittelsey' s letter to Code Authority 
dated April 5, 1935, paragraph (b) 

"Receipt is acknowledged of your letter of April 5th, in con- 
nection with definition of em.ergency work. 

"In view of the Code Authority' s letter of even date re- 
questing a further extension of the partial stay 
(Administrative Order 2-31) covering e.viergency work, 
it is requested that our letter of March 23th, asking 
that the code be amended to cover definition of emer- 

9732 



-24C- 

gency "be held up -until our appeal from tae decision 
of AdiTiinistrative Order 3-32 iias been acted upon \>y ' 
the Industrial Appeals Board." 

Tlie amendment had "been sent to the Advisory Boards, etc., hut they 
were all notified .h.y memorandum dated April 9, IfoS of the situation 
from H. Newton "fcittelsty. Assistant Deputy Administrator. 

Eie shirhuilders were duly further auth.orized by Adjninistrative 
Order 2-34, Extension of Stay (Administrative Order 2-31) signed by 
W. A. Harriman, E:-:-3Cutive Officer. 



9732 



( a) Fro-'osed .A mendnent of Paraf:raphs 3 (a) and (h) of the Code as 
Amended "by No. 3. A-oril 2. 19? 4. 

Au-^^st 3, 1934. The proposed anendecl Code had not "been submitted 
and conseoj\ently the hour provisions of the Code remained at 36 ho\irs ryer 
week whereas the Congress had definitely sej^the naxinuri weekly hours for 
the Govern:-.ient llavy Yards at 4C hours r^er week. 

Documents were drafted to correct the situation hy a proposed amend- 
ment to the Code to provide 40 h-mrs as the maximu:-;! weekly hours. 

The Order was signed "Approval Recommended" by C. E. Adans, Division 
Ac^ministrator of Division I, but was nit signed ''oy Hugh S. Johnson, Admin- 
istrator. Exceripts from the Order (Reference: Volume I, Amendment Tolder, 
Deputy's Piles) are as follows: 

"Part 3, Paragraph (a) is modified to read: 

'Shipbuilding - Ko employee on an h-iurlj'' ra,te shall be permitted 
to work more than forty (40) hooars per v;eek. If an employee cm. 
an hourly rate works in e::cess of eight (8) hours in any one day, 
the wage paid will be at the rate of not lesr; than one and one- 
half (1-?:-) times the regular hourly rate, but otherv/ise according 
to the prevailing custovi in each port, for s\ich time as may be in 
excess of eight (8) hours.' 

"Pa.rt 5, Paragraph (b) is modified to read as follows: 

' Shiprepairing - ITo employee on an hourly rate shall be permitted 
to worlr more than forty (40) hours ner week averaged over a per- 
iod of six (6) months, nor more than forty-four (44) hours during 
any one week. If anj'' employee on an hourljr rate works in excess 
of eight (B) hours in any one day, the wage paid will be at the 
rate of not less than one and. one-half (IrO times ..the regular 
hourly rate, but otherwise according to the prevailing custom 
in each port, for such time as may be in excess of eight (8) 
hours. ' 

"Provided, however, th?t the hourly rates now i3revailin.^ in 
private yards shall "not oe reduced because of tlie increar;e 
in hours except rates resultin-'^: from the a.ioplication of 
Public TTorks Administration Bulletin ITo. 51," 

The report, August, 3',. 1334, to Hugh S. Johnson, Adminintrator, signed 
by J. B. ¥eaver. Deputy Adminietrator, and approved \)j C. E. Adams, Division 
Administrator, (Reference: Volume II, Aiiend.nent Folder, Deputy's Piles) is 
excerpted as follov;s; 

"This is a. report on the amendi^ent to the Code of Fair Competi- 
tion for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry and on the 
recommendations made thereon by the national Labor Board to the 
national Er.iergency Council on March 22, 1934. 



9732 



"The follo^.-'ing exliiliits are inc"'-iicled or attached: 

Legal Division's a.p"oroval 

Original letter of tr^^isnittec'. fron Industry 
^'otice of Opportunity to file objections 
Code on rhich anend-ient is beixV^ made 
Letter from Secreta?"3'' of the lisTy 
Transcript of tiie hearing; held liefore the 
national Labor Boa,rd 

"The other e:diibits ordinarily included are not present in this 
case due to the fact that no hearing has been held before the 
national Recovery Administration on this amend-ient. 

" A co-ny of the i:a,ticnal Labor Board's re-oort is ' . 

included in tiie ex^aibitc, 

"Para:'5rar)h of 3 of the findings of this ireport reads as follorrs: 

'Tha,t the desirability^ of uniform hours in the shipyards 
and in the l^ovj Yards be recognized, and in the event that 
such equalization is not broughtabout vithin a period of 
six months from the date hereof, the Administrator of the 
Industrial Hecovei-j^ Act shall revier; the question of weehly 
hours in the shipyards. ' 

"The passage on Uarch 23, 1^34, of the Independent Offices 
Apnro-oriation Act cst.abllshed for the I'avy Yards a work 
reel: of forty (40) h.ours. The Act likev;ise provides that 
emploj'ees of the Ilav^'- Yards should receive for the ner 
forty (40) hour week a veclzly '^age rhich vould equal that 
nhich TTOuld have been received for a forty-eight (48) hour 
/week under the old wage scale. 

"The Navjr Department in submitting its vievrc on the natter 
has stated tiiat a completion of all vessels nor unden. con- 
struction is essential at the earliest loossible date and 
recommends as a means of accelerating orogress on this rork 
that the hours be increased fr-m thirtv-six (36) to forty 
(40) in the Shipbuilding and ShiDrepairing Code," 

During this period the controverse.y over the Industrial Relations 
Committee as betv/een Industry and Labor reached a climax. The Labor mem- 
bers of the Committee testified before the Black Committee of the Senate 
which resn-lted in a letter, from- Senator- BlAck. to, the Secretary 6f'"the Ifxvf. 
This letter, amongst otlier things, suggested that the Naval bids v/hich 
rere to be opened August 15, 1934 be rithheld until the Industrial Re- 
lations Connittee ras properly set up. (The details of this situation 
will be set forth by the Author under the title of Industrial Relations 
Committee) 

Also the Shipbuilding Coc'e and the Author rere transferred August 1, 
1934 from Division I to Division II, although by agreement the Division 
Administrator and Deputy Adiinistrator of Division I signed the repott 
to the Administrator. 

9732 



The dociments \7ent f.irect i^ro-i Divisio-i I to Colonel Goor^^e A. Lynch, 
Administrative Officer, T'ho informed the Author that he t/ould hold the 
matter until the return of G-eners.l Ku.^h S. Johnson, Adjninistrator, and 
further was of the opinion thc.t the orcer coul.d not te approved without 
an onen hearing in view of the controversey existing hetv/een Industry and 
Labor. The documents \7ere returned to the Author without comment after 
the return of the Administrator Au-^r-ist 15, 1C54 without the Adninistrator's 
signature. 

Proposed Amended Code 

March 2, 1954 the Code Ai\thority neetin^;. The following resolution 
was passed: (Ref. page 5, Minutes, Deputy's Files) 

"¥riZEZAS The Riles and Heg-alations for the Adnin- 
istration of the Code of Pair Corapetition and Trade 
Practice for the ShipbiiilcUnr and Shiprepairing In- 
dustry in the United States have 'been violated with 
such frequency as to "be detrimental to the Industry; 
and 

"TTHEFZHAS There has Deen no conclusive action ta':en 
hy any enforcement a.uthority; a.nd 

"TTHEEEAS The Code Corraittee has iDeen informed hy the 
National Compliance Director that the Rules and Re- 
g-ulations are u-ienforceahle and otherwise defective 
in rneziy respects; ?i.rd. 

"T7HEPJEA.S There seens to he a general denand within 
the Industry for modifications and. improvements 

"THSREirOHE, 3E IT 73S0LTzD'. That the" Shiphuilding 

and Shiprepairing Code he re-written with a view 

to including therein all necessr.rj'' and iDi-oper features 

for its adriinistration, regula.tion and enforcement; 

and 

" 3E IT FJRTI-iEE RESOLVED: That the re-writing of the 
Code he postponed' until immediately following the first 
meeting of the Code Committee following the general 
meeting of all Code Authorities called by the Admin- 
istrator in Washington, commencing March 5, 1934," 

";arch'15^ 19u4 the .Code -AVithority ?.:eeting. 
Excerpts from the Minutes are as follows: (Ref, page 5, Minutes, Deputy's 
Files) 

"Mr. J. B. "eaver wan of the opinion tliat the code should he 
amended and re'.'rittea as there are a lot of loose ends which 
could he rectified '"'hen the code was heing redrafted. Mr 
Roger TTilliams in speaJiing of the resolutions was of the op- 
inion t'.ip.t no action he ta'::en on them but stick to the pro- 
visions of the code "'ontil the code is re'^ritten and t hat it 
should be rewritten immediately 

9732 



'^nr. Gerhauser suggested that i^ubconmittee of the Code of 
the Code Corar-ittee. te r?>TX)oA"iiit4u to ajaend the code and he there- 
fore nade the folloTring mctioni 

'That the Chairman he empowered to appoint a committee 
to work T/ith the Administration representatives in re- 
drafting the code, taking into account the three reso- 
lutions taoled at the laeetin;^ of Ilarch 2nd, together 
v/ith all the matters '^hich have been discussed from 
time to time and which should he considered in connec- 
tion with redrafting the code and further that the 
Chs.irmar. "be authorized to employ Cotuisel if found nec- 
essary. ' 

"Motion wa,s seconded by Horyer Williams and carried and the 
Chrdrman announced he: would make these appointments promptly," 

In accordance with the foregoing resolution the Code Revision Committee 
was appointed as follovrs: (Ref, letter Sept. 27, 1935 to H. Newton 
Whittelsey, Assistant Deptity Director, from C. C. Knerr, Secretary of the 
National Council of American Shipbuilders, Deputy's Files) 

A. B, Konior - Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. 
W. H, GerhauF:3i-— ' American Shipbuilding Corp. 
Carl E. 'fe-cersen - Newport Hews S/b & D/H Co. 

The Committee thus a;opointed promptlir began work on a Revised Code ac- 
cording to verbal information given the Author, 

April 24, 1934 the Code Authority passed a resolution pertaining to 
code modification, (Ref. r^are 11, Minutes, De2outy's Files), Excerpts of 
this resolution are as follows: 

"Code Modifica.tion - Longer ITorking Hours 

"The Code Authority, cognizant of the hardship involved in 
the Industry due to the shorter vorl: week under the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Code than in the majority of the approved codes 
passed the following resolu.tion offered by Mr, S, W, Walceman, 
seconded by Roger ITilliaras: 

"THEREFORE, NOW BE IT RESOLVED: It is the opinion of 
the Code Authority for The Shipbuilding and Shi-orepair- 
ing Indus'Ci-y that the stabilisation of the Industry, the 
elimination therefrom of unfair competitive practices and 
the maintenance of harmonious relations between mana-ge- 
ment and employees, requires the establislxnent of forty 
hours a week of employment throughout the shipbuilding 
branch of the iU'S-Ustiy a,nd an average of forty hours a 
week over a six months i^eriod \ ith sufficient leeway to 
permit a maximim of forty-eight hours of employment in 
any one week for the shiprepairing branch. The Code 
Authority recommends immediate ap"i~roval of the above 
changes in hours for the' Shi-pbuilding and Shiprepairing 
Industry, 

9732 



-245- 
"Tlie acove resolution v^ar. unaninotisl^ ac'.ootod. " 

As a result of the foi-e;;oir.g resolution -neinbcrs of the Shipouilding 
Code Authority appeared before General ''^ufrh S. Johnson, Adiainistrator, 
in a prelininar;'" -orivr.te conference "lay 4, 1954, and again before him in 
a general conference Kay 7, !'9r4, v^here pri?icipa.l parties of interest were 
present. The subject Fas the request of the Indurstr^'- for a 40 hour v/eek. 
Research and Planning nade a report lator, hut tho Aclministrator rendered 
no .decision and therefore no relief vn-xs {^ranted. (Atithor's note: The 
details of this occurrence Till be set forth under lY, Operations of Code 
Provisions, C. Ho-'ors) 

June 1, 1934 the proposed amender' code had not been submitted, as 
the Shi-Douilders contended that the question of maximum Treekly-hours should 
be first settled. The Author, by direction of J, B. Weaver, Deputy Admin- 
istrator, drafted a letter to I-!. G-errish Smith, Chainnan, of the Code 
Authority, for the sijTjiature of Hu^h S. Jolinson, Administrator. This letter 
required the Code Ao.thority to submit the proposed amended code by June 15, 
1934, The letter and co-oies veve sent forward, biit nas not promptly signed, 
in fact both the letter and conies became lost. A substitute letter was 
drafted for the same purpose and sent forvard. Tlien the original letter 
was received by IJr, Smith in ITgw Yor': duly signed. ITo copies of the signed 
letter can be found -- in any files although careful search has been made in 
General and Deputy's Files. 

The Author knows of no re-oly to the subject letter nor can any be 
located in the file. However, there was a conference arranged by telephone 
by the Aiithor for Jxine 23, 1934. For the Shipbv.ilders, H. Gerrish Smith, 
Chairman of the Code Authority, anc' Roger TTilliams, Vice-President of the 
Newport 'J.evs Shipbuilding and Drydock Company, and mera:ber of the Code 
Authority were ^:)resent, and J, B, Ueaver, Deputy Adjninistrator, and the 
Author, The Shipbuilders contended, thrt in view of the controverry be- 
tween the Industr^r and tlie Washington representatives of Labor, both at 
the conference of L'ay 7, 1934 hereinbefore referred to, and the Industrial 
Relations Committee that it was iin^'use to submit the amended code and put 
it to open hearing prior to the e:qjected o"oening of Fav"'- Department bids, 
August is, 1934. 

Ilr. TTeaver agreed with the Shipbiailding view but with the understand.- 
ing that the proposed amended code would be submitted as soon as the new 
Navy contracts were awarded. 

The foli'.owing letter is quoted as t^'-picrl of the views of the Indur.tr;'- 
at this time, (Ref, Deputy's Tiles) 

"June 23, 1934, 
"Dear Sir: 

"I I'^ave your letter of June nineteenth "ith reference 
to the revision of the Shipbuilding and Shipre-oa.iring Code, 

"It seems to "-e tha.t is useless for the industry to 
a.ttemp}) to revip.o the ■•:.re&ent Code until the question of 
weekly hours, both on ship building and ship repair work, is 

9732 



-C4G- 



settled on a more satisfactory "basis than at present. The indust- 
ry has teen promised relief anu eqv.itable treatment in this re- 
gard, but thus far thes3 cror.ises have not been kept. 

"Yours V'?ry triily, 

"/s/ W. H. Gerhauser" 

"H. Newton Whittelsev, Assistant 

Deputy Adn) inistrator, 
Shipping Section, 
National Eecov&ry /.c.ministraticn, 
Washington, LV C.'' 

The Code Authority sent out the following duplicated letter: 

"June 26th, 1934. 

"TO: The Code Conraittee 

Shipbuilders Aa ainistrative -Committee 
Shiprepairers National Com-nittee 
All Local Area Chairman 

"The Code Rev:-.;^cn Com'aittee has continued its work of revi- 
sion of the Shipbuil-Jing and Shipre-oairing Code but this v/ork has 
necessarily rjroceec'ed slov-ly because of the numerous changes in 
Codes resulti*-!? frcm Administrative Orders and because of the f3,ct 
that the Comi-'iittee has bspn asksd to give thorough consideration 
to many points sug.-::Boted to it by the Administration itself. There- 
fore it will be some time before a revised code can be submitted 
to the Industry for final comment. 

"Very truly yours, 

"H. Gerrish Smith 
Chairman. " 

Letter to H. Gerrish Smith, Chairman, from H. Newton Whittelsey, 
Assistant Deputy Administrator, dated Jime 23, 1934, made the following 
request, quoted from the letter: 

"Under the circumstances it is my duty to ask you to kindly 
point out the Administrative Ord.ers j'^ou have reference to and e.lso 
the many points su;:gected by the Administration." 

Mr. Smith sailed for Europe the same day and no reply was received. 

August 6, 1934, the Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding 
Tforkers of America, Local No. 4, Bath, Maine, by letter to Mr. Lloyd Gar- 
rison, Chairman, National Labor Relations Board submitted an amendment 
to the Code. (Ref. Denutv' s Files") 

August l*"), 1934, Benedict TJolf, llxecutive Secretary to the National 
Labor Relations Board, acknov/ledged the sub.ject letter to the Union and 



9732 



-247- 

forvrarded the letter to J. B. "/eaver, Deiouty Adriinistrator. CSef . De- 
-out;-' s Files") Tb;e Code and the Aathor by this time had been transferred 
to Division 2, however, the letter was finally received Aiigust 19, 1954. 

The subject letter was submitted to the Legal Adviser on the Ship- 
building Code who replied by memorandum August 17, 1934, to H. Her.'ton 
Uhittelsey, Assistant Deputy Administrator, from Howard F. Ralph, Assist- 
ant Counsel. (Hef. Deputy's Files'! August 21, 1934, the subject letter 
vras sent to H. Gerrish Smith, Chairman of the Code Authority, from H. 
Ke'r'ton ffhittelsey. Assistant Deputy Administrator, for consideration 
by the Code Revision Committee and was duly acknowledged by return let- 
ter dated August 22, 1934, from Mr. Smith. (Ref. Deoutv' s Files) The 
Union's letter was also acknowledged August 21, 1934, to Leo W, Hig- 
neault. Secretary to the Union, by the Author and the Union was advised 
that the proposed amendment was forwarded to the Code Authority. 

i,;r. H. Gerrish Smith, Chairman of the Code Authority, was in ffa- 
shington, D. C, the week beginning August 12, 1934, and discussed vfith 
the Author the proposed amended Code. Augast 21, 1934, letter to H. G. 
Smith, Chairman, from H. llev/ton Fnittelsey, Assistant Deputy Administra^ 
tor, (Ref. Deputy's Files'* contained the following; 

"When you were in Washington last week v;e discussed the "oro- 
posed Amended Code which your Code Committee is preparing a.nd I 
understand you are now a-ooroaching the time when same is to be print- 
ed and submitted to the Industry. During the conference I informed 
you that I had, with the aid of our Legal Staff, made preliminary 
drafts of the Amended Shipbuilding Code in the hoioe that same ma.y 
be of assistance to ycur Code Authority. 

"I am sending this matter to you with the luiderstanding that 
it is to be talcen only a.s containing ra"' osrsonal views and not in 
an-f sense as protjosed by the national Recovery Administration." 

The draft of the -oroposed amended Code above referred to is 
filed in the Deputy's Files. 

September 5, 1934, letter to H. G. Smith, Chairman of the Code 
Authority, from H. Newton Whittelsey, Assistant Deputy Adjninistrator, 
(Ref. Deputy's Files) was as follows: 

"Re: Amendments to Code 

"Dear Mr. Smith: 

"Please find attached coioy of a letter addressed to Mr. Bar- 
ton W. Liurray, Division Administrator, under date of AT:igust 30 by 
Philip Van Gelder, Executive Secretary, Industrial Union of Ua- 
rine and Shipbuilding T7ori:ers of America. 

"The purport of the letter is to make recommendations for cer- 
tain provisions to be incorporated in the Shipbuilding and Ship- 
repairing Code. 



9732 



"In view of the f;~ct that you are working on the amended Code, 
I am sending this to you for consideration of your Code Authority. 

"ITill yoTi please ac'.Dicwlel.'^e? •' 

September 12; 19o4, meeting of the Code Authority attended by W. 
\i. Rose, De-outy Administrator, and H. Newton '.Thittelsey, Assistant 
Ee-Quty Administrator. The proposed amended Code was informally dis- 
cussed ano- we were given to i-u-;.derstand it was substantially ready, how- 
ever, there is no record of the discussion in the Minutes of the meet- 
ins- 

September 20, 1954, letter tc H. G-errish Smith, Chairman of the 
Code Authority, from H. Newton Whittelsey, Assistant Deputy Adrainistrs.- 
tor, (Hei. De'outy' s Tiles') was as follows: 

"Re : FroTQOsed Amended Code . 

"Dear Mr. Smith: 

"Conf irnin.^ my conversation of yesterday, I beg leave to 
give you the following information: 

"Tfe h.ave already received from the Industrial Union of Ma- 
rine and Shbibuiiding \7orhers. Local 7H, Bath, Maine, a proposed 
8,ne;adraent to the Shiobuilding Cede. Further, we received from 
the Industrial Union of .larine and Shiijbuilding Workers, Camden 
local, under date of Aug-ast 3'\ another proposed amendment to 
your Code. Both of these -oroiDOsed amendments -oertain to maximum 
hours and other labor ;.iatters. 

"There a,lso is in process, although v/e have not officially 
received same, a iDrooosed amendment to the Boatbuilding and Boat- 
repairing Code which will effect the definitions contained in the 
Shipbuilding a,nd Shiprepairing Code. There is a possibility 
that other amendments proposed by the Boatbuilding and Boatre- 
pairing Industr^r may likewise be of interest to you. 

"From the discu.ssion at your Code A^ithority meeting, it is 
mjr understanding tnat yoior proposed amended. Code is substantially 
ready for final submission to the Industry and that you are about 
ready to ordei' it r)rinted. 

"Perha-DS in yo\xr meeting toviiorrow, or the one proposed for 
Tuesday, you can obtain authority for the printing of this Code 
and promptly get it out to the /embers of your Industry. 

"It is verv desirable that definite -orogress be registered 
and that we nay definitely expect the amended Code to be submit- 
ted to the Administration not" Inter than October 31. This, under 
normal -orocedure, would bring the Hearing in late November. 

"I must definitely notify the two Locals of the Industrial 
Union of Marine and Shipbuilding TTorkers that definite progress 



97C2 



■■1/1 n 

is being made in the submissii:n of the Cede in order that they 
may be satisfied to arait the Hea-ring on the amended Code and not 
enforce an apilication for an a lerdment under the present Code. 

"Both cf thece rea"ies''"s for amendment v/ere 'oro-iptlv sent to 
you and you kindl-' ack:novvl90-:2;c~.d saine. 

During October and i'lcvember and December, 1934, lir. H. Gerrish 
Snith, Chairman of the Code Av.tncrity, and president of the National 
Cou:.".cil of Aaericon Shipbuilders, v/as in 'vTashington aliiost weekly. 
i.Ir.ny informal talks were had ?/ith him by V. u. Kose, Deouty Adi.iinistra- 
tcr, and the Author. He was continually pressed to submit the proposed 
auended Code. Certain membex's of the Code Authority were unwilling to 
have it submitted for several rersons, i. e. : The 30 hour law before 
Congress, the controvsrsy over the Industrial Relations Com:iittee with 
iTc.shingtcn renresentatives of Labor, which was finally adjusted early 
in Hcvenber, the lack of favorable decision Dj General Hugh S. Johnson, 
Administrator, on their aoolication for a 40 hour week, and the general 
determination to stay out of o-oen hearings during the period of inves- 
tigation by the Nye Comriittee of the Sena-^e on munitions. The Ship- 
bi-.ilders out none of the foregoing in rriting for obvious reasons, and 
even meetings of the Code A'athority were not held. 

However, December 2'"^, 1954, meeting of the Code Authority v;as 
held and- the loraoosed amended Code w?.s discussed. (Ref. page 14, ; Mi- 
nutes, Deputy's Files'* Excerots are as follo^vs: 

" Revision of Shipbuilding and Shioreppiring Code 

"The Chairm.a;i rj-norted that the Committee appointed to con- 
sider the code rerision is still r'orking on revision of the cods 
but t'h£.t the matter would be taken up with a view to having it 
in such sha^>e that it en be printed at an early date and sent out 
to the industry for suggestions before submission to N.R.A. for 
hearing. Tl:e Chairman ir-formad lir. VJi.ittelsey that the Shipbuild- 
ing and Shipreoairing Industr / has not accepted the revised de- 
finition for shipbuilding end shiprepairing. " 

January 17, 1935, meeting of the Code Authority was attended by 
'•J. '.'. Rose, Deputy Administrator, and the Author, H. ilewton Whittel- 
se-', Assistant Deputy jiirainistrator, for the particular purpose of in- 
dtLcing the Code Authority to submit the amended Code. The followi^-g 
is excerpted from the i-iiutes. (Ref. Kinutes, pages 8 and 9, Deput"'-' s 
files'! 

" Revision of Code 

"The Cha.irr.an of the Code ^uthorit^'- reported that both Colonel 
Rose, Deputy Adainistra,tor, and Mr. H. lTe'.7ton TiThittelsey, Asr^stant 
De:uty Administrator had urged, a revision of the Shipbuilding and Ship- 
repairing Code and th^it the laatter had be^n discussed by the Chairman 
a.t some length with both the Deputy and Assistant Deputy Administrators. 
It was requested that Colonel Rose night state to the Code Authority 
his reasons for feeling that the Code should be revised at the present 
tine. 

9732 



"Colonel Rose stated tht.t si-ice the a.donticn cf the Shiobiiilri- 
ing and Shioreoairing Code, v^hicb was Code i^Ic , 2, that many -ore- 
visions had been adooted by ii.^.A. vrhich it ras felt should be in 
all the codes and that f Lrrther.m^re tne oresent Code we,s lacking in 
certain -orovisior.s to ta-:e cr.re of ce.ses that had arisen and tha.t 
it is his belief Code Prevision v'ould he of benefit to the IndLXstr--. 
He stated he rUd not want the Industry to think he was attei-roting 
to coerce it in any manner bv iressing for Code Revision and thero- 
uoon ga,ve the following exa-anles of wha,t thn Code does not now pro- 
vide for and which in his opinion should be incorToorated in a 
revised Code. 

"1. The definitions are inademiate. It has been sij^gested 
that there be p. iJaval Shiobuilding Code, a ' Com:nercial 
Shi-'obixilding Code, and a Shiprepairing Code. Also that 
the Codu oUfTht to be modified with respect to the boat 
building Coae where there is conflict. 

"2. Question of hoiu-s of vork in connection with draftsnen 
and mold loftsr.ien, where nay is in excess of $35. OO a 
week. 

"3. 'Question of hours for clerical staff. 

"4. provisions for einergency work. 

"5. Provision of testing installations and trial trips, etc. 

"6. Hours of w;itchmen and firenaJi. 

"7. Clause to orevent eriir)lo'"'ees from exceeding inaxirnu:n hours 
by v-.'orking for t'vo enplcyers. 

"8. Lack of Regional and Divisional Code Authorities. 

"9. Present Code Authority represents JTaval builders only. 

"10. Absence of Fair Tr-^de Practices. 

In the discussion of these matters it was loointed out that the 
present Code Authoritv does not represent Haval shipbuilders only as 
onlv two of the raembers of the Code Authority are builders of nav-al 
vessels and that through the Committees set uio under the Rules and Re- 
gulc.tions which were developed in connection with the Code that all 
gecgraohical districts on the coasts of the United States and on the 
Great Lakes are reoresented. 

"This led to A discussion of the Rules and Regulations adopted 
October 2nd, 1933. 

"I.ir. Whittelsey stated that these Committees are not recognized 
''OY il. R.A. The Code Authority argued that they should be recognized by 
il.R.A. because the Rules and Re/-;ulations had been developed in coopera- 
tion with Kr, William H. Davis, oui' Deputy Administrator at the time 
and that they had "Been approved by him." 



9732 



During; the discussion substantially the same reasons for not 
subraitting were exoressed and in adaiticn the question of the vr.lidit" 
of the Act, vrhich was much in the nev/soapers at the tii.i.e. 

The same situation continued throxi^-^h ^^ebruary and I.iarch, 1935, 
Aoril 17, 1935, letter to H. G. Smith, Chair.aan af the Code Authcrity, 
fron K. Kewton Whittelsey, Assistant Der-uty Administrator, (Ref . Doou- 
■' s ITiles^ was as follovs: 



'/ 



"Re: Fronosed Amended Code 

"Dear !'ir. Smith; 

"Plans apDear to oe f ori,nilatinf:, subject to the action 
of Congress, to rewrite all the Codes \7ithin s coiirparative- 
ly short ueriod of say three months. 

"Your riroblem will be quite difiicult in that your amend- 
ed, or rewritten Code will substaatiallv have to be nev; from 
cover to cover. Under the circ\.rastyjices it would seen '7ise 
tc contin^e work on this matter, r^articularly on Tr-rde Prac- 
tice provisions with a possible idea of subraitting a "orelini- 
nary draft of such nrovisicns to the Administration. 

"I am advised the Industrial Relations Committee vi^ill 
probably hold a meeting next Tuesday the 23rd and I hooe that 
your orooosed meeting may be broiight about on Thiorsdajr the 
25th. 



9732 



-253- 

2 . Internre tat ion s 

0. (1) There was only one official Interpretation, Admin- 
istrative Order 2-27, dated Lecera'ber 13, 1934, signed by Sarton VJ. 
M-urray, Division .-administrator, (Reference: Code Record Section, In- 
terpretation J'older, Leputy's Files, and Exhibit K-27, Appendix) from 
which an excerpt I'rom the order is as follows: 

"QUESTION: In Sub-Section (c) of Section 3 

of the Code, does the six months' 
period begin on the effective date 
of the Code or on the date the 
order i.- placed for each new ship? 

"INTERPRETATION: The six months' exception permitted 

under Sub-Section (c) of Section 3 
of the Code of Fair Competition for 
the Shipbuilding a::d Shiprepairing 
Industry begins on the de.te the order 
is placed for each new ship." ^ 

Reference is made to the memorandum of December 5, 1934, to 
Barton '''. Hurray, Division Administrator, from H. Newton Whittel- 
sey, Assistant Dcj)uty Administrator, (Reference: Volume, Order 2-27, 
Code Record Section and Interpretation Folder, Deputy's Files) from 
which excerpts are as follows: 

"INTLRFRSTATIO '. Exccptioiis , Section 3 (c) of the Code of 
Fair Competition for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing 
Industry, 

"1. The above setion of the Code reads as follows: 



'Section 3 (c) Exceptions. - For a period of six 
(6) months exception maj'' be made in the number of 
hours of employment for the employees of the Ship- 
builders engaged in designing, engineering and in 
mold loft and order departments a,nd such others as 
are necessary for the preparation of plans and order- 
ing of materials to start work on new ship construction, 
but in no event shall the number of hours worked be in 
excess of forty-eight (43) hours per vreelr, and in no 
case or class of cases not approved by the Planning and 
Fair Practice Committee provided for in -ection (8).' 

The Shipbuilding and Shi 2irepai ring Industry Committee 
telcgrapheo. vith reference to its interjDretation of 
the meaning of the above Section ;,s follows: 

'It is our inter;:iretation of exception three C in 
the Code for the Shipbuilding Industry thsi-t on new 
ship construction such as tha,t on naval vessels for 
v/hich contracts liave been recently pla,ced draftsmen 
and loftsmen on these new contracts can worlc forty- 
eight hours a Vvrcek for a six months period stop 

S732 



t 



request confirmation this v-uidcrstaixdinf-;'" 

"4, This Section of the Code provides that 'for- a period 

of six months exception may be made on 

new ship construction ' The question to he 

d.etermined hy internjretation is the time from v/hich 
the sir. months exception is dated, 

"5. In August, 1933 the iiavy Department placed large 

naval shi-i?huilding orders v/ith private shipbuilders. 
Again in Aiigust and September, 1934 orders v/erc 
further placed v/ith private shipyards. The ship- 
builders contend th.-xt the Exception with regcard to 
the naval contracts pla,ced in 1934 should data from 
the time of placing of the orders and th-^t tliis was 
the intent ymen they proposed the Exception in the 
original Code submitted by the Industry cs recorded 
in the hearings prior to a^p'^'roval, 

"6, (a) By advio,!?. of cou^isel the Shipbuilding and Ship- 
repairing Industry Conmittee on ITovember 19 v/as in- 
vited to submit their argument in support of their 
Interpretation, The argument was submitted in their 
letter of ilovember 20 nereto attached. 

"6. (b) The Shipouilding and Shiprepairing Industry 

Committee further submitted argui'nent on "ovember 21, 
and therein pointed out that the Exception was proposed 
in the original Code as shovm ir. the record of the hear- 
ings of July 19, 1953;' and tha.t the necessity- for this 
provision was discussed by Rear Admiral Land on Page 
99 of the hearings and also by llr, Lawrence Spear, of 
the Hew London Ship and Engine Com;nany, on Page 60. 
They fiu"ther point out th t the Exception y/as written 
into the original proposeci Code applicable to all nev; 
construction with the - 

'full realization of the fact tlii^.t it is impossible 
to create emroloyment in the mecluxnical trades until 
the plans are prepared and. arnproved and until the 



"7, Mr. A. D. Whiteside, acting as Deputy ir. charge of 
the Shipbuilding and S nip re'oai ring Code, condiicted 
the hearings of Julj/' 19, 1933, and was present at 
post hearing conferences with General Johnson. In 
conference he stcated tiiat he remembered the incident 
clearly and confirmed same as follov/s: 

'It is my recollection that the six months e.xception 
provided in the clause v/as to date from the time of 
placing orders for new ships as such orders niay be 
placed from time to time a,nd not to date from the 
time of the approval of the Code,' • 



9732 



-2 J4- 

"8, Captain Henry rillianG (C .C.U.S .:i.) v/as presont at 
the hearings of July 19, 1933, and v/as appointed ty 
the President to represent the !fevy on this Code 
Authority. Sy Kcnorahduit he points out that the !Iavy 
Dejiartinent "nr^'ed exemption from hours of vovlc limit- 
ing draftsmen, loftsnen, a xl other clerks, and that 
after a shipyard receives a contract for a new ship , 
its actual construction cannot proceed until the 
- drafting room ha.s prepared the detailed plans, the 
material orcered, and the vessel laid c.ovm in the 
mold loft, rle further sta,tes as follows: 

'VPnile at tne tine of consideracion of the Code, atten- 
tion T/as focussed on the new naval program, the proha.- 
oility of additional nevr sThi^o constru.ction was recog- 
nized and all of the provisions of the Code affecting 
nev/ ship construction had in viev/ additional new con- 
struction to that contemplated at tliat moment. 

^U^' recollection is tliat the provision of tne Code in 
qLiestion was intended to apply >~ilso to future new ship 
construction and not exclusively to" the naval ship- 
building program tncn "ondcr considera'cion. 

'I iia,ve in my possession a copy of a memorandum dated 
• 14 July? 1933, wnich I i:3repared for Mr. Whiteside fmd 
which contemplated and urged the need for e. general 
exerqption for ill draftsmen tj-t all times from any 
lijnita.tion on hoiu-s of 'j'or]~, ' 

"9. lir, Joseph S. Mcrfonagh, "rho v;as appointed "by the 

•president as Lahor adviser to the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Code Authority, v;as present at this hear- 
ing. He states that it is his conviction that the six 
months' exception contained in the Section was to date 
from t":ie time the Code was approved "by the President 
and not from the time new contracts vrere signed." 

Research and Planning Division made no definite recommendations; 
the Lahor Advisory Board rmde no definite recommendation, hut the 
tenure of their memoranda was uafavora.'ble ; Consumers. Adyispry Board 
recommended disapproval, although tney v/ere supposed to represent the 
interests of the llavy' in this instpjice, Industrial Advisory Board con- 
curred; the Assistant ^Counsel concLirred, and ihe Assistant Deputy 
reconrnended. 

a (2) Interpretations "by Code Authority 

The Ship'oui Iding and Shijorepairing Industry Committee (Code 
Authority) "b - resolution made certain interpretations wnich v/ere not 
submitted ior approval, as folloT/s; 

Meeting Novemher 8, 1933 (Reference: Minutes, page 4, 
Deputy's Piles). 



9732 



-255- 

IHTTP-PiffiTAJ-IOlT NO.. 1. . 

HoV'.jr.iber 15, 1'2'3" 

RULES All. IlIOtLiTIOyS, Section VIII 

faiui'tIiap:-: (i) 

tertaini.if; to G\ira''intee iien (l\ef« Ixli. I-l, A i^x) 

Meeting Novemocr 8, 193? (P.eicrence : Minutes, pa,"e 3, 
Deputy's Files) 

Ii:i!£E?BETATI01T iTO. 2, 
Koveraber 16, 1933 
SHIPEULLDEES & SHIFH^FAI^xERS CODS 
Paragraph 3 (a) (l) 
Para-::rapli 3 (b) (l) 
Smcrp;ency Work (lef.Lxh. 1-2, Appx) 

Meeting January -1-, 193'!-, (lieference: Minutes, page 5, 
Deputy's Files) 

Il'SEHPHEo^iiTION JO, 3, 
Jan-ioary 4, 1954- 
P.UIiSS A:tD HEGUIATIOIIS, Section VIII 
Fara;^-raphs (c), (d) <£; (c) 
iviain Contracts (P.ef. 3xh. 1-3, Arpx) 

Meeting Sanuary 4, 1934, (Peforcnce: Minutes, Page 1, Deputy's Files) 

lilTESPRETAI'IOii !T0. 4, 
Jan-ocary 4, 1934 
PUIi33 AFD PZC-ULAPIO:;TS, Section VIII, 
Para£:raph (d) 
Lu-iro Sue: Price (p.ef . 'E:zh, 1-4, Appx) 

Meeting Janus.ry 4, 1934 (Reference: l.Iinutes, page 2, Deputy's Files) 

INZEEPEEiAIIOH I'O. 5, 
Janua.ry 4, ■19r'4 
SHIP3UI IDLES & SHIPKSPAIPSRS CODE 
Inter-retation £is to Those '.'.'ho Cone Under the Code 
(Eef. Sxh. 1-5, Appx) 

Meeting Jan^aary 4, 1934 (Reference: Minutes, page 3, Deputy's Files). 

IPSERP-PJITATIOIT I'O, 6, 
Jan-oar y 4, 1934 
SHIPBUILDERS &"SPI?RSPAIREES CODE . 
Ruling as to TThether Iviiichinery Built in a Shipyard Shop 
for 4no'Pner Shipbuilder Comes Under the Code 
(Ref. Pxii. 1-6, 'Appx)' 

Meeting' Jan-oa.ry. 4, 1934 (Reference: "'linutes, page 4, Deputy's Files) 

liiTEERPkEPATIOH ilC. 7, 
January 4» 1934. ' 



9732 



"356- 

RULES AlTD lE&ULATIOITS, Section VIII 

PrracTapli' (i) 

- Tec ■ - 

(Rcf . Exli, 1-7 fi-o-^r.) 

Meeting Jan-'o^ry 4, 1934 (Reference; iiinutcs, pa-ge 5, Deputy's Piles), 

IITTIJ-PEETA-'ICj! !jO. 8, ■ 

Jam^ary 4, 1934 
RUISS AilL RZGULATICIIS . Section VIII 
Parai^raph (i) 
Compliance Certii'icate 
(Refo E::h. 1-3 Appx) 

Meeting Ja,n-uary 4, 1934 (Reference: ianuteo, pa-^^'c 5, D.-3puty's Files) 

II'TTIEPHBTA^IOIT W. 9, 

January --l-, 1954 ; 

RUIES Al'I* T.GULATIOIIS, Section VIII 

Para' rppii (i) 

Exception Denied 
(Ref, S-:h. 1-9, Appx) (<__ 

Meeting Jamiary 4, 1934 (Reference: liinutes, page 10, Deputy's Piles) 

IKTERFRSTATIOII :to. 10 

January 4, 1934 , ■ ' 

RUIIJS A:\D REG-ULATIO'S, Section VIII, 

Paragraph 3 (c) 
Shii^ping Board Btireau Vessels u^ider 
Private operation 
(Refo Zxli, 1-10, Appx) 

Meeting Jan-uary 4, 1934 (Reference: i'inutes, page 9, Deputy's Piles) 

IKTERPRETATIOK HO. 11,' 
January '.- , 1934 

SHiPRUiLDERS a:":d shipp:spaipj:rs code r 

Fara;i.r?.pli 3 (a) (l) ^ 

Overtime Payment 
(Ref. E:-Ji. 1-11, Appx.) 

Meeting January 4, 1934 ('leference: Minutes, page 10, Deimty's Piles) 

INTEPJ'RETATIOil 110. 12, 
J .nu;a-y 4, 1934 
RULES AlID liECUIAriOilS, Section VIII 
Paragraph 3 (c) 
Special Marine Repairs 
(Ref. Exh. 1-12, Appx.) . 

Hceting January 4, 1934 (Refere.ice: Minutes, pa^.e 6, Deputy's Riles) 

II'TEPJPRETATIOiT ITO.. 13,- 
Janurvry i, 1934 
SEIPEUILDERS ;j:iD SHIPREPAIRERS CODE 

9732 



-257- 

Rc^ilroad S":iu^rcpair Flnnts Repairing Their Ovm Eauipment 
(lief, Exh. 1-13, Ar^-px.) 

Meeting January 4, 1934 (Reference: ".iinutes, v!~>.^:e 4, Deputy's Files). 

INTERPRETATI.OF 1"0. 14, 

Jj.n-uary 4, 1934 

SHIPFUI-LDERS AlID SlilPREFAIRERS CODE 

Repairs to Fumps and Dredge Enxii-Dment 

(Ref. Ej:h. 1-14, A-'^px.j" 



)732 



-258- 

Interpretation "by H. Gerrish Smith, Chairman of the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprc}jairin^- Indur^trv Conmitteo, and confirmod by inference at 
meeting March 2, 1934 (Reference: Minutes, page 6, Deputy's Files). 

IKT3EPHETATI01- IIO. 15 
January 15, 1934 
RULES ArD EEGULATIOIIS, Section VIII 
Paragraphs (c), ( d) and (e) 
Shipping Beard Vessels Under Private Operation 
(Rcf. Exh. 1-15, Appx. ) 

Reference is made to the foregoing intcr-pretations made and issued 
to the Industry by the Code Authority. They may be classified as 
follows: 

Interpretations of the Rules and Regulations 
are Kos. 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12 and 15. 

Interpretations of the Code are Kos. 2, 5, 6, 
11, 13 and 14. 

No sufficient explanation can be found in the files whj^ these in- 
terpretations were not submitted to the Adriiini strati on for arjproval. 
Mr. W. A. Davis, Dc:outy Adjninistrator, on the Code during this period 
was also the appointee to the Code Authority to represent the Adminis- 
tration. The Minutes of the Meetings of November 8, 1933, and January 
4, 1934, set forth that he was present at both meetings. (Reference: 
Meetings, Deputy's Files) 

With regard to the Rules and Regulations, Mr. Davis made the 
following statement as to the necessity of submitting them in the 
October 2, 1933 meeting, at which meeting they were approved by the 
Code Authority. (Reference: Minutes, Deputy' s Piles) 

"Mr. Smith raised the question as to the propriety 
of having the Rules and Regulations approved by the 
President of the United States so as to become the 
"law of the land". Mr. Davis reported that he had 
taken this ma.tter u-o with Colonel Lea and that it 
was thought that the Code Committee had siifficient 
power under the code to enforce, the Rules a.nd 
Regulations as v/ritten and that the approval of our 
Rules and Regulations would establish a precedent. 
Mr. Davis was of the opinion, however, that if the 
Rules and Regulations were found to be ixnenf orccable 
that he would again take the matter up with the 
Administrator to ha^ve them approved by Executive Order." 

Under the foregoing advice the Code Authority assumed that In- 
terpretations of the Rules and Regulations were within their authority accordir^ 
according to verbal statements to the Author. 

However, the IntcriDretations of the Code, other than explanations 
in fact, have even less foundation for not liaving been submitted to the 
Administration for approval in the opinion of the Author. 

9732 



U 



-259- 

t . Resul ts of Inter-orctations 

Interpretation (Order 2-27) of sub-section (c) Section 3 
of the Code was promptly put into effect by private shipyards building 
the 1934 Naval program. These yards v/ere duly authorized at the meeting 
of the Code Authority (planning and Fair Practice Committee) on 
December 20, 1934, (Reference: Minutes, pages 9 and 10, Deputy's Files) 

Draftsmen and Mol d-Lof t smcn 



"The Assistant Deputy Administrator, by letter of December 6th, 
informed the Code Authority tha,t in the event interpretation of 
Section 3 (js) as to working certain euro loyeesoccn new ship construction 
bein^ favorable it would be necessary for the Code Authority to pass a 
resolution approving each case for each shipyard that will be per- 
mitted to wrrk under the exception and in viev; of such interpretation 
(2-27) being favorable thereupon on motion of W. H. Gerhauser, seconded 
by Roger Williams the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 



1934 to: 



"WHEREAS, certain Naval contracts were awarded in August 



yards 



Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. Ltd. , '^Quincy, Mass.) 

Electric Boat Company 

United Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Corp. 

Federal Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. 

New York Shipbuilding CoiTporatinn 

Newport News Shipbuilding &. Dry Dock Co. 

"ITHEHEAS, such contracts were allocated to the above chip- 
as fellows: 



No. 



Type of Vessel 



.CL-46 


Light Cruiser 


CL-47 


II 


DD-380 


Destroyer 


DD-382 


II 


DD-381 


H 


DD-383 


1! 


DD-384 


11 


DD-385 


H 


SS-176 


' Submarine 


SS-177 


H 


SS-178 


II 



Shipyard 

New York Shipbuilding Corp. 
Newport News S'/B & D/D Co. 
Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. 
n 

Federal S/B & D/D Co. 
n 

United S/B & D/D Co. 
II 

Electric Boat Corapan;'- 
n 

" , and 



"WHERMS, Section 3 (c) of the Code for the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing industry provides for the follov/ing exception: 

'For a period of six (G) months exception may be 
made in the number of hours of employment for the 
employees of the Sh-ipbuildors enga.£ed in de- 
signing, engineering and in mold-loft and order 
departments and such others as arc necessary for 
the preparation of plans and ordering of materials 



9732 



-26C- 

to start work on nev; ship construction, but in no 
event shall the number of hours worked be in ex- 
cess of fort;''- eight (4S) hours per week, and in 
no case or class of cases not approved by tbc 
Planning and Fair Practice Committee provided for 
in Section (8)', and, 

"T'HErLEA.G, The Code Authority is in receipt of Administrative 
Order I'O. 2-27 dal^ed December 13, 1934, which reads as follows: 

'QUESTION: In Sub-Section (c) of Section 3 of the 
Code, does the six months period begin on the 
effective date of the code or on the date the 
order is placed for each new ship? 

•INTEEPHETATIOIT: 

The six months' exception permitted 
under Sub-Section (c) of Section 3 of the Code 
of Fair Competition for the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepa.iring Industry begins on the dat e the 
order is placed for each new ship. 

'NOW, THEHEFOEi;, BE IT EESOLVED: That the above shipyards are 
granted the privilege of working all trades cnuJiierated in Section 3 (c) 
of the Code for a period of six (c) months from the date of the contracts 
on the above named vessels. ' w • 

Interpretations by the Code Authority, not submitted for 
approval of the Administration, which -Tortaincd to the Rules and Regula- 
tions will be discussed under the heading III-D-5 "Othei- phases of 
Code Administration." 

Interpretations by tlie Code Authority pertaining to the. 
Code reflected on Industry as follows: 

Interpretation No. 2 had the effect nf authorizing the 
employment 'of men on Emergency work beyond t]ie maximum weekly hours of 
the Code, provided certified reports viere made on certain forms to the 
Code Authority. 

Exemption was later granted by the Administration for 
emergency work, as this interpretation was clearly without the powers 
of the Code Authority in the opinion of the Author. 

Interpretation No. 5 pertained to "Those Who Come Under 
the Code." It was in fact an explanation and for the most part within 
the authority of the Code Authority and tended to enhance corrpliancc. 

Interpretation No. 6 pertained to "Machinery Built in a 
Shipyard Shop for Another Shipbuilder." This also is an explanation 
and tended to maintain compliance with the Code, 

Interpretation No. 11 was as follows: 

That overtime is not to be paid for the four hours in 

9732 



-251- 

excess of the 36 hours in imy one. week, hut is only to he p-.-.id for hours 
in eiicesE of eight hours in cjiy one d,.y. 

The excerpt from the meeting of Jrjiuary 4, 1934 (Hcference: Minutes 
page 9, Deputj'-'s Files) is c,s follov;s: 

"The Lc.bor representatives of the Code Com- 
mittee "jrescnted a letter i.t this time re- 
l:.tin£; to overtime in which it Vi/c,s clcimed 
th;.t overtime shoxild be paid on commercial 
work cftcr thirty-six hours c. week. The 
matter v/r.s discussed and Mr. Davis, Deputy 
Adiainistr^,tor , gave the following- inter["ire- 
t at ion, ncjae 1 y ; 

'Tl-iat overtime is not to be paid for the 
fo'or hours in excess of the 36 hours in 
any one v.'eek but is only to be paid for 
hoiors in excess of eij^jht hours in any 
one day. ' 

"This interpretation was adopted upon 
motion by Soger Williams, seconded by 
Robert Haig." 

Therefore, it was really Deputy Administrator W. H. Davis 
v;ho mate this Interpretation and the Code Authority adopted it. It 
most assuredly should have been submitted to the Administration for 
approval in the opinion of the Author. 

Interpretation No. 15 pertained to "Railroad Shiprepair 
Plants Repairing their Own Eouipment." This v/as an explanation made by 
Deputy Aci-ministrator \i. 11. Davis and adopted by the Code Authority, and 
was wpII groujided in the opinion of the Author. 

Inter-jretation ITo. 14 pertained to Repairs to "Puiiips and 
Dredge equipment." This was an explanation by the Code Authority and 
is concurred in by the Author. 

c. Interpretation (Order 2-27) of sub-section (c) Section 3 of 
the Code was effective at the time v/hen all private snipyards building 
•n the i'iaval programs of 1933 and 1934 were msiking every effort to 
obtain longer hours for designers and loftsmen, in order to shorten the 
time to actual ship /construction. For the 1933 program there were a 
series of Administrative Orders extending the exceptions granted in 
Section 3 (c) of the Code, namely Order 2-3 February 1, 1934; Order 
2-17, May 4, 1934; Order 2-24, Hovemb^r 14, 1934; Order 2-28, December 
29, 133-_-, and Order 2-23 A;pril 13, 1935. (Reference: Code Record Section 
and Exemption Folder - Deputy's Files) Reference is mad-e to the 
volumes containing these Orders. They contain the Resolutions of the 
Code Authority setting forth the necessity for longer hours, coit>- 
raunications from the Kavy Department and other pertinent information of 
the sarr.e natijxe. 

There is no doubt in the Author's mind that the subject 

9732 



-262- 

Interpretation viras properly ^■[^roiuidecl and of considerable benefit to the 
Industr/ anc] to the lTa.vy jepartaent, in that it acted to encourage 
reasonable 'rogress on the l^aval building prograi.i. 

Inter'or etat ion' b'^ t : le Code Authority not submitted 
for a.iDoroVgl of the Adi-:i n istration 

The Author in general concurs v/ith those that are substantially 
explanations as hereinbefore set forth. 

However, Interpretation No. 2, which had the effect of 
authorizing limergency worl: beyond the raaxinnjin hours of the Code, vie.s 
clearly, in the opinion of the Author, a modifica;tion of Code pro- 
visions and should have been submitted at the time as a Code Ainendr.ient . 
It vi^as necessary, later for the Author to rectify the situation, which 
unavoidably ca\ised irritatio:.i of the Industry. 

5^arther, Interpretation No . 11, v/hich provided "That Over- 
time should not be paid beyond the maxim'-oin v^eekly hours" was a clear 
limitation of the Code provisions in the opinion of the Author. It was 
a bad start on a complicated ouostion. After the Code Authority once 
had this Interpretation, it resisted to the end of the Code, every 
provision in later Exeniptions and Stays tliat provided for overtime be- 
yond weekly hours. 



9732 



<■> -^ t-7 

3 . E::enptions gnd Stays 

Exerotions ar.d Stays tre iiereins.fter grouiDed as follows; 

a. I'lscell-neous Lxomptions to ividividusl corap.'HJiies because 
of shortage of ccrtr.in classes of labor in each case. 

h. S::tensions of Section 3 (c) o-^ the Code pertaining to 
rr.aigners -^-- Loftsnen. 



work. 



c. Stc;:j of Sections (a) p.nd (u) pertrinin:-; to 8:nergency 

d. Stay of Sections (a) anr' (h) pertaining to Trials. 

e. S.-:ei.rotions pertaining to San ITrancisco Pay Area. 

f . protest of Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Com- 
mittee agair.st provisions in evc;mption and stay Orders requiring pay- 
ment for o-v-ei-ti:.:e beyond the maximum weekly hour provisions of the Code. 

a. liiscellnieous Exempti ons 

Administrative Order 2-5, Ilarch 1, 1934, signed by K. ¥•. Simnson, 
Division Ac>:inistratcr, Division I, and recommend-ed by J. B. TIeaver, 
Division Acxiini^tr .tor, (Reference: Code Record Section, Exemptions, 
Deputy's ?iles vi\C. Tichibit 'K-G, Apnendix) . The Order was granted as per 
the following excerpt: 

"Approval of application of JiTtton-Kelly Cojii^any for exemption from the 
provisions of Article 3, Section (b) 

"An application ha.ving been duly made by the Jutton-Kelly Company, 
Field Office, of C-enoa, 'Jisconsin, for an exemption from the provisions 
of Article 3, Section (b) , of the Code of Fair Competition for said In- 
dustry, for ship carpenters, ship crulkers and ship carpenter helioers 
employed in the c-'nstruction of two ba.rges to be used in floating their 
equipment needed in the construction of Lock No. 8 on the Mississippi 
River at Genoa, "isconsin, to alld" the above employees to work forty- 
eight (48) hours :er week for a period of not to exceed three weeks from 
the date of this order, and finding that justice requires that said 
application be grrnted, provided thp.t overtime is ■•">aad at the rate of 
time and one-half for all hours in excess of fo-.-ty (40) hours per week." 

Administr .tive Order 2-7, Karch 10, 1934 signed for K. V^. Simpson, 
Division Ac"ni:-iistrator, Division I, b;r Beverly Ober, Executive Assistant, 
Division I, a:d. recommended by J. I.. 'Jeaver, Deput?/ Administrator, (Ref- 
erence: Code r^ecord Section, Exemptions, Deputy's Files, and Exhibit 
K-7, Appendix). The order -jas granted as -oer the following excerpt: 

"Approval of apolir.- tion of ■'■^evTport i^e¥;s Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Com- 
pany for exception from tho provisions of Article 3, Section (b) 

"An applic-.tion having been duly made by the T'ewport Hews Shipbuild- 
9732 



-264- 

ing and Dry Dock Cov.i^rtny, xTe\Toort llerrs, Virginia, for an. exception for 
employees --or?:i-A on Aircraft Carrier iTo . 4, the 'RjUrGIlH', from the 
provisions of .-.rticle III, Section (n) of the Code of Pair Com-cetition 
for said 'Incaistry, to allow the employees to -.'ork forty-fouj" (44) hours 
per week until the 'PjiJIG-LrL' has been delivtred to the United States Gov- 
ernment, and finding that justice reor.ires tlia.t s r.id application be 
granted to certain euployccs, namely* electricians not to exceed one 
hundred (lOO) in nuvdoer whose urates cf pay are in excess of sixty (60) 
cents per hoxir, ciid mechanics from the Plumhing Dep-rtnent, not to ex- 
ceed fifty (50) in nun-.ter, whoze v.or!: ir: necessary i,nd in conjunction 
with that of the electricians herein excepted;" 

Adminictrative Order 2-15, May 4, 1S34, signed "by K. L'. Simpson, 
Division AcUiinistrator, Division I, and recommended hy J . B. V/eaver, 
Deputy AdJiiinistrator, (Reference: Code P.ecord Section, Exemptions, Dep- 
uty's Files, and Ezdiihic Z-16, Appendix). The Order was granted as per 
the following excerpt: 

"Approval of a;oplica,tion of Manitowoc Shiphuilding Corporation, 
Manitowoc, "Wisconsin, for exeiiption from the provisions of Pa.rt 3, 
Paragraph (h) of the Code of Pair Competition for the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Industry, as aiuended. 

"NOW, TIEPlDPOPJj , pursu3.nt to authority vested in me by the Admin- 
istrator for Industrial Recovery, and otherwise, it is hereby ordered 
that the said application for exemption be and it is hereby granted to * 
the extent of per:,:itting- caulkers engaged in work on the United States 
Coast Gua.rd Boat 'Erxaufba' to '-ork in excesr, of forty (40) hours per 
week, for a period of one (l) week from a,nd ri"ter the da.te of this 
order, the w?:/;e paid to be at the rate of not less than one and one-half 
(l-^) times the reg-alar hoiu'ly rate for time vorked in excess of forty 
(40) hotirs pe:.- v/eek." 

Administrative Order 2-19, June 25, 1934, signed by C . E. Adams, 
Division Atxiinistratcr, Division I, and reconriended by J. B- Weaver, 
Deputy Aiiimistrator, (Reference: Code Record Section, Exemptions, 
Deputy's Piles, and Erdiibit 1^-19, Appendix). The order v; as granted as 
per the follov-ing excerpt: 

"Granting Ap'olicr.tion of St. Lo'ais Car Coiipany, St. Louis, Missouri, for 
an Exemption froi the provisions of Part 3, pa.ra.graph (a,). 

"WHEREAS, an a'^-'lication has been made by the above-named applicant 
for an exemption from the provisions of Part 3, paragraph (a), of the 
Code of Fair Competition for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry, 
as amended; and 

"NOW, THEREFORE, -oursuant to authority vested in me, it is hereby 
ordered that the above-named applicant be and it hereby is exempted 
from said provisions of said Code, as amended, to the extent of permit- 
ting riveters, caulkers, sand blasters and welders engaged in construct- 
ing steel pontoons for U.S. Engineers, Memphis, Tennessee, to work a 
maximum of fift3''-six (56) hour 3 per week for a period of two weeks end- 
ing June 30, 1934, the v;age paid to be at the rate of not less than one 

9732 



-265- 

and one—half (l^) times the regular hourly or piece-work rate for time 
worhed in excess of thirty-six (36) hours per week," 

Adsiinistrative Order 2-25, Noveraher 17, 1934, si:_^ned hy Barton IT. 
Murray, Division Administrator, Division 2. recommended "by ¥. W. Hose, 
Deputy Adn:inistrator, and memorandum and recommendation "by H. Neuton 
Whittelsej'-, Assistant Deputy Administrator, (Reference: Code Record 
Section, Exemptions, Deputy's Piles, and Sxhibit K-25, Appendix), 

"G-remting Application of Marietta 1 lamif acturing Companj'-, Point Plea- 
sant, ¥est Virginia, for a Temporal;)^ Exemption from the Provisions of 
Part 3, paragraph (a), of the Code of Fair Competition for the Ship- 
huilding and Shiprepairing Industry, as Amended. 

"ilOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to authorit;"- vested in the national In- 
dustrial Recovery Board, it is hereby ordered that the ahove-named ap- 
plicant he amd it herehy is exempted, as of the date of this Order, aoad 
for a period of ninety (90) days thereafter, from so,id provisions of 
said Code, as amended, hut only to the extent of pemitting employees 
engaged in the trades of pipe coverers, sheet r:etal \7orkers and their 
helpers to he worked a maxiiium of forty (40) hours in anj'- week d'oring 
said QO-da];" period; r)rovided, that said em::)loyees shall he compensated 
at the rate of not less than one and one-half tines the regular hourlj'' 
rate of pay for time worked in excess of thirty-six (36) hours in any 
week, Tlie temporary exemption herein granted is suhject to cancellation 
prior to the eiqpiration of said 90-day period in the event of a shov/ing 
of proper cause therefor, " 

D, Extensions of Section 3 (c) of the Code pertaining to Desi^'^ers 
and Loft sm en 

Adrainistrative Order 2-3, Fe-oruary 1, 1934, signed hy Hugh S. 
Jolinson, Administrator, and approval recommended hy k, li, Simpson, 
Division Administrator, Division I, and memorandum and recommendation 
hy T7, H. Davis, Deputy Administrator, (Reference: Code Record Section, 
Exemptions, Deputy's Files, and Exliihit K-3, Appendix). The Order r.'a.s 
gremted as per the following excerpt : _ 

"EXTEimillC- PROVISIOIIS OF SECTIOH 3, SUS-SSCTIOLT (c) OF CODE OF FAIR 
COltPETITIOK FOR THE SlilPSUILDI/a AID SHIPEEPAIRIilG IlIDUSTRY 



"A Code of Fair Competition for the Sliiphmlding and Shiprepairing 
Industry having heen approved hy the President July 26, 1933, said Code 
providing in Section 3, Suh^Section (c) that. for a. period of six (6) 
months exemption from the maximum hours provided in said Code ma;"- he 
made for employees of that Industry' enraged in necessarj'- preparator3'' 
work to start new ship constraction, and upon consideration of a memo- 
randum from the Deputy Aojiinistrator, dated January 26, 1934, apjroved 
hy the Division Administrator, recommending that favorable action he 
taken : 

"ilOn, THEREFORE, I, Hugh S. Johnson, Administrator for Industrial 
Recovery, pursua,nt to the authorit3'- vested in me hy Executive Order 

9732 



No. 6543-A, dated December 30, 19??, do hereby p-rant an extension of 
the Drovisions of Section ?, Sub-Section (c) of the said Code of "^air 
Comnetition for a loeriod of thr'^e months from and a-^ter 
February 5, 1934 ■• ^ Th-^ Administi-ator reserve's the rieiht to stay this 
order if adequ-ate cause therefor is shown to him by anyone within a 
■oeriod of ten (10) days from February 5, 19?4." 

Administrative Order 2-17, May 4, ISS-^, sif^ned by Hugh S. Johnson, 
Administrator, aiDiDroval recommended by ^<!. I'. SirnDSon, Division Ad- 
ministrator, Division I. and memorandum and recommendation by 
J. B, Weaver, Denuty Administrator. (R ference: Code Record Section, 
Exemptions, Denuty's Files and 'Sxhibit K-lVj Ari-Dendix) The order was 
granted as Ber the following excer-ot : 

"EXTENDING PROVISIOlvS OF S~CTIOF 3, ST^B-SECTION (c) OF THE 
CODE OF FAIR COf.'P^TITION FOR Tl" SHIPBUILDING 
AJ}JD SKIPR^PAIRING INDUSTRY 



"NOW, THEREFOR'^, I, Hus'h S, Johnson, Administrator for Industrial 
Recovery, pursuant to the authority vested in me by Executive Order 
No. 6543-A, of December 20, 1933, do hexeby ^rant a further extension 
of the provisions of Section 3. Sub-Section (c) of the said Code of 
Fair Com-oetition for a period of six (5) months from and a-fter 
Hay 5, 1934, only to the extent, hc^ever, of exempting designers and 
mold loftmen, FroviAed , ho-'eve r, That designers and mold loftmen shall 
not be permitted to work in excess of forty-four (44) hours per week. 
The Administrator reserves the right to stay this order if adequate 
cause is shown to him by anyone within a period of ten (10) days from 
May 5, 1934." 

Administrative Order 2-24, November 14, 193i , signed by 
W. A. Harriman, Administrative Officer, recommended by Barton W. Murray, 
Division Administrator, Division 2, memorandum and recommendation by 
H. Newton Whittelsey, Assistant Deputy Administrator, approved by 
W. W. Rose, Deputy Administrator. (Refer^nc^^: Code Record Section, 
Exemptions, Deputy's Files, and Exhibit t<'-24, Appendix). Excerpts 
from the Order are as follows: 

"Granting Further Extension of Revisions of Section 3, Sub-Section (c). 

"NOW, THEREFORE, the National Industrial Recovery Board, pursuant 
to authority vested in it by Executive Orders of the President, in- 
cluding Executive Order No. 6859, and otherwise, does hereby order 
that the provisions of Section 3, Sub-Section (c), of said Code be, 
and they are hereby extended for a period of thirty (30) days from and 
after November 5, 1934, only to the extent, however, of exempting 
designers and mold loftmen: Provide d, however, that desie-ners and mold 
loftmen shall not be permitted to work in excess of fort<'--four (44) 
hours per week, and provided further that all time worked in excess of 
thirty-six (36) hours per week shall be compensated for at the rate of 
one and one-half times the regular hourly rate," 



9732 



— ^ u ( -' 



This Order was originally sip'ned l)y Hr. warri-^an 'MoveTn'ber 7, "but 
his signature was withdrawn November 8 and finally ^jade effective 
Novenber 14. The Shiiobuilders protested the time and a half beyond 
maximum weekly hours nrovision in the order; therefore, the Author, 
Assistant Deputy 'Vhittelsey, addressed memoranda of November 9 and 
Nov--mber 13 to Barton 'i?. Murray, Division Administrator, which were for- 
warded to Mr. Harriman, setting forth the necessity for the -orovision 
(the increase of emx)lovment and the discouragement of excess overtimed 
(Reference: 'Sxem-Dtion Folder, Denuty's Files and inside cover of 
Deriuty's cony of Order in Deputy's files). 

Reference is made to the memorandum November 3, 19?4, to 
1. A. Harriman, Administrative Officer, from H. ^lewton lhittels°y, 
Assistant "?enuty Administrator, (R=>fer9nc-: Order 2-24, irolume, Code 
Record Section and De-outy' s Fil°s) of which the f oil owins: is excer-pted: 

"1. The Code, Section ?, Sub-Section (c), -orovides: 

'For a -oeriod of si?: (6) months exce-ction mav oe made 
in the number of hours of emoloy-neut for tne em-olovees 
of the Shipbuilders ensa^ed in d^si.^nins-, en"-ineering 
and in mold loft and other d-ioartments and s-.ich others 
as are necessary for the T}i'°r)aration of "olans and 
ordering of materials to start ^-Tk on new shi^ con- 
struction, but in no event saeV^ tiie number of hours 
worked be in excess of -forty-eieht (A'^) honrr. ner week, 
and in no case or class of cases not a^nroved by the 
Planning and Fair Practice Committee -orovided for in 
Section (Q) . ' 

"2. In addition to the original extension of six (6^ months 
Drovided in the Cod = , there has b^en "-ranted a f^i.rther three (3) 
months extension and a still further six (6) months extension of this 
Drovisipn, the latter extension expiring Nov, 5, "i°34. 

"3. The ShiiDbuildine: and ShinreiDairing Industry Committee has 
made aonlication for a further extension of seven and one-half (7cr) 
months of this Droyision of tne Code, 

"5. The time period as between the actual receipt of this a^oli- 
cation for extension and the exuiration of the nresent ord^r, 
Nov. 5, 1934, was insufficient to make an adeauate examination of the 
matter, and, therefore, an equitable determination on the ar>T:lication 
f or p 6 veil a-.-3 one-half (?-) m.onths extension. 

"6. "^he Code Lee-al Adviser recommends a thirty (70) day extension 
with time and one-half for overtime. 

"7. Research and Flamming Division ''Fconomic Adviser) recommends 
denial of extension for seven and one-half (7-) months. 

"8. Th= Industrial Relations Co-!mittee for the ShiiDbuildine- and 
ShiTDre-oairing Industry has under the circumstances unanimously voted 
to grant an extension f'^r thirty ("0) days, during which time nro-oer 
inves'-igation can be made, I concur in this for designers and mold 

9732 



loftsmen, but with time and one-half raid for overtime. It arj^ears 
advisable and necessary thus to duly recom-nense such eToloyees and to 
induce by such o-^ertime ■orovision th° incrf^asa of e-nnlovment . Other 
exemr)tions for skilled and unsMlled labor have lorovided time and one- 
half for overtime. 

"9. Th= Acting Secretary of th^:> ATavy in the memorfmdum to the 
National Indiictrial lie covery Board ureas the necessity of further ex- 
tension of time and the 'memorandum from Caritain Henry "Tilliams (C.C.) 
of the Navy further details such necessity. The re-oly to the last 
memorandum by 11. '.?. Rose. Deuutv Administrator, is concurred in by the 
writer as a suitable analysis TDendine; amole inves*i.2;ation. 

"10. The Shii^buildin?; and Shi-orerairing Industry Committee's 
letter of October 50, 19-34, sets forth thfot on July 1, l^??, there 
were 894 draftsmen and icitsrae:: on Noval work and at the -oresent time 
there are 1210. The said lett^.r further sets forth excerots from 
letters of -nrincir^al shiTjluildir,?; coin-^anies building Naval vessels. 
These excerpts allege th'^t they have em-iloyed dra-f"tsmen and loftsmen 
to the fullest ext^^nt of tLeii' T:)r°s.^iit caoacity in dra'^'ing room and 
mold loft space, and further tht'o the difficulty is largely the lack 
of skilled men to lead the less skilled. 

"11. In vie^ o''^ the emer'"-^ency existent, I recommend an extension 
for thirty (30) days after Nov. ', 1P3<1, of the -provisions of Section 3, 
Sub-Section (c), of the G'jde, only to the extent, however, of exempting 
desip-ners and mold lcjft&T.=^n; pr'^vided, howevx^r, that designers and 
mold loftsmen shall Tiot •: j permitted to work in excess o-f forty-four 
(44) hours per weekj and orovided fui Lher thnt all time worked in 
excess of thirty-six (36) hoars per we^k shall be compensated for at 
the rate of one and one--ha.lf times the re.gular hourly rate." 

Administrative Order 2-23, jecember 29, ''934, signed by 
-I. A. Harriman, Administrative Officer, recommended by Barton T. Murray, 
Division Administrator, Division 2, memorand'im and recommendation by 
H. Newton Whittelsey, Assistant D^p^ity Adnin-.strator, approv=d by 
W. W. Rose, Deputy Administrator. (Refer7;nc': Code Record Section, 
Exemption Folder, Deputy's Files and ^.zhibit T-.''-2e, Appendix). "Excerpts 
from the Order are as follows: 

"Denying Blanket Extension of S--3ctinn 3, Subsection (c) of the Code 
and Granting Extension thereof with limitations and conditions to the 
Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company, the Bethlehem Ship- 
building Corporation and the New 'J^ork Snipbuilding Corporation. 

"WHEREAS, the Chairman of the Shipbuilding and Shipreoairing 
Industry Committee submitted to the Administration a letter dated 
November 24, 1934, setting forth a resolution of the Shipbuilding 
and Shipr=pairing Industry Committee adopted November 22, 1934, re- 
questing a further extension from and after December 4, 1934, for a 
period of six and one-half (6^) months of S-ction 3, Sub-Section (c), 
of the Code; and 



9732 



-r.69- 

"NOW, THERSFCR^., the Kational Industrial Recovery Board, pur- 
suant to aiithority vested in it ty "Executive Orders of the President, 
including Executive Order 6859, and other^is", does hereby order: 

"1. T^hat tiie ap-olication o-f the Shi-ohulldins: and ShiTDr^nairing 
Industry Comtiittee for a olan'-et extension o*" Section .'', Suh-Section 
(c) of the Code for a neriod of six and one-half (5--) months froii 
and after Decemher 4, 1P?4, "be, and it her^hy is denied' 

"2. That the NewiDort News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company 
designing Aircraft Carriers CB5 and GE6 and the Bethlehem Shi-obuilding 
Corporation designing H-avy Cruisers CA 35 and CA Z-4 be, and they 
hereby are granted an extension of Section 3, Sub-Section (c) of the 
Code for a -oeriod of four (4) months froTi IieceTiber 5, 1934 only to the 
extent, however, of exeimoting designers to work on designs herein- 
befor= named; -orovided, however, that such desia-ners shall not b= "oer- 
mitted to work in excess of forty (40) hovjrs -oer week, a^d TDrovided 
further, that if an em-oloyee works in excess of eight (8) hours in any 
one- day or in excess of thirtv-six (36) hours in any one- week he shall 
be Toaid at the rate of at least one and one-half (li) times his regular 
hourly rate for overtime so worked; however, in the corarjutation of xiay 
when an emiDloyee works during any one we-^k overtime in excess of both 
eight (8) hours uer day and thirty-six (36) hours -oer week, the over- 
time TDay shall not be comt)Oundcd by addition of bo':h daily and weekly 
overtime, but the e"nDloyee shall be rt^id either the sum of the over- 
time Day earned during the overtime d?ys or the overtime xiay earned 
during the overtime week, which ever is the higher for said week; and 

"3. That the New York Shi-obuilding Cor-ooration designing Light 
Cruisers CL40-43 be, and it hereby is granted an extension of Section 3, 
Sub-Section (c) of the Code for a -oeriod of four (4) months from 
December 5, 1934 only to the extent, however, of exem-oting desio-ners 
to work on the design hereinbe-fore named; -crovided, hoT'ever, that such 
designers shall not be -cermitted to work in excess of forty-four (44) 
ho-ars per week; and, -DroYTded further-, thrt if an em-oloyee works in 
excess of eight (8) hoir-'s in f^uy O'oe day cr in excess of thirty-six 
(36) ho-'urs in any one w^-jk he shall be paid at the rate of at least 
one and one-half fl--) ti'jes his regular hovriy rate for overtime so 
worked; however, in the comxiutacion of -oay when an em-oloyee works 
during any one week overtime in excess of both eight (8) hours -oer 
day and thirty-six (36) hours -oer week, the overtime -oay shall not be 
conroo-'Jiided by addition of both daily and weekly overtime, but the 
em-oloyee shall be uaid either the s-um of the overtime -oay earned 
during the overtime days or the overtime -oay earned during the over- 
time week, whichever is the higher for said week." 



9732 



-870- 



Seierence is made to ihe. uer.ior.,.nc.'uni- Tecember 18, 1934-, to W. A. 
Harrinian, Aojninistratiwe Officer, f±'oiii H. Kewtou \7iiit tclspy, Assistant 
De jiity Acjninstrator , (Heference: Orl.^er 3-28, Voluiiie, Cole Hecord 
Section 5.nJ. rOcouty's riles) of v/liich the iollov/ir:;.. is excerpted: 

"'i. The Code provided a six.(G) i.ionths exception anr. tlie Acxiiuis- 
tration ^-.raaited fr.rther Extensions oi throe (3) months, six, (j) 
months and thirtv (30) days, respeccively. 

"5. The Sliiphuildin^ ani. Shiprcpairin^ Inu^ustry was , ^'ranted an 
interpretauion on this Section of the Code, Order lie. 2-27, December, 
13, 1934, to the effect that the six { ,) months exception ber'\'ins on the 
date the order is placed f6r each -aoM ship. , 

"8. JiPDloyment is 1310 as of October 50, 193':.-, ...esi^ners c^nd 
loftsmen 894 as of July 1, 13^3, c«n increase of only 35,;. 

"9. Avera,;:e time Y.orhed per weeh over a 'jeriod of sixteen months ■ 
is about 4- hours. Time worlzed durin' the last six months is 4-4 hours. 
Zstimated increase -employment rsouircc^ to maintain the present pro:2;ress 
of designers on a 3' hoxir basis about 300 men and on a 4-0 hour basis 
IJO men. 

"10. llr.val contracts for shipbuildin._; in private yards ,131,728,500. 
Designs for these ships are not only bein;; made for. the -private yards 
but aluo for a pro;;ram of abou.t.'lijrc cost buildin,:'; in the Government 
Navy yards. , 

"11. ShipDuildin;'j and "Shiprepairihg Industry Corai-iittee letter of 
November 2-l-, 1954,' reouests Extension of six and one-half (G-?t) months ■' 
from December '_, 193-_-, ta^res exception to pa/in;, overtime beyond 
thirty-six (35) hours per weeh. and sets forth the Shipbuilders' 
interpretation of Section 3 (c) of the Code, which interpretation v/as 
approved in substcnce by the Achmnistration. 

"12. IJavy Department letters froi.i the Hon. II. L. Hoosevclt, 
Acting Secretary of the Navy, of October 24, 193--:: and from Capt. Henry 
Williams (C.C.) U. S. N. of Octover 30, 1934, recoi.L.iend a further 
Extension and set forth the shortage of experienced desi, ncrs and the im- 
possibility of iuraodiate employment sufficient to make up the man hours 
lost by the redtiction of the weehl',^ hours. 

"13. (a) llavy Departiient letter from Captain Henry Williams (C.C) 
U. S. N., dated December 18, 1934, sets forth the definite progress on 
the six (6) dosi,;ns of the 1933 pro-r,am. This data inc.icated that all 
desi;_,ns with an employj xnt of a/J.-^-- to 48 hour basis are substantially 
on the projected pr0;i;ress pro 'Tarn, except C140-43, 4-6-4-8 Lifjit Cruisers, 
New York Shipbuildin;v, Com:)any estimated -Tcrcenta; e 65' with tictual 
percentage 44yi. This latter c.esi;2Ti is 21;. behinc". schedule and is to be 
sup-olied to the New York Nav-; Y'-a'd , the P hiladelpliia Navy Yard and the 
N evoort News Shi"ibuildin'; Ccnany for the construction of the same class. 

(b) The letter further states that the Navy Dc-mrtment hesi- 
tates to enter into the discussion but 'tirefers the cuestion be settled 



9732 



-271- 

by N. d. A. in accordance with the Hctional polic?/. This ua/ he ti-ans- 
lated iniio "in ■occordaace with the national Defense" and f-orthei' offers 
the opinion that i^Tcater pro^ircss in construction and employraent inclu- 
ding di-af tsmen, would have "oceii m.-^de on a 40 hour week from the outset 
aoid also {^reater progress in the future may bo expected from a 40 hour 
week. 

"14. Letters from the four nia^or private shipyards of the seven 
private shipj'ards buildin^j ITaval vessels set forth their employi.ient 
condition re^c^'ardin^; design one. moldloft, and ar£,ue as to the necessity 
of a further Extension. 

"16. (a) Incorporated by reference to file containing" data from 
the U. S. Dept. of Labor, U. S. C. Service Comi.iission, TeciinicUl',, 
Societies, Universities and Enr:-)loyees Committee listing eight hunc'jred and 
forty-nine (849) en^uneers, desi';-ner3: and iof tsmen. 

(b) The list contains a larii;e niiriber of hi;2;hly trained 
ensi^incers of experience who coiild be adapted to ship work; many hi .hly 
qualified Marine desi-jiers and also beginners and over fifty (50) ship- 
yard draftsmen Icnown to the desi',-ners of the United Dry Docks, Inc, 
For the most part the names, addresses, classif ica^tions, experience 
are shov/n on these lists. There appears little doubt but that desir^ners 
are available at proper recompense. 

"23'. National Defense and Maximum Increase of Suiployment of this 
ship construction must be the basis of the determination on this request 
for extension and both are coincident and will be as the program progres- 
ses. An increase of man-hours worked on designs, whether through in- 
crease of eLiploynent of designers or increase of their hours, will act 
for the benefit of the National Defense and the shortening of the 
period to Ma:>:imum Construction IGmroloyment may be twenty to one at the 
peak of the construction time. 

"34. National Defense and Increase of Employment will be best 
served by a plan v/hich will act to aid and not retard the progress of 
the designing. Reference is made to letter of the Navy Department dated 
Dec. 18, 1934, settin" forth the actual progress made on the designs for 
the 1933 program. This letter indicates that a blanlcet Extension of 
Section 3 (c) of the Code is not necessary in this instance even for the 
shipyards building Naval vessels and no facts havo been submitted, or do 
I laiow, of any major comraercial contracts •:ilaced with the shipyards 
vfhich \7ould require permission to work beyond 5C hours -ler v/eek on 
designs. 

"26. (a) Tii.ie and one-half for overtime beyond 36 hours per week 
has been actively protested by the Shipbuilders and they liave pointed 
out tliat where the Code -provides for time and one-half beyond ei^ht 
hours per day and an Order provides for time and one-half beyond 36 
hours a week, th.at the overtime paid may be compounded. Examination 
of the matter discloses that their point is well taicen. 

(b) A suitable clause pcrtainin,-; to overtime beyond eight 



9732 



-272" 



hours -per day and 3G hours -^er .'oek, desi.':nec'. to prevent cor.ipoundin^, 
was drav/n and sent to all advisory Boards and the Le.^al Division, 
Sug/iestions and criticismc were duly received, all of which were suuiaitted 
to Review tocpthcr with the ori.inal draft and Revie?/ edited a suitable 
finished clause which may he used wherever Orders "provide for overtirae 
beyond ei-jht hours per day and 3G hours per week as in this case. 

The clause just referred to is as follows: 

"and, provided further, that if an employee vTorhs in excess of 
ei:',ht (8) hours in any one day or in excess of thirty-six (3o) 
hours in any one week he shall "be paid at the rate of at least 
one ana one-half (l-g-) tiraes his roTular hourly rate for overtime 
so worked; however, in the computation of pay v/hen an enrployee 
workes durin;_: any one week overtime in excess of both oijht (8). 
hours per day and thirty-six (36) hours per week, the overtime 
pay shall not be compouiided by addition of both daily and vfeekly 
overtime, biit the employee shall be paid either the sijia of the 
overtime pay earned durin , the overtime days or the overtime pay 
earned durin;2,' the overtime week, whichever is the hi/;.her for 
said week." 

Adiuinistrative Order 2-33, April 13, 1935, si.jned by Sarton ¥. 
Murray, Division Adiainistrator, Division 2, recouuuended by W. "7. lose, 
Deputy Administrator, memorandum and recoi.imendation by H. IJewton 
V/hittelsey, Assistant Depiity Ad:ainistrator . (Reference: Code Record 
Section, Deputy's Files, and Exhibit K-33, Appendix.) 

This Order pertained to the 193'_- Naval building; pro.'-;ram, except 
in one case of the New York Shipbuilding^, Corporation, whereas all the 
orders previously cited under this heading pertained to the 1933 
program. Excerpts from the Order are as follows: 

"Granting Exemption from Part 3 (a) of the Coda of the New York Ship- 
building Corporation, Llectric Boat Coinipany and the Bethlehem Ship- 
building Corporation, to permit designers to exceed the maximum hoTirs 
of the Code on certain Naval shipbuilding designs. 

- "WHERMS, Administrative Order 2-27 interpreted Part 3 (c) as 
follows: 

'The six months' exception permitted under Sub-seci:ion (c) 
of Section 3 of the Code of Fair Competition for the 3.:ip- 
building and Shiprepairing Industry begins on the date the 
nrder is placed for each now ship'; and 

V/HEREAS, the Navy Department reports the contracts let and the 
dates thereof to respective shipyards as follows: 



9732 



-273- 

Shj-p - Contractor J^'.to of Contract 

CL-46 New York Shipb-ailding Corp. 22 A-u^ust 1934 

SS-176 Electric Boat Comoany 22 Au^^ust 1C34 

SS-177 Electric Boat Conrpany 23 A-agust 1934 

SS-178 Electric Boat Comany 22 Aiit.ust 1934 

DD-380 Bethlehem Shipt-aildins Corp. 2 October 1934 

DD-382 Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. 2 October 193-- 

and 

"V;hEEEAS, Administrative Order 2-28 granted to New York Ship- 
building Corporation permission to work designers on light cruiser 
design CL40-43 for a ^oeriod ^f four (4) months from December 5, 1934, 
which extension terminates April 5, 1935; 

"FjiEiaiS, The ClmiriEan of the Shipbuilding and Ship repairing 
Industry Committee transmitted by letter dated Feb ruarj^ 23, 1955, a 
resolution of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee 
requesting extension of Part 3 (c) of the Code for the above named 
siiipyards; and 

"iTOW THEEEFOEE, The National Industrial Recovery Board, pursuant 
to authority vested in it by Executive Orders of the President, in- 
cluding Executive Order 6-859, and otherwise, does hereby order: ■' 

"That the Ne\7 York Shipbuilding Corporation, designing 1933 
class of light cruisers- CL40-43, be and it is hereby granted an ex- 
emption from Part 3 (a) of the Coda, as amended, for a -ocriod be- 
ginning April 5, 1935, to June 16, 1935, only to the extent, however, 
of permitting employers to employ designers to \7ork on designs of the 
vessels hereinbefore named; and 

"That the ITew York Shipbuilding Corporation, dctjigning '1934 
class of light cruiser CL46, be and it is hereby granted an exerap- 
tion from Part 3 (a) of the Code, as amended, for a period beginning 
April 5, 1935, to June 16,' 1935, only to the ext en t,-' however, of per- 
mitting eriployers tj employ designers to work on design of the vessel 
hereinbefore named; and 

"That the Electric Boat Company, dcsignine, submarines SS176, 
SS177 and SS178, be an-d it is hereby granted an exemption from 
Part 3 (a) of the Code, as amended, for a period beginning April 5, 
1935, to June 16, 1935, only to. the extent, hov/ever, of permitting 
eiroloyers to employ designers to work on designs of the vessels 
hereinbefore named; and 

"That the Bethlehem Shipb^jilding Corporation, designing 1934 
class of destroyers DD380 and DD382, be and it is hereby granted an 
exemption from Part 3(a) of the Code, as amended, for a period bc- 
binning April 5, 1935, to J-ono 16, 1935, only to the extent, however, 
of permitting employers to employ designers to v/ork on designs of 
vessels hereinbefore named; 

"PROVIDED, HOWEVEP, that employers shall not employ designers to 
9732 



-274- 



work in excess of forty-four (44) hours per week, and provided, 
further, that if an enroleyee on an hourly rate works in excess of 
eight (8) hours in any one day or in excess of the maximum hours 
permitted "by the Code to he v/orked in any one week, he shall he paid 
at the rate of at least one and one-half (li) times his regular 
hourly rate for overtime so worked; and, provided further, that in 
the computation of pay of such an employee whose overtime in any 
one week is in excess of "both eight (8) hours per day and the max- 
imum hours permitted "by the Code to "be worked in any one week, the 
overtime pay shs.ll not "be compounded "by addition of "both daily and 
weekly overtime, but the employee sliall be paid either the sutti of 
overtime pay earned during the overtime days or the overtime pay 
earned during the overtime week, \7hichever is the higher for said 
week; and" 



Reference is made to memorandum March 11, 1935, to Barton ?f. 
Murray, Division Administrator, Division 2., from H. Newton ^Thittelsey, 
Assistant Dgputy Administrator, (Reference: Order, Volume, Code Record 
Section, and Deputy's Files) of which the following is excerpted: 

"3. The Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee by 
resolution has requested an extension of Section 3 (c) of the Code 
to permit the Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, Ulectric Boat 
Co., and the Hew York Shipbuilding Corp. to employ desigTiers and 
loftsmen to exceed the maximum hour provisions of the Code on Naval 
contracts taken in, 1934 for a period beginning six (6) months'after 
signing of such contracts and also a provisional request for the 
New York Shipbuilding Comisany on two (2) contracts (of one class) of 
the 1933 program, which latter contracts, however, are of the same 
class as the contract taken by the same shipbuilding company for the 
1934 program. 

"(a) The said light cruiser designs are of the 1933 Naval program. 
This class of vessel is being build not only by the New York Ship- 
building Corp., but by the New York Navy Yard and the Philadelphia 
Navy Yard from the designs of the shipbuilding company,- This exemp- 
tion expires April 5, 1935. 

"Reference is made to the memorandum of the Navy Dopartraent 
of December 18, 1934, which sets forth the dates that the following 
contracts vvere let to the respective shipyards: 



e 



Shi- 



Cl-46 

SS-176 

SS-177 

SS-178 

DD-380 

DD-382 



Contractor 

New York Shipbuilding Corp. 

Electric Boat Co. 

Electric Boat Co. 

Electric Boat Co. 

Bethlehem SB Corp. Fore River 

Bethlehem SB Coro. Fore River 



Date of Contract 

22 August 1934 
22 Au^st 1934 
22 August 1934 
22 August 1934 
2 October 1934 
2 October 1934 



9732 



-275- 



"8. Reference is made to mcmorandvun from the Navy Department, 
dated iviarcli 8, from vfhicli the follovan^ is an exccri-it: 

"Vessels • Contractor Bstimate Actual 

CL 42 43 II. Y. Shiphuilding Hull Lachineiy Hull Hachinory 

Corporation 
Light Cruisers Camden, N. J. 6,?,j - 54.6,:i 56.2',j 

'These figures are "based on man-hours of drafting work and 
not on corji)leted plans issxied to the yard." 

"9. Reference is made to the resolution cf the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Industry Conmittee, which sets forth that it is 
necessary to the progress of preliminary work on the aforesaid Naval 
contracts, upon which the rapid employment of men on the contracts 
of these vessels depends, that there should be a further extension 
for a period of four (4) months, of paragraph 3 (c) of • the Code. 

"10. Reference is made to letter of February 7 from the-Cliair- 
man of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee, which 
sets forth the argument of the shipyards for which the request as 
contained in their respective letters. It is noted that the Ncv/pbrt 
Hews Shipbuilding and Drydock Co., the Federal' Shipbuilding and 
Drydock Co., and the United Shi-obuilding and Drydock Co., who also 
took contracts of the 1934 program, liave not made requests for the 
extension of this section of the Code, 

'"11. Reference is made to letter of the Bethlehem Shipbuilding 
Conipany, which sets forth the following: 

(a) That -it is the desire of the llav;'' Dept. as e:qpressed 
in contracts for Haval work that the contractors make every possible 
effort to expedite the work during the first and second years of 
the contract time .in order that employment may be increased. Employ- 
ment in the yards is depend.ent upon the production of the plans; tliat 
the creative effort involved in this work precludes the use of shifts, 
thus making the hours wliich the designer or skilled draftsman can 
3.pply to his task the limiting factor iu plan connletion. Additional 
men v/ill not relieve the sit"aation. 

"(b) That the six months' period from the signing of the con- 
tract is not sufficient to accom»lish the desired res"alts, and that 
they refer to their letter of April 13, in ',vliich it was suggested 
that the forty-eight (48) hour week should b.e effective for 30,j of 
tne contract time (that is the time v/itiiin which the vessels are to 
be built)'. 

"14. (a) Reference is made to letter of the l]e.-vy Department 
dated February 12, 1935, of which the following is an excerpt. It 
sets forth the progress of design on the vessels contracted for . i 
the 1934 program. 



9732 



-276- 
Vessels Contractor 



Hull 


IVlach. Hull 


Mach. 


- 9^r- 


• • 

'l6,o '9^" 


"2,^, ' 


gfo 


39.&/j 36.9fi 


40,0 


15fi 


** 33. 3; J 


,M 



DD380, 382 Bethlehem Shipbuilding 

2 destroyers Corporation, Quincy.Mass. 

CL 45 Hew York Shipbuilding 

1 lisl^t cruiser Corp., Camden, N. J. 

SS175-178 Electric Boat Company 

3 submarines Groton, Conn. 

"15. Employment is 1210 designers as against 894 in 1933, an 
increase of 35^0. This force is working on the 1933 and 1934 pro- 
gram. 

"16. Reference is made to memorandum from the U. S, De-oartment 
of Labor setting forth the available ship draftsmen and mold lofts- 
men in the principal shipbuilding districts V7here Haval vessels are 
under construction. The total of these is less than IO^j of the 
total employment. 

"17, This office carefully investigated the av3.ilability of 
suitable engineers and draftsmen in llovember and December, 1954, 
prior to the issuance of Administrative Oi-der 2-28, which pertained 
particularly to 1933 contracts. Lists of a considerable number of 
electrical, civil and mechanical engineers were obtained. 

"However, the difficulty now appears to be that only special, 
highly trained men in naval ship design can be usefully added to 
the present forces. This aspect has been pointed out in conference 
by the representatives of each of the shipyards and is set forth in 
the letter of Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. attached hereto. 

C. Stays of Section 3 (a) and (b) of the Code pertaining 
to Emergency Work 

Administrative Order 2-31, February 19, 1935, signed by W. A, 
Harriman, Administrative Officer, recommended by Barton W. i-rurray, 
Division Administrator, Division 2, memorandum and recommendation 
by H. Hewton V/hittelsey, Assistant De-outy Administrator, and ap:Trovcd 
by W. W. Rose, Deputy Administrator (Heference: Code Record Section 
and-. Exemptions, Stays Folder, Deputy's Files, and Exliibit i:-31, 
Appendix). Excerpts from the Order are as follows: 

"Granting application for partial stay •f the maximum hours provi- 
sions of the Code of Fair Competition for the Shipbuilding and Ship- 
repairing Industry, contained in Part 3, Paragraphs (a) and (b), to 
permit emergency work. 

"1/THEEEA.S, the Shipbuilding and Shiprcpairing Industry Committee, 
through its Chairman, has made a request for a partial stay of the 
above provisions of the Code of Fair Corrnetition for the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprcpairing Industry to an extent which v/ill permit emergency 
work on vessels when there is a danger or menace to the safety of the 
vessel, to life, or to property, or when a delay v/ould work on undue 

9732 



-l;??- 



hardship ; and 

"HOV;, THI;RZ?OR::j, the National Industrial 2ecovci-y Board, 
purs-aant to authorit:/ vested in it ty Zxcc-u-tive Orders of the Presi- 
dent, including 3xocutivc Orior G859, and otherv.dse, aces hereby 
order: 

"Tiiat a jartial stay of the maxirau'-n hour provisions of tne 
Code of Fair Competition for the Shipbuilding- and Shiprepairing 
Industry contained in Part 3, parat];ra-:)hs (a) and (b) as amended, 
be and hereby is ^ranted for a period of sixt: (GO) days from 
the 'late hereof to the extent of permitting emioloyeps to em^^loy 
emoloyecs in excess of the maximum hour provisions of the Code 
when they are emoloyed i/i emergency woi-k involving dant^er or 
menace to the safety of a vessel, to life, or to pro-ocrty, or 
vdien a delay '.70uld i,7ould an undue hardship on the o^.Tner or the 
shippers or the passengers through loss of use of a vessel for 
prompt Ijading or discnarge or prompt and safe carriage of cargo or 
passengers to destination. 

"PROVIDED, H0V;'3V3Il, that if an erqoloyee on an hourly 
rate works in excess of eight (8) hours in any one day or in 
excess of the maximum hours permitted by the Code to be worked 
in any one week, he shall be paid at the rate of at least one 
and one-half (l:j) times his regular hourly rate for overtime 
so worked; and, provided fiirther, tliat in the computation of 
pay of such an employee v;hose overtime in any one v/eok is in 
excess of both eight (3) hours per day and the maximum hours 
x)ermitted by the Code to be worked in any one week, the overtime 
pay simll not be compounded by addition of both daily and weekly 
overtime, but the employee sha.ll be paid either the s^irn of the 
overtime pay earned during the overtime days or the overtime pay 
earned during the overtime week, vdiichever is the higher for said 
week; and 

"PROVIDED, PURTHER, tliat this partial stay shall not be 
used for the purpose of decreasing employment or for reclassi- 
fication of eniployeos at a lower rate; and 

"PROVIDED, rURTHER, tha,t in each case when maximum hours 
specified in the Code provisions are exceeded, the facts and 
circumstances shall v.'ithin five (5) days of the ending of the 
week during which such overtime v.'ork vra-S ■■Terformed, be reported 
to the Industrial Relations Committee for the Sliipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Industry on duly notarized forns stipulated by said 
Industrial Relations Committee. A copy of such re-oort shall be 
sent to the Code Authority." 

Reference is made to memorandum Jantiar:;' 31, 1935, to V/. 
A. Harriman, Administrative Officer, frci H. Nev/ton Whittelsey, 
Assistant Deputy Administrator, (Rroference: Order 2-31, Volume, 
Code Record Section, and. Deputy's Piles) from v/hich excerpts 
are as follows: 



9732 



-275- 

"2. The Shipbuilding arid Shiprepairing Inc'u.stry Conmittee, 
thro-agh ito Chairman, has made a rcqiiest for an e::enption from 
the above provisioiiG of the Co6.e to permit energency nork. 

"4. Energency work en chips has alr.'ays been necessary'- where 
there has been a danger ci' mencoe to safety of a vessel, life 
or property, or Yihen a deJ.ay T;o"j.ld motIz an undue hardship on 
the orner or shippers or passengers through loss ox use of a 
vessel for pr:i:-pt loading or discharge or prompt and safe car- 
riage of cargo or passengers to destination. 

(a) A ship Js our most complicated unit of trans'oortation. 
it nay embody the capacity of a usrehouse, have accomodations 
of a hotel, a prop'3l:ing plant capacity of a. power plant, and 
must be a strajturo i'o resist the stresses of the sea with 
sea-going qualities to wi'distand the forces of the storm v;a.ves 
of the ocean, and be suita.ble for -oropulsion. 

"(b) It not only represents a large investment of capital but 
is used by a multivade oC shippers and hundreds of passengers 
for transportation. The prompt and safe carriage of the goods 
or passengers a^id prompt 6.ischarge at destination is vital to 
the interests and welfare of a large niinber of people. Other- 
\7ise goods ma.y be sp-'-xou;_>ly delayed in distribution, passengers 
delayed, some of wncm may have vital transportation connections 
to mak^. or important fimuxcial or business a;'^pointments to keep 
and further, the loading docks soon pile up in congestion with 
goods for transportation when a ship is delayed in tailing on,^— 
ca,rgo . 

"(c) Emergency repairs, always have been and alv'ays must be 
made with the utmost speed. Kmergancj'' work here contemplated, 
is of a kind tha-t cannot be successfully rierformed by second 
or third shifts of men. T/here such shifts caji be used, work 
so performed would not come under the title of "emergency 
v/ork" , nor wovJd usual repairs and overhauls. 

"(d) Such emergency work m.ay be reo^uired on the lining of 
pro^oeller shafts in cases where one foreman and crew must be 
maintained on the job ui.til it is completed as the work may 
be largely of a trial ana correct the error method. Such 
shafting may be 150 feet long a:'id 15 inches in diai-ieter or 
larger, supported by tail bearings and st'off ing box and many 
line bearings, all of which must be properly lined with 
due regard to the flexing of the vessel, kany other opera- 
tions may also be of a nature tha.t would require the work of 
one foreman and crew to perform such as certain repairs of 
propelling machinery' or important auxiliary machinery, re- 
pairs to boilers, blov/er equipment and the like, or repairs 
to steering gears or electrical installations, especially 
on ships highly electrified. AIl'O certain hull repairs for 
dama.ge received entering or leaving port. Emergency repairs 
may be necessary w}iere no danger to the ship, life or prop- 
erty may be determined beforehand such as repairs to venti- 
lating systems for ships sailing to hot countries where the 

9752 



-279- 

health -^jid confort of passengers may be vitallj'- affected, or 
perishable cargoes spoiled. 

i'(e) Emergency repairs of all kinds cannot be defined before- 
hand; therefore, the Order for the Partial Stay herewith con- 
tainr provisions to prevent abuse, in that, at least time and 
a half is provided for overtime and notarized reports are re- 
quired to be made by the shipyards to the Industrial Relations 
Connittee for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Indv. trjr on 
each emergency contract vrorlied. The Industrial Relations 
Committee, composed of three labor representatives and three 
industry representatives, are a capable committee to judge 
the necessity for emergency i70rl:. It is expected that this 
Committee will file charges of violations of the Code in the 
event of any abuse of this Partial Stay by any shipyard. 

"(f) Experience indicates that such emergency repairs as 
herein contemplated, will average one per month for each of 
twenty-five (25) major shiprepairing plants and one per year 
for one hundred (l09) medium size plants of the two hundred 
and forty- six (246) plants which have assented to the Code. 
A Partial Stay has been drawn instead of an exemption in or- 
der to provide for this situation. 

"(g) Application has been received from the Code Authority 
for an amendment to the Code to permit emergency repairs on 
vessels. Therefore, this Partial Stay is drawn for only a 
period of sixty (60) days during which time it is proposed 
to make up the case for the granting of the amendment. 

"5. The Shipbuilding Industry since iTovember 8, 1933, has 
been working on the supi-iosed e;athority of the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Industry Committee (Code Committee) to 
permit such emergency vrork. However, the Code was never 
properly amended, nor was an exemption requested, or grant- 
ed by the Administration. For this reason I advised the 
Code . Committee that I could find no adequate authority for 
the Industry to continue to exceed the ma:cimum weekl;, .lOurs 
of the Code on emergency work. I advised them further that 
the Code might be amended and while an amendment was under 
consideration, a teraporarj:' exemption might be granted." 

Administrative Order 2-34, Hay 2, 1935, signed by W. A.Harriraan, 
Administrative Officer, recommended by Barton T/. Lurray, Division 
Administrator, Division 2, memorandum and recommendation by H. Newton 
TTnittelse;^, Assistant Deputy Ac'jninistrator , approved by W. ¥. Rose, 
Deputy Ao-'iinistrator. (Reference: Code Record Section, Deputy's Files, 
and Exliibit I';-34, Appendix.) Excerpts from the Order are as follows: 

"Granting stay, upon application for extension of Adminis- 
trative Order 2-31, dated February 19, 1955, granted for 
sixty (60) days, terminating April 20, 1935, of the maximum 
hour provisions of the Code Part 3, Paragraphs (a) and (b), 
as amended, to permit emergency work. 



-280- 



"\»'HEHEAS, the Shir)building and Shinrer)airing Industry 
Conmittee through its Chairman has made a request for an 
extension of the partial stay, Administrative Order 2-31, 
dated February 19, 1935, granted for sixty (60) days, ter- 
minating A"pril 20, 19r,5, of the maximura hour provisions of 
the Code, Part 3, Parati'raphs (a) and (t), as amended, to 
permit emergency work, t)ending the determination of the 
appeal to the Industrial Appeals Board from Administrative 
Order 2-32, and pending the subsequent action on the amend- 
ment to the Code to nermit emergency Y/ork; and 

"HOW, THE5.3F03E, the National Industrial Recovery Board, 
pursuant to authority vested in it by Executive Orders of 
the President, including Executive Order G859, and other- 
wise, does hereby orders 

"That a stay of the maxim-am hour nrovisions of the Code 
of Pair Competiticn fOx- tne Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing 
Industry contained in P„;..^-c 3, Paragraphs (a) and (b) , as 
amended, be ^nd it hereby is granted for a period from 
April 20, 1935, to June 16, 1935, only to the extent 
of permitting employers to employ employees in excess 
of the maxim-um hour provisions of the Code, as amended, 
when they are employed in emergency work involving danger or 
menace to the safety of a vessel, to life, or to property, 
or when a delay would work an undue hardship on the owner or 
the shippers or the passengers through loss of use of a 
vessel for prompt loading or discharge or prompt and safe 
carriage of cargo or pa^-sengers to destination; 

"PROVIDED, KOlffiVER, that if an employee on an hourly rate 
works in excess of eight (8) hours in any one day or in 
excess of the maxim-am hoars permitted by the Code, as 
amended, to bo worked in any one week, he shall be paid 
at the rate of at least one and one-t'alf (l^-) times his 
regular hcur]y rat? for overtime so ■ri;rked; and provided, 
further, that in the comoTitation of pay of such employee 
whose overtime in any one week is iri excess of both eight 
(8) hours per day and the maxin-.:ri hours permitted by the 
Code, as amended, to be worked in ar> one week, the over- 
time pay shall not be compounded by addition of both daily 
and weekly overtime, biit the employee shall be paid either 
the sum of the overtime pay eai-ned during the overtime days 
or the overtime pay earned during the' overtime week, which- 
ever is the higher for said week; and 

"PROVIDED, FURTHER, that employers shall permit employees 
a rest period of not less than eight (S) hours between the 
termination of the last hour worked in any day and the 
beginning of the first hour worked in the succeeding day; 
provided, however, that if any employee is permitted to 
work during such rest period, he shall be paid at least 
time and one-half his regular hourly rate for the time so 
worked; and 



9732 



-281- 

"PROVIDED, FURTHER, that in each case when maximiim 
hours specified in the t)rovis'ons of the Code, as amend- 
ed, are exceeded, the facts and circumstances shall, 
within five (5) days of the ending of the week during 
which such overtime work was -performed, be reported to 
the Industrial Relations Committee for the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Industry on duly notarized form stip- 
ulated by said Industrial Relations Committee, and a 
coTDy of such report shall be sent to the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Industry Committee; and 

"PROVIDED, FURTHER, that this Order is expressly subject 
to cancellation in the event of a subsequent showing of 
TDroper cause therefor." 

Reference is made to memorandum April 17, 1955, to W. A. 
Harriman, Administrative Officer, from H, Newton Whittelsey, 
Assistant Deputy Administrator (Reference: Order 2-34, Volume, Code 
Record Section, and Deputy's Files). 

"4. The Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Com- 
mittee, through its Chairman, in its letter of April 8, 
1935 sets forth the following: 

(a) 'In view of the Industry's intention to appeal 
to the Industrial Appeals Board from the ruling laid 
down in Administrative Order 2-32, will you kindly have 
a further partial stay granted to the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Industry similar to that covered in Adminis- 
trative Order 2-31.' 

(b) It is requested that this stay may be granted to 
Jujie 16, 1935 subject to cancellation if and when the 
proposed amendment to the Code defining emergency work is 
approved, ' 

"5. Further, the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry 
Committee, through its Chairman's letter dated April 8, 
requested that action on the amendment, submitted to the 
Administration to cover emergency work, be withheld -until 
Administrative Order 2-32 has been acted u-oon by thf^ In- 
dustrial Appeals Board. 

"6. (a) Administrative Order 2-32 is the denial of a 
request from Industry to delete the time and one-half 
provision for overtime beyond the maximum weekly hour^ of 
the Code incorporated in six (6) exemptions and partial 
stays granted. The findings of the Industrial Appeals 
Board are necessary, as ' they directly affect a condition 
that may be incorporated by the Administration in the ap- 
proval of the amendment submitted to permit emergency work. 

"15. There has been brought to the attention of the Admin- 
istration an abuse by a member of this Industry, that de- 
serves consideration with a view of adopting means to pre- 
vent its recurrence. 

9732 



-282- 



"(a) A certain comnany on the Gulf Coast in the Opera- 
tion of docking a vessel and work thereon T7orked its em- 
ployees from four o'clock in the aft'ernoon to twelve mid- 
night, and from twelve midnight iintil eight the next morn- 
ing, and did not -oay overtime for the period worked from mid- 
night to eight A. n. The reason given wps that the second 
eight hours were in the successive day, 

"(d) This matter was called to the attention of the Ship- 
huilding pjid Shiprepairing Industry at their last meeting. 
It was generally deiolored "by the members of that Committee. 
One of the members of tha.t Committee hy letter has suggested 
a rest period as a suitable corrective means. 

,"(c) In the dry-docking of ships, docking crews and cer- 
, tain others skilled in emergency work, must often work con- 
', tinuously for eight hours or more, althciigh sixteen hours 
are unusual. Sh:p;3 generally must be taken off /out of the 
dry-dock on the hi^;h tide and put on/into the dry-dock on 
the high tide. The tii::e of high tides change approximate- 
ly one hour per day,, and tides wait for no mano 

"(d) It is a common custom in the shipping business to 
dry-dock, if possible, at night and leave the dry-dock at 
night in order not to break into discharge or loading days 
and, therefore j save time of the ship and the delay of 
cargoes. There no doubt have been several thousand dry- 
dockings at night during ;the In^st year and possibly, 
one-quarter of these required men to work beyond midnight. 
Ho'^ever, the Assistant Deputy has learned of this one 
complaint only, undoubtedly for the reason that the In- 
dustry in general has volunta.rily. for a period of time. 
Paid the men proper overtime beyond midnight. 

"(e) Provisions for an eight hour rent period. It is 
believed, will prove a proper corrective means^ That is, 
a rest period of eight (S) hours from ths termination 
of the last ho\ir that a ri-ian works one day to the beginn- 
ing of the first hour tha,t he works in the succeeding day; 
howfever, if a man is required to work during such a rest 
period, he should be paid at the rate of at least time and 
one-half his regular hourly rate. Such overtime require- 
ment would act to discourage, undue and ■unnecessary over- 
time work of employees." .1 

d. Stays of Section 3 (a) and (b) pertaining to Trials 

Administrative Order 2-14, April 27, 1934, signed by Hugh S. 
Johnson, Administrator, recommended by Ko ivl. Simpson, Division Admin- 
istrator, Division I, memorandum pjid recommendation by J. B. Weaver, 
Deputy Administrator, approved oy K. M. Simpson. (Reference: Code 
Record, Section, Deputy's Piles, and Exhibit X-14, Appendix.) Ex- 
ceipts from the Order are ag follows: 



9732 



-283- 



"STAY 07 THE PROVISIONS 07 TXRT 3, SECTIONS (a) and (b) 

"NOV/, THEEEFORE, I, Hugh S. Jolinson, Administrator for In- 
dustrial Recovery, nursuant to authority vested in rac, do 
hereby order that the said provisichs of said Part 3, in- 
sofar as the hours of emriloyinent for employees of ship- 
builders or shiprepairers are concerned, are hereby stayed, 
for a period of sixty (60) days from the date of this order 
and subject to ray further orders, to permit exceeding the 
maximum hours of v/ork of eraxiloyees rirovided in the Code 
in testing installations, machinery and equipment for ships, 
dock trials, and sea trials to demonstrate . satisfactory 
ODeration or contractual requirements where it is imprac- 
ticable to do the work Tith safety or to the satisfaction 
of the customer's inspectors by the employment of addi- 
tional men, -orovided that this stay shall not operate or 
be used to decrease employment or reclassify emDloyees at 
a lower rate, of wages. Provided , however, That if an, em- 
ployee on an hourly rate works in excess of eight (8) hours 
in any. one (l) day, the wage paid will be at the rate of 
not less than one and one-half (1^) times the regular hour- 
ly rate, but otherwise according to the prevailing custom 
in each port, for such time as may be in excess of eight 
(8) hours: And, provided further. That in every case where 
code hours are exceeded hereunder the facts and circiom- 
stances shall be reported to the Code Authority and the 
Industrial Relations Committee on a form stipulated by said 
Industrial Relations Committee," 

Reference is made to memorandum April 19, 1934, to Hugh S. 
Johnson, Administrator, from J. 3. Weaver, Deputy Administrator. 
(Reference: Order 2-14, Volume, Code Record Section and Deputy's Files) 
Excerpts from the memorandum are as follows: 

,"The Code Authority for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing 
Industry has applied for an exemption from the maximum hours 
established by the Code for employees of shipbuilders and 
shiprepairers engaged in the conducting of preliminary and 
official trial trips incident to the completion of wor''- on 
vessels. This application has been approved by the Chairman 
of the Code Authority on behalf of the Industry. 

"The Industrial Relations Committee of the Shipbuilding and 
Shipre-oairing Industry has approved of this application with 
the reservation that overtime rates be paid for all hours 
worked in excess of eight hours per day and also that all 
such ca.ses of exceeding maximum weekly hours be reported to 
that Agency, The Labor Advisory Board likewise approved on 
the same conditions. 

"The Order has been drawn up in accordance with these re- 
commendations to provide for overtime rates of pay for all 
time in excess of eight hours per day and to provide that 
all such cases of exceeding maximum weekly hours shall be 

9732 



;4" 



reported "both to the Industria,! Relations Committee and to 
the Code Authority." 

"It has "been found that exera-otion from the maximum hours 
• in the cases referred to herein is necessary to the In- 
dustry and in accordance with the -orovisions of the Act 
and is herety recommended for your approval." 

• Administrative Order 2-18, June 20, 1934, signed hy Hugh S. 
Johnson, Administrator, recommended "by C. E. Adams, Division Admin- 
istrator, Division I, memorandum and recommendation hy J. B. Weaver, 
Deputy Administrator, approved by C. E, Adams, Division Administrator. 
(Reference: Code Record Section, Deputy's Piles, and Exhibit K-18, 
Appendix.) Excerpts from the Order are as follows: 

"FURTHER STAY OF THE PROVISIONS OF PART S, SECTIONS (a) and (b) 

"^iTIEREAS, an order was signed by me on April 27, 1934, 
staying the said provisions of said Part 3, insofar as the 
hours of employment for employees of shipbuilders or ship- 
repairers are concerned, for a period of sixty (60) days 
from the date of the order and subject to my further 
orders, to permit exceeding the maximum hours of work of 
employees- provided in the Code in testing installations, 
machinery and. equipment for ships, dock trials, and sea 
trials to demonstrate satisfactory operation or con- 
tractual requirements whefe it is impracticable to do the 
.'work with safety or to the satisfaction of the customer's 

• inspectors by the employment of additional men, provided 
that' the stay shall not, oper&te- or be used to decrease 
employment or reclassify employees at a lower rate of wages. 
Provided , however,' That if an employee on an hourly rate 
works in excess of eight (8.) hours in 'any one (l) day, 

the wage paid will be at the rate of hot less than one and 
one-half (P) times the regular hourly rate, but otherwise 
according to the prevailing custom in each port, for such 
time as may be in excess of eight (8) hours: And provide d 
further , That in every case where code hours are exceeded 
hereundpr the facts and circumstances shall ba reported to 
the Code Authority and the Industrial Relations Committee 
on a form stipulated by said. Industrial Relations Committee; 
and 

"".jTIEREAS, ray said order of April 27, 1934, expires June 27, 
9732 



"285- 

1934, and justice requires that an extension of the said 
stay he granted; 

"NOViT.TJIEIREPORE, I, Hu^h S. Johnson, Administrator for 
Industrial Recovery, pursuant to authority vested in rae, 
do hereby order that the said provisions of said Part 3, 
Sections (a) and (h) of the Code of Fair Competition for 
the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry, stayed in my 
order of April 27, 1934, be further stayed for a period 
of six (6) months from and after June 27, 1934, subject 
to my further orders. " 

Reference is made to memorandum to Hugh S. Johnson, 
Administrator, from J. B. Weaver, Deputy Administrator. (Ref- 
erence: Order 2-18, Volume, Code Record Section, and Deputy's 
Files) Excerpts from the memorandum are as follows: 

"The Code Authority has applied for a further stay 
of the above mentioned provisions of the Code, and the 
Industrial Relations Committee has reaffirmed its former 
recommendation that the stay be granted. 

"The Order has been drawn up extending the stay of these 
provisions for a period of six (6) months. This is felt 
to be justified in view of the fact that dock trials and 
sea trials are conducted from time to time by members 
. ■. , -. of the Industry, and in the operation of these trials it 
. is often impracticable to observe the maximum hours id:^o- 
vided in the Code. " 

Administrative Order 2-29, December 29, 1934, signed by W. A. 
Harriman, Administrative Officer, recommended by Barton W. Murray, 
.Division Administrator, memorandum and recommendation by H. Newton 
IThittelsey, Assistant Deputy Administrator, approved by W. W. Rose, 
Deputy Administrator. (Reference: Code Record Section, Deputy's 
Files, and Exhibit K-29, Appendix.) Excerpts from the order are 
as follows: 

"G-ranting Further Exemption from Provisions of Part 3, 
Sections (a) and (b), of Employees Engaged in Testing In- 
stallations, Machinery and Equipment for Ships, Dock Trials 
and Sea Trials. 

"WHEREAS, an application has been made by the Shipbuild- 
ing and Shiprepairing Industry Committee for a further ex- 
tension of the aforesaid exemption from the provisions of 
Part 3, Sections (a) and (b), of the Code of Pair Compe- 
tition for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry 
from December 27, 1934 to June 16, 1935; and 

"HOW, THEREFORE, the National Industrial Recovery Board, 
pursuant to authority vested in it by Executive Orders of 
the President, including Executive Order 6859, and other- 
wise, does hereby order: 

9732 



"That an exemption from the maximiira hour -orovisions of the 
Code contained in Part 3, Sections (a) and (h), as amended, 
"be and it hereby is granted from Deceraher 27, 1934 to Jtme 
16, 1955 to permit emiDloyees to exceed the maximum hour 
provisions of the Code employed in testing installations, 
machinery and equipment for ships, dock trials and sea 
trials; provided ho\7ever, that if an employee on an hour- 
ly rate work-s in excess of eight (8) hours in 'any one day 
or in excess of thirty-six (36) hours in any one week he 
shall be paid at the rate of at' least one end one-half 
(l^-) times his regular hourly rate for overtime so uorked; 
however, in the computation of pay nhen such an em"oloyee 
works during any one week overtime in excess of toth 
eight (8) hours per day and thirty-six (36) hours per 
week, the overtime nay shall not be ' compounded by addition 
of both daily and weekly overtime, but the employee 
shall be naid either the sura of the overtime pay earned 
during the overtime days or the overtime pay earned dur- 
ing the overtime ueek, whichever is the higher for said 
week; and, provided further, that in each case where Code 
hours are exceeded hereunder the facts and circumstances 
shall be reported to the Code Authority and the Industrial 
Relations Committee on a form stipulated by said Industrial 
Relations Committee." 

Reference is made to memorandum December 21, 1934 to W. A. 
Harriman, Administrative Officer, from H. Newton Whittelsey, 
Assistant Deputy Administrator, (Reference: Order 2-29, Volume, Code 
Record Section and Deputy's Files) Excerpts from the memorandum are 
as follows: 

"4. Testing installations, machinery, equipment of ships, 
dock trials and sea trials to demonstrate satisfactory 
operation and meet constructional requirements have been 
the practice of the Shipbuilding Industry for many years. 
To do the work with safety and/or to the satisfaction and 
specification of the customer, it is usually necessary to 
exceed the hours stated in the Code as the maximum hours 
of the Industry. Many of the employees are specialists 
and of long experience with the shipyards by whom they are 
employed. Trial trips and dock trials, testing operations, 
new installations of machinery, boilers, electrical equip- 
ment, etc, can only with safety be entrusted to thorough- 
ly trained men of known experience and of a limited number 
on the respective tests." 



9732 



-237- 



e. Exemption Part 4 Section ("b) (also written as Sn ' tion 4 (b) 
pertaining to the San Francisco Bay Arsa . 

Administrative Order 2-15, fey 1, 1934, signed "by K. M. 
Simpson, Division Actainistrator, Division I, recommended by J. 
B. Weaver, Deputy Administrator. (Reference; Cods Record Section, 
Deputy's Files, and Exnibit K-15, Appendix.) Excerpts from the 
Order are as follows: 

"Denial of application of General Engineering Sc Dry Dock 
Conipany, United Engineering Company, Colijmbia Iv^ciiine Works, 
Brown Bros, Welding Company, f/larine Electric Company, Tourney 
Electric & Engineering Company, Morrison cS: Bevilockv;ay, De 
Lano Bros. Company, Cook Sc Company, Bowes Cc Andrevifs, Cassidy 
& Gratta, Neptune Machine Works, Dahl-Beck Electric Company, 
Thos. H. Smith Machine Works, Von Tagen Company, E. T. Tray, 
C. W. Smith Copper Works, S. I/i. O'Donnell Copper Works, C. A. 
McCarthy & Company, and T. J. MojTiihan cS: Company, engaged in 
ship repair work in the San Francisco Bay area, for exemption 
from the provisions of Part 4, Section (b) reading as follows: 

'The amount of differences existing prior to 
July 1, 1933, between the wage rates paid various classes 
of eirployeos receiving more than the established miniim:mi 
wage sliall not be decreased. In no event sl"iall any em- 
ployer pay an employee a wage rate which will yield a 
less wage for a work week of thirty-six (36) hours than 
such employee was receiving for the same class of vrork 
for a forty (40) hour week prior to July 1, 1933. It 
is understood that there shall be no difference between 
hourly wage rates on commercial work and on naval work, 
for the sajae class of labor, in the same, establishment. ' 

"An application having been duly made by General Engineer- 
ing & Dry Dock Company, United Engineering Company, Columbia 
I&chine Works, Brown Bros. ?/elding Company, ferine Electric 
Company, Toumpy Electric & Engineering Company, Morrison & 
Bevilockway, De Lano Bros. Company, Cook & Com;:oany, Bowes & 
-Andrews, C.assidy £!: Gratta, Kcptunc Machine Works, Dahl-Beck 
Electric Conitpany, Thos, H. Smith Ifechine Works, Von Tagcn 
Company, E, T. Tway, C. W. Smith Copper Works, E, M. O'Donnell 
Copper' Works, C. A. McCarthy 5: Company, and T. J. Moynihan & 
Company, engaged in ship repair work in the San Francisco 
Bay Area, for exemption from the provisions of Part 4, Section 
(b) of the Code of Fair Competition for the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Industry, and the Deputy Administrator Iiaving 
recomiriended, and it appearing that justice requires, that said 
application be denied; 

"IJOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to authority vested in me by 
the Administrator for Industrial Rgcovery, and otherwise, it 



9732 



-ass- 
is hereby ordered that the said application for excm-otion 
he and it is hereby denied." 

Reference is made to meraorand-ara, April 24, 1934, to K. I.'. Sim-;)- 
son, Division Administrator, froin J. B. Weaver, Le^outy Administrator 
(Reference: Order 2-15, Vol-ome, Code Record Section, and Deputy's 
Files) Sxcerpts froi:i the icemoi-and-cun are as follows: 

"On December 11, 1333 certain firms, doing reiDair 
work in the Sa]:, Francisco Bny Area, nade application to the 
District Conrpliance Director for an exemption from the provi- 
sion _^of txie Shipbuilding and Ship repairing Code >7hich requires 
.11. 1> increase in wage rates. Previous to this, application 
. was made to the Code Authority for exemotion from this provi- 
sion of the Code, and the Code Au.thority is not empowered to 
grant or deny exemptions from the Code, a formal application 
v;as raa.de to t/io National Recovery Administration. 

"Action on this application v.'f.s delayed until an In- V 

dustrial Relations Coraraittoe. was established for this Industry 
m order that such an agency might consider the matter and 
maice recommendations th,,,!., on. This Committee is now in existence, 
ana on being presented with the case, unanimously recomruendod 
that the exemption from the Code be denied. The Labor Advisory 
Board, in their rcoort, concurred in this decision. 

"Some of the concerns making application for this cxerao- 
. tion have delayed raising wages .in accordance with the provi- 
sions of the Cod-, awaiting a final decision on their a^oplica- 
tion, and several comolaints liave been lodged against these 
firms charging violation of the Code. These comolaints will 
be turned over to the Industrial Relations Committee for 
adjustment of back wages due to under the provisions of the 
Code. 

"In view of the cirajrastances, and the ' recommendations ^^ 

of the Code Authority and the Industrial Relations Committee, 
I recommend this denial for your approval." 

_ Administrative Order 2-20. J^lly 5, 1934, signed by C. E. Adams, 
Division Administrator, Division I, recommended by J. B. Weaver 
Deputy Administrator, Brief on hearing by H. Newton Whittclsev, 
Assistant Deputy Administrator. (Reference: Code Record Section. 
-e:-mty's Files, and Exhibit K-20, Appendix.) Exceri^ts from the 
Oraer are as follows: 

"Granting Application of the Ggncral Engineering & Dry Dock 
Company, United Engineering Comoany, Columbia Machine Works, 
Brown Bros. Welding Company, ferine Electric CorrnDany, Tourney 
ilectric & Engineering Company, I.'orrison r": Bevilockway, Do 
i.ano Bros. Company, Cook Cc Company, 3o'.;cs & Andrews, Cassidy 
c.^ Gratta, Neptune Machine V.'orks, Dahl-3cck Electric Com^mny, 
£aos. ii. Smith I/achine Works, Von Tagcn Connany E. T.Tmy 
C. W. Smith Copper Works, S. M. C'Donncll Cnpper Works, C. A. 

973P 



-289- 

McCarthj'- & CoiTOai^v, T. J. Moy^.ih, n t. Coni'-x^n;' and EMre]-a Boiler Works, 
Incorporated, eny-^ed iu shi--) r^iair v;ork in the Sim Francisco Say Area, 
r f or exemption from the provisions oi 'i'art ^■-, Section (b). 

"ViTiEaEaG, an order si^-ned a/ 1, 19r-<4, denieci the arnlication for 
exemption from the -n-ovisions of Part 4, Section (b), of t;!-; Code of 
Fair Competition for the Shi Vjuildin. and Shi ^rr-^airint... In." -try; and 

"TffiERIJlS, a hearing }ias beer, duly held on the order sii,ned ury 1, 
1934, which denied the amplication for an £xe;/.ption from the ^n'ovisions 
of Part 4, Section (b), of- the Code of Fair Ccmf-ietition for the Ship- 
building, and Shi;nre--iairin^ Industry, and the Deputy Administrator havin^ 
reported that the failiu'e to .^rant the exe;n-)tion from the -provisions of 
Part 4, Section (b) in the instant case v/ould be discriminatory and re- 
sult in increasing; by 11.1 percent an alrerc"i,y adequate mini;num hourly 
wage rate of 84-3/8 cents maintained by the aforesaid firms durin.' the 
period 1933 to date, and it a^-inearinB to :-Ty satisfaction, that the 
exemption hereinafter .^ranted is necescar-- and v/ill tend to effectuate 
the Policies '^f Title I of the ^faticnal Industrial Recovery Act; 

"!IOi.", T:iEIEI''0?i: , -nursu.'rnt to authorit - vested in ne, it is hereoy 
ordered that the order sitined May 1, 19r4, which denied the anplicrtion 
for exemption from the -)rovisions of Part 4, Section (b), of said Ccd'-;, 
be cancelled, and it is hereby further ordered ttet the s.bove-naned 
amlicants and the firms recommended for exem-ition by the Code Authority 
be and they hereby are exempted from -said ;-'rovisions of s?id Code. Pro- 
vided , however_, that the wa^'^ r^tes being -^aid on July 1, 193C-'; to various 
classes of emi^loyees by the firms h-rein exemited shall not be decreased." 

Reference is made to ;.ienorand:;jn, June ?7, 1934, to C. lii. Adp.ms, 
Division Administrator, from J. 3. IVeavor, De"nuty Adi-:iiTistratcr . Re- 
ference: 2-20 Order Volume, Code Record Section, and Dnnuty's Files) 
Excer-ots from riemorandum are as follo'vs: 

"On iviay 1 an Order was signed deiiyino the a:Tolication of twenty 
ship re-oair films in the San Francisco Bay Area for exempt:.! from the 
previsions of Part 4, Section B of the Code of Fr^ir Competition for the 
Shi^ouildinti -.and Shiprepairin^ Industry, v/hich r.'-auires an increase of 
11.1/0 in the hourly wat^e rates in effect on Jul;-' 1, 1933. 

"On protest from certai;. of these firms a mblic hearin, was held 
in Washin^^ton on June 7, at which time certain facts were brought go 
li^ht shov/in^ thp.t these firms should be exem^ited from that -)rovisi''n 
of the Code requirin, an increase of ll.lv' i'-^ the hourly rate of em- 
ployees. It was pointed out that these firms, in every case small 
enterprises, had reintained their hourly waf_e rates a-t the same level 
for the -last eleven years, while two other firms, the largest concerns 
in the area, and in direct com-ietitiori, had lowered wa._.cs substantially. 
The 3ethlehem Shi)buildinp, Corporation naid a base rate of 71(* per hour 
for machinists in 1929, 54(^ ;-)er ho'or in 133?, and is now paying. 68# nor 
hour. The smaller firms have 7iaid continuously for this class of skilled 
labor 84-^ '^er hour base rate, which in 19?S wrs IB^'o hij^hcr than tiiat 
paid by Bethlehem, i.: 1932, ^q ', •■.-_ ,: ,^-. ;_vg, ' ithout^ the 11.1,J i/.crcase 
is 24,j hi_h--r. TTith tJie^ 11.1 ■ i-.-icr-er.s-, >■:. in^.i;-.,^ '•'.,& ra-^s up to 93(#, it 
would be Z6% hisher than the Bethlehem rate. Even without the increase re- 
quired by the Code the differential in the wage rates is greater nov; tlian 
9732 



-290- 

in 1929. By com^Tellin^, the small firms to raise their v;a;_:es to 93(# per 
hour, a decided hardship is ira-:)Osed u;oon them. Although a differential 
has al?/ays existed, an increase of this differential at the -present time 
would be disastrous to the small firms through the establishment of an 
unfair com-:)etitive condition. It v.'.s definitely established that the 
Code aggravated an already existing injustice. 

"This, is just one instance v/herein the Code of ?air Competition for 
the Shipbuilding, and Shirjrepairing Industry has been unv/orkable. It 
will be necessary to revise the Code com--iletely at a later date so that 
it will be of greater advantai^^e to the Industry. 

"The Code Authority has tv/ice before talren unfavorable action on 
the a-oplication of these firms for exemption, and its recommendation is 
therefore not included in this report. It developed at the Hearing that 
the Code Authority had denied the exemption previously not on the merits 
of the case, but because of the inadvisability of setting an example by 
^ranting, the exem-^tion. 

"I believe that the purpose of the National Industrial Recovery 
Act, furthering, methods of fr.ir competition, protecting small entemrise, 
and preventint^ monopoly, ca,n only be obtained by grantint^ relief to the 
appellant concerns. An Ordei' ht^.s been di-av/n up cancellinti, the former 
Order of May 1, and ^.ranting the exenrjotion applied for, which I urgently 
recommend for your signature." 

Heference is made to the Brief by H. Newton Tlhittelsey, Assistant 
Deputy Administrator. (Reference: Order 2-20, Voluiitte, Code Record 
Section and Deputy's Fil-s.) Excer-nts from Brief arc as follov;s: 

"HEARIIIG ON OEDZR DENYING APPLICATIONS FOR EXEIPTION Ul'DNR PROVISIONS OP 
PART 4, SLCTION (b) OP TIS CODE OP PAIR COMPETITION FOR THE SHIPBUILDING 
AND SHIPEEPAIRING INDUSTRY 

"BRIEF 

"(?:E'F3RENCES HEREII^ refer TO THE EXTRACT PAGES) 

"1 (c) Substantially all yards and re>mir plants were forced to 
reduce drastically hourly rates due to the deioression. It may be 
assumed the proponents of the Code, with the immediate necessity before 
them of establishing conditions for Navy contracts, believed all "jlants 
v.'ithout exception had so reduced wages, and the provisions of Part 4, 
Si-CLion (o) of the Code were written in for the s^oecific Durpose to re- 
turn wa£,es to a fairer livin^ scale, and no provision was made for con- 
ditions v/hore plants had not reduced wa^^es below the 1929 basis. This 
unfortunate omission is the underlying cause of this controversy . (Ref. 
p. lb, Sec. 23 (b), p. 36) 

"3. The National Industrial }\ecovery Act \/f;„s never intended to 
raise wa^es above the 1929 level, but this Oaiission would have exactly 
that effect. (Ref. p. 51, p. 59) 



9732 



-291- 

"3. In fact the ^oal of the national Administration, as imhlicly 
stated manj'- times, is to retia-n Industry, Labor, etc. to the 1926 scale. 
These petitioning shiprepair -olants of 'the 'San Francisco 3ay area have 
been -laying: the 1936 scale, and did not reduce same. 
(Ref .' p. 19, Sec. 17) 

"4. The hourly base rate of 84-3/S(# for skilled labor paid by the 
petitioning, plants coiiroares favorably v/ith that of nine major ship- 
buildii-s plants buildinti Raval ves-sels nov; employing 10,000 men, v/ho 
were the principal "oroponents of the CoO.e thrjiiji their Trade Associ- 
ations. 

"5. The apnlicant small -olants of the San Prancisco Bay Area 
maintained the base scale of 84-3/G^ for skilled labor froai 1933 to date. 
(Eef. p. 5, Sec. 8 (b) ) 

"6. The srid a^T-'licant small slants could not reduce wages during 
the depression because of labor trade ai-,reements. 
(Ref. p. 6, Sec. 9 (e), n. 18, Sec. 23 (c), ■!. 35, -n. 38) 

"7. The Sc^ii a-^licant small plants, if required to comply v/ith 
the Code, would have to raise the base scale to 93. 7(^. 
(Sef. ;^, 7, Sec. 9 ( d) , ^t. 37) 

"8. The ;>ethlehem Shipbuildin , Coranany, Union Iron ".'orks Plant, 
did reduce washes to the 54<# scale, also the.lioore Shipbuildin,, Company 
to j8rf. 
(Sef. p. 16, Sec. 21 (a), ■■>. 35, -•). 40, Sec. 5) 

"9. Ho prooi has been offered to show that the 84-3/8rf base is 
not a fair livin^. wa^e. 

"10. (a) The Jethlehcm Shiibuildint,- Coranany prior to the degression 
paid a scale of 71-|^ which V7as a differential of 13rf under the scale 
of the applicant plants. It a-ipears from the record this is the 
differential of normal times, and any increase of differential tireater 
than 13(!J is a h; rdship on the applicant plants. 
(Ref. p. S, Sec. 9, -o. 6, Sec. 9 (f), p. 6, Sec. 9. (t) ) 

"14. Enforcement of srid '-jrovision would tend to create a 
monopolj- as it v/ould tend to le: ve only the lar^^e shipyards v.'ith their 
lower scales in the field at San Francisco, and it v;ould tnnd to crush 
small industries, all of which is sioecif ically prohibited by the 
rational Recover;- Act. 
(Ref. p. 39, p. 51 (d) ) 

"15. Question: 'Do you thirk that a tenToorary rcstrainin^i order 
would be issued b^'' a Court of competent jurisdiction in view of the 
records .-ie.de at the recent hearin^ on an a-)plication for exemption from 
the labor ;orovi3ions of the Code?' 

(iTot pert of the record: Re-)ly : 'ir. Conway (Lethal Counsel): 'Yes.' 

"17. Code Authority denied a-rolication, not on the merits but on 



9732 



-292- 



policy because of nev/ness of the Code. ■ . 

(Ref. ;i. 17, Sec. 23 (a), p. 20, Sec. 29 (a), (b), (c), (d) ) 

"18. Industrial Relations Coimaittee denied application not on 
merits but for lac]:, of jurisdiction. 
(Ref. p. 20, Sec. 28) 

"19. Labor is not without synroathy for the difficulties of the 
applicants. 

(Ref. p. 22, Sec. 21, p.. 23, Sec. 33.) 

and hold the Bethlehem and lioore plants should be reauired to bring ut 
their wage scale. 

"25. The Inuustrial Adviser recormr.ends the excrmtion be granted 
in the follov/ing: 

Accordiai totrhfe Code, b:--sed upon a strict interpretation, the 
request for exenr-ition must be denied. In that even the code itself: 

Oppresses k.tif.II enternrise and creates mono';:)oly. 
With this heavy wage differential the "little 
fellow" cannot compete with the "big fellow" even 
in bids f or Governuent work. 

It works a gross injustice to the many in favor 
of the few, to the small in fa,vor of the la.rge, 
to the \veak in favor of the strong, to the just 
in favor of the unjust. 

Codes were never so intended. Therefore, as a natter of fairness 
and equity*', this roouested exemption should be granted." 



9732 



-233- 

f» Protest of Shj-pbuilding: n nd S hip re-pairing- Industry Committee 
(Code A-'athority) a^rainst ^jrovisions in Exenotion and Stay orders recg-iir- 
in^:: -Qp.yment of overtime beyond the maxi'..i-ujn T'eokly hour iTrovisions of the 
Code , 

Administrative Order '2-32, March 21, 1935, signed ^oy V. A. Harriman, 
Administrative Officer, recommended "by Barton W. Murray, Division Admin- 
istration, Division -2, raemorand-ara and reconnendation 'by H. Nei-'ton Whittelsey, 
Assistant Deputy Administrator, approved by W. W. Rose, Demty Administra- 
tor, (Reference: Code Record Section, Deputy's If'iles a.nd Exhibit K-32, 
Appendix.) Excerpts from -the Order are as follorrs: 

"Denying request of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairin;'.; Industry Committee 
for deletion of provisions in Exemptions and Partial Stays granted, per- 
taining to the requirement that at least time and one-lialf be paid for 
all hours worked in excess of the maximum weekly hours of the Code incor- 
porated in Administrative Orders Nos, 2-6, 2-16, 2-19, 2-25, 2-20, 2-20 
and ^51. 

"The Code, as amended, Part 3 (a) and (b), provides: 

'(a) "Shipbuilding - Ho employee on an hourly rate shall be 
permitted to work more thpji thirty- six (36) hours per week. 
If an employee on an hourly rate works in excess of eight 
(8) hours in any one day,, the wage paid will be at the rate 
of not less than one and one-half (1-7) times the regular 
hourly rate, but otherwine according to the prevailing cus- 
tom in each port, for such time as may be in excess of eight 
(8) hours." 

'("b) " Shipre^airing - No employee on an hourly rate shall 
be "oerraitted to work more than thirty-six (36) hours oer 
week averaged over a period of six (6) months, nor more 
than forty (40) hours diiring any one week. If an employee 
on an hourly rate works in excess of eight (s) hours in any 
one day, the wage paid will be at the rate of -not less, than ■ 
one and one-half (l;:-) tines the regular hourly rate, but 
otherwise according to the prevailing custom in each port, 
for such time as may be in excess of eight (8) hours,"' 

"■WHEREAS, the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Indus trj^ Committee 
by resolutions passed at meetings held Jaji-'oary 17, 1935, and February 
21, 1935, respectively, protested the requirement that a.t least time 
and one-half be paid for all hours worked in excess of the maxiraam 
weekly hours of the Code and requested that this requirement be stricken 
from Administrative Orders 2-6, 2-15, 2-19, 2-25, 2-23, 2-29 and 2-31; 
and 

• "WHEREAS, the Administrative Orders referred to were granted as 
follows: 



9732 



54- 



Order 




Granted 


Overtine 




11-111111)6 r 


Dated 
S-.1-34 


For 
3 Txks. 


Rate 


Over 


2-6 


1-^ 


40 iirs. 


2-16 


5-4-54 


1 ;rk. 


li 


40 hrs. 


2-19 


6-25-34 


2 v;ks. 


1- 


36 hrs. 


2-24 


ll-14r-34 


30 d-i^e^s 


i'; 


36 hrs. 


2-25 


11-17-34 


90 days 


I'- 


36 hrs. 


2-28 


12-29-34 


4 mo. 


ll 


35 hrs. 


2-29 


12-29-34 


6-16-35 


li 


35 hrs. 


2-31 


2-19-35 


60 days 


1} 


max. hrs. 



Granted 
to 

Jut ton Kelly Co, 
liajnitowac SB. Corp, 
St. Louis Car Co. 
Industry 

Marietta Mfg. Co, 
ITevroort News SB. DD, Co, 
Hew York SB. Co. 
Bethelehem SB, Co, 
Indus tr^'- 
Industry 



.".ITHSEEAS, the Demity Adninistrator hciS reverted, and it ap'r'ears to 
the satisfaction of til? national Industrial Recovery Board that the denial 
of the aforesaid request is neceasa,ry and will tend to effectuate the 
policies of Title I of the ITation?! Industrial Recovery Act, 

"NOW, TIITREPOPuE, the National Industrial Recovery Boprd, pursuant 
to axithority vested in it "by Executive Orders of the President, including 
Executive Order 6859, find otherwise, does herehy order; 

"That the request of the Shipbuildin,';,- and Shiprepairin,:: Industry 
Committee for deletion of provisions in exemptions and -oartial strays 
gra,nted renuiring that at least time and one-half be paid for all hours 
worked in excess of tho maximum weekly hours of the Code in 'Adriiinistra- 
tive Orders 2-6, 2-16, 2-19, 2-25, 2-28, 2-29 and 2-31 he and is 
hereby denied." 

Reference is made to memorandum March 5, 1335 to W. A. Harriman, 
Administrative 0:'"f icer, from^ H, Newton Fiaittelsey, Assistant Deputy 
Administrator. (Reference: 2-32 Orcier Volume, Cbde Record Section and 
Deputy's File:j.) Excej)ts from the mei.iorandum are as follows: ' 

"2. (a) The Shipbuilding and Shiprepairiag Industry Committee 
passed the following resolution at meetin^;,- held Jan. 17, 1935: 

"Whereas in Administrative Orders No. 2-6, 2-16, 2-19, 2-25, 2-28, 
2-29, N. R. A. . have directed, tliat overtime be paid beyond weekly 
hours as v/ell as beyond daily hours the Code Authority protests this 
raling as not being within the requirements of the Shiobuilding 
and Shiprepairing Code, and further has never been a practice of 
the Industry a.nd therefore is unacceptable to it; and 

'TKEREPORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Code Authority directs its 
Chairmr'n to address a letter to N, R. A. asking tha.t this require- 
ment be stricken from the aforesaid Administrative Orders," 



u 



♦Contains the; subject provision but is not listed by the Code Authority; 



-2?5- 



(b) The Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Connittee passed 
the follc-ing resolution at ingeting held Feb. 21, IS.'^S. 

'THE CODE iUTHOHITY RESOLVES: That the Chairman of the Code 
Authority be directed to protest to N.R.A. the Administrative 
Order No, 2-31 in its present form as being opposed to the payment 
of overtime bevond the maximum hours of the Code, and as opposed 
to the provision of the Order requiring weekly reports of overtime 
performed to be reported to the Industrial Relations Committee 
unless such reports are the result of a complaint filed in regard 
thereto; and, 

FURTHER: That the Chairman be directed to communicate with K.R.A. 
and request an opportunity for the Code Authority to a-^mear before 
the national Industrial Recovery Board and present its point of 
view regarding these matters,' 

"7, Reference is made to letter of Jan. 28, 1935, from the Chair- 
man of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee in vihich 
argument is set forth as follows: 

"(a) That the overtime clauses (subject provisions) directly 
conflict with the 'Code which provides for overtime payment beyond eight 
(8) hours per day, but does not provide for overtime payment beyond the 
maximum weekly hours. The Code does not provide for overtime work beyond 
weekly hours under any circumstances, 

"An exemption or limited partial stay granted v/hich acts tempo- 
rarily to modify a provision of the Code, na^^ contain any conditions 
deemed' advisable by the Administration, 

(c) That on January 4, 1934 , I.!r, William H, Davis, then Deputy 
Administrator, dictated a statement incorporated in t.ie ianutes of the 
Meeting held an that day as follows: 

'That overtime is not to be paid for the four hours in 
excess of the 36 hours in eny one week but is only to 
be paid for hours in excess of eight hours in any one 
day.' 

"The above provision was not submitted to the Adnini strati on 
for approval. If approved, it '"ould constitute an aaendiient to the 
Code, Further, the Code in Section 8 (d) clearly provides .-.at supple- 
mental provisions shall be submitted for the aroproval of the President, 
Therefore, the above provision is of no force or effect, 

•"3, Reference is made to letter dated Feb, 21, 1935, from the Chair- 
man of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee setting 
forth argument as follows : . ■ - 

"(a) That the Industry did not consider or agree to any over- 
time provision beyond the weekly hours of the Code, This is answered in 
7 (a) hereof. 



9732 



-296- 

"(b) That the practice has never prevailed in the Industry 
to pay over tine except "beyond daily hours and it rrould establish in the 
Industry a condition that vrould be very difficult, if not impossible, 
to change, 

"The Industry has paid for Simday v/ork double time or a higher rate, 
and for Saturday afternoons, tine and one-half or h, higher rate. These 
payments are in fact payments bej^'ond the usual weekly hoiirs of v-'ork, 
whicli, viere generally forty-four (44) hours. The exenptions and partial 
stays granted in most cases pertained to relc.tivelj^ few employees in re- 
lation to total euploj^nent; therefore, it does not ao Dear that the over- 
time requirement vould act to establish a precedent, 

"(e) , That the Ilav;;'' De-oartment only requires overtime payment 
beyond forty (40) hours per \7eek, 

"The nandatory law limiting the hours per day to eight 
(8) hours of ^'orkg requires no overtime provision to protect the situa- 
tion. Therefore, in effect, the Eavy Department's daily and weekly 
hours are effectively protected against undue overtime, 

"9c Reference is made to Administrative Orders 2-6, 2-16, 2-19 
and 2-25, all vere -granted to sioecific shipyards on representatives 
that the particular kind of labor exempted was not available in the 
immediate localitj'-. In such instances the local labor offices cannot 
be considered an infallible guide nor is it possible to judge the avail- 
ability of men 'in not too distant points that might be moved. Therefore, 
the subject provision of overtime pD.yrnent beyond the maximum hours of 
the Code is most useful to properly'" control such situations; that is, 
to discourage undue overtime ^ ork and induce the increase of employment 
of more men to handle the work in question. 

"10, Reference is made to idministrative Orders 2-24, and 2-28, 
both of which pertain to the extension of Section 3 (c) of the Code 
regarding designers and loftsnen. 

"(a) The memorandum cf llovember 9, 1934, to the Division 
Administrator, copy attached, sets forth that there was an original 
exception provided by the Code for six (o) months, and this was extended 
by an additional three (3) months, and a still fu:'ther additional six 
months, all without overtime provision. During this total time of 
fifteen (l5) months the designing forces were only increased 35^, 

"(b) This tine was quite sufficient to train additional men 
to properly handle the designing of the large naval program that ?/as 
let in 1933, However, at the termination of this period, llov, 5, 1934, 
the Shipbuilders apiolied for a further extension, 

"(c) The condition therefore existed as follows: The ship- 
builders ho,d vforked their designing forces for nine (9) months at 48 
hours ajid for six (6) months at 44 hours, the;'" had failed to employ and 
train sufficient men to do the work, they raid the men no overtime for 
work beyond 36 hours per week as it v^as not required by the Code or the 
extension thereof. This is a clear case of the lack of a suitable pre- 
vision to prevent \andue overtime and to increase employment, 

9732 



-297- 

"(e) The memorandum of November 13, 1934, to the Division 
Administrator, copy attached, sets forth the increased cost per month 
of overtime required hy the respective Orders in the designing of the 
$181, 728,600 naval "building in private yards. It is shown that the 
percentage of increased cost per month with relation to the contracts 
is estimated at only IS/lOOO of ifo, and the overtime cost per month 
with relr.tion to the jayroll at only 7/l00 of 1^. 

"11, Reference is made to Administrative Order 2-29, which grajits 
a further exemption to employees engaged in testing installation, 
raachinerjr end. equipment for ships, dock trials and sea trials. 

"(a) The memorandum in this case addressed to the Adminis- 
trative Officer sets forth in considerable detail the special problem 
connected rith this matter. The men selected for such trials and their 
number is a management problem of shipyard operation and cannot well be 
intsrf erred, with. 

"(b) This matter, however, should be adequately safeguarded 
in order to discourage unnecessary overtime work and encourage em- 
plojaient of sufficient men to the fullest extent. Therefore, the sub- 
ject provision embodying the requirement that time and one-half be raid 
for overtime beyond thirty-six (36) hours is most desirable and ne- 
cessary 3j.id the only one suitable to properly guard the situation. 

"(c) The Labor Advisory Board, Research and planning Divi- 
sion cjid Legal Division recommended that time and one-half be paid for 
overtime beyond the maximum hours of the Code, although the question 
was not definitely asked of the Advisory Boards in the memoranda that 
went to them. 

"12 (a) Here again the memoroJida in the case, addressed to the 
Administrative Officer, v7ent into considerable detail in regard to the 
necessity of emergency work in the repair of ships and clearly set 
forth that permission to perform emergency repairs must be --^ranted to 
the Industry. Such repairs must be ma,de immediately when tj.re is in- 
volved the danger of menace to the safety of a vessel, life or property 
or when a delay would work an undue hardship on the owner or shippers 
or passengers. 

"(b) Here again is a situation that must be safeguarded. The 
Order provided for time and one-half beyond the maximum hours of the 
Code aiad required that reports of such emergency work should be made 
promptly to the Industrial Relations Committee for the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Industry. 

"(c) The subject provision of time and one-half is the only 



5732 



-293- 

suitr.tle control to discourage undue overtiinu nork and to encourage 
adequate enployment. The Indur trial Relations Conraittee, the Consumers' " 
Advisory Board, Eesea:rch and Planning Division, Lator Advisory Board and 
Legal Division recorinended such time and one-half Toe -oaid for overtime 
"beyond ma,xinuin hours of the Code, 

"13, The Industrial Relations Committee for the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Indvistry recorinended "by resolution March 1, 1935, as 
follows: 

'BE IT REGOLVjJD, that the Lahor i.Iembers of the Industrial 
Relations Comnittee hereby record themselves as favoring the payment 
of not less than tine and one-half for work performed in excess of Code 
weekly ma^'tiraTin hours, and recom-'iend tho,t the Code Authority's protest of 
January 23th, 1935, be referred to herein, be denied, and 

'BE IT RESOLVED, that the Industry I.ienbers of the Industrial 
Relations Committee hereby record themselves as O'oposed to the payment 
of overtime for ■ ork performed in excess of Code ^;eekly manimum hours 
and recoinmend that the Code Authority' s protest of January 28th, 1935, 
referred to herein, be sustained,' 

"20, An exemption from, or a stay of, maximum hour' provisions of 
the Code which permit work beyond maximum hours is a temporary modifica" 
tion of the Code provision effective for a limited time in lieu of an 
actual aiendmcnt to meet the particular conditions for ?/hich the exemp- 
tion or stay may be granted, 

"(a) It follows that such temporary modifications of the Code 
must be guarded by suitable conditions, in order that such modifications 
may not be used for the purpose of decreasing employment or for reclass- 
ification of employees a,t a lo- er rate, 

"(b) Means to so guard such temporary modifications may con- 
sist of the following: 

"(l) The Compliance Division or other suitable agency 
might be instructed to send its representatives into o.:.th plant to check 
both the work and the payrolls, where men arc worked in excess of the 
maximum hours of the Code under a given exemption or stay, to determine 
and reoort that the privilege granted is not used to decrease employment 
while working undue overtime and thereby not putting on sufficient men. 
It is thought this method would be a nuisance and expense to the ship- 
yards and has not been followed: 

"(3) Another means is to act through economic inducement, 
such as the subject provision that not less than time and one-half be paid 
for ^^ork beyond the maximum hours of the Code, This automatically acts to 
induce a shipyard to hire more men instead of i^orking a smaller force on 
undue overtime and paying them time and one-half for overtime so worked, 

"(3) No other effective nerns, that is not of a nuisance 
nature, is knoTm that will guard this situation of the modification of 
the Code by exemptions or stays. The time and one-half provision has un- 
doubtedly worked tov/ard an increase in employment and toward a curbing of ', 
undue overtime, 

9732 



-299- 

"(4) The shi-nbuilders have made no constructive suggestion 
as to means for guarding such tcm-oorary nodifications of the Cede in lieu 
of the subject provision, which they protested, 

"21, I recomend the protest of the Shipbuilding and Shi-:irepairing 
Industry Comnittee and request for deletion of .provision in exemptions 
and pai'tial stays granted, pertaining to the reauireinent that at least 
time and one-half be paid for all hours '"orked in excess of the maximum 
weekly hours of the Code incorporated in Administrative Orders Nos. 2-6, 
2-16, 2-19, 2-25, 2-28, 2-29, and 2-31, be ended. 

"I, therefore, recommend for your signature the apioroval of the Order,' 



9732 



-300" 

4 . Oth er Administrative Actions and Agen cies 

a. grade Practice Comi?! JAts Corimittee 

February 14, 1934, The Code .aithority set u^i the Trade Practice 
Complaints Coi2":'.ittee as -oer the i-ollowing excerpts from the liinutes 
(Reference: pa.5:os 1 ani: 3, i'lirratcs, Deput^'^s Files). 

"The Chairiiir.n py.plained in co-:isidc-raolG dot-.il to the niemoers 
of the SMp "building and Thiprcpairing Industry its status with 
respect to the sotting up of coyxiittees to deal with Trade 
Practice Complaints and La'oor Complaints as provided for in tlie 
Manual for Adjustment of Complaints, Bulletin #7, issuea "by the 
national Kecovery Adriinistrf:..tion, 

"After discussion, upon motion "by S. W. ¥al:eman, seconded "by 
Eooert Haig -and u^ianimously carried the follov/ing resolution 
v.'as adop;bed: 

'Tmt a, Trade Practice Complsiints Co'L.dttee "be 
organized and set up to "be comprised of the six 
Industry I.Iem"bcr3 and the Adinini strati on member 
of the Code Authority. ' 

Therefore, the mem'bers constituting this Committee are; 

H. G. Smith, President, National Council of Americo.n 

Ship'builders. 

Roger "Jilliarns, Vice President, Nemort ITews Ship- 
building and Dry Dock Company. 

Rohert Haig, Vice President, Sun Ship'building 2c Dry 

Dock Company, 

S. 17, ITakeman, Vice President, Icthlehem Shi}: "building 

£: Iry Dock Corap.any. 

W. H. Crcr'nauser, president, Ainerican Shi ;n "building Com- 
pany. 

Joseph Haag, Jr., President, Todd Dry Dock Engineering 

P'. Repair Co. 

Ar"ba E. Kar'vin, Acministration iJem'ocr of Code Ar.thority 

without vote "but \7ith veto, sxib- 
ject to reviev/ "by NRA. 

"In order tn fuxther the v/ork of the Trac'e Praxtice 
Coivimittce the Code Authority passed a resolution tjia.t: 

The Trade Practice Complaints Committee "be author- 
ized to set up divisional, regional, or local In- 
dustrial Adjustment At.-,cncies or :.se existing Rational, 
District and Local Area Comxnittees orii,anized and 
functioning imder t'ne Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing 
Indxistry Code, 

April 4, 1954, Administr-vtivc, Order .■J-12A was issued in letter 
form addressed to C. C. Kncrr, Secretai-y, Code Authority, from K. M. 
Simpson, Division Aduiinlctr:;.tor , Division 1, as follov/st (Reference: 



3732 



-301- 

Code Record Section, Deputy's Ziles, cjiC. Kdii-Liit E-12A, Air:)endix.) 

"V/e have oxanined the proposals outlined in a letter from 
Mr. Art)a B. Ilarvin, dated Mr'.rch 6, addressed to Deputy Administrator 
J. 3. IVeaver, and the followint.,- naiaed persons are recognized as 
niemljers of the iTavle Practice Complaints Committee for your Industry; 

H. Cr. Smith, Presiccent, National Council of American 

Shi^uuilders, 11 Broa.dway, Now Yorli, N.Y. 
Ho^-er V'illiams, Vice President, Nevfport Hews Shiphuilding 

and Dry Dock ConpanyT 90 Broad Street, New York, N.Y. 
Joseph Haar;, Jr., President, Eodd Dry Dock Engineering & Repair, 

Pt. of 23rd St"., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
V/.'"H. Gerhauss];, President, Aaerican Shipbuilding, CoLipany, Cleveland, Ohio 
P.o'aert Haig, Vice-President, Sun Shiphuilding & Dry Dock Company, 

Chester, Pennsylvania. 
S. ¥. '.'akenan, Vice-President, Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation 

Ltd., Quincy, l,Iassachusetts . 
Arba 3. Marvin A(?^iiini3tr>:'.tion iiepresenta,tive ol the Code 

Authority, 277 Park Ave., New York, N.Y. 

"You are hereby, authorized to handle traae practice complaints 
in the first instance. This authorization is granted with the under- 
standing that such complaints will be handled on a National basis, 
with the Tra:;.e Practice. .Complaints. CoLimittee a-uthorized, to set up 
regional or local adjustment agencies,, or us.e available agencies in 
The Industry as fact. finding and advisory, bodies. .If,, in the future, 
it should b.e dee.med advisable for such, regional or local agencies 
to adjust complaints in, the fir.'^t instance, specific authorization OTj.st 
be requested for this purpose." 

1. Reference is made to memioranduin, April 4, 1934, to K. 
M. Simpson.^ Division Administrri.tor, from J. B. V/eaver, Deputy Adjnin- 
istrator, (Reference:, Volume, Order 2-12A, Code Record Section and 
Deputy's, Piles) from which the folli^wing is excerpted. 

"On l.Iarch 7th we submitted plans for a Trade Practice 
Complaints Cov.niiittee for the above Industry to the Code 
Authority Organization Committee, and requested that the 
Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee be 
granted permission to handle trade practice complaints 
in the first instance. 

"Pavorable reports were iliade by the various members 
of this Cnmi.-dttee, but before final action was taken by 
the Commitee they were instructed to retiorn all requests 
tortile -Karioiis Industry Divisions in keeping with the new 
procedure outlined in Office Orders 74- and 75. 

"I feel th^t authorization should be granted to the 
Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Coi.imittee to 
handle trade practice complaints in the first instance 
T/ith the understanding that the Trcde Practice Compiaints 
Ccmrrdttee, as organized on February 14, 1934-, be recog- 
nized and authorized to set ixp re.gional and local e.djustment 

9732 



-305- 

apencies, or use available agencies in the Industry as advisory 
and fo.ct finding bodies. If, in the future, it should be deemed 
a,dvisahle for these regional or local agencies to handle trade 
practice com-olaints in the first instance, special authorization 
should be requested for this purpose." 

Zeforence is made to letter, March 6, 1934, to J. B. Weaver, De- 
puty Adniinistrator, from Arba B. Marvin, Administration Eepresenta,tive, 
(Reference: Volume, Order 2-12A, Code Record Section and Deputy's 
?iles) from vdiich the follov/ing is excerpted. 

"It is to be noted that the personnel of this Committee is 
•lOt identical with that of any committee in this Industry hereto- 
fore authorized to handle trade practice complaints ' on reference 
cjad it is not the intent that the proposed new Committee shall 
tal:e to itself compla.ints on reference which since October 28, 1933, 
have been delegated to District and to Local Jirea Committees in the 
Industry. It is the intent that the proposed ne\7 Committee shall 
take over the responsibility in the first instnjice of such earlier 
coaplaints on reference and that the reoorts of the District and 
regional Area Committees shall be ma.de to the oro'oosed nei7 Com- 
nittee ojid then relayed by the latter to the Rational Recovery 
■■ AcV.iinistration. 

"Action on complaints in the first instance by this proposed 
Trade Practice Comolaints Committee is to be national in scope. By 
approva„l of the Code Authority now obtained, said Committee may 
set up divisional, regional or local Industrial Adjustment iigencies 
and tLse available agencies in the Industry such as existing trade 
associa.tions. The present intent is to utilize to the fullest 
possible extent the four District Committees and the fifteen or 
more Local Area Coi.miittees tabulated on the accompanying chart, but 
for the time being and until such divisional, regional ob local In- 
dustrial Adjustment Agencies have demonstrated their capacity to 
handle complaints on reference, the said proposed new Committee is 
to receive all trade practice complaints in the first instance and 
then use its discretion and judgment in referring anj^ -of those 
conplaints to one or another of the available Industrial Adjustment 
Agencies as occasion may arise." 

The foregoing reference to October 28, 1933 was no doubt a typo 
graphical error. There was no Code Authority meeting on that day, but 
there was a meeting October 2, 1933, during which the Rules and Re- 
gulations v.'ere approved by the Code Authority. 

Reference is made to memorandum L'arch 22, 1934, to Dr. E. 
Christopher I.ieyer from Theodore Voorhees of the Legal Division, (Re- 
ference: Volume, Order 2-12, Code Record Section and Deputy's Files) 
of which the following is excerpted. 



9732 



-303- 

"L.liava examined the. rules and regulations for t.ie 
adi.iinistration of the above code and the other papers 
with regard to the handling of tra.c.e practice complaints 
and I am of the opinion that the code coi.mittees should 
be permitted to handle trade practice complains in the 
first instance. 

"Vrhile the r-olcs in this Industry are not particularly 
similar to the sug^restions in Bulletin 7 for Industrial 
Adjustment Agencies, I thin!: that it would be a, great mis- 
take where an Industry has set up machinery for compliance 
which is working effectively, for the Administration 
to force the Industry to adopt an entirely different 
syster.i. In other words it seems to me that unless it 
appears tlmt the system ^f handling trade practice 
complaints is inadequate or unfair we should approve 
the set-up and allow the Industry to handle complaints. 

■ "If you agree with me and propose to permit to handl- 
ing of such cornplaints I suggest that you be particularly 
careful to confine your approval to the handling of com- 
plaints and that you do not permit the Industry to infer 
that the rules and reg-ulations 'approved anc. effective 
October 2, 1333' are approved by the Administration. 
Perhaps these rules have been approved by the Deputy Ad- 
ministrator. They contain many rather drastic provisions, , 
• however, and I do not think thv.t the Code Authority Organ- 
ization Committee should a /lear to be sanctioning these 
provisions unless they were carefully sfudied." 

llo plan of Procedure for Handliiig Trade Practice Complaints 
was approved in the subject order 2-12A. The Rules and Regulations and 
the ciiart of the District and Local Areal .Convnittees was submitted and 
incorporated in the volumes, and it may be assiuned that the Adminis- 
trative provisions of these Rules and Regxilations received taci* 
approval in that no exception was taJcen to them e ven v/hen pointed out 
in the letter from Arl^a 3. l.iarvin hereinbefore quoted and bound in the 
volumes. 

As to oualifications of the members of the Committee.. It 
is the identical list of members of the Code Authority which was 
elected by the Industry as a whole as hereinbefore set forth and more- 
over the author loiows these individual men are the actual heads of 
active operation of the respective large shipyards set forth as their 
affiliations. 

April 24, 1934. L.Ieeting of the Code Authority, The 
following action was talcen (Reference: page 13, I.iinutes, Deputy's Ziles): 

"Trade Practice Comolaints Committee 

"The Chair;nan announced that puarsuant to authority contained in a 
letter of April 4, 1934 from K. M. Sin^son, the Trade Practice Complaints 
Committee v/as duly organized; today but at the present time -has no report 
to make to the Code Autlwrity. 

3732 



''Mr. Marvin drew the attention of the CocLe A"uthority--to 
a letter dated April 12, 1934 from Lr. K. M. Simpson relative 
to an Inter- Indus try practice Hele,tionship Coivimittec to be ap- 
pointed to meet with similar Trade Practice Committees iinder 
such other codes as experience proves to he sufficiently re- 
lated to require coordination for the purpose of formulating 
fair trade practices between such related codes. 

"Upon motion of Ivir. S. W. Wakeraan and seconded by l.Ir, 
Hoger Williams the Trade Practice Complaints Committee of 
the Shipbuilding and Shiprepa.iring Industry was designated 
as the Committee to meet v/ith such other Conniittees as out- 
lined above." 

Mr. H. Gerrish Smith, Chairman of the subject committee and also 
the Code Authority, was requested from time to time to develop adequate 
plans of Procedure for handling Trade Practice Complaints, but it was 
delayed awaiting the amended code. However, the author addressed Mr. 
Smith ilovember 20, 1934-, (Eeference: Deputy's Files) as Follows: 

"Last week I sent to Mr. Knerr, your Secretary, 
multiple copies of two diff^.rent plans for handling 
Ttade Practice Complaints. • 

"Reference is made to the Division Administr;itor ' s Order 
dated April 4, approving the Trade Practice CoiTiivdttee . It is noted 
that this Order did not contain the very pertinent paragraph in Mr. 
Arba B. Marvin's Mninistration Member, memoranduivi dated March 5 to I.ir. 
J. B. V/eaver, Deputy Administro.tor as follows: 

'In general the procedure to be .followed 
by. the Trade Practice Complaints • Committee 
here proposed is that vdiich appears in IIRA 
Bulletin IIo . 7, page 36, section 4'. 

"It is now required that a plan for a Trade Practice 
CoEipraints Comr:dtte.e be aiproved by the Division Adminis- 
trator. The plan follov/s Bulletin No. 7, bxxt is more 
complete in setting forth the detail matter in which 
complaints are to be handled. 

"I hope you will give careful consideration to these 
plans of procedure for your Trade Practice Complaints 
Committee and have the same adopted. 

"I find no record of reports from yoixr Trade Practice 
eorirolaints .Committee to the Acljni'ni strati on, which v;as under- 
stood to have been made by the Code Authority. Will you 
pleas-c have a surm.iary made and forward with extra copies." 

Copies of the Tvio Plans of Procedure are filed in Trade Practice Folder 
Deputy's Files. They differed in the field organization provisions. 

December 20, 1934 meeting of the Code Authority the following action 
was taken (Reference: pa^.e 14, Minutes, Deputy's Files): 

9732 



-305- ■ 

"By-Lav/s - (Code Authority 

(Trace Practice Ccinplaints Committee 

"The Chairman reported that I.lr. II. Hewton Whittelsey had forwarded 
to the Clmiruan of the Code Authority proposed by-lav/s covering the 
operation if the Code Authority and also for the operation of the 
Trade Practice Cor.plaints Coraniittee and upon motion ty i.lr. A. B. 
Homer, nnconded by Hr. iloger 'Jilliams ooth 'jubjects v»rere to be ;ef erred 
to the Coumi.ttee on- Code Hevision for study and report thereon." 

January 17, 1955 meeting of the Code Authority the Plan 
was ajain on the agenda but the discussion became involved with the 
Rules and Ees'.ulations and no action 'vas taken (Reference: Llinutes 
Deputy's Files) . 

Pebruary 13, 1955. ^'he Author a/;:ain addressed Mr.' Smith 
as follov/s: 

"On November 13 I sent to Mr. C C Knerr, your 
Secretary, ajid later v/rote yo'i on November .20, in 
re^;ard to this matter. 

"You have a Trace Practice Coirimittee set up and 
approved, but until your :3lan of Procedui*e is adopted 
this .CouTinittee cannot properly function. 

"This Plan of Procedure, the form of v/hich I sent 
you, is in accordance with the policy of the Compliance 
Division and includes in the Plan the method hy v/hich 
complaints that cannot be adjusted by' your Trade Prac-^ 
tice Committee may be sent forward to the Comtjliance 
Division of the N.R.A. and thereby bring in the aid' 
the Administration can -jive in the enforcement of 
Trade Practice. 

"Will you please bring these up before your Code 
Auth'->rity meeting aiid have them passed. I believe 
they are now in the hands of the Code Couii.dttee." 

As to the activities of the subject committee there v/as 
little left of fair trade practices soon after the comi.dttee was appointed. 
The Code only provided as follows; 

■ " 7-"-UiiPAIR I.S;TH0DS OP C01.IPETITI0N 

"To accomplish the 'oui-^jose contemplated by this Act, the members 
signatory to this c^de agree that the following practices are hereby 
declared to be tmfair methods of competition: 

"(a) To sell any products (s) or service (s) bel^w 
the reasonable cost of such product (s) or service (s). 

"(l) Por this pujrpose, cost is defined as the 
cost of materials plus an adequate ejiiount of 
overhead, including an ajnount for the use of 

9752 



-306" 

any pl8,nt facilities employed as determined ty 
cost accoujiting metliocls recognised i.. the in- 
dustry (and approved "oy the co;.imittee constituted 
for the enforcer.ient of this code as provided in 
Secf ion 8 (a) ) . 

"(h) To give or accept rebates, refunds, allowances, 
unearned discounts, or special services directly or in- 
directly in connection T/ith any work, performed or to 
receipt hills for insurance work until payment is made." 

The Rules and Eej.'r^u.lations from Article VII v^cre intended 
to amplify the code provisions, as hereinbefore set forth, these Rules 
and Re^^ations were adopted October 2, 1933, but were not subnutted 
to the adminic;tration on c^dvice of the Deputy in chtrin-e of the Code 
(Reference: pa;:^e 2, Minutes, October 2, 1933, Deputy's Piles.) Their 
legality bejan to cruiTible Feur^Jai-y 6, 1934 in raem6rand"'ain to C-eori^^'e 
H Shields III, Iccictant Deputy Administrator, from Howard F. Ralph, 
Assistant Counsel (Reference: Deputy^ s Riles), •'■here appears no 
record, however, of the Code Authority bein^; informed accordingly, 
prior to their appointment of the subject coinmittee. 

April 30, 1934 letter to J. B. V/eaver, Deputy Administrator 
from H. Gerrish Smith, Chairman of the Code Authority, reouestcd a 
legal interpretation of the Rules and Regulations for the .guidance of 
the subject co:ri..dttee . (Reference: Trade Practice Folder, Deputy's Files). 

The reply was made by letter. May 18, 1934, to H. Gerrish 
Smith, Chairman, from H. Nev;ton VAiittelsey, Assistant Dejmty Administrator 
(The author joined N.R.A. organization April 24, 1934) (Reference: 
Trade Practice Folder, Deputy's Files). Lxcerpts from the letter are 
as follows: 

"In reply to yotir letter to Mr. J. B. Y/eaver dated 
April 30, v/hich has just come to my hands, in regard 
to the Trade Practice CoLu.iittee on nuestions arising 
pertaining to the Code of Fair Coi.metition and Trade 
Practice of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Indus- 
try. ■ 

"This matter was the subject of a letter I wrote 
to Mr. Arba B. Marvin on May 10 as follows: 

'I am informed by our Assistant Counsel as follows; 

"1. Replying to your question number one it is 
obvious that the Committee should not tal:e .action 
on complaints filed solely on the By-Laws that 
were in effect for a few v/eeks in the suiiiiner of 
1953 and v/ere v/holly discarded and abandoned. 

"2. Replying to your question nwnber two that 

ComTiiittee should only take action on coniplaints 

filed on the Rules and Regulr.tions as issued where 

such complaints are based on provisions v/ithin the Code."' " 

9732 



-307- 

Reference is uiade to letter, September 26, 1934, to Jacques J. 
Reinstein, Atsistant for Code Authorities, from H. Gerrish Smith, 
Cliairmaa .of -the Code Authnyity. (Reference: Trade Practice Folder, 
Deputy's Files) The letter is explanatory of the situation at the 
time and is excerpted as follows: 



"Receipt is aclmowledged of your letter of September 
13, addressed to the Secretary of the Shipbuilding an 1 
Shiprepairing Industry .Coimnittee, concerning conpliance 
activities of our Code Authority. 

"This Industry has operated under a Code and a set of 
Rules and Regulations, drawn up by its Code Authority in 
cooperation with and approved by its Deputy Adininistrator. 

"Prora time to time an occasion trade-practice com- 
plaint was submitted to the Code Authority that provisions 
of the Rules and Regulations had been viblated. The com- 
plaints were brought to the attention . , of the Trade Prac- 
tice Complaints Committee at a meeting on April 24th at 
which time the vari-^us comnlaints in Question were considered. 

"There had arisen in the meantime some doubt as to the 
legality of the Rules and Regulations as adopted by the 
Code Authoi'ity saiC the various complaints, therefore, 
were laid on the table v;ith a request that the Ifational 
Recovery Administration be ashed to render a decision as 
to the legality of them. Accordingly, a letter was writ- 
ten to ITRA under date of April 30th , and under date of 
May 18th v/e received a reply from Mr. H. N. V/hittelsey, 
Assistant Deputy Administr...tor of the Shipping Section, 
as per copy •. enclosed. The Riiles and Regulations were 
dravm, as shown, to ccver the tra,de-practice provisions 
of paragraphs 7 and 8 of the code. This Office has found 
no way, however, in proving there has been a code viola-- 
tion of the Rules and Regulations,, so that there are •n 
file at the present time no claims that this office can 
show to be a violation of the Code itself. The total 
number of such complaints under the Rules and Regulations 
that v/ere submitted is twenty-eight (28)." 



9732 



"308- 
b . Lati or Corn-plaints Committee s 

Industrial Relations Committee for the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Industry vias originated by resolutici of the 
Code Authority at meeting held J/arch 15, 1934 (Reference: 
page 10, I/inutes, Deputy's Files). The Resolution is as 
follows: ; .. 

"There shall be constituted by appointment of the 
Administrator for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepair- 
ing Industry an Industrial Relations Committee, to 
be composed of seven (?) members: three (3) to be 
nominated by the Code Authority to represent the 
employers, three (3) to be nominated by the Labor 
Advisory Board of the National Recovery Administra- 
tion to properly represent the employees in the in- 
dustry, and one (l) to be selected by the other six." 

Administrati /e Order ?-8, I'arch 26, 1934, signed by 
Hugh S. Johnson, Administrator, appointed three Industry Mem- 
bers nominated by the Code Authority. (Reference: Code Re- 
cord Section, Deputy's Files and Exhibit K-8, Appendix.) 
Excerpts from the Order are as follows: 

"AlID raEREAS, the following persons have been nominated 
by the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee: 

Lawrence Y. Spear, Electric Boat Company, 

Groton, Connecticut. 
George H. Bates, United Dry. Docks, 

New York City. 
John B. Woodward, Newport News Shipbuilding 

and Dry Dock Company, Newport 

News, Virginia. 

"NOW, THEREP'ORE, I, Hugh S. Johnson, Administrator for 
Industrial Recovery, do hereby order that tne above named 
persons be and they are hereby appointed and constituted mem- 
bers to represent employers on the Industrial Relations Comm- 
ittee for said Industry." 

Administrative Order 2-12, April 4, 1934, signed by 
Hugh S. Johnson, Administrator, appointed three Labor Members 
to the Comnittee, nominated by the Labor Advisory Board (Ref- 
erence: Code Record Section, Deputy's Files and Exhibit 
K-12, Appendix.) Excerpts from the Order are as follows: 

"AND WHEREAS, the following persons have been nominated 
by the Labor Advisory Board: 

Arthur 0. Wharton, President, International 

Association of Ii'achinists . 
Joseph S. McDonagh, Legislative Representative 

of the International Brotherhood of 

Electrical Workers. 



9732 



-S09- 

rilliairi. A. Calvin, Vice President of the Inter- 
national brotherhood of Boilermakers 
and Iron Shipbuilders. 

"now, THEREFORE, I, Hugh 3. Johnson, Administrator for 
Industrial Recovery, do hereby order that the atove 
named persons "be and they are hereby appointed and con- 
stituted members to represent employees on the I: dustrial 
Relations Com.mittee for said Industry." 

Adm.ini strati ve Order t.~13, April 6, 1934, signed by Hugh 
S. Johnson, Administrator, appointed James Swann in place of 
George H. Bates, resigned (Reference: Code Record Section, 
Deputy's Files and Exhibit K-13, Appendix). Excerpts from the 
Order are as follows: 

"AlvTD WHEREAS, George H. Bates, who, pursuant to the 
provisions of said resolution, was on March 26, 1934, 
appointed a member to represent employers on the Ind- 
ustrial Relations Committee of said Industry, has sub- 
mitted his resignation as such member. 

"NOW, THEREFORE, I, Hugh S. Johnson, Administrator for 
Industrial Recovery, do hereby order that James Svrann 
be and he is hereby appointed and constituted a member 
to represent employers on the Industrial Relations 
Committee for said' Industry." 

Administrative Order 2-21, Aug'ast 15, 1934, signed by 
Hugh S. Johnson, Administrator, approval recommended by Barton 
W. Murray, Division Administrator, December 2, amended pre- 
vious orders relating to the numbers of the committee as per 
the following excerpt (Reference: Code Record Section, Deputy's 
Files and Exhibit K-21, Appendix): 

"UOW, THEREFORE, I, Hugh S. Johnson, by virtue of 
authority vested in me, do hereby order that my pre- 
vious orders of March 26, 1934, and April 4, 1934, 
whereby I appointee the Industry and Employee members, 
respectively, of the Industrial Relations Committee 
for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry, be 
amended by omitting the provision requiring the selec- 
tion by the Industrial Relations Committee of a seventh 
(7th) m.ember." 

The full membership of the subject committee was there- 
fore as follows: 

Lawrence Y. Spear, Electric Boat Company, 
Groton, Connecticut. 

James Swann, Hew York Shipbuilding?' Corpora- 
tion, 420 Lexin.!ton Avenue, 
New York City. 



9732 



-310" 

John B. Woodi7a,rd, :Te\7port News Shiptailding 
and Dry Dock Company, Newport 
News, Virginia. 

Arthur 0. Y.liarton, President, International 
Association of Machinists . 

Joseph S. i;cDonr.gh, Legislative Eepresentative 
of the International Brotherhood 
of Electrical 7/orkers. 

^(Tilliam k. Calvin, Vice President of the In- 
ternational ?rotherhood of Poiler- 
makers and Iron Shipbuilders . 

Adr.inistrative Order 2-30, January 17, 1935, signed hy y. A. 
Harrinrji, Adjninistrative Officer, appointed Joseph W. Hart to serve in 
place of James Swan, resigned, as follows (Reference: Code Record 
Section, Deputy's Jiles ^.nd Exhihit K-SO, Appendix): 

"That the resL~nation of James Swan as a memher of the In- 
du-strial Relations Ccmraittee for the Shiphuilding and Shiprepairing 
Industry to represent employers be and hereby is accepted and that 
Joseph ".'. Hart be and he hereby is appointed and constituted a 
member to represent employers on tae Industrial Relations Committee 
for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry. 'i 

Reference is made to memorandum, January 10, 1935, to li. A. Harriman, 
Administrative Office, from E. Newton Thittelsey, Assistant Deputy 
Administrator, (Reference; 2-30 Order Volume, Code ...ecord Section and 
Deputy's Files) excerpted as follows; 

"3. The Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee 
have duly nominated i:r. Joseph ^. Hart as a member of the Industrial 
Relations Committee, effective January 14, 1935, and have made re- 
quest he be duly appointed. 

"11. I have met I;Ir. Joseph 1. Hart, Assistant to the National 
Covjicil of American Shipbuilders and discussed with him the affairs 
of this Committee and the problems of the Shipbuilding Industry 
pertaining to Labor Complaints and Labor Disputes. Prom his back- 
ground and experience, I believe he will be a desirable, efficient 
ajid suitable member to represent Industry on this Committee and I, 
therefore, recommend his appointment." 

The address of Joseph ". Hart is National Council of American Ship- 
builders, 11 Broadway, New York, N. Y. 

The qualification of the Industry Members is by long experience 
with each of the respective shipyards with which they were affiliated as 
hereinbefore set forth, except that of Joseph V7. Hart, whose qualifi- 
cation has been set forth hereinbefore. The qualification of the Labor 
Members is through their long experience with labor matters and in their 
present duties as officers of the respective labor associations set forth 
with each of their names. 

1 . Development of the Indu strial Relatio ns Committee for 
the Shi'obuilding and Shiprep air ing Industry, and Pl?n for Adjustments . 

9732 



-511- 

The first action toward the orr^anization of an Industrial Re- 
l-^tions Conmittee was at the meetinfi- of the Code Authority held Sept- 
emter ?7 , 1934 (^.eference: page 2, I'inutes, Deputy's Piles). Excerpt 
from the minutes is as follows: 

"t'r. S. W. Wakeman vas assigned a Committee of one to 
draw up a plan for the handlin,-: of Labor Problems and to re- 
port back at next Code Committee meeting." 

October 9, 1933 meeting of the Code Authority discussed the subject 
(Reference: page 2, fc-inutes, Deputy's Files). Excerpt from the minutes 
is as follows: 

"Procedure for H;ndlin,3: Labor Disputes 

"This question was discussed at length as to what kind of an 
organization should be set up to handle disputes within the in- 
dustry. The Code Committee has before it, at the present time, 
two suggestions from members of the industry and one suggestion 
from Ur . Joseph Franklin. -The various plans will be considered 
and discussed at a later meeting." 

October 25, 1933 meeting, of the Code Authority discussed the sub- 
ject (Reference: page 3, Finutes, Deputy's Files). Excerpts from the 
minutes are as follows: 

"Labor Representation 

"The question was also discussed as to how labor should be 
represented in the administration of labor disputes arising under 
the code and as several other plans had been previously suggest- 
ed, ^'r. J. S. McDonagn presented the following as another method 
of procedure. 

'For the purpose of dealing with all questions and 
complaints arising-: out of labor conditions in the ship- 
building and shiprepair yards, there shall be established 
a National Committee consisting of seven; one to be ap- 
pointed by the Admdnistrator of the.K.R.A.; three to be 
selected by the shipbuilders and the shiprepairers ; and 
three to be selected by the Metal Trades .Department of 
the A.F. of L. with the approval of the President of the 
American Federation of Labor. Such National Committee 
shall have authority to take up and dispose of all labor 
questions coming to it from the employers or employees 
of any shipbuilding or shiprepair yard, or from any of 
the divisions and sub-divisions into which the ship- 
building and shiprepriring industry may be divided.' 

"This miatter is to be tal^en under advisement." 

November 8, 1933 meeting of the Code Authority discussed the sub- 
ject (Reference: page 2, I/:inutes, Deputy's Files). Excerpts of the 
minutes are as follows: 



9732 



-512" 
"M ethod For Handling La"bor Di sputes 

"Mr. Davis called the attention of the Code Committee to the 
lack of a committee within the industry to settle labor disputes. 
He cited the method adopted in the Bituminous Coal Code as being 
an example of rhat another industry has done. 

"The Chairman reminded Mr. Davis that tv/o members of the Code 
Committee had filed sugi^'ested plans and that a plan was on record 
presented by I'v. I.'cDona^h and by Mr. J. A. Franklin and that the 
industry had this matter continually in mind but to date had come 
to no agreement as to whether any plan would be suitable. The 
matter is still open and having the consideration by the industry 
members of the Code Committee- 

"Mr. Davis stnted that any plan adopted would have to have 
the approval of G-enernl Hugh S. Johnson." 

January 4, 1934 meeting of the Code Authority discussed the sub- 
ject (Reference: pages 11 and 12, Minutes, Deputy's Files). Excerpts 
of the minutes are as follows: 

" Tentativ e Plan for Handling Labor Disputes Head.iustment of 
Hours, VJagner Committee 

"A tentative plan for a Labor Committee within the Ship- 
building and shiprepairing Industry was discussed for sometime 
with Mr. Shields and later with Mr. Davis. There was also dis- 
cussion with Mr. Davis as to the pending report of the National 
Labor Board upon the question of uniform hours in the perform- 
ance of all work in the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing industry. 
Mr. Davis informed the Committee that it was anticipated that 
the report of the National Labor Board would recommend 40 hours 
a week for the industry but that such a recommendation would be , 
contingent upon acceptance by the industry of some plan for the 
handling of labor disputes and complaints. Without commitment 
by the members of the Comm.ittee at the meeting there was lengthy 
discussion of tne tentative plan which developed the desirability 
of some changes. Mr. Davis offered to rewrite the plan to pro- 
vide for such changes and to send the revised plan directly to 
the members of the Code Committee for their further consideration 
in order that the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry might 
consider such revised plan and decide upon the action they would 
take regarding it." 

The foregoing alleged statement attributed to W.H. Davis, Deputy 
Administrator, is the basis for the contention of the Shipbuilders that 
they were to receive the 40 hour week if they would set up the Indus- 
trial Relations Committee as they have verbally stated to the author. 

The tentative Flan for a Labor Committee before referred to was 
dated December 1, 1933 and titled "Preliminary Flan Proposed by a Sub- 
committee of Shipbuilders and Shiprepairers for Handling of Questions 
and Disputes Arising in the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry, 
involving Wages, Hours of Labor, or other differences between Employees 

9732 



and Employers" (Reference:, Industiial Relations Committee Folder, 
Deputy's Files). ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 

February 14, 1934 meeting of the Code Authority further discussed 
the sutject (Reference: pages'l, 2, 3, Minutes, Deputy's Files). 
Excerpts from the Minutes are' as fellows: 

"Mr. TT.H, Davis, unde?r dato of February 1st, wrote a 
letter to the Chairman of the Code Committee, stressing the 
importance of immediately formini? an appropriate committee to 
handle labor 'complaints, as in the absence of such a comm.ittee 
the NRA vrould be compelled to refer such questions as do arise 
to the State Director of the Notional Emergency Council. There- 
upon tne Code ComjEittee took londer consideration the formation 
of committees to handle Trade Practice Complaints and Labor Com- 
plaints. 

"The definition of Labor Complaint is <iven in Bulletin 
,f7 as follows: 

'The term, "labor complaint" wherever used in 
this manual (Bulletin ff?) refers to a com- 
plaint alleging a violation of the labor pro- . 
visions of a Code.' 

" Committee to Consider L abo r Complaints 

"The Manual for Adjustment of Complaints (lulletin #7) page 
24, provides a method for the handling of Labor Complaints. There 
was considerable discussion, as to the functions of this committee 
and the duties of. same. . 

"It was the oninion of the Code Authority that a committee 
should be organized to handle labor complaints and upon motion by 
VJ.H. G-erhauser, seconded by S.'/*'. Wakeman, it was resolved: 

"That a Committee of Three be set up as a 
L.abor Complaints Com.mittee and that Roger 
Williams, Vice President, Newport News 
Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Company is nomin- 
ated as the Industrial Mem.ber of this 
Committee, and that Joseph S. McDonagh is 
recommended as a second member of tne com- 
miittee." 

Varch P, 1934 meeting of the Code Authority (Reference: pages 1 
and 2, Winutes, Deputy's Files). Excerpts on the subject are as 
follows: 

" Industrial Rel.ations Board 

"The Chairman reported tn.-it he was in receipt of a letter 
dated February 21, 1934 from l.'r. J. B. Weaver, Deputy Administrator, 
Shipping Section, with reference to setting up within the Industry of 
a Committee for the handlir.iSr of labor disputes to be known as the 

9732 



-514- 

' Ind-astriril delations Board'. The Administrator suggests that 
this Board should consist of six members; three to be appointed 
by the Administrator from nominations by the Labor Advisory Board 
and three to be appointed by the Code Authority to represent Ind- 
ustry, and a seventh member to be appointed by the other six mem- 
bers. 

"The contents of this letter v;ere discussed at length, and 
upon motion by Mr. Robert Haig, seconded by Mr. V/. H. Gerhauser 
the follov'ing resolution was offered and adopted. 

'That the industry set up an Industrial Relations 
Conimittee consisting of three representatives of 
Industry, three representatives of Labor, and a 
seventh member to be selected by the other six, 
with the understanding that if this Committee is 
set up, that the longer hours and other provisions 
of the report of the National Labor Board concern- 
ing hours and wages relating to the Industry be 
promptly approved by such governmental agency as 
necessary to make it effective, and with the fur- 
ther provision that the Labor Members of the Com- 
mittee be properly representative of the employees 
engaged in the Industry, and 

'Provided further, that the plan of organization of 
such a Committee be substantiallj' along the lines 
of a plan already prepared by the Industry and com- 
mented upon by I.'r. W. H. Davis and which is in gen- 
eral satisfactory to the Industry,'" 

March 15, 1934 meeting of the Code Authority (Reference: pages 
7, 8, 9, 10, Minutes, Deputy's Files). Excerpts on the subject are as 
follows: 



9732 



" Indugtrial Relations Committee 

"The Chairnan called to the attention of the Committee a letter 
dated March 10th from J.. B. Tfeaver, De-Diat5'- Administrator, in response 
to a letter of March 2d, 1934, from the Code Committee, relative to 
the set up of an Industrial Relrtions Committee. These letters vrere 
as follows: 

March 2d, 1934 
"Dear Sir: 

"The Code Authority,'' of the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Industry at a meeting held this day, 
"by majority vote, passed the following resolution: 

'That the Industry set up an Industrial 
Relations Committee consisting of three 
representatives of Industry, three repre- 
sentatives of Labor, and -a seventh member 
to be selected by the other si::, with the 
understanding that if this Corahiittee is 
set up, that tJie longer hours and other 
provisions of the report of the National 
Labor Board concerning hours and wages 
relating to the Industry be pj-j^mptly ap- 
proved bv such governmental agency as 
necessan"- to maize it effective, and with 
the further provision tho.t the Labor I.cera- 
bers of the Committee be oroperly repre- 
sentative of the employees eng-^ged in the 
Industr-/, and 

Provided further, that the plan of organi- 
zation of such a Committee be substantially 
along the lines of a plan alreacy prepared 
by the Industry and commented upon by Llr. 
V. H. Davis and which is in general satis- 
factory to the Industr;;.''. ' 

"Under the conditions outlined, the Code Auth- 
ority is prepared to appoint the Industry members 
of the Committee. 

"Sometime ago the Industry outlined a proposed 
plan for the consideration of Labor Disputes which 
plan was submitted to and comraented upon by i.ir. T7, 
H. Davis. A revised plan to provide for a Committee 
of Seven instead of a Committee of Three will be along 
the lines of the previous plan and is being prepared 
and will be submitted to you within a very few days. 

Very truly yours, 
(Signed) H. G. Smith 
Chairman. " 



"NATIONAL EECOVHEY AD" :ii:i STRATI OK 
^ASHIiJGTOF, D. C. 

March 10, 1934. 

"l.Ir. H. Gerrii^h Smith, Chairnan, 
Shiptuilding end Shiprepairing Code Committee, 
11 Broa,dway, 
New York, K. Y. 

"Dear Ilr. Smith: 

"The Labor Advisors'- Board has refused to recommend the ap^ioint- 
ment of a man to represent labor on the Labor Complaints Committee 
for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry/-. Their position is 
based on the fact that an Industrail Relations Board has been discussed 
and a E.esolution has been passed authorizing siich a Board and that 
they believe this Board should be definitely established before thej)- 
take action on the Complaints Committee. In view of the provisos att- 
ached to your Resolution authorizing an Industrial Relations Board, 
the Labor Ad^^isory Board feels that undue obstrcles are Veing placed 
before the setting up of this Board. 

"I find their refusal to appoint a nan to the Labor Complaints 
Committee indefensible. However, I do agree with them that the -oro- 
visos attached to the Industrial Relations Board set-up are out of 
order. I want to take this opportunity to inform the Code Authority 
that until such time as this Board is established, without strings 
attrched in the form of provisos, and empowered to handle not only 
labor disputes but also broad labor questions without restriction, 
this office will not consider petitions for exceptions, exemptions, 
etc. Furthermore, it cannot be expected that the Recover^'- Adminis- 
tration will amend the Code in order to clear up the hour question 
without such a Board being established although it is agreed that 
the question will not be turned over to this Board for settlement 
but rather that we will press for a decision from the national 
Labor Board and a subsequent amendment of the Code inde-oendent of 
this Board once it is established. 

"Serious doubt has been raised in my mind as to the trul],^ 
representative character of the existing Code Authority. This 
is evidenced not only by the fact that there is no representation 
from the shore shops on the Code Authority but also from the fact 
that following a conference of the members of the Industry'- located 
in and aro'und Sew York at v;hich some iraraediate amendments were 
decided upon, the Code Authority determined to delay action. 
Furthermore, the representation of the Gulf and Pacific Coasts would 
not appear to me to be entirelj'- satisfactory. The men on the Code 
Authority representing these Districts do so bv virtue of the fact 
that plants subsidiary/ to their main plants are located in these 
districts. It majr be, of course, that it is im-oossible for mem- 
bers on the Pacific and Gulf Coasts to attend meetings of the Code 
Authority. If this is the case it will -oerhaps be desirable to 
decentralize in some manner and give more loca.1 autonomy to the 
different regions. 

9732 



-317" 

"In conclusion it is my -understanding that a raeetino" of the 
Code Authority v/ill oe called immediately now that the conferences 
are completed here, to outline a plan of procGdure. It seems desirable 
either that the meeting he held hc-re or that I come to New York for it 
inasmucn as I helieve it would be mutually beneficial if I could attend 
that meeting in oraer that the Industry and myself may be -oerfectly 
clerr on our future course of action, 

"Yours very truly, 
(Signed) J. B. Weaver 

Deputy'- Administrator." 

"The Chariraan took exception to the language used in the second 
paragraph of the letter uhich reads as follors:" 

'I want to take this opportunity to inform the 
Code Aiithority that until such time as this 
Board is established, *** this office \7ill not 
consider petitions for e:cceptions, e;:eraptions, 
etc' 

"The Chairnan stnted tart the Committee is bound to send to the 
administration whatever reauests come in and tliat he did not like the 
code authority to be nut in a iiosition of not being able to send such 
requests through proper channels. 

"i:r. Weaver errplained his position in connection with request of 
the industry- for a longer work week and stated that the TRA and 
peoDle connected with it cHd not have the power to oush through de- 
cisions of the national Labor iSocrd. He ur^-ed that" the industrj^ set 
up a Board that can act on exemptions, wage rates, etc., and that a 
resolution should be adopted somewhat along the lines passed on March 
2nd but without sjiy limiting restriction. 

"Hoger williajTis asked ivir. Ueaver if we set up this Board today 
without any strings attached to it would it remove the difficulty in 
getting a cecent break on hours for the rest of the indu■str^^ i.e. 
straight ■ .36-hour week for our industry and smooth it out for excep- 
tions to the worlcing hours and which will permit Kewuort News to fin- 
ish the 'Ranger' which the government wants. Mr. J. B. 'Teaver 
replied ' It will. • 

"There was further discussion of the need for an Industrial 
Relations Committee with comjnents by Mr. Robert Haig, J. B. Weaver 
and the Chairman. 

"On motion of Mr. Robert Haig, seconded by Roger Williams, the 
following resolution was read and adopted: ^ 

'There shall be constitutea by a.p-oointment of 
the Adjninistrator for the Shi-obuilding and Shipre- 
pairing Industry'- an Industrial Relations Committee, 
to be composed of seven(7) members: three (3) to 
be nominated b'^ the Code Authority to represent the 
employers, three (3) to be nominated by the Labor 

9732 



(^ 



- S18 - 

Arlvisorj^ Soard of the national Recoveiy Adninistra- 
tion to properly represent the employees in the in- 
dustry, and one (l) to "be selected "by the other six. ' 

"i.ir. Jos. Haag, Jr. vras recorded a,s not votin.5, as the ITevr York 
and lien Jersey Dry Docl: Association r/ere not vdlling to vote in 
favor of an Industrial Helations Conraittee vrithout passing upon the 
plan finally set up for such a Committee. 

"As the original resolution provides for three industry members, 
I'r. Roger ITillians made a motion 

That the Chairman of the Code Authority he 
authorized to nominate the three industry 
members of the Inc-ustrial Relations Conrait- 
tee. 

Hotion T7as seconded by i.lr. W. H. Gerhauser. Tlie vote nas as follovrs: 
i.Iessrs. Gerhauser, TJilliams, Smith and Haig in the affirmative. 
l.Ir. Jos. Haag Jr. recorded as 'not voting'," 

;;arch 16, 1934, letter to J. B. leaver. Deputy Adxiinistrator, from 
K. Gerrish Smith, Chairman of the Code Authority, set forth the fore- 
going resolution aJid attach a "Plan for Adjustment of Complaints and 
Disputes in the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry. This plan was 
dated harch 16, 1934. (Reference: Industrial Relations Committee 
Folder, Deputy's Files) 

Harch 28, 1934. J. 3. ¥eaver. Deputy Administrator, called the 
subject committee together for its first meeting during nhich by-lans 
vrere adopted (Reference: Administrative Order 2-9A, Volume, Code 
Record Section, and Deputy's Piles). See memorandum dated March 30,1934 
to IC. v.. Simpson, Division Administrator, from J. B. Weaver, Deputy 
Adr.iinistrator, and By-La^vs bo-aiid in volumes." 

Administrative Order 2-9A, liarch 30, 1934, -in letter form address- 
ed to ?I, Gerrish Smith, Chairman of the Code Authority, signed by ( 
K. i,;. Simpson, Division Administrator, Division 1, (Reference: Code 
Record Section and Deputy's Piles) authorized the Code Authority as 
folloTr^s: 

"You- -are hereby granted authorization to handle labor 
complaints on reference, and labor disputes for a 
period of sixty days from date hereof. 

"¥ithin said time there shall be presented a complete 
plan of procedure for handling such complaints and 
disputes to the IT.R.A. for examination and approval 
by the Administrator." 

The foregoing order authorized the Code Authority and not the Indus- 
trial Relations Committee, llo record can be found \7hereby the Code Auth- 
ority delegated such authority to the Industrial Relations Committee by 
suitable formal resolution. 

9732 



-319- 



The Shipbuilders looked uv)on the subject committee as t.Leir conmittee, 
and subject to the Gode Axithority, v/hich apr)ears to be confirmed by- 
inference from the subject Order 2-9A 

Heference is mf-de to Memorandum, dated March 30, 1934, to Division 
Administrator, K. II. Simpson, Division 1, from Code Atithority Orga^niza- 
tion Committee, sii=;ned by W. Averill flarriman. Chairman, finding that 
the Code Authority is o^ualified to handle labor complaints on reference, 
and labor disputes, and recommending such authorisation be given for 
period of sixty days within which the Code Authority shall present its 
corai^lete Tjrocedure for handling such complaints aiid disputes. 
(Eeference: Order 2-9A Vol^jxne, Code Record Section an.d Deputy's Files) 

Here again it was the Code Authority and. not the Industrial Rela- 
tions Committee recommended. This caused misunderstanding and con- 
fusion, which w."s later the cause of considerable trouble and delay in 
the proper set up and functioning of the subject committee, in the 
opinion of the ^'aithor. 

Legal Division made a similar recommendation (Heference: Order 
2-9A, Volume, Code Record Section and Deput,3^'s Piles). 

April 2, 1934,. the second meeting of the Industrial Relations 
Comi-iittee was called ''oy J. .3.. TTeever, De-^uty Administrator (Reference: 
i.Iinutes, Industrial Relations Con-iittee Files). The following is 
e3:cer;oted from, the mini-ites: • 

"rir. TTinship reported that the Code Authority 
Orgajiization Committee of i'JRA had recommended that 
the Industrial Relations Conriittee oe given auth- 
ority for a -^seriod of sixt"'- days to adjust com- 
plaints on reference and disputes, during '..hich 
period the Committee wo'old be expected to complete 
an orgaJiization and develop a procedure for car- 
rj'ing on its work. This recommendation met the 
approval o.f the Administrator." 

The report just quoted is a direct contre.diction of the find- 
ings and recommendation of the Code Authority Organization Committee 
as bound in the Yol'ome Order 2-9A. 

April 11, 1934, reconvened meeting of April lOth of the Indus- 
trial Relations Committee there was considered and adopted a "Plan 
for Adjustment of Complaints and Disputes" (Reference: Minutes, 
page 3 , Industrial Relations Committee Files and Indur-trial 
Relations Committee Folder, Deputj'-'s Files). Tlie By-Laws were also 
slightly amended at this meeting (Reference: page S , I-Iinutes, 
Industrial Relations Comjnittee File). The following is excerpted 
from the minutes: 

"After full discussion a plan for adjustment of com- 
plaints and disputes was agreed. U"^on and a letter drafted 
to the Chairman of the Code Authority and the De^juty Ad- 
mini str8.tor presenting the plan. The letter with its en- 
closures was Tananimousl3'' approved and a cop'^ ord.ered 
filed in the minutes. " 
9732 



~32C- 

April 25, 19?4 meeting of the Indiistrial Relations Committee 
(Reference: Llinutes, Industrial Relations Committee Files). Excerpt 
is as follov/s: 

^'On communicating by telephone r/ith the Chariraan 
of the Code Authority it was learned that an initial 
appropriation of $3,000 had been made on 4-24-35 
toward the salary of an Executive Secretary and other 
office ex-censes. " 

April 24, 1954, dated Plan for Adjustment of Complaints and Dis- 
putes was drafted by a Sub-Committee of the Code Authoritj'- and sub- 
mitted to members cff the Code Authority by mail. !,Ir. H. .Gerrish 
Smith, Chairman of the Code Authority, in letter dated May 15, 1934 
to James Swan, Member of the Industrial Relations committee attached 
the plan (Reference: Plans for Adjustment Industrial Relations 
Committee Files). The letter reads as follows: 

■T "In connection with the propsed 'Plan for adjustment 
of complaints and disputes in the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Industry, April 24th, 1934, ' I am pleased 
to hand you herewith copies of three letters received 
from Mr. Robert Haig, Mr. W. H. G-erhauser and Mr. 
S • W . Wakeman . 

"For your information, you may also include Mr. Roger 
Williams and myself as being in favor of the plan. 

"Mr. Joseph Haag, the sixth member of the Code Authority, 
may, for the time being,- be recorded as not voting upon 
the adoption of this plan. This is in accordance with 
the action taken by him and recorded in the minutes of 
the Code Authority meeting held on March 15, 1934." 

May 16, 1934 meeting of the Industrial Relations Committee 
(Reference: Minutes, Industrial Relations Committee File), 
Excerpts from page 1 and 2 are b,s follows: 

"Mr. Swan submitted the Code Authority's plan for the 
adjustment of complaints and disputes. Tlie fact was 
brought up that the Industrial Relations Committee had 
prepared and submitted its own plan to the Code Authority 
and the Deputy Administrator, \inder date of April 11, 1934, 
and as there seemed to be differences between the two plans, 
the Executive Secretary was directed to make a study of the 
two plans to see wherein they differed. 

Excerpts from Pages 3 and 3 of the May 16, 1934 Industrial 
Relations Committee meeting are as follows: 

"Upon receiving notice, unofficially, that the Secretary 
of Labor had communicated to the Administrator the desire 
of that Department to have three governmental representa- 
tives appointed to the Industrial Relations Committee, the 
Deputy Administrator, Mr. Weaver, was interviewed. 

9732 



-521- 



It uas the feeling of the Committee that no addiiricnpl ■ 
members should he appointed; the scope and authority 
of thL"? Co;a.":ittee as at present constituted is vague and 
uncertain; the Administrator should he communicated with 
regarding a general clarification of the organization, 
purposes and authority of the Committee. 

"The Deputj-- Administrator, Mr. Weaver, volunteered to 
take such communication as the Committee might prepare, 
to the Administrator. The Chairman then directed Mr. 
lIcDonagh and I.ir. Woodward to prepare such a communication. 
The Committee recessed at 12:55 P. M. to meet again at 
2:00 F. ivl. 

"The Committee proceeded with a discussion of the tentative 
letter drawn up by Mr. McDonagh and Mr. Woodward. After full 
study, a final form was decided upon, prepared, signed by 
each member of the Committee, and delivered to the'^Deputy 
Administrator for transmittal to the Administrator. The 
letter is as follows: 

'I.;r. J. B. Weaver 
Deputy Administrator 
Shipping Section 

National Recovery Administration 
Washington, D, C. 

'Dear Mr. Weaver: 

'The Industrial Relations Committee, recently set up 
by appointment of the Administrator, has held a number of 
sessions largely devoted to develoDing its functions, or- 
ganization and prccedoire. Progress has Deon hampered by 
lack of a clear definition and understanding of the scope 
of the Committee's authority in dealing with the questions 
which it has been set up to handle. The Committee believes 
its main function to be the adjustment of labor complaints 
and disputes and related questions arising within the 
industry, including questions affecting hours of ser- 
vice, overtime ws^~e rates, and adjustment of inequal- 
ities with the object in view of removing unfair in- 
equalities as between plants in competitive territory. 

'In dealing with these matters its authority should 
be coipplete to the extent allowed uiider N.I.R.A. , sub- 
ject only to review by the Administrator. It further- 
more believes it to be the spirit and intent of the K. 
R.A. to afford to industry and labor generally the 
fullest powers permitted under the 11. 1. R.A. in dealing 
with these problems, and that the addition to the mem- 
bership of the Industrial Relations Co.mmittee of the 
Shipbiiilding and Shipreioairing Industry of representatives 
of tne Government is in violation of the intent of the 
IM.R.A., and will hinder rather than help the solution of 
the problems presented to the Committee. 



9732 



'Ine CoEiudttee \7igiifis to feel Aw® |q call Mpcjei the (Joveniii'^t 
f (T help in situations which seiim to require it, "but it re- 
spectfully protests any unnecessary goyerninent control of it» 
actions. 

'It id the further "belief of thi? Committiie tha* its 
formation should constitute it as an IndependenU j^adiciaj 
body for the purposes set forth ahove; e. coraiailjtee not S^^" 
ject to the authority or reviev/ of any Governmental ? ^ency 
or body, other than the Administrator, nor subordinate t^ 
the Code Authoritj'- of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing 
Industry in its handlings of the problems properly submitted 
to it. Under its present set-up, the Committee ha$ only 
such authority to act in labor complaints and di,spufces, and 
other matters, as is derived from authorization granted the 
Code Authority, in letter of Division Administrator W. M. 
Simpson, dated March 30th, 1934. 

'Very truly yours, 

/s/ A. 0. Wharton ^. 

JaiAes S'van f 

J. B. Woodward, Jr. 
J. S» McDonagh 
L. y. Spear 
y. A. Calvin'" 

Administrative Order 2-17A, June 5, 1934, signed by C. Et Adama, 
Division Administrator, Division 1, in letter form addressed to Arthi^r . - 
0. Wharton, Chairman of the Industrial Relations Committee, (Referenci?{ 
Code Record Section and Industrial Relations Committee Folder, Deputy'tp 
Piles) extended the authority of the subject committee as per the fol- 
lowing excerpt: 

"On March 30, 1934, authorization was granted to 
the Code Authority for the Shipbuilding and Shipre- 
pairing Indur.trj'' to handle Labor Complaints on Refer- 
ence, and labor disputes, for a period of sixty days. ^ 
It was further provided that within this time a com- 
plete plan of procedure for handling labor complaints 
and disputes should be submitted to the National Re- 
covery Administration for the approval of the Adminis- 
trator. 

"This temporary authorization is hereb-"- extended to 
the Industrial Relations Committee for the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Industry to handle labor complaints 
and labor disputes for a period ending June 30, 1934. 
Within said period the Industrial Relations Committee 
shall submit a complete plan for handling such com- 
plaints and disputes for the approval of the Administra- 
tor." 

Reference is made to raemorand'om, May 29, 1934, to K. M. 
Simpson, Division Administrator, Division 1, from J. B. Weaver, 
Deputy Administrator, (Reference; Volume Order 2-17A, Code Record 
Section and Industrial Relations Committee Folder, Deputy's Files) 
Excerp is as follows! 
9732 



• -323— ■ 

"The Industrial delations Comrnittes for this Industiy 
har> d\iring the sixty (60) day period, functioned satis- 
factorily. It is felt that authorization should be di- 
rected to this Committee to continue its good v.'ork. " 

June 6, 1954 neeting of the Industrial Relations Committee (Re- 
ference: Minute?, Industrial Relations Committee File). Excerpts are 
as follows: 

"The Chairman readletter received from Mr. C. E. Adams, 
Division Administrator, IT.R.A. , dated June 5, 1934. 

"The Committee then proceeded v'ith a, discussion of a 
plan for the adjustment of complaints and disputes, and re- 
ceived from Mr. Whittelsey, Assistant Deputj"- Admini strator, 
suggestions as to the operation of the Cotton Textile In- 
dustrial Relations Committee. 

"The Deputy Administrator, Mr. TJeaver, was heard on the 
subject of a plan and he presented his view that the panel 
system, as provided in plan of the Code Authority, dated 
April 24, 1934, was not a satisfactory -olan of procedure. 

"After discussion of the original plan of the Com- 
mittee, as submitted to the Code Authority and the 
Deputj"- Administrator on April 11, 1934, and the plan 
of Code Authority dated April 24, 1934, the Chair- 
man appointed Mr. McDonagh, and Mr. T/oodward to attempt 
to form.ulate a plan which might meet all objections." 

Reference is made to letter, June 11, 1934, to C. E. Adams, 
Division Administrator, from A. J. Doyle, Executive Secretary of the 
Industrial Relations Committee, (Reference: Industrial .Relations 
Committee Folder, Deputy's Files) from which the following is 
excerpted. 

"This will refer to ^--our letter of June 5, 1934, 
addressed to Mr. Arthur 0. T/harton, Chairman, Indus- 
trial Relations Committee, wherein you extend to June 
30, 1934, the temporary authorization of this Commit- 
tee to handle labor complaints ajnd labor disputes. I 
am informed by memorandum of the Assistant Deputy Ad- 
ministrator, Mr. Shields, that yjider the terms of Ad- 
ministrative Order IIo. X-29, abolishing 'complaints on 
reference' and establishing only 'official authoriza- 
tion,' authority of this Committee to act will expire 
on June 15th. 

"It was assumed ^oy the Industrial Relations Committee 
that the extension of its temporary authorization wo-ald 
not be affected by the Administrative Orders above re- 
ferred to. If such is not the case, it is respectfully 
requested th£-tt temporary official authorization be granted." 



9732 



Administrative Order 2-17B, June 18, 1934, in letter form addressed 
to Arthur 0. Wharton, Chairman of the Industrial Relations Committee, 
signed by Hugh S. Johnson, Administrstor (Reference: Code Record 
Section and Industrial Relations Committee Folder, Deputy's Files). The 
order is as follow 's: 

"Pursuant to a resolution dated March 15, 1934, of the 
Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee I ap- 
pointed, the employer representatives of yo\iv Committee on 
March 25, 1934, and tlie emnlovee representatives on April 
4, 1934. 

"Due to a labor emergency in the Shipbuilding and Ship- 
repairing Industry authoriz.ation to handle labor complaints 
on reference and labor disputes for sixty days was given to 
the Code Autliority on March 30, 1934. This authorization . • 
was extended to your Committee on June 5, 1934 for a period 
ending June 30, 1934. 

"The practice of handling complaints on reference was, 
however, discontinued by Administrative Order X-39, ef- 
fective June 15, 1934. 

"In vievz of the above the Industrial Relations Commit- 
tee as aiDpointed on March 26, 1934, and April 4, 1934, is 
temporarily recognized- as the agency to handle labor com- 
plaints and labor disputes for the Shipbtiilding and Ship- 
repairing Industry/ subject to the following conditions 
subsequent: 

1. That the seventh member of said Committee be 
selected at the next regular meeting of said 
Committee. 

2. That said Committee submit to this Administra- 
tion for approval before June 30, 1934, com- 
plete plans of procedure for handling labor com- 
plaints and labor disputes. 

"This recognition will terminate upon the aoriroval of 
a new code or amendments to the present Code affecting 
the Industrial Relations Committee. 

"Until further notice the headquarters of the Industrial 
Relations Committee will be in Washington, D. C. " 

June 21, 1934 meeting of the Industrial Relations Committee 
(Reference: Minutes, Industrial Relations Comhiittee File). Excerpts 
from Pages 1,2,3,4,5,6 follow: 

"The Temporarj' Chariman rend a letter received from the 
Administrator, General Jolmson. 



9732 



-325" 

"After formal discussion on the election of the Coromittee' s 
seventh member, the members took up the question of the plan 
for the adjustment of complaints and disputes; how the regional 
committees slicijld he established, and how employee representa- 
tives of aay panel, or other regional representation of the 
Ccmmittee, should he appointed. Mr. Wharton stated that he 
would not suhscribe to any form of plan v/hich might place the 
question of emioloyee representation in the liands of a compar,/ 
union. 

"Mr. Whittelsey, Assistant Deputy Administrator, came into 
the meeting at 10:30, and Mr. H. G-errish Smith, Chairman of 
the Code Authority, came in at 10! 40. 

"Letter of the Administrator, noted above in these 
minutes, was haiided to Kr. Smith for his information. 

"The situation at the Fore River Plant of the Beth- 
lehem Shipbuilding Corporsition Mas immediately taken 
up, copies of all correspondence in the case being in 
the hands of the Committee. The Executive Secretary 
read letter received from Philip H. Van Gelder. 

"The cases of the five employees mentioned in the 
above letter, who, it was alleged, had been discharged 
because of union activities, had been presented to the 
Committee on June 13 by the Deputy Administrator, Mr. 
Weaver, for immedia,te handling, preferably in the form 
of a sub-committee. The Temporary Chairman had there- 
upon a-npointed a sub-committee, consisting of Messrs. 
LicDonagh and Woodv;ard, and txie Executive Secretar:/, to 
proceed to Q,uincy, Massachusetts, to investigate the 
situg.tion. The Chairman of the Code Authority had for- 
bidden such investigation by sub-committee, however, by 
telegram of June 14, which read as follows: 

'W6 38 SEE-3C- Hew York, N.Y. June 14, 1934 
A. J. Doyle, Secretary 
Industrial Selations Gomm.ittee 
525 Investment Bldg. 

'Industrial Relations Committee! should not s:nd 
men to Eore River until plan approved by Code 
Authority for settlement of all labor complaints 
and disputes is definitely accepted and in oper- 
ation stop Fnen will you establish your offices 
in Hev.- York. 

H. Gerish Smith' 

"Mr. Smith -nresented the attitude of the Code Authority 
that the matter should have- been handled in the first in- 
staince by correspondence with the respondent company, ajid 
that no investigators or sub-comiriittees should be sent to 
any plant until the Code Authority's plan for the adjust- 
ment of complaints and disputes had been accepted and v;as 
in operation. 



9732 



-326- 

"In view of the express order of the Code Authority, 
the E::ec-ative Secretary had previously a.dviaed the Deputy 
Administrator that the Committee vas powerless to e.ct 
immediately hy suh-committee. Inasmuch as fairness 
to the men involved seemed to call for some immed- 
iate action, end as the Committee was powerless to 
act, the only alternative seemed to he to turn the 
cases over to the National Labor Board, as origin- 
ally requested by the complainant, Ban Gelder, with 
a recital of the facts involved. 

"Mr. Woodward moved that this be done, co^iy to 
be sent to the Deputy AdminiEtrat.or, pjid Van Gelder 
notified. Motion was seconded, passed by unanimous 
vote and the Secretary so instructed. 

"Telegrams of the Code Authority, directing that 
the office be established in New York were noted as 
follo'./s: 

'(A) "T[108 SER S EXTM-BG Mew fork II. Y. 12 S:34 
P 1934 June 12 P;I 3:58 , 

"A J DOYLE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY 
IiT)USTRIAL RELATIONS COIvnOTTEE 
li.TESTIvEENT 3LDG. ROOM 526 

""ITH REEERSFCE TO OUR LETTER OE APRIL 
TT7ELTTY-SIXTH AND TELEGRAM OP MAY PIF- 
TSENTH PLEASE A3PAliGE TO TRAITSESR YOUR 
OFEICS PROMPTLY TO ELE^.^N BROADWAY NE? 
YORK: CITY 

H GERRISH SMITH CHAIRIvIAN 
CODS AUTHORITY 

'(B) "W105 13 SER-3G New York NY 14 4:16 P 
1934 June 14 PM 4:42 

"A J DOYLE SECRETARY 
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COIvu/IITTEE 



526 IWESTIDilNT 3LD 
"ASHINGTON, D C 



'U-. 



"I/IY TELEGRAIvi TVJELETH STOP TPAalSFSR OFFICE 
TO NEW YORK AS O'F MONDAY JUNE EIGHTEENTH 
H GERRISH SMITH"' 



C 



97S3 



"The auestion was? discussed, Mr. S'nith statins; 
Industry's deteniration th^t the office should he 
located at 11 Broadway, F'w York City, and Mr. Tharton 
and 'At. FcDona.<?h em-ohasizing that a conraittee for the 
settle'Bent of lab'^r coiirilaints and disriutes should not 
be located in th-^- headquarters of the "^Tational Council 
of American Shi-obuilders, hut should have its o^n inde- 
t)end'5nt head offic?. 

"Mr. Whittelsey, h-'for':- leaving, exoressed the 
ho-oe that the . Coni".ittee might be able to do somethina* 
looking toward the aD-oointment o'^ its seventh Tiember, 
and that the -nembers iiight be cble to a:et toaiether and 
decide uuon a mutually satisfactory "olan f'^r the adjust- 
ment of comrilaints and dist)utes. 

"Such a nlan was a^ain discussed and th? obstacle 
encountered, on the one side, that em-oloyee re-oresenta- 
tives of 'Whatever form of regional representation, 
should be selected by the Labor Advisory Board, and on 
the other, that such re-oresentatives should be selected 
by the emtjlovees of the individual Tjlants. In view of 
the Committee's inability to reconcile the two separate 
ideas, and the advice of the Chairman of the Code Authority 
that industry would not agree to selection by the Labor 
Advisory Board, it was tentatively decided to draw uv 
separate rilans, embodying the two viewooints, and submit 
them to the Code Authority and the Deputy Administrator. 

"The Committee th°n recessed at 12:55, to meet a^-ain 
at 2:00. 

"IIiDOn comins: together at 2:00 o'clock, th^ Committee 
continued .its discussion of a -olan, and ai/i, members being 
avers^' to a disagreement which would be evident were two 
se-oarate nlans submitted, a further study was "lade. It 
was finally decided to eliminate entirely from the Com- 
mittee's TDrevious -clan, all mention and reference to re- 
ference to regional committees, on the assumiDtion that 
something mignt be devised later in the form of traveling 
re-oresentatives or investigators. Copies of the amended 
TDlan were "Drenared, and attemiot was made to locate the 
Chairman of the Code Authority for discussion of the 
amended plan. 

"The Chairman of th- Code Autrority returned to the 
meeting at 3:40 and was acouainted with the new r>lan, 
being furnished a co-oy. The '^ecutive Secretary read it 
to the m.embers for the Diaroose of a checka--'e with the 
other plan, and u-oon being informed by the Code Authority 
that -"personally, he could see no objection to it, motion 
that it be ado-ot'od was unanimously a-oDroved, a^d the 
"ilzecutiv? Secretary instructed to advise th^ Code Authority 
formally by letter, with cor)y te the Ee-outv Administrator." 



S732 



-328- 

The Plan for Adjustment of ComrjlPints and "Disputes of 
June 21, 1P34 is filed in Plans, Industrial R':^lations Co-niiittee 
File, and Industrial "delations GoTiTiittee Polder of De-outv's Files. 
This -olan was duly submitted by letter, June 22, l^S'J, to 
J. B. Vi'eaver, DeiDuty Administrator, and also to H. Gerrish Smith 
by letter, June 22, 1P34, both sifrn-d by A. J. Doyle, Executive 
Secretary of the Industrial Relations Committee (Reference: 
Industrial Relations Committee Folder, Denuty's Piles and Plans 
Folder, Industrial Relations Committee File\ 

June 18, 1°3^, letter to K. Gerrish Smith, Chairman of the 
Code Authority, from Huffh S. Johnson, Administrator (Reference: 
Industrial Relations Committee Folder, T)eT)utv's Files). Excerpts 
from the letter ar^ as follows: 

"The handling: of com-olaints on reference was discontinued 
effective June 15, 1934, by Administrative Orrler X-29. I 
have, however, recos'nized the Industrial Relations Committee 
as th'^ authorized agency of the Shi-obuildinfi- and ShiiDre-nairing 
Industry to handle labor comTjlaints and labor disputes -oending 
tne a-oriroval of a new code or amendments affecting the Indus- 
trial Relations Comraittfee. A co-oy of this letter is attached 
for your information. 

"The scoTDe and nature of the activities of the Industrial 
Relations Committee shall not be under the direction of the 
Code Authority. The Committee shall, however, continue as 
in the -oast to cooneratjo with the Code Autnorit,y in carrying 
out its functions. 

"In Administrative Crd^-r X-12, dated March 3C , 193^, I ■ 
requested all industries otjerating under aiD-oroved codes which 
do not specifically -orovide for the creation of aeencies to 
handle lebor disnutes and labor com-olaints to -oroceed in each 
case to create and Industrial Relations Committee to nandle 
both labor complaints and labor disnoutes-. In the rewriting 
of your Code wuicr. is now under consideration it will be ad- 
visable, however, to include definite -orpvisions relative to 
an Industrial Relations Committee for your Industry in wliich 
its -DOwers and duties are definitely ' outlined. If the -oresent 
Committee should qualify under the provisions of thp rewritten 
code, recosnition could be extended on the basis of such 
Torovisions." 

June 23, 1974 letter to H. Gerrish Smith, Chait.-. ^an of the 
Code Authority, from J. B. Weaver, Deputy Administrator (Reference: 
Industrial Relations Cor.;.iittee Folder, Deputy's Files). Excerpts 
from the letter are as follor/s: 

"I have at hand a plan ado-oted unanimously by the Com- 
nitteo at their meeting on June 21, 1934. This plan arpears 
satisfactor^r to me in vien of the circurastaiices, and I am 
accordingly reco:nraendinj?' to ilr. Adams, Division Administrator, 
that he a-jorove the plan and that the Com'iitte'e as no\7 con- 

9732 



-529- 

stituted be 'officially author! ", ed ' to handle labor 
conplaints and la^or dilutes for the Industry, 

"I also 'Uive a. co'^y of Ganeral Joiir.son's letter to 
you of June 18, li'34, in vr.iich he states that 'The scope 
a:id nature of the activities of the Ind\istrial Relations 
Cory.iittee shall not be under the direction of the Coc'e 
Av.thority, ' In vierr of these letters and the expressed 
statements of the Acbainistra.tor therein, I see no other 
course except to submit the plan for approval. It is nade 
clear oy the above quotation that it is not necessary for 
this plan to be a -proved by the Code Authority." 

June C6, 1934 telegrav.i to J. 3. ^leaver, Deputy Administrator, 
fron ::. e-errish Snith, Chainnan of the Code Authoritj'-, (Reference: 
Industrial Relations Comittee Folder, Deputy's ?iles) is as follows: 

"Ship bull c'infj and Shiprepairing Industn'- not satisfied 
for Industrial Relations Co^inittee to o'oerate under any 
plan that has not been definitely approved by the Industry 
iiienbers of Code Authoritj'' Stop Revised plan as acted upon 
o'j Industrial Relations Comrrdttee Jtme twenty first is be- 
i,if siibiiitted today to committee that ori.-inally drafted 
the plan for report and position of Industi-;^ on this whole 
subject T'ili be set forth in letter to Creneral Johnson Stop 
Action will be talcen as quickly as jjossible. " 

Jiuie 26, 1934 letter to General Hu£-:h S. Johnson, Adninistrator, 
fron H. Gerrish Smith, Chairman of the Code Authority (Reference: 
Industrial Relations Committ.ee Folder, De-outy's Files). Excerpts 
are as follows: 

"References (a) Letter Administrator to Code Authority June 18th. 

Aiid (b) Letter Ad-iinistrator to Industrial Relations 
Enclosures . Committee, JuJie 18th. 

(c) Letter J. Ij. leaver to Code Authority, J-'Jine 23rd, 

"Dear Sir: 

"Under date of Jujie 18th, reference (a), T/e received from 
you a letter in which yoii recited certain steps that had been taken 
towards settinfi uo an Industrial Relations Committee of seven 
members for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairins^ Industry. We also 
received with your letter 0007/ of a letter, reference (b), that 
had been addressed to hr. Arthur 0. ITnarton, Chairman of the Indus- 
trial •R3lations Committee in which it wrs stated, reference (b) 
that ;rou had temporarily reco;;r.ized the Industrial Relations Com- 
mittee e,s an a;^ency to deal with labor complaints and labor disputes 
in the Industry-, subject to the following conditions: 

'1. 'Tliat the seventh member of said "Conraittee be 
selected at the next regular m.eeting; of said 
Committee, 



S732 



-330- 

'2. That sfdd Co:inittee siibnit to this Administration 
for ao-proval 'bsfore Jime 30, 1S34, conplete plans 
of procedure for handling Is-'oor connlaints and 
labor disputes. ' 

"Since the receipt of this letter the Industrial delations 
Couuittee held on Jtine 21st a meeting in Washington and re- 
quested ne, as Chairman of tne Code Authority, to a-o^ear 
oefore it and present the viev^s of the Industry in regard to 
the -orocedure to he follovzed and the functions to he performed 
h7 the Comnittee in the perfornraice of its duties. 

"I aroeared hefore the Covr.iittee and pointed out that, 
at tlie time the resolution requesting the setting up of the 
Industrial P.elations Coumittee w:,s passed "hy the Code Authorit--, 
a letter was addressed to the Deputy Acliinistrator auoting 
therein a resolution passed hy the Code Authorit"/, acconraanied 
'or a PROPOSED PLAh for committee operation. 

"All discussion preceding the setting u:p of an Indu.strial 
P.elations Co.Timittee for the handling of laoor complaints and 
laoor disputes have proceeded iroon the premise that the 
Industry i-'ould accept the creation of a Co^-.nittee to adjust 
its lahor complaints and later disputes within the Industr"^ 
in accordance i7ith a plan approved hy the Industi-;/-. Part 
Three of Bulletin T.o. 7 confirms this position in the title 
uhich reads as follows: 

'PAl-IT THHEI] 
• adjust: EFT 3Y CODE AUTHORITIES OP C0MPLAI1>TTS 
OP 7. R. A. CODE VIOLATIOhS' 

"It nor; appears that the PROPOSED PLAl! ahove referred to 
and approved hy the Industry was not -nresented to the Indus- 
trieA Relations Coumittee when it first met and was onlj'' 
received hy it at a much later date, TJhen finally received 
the Industrial Relations Committee modified the proposed "olan 
and submitted it hacL- to t:iis office. The Industry accepted 
the plan after making some modifications and again returned 
it to the Committee. The Committee further modified the olan 
and has no--' returned it to this office to he checked hy the 
Indu.stry. 

"In the meantime'' we are in receipt of a letter from the 
Deputy Administrator, reference (c), stating that he is 
recommending to you the a-^nroval of the plan as passed upon 
hy tne Industrial Relations Comiiittee on J-une 21. 



Ilrni 



he Industrj"- takes this -oosition: 

1. That the Industrial Relations Co:'nittee is to 

operate under a plan approved jointly by the Code 
Authority and by the Administrator, 



:!732 



-351- 

2. Th.-^.t the Industrial Relations Connittee may make 
si\7.festions as to the plan of operation, "but 
that such plan does not hecome operative until 
such siT^f^estions are a;ooroved "by both the Code 
Authority and the At-'irainistrator. 

5. That as the Code Authority is responsible for the 
cost of operation of the Industrial Relations Gom- 
niittee that it has the right to designate the 
location of the headquarters of the Coranittee. 

4. That vrhen the -olan of operation is api^roved and 
the coFiinittee is completely set up with its seven 
nerahers that the reports of the Committee to 
•phonsoever the}' are sent muGt he forrarded through 
the Code Authority in order that the Industry may 
know what is going on in connection with its o\7n 
"business, " 

J-Jine 27, 1934 letter to H. C-errish Smith, Chairman of , the 
Code Authority, from the Suh-Comnittee, Roger Williams and' A. 3. Horner 
(Reference: Industrial Relations Co-mittee ?older, Deputy's Piles). 
The letter is as follo-'s: 

"Your Sub-Committee has carafully examined the Plan for 
Adjustment of Complaints and Disputes in the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Industry as re-drafted liy the Industrial Relations 
Committee and reports as follows: 

1. Tiie redrafted lolar. follows very closely the original 
proposed plan approved by the Industry and s\ibmitted 
to the Administrator prior to the appointment of the 
membership of the Industrial Relations Committee, 
the principal exception being the elimination of the 
proviso tliat v;hen a labor dispute is presented to 

the Industrial Relations Committee, either bv employees 
or employers, the Industrial Relations Committee 
shall first refer it for settlement to the Connittee 
representing employees and employers equally within 
the plant, : 

2, Subsequent to the official appointment of the members 
of the. Industrial Relations Committee, dissatisfaction 
was e:5)re6sed 'oir the employees in certain 3rards o- 

the groiinds that they were not properlj'- re-oresented 
on this Co:.'mittee. These objections -were overcome b3'" 
adding to .the 'plan Regional Adjustment Agencies, a 
provision Iiy wl"ich employees at a -oXant where a dis- 
pute occurs have representation on such Regional 
Agenc;'-, arid it was also considered that the appoint- 
ment of Regional Agencies would facilitate the \7ork 
of the Industrial Relations Comjnittee. 



5752 



-532- 

3. Your Sub-Committee sees no objection in reverting 
to the orii^inal plan in vmich all reference to 
Hegional Adjustment Agencies is eliminated tut 
desires to point out that such plan wi\l meet oh- 
jections on the ps.rt of employees on the same 
groujids as e-qoressed above. 

4. Your Suh-Committee considers that the inclusion of 
the proviso requiring the Industrial Halations 
CoTomittee to first refer a dispute for settlement 

to the Committee representing em-oloyees and employers 
equally within the plant is vital for the proper 
operation;;of the plan. Furthermore this conforiiis 
to the procedure in Bulletin Wo, 7, and there- 
fore ^'■our Suo-Corimittee is unrfilling to agree to 
its deletion from the plan. This also necessitates 
the reinstatement of the t?ro paragraphs referring 
to this particalar question as written in the 
original plan dated April 24, 1954, 

5. Your Suh-Gommittee also objects to the. change in 
the paragraph referring to the decision of the 
a-roitrators. The paragraph as drawn hy us gives 
to the arbitrator the decision as to the duration 
of the agreement. Your Sub-Committee is of the 
opinion that this should be left as originally 
d-rav/n and that no fixed time should, be imposed 

by the plan. 

6. YovT Sub-Covimittee has no objections to the 

omission of the last two paragraphs of the plan as 
it is believed that the Committee can function 
effectively und.er the conditions outlined without 
the instructions contained in "these paragraphs. 

A copy of the plan as recommended herein is attached," 

June 27, 1934, "Plan for Adjustment of Complaints 
and Disputes" hereinbefore referred to in the letter, 
June 27, 19o4, is filed in the Industrial Relations Committee 
Folder, Deputy's Files, Copy of the June 27, 1934 letter and 
Plan of the Sub-Com.mittee was forwarded to General Hugh S. Johnson, 
Administrator, with letter, June 29, 1934, from.H. Gerrish Smith, 
Chairman of the Code Authorit;^ (Reference: Industrial Relations 
Committee Folder, Deputy's Files). 

The "Plan" of June 21, 1934, adopted by the Indus- 
trial Relations Committee, was submitted to the Industrial and. 
Labor Advisory Boards, Research and Planning, Compliance and. 
Legal Divisions. The Compliance Division, amongst other things, 
took the position that the "Plan" did not set forth satisfactory^ 
procedure. The Labor Advisory Board disapproved the Plan and 
mad.e many criticisms. (Reference: Industrial Relations Com- 
mittee Polder, Deputy's Files). 

9732 



c 



-333- 

J. B. Weaver, De-o\it3'- Aiainistrator, thercAipon called a conference 
Jill;,- 5th \7iien the Industrial and Lahor Advisor^/- Boards, Legal, r.e- 
search and Planning, and Conroliance Divisions were represented. The 
author uc.s a"bsent on vacation. A plan was draiA'n dated July 5, 1934 
containing many of the reco;-)'nendations of the Compliance Division and 
the Labor Advisorj^ Board (Reference: Industrial Relations Conmittee 
Folder, Peputy' s Files), 

rlotrever, the subject "Plan", departed from some of the provisions 
that had "before "been common to "both the, plans of the Industrial 
Relations Committee and the Code Authority, and were desired hy "both; 
conseouently, the author, with the assistance of HpT/ard F. Ralph, 
Assistant Counsel, and A. J. Doyle, Executive Secretary of the 
Industrie,! Relations Committee, made a carefijl analysis of the three 
"Plr.ns" of June 21, June 26, and July 5, and drafted a consolidated 
new plan of July 18, 1955 (Reference: Indiistrial Relations Co;nmittee 
Folder, Deputy's Files), 

"This latter "Plan" was approved or no ohjections found hy 
Ind^^strial Adviser, Research and Planning, Compliance, and Legal 
Divisions hut certain e:cceptions were taken hy Labor Advisory Board 
(Reference: Industrial Relations Committee Folder, Deputy's Files), 
The "Plan" was sent to A. J. Doyle, Executive Secretary of Industrial 
Relations Committee, and K. Gerrish Smith, Chairman of the Code 
Axxthority as of Jrdy 26, 1934 by letters signed by the author, 
H. iTewton Uhittelsey, Assistant Deputy AdjTiinistrator. The subject 
letters explained the new subject "Plan" and advised of the approval 
already received, and attached copies of the memorandum of 
July 25, 1934 from the Labor Advisor;y' Board, 

There existed at t^iis time general dissatisfaction, of both 
Industr:"- and Labor, of the situation regarding the Industrial 
Relations Comraittee, Industry adliered to its vieT.-point that it was 
to handle its o^m labor affairs through the Industrial Relations Com- 
mittee, whose expenses were being paid oy Industr3'-, and on a Plan 
approved by Industry. Labor held that the Industrial Relations Com- 
mittee should be an independent body and not interfered with by the 
Code Ar.thorits'" or Industry nembers. 

July 27, 1934, the Washington representatives of Labor appeared 
before the Sub-Committee of the Committee on Education and Labor of 
the Senate, David I. Walsh, Liass . , Chairman; Royal S. Copeland, IT.Y, ; 
Louis iiurphy, Iowa; Elbert D. Thomas, Utah; Jai.ies J. Davis, Pa,; and 
Ja:3es T, Clark, Clerk. 

Those that testified were Joseph S. McDonagh, Legislative Repre- 
sentative of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, and 
Willian A. Calvin, Vice President of the International Brotherhood 
of Boilermakers and Iron Shipbuilders, both being members of the 
Industrial Relations Con.iittee, Captain Henry Williams (CC) United 
States iTa\'y and J. 3. Weaver, Deputy Administrator. The shipbuilders 
were invited to testify, but did not appear, Ar.iong those present were 
Geo, W, Shields III, Assistant Deputy Administrator, and the Author, 
H. ilenton Wlaittelse3-, Assistant Deputy Aoninistrator. (Reference: 
Transcript of the Hearings in Hearings Folder, Deputy's Files) 
9732 



-554- 

Tlie Senate Comraittee's vieu concerning the situation was convej^ed 
in the falloT7in.~ letter (Heference: Order 2-21, Yolijme, Code P.ecord 
Section, and Industrial Relations Committee Tolder, De-outy's Files); 

"David I. T7alsh, I.Iass., Chairman. 
Royal S. Copeland, IT. Y. 
Louis Murphy, lov/a. 
"abert D. Thomas, Utaii. 
Frederic C. Walcott, Conn. 
Jajies J. Davis, Pa, 

James T. Clark, Clerk 



ITi.'ITED STATES SEFATE 
SUBCOllJTTEE OF THE CO::i;iTTSE Oil EDUCATION 
AilD lABOR 
TO IITVESTIGATE TKS RZrATIOlTSinP BETWEEN 
E!:PL0YESS Al^D CONTRACTORS ON PUBLIC WORKS 

(Navy file A1-3/QN(540802) Au,:;ust 2, 1934. 

"The Honoraole 
Claiade A. Sranson 
Secretary of the Nav;'- 
Washington, D. C. 

"Dear Ilr. Secretar^^: 

"At a recent ^learinf^ of the Senate Conmittee investigating 
lahor ahuses, of 17'iich I am Chairman, representatives or or- 
ganized lahor appeared, and requested to be heard in regard to 
certain lahor questions arising out of contracts alread'y let and 
to oe let hy the Nav^'- Department for the "building of naval ves- 
sels, funds for w]iich had been allotted to the Navy by the I\iblic 
Works Administration and also appropriated in the Deficiency Bill 
for Public Works, and heretofore specifical].y set aside by the 
President for naval construction. 

"Fnile it was Tcrf vievi as Chairman of tais Senate Committee 
that the matters soioght to be referred to our attention by the 
labor representatives as aforesaid were not in all respects with- 
in the purview of the jurisdiction of the Committee, yet, since 
it was pointed out that a chain of labor abuses would result from 
failure to o&j prevailing rates on th.s work, and, since it was 
emphasized that the coc e for the Industry'' of Ship Building and 
Ship Repairing Code, and, if they desired to be heard, the 
re'oresentatives of the Ship;oing interests. The latter did not 
ap-)ear. The testimony of the others was taken and is submitted 
in its entirety herewith for your attention. 

"In brief, the testimony sets forth substantially the 
following allegations: 



5732 



(l) 'That 1310.5 \7ill be received for the "building of 
Ilaval vessels on A-'j^nast 15th involving about 
$50,000,000. 

(2). That the Ship Euildini, Code signed last year 

provides for an Industrial Relations Committee 
to he set uo as agreed by the members of the In 
dustry on October 7, 1933, but that such an In-- 
dtistrial Relations Cor.inittee has not yet been so 
set tip. 

(o) 7natthe provisions relating to labor in the Slip 
Building Industry Code were less beneficial to 
labor than the Davis-Bacon Law or the Public Works 
Adininistration reg^j.lations, and that the zone 
rates for labor do not auply therein. 

(4) That there has been failure to nake satisfactory 
progress on the construction of I'aval vessels, 
T/-hich has restilted in the failure to employ the 
mjjnber of uorkers estimated with resultant injui^r 
to labor. Tliis is due, it was testified, to 

. failure to provide engineering plans and designs 
for construction; further, that no satisfactory 
progress has iDeen :nade, and thousands of nen 
have been left out of employ^ient both in private 
and in nav;' yardt- on this new ship construction 
-orograin \\ntil the "orivate yards submit plans to 
the lIay^r Departnent ap:)roves these plans. 

(o) That the naval progress sheets indicate that the 
Ship Building Program is considerably behind 
schedule on all 20 ship contracts heretofore 
awarded. 

(6) That in the erdsting contracts the rries and 
reg-oJ.ations of the Public Uorhs Administration 
are conditionally a-rolicable, but that there is 

a spocial ruling by the Public Uorhs Administrator 
to the effect that the Ship Briilding contracts 
shall follOT/ the Code and not Bulletin 51 of the 
P.w.A, regi:.lations as relating to labor natters. 

(7) That thj P. "7. A. Labor Advisory Board has ruled 
that if the Code is not deemed to be in effect on 
the Ship Building Program, ths.t the labor questions 
arising therefrom shall be referred to the Wagner 
Labor Board, 

(5) That the Ship Building Code is not functioning, 
and there is no provision in the Code for properly 
assessing the Industry for the expenses of opera- 
ting the Code, 



9732 



— 526-f 

(9) That it is the opinion of the Code Administrator 
that a revision of the Code shoixLd "be made before 
the letting of the Arigust 15th contracts in the in- 
terests of all parties concerned including laoor 
and the Ship Building Cornoanies. 

"I have attempted to snniMarize only the salient points 
of the testimonjr. 

"If the facts set forth therein are correct and accurate, 
it ^Tould seem that surariary action ought to he ta]:en hy the ITav;'' 
Department to clarify- the wage rates and working conditions 
under which the Ship Building Program is to he carried out 
hefoi-e the letting of the next contracts, 

"If the Code is to apply, and if it is imsatisfactory to 
la,l)or, and if no stipulations are to "be incorporated into the 
contracts requiring acSJierence to prevailing wage rates and the 
estahlishment of satisfactory working conditions, then it is 
clear that -in the public interest either the Code should he 
revised "before the letting of the contracts or provisions ought 
to 'be written into the contract compelling compliance with P.L'.A, 
regulations or with some other Governmental regulations, which 
set adequate standards of \7ages and conditions of work, 

"It is, therefore, ray opinion, and I stronglj'' urge uoon 
you as reconmendations for yo\ir consideration, - 

(1) That your Department urge a.nd try to arrange for 

a revision of the Code satisfactory to la"bor before 
receiving; bids on or letting the Ai:igust 15th con~ 
tracts. 

(2) That in such revision the IJavj'^ Departnent insist 
upon the incliision of a provision setting forth the 
power and authority of the Industrial delations Board 
already created by the Code (but not now frinctioning) 
with a budget approved by the Administrator, providing 
for financing by the Code Authorit;^ of the activities 
of this Board, 

(3) That if the above action be impossible or for 
any reason not feasible, t"hen the Mav/ Department 
with the cooperation of the Public ¥orks Acministra.- 
tor o-ught to promiiLgate rales aind regulations b'^ 
which wages and working conditions may be maintained 
at prevailing scales and high standards and incorpo- 
rate the some into the contracts. 

(4) That, in no event, shouJ.d the T.a-^rj Departnent proceed 
with the letting of these contracts until the labor 
wuestions now pending are resolved by some definite 
contractual understanding with the contractors. 



9732 



-537- 

"I know you will iindcr stand, ny dear Mr. Secretai"-, that 
in forwarding you the testimony adduced at the hearings, 
together with a suniiaary of tae more imi^ortant facts presented, 
and sug,:'-ested recommendations, that I am acting in the public 
interest with an eye solely to the performance of my du.t2'' and 
with no desire to a^pe^ r to he interfering in matters concerning: 
which the iJa.vy Department has original and -ultimate jurisdiction, 

"Ti-usting that you may "be ahle to give this matter your 
immediate attention, so that the conditions complained of herein- 
above indicated nay he rectified before the letting of the 
Augiast 15th contracts, and with kindest personal regards, 



"Sincerely yours, 
/s/ mVID I. TJALSH." 

Aijgxist 8, 1D54, a conference on the subject was held by 
Colonel H. L. Eoosevelt, Acting Secretar:/ of the Navy of which 
the following is a report to the Adrainistrator and was aoproved 
oy the Administrator, (Reference; Industrial delations Com- 
mittee Polder, Deputy's Files) 



"August 9, 1934 

"lI£IIO?Ain)mi 

"To: The Administrator 
?rom: Acaainistrative Officer 

Subject: Conference on Administration of Shipbuilding Code 
held August 8, 1934. 

"1. Conference was held at Assistant Secretary Hoosevelt's 
office, 3:00 p.m. : 

Present: Ass 't Secretar"/ Roosevelt, ITavy Department 
Colonel Lynch, IMl.A. 
Mr. Bsxttle, Labor Department 
lir. hcDonough ) Union 
ilr. Fry ) Representatives 
Mr. rnittelsey, Division 2, I'.R.A. 
I.r. I.:ui-ra7, Division 2, I'.L.A. 
ilr. Lubin, Labor Department 

"2. The proposal advanced by Mr. Battle was to have an 
S.-ecutive Order issued setting up the Industrial Relations Board 
of the Sliipbuilding Industry as a board independent of the Code 
Authority, supported by funds allotted by jT.R.A. and endowed 
with power to fi:: hours, wages and labor conditions in the 
industry; such powers to be given the sanction of a clause in all 
Shipbuilding contracts let by the Favy Department requiring the 
contracting concern to abide 'jj the decision of the fndustrial 
Relations Board, 

9732 



"3. The question of extending weeldy hours to 40 r^as "lot 
discussed. 

-"4. !ir. Roosevelt took the position that he coiold not 
consent to any action Trhich i70\ild delay tne opening of the hids. 

"5. I thinl: the position of r.L.A. on this matter should 
he: 



(a) It does not concur in the drafting of an Executive 
Order on this suhject by the Lahor Department. This is an in- 
cident of code administration nhich perts,ins to H.R.A. 

(h) The Labor Department should as a matter of procedure 
outline its desires and recommendations in a letter to the 
Administrator of Industrial Recovery as to the action which 
should he taken in the case, 

(c) IT.R.A. concurs in the desirability of setting uo the 
Industrial Relations Board as a committee independent of the Code 
Authority. 

(d) N.R.A. is not prepared to concur in the transfer to 
this board of power to alter code lorovisions or engage in code 
administration though the board may be authorized to submit 
recommendations to N.R.A. on these matters. 

(e) 1T.R..A. is not prepared to concur in any arrangement 

by which the powers of the Code Authority are transferred to the 
Board. 

(f) IT.R.A, is willing to allot a reasonable sum to cover 
the expenses of the committee to include: 

1 - Travel expenses on the business of the board. 

2 - Office expenses - but exclusive of anj'' ex- 

penses incurred by a 'member in traveling to 
or from TJashington, D, C. to attend meetings 
of the Board, 

3 - N.R.A. will furnish secretarial, clerical, 

and technical assistance to the Board, 

"/s/ G, A. LYKCH 

Administrative Officer," 

The Secretary of the llavj^ replied to Senator Walsh by 
letter August 8, 1934, (Reference: Industrial Relations 
Committee Folder, Deputy's Piles) The following are excerpts: 

"In response to your letter of 2 Aug-ast referring to the 
complaints of representatives of organized labor who appeared 
before your committee as to labor questions arising o\it of our 
shipbuilding contracts, the questions you raise have been given 
careful and thorough consideration by this Department and I am 
9732' 



-339- 

of the opinion that it is highly unc'esira'ble to delay the ava.rd of con- 
tracts for the construction "by private industry of thpse vessels for 
rhich bids are to be cpened on 15 Auf;ust. Such a course not only would 
defer the final cor.pletion of naval vessels needed so urgently for the 
national defease to re'olace vessels already over age "under the Treaty, 
but rrould dela3' for so le tine the emDloj^iient of many "len in the ship- 
building industi-y. 

"Sach of the contracts entered into for the construction of these 
naval vessels wil]. contain a -orovision that each cor.tractor and sub- 
contractor shall comply with each apuroved code to which iie is subject, 
liodifications of or additions to the codes are equally binding whether 
made prior to or after execution of the contract. 

"The formulation and acjninistration of these codes is under the 
Administrator for Industrial Recover;^ who has ber-n charged by the 
President with this dutv and the adnini strati on of the W.I.R.A. Questions 
regarding changes and additions to these codes are hendled londer his 
direction and this Deioart-nent has not felt that it had any cognizance as 
to these questions beyond "ms-'^ing reco^nnendations from tine to ti'^ie if re- 
quested or as occasion demanded. 



)732 



-34 ,V 

"The I'lavy Department is of the 0;-)iniO;i that the ques- 
tions of Labor abuses brought to the attention of your 
Cornraittee would not have been raised had the Industrial Re- 
lations 3oard been functioninti' as contemijlated. 

- . "As re:,r,rds .t]:e question of apnlyin^- the rates of i^ay 

stipulated in P.Tif.A. bulletin ITo. 51, it must be borne in 
mind that this industry has other worh besides the construc- 
tion of naval vessels. It must be depended on to build 
vessels so badly needed by the merchant marine and to re- 
pair those i]i service. The Lnposin^^ of snecial rates of pay 
for einriloyees working on naval contracts would result in 
difficulties and cause unrest amonj;: the v.-orkers to such an 
extent as conceivably to wrec]c the industry. All of the 
agencies including- the Wagner 3oard vvhich considered the 
question concluded that it is desirable tha,t the provisions 
of the Code should ^ovcr:i vjage'i for the naval v/ork as v.-ell 
as for thf other work in these shi^oyards. It seems evident 
that this is the equitable course of action and that an,y 
other course will lead to very serious difficulties. 

"Since most of the ;TOints brou^^ht out by your letter of 
3 August primarily concern matters under the jurisdiction 
of the Recovery Administration, I am forwarding to General 
Johnson, the Adniinistra.tor, a coioy of your letter to me, 
v.'ith the request thct he _.ive consideratioxT to your re- 
comniendations that there be a revision of the Shipbuilding 
Code satisfactory to labor, including- a. ^jrovision setting 
forth the pov/er and authority of the Industrial Relations 
i3oard as 'veil a,s a;.jpropria.te a^rrangements for financing." 

August 9, 1954, letter to Turner W. Battle (Reference: Industrial 
Relatione Committee bolder, Ee^uity's Files) from Colonel G. A. Lynch, 
Administrctive Officer, set forth the position of IT.R.A. as follows: 

"August 9, 1934. 



"i,ir. Turner 11. Battle 
Assistant to th^' Secretary, 
Labor Department, 
Vrashini-^ton, D. C. 

"Dear Ivlr. Battle: 

"Reference is raa.de to the conference in Assistant Secretary Roose- 
velt's office yesterday on the subject of the li-lustrial Relations Board 
of the Shipbuilding Industi-y. 

"I have submitted the ouestions .liscussed to the Administrator 
and his views on the matter a.re as follows: 

"1. He does not ccvicur in the 
drafting of an e:':ecutive Order on this 

977>2 



subject by the Labor De;)art;me:it . 
This is an incident of code Ad- 
rriini strati on v;hich -nertains to 
IT.R.A. 

"?.. He thinics the Jjabor Depart- 
ment should as a natter of -nroce- 
dure outline its desires and rec- 
ommendations in a letter to thr- 
Adninistrator of Industrial Recov- 
er^^ as to the action which should 
be tahen in the case. 

"?. He concurs in the desirc- 
bility of setting, up the Industrial 
Relations Board as a comniitte'^ i.-;- 
denendent of the Code Authorit;-. 

"4. He is not pre-oarcd to cor.cur 
in the trrnsfer to this board of 
"ov.'cr to alter code "orovisions or 
en^:a^e in code administration though 
the board ,m.y be authorized to sub- 
rait recorraendations to "'. ^. A. on 
these matters. 

"5. He is not -^reoared to concur 
in any arran^iement s by which the 
powers of the Code Authority are 
transferred to the Board. 

"6. He is v/illin^ to allot a 
reasonable sujn to cover the e:nenses 
of the com.;iittcn to include: 

"a. [Travel expenses on the 
business of the Board. 

"b. Ee r.'ill ap;^rove the furnish- 
in:i of secretarial, clerical, 
and technical assistance by 
the K.H.A. to the .3o-'ird. 

"■"■pry truly yours, 

"/s/ Cr. A. Lynch, 

Adiiii ni s t r at i ve 
■ Officer." 

AUi^ust 9, l'J?>4, a second conference v/as held by Colo;iel Roosevelt 
with the same -.orsons present and also H. ^errish Smith, Chairman of 
the Code Authorit". 

Au_^ust 11, 1934, a final conference was held on the subject by 
9732 



-S42- 

Miss Frances ?er.:in3, Secretary of Labor. Only Departments of the G-ov- 
ernmert vere represented. Amon, those present were Assistant Secretary 
Roosevelt, havy De^iprtraent ; Turner \i . Lat 1 1 e an J. Isador Luhin, Labor 
Department; a,nd 3arton \: . iiurray and H. I'Tevton VJhittelsey, ;'p.tional 
Recovery Administration. 

It was at^reed that Colo-.el Roosevelt, for the llavy De-oartment, 
and Miss Perkins, for the La.bor Depr.rtaent , iTOuld each v/rite a letter 
to General Hu ,h S. John-jon, Aclministr^Ttor, recominendinij that the Indus- 
trial Relaticp-s Conaitter be mt'?de independent of the Code Authority, 
its ex'ienses be ^aid by National Recovery Adininistr, tion. Conies of 
these letters, dated Auiust i:^., 1934, are found in Volume Ord-r 3-21, 
Code Record Section, and Inaurrtrial Relations Committee Folder, 
Deputy's Files. 

Reference is made to memorandum, Aut^nst 14, 1934, to General Hujh 
S. Johnson, Administrator, . from H, llewton T'hittelsey, Assistant Deputy 
Administrator. (Preference: Order 2-?l ■"'olurae, Code Record Section and 
Industrial Relations Cov.Traitte9 Folder, De-mty's File=) Excerpts of 
the memorandum are as follov/s: 

"Reference is here made to the letter of Au^'ust 3, 1934, to 
the Secretary of the rav^,.' from Senator Dgvid I. '''alsh. Chairman 
of the Senate Subcouuaittee v.-hich is investigating the relationshi;o 
betwefni em^iloyees and contractors on public works. Tv/o conferences 
in ret,,an-d to labor conditions in the Shi-Vouildinti' Industry were 
held in i.he office of Colonel Roosevelt, Assistant Secretary of 
the IJavj'-, at which all ;oarties in interest particiioatcd. 

"a later co:iference was held in the office of the Secretary 
of Labor, at which the Secretary of Labor, the Assistant Secretary 
of the llavy and representatives of II. R. A. -oarticipatcd. 

"The Nav^/ and Labor Departments have agreed that the com- 
plete divorceaient of the Industrial 'Relations Committee from the 
Shipbuilding and Shi^orepairin,, Industry Comm.it tee (Code Authority) 
is most desirable as a means of removin;, the final obstacle for 
the inuiiediate carrying out of the ITaval building prOt^ram. I 
believe that letters from these t"'o De-virtmcnts to this effect are 
noviT before you. This divorcement ca.n'bcst be brought about by the 
AdiTiinistration assuming the necessary ex~ienses of the Industrial 
Relations Committee. 

"!Frorn my own observation I am convinced of the almost im- 
perative need of completely se^iarating the Industrial Relations 
Com. littee from the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry 
Coini.dttee (Code Authority) by the assumrition of all its necessary 
,^ expenses by the F.R.A. 

"Labor has requested a.nd Industry has a,greed tliat the Com- 
mittee be relieved of the requirement to ap-,)oint the seventh (7th) 
member and be ")er;iiitted to continue ■.'ith'the present membership 
of three (3) Labor members and three (5) Industry members, as 
both Labor and Industry hold that collective oargaining is better 
procured by a com.iiittce of six (6). 



-343- 

"Therefore, the accoiapan^'in^ Order hns "been drawn ut3 
for the maintenance of the Coumittee by the Ilational 
Recovery Adrainistr?tion, In vievi of the recommendations 
of the De-Dartnents of Nsvy and Lahor and my knowledge 
of the siturtion, I recommend the accompanying Order for 
your apTDroval." 

Administrative Order S^-Sl, AUf::ust 15, 1934, was signed by 
Hugh S. Johnson, Administrrtor, before 12:00 noon of AUf^ust 15 and 
the Navpl bids '7ere duly opened on schedule. Approval was recommended 
by Barton W. Hurray, Division Administrator, Division II. (Reference: 
Code Record Section and Indiif.trial Relations Committee Polder, Deputy's 
Files) The Order reads as follows: 

"ORDER 
CODE OP PAIR COIIPETITION 
FOR TI-IE 
SHIPBUILDING Aim SHIPREPAIRIilG INDUSTRY 



"wHEKEAS, on L'arch 15, 1934, the Shipbuilding and Ship- 
repairing Industry Committee passed the followin^^ resolution: 

'There shall be constituted by aopointment 
of the Administrptor for the Shipbuilding and Ship- 
repairing Industry an Industrial Relations Committee, 
to be composed of seven (7) members; three (S) to be 
nominated by the Code Authority to represent the 
employers, three (3) to be nominated by the Labor 
Advisory Board of the National Recovery Administration 
to properly represent the employees in the Industry, 
and one (l) to oe selected by the other six'; and 



"'wTIEREAS, three (c) m.erabers of the aforesaid Committee 
were duly appointed ''oy me on March 26, 1934, from a list of 
nominees submitted by the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing 
Industry Conmittee, and three (5) members were apoointed by me 
on April 4, 1934, from representatives of employees recommended 
by the Labor Advisory Board of the National Recovery Administra- 
tion; and 

"TJHEREAS, a seventh (7th) member of the said Committee has 
not yet been selected; and 

"TifHEREAS, it is desired by both Labor and Industry repre- 
sentatives thrt a seventh (7th) member of the Industrial Relations 
Committee for the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry be not 
selected; and 

"TTHEHEAS, it appears from evidence submitted to me that the 
Industrial Rela.tions Committee should be independent of and not 
subject to the Jurisdiction of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing 
Industry Committee, which latter Committee is provided for under 
Section 8 of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Code, 
and that certain of the expenses of the Industrial Relations 
Committee_ should be defrayed out of the funds allotted to the 
National -"-ecovery Administration; 
9732 



-o44~ 

"■J0\", TriEREl''OI?E, I, HUfch 3. Johnson, b" virtue of B.uthority 
vested i;i me, do hereby order that .g ^reviou:. orcers of iiprch 25, 
19Z4, and A;)ril 4, l''o4, whereby I o- . .ointed. the ladustrj'- pnd 
Enxoloyee meubers resjiectively, - of the Industrial Helations Com- 
mittee for the Shi".-!buildinfj and Shi-orepa.ir ing Industry, be amended 
4 by omittinj- the "^rovisioj:- requiring the selection by the Industrial 
Helations Comi-aittee of a seventh (7tii) member. 

"It is fiu'ther ordered thc?.t tlie Inclustrirl Helations Com- 
mittee be a-d is herebj'- made inde-^endent of and not subject to the 
jurisaiccio:- of zhe Shiobuildin^. and Shi^.reMairin^ Industry Com- 
mittee h'rrei.-.above referred to. 

"It i'r. further ordered th;rt the :\atiQnal Recovery Administra- 
tion shall set aside a reasonable "ortion of the funds r Hotted to 
it to cover the ComiTiittee' s office ex-^enses, travellin,-^ and sub- 
sistance exrienses of each of its .lembers v.'hen on official business 
in connection ?:ith the -Terfornance of his duties as a member of 
the said Comraittee, and funds for the -"layment of such secretarial, 
clerical and technical assistance as the Coi"J7iittee may require in 
the performance of its duties. In addition to the above, each 
mer.iber of the Cora.;nttee shall be entitled to a ;oer diem of 
Fifteen Dollars ($15.00) for each day of a.ctual a,ttenda.nce at any 
end a,ll meetint,-E of the Committee and ?/hen on official business for 
the said Coraj.iittee, from the time of departure to the time of 
return; • provided, hov.'ev'^r, that any financial commitments made by 
the Committee shall be subject to the fiscal ret-,ulations of the 
rational Recovery Adiainistration; and provided further, thot Tsefoye 
any ex;-ienses incurred by the Committee or any of its members are 
paid oy the Ffitional Recovery Adrainistr;- tion vouchers therefore 
bhe.ll be duly authenticated by the Secretary of the Comiiittee and 
shall be subject to reviev and disarorovrl by the I''ationa.l Re- 
covery Adiiiinistr; tion. 

"/r7 Hueh 3. Johnson 

Adini; .istr.atcr for Industrial 
Recovery 

"Ap'iroval Recomme.Tded; 
/s/ J^arton Yi/'. Murray 

Division Aoministrator 
Au.vast 15, 1934." 

Administrative Order 3-21, August 1.0, 1934, hereinbefore 
cited, so chan^.ed the status of the Industrial Relations Comiiiittee 
thct certa,in irovisions in the "Ple.n for Adjustments", dated July 
1&, 19?4, had to be corrected. Also it was desirable to meet a-s 
far as possible the certain vie'-s of tlin Labor Advisory Roard. 

Therefore, the author drafted a ne'.r "Pl-n", ch^ed August -8, 19?4, 
which was conveyed with a letter, -'i.u_;ast 29, l.;r:4, to A. J. Doyle, 
Executive Secretary of the Industrial Relations Coraaittee, from H. Ilev- 
ton i.;hittelsoy, assistant Deputy Adrainistr;"tcr. (.";eference : Industrial 
Relations Couii.iittce Folder, Deputy's 'yiles •■rnd i^inutes, September 6, 1934, 
Industrial Relations Gomraittee Piles) Excerpt from the letter is as 
lollov/s ; 



-545- 

"It is i-ji-esLimed your Coxiittc" will examine "11 Pln,ns ^\.'i- 
may bo before it and on its ovm authority will develop the Plan 
which to them best suits the situation and renuirements and as 
pronntly ss -^ossiole forv-nrd it to the Administrption for ap- 
■oroval. I i^resurae definite action vrill be tal:en at your next 
meeting; in this matter and upon receipt of the Plan from your 
Committee it will have immediate attention." 

September 6, 1954, meeti7-ig of the Industrial Relations Committee. 
(Seference: Minutes, Industrial P.elPtions Committer Files) Exccrots o.rc 
as follows: 

"The Chairman announced that the next order of business should 
be a study and discussion of the Plan with a viev to r)ossible chant^ca 
before approval. 

"Mr. Wood\-ard announced that he felt he could take no action 
on the Plan at this time. The Shairman of the Code Authority had 
not seen th^ Plan and the members of the Code Comrriittee had had 
no op:)ortunity to study it. Mr. ffood?/ard stated that he was a 
representative of Industry on t..e Comraittee, and that inasmuch as 
he did not kno\.- the views of Industry members of the Code Committee 
on the Plan, he was not in b. position wher^ he could vote on it. 

"Mr. Swan stated that he v/as in accord with Mr. Woodward's 
sentiments and that they expressed his own views. 

"It was finally determined to make a study of the Plan on 
the basis of whether or not it met with the ap-iroval of the Labor 
members, and the Industry members might inter;oose questions to 
any -nart or "oarts of it, their action, however, to be deemed mere- 
ly a personal study with no corarait;-ient of Industry to the Plan. 

"The Plan was read by the Chairman, article by article, and 
compared with the Plan previously amrovdd by the Co.nm.ittee on 
June ?1, 1934. 

■'Upon coiTinletion of the stud;-, a vote was taken on apnroval 
of the Plan as amended. The Chair:.ian, Ux. V.'harton, Mr. McDonagh 
and Mr. Calvin found the Plan satisfactory and voted in the affirma- 
tive. In accordance with their previously expressed ideas, Mr. 
Swan and Mr. Woodward did not vote. 

"The Secretary was directed to drav; up a new Plan, incorpora- 
ting the ciianges, amendments and substitutions noted, and to 
furnish co-Ties to Mr. Swan and Mr. Woodward, it being understood 
that they would take the plan up immediately with Industry members 
of the Code Authority and be prepared to consider it finally as 
soon as possible. 

"Tn.e new Plan, dated September 5, 1954, as approved oy the 
Labor members, is incorporated in these minutes as APPEl'DIX B. 

"The Chairman invited attention to Article VI, Section 2, of 



9732 



-346" 

the P1.-..1, v'hich called for ohe submission of •■-. badii^et to the 
Administrator coverin,^ the Goraiaittee' s ostirimted exoenses. 

"After full discussion of the question of a budget, and 
after j-iearin^^ Assistant Dcnuty Adininistrator 17hittelsey on the 
subject, Mr. '.'ocdvard moved that the Exocutive Secretary be 
directed to ;7re;oare a letter to the Administrator, submitted an 
estimated budfiot of tv,'enty five thousand dollars ($?5,000) for 
a :-)criod of ten and one-h?lf nor.tnrj, from August 16, 1934, to the 
end of thr- f iEca.l ypnr, June ?0, 1955. Ilotion was seconded by 
llr. Calvin and unanimously voted. Ino S'cretary was directed, in 
the letter of transmittal to set forth the inriortance of the 
Committee, the difficulty of estimating the needed sum with any 
decree of accur-cy, and to advise N.il.A. fully thrt the sco-^ie and 
activities of tlic Conmitcee i.iight make the pro-^osed estimate an 
insuff ici'-nt on_e." 

The nev; "Plan", dated Se;-)tember 6, 1934, is also filed in 
the In.Jiustrial :iel;~tions Goi.udttee Polder, Deputy's ^i'ile. 

September 11, 19r4, letter to the Administrator from A. 0. VJharton, 
Temporary Chairman of the Industril ■delations Goranittee, set forth the 
budget (Heference: Industrial Relations Committee Folder, Deputy's Files) 
The letter was as follows: 

"In conformance with Article VI, Sf^ction 3, Plan for Ad- 
justment of Complaints a.nd Disputes in tlie Shi;ibuilding and 
Shi^repairing Industry, which -provides 'The Coiiimittce shall pre- 
;:)are a budget of its estimated ey^enses which budc~et shall be 
submitted to the Administrator for apioroval' the following motion 
was seconded ?.nd unanimously a;oprovcd by the members of the 
Industrial Relations Committee at meeting of September 6, 1934: 

"THAT TISR.E BE SUllIIITTED TO IKE AD- 
airiSTRATOR FOB ■■ATIOITAL ;^j;COVERY A BUD- 
GET ir TItL SUM 0? TUETTY FIVE THOUSAUD 
DOLLARS ($25,000) TO COYIR THE ESTILIATED 
EXP3■^'SES 07 Tj;. INDUSTRIAL RELATIO'-S 
GOii[,iITTEE PO,,.l A 'I'^P.RIOD OF TEl- A"'D OIT- 
HALF liOilTKS, FRO:! AUCtTJST 16, 1934, TO 
THE El'D OF Thx 'FISCAL T'aR, JUI^E SO, 
1935. 

"Tliis sum, follov.'ing the Administrator's Order of Au,ust 15, 
1934, loe^y bo subdivided as follows: 

"OFFICE Ea^EUSE 

"Incl.i.din^, telephone and telegra-oh, postage, and mail- 
in^,, station^n^,- and su-rolies, ^rintin.-, and mimeogra-ihing, and 
miscellaneous (rent, furniture and ty-x:writrr n:t included) $2000.00 

"TRAVELIliG ^rD SUBSISTE"iCE OF ;;E...ER3 $4000.00 

"SECRETARIAL, CLERICAL AD -RCK"ICAL ASSISTAITCE 



977^0 



-347- 

" Includes an Executive Secrotarj a !p50G0, a 
Technical Assistr-,nt a $4800*, and steno- 
dTr:nher-file clerh a :^1800* $9600.00 

"PER-DIEIJ OF -.ZLLBEHS $3000.00 

"niSCSLLAITQ-S (Artitrrtion 

( Investit_:ation $6400. 00 

"*97| months frO:.i 3er)tember Id, .1934. 

"In connection \ ith the sahniission of this budget, your 
attention is invited to the fact that it is difficult to 
visualize at this tirae the sco^tg and irmortance which the 
activities of the Connittee nay assume. Many invest it;;at ions 
p.'ill unaoubtedl- have to be m^ae; there raa.y be numerous 
occasijns where arjitrati'n will be requested; the nuiaber 
of committee and sub-comzaittee raeetin;3S may be larger than 
anticiiated; duties rray be olaced U'lon th.e Committee which 
will _,reatly increase its activities;, data, facts and in- 
fornr^tion must be collected. 

"-his Committe'^ is of paramount imoortance. It is 
res.-5cnsible for the carrying out of the labor provisions of 
the Code in connection v/ith contract awards involving 
hundi-eds of millions of dollars r.iade 'oy the Tav^/, Far, 
Treasury, Commerce, and other de-iartraents of the government, 
to private shinbuildint, and shi--)re:oairin^ yards. 

"In addition, Hesolutio:! passed May 9, 1954, oy a 
Special Board for Public Wor_^:s, ampn^. other thin,_s, provides: 

' 3e it Resolved further , That . o he 
wage rrtes on shrnbuildini-. and 
shi~)rn;'iairin-. ircjects on -irivate 
shiij^ards financed with funds al- 
lotted by the Public 'Vor^rs Admin-r 
istration, where Public Tl^or.ts Ad- 
ministration Bulletin T^o. .51 has 
not been ap-olied, shall lil.-ewise 
be determined by the aforesaid' 
Industrial Relations Committee 
whenever such adjustment ma^^ be 
hereafter adjud^-^ed by such com- 
mittee to be necessary. ' 

^ "The su::i. allottt-d for arbitrption and investigation 
may be considera,bly lower than the amount which must be 
exiended, but it is aifficult, if not impossible, at this 
time, to estims.te the needed sum with any degree of accuracy. 

"Tallin^ the budget submitted as a whole and consider- 
in^^ the P'Ossiuilities ox the Com^nittee, it is -nossible that 
the sum re-^ested may be insufficient." 



97C2 



-348- 

The bud,jet letter was received, "b-^ the Author and sent forv/ard 
throii^h KevYitc Crosbv, Executive As'sistant of Division 2. Reply was 
received to the effect that there would be no administrative a"Toroval 
of it but it would be filed for reference. Vo objection was taken by 
N.K.A. 

September 13, 1934, raeetin.^ of the Code Authority. (Reference: 
Minutes Folder, Deputy's I'iles) The follov.i5.\^ is er-cerptcd from the 
Minutes: 

" Industrial Relations Committee 

"Inasmuch as Colonel Rose had but recently been rssigned as 
Deputy AdjTiinistrator to handle the Shi-ibuildin^;; and Shiprepairing 
Code, the Chairma:-. outlined briefly the entire history of the 
Industrial Relations Committee i:i connection with its set-u:o by Reso 
Resolution of the Code Authority on March 15, 1934; the -ilan dated 
i.^rch IS, 1934 and submitted on tlie same date for its operation; 
the apnointment of members to the ComiTiittee and subsequent 
events. The first nlan subraitted by the Industry on March 16th, 
for some reason, had never been transmitted by the Deputy Ad- 
ministrrtor to the Industrial Relations Committee, so that there 
was some delay on irocedure until the plan which had been jointly 
prepared by the Industi-y a .d our Deputy Administrator received 
the comi.ients of the Industrio.l Relations Committee. It was 
approved by the Com^uittee on June 31st with some changes. All 
of the changes were not acceptable to the Industry but with a 
very fuw clmnges the pl£.n was returned to il.R.A by the Industry 
with letters from the Code Authority dated June 36th and 39th, to- 
gether with a letter from a sub-committee of the Industry to 
the Code Authority dp.tod June 27th. ITo further comments were 
received from F.R.A, until July 37th at which time :.'r. H. Newton 
^'hittelsey submitted another plan different from tJie -ilans of 
June Slst and 37th. 

"Subsequent events were as follov/s:- 

"On July 27th a herring was granted labor by Senator Walsh, 
Shairi.ian of the Senate Committee on Education and Labor. At this 
hearing Labor alleged labor abuses in the iirivate shi :)building 
industry. On Au^;ust 3nd, Senator Halsh addi'essed a letter to the 
Secretary of the Navy calling attention to the statements made 
by Labor representatives at the hearing on July 37th. In this 
letter Senator VJalsh suggests that summary a,ction be taken by the 
ITavy Donartment to clarify the wage rates and working conditions 
under which the shi;ibuilding yjro^.ram is to be carried out before 
the letting' of the next contracts. 

"Qn the morninti of Au.^ust 9th, a meeting was held in the 
offices of the Assistant Secret;;ry of the I'avy, at vrtiich there 
were present : 

Assistant Secretrry and his staff 
of Jiareau Officers 



9732 



-549- 

RoprGsontatives of those "private 

shipouildcrs engaged in Naval 
cor.atrufction 

"The Assistant' Sccrctp.ry of the Navy was in- 
formed that the int.ustry Icncw of no ahuscs in the 
private shiphuildint^ industiy and that thei'e vyas 
no reason wliatcvcr for delaying tlie opening of hids 
or the placing of contracts for new no-Val construc- 
tion. 

"The morning meeting was followed hy a meet- 
ing in the afternoon at which there were -oresont: 

Assistant Secretary of the Navj' and 

his staff 
Two rcoresentativGS fron the Ship- 

tuilding Industry 
Heprosentatives of N. H. A. 
A representative from, the iJepartment 

of lahor 

"At this meeting a proposed Executive 6rdcr, 
prepared "by the Department of Labor v.'as presented 
to the effect that there shoi^ld he a special hoard 
appointed to review shipbuilding wages and working 
conditions under PV/A- appropriations as applicable 
to naval vessels ~ those now under construction 
and those for which contracts were to bo placed. 
This meeting was adjourned without any final action 
but the same parties reconvened the following morn- 
ing, A-ugust lOth, together ?/ith representatives of 
Labor. The proposed Executive Order was thoroughly 
discussed and the Industry Members "oresent pointed 
out that the President of the United States by let- 
ter dated i.!arch 27th had directed all work '^n Govorn- 
ment contracts for shipbuilding and shiprepairing to 
be performed under the provisions of the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Code. As a result of the discus- 
sion it vras decided at this meeting that there should 
be a joint meeting on the following day, August 11th, 
of the: 

Na\'y Department officials 
Department of labor; and 

N. R. A. 

"Such a meeting was held and it was decided that 
instead of the special committee discussed the day 
previous, th^t the Industrial Relations Committee 
should proceed under its present set-up but under an 
Administrative Order which v?ould provide for its fi- 
nancing by NRA with offices in Washington and with 
six (6) members instead of seven (7). 



9732 



■35j« 



"In connection with these meetings the fol- 
lowing letter w-?.s addressed to the Assistant 
Secretary of the Kavj^- hy the President of the Na- 
tional CouLicil of American Shi-ohuilders, "u:^dcr 
date of August 10, 1934: 

■V/ith reference to the conference 
of yesterday morning in your office as 
"between the private shipbuilders engaged 
in naval work and yourself and the fur- 
ther conference in the a.ftemoon with 
Mr- Battle of the Department of Labor, 
and the further conference this morning, 

'I wish to make the following state- 
ment on "behalf of the -u'lvate ship"builders: 

The subjects discussed a.t our con- 



ference were the following: 



I 



1. -A letter submitted by Senator 
Yfalsh ^resenting certain , 
statements m;ado by labor "be- 
fore his Committee at a hear- 
ing on July 27, which state- 
ments alleged labor abuses 
in the Private Shipbuilding 
Indus trj^. 

2. - An Industrial Relations Cnm- 
mittec in the Shipbu-ilding 
Industry,'' set up in connec- 
tion with its code of fair 
'Conrpctition. 

5. - A proposed E::ccutivc Ordsr 
presented by iar. Battlft 
which would provide for set- 
ting up a xlava.1 Shipbuilding 
Vfege Board to deal with wages 
and hours under Title II of 
the Smergency Appropriation 
Act for the fiscal year 1955. 

'These three subjects have been 
enumerated in the order in v/hich they 
arose for discussion, but it is nec- 
essary to first discuss briefly the 
proposed Executive Ci-der pre-oarcd by 
the Department of Labor. This Order, 
if issued, vculC. c^ivc financial dn- 
trol over the expenditures of funds 
for now nav^l vessels, bids for which 



9732 



^51- 



are scheduled to "be opened on Ai\just 
15. 

'I cp.ll your r.ttention to the 
fact tint it is xiecccsarv in the con- 
duct ni v.'orr. in a private shipyard to 
conduct this v.-ork on a uniform basis of 
hours and wages if work is to "be "ocr- 
formed in an orderly manner and exped- 
itiously. The proposed ITaval Shiphuild- 
iaig 'J7a^e Board would have jurisdiction 
over hours and wa^RS that might he vvholly 
differ::';it from those pr^vailii'ifi under the 
Code .-uid mirfht result in a wage and hour 
condition that would ^ireclude the possi- 
bility of securing any commercial work. 

'FurthDi-inore, such jurisdiction 
would apply only during the expenditure 
of the -oarlioular f-ands appropriated for 
this ?isca'I Year, v-hile future funds for 
the enable tion of the contracts would 
i^rohably "be under Increase of the Navy 
App rop T j.at i r, ns . 

'By order of the Pref.ident of the 
"UFnited States all work in the private 
shipyards, with the exception of a few 
early contracts placed under PVJA funds, 
is no^T "oeing carried on under a Code of 
trade practice and fair comitictiiion appli- 
ca"blo to all work in process. 

'It is necessary in connection v.lth 
new contracts for naval vessels -fehat the 
same condition should apply for all work 
under way in a s"nipyard, whether Govern- 
ment work or commercial work, and regard- 
less of the ai^propriation under vriiich such 
v/ork is performed. 

'If t"nis condition is made to apply, 
then the only ot'ner problem referred to 
in Senator \7aleh's letter as needing con- 
sideration and which was very freely dis- 
cussed with you is tliat of an Industrial 
Relations Comjuittee. ?rora the statements 
made by the Members of the In^iustry at the 
meeting yesterday, I believe you fully un- 
derstand f.ie difficulties confronting the 
Industry It. setting up an Industrial Rela- 
tions Committee of seven; three of v.'hom are 
Industry- Mumbcrs, t'nreo of v;hom are Labor 



9732 



-352- 

Members, and the seventh of whom is to "be 
an impartial memher, and for the reasons 
stated to you we do not believe that this 
"bi-partisan committee will ever function 
satisfactorily and the Industry, has, 
therefore, suggested to you, and urgently 
requests, that this committee should be 
made up of not mere than three disinter- 
ested members to be crofted by Presidential 
Order. With this in mind we ash you to re- 
quest the ?:"osident to extend the duties of 
the llational Steel Labor Relations Board to 
cover disputes and coiiiplaints arising in 
the Shipbuilding industry, the extent of 
the responsibilities of this Board for the 
Shipbuilding Ind .sti-y to be the same as 
those -prescribed by the President for the 
Steel Industry. 

'¥e believe tliat the two definite stig- 
gestions nnde herein will fully dispose of 
the probloMS involved in the discussions in 
your office this morning. 



9732 



-355- 

"On Au'just 15th General Jolmsori issued an Administrative Order 
v^hich has not as yet been received by the Code Authority although 
an unsi/jned copy has been received which it is presuiTied is correct 

"It is noted that the order would establish an Industrial Re- 
Lations CCiiL.dttee as independent of and not subject to the juris- 
diction of the Shipbuilding- and Sliip rep airing Industry Cormuittee. 
i'he Chairman uiade clear tliat it v;as not thoroU|2;hly understood v/hat 
•independent of the Code Authority' meant, Ke did make it clear, 
however, that the Chairman had tal:en the position with Mr. Murray 
Division Adminiatrj.tor of the Sripbuildinf^ and Shiprepairing 
Code, that any plain of operatior. of the Coixiittee must be satis- 
factory to both Industry and IJ.P..--^. and stated that Llr Murray 
liad fully a^-reed wiVii this viev. The Chairman also stated that 
he had. info i-med Mr. Murray that any plan materially different 
from that ori£;inally laroposed bv industry and passed upon by the 
Industrial Relations CoLi..iittee^on June 21st, v/ould take from 
three to four wrcks for su.bmission to the Industry and action 
upon it. The Chairman informed the Committee that in the meantime 
K.R.A., on August 29th, had subirdtted to the Industrial Relations 
Committee another proposed plan of operation end had asked the 
Committee to prepare and submit to N.R.A. for approval, a plan 
which the Co..ii"nittee would recorun^end. llo copy of this proposed 
plan nor copy of the letter submitted to ti e Industrial Relations 
ComLiittee was sen'^ to th3 Code Authority. It received, hov/ever 
unofficially, s. copy of the proposed plan from one of the Industry 
Members. 

"Under date of July 27th an Administrt^tive Order covering; 'Labor 
Complaints and disputes' v/as issued by the H.R.A. and in connection 
with this subject the Chairman a:uke,d to have inscribed in the 
minutes a copy of Acujinistrative Order llo . X-69 . 

"Prom this point on there was :mich discussion of the v/hole subject 
of Industrial x\elations Cormmttee R,nd the Chairman made it clear 
that the Industry v/ould insist unon its Members working to a plan 
that is satisfactory to the Industry and stated that it ;Gav/ no 
reason whatever, v;hj'' the plan that had been approved by the Commit- 
tee on June 21st and v/hich was acceptable to the Industry, v/ith a 
few modifications, should not be adopted. 

"In discussing; the question of independence of the Industrial 
Relations Co.ni-.u.ttee Mr. McDona,-;h stated tl'ia.t this v/a.s necessary 
because of interference b"^ the Code Authority with a specific 
Labor matter that liad arisen at the Pore River Plant of the Beth- 
lehem Shipbuilding Cor'Joration. In order tlis.t the record might 
be clear the Chairman pointed out that the Coi:imittee's plan 
of operation had not been approved at the time and thc.t the 
Committee hc/d stricken from the pla,n a specific reouirement to 
the effect that v/hen a dispute arose that the first step to be 
talcen should be a reference of the matter by letter to the 
laanagement for a statement of faicts in the ca.se . The procedure 
taken by- the Committee was not .satisfactory to the Code Authority 
for the Industry and the telegram in connection with this matter 
so far as it relr.tes to the subject in question was as follows: 

9732 



-354- 

•IIJDUSTPJAL RZLATIOITS CCiLITTEE 
SHOULD ITOT SSilD I.SJ TO jPOrjlRIVEH 
UlTTIL PLAil A I-ROVED BY COiDE AUTIi- 
OSITY ?0R SZT'_ LEi.j::TT OF ALL LAB.-R 
COiviPLAIlTTS AITD DISPUTES IS DEFI- 

iiiTELY ACc:;prED Aia iii op ■h.-.ticii.' 

"During' f'sie course of the discussion Mr. Joseph Haag, Jr. and Mr. 
Gerhauser expressed the opinion that the order of August I'Sth was 
issued hy G-eneral Johnson in view of the i^iaval vessel situation and 
they- asked the Code Authority to view the order in light that a 
preponderant inajority of the industry have no ^'^•overnnental contracts 
of any kind and that the Board as now proposed is not needed, in- 
asmuch as complaints can he handled through the Code Authority. 

"At the end of the discussion lur Gerhauser offered the following 
resolution: 

"WHEREAS, A plan proposed by the K.R.A. 

dated Au,5u.st 28, 1954 for the handling of 

labor relations by an Industrial Relations 
ConLaittee has been brought to the attention 
of the Code Authority for the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Industty; 8,nd 

'WIIEPiEAS, the order signed by the Admin- 
istrator of the N.R.-'^. on August 15th would 
mal:e the Industrial Relations Coininittee in- 
dependent of the Code Authority; and 

'WHEREAS, this proposed plan and order 
attempts to. impose upon the Industi-y a bas- 
ically different plan for handling labor re- 

: ,■ lations than that previously submitted to 

r ■ all members of the Industry and approved by 
a majority of its members, 

'BE IT RESOLVED: That the Code Authority 
take no action at present upon the plan ' 
dated August 28th; and 

'BE IT F..TITHER RESOLVED: That the Adrainis- 
tration M-ember of the Code Authority be re- 
ouested to consider with the Ac'-ministration 
the fundamental differences betv/een the plan 
previously approved by the Industry and the 
plan of August 28th, and advise the Code 
Authority as to further procedure.' 

" Tlie resolution was carried. 

"At the request of Colonel Ross the Code Authority will submit 
to him a statement covering the views of the Code Autliority as to 
the plan of jjrocedure forv;arded by NRA to the Industrial Relations 
Committee dated August 28th." 

9732 



-355- 

Septem'bpr 13, 1934, meetin;^ of the Industrial Relations Commit- 
tee. (Reference: Minutes, Industrial Relations Co.xiittee Files) The 
following is excerpted froiri the r.Iinxites; 

"Mr. McPonai^h inurediately called attention to resolution passed 
■by the Code Authority at raeetinrj of '.'ednesday Septeiriber 12, 1934. 
"That resolution was read hy the Secretary 

"Mr. ".Tnittelsey called attention to his telegram dated 
September 13, 1934, to Mr. Arba B. Marvin, Auninistr tion Member 
of the Shipbuilding- Code Authority, which was read by the Secretary 
and wa-s as follov;sj 

Arba 3.- Marvin, Ac'junistration i,.ember 
Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry 
Laurel Road 
Kevi? Canaan, Connecticut 

'In view of Administrator's Order Au'':ust fifteenth making Industrial 
Relations Comirdttee inde~iendent of Code Authority Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Industry I thihl-: it inadvisable that a member 
of the Administration rnal:e analysis of plans for Adjustment of 
Labor Complaints and Labor Disputes .of Industrial Relations 
Committee Stop Code Authority has available three able Industrial 
Members of Industrial Relations ConL.dttee and a.n able sub-code 
Cor.n-iittee v/ith exj; rience on such plans Stop Position thtt 
Industrial Relations Coniinittee muct adopt by its ovm authority 
its own plan should be maintained Stop Please phone or v/ire Code 
Authority in accordance Stop Sorrv" I did not recognize yester- 
day complications tha.t might arise. 

'H. Tewton vrnittelsey 
Assistant Deputy Acjninistrator 
Section 4, Division 2.' 

"Diccussion follov:ed ae to the position of the Administration 
Member of the Code Authority. Mr. Whittelsey defined his duties. 
He further otxtlined the position of his superior officers, that 
the Plan for Adjustment v.-as for the consideration of the Comnittee, 
that both Industry and Labor VYere eajoally represented on the 
Committee, and that their representatives should be authorized 
to take definite action on the Plan, the Code Authority or the 
Administration i'iember having no direct say in its approval. 

"Mr. ;7oodward advised the Coi.niiittee members that after the 
meeting of September 6th he and Mr. Swan dispatched a telegram to 
the Chairman of the C'^d.e Authority, Mr. H. Gerrish Smith, apprising 
him of the situation. That in view of. the resolution of the Code 
Authority just noted by the Committee, the position of Mr. Swan 
and himself had net changed and they were no more able at this 
time to vote on the plan as representatives of Industry than they 
were at the meeting of September Cth. 

"Mr. McDo.-.agh stated that he felt a deliberate effort had been 
made to obstruct the setting up of the Committee and that the blame 

9732 



could te placed entirely en Industry. He gave 'a resume of the 
happenings before aiid since the Cohmittee's meeting of June Slst 
and allejed a lack of cooperation and a policy of hindrance and 
obstruction on Industry's part. 

"Mr. Woodward felt that H.H.A. changes in the Plan and in 
the set-uij of the Qcminittee had caused the trouble, and question- 
ed whether or not the Codu Authority liad "been furnished copy 
of the Administrator's Order of A''a/.ust 15th. Also, why copies of 
the Nevr Plan for Adjustment had not "been- f-ornished the Code 
Authority. Lir. Whittelsey ex;plained that copy of the Order had 
"been sent the Code Authority iuiir.ediately Upon its signing, August 
15th, hut that copies of the Plan for Adjustment had not "been 
f'ornished inasmuch as the Coi.inittee ' s new set-up "under iJ.R.A. made 
it entirely independent of the Code Authority. 

"Ivir. V/1-arton stated ths-t there v;as no question in his mind 
that if the Code Authority lic-,d v;anted the Committee to function, 
it v/ould ha.ve been functioning within tv/o v/ceks after the submission 
of its original Plan. There has been only one interference, and 
that the Code Atithority. Industry Members on the Committee are in 
the same position as La.hor Llerabers in regard to voting on the Plan. 
Ee feels that ^,o long as Mr. Swan and Mr. Vfoodward are Industry 
representatives on the Cominittee, the Committee has some definite 
orders and must aiid should-proceed; that the whole situation refers 
back to his original statement tn:,t Industry is responsible for 
the Conrndttee not functioning. 

"ivIr. McDonagh felt that it v.as a disgrace for Industry to 
attempt to wreck the Co;xuttee at this time. The members came into 
the Committee V7ith ideals and hopes that the Coiwnittee would be a 
functioning body and of great assistance to Industry. He called 
attention to the fact that no meeting of the Code Authority had 
been held from April 24, 1954 to September 12, 1S34, and that ap- 
parently the Code Authority meeting was brought on by the definite 
approval of the Labor Members of E.H.A.'s Plan for Adjustment, 

"Mr. Calvin felt that in view of all the circumstances, and 
the efforts to obstruct the Cooiiittee by Industry, a report of the 
v/hole situation should be submitted to the Administrator. 

"The Comi'dttee came bad: after recess at 2:04 P.M. Mr. Wood- 
ward advised that during recess he and Mr. Sv/an had reached Mr. 
Smith on the telephone, advised him of the situation and asked him 
to settle matters definitely in order that Industry's representatives 
on the Committee might be able to act. He advised that Mr. Smith 
notified him that he would put in the mail, not later than Thursday 
night, the 13±h, a letter addressed to N.R.A. and setting forth 
the comments of Industi-y on the. Plan for Adjustment of August 28th 
that, further, he would be in ?/ashington On Monday, September 17th, 
and would then take the question up with K.E.A. officials in an 
effort to str;..ighten the situation out. 



9732 



-7>57- 



Septeml) r 17, 1934, Meetinc; of the Industrial Iv--'.lations 
Committee (Reference: Mintites, Industrial Relations Committee Files). 
The following is excerpted from the Minutes: 

"The mitter of a PIdji for .^..djustm.ent of Complaints and 
Disputes was then talcen -0^3. 

■ "lur. Wooav/ord advised the Coimiiittee that in an effort to clear 
the sittiation vco, he and Llr. Sv/r.n had "been together in the morning 
and had dravm vqi a Resolution. Copies of this Resolution were furn- 
ished each of the meirTsers, informally. 

"Discussion ensued as to why the Committee's Plan for Adjust- 
ment of June 21, 1934, should nov< he considered at all in vievif of 
the Adi:unistrator's Order of Aii;ust 15th, and the different set-up 
of the Coi:iiuittee uiider the terrac of tha.t Order. 

"Mr. Woodward ex;olained th;: t there v;as no effort on the part 
of Mr. Swan and hihiself to substitute the old Plan for the one 
of September 6th, or to impose it on the CoiTiraittee; tuat their idea 
of hrinf^-inG the Plan of June 2l3t up for consideration v/as simply 
an attempt on their part to have a plan approved by the Comraittee 
under which it loi^ht proceed with the business before it. That 
the v/hole ouestion of the nev/ plan of September 6, 1934, and the 
Administrator's Crdf r cf Aur,n.iit 15, 1934, is a matter between N.R A. 
and Industry, and that the question mast be settled between them, 
Wien that question is dfcdide', a nevr Plan for Adjustment may be 
devised and the Industry members of the Committee can then properly 
vote. Ke had not been informed that Industry has accepted the 
.-.dministrator 's Order of Auc^ust 15th. 

"Mr. Vfliittelcey advised that it was clearly understood by all 
concerned that the new set-ujj of the Comi.iittee was satisfactory and 
it v;as oh that understanding th,^t the ifavy bids were opened on August 
15th. 

"Mr. liTliarton stated that it was his understanding at the last 
meeting that the Industry members would find out just v/here they 
stood and would come to this meeting prei:)ared for some definite action. 

"Mr. Woodward claimed that he and the other Indu.stry members 
were appointed to the origina,l CoiiUaittee, established uponrecommend- 
ation of the • Code Authority. The nev/ set-up, under the Adi.iinist rat- 
er's Order of August 15th, is a different one and, as he under- 
stands it, has not been approved by the Industry as yet. 

"Mr. Yrnarton stated that the new set-up was made because the 
Code Authority \7ould not allow the Committee to function. There 
were various labor and other problems in connection with the 
Industry, and somethin,g had to be done l9oking to their settlement. 
This resulted in the Ac'-minstrator 's Order of August 15th. 

"Mr, Woodv/ard advised the Chairman that, in order to dispose 
of the matter, he would lihe to move accejjtance of the Resolution 

9732 



-353- 

prepared by 'ulr. Swan and hiiasclf. 

"The Clia-iruan advised that such a motion vrould be out of order 
that it was not a rjrop^r c^uestion to come before the CoiUmittee in 
view of the Auministrator 's Order of August 15th. 

"llr. Sv/?n stated that, ±n viev/ of the Chairman's statement, 
it seemed that all the Industry members could do was to v;rite a 
letter to the Chairman stating that Llr. Wood?/ard and he, in an 
attempt to devise some suitable plan of procedure under which the 
Committee's work could be carried along until the major ouestions 
at issue were settled, had proposed to submit a Resolution made 
jointly by them. 

"llr. 'Joodward a.nd Mr. Sv/an then prepared a letter to the 
Chairman. 

" Mr. "liartnn, for the Labor members, then prepared a state- 
ment for. ..the record. 

"That letter of the Industry members to the Chairman of the 
Industrial Relations Committee, and the statement of the Labor 
members of the Cou-inittee are incorporated in these minutes and fol- 
lov; irai^iiediately hereafter. 

"liTashington, D.C. 
September 17, 1934 

"Mr. A. 0. TfJliarton, Chairman, 
Industrial Relations Coh':..u.ttee 
Yfeshington, D.C. 

"Lear lir. ; /hart on: 

"Vifhile the question of the status of the Indus- 
trial Relations Coumitteo as affected by the Adrainis- 
trator's Order of Axi^bust 1-5, 1934, and as set forth 
in the Plan for Adjustment of Complaints and Disputes 
in the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry of Au- 
gust 28, proposed by II.R.A. is under discussion be- 
tween the Industry and the N.R.A. the Industry mem- 
bers of the Industrial Rlations Cor.urdttee feel that, 
pending a settlement of this question, the Comjnittee 
can function under the plan approved on June 21, 1934, 
and accordingly offer the follov/ing resolution: 

'wHUREAS, The Industrial Relations Committee on June 21, 1934, 
unanimoiisly adopted a plan for adjustment of complaints and dis- 
putes in the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry, and 

'^"'HEIiHAS, A letter oated Jtme 29th, 1934, from the Chairman 
of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee (Code Auth- 
ority) to the Administrator, National Recovery Administri-tion, 
indicates thc.t a -majority of the Industry/ Members of the Code Auth- 
ority have approved said plan with certain modifications, and 

9732 



-353- 

'"w'HZIffiAS, It now orppears tlii-t the expense of the Industrial 
Relations C^^u;littee are beint; 'borne by the N.H.A. instead of by 
theCode Authority as contemplated in said plan, 

»!IOV/, TIIHRITOHE, 3E IT 

'KESGLVjID, That in order thr-.t the Industrial p.elations Commit- 
tee may proceed in the exercise of its functions looking to the ad- 
justment of labor conplaints and disputes, the plan adopted June 
21, 1934, be ainended to conform to the above modifications, and 
furthermore be it 

'RESCLVSD, That the amended plan be submitted to the. Admin- 
istrator, National Hecovery Adinini strati on, and his approval be re- 
quested. 

U7e understand that in view of the Adminstrator «s Crdcr 
above referred to you consider this resolution out of order and so 
rule. ' 

"Yours very truly 
/s/ Jajnes Sv/an 
/•s/ J. B. ¥oodv/ard, Jr. • ' 

"September 17, 1934. 

["It is our ijiiderstanding of the position of the Management 
Members of the Industrial Relations Conraittee of the Shipbuilding 
and Shiprepairing Industry that fhej ccai not proceed v;ith the worl: 
of the Committee -ontil they are advised by the Code Authority 
of the Industry that the. Order issued by C-eneral Johnson as 
Administrator of the National Hecovei-y Administration, dated 
August 15, 1934, creating this C'^mmittee as an a'-^ency independent 
cf the Code Authority, is acce-:)t,' Jjle to . the Industry. It is our 
further "ondei standing that the Order cf Augi:.st 15, 1334 supersedes 
all previous orders relating to this Co;.a:iittee, and that 
subsequent to August 15th we-, as a Cocaviittee, are reouifed to 
function in ':.eeping T,'ith provisions of said Order. 

"/s/ A. 0. '.Tliarton 

/s/-\7.A. Calvin 
/s/ Joseph 3. ;.cDonagh 

" At 4:15 the Industry members went \;ith I.Ir. '.."hittelsey and 
Captain 'vlilliaiMS to Soon 506 for a discussion of the situation. 

"They returned to the meeting room at 4:50 

"llr. "Jhittelsey s\ugested tli?.t certain changes in the Plan 
for Adjustment of September 5, 1934, might malce the plan agreeable 
to all concerned. 

"l.h-. TJocdward stated th...t he and I.Ir . Swan v,'ere prepared to vote 
approval of the Plan if the following clianges were made: 



9732 



-360- - 

"In Article II, line 4, strike oiit the v/ords 'i,nd.epenclent of: 
the Code Authority', '' . 

"In Article IV, Section 1, line 5, cho^nge the coniiiia' ,'• after 
the v;ords 'Relations CoiXiittee ' to a period' '.', and strike out all 
remaining matter in the Section hesinnin/i,' with and including the 
words 'but the Coim.dttee' up to aid Iricludin;'; the words 'are "being conv- 
' plied v/ith' . 

"The memhers discussed the importa.nce of these tv/o articles, 
the Chairman and Mr, McDonagh contending th^.t the phrase 'indepen- 
dent of the Code Authority' \ias entirely correct in viev? of the 
Administrator's Order of AugTJ-st 15th, and tha,t Article I? gave the 
■ Committee poVi^crs which it should rightfully have. 

"lir. Swan and l^^r. Woodward contended thct these changes must 
be made before they could vote an approval of the Plan, and that 
by voting on the Plan, if such ch^ang'S were made, they were lassum- 
ing a personal liability to the Industry solely for the purpose 
of giving the Coi.ii'.uttee a Plan which would allow it to proceed with 
its duties. 

"lur. V,rharton stated that such changes might be considered 
except for the manner in y/hich the Industry has acted. He has seen 
no evidence thi t there is any desire on their part to go along on 
matters of this kind. 

"The Chairman and lur. HcDonagl'. being unable to agree to the 
deletions from Articles II and IV which Mr. Swan and Mr. Woodward 
insisted were necessary before they could vote approval of the 
Plan, the members disbanded at 6:00 P. LI., v/ithout formal adjoixrn- 
ment . 

"i\ji engagement of Mr. Calvin mcide it necessary for him to leave 
the meeting at 5:15 P.M. 

"Captain Williams left at 5:30 P.M." 

Referring to the foregoing incident at 4:15. The parting of Industry 
and the Labor re iresentatives, located in V/ashington, had been widening 
for months and finally at this time the Industry members were ready to 
walk out, follov/ed by the Labor members, and that v/ould have been the 
end of th^t CoiTaittee as constituted. Therefore, the Author's request 
ti talk with then privately. 

The substance of the Author's conversation v/as: 

1. That there raast be an Industrial Relations ConTaittee for 
the Industry. 

2. That if t'le CouUiiittee members could not agree on a "Plan" 
and then fimction properl3'', that papers would be immediately d ravm 
terminating the Committee, and requesting the National labor Relations 
Board to appoint a new nonpsrtisan committee of three for a new Indus- 
trial Relations Coi.urdttce, and farther that the Author would malce every 

9732 



effort to have it approved by the AcKinistrr.tion. 

3. That the iridur-try members had already informally approved 
all provisions of the Plan of AiJi,-UGt 28, as amended hy the Labor members 
of the CoiTimittee September 6, exce-it two points as follows: 

(a) That in Article II, line 4, the -wording "independent 
of the Code of the Code Authority" was not es£;ential in the "Plan", 
but if it was objectionable to the Code Authority, the Axithor would 
recommend its deletion. 

(b) That in Article IV, Section 1, line 3, after the words 
"Relations Co-inittee" the deletion of the balance of the paragraph, 
would not change in any practical way the powers of tlie Committee. 

It merely cited that the Committee could investigate any Labor dispute 
even if not requested, which could be easily brought about under every 
plan that had been drawn. Therefore, the Author was willing to recom- 
mend this deletion in view of the fear of Industry, that every plant 
might have an investigator of the Committee in its midst. 

Ifhen the Author returned with the Industry m.emb rs to the 
ComiTuttees Room, he was quite confident that the labor members v/ould 
be pleased that the last ^^oint of dissension between the two sides 
could je eliminated. However, the situation ]iad become so tense 
that Labor was not ready to ihunediatelv go ahead. The meetings 
were businesslike and o^uiet and no .hixsh language v/as used, even 
•under the tension. The labor members appeared at the time to be 
of the opinion that the Code Authority intended to. nullify the effects 
of Aclministrative Order 2-21 dated August 15, 1934, whereby the Commit- 
tee was made independent of the Code Authority. 

September 18, 1934, the Author requested Joseph S. iucBonagh, 
Labor member of the Comraittee, to attend a conference, which occTJjred 
in the morning. He set forth the same points to i'.ir. I.IcDonagh that had 
been used v/ith the Industry raem.bers of the Coi.imittees the day before 
and tried to imoress upon Hr. I,:cDona.gh that the American Federation 
of Labor would likely lose its representation on the Shipbuilding 
Industrial Relatinns Coi.inittee, if the Labor members on the Committee 
were not disposed to go ahead and agree upon the Plan of September 6 
as it was proposed to an amendm.ent. The Labor members on the Committee 
at this time were shortly to go to the American Federation of Labor 
convention at San Prancisco and would probably be away for a period of 
three v/eeks and it was, therefore, necessary to obtain favorable 
action immediately from the, 'vlr. McDonagh said that he would confer 
with the other Labor members of the Coiiimittee, and at 2:30 in the 
afternoon he telephoned the Author that they would a^ree to the Plan 
of September 6 as it was proposed to amend it. 

ThereuT)on i,Ir. A. J. Doyle, Executive Secretary of the Commit- 
tee, was telephoiied and so advised of the aereement of the Labor 
members and requested to imi-nediately corrjnunicate with'the Industry 
members and receive confirmation from them of their agreement. Mr. Doyle 
made every effort to accomplish this, but he did not fully succeed. 

September 19, 1934, the Author called ^'^r. E- Gerrish Smith, 

9732 



Chairman of the Code Authority, a.t the offices of the Code Authority in 
llev/ York. He recounted the SLjae points as heret-;fore set forth and re- 
quested Mr. Smith to cp21 a meeting; of the Coca Authority and duly 
authorize the Industry menhers of the, Coi.imittee to act. llr . Sinith agreed 
that he v/ould jDut the :aatter 'before the Code Authority. 

Septemher 21, 1934, latter to I-I. Kerton Vifhittelsey, Assistant Depiity 
Administrator, from H. Gerrish Smith, Chairrrrin. (l^eference: Industrial 
Relations Couimittee Folder, Deputy's Files) llr. Siaith wrote as follows; 

"Vfe had considerable discussion at our meet- 
ing yeaterday on the Industrial Relations Conmittees 
for the bhiphuiliing and Shiprepairing Industry, 
"but as I told you, this was a National Co-cuicil of 
American Shipbuilders meetin.'j; and rnsjiy interested, 
members ?/ere not ijresented. 

"I have called a maeting for Thursujiy, September 
27th, at 2:00 P. 1.1., the earliest date at which I 
can ■i;et out members tot-^icthcr to consider this 
matter and I will advise you 2Ji"omptly there- 
after as to the results of this meeting." 

September 27, 1934, letter *to Industry meiabers of the Industrial 
Relations Conmittee, J. B. Tifoodward, James 3v;an emd L. Y. Spear, from 
H- G-errish Smith, Chairman o- the Code Authority. (Reference: Industrial 
Relations Coi:iraittee Folder, Deputy's Files) The letter reads as 
follov/s: 

"At a meetin,^; in this office tod;iy at i.vhich 
there were present five of the Industry members 
of the. Code Authority to.^ethcr with seven other 
representative shipbuilders and shipre'oairers, 
it v/as unanimoixsly voted that the industry should 
proceed with a set-up of its Industrial Relations 
Coimrdttee and to advise its Industry ^-embers that 

the plan, dated Au;:;ust 28th, 1934, submitted to the '' 

Industrial Relations Cornr.iittee by the N.R.A' is satis- • 
fa.ctory tc tlie Industry with the follov/ing changes. 

"Article II, Lines 3 and 4, eliminate the words 'independent 
of the Code Authority'. 

"Article IV, Lines 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, eliminate the wording 
'but the Cormmttce nay tcJte cognizencc of inipending Labor Disputes and 
act v/ithout the fori.iality of a complaint having been filed, or may^^ on 
its, own motion, conduct in-vestigations to determine vrtiether the Labor 
pro2fisions of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Code are being complied 
with' . 

"It is understood thut the Industry ^'"embers of the Comr.iittee 
have already agreed 'to vote favorably on the plan dated August 28th with 
these eliminati ns." 

October 3, 1934, letter to H. Nev;ton Wiittelsey, Assistant 
Deputy Administrator, from A. J. Doyle, Executive Secretary, Industrial 

9732 



Helatior.s Coniuttee (deference: Orcer 2-Pc VolvriO, Incustrial Relations 
Co:.i;iittee lolc.er, Deputy's Tiles). The letter reads as follOTrs: 

"The:~e are enclosed five copies of a Plcn for the Adjust- 
nent of Conplaints raid Disputes in the ShiplDuilding and 
Shiprepairin," Inc.ustn^, ap;iroved b:' the Intur.trial Rela- 
tions Cora-iittee." 

The Plaji acconpanyint'^ the alDOve cited letter of October 3, 1934, 
dated and hnom as the Plan of October 2, nas the Pl;in of September 6 
modified as per the a:3reenent of the resiiective Industry aiid Labor 
aenbers. The subject Plan vrs duly sent to the Labor Advisor;' Board, 
Conpliance Division, Legal Division, Research and Plrjinln^; Division 
and Industrial Advisory Board for their recomnendations. 

:Tove::.ber 1, 1G34-, Adiuinistrative Order 2-22, si{jned by !";. A. 
Ilarrinan, Adi,:ini strati ve Officer, and aioTiroval reconnended by Larton 
'J. ..iurra^r. Division Adj:inistrator, Division II. (Reference: Code 
Record Section, Industrial Relations Cor.v.ittee 1 older. Deputy's Piles). 
The Order reads as follorrs: 

"ORDZR 
CODE 01; PAIR COiJETITIOlI 

roR 

SRIPRUILDIhG Ai"D SHIPRRPAIRIRG IRDUSTRY 



"""HEREAS, due to a labor ener^^^encj'- in the Shipbuilding and 
Ship ^'epjai ring Industry, and by virtue of Orders Dated harch 
25, 1C34 and April 4, 1934, as amended August 15, 1934, 
there -as constituted by appointnent of the Acministrator 
ar. Indu'?.trial Relations Con::ittee for the Shipbuilding and 
Shi-orepairing Industry; and 

"TIIEREAS, The Industrial Relations Cor.: it tee -as, on June 13, 
1934, tenporarily reco2,'iiized 02'' 'the AcMinisti^ator as the agency 
to hrii^d.le labor complaints and labor disputes for the Ship- 
bvalding aiid SJriiprepairing Industry, subject to the following 
conditions subsequent: 

'1. That the ^.eventh nernber o-2 said Coriittee 
be selected at the next regular neeting of said 
Co:a;,:ittee. 

'2. That stjid Committee submit to this Adminis- 
tration for a.p~)roval before June 50, 1934, complete 
pl?Jis of procedure for handling labor complaints 
ant labor disputes'; and 

"7PZERJEAS, ^oy Administrative Order of August 15, 193'-1-, the 
first condition subsequent rras dispensed '-rith; and 



9732 



"VJIfEPJlAS, the second condition subsequent ttb.s conplied v.'ith; 
and ' 

"UHEHEAS, a plan of procedure for handling labor disputes 
in the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairinc IndustrJ? has been offi- 
cially approved; 

"NOW, THESEPOHE, the National Industrial Recovery Board, 
pursuant to authority vested in it by Ezecu.tive Orders of 
the Presic'jEnt, including E::ecutive Order 6353, and other- 
irise, does hereby order, subject to any jiertinent rules 
and regulations issued by the rational Industrial Recovery 
Boa.rd and to the right of the National Industrial Recovery 
Soard to rnal:e such changes in the authorisation herein 
granted as uay seen to it necessary in order to effectu- 
ate the policies of Title I of the National Industrial 
Recovery Act, that 

"Said Industrial Relations Conrdttee be, and it is hereby 
officially authorized to nroceed rrith the handling of labor 
cornplaints and labor disputes arising under the Code for 
such Industry, pursuant to the approved plan of procedure. 

"Approval Reconmended: NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL RECOVERY BOARD 

/s/Barton M. Lairray By /s/Vf. A. Na,rrin.an 

Division Adiuinistrator Adninistrative Officer." 

Novenber 1, 1954, 

Washington, D. C. 

Reference is made to nenorandurri of October 25,1934, to Colonel 
&. A. Lynch, Adrainistrative Officer, fron H. Nev/ton \7hittelsey, 
Assistant Deputy Adriinistrator. (Reference: Order 2-22 Volume, Code 
Record Section, and Industrial Relations Committee Folder, Deputy's 
Riles) The nemorandoja reads as follov.'s: 

"Tenporarj?- authority to tlie Industrial Relations Co'imittee C 

for the Shipbuilding ajid Shiprepa,iring Industry for hand- 
ling Labor Gomplaint'o and Labor Dispu.tes v/as conveyed in the 
letter of the Adjiinistrator to the Chairraan of the Comnittee 
under date of June 18, 1934, subject to t''0 conditions. 

"The first of these conditions \7as deleted b;'' Order of the 
Adr.unistratcr dated Au,g-ast 15,1934, and the second has 
been laade by the Corxiittee. Legal Counsel advises ne the 
Comiiittee is erapovfered under the authority taus conveyed 
in this letter. 

"Ho'Tever, the situation is rnisiuiderstood and the authority 
questioned by certain Regional Labor Boards and Field 
Branches of Compliance, and 

"lYirther, in vieu of the change in the status of this Ccnnit- 
tee by Order of the Adainistr.atoi',! darted August 15, 1934, 
it is desira.ble that a nev Order of Authorization for the 
handling of Labor Cor.plaints and Labor Disputes be issued. 

9732 



~S65~ 

"I, thereiore recommend for "'oar si 'nature the ap"Troval 
01 the Order." 

(i.r. IT. A. Harrii.ian "becr.ne ACiinistrative Ofiicer llovenher 1, 1334, in 
place of Colonel G. A. L:aich, resi;vned. ) 

ilove.i'ber 7, 1354, Adniuistrative OrO.er 2-55, si:jned ty Barton \J. 
Liurr^y, Division Adninistrator, .Division II, r:id recommended ''03- 
7f. 1. T.ose, Deputy Adninistrator. (deference; Cede Ilecord Section, 
and Industrial delations Corrdttee Tolder, Deputy's Tiles) 
Excerots fro-i the Order are as follows: 

"Said Plan of Procedure for adjustr:ent of laTjor conplaints 
and disputes, the original of which dated Octoher 2, 1354, 
is on file vith the national ?.ecove-_y Administration, he 
and it is hereby approved, \7ith the exception of the follow- 
inf provisions: 

"Article VII, change to read: 

'All records of cases shall conform ^vith the 
requirements of the ITationPol P.ecoverj'- Adminis- 
tration, and may be inspected bj^ the Advisory 
Boards of the said Adiinistrs.tion. The Complain- 
• rjnt and Itespondent shall each receive a copy of 
the ruling and copies of adjustments and settle- 
ments. A copy of all rulings, adjustments and 
settlem.ents shall be filed vrith the Code Author- 
ity, The national hecovery Acuuinistration, the 
Compliajice Division and the Labor Advisoiy Board 
of I'.Pl.A. By— jeehly repoi'ts of activities shall 
be made to the Code Authority, the national 
Recovery Administration and the Compliance Divi- 
sion of IT. P.. A. ' 

"Article VIII, Paragraph (a), change to read: 

'The Corimittee, in its handling of Labor Com^Dlaints 
rrhich are received b^- it, shall proceed in accord- 
ance with the procedure herein outlined, uhich is 
in accordance vith I'.R.A. Bulletin ITo. 7, and which 
procedu.re is subject to "'.?.. A. Bxilletin ITo. 7 and 
rJiy modification, amendments or substitutions 
thereto. ' 

"Article VIII, Paragraph (f ) , change to read: 

•Upon receiot of a Co'^iplaint of a Code violation, 
the respondent shall be advised b'' registered 
mail of the nature of the Complaint, and the parti- 
cular provision of the Code which it is alleged he 
is violating, and shall be sent a copy of the Code 
ejid a copy of the statement "Information for 
Persons charged with Violations of I'.Ii.A. Codes" 



J732 



.66- 



cJid asl:ed for a Gtrte:'ent of his or its position 
vathin five (5) b'lX'jiaess daj's of the receipt of 
such notice. In the event the respondent does not 
reply uithin five (5) 'b^.siness da^s, plus reason- 
able a.llo\7aMce for transi'ittal in the -lails, he or 
it shall he advised t]'.e second tine in the s'ine 
nanner as above provided h^' re-'istered ;iail, out 
r.'ith rctu.rn receipt requested. The na'ie of th.e 
conplainant and any natter i.rhich "ould tend to 
identify hi:i, shall he '.vitliheld. '" 

Reference is ,.iade to nenorandiij-.i of hoveifoer o,1954, to 
Barton V,. hurray, Division Adxiinistrator, fron K. ITev/ton Uliittelsey, 
Assistant Deputy Administrator. (?.ef .n-ence: Order 2-23, Voluiae, Code 
Record Section, and Indu.strial 2.elations Cou:iittee Tolder, Deput;'-'s 
Files) Erccerpts fron the r.e^ioranduj.: are as follo'Ts: 

"1. This is a re-.ort of a Flan ;iroposed by the Ind"astrial 
Height ions Coranittee for the Shipbuildin,^:^ aiio Shiprepairing 
Industry for handling- Labor Coirolaints and Labor Disputes. 

"4. The Industrial Advisor reconnends approvo.1 subject to 
a nodification of Article VIII Sub-Section (f), to the ef- 
fect that a copjr of the Cpde shall accor.paiij'" the leaflet 
'Information for Persons char.'^ed vith Violation of h.R.A. 
Code' and su-bject p.lso that a definite tine be allowed the 
respondent to reply, 

"5. Research and Planninij ^rrites that the subject has no 
econonic significance and therefore Research, ajid Planning 
has no comnents to offer. 

"5. Conpliance Division aira-oves exceot in regard to the 
follo'Ting points: 

(a) Reconnends an additional henber to the 
Copxiittee. 

This roulc be contrar;.^ to the agreenent as 
carried out in the Administrative Order of 
August 15, It 34. 

(b) Request is nade for by— ^eehly reports. 

"7. Tlie Labor Advisor^" Board approves e::cept that it notes 
that an earlier provision of the Plan has been onitted, to- 
\".'it; to authorize the CoLinittee to investigate con]Dliance 
v'ith the la.bor provisions of the Code although no conplaint 
has been filed nith it, an.d the Board reco;:inends that tJiis 
be added to the draft. Hor/ever, the Con-iittee has been 
brordl;^ authorized 'b-j the hational Incustrial Recover^'- Board 
to handle labor conplaints aiid labor disjjutes after the fil- 
ing Of the complaints. The addition of such a provision 
could neither extend the actions of tlie Comi-iittee nor \70uld 
the oraission of such a provision act to restrict their ac- 
tions. 

9732 



"8. The Lc^al Divi'3io:i a;rorove?5 sulj.ject to the change 
in Article VII i;i Records of Conplrunts and Disputes, 
Article VIII in procedure for handling Laljor Conplaints 
(a) pjpA (f ) as per the redraft of t'.iesR sections herein- 
after set forth in the Or'-or. 

"3. I have r;ive:i sra-eful stua;;- to the pl^m subnitted 
and believe it is conprehensive and oractical. I, there- 
fore recomjiend thr.t ^ou approve the plan, ^-ith the e::cep- 
tion of the follot.-ini; provisions; Article VII, and Article 
VIII (a) and (f) to be nrde to read as set forth in the 
Order to neet the require- lents of the Indurtrial Advisor 
and Conpliance Division. 

tJlO. I recon'iend for vour signature tjie approval of the 
Order." 

Koveriber 7, 1334, meeting of the Industrial ?.elations Con:iittee. 
(Reference: Lanutes of heeting, Incustrial delations Coniiittee ITile) 
The follo'-'in^- are e"cerpts f:con the ninutes: 

"The Coniiittee first noted Order, Code of fair Conpetition 
for Shipbuilding and Shi-ire:oairinG Industry, of the national 
Industrial Recovery Board, dated "fovenber 1, 1934, copies 
of T.'hich had previously been furnished nembers. 

"The By-La'-'s of the Coir.iittee, as approved harch ?8, 1334, 
and as anended April 11, 1934, bein.-; deeded in need of re- 
vision, hr. S^ran sug:--;ested that consideration be .-iven 
b;" the Connittee to a revision of those 3y-LrA7s. After 
discussion pjid consideration, the follo'Tinij chant;;es iTcre . 
tentatively noted, uithoxit objections 

"At 4.00 P. 1 ., Assistgjnt De-outy Ad:.iinistrator Wiittelsey 
cane in and annoijnced the,t the Order approvin;';: the Plan 
for Adjustment had been signed. The Secretarjr road copy 
of the Order 

"Mr. 7ood'xard uoved that Articles VII, VIII (a) and VIII 
(f) of the Con;iittee' s approved Plan for Adjustment , dated 
October 2, 1934, be revised to confom to the require- 
ruents of the Order of Tovenber 7, 1334, of the IJational 
Industrial Recovery Doard, and that the Plan, as revised, 
be approved in its entirety by the Gomittee. hr. iicDonagh 
seconded the notion and it vas Linaninously carried. - 

"The Plan for Adjustment of Cor.plaints and Disputes in the 
Shipbuilding pnL Shipre-oairing Indtistrj?-, dated October 2, 
1934, 8,s revisGO. gaid ap'iroved hovenber 7, 1934, is incor- 
porated in and made a part of these minutes as Appendix A. 

"l.r. woodrard then noved the adoption b-;-- the Co.nnittee of 
the revised By-La^s as a vfhole. hr. hcDonagh seconded the 
ootion ajid it na-s unaninouslj'' carried. 



:^ f oc 



-388- ■ 

"Second Day - ITo^^/ ember 8, 1934 . 

"In view of the AcVninistrator ' s Order of Au^^-ust 15, 1934, 
Order of the -^'^ationcl Industrial Eecovery Board dated 
lloveraber 1, 1934, and Order of the ITafional Industrial Re- 
covery Board dated Woveuber 7, 1934, it V7as deemed advisable 
to reappoint the officers of the Co..mrittee. 

"Mr. T/Yoodward nominated Mr. A. 0. ITliarton as Chairman, 
Mr. Swan seconded the motion, and it was unanimously carried. 

"Mr. ^ifharton nonunatGd L.ir. J. B. Woodward, Jr., as Vice 
Chairman, Mr. McDonafda seconded the motion, and the motion v^as 
unanimously carried. 

"Mr. McDonagh moved the ratification of Mr. A. J. Boyle as 
Executive Secretary of the Committee, Mr . Woodward seconded 
the motion, and the motion was unanimously carried." 

The "Plan for Adjustment of Complaints and Disputes in the Ship- | 
building and Shiprepairing Industry," dated October 2, 1934, as revised 
and approved November 7, 1934, is uvarked IJxhibit P, Appendix. 

The By-Laws as revised and adopted November 7, 1934, are in the 
By-Laws Polder, Industrial Relations Cor/Lmittee pile, and in the Industrial 
Relations Committee Polder, Deputy's Piles. 

November 15, 1934, letter to H. Ilewton T,7liittelsey, Assistant Deputy 
Administrator, from A- J. Doyle, Executive Secretary, conveyed the 
Plan as approved and amended ITovcmber 7, 1934, 'oy the Industrial 
Relations Committee. The Plan was duly submitted November 16, 1934 
to Euffiiett ?. Delaney, Assistant Counsel, by memjranduiii from H. Newton 
Whittelsey, Assistant Deputy Administrator. 

November 17, 1934, Eminett P. Dolaney, Assistant Counsel, sent 
a memorandum to H. Newton V/ittelsey, Assistant Deputy Acijninistrator 
approvin;7,- the Plan as follows: (_ 

"You are autliorized to aclaiowled^'edthe receipt of the revised 
plan and to advise this committee that the plan as nov/ received has the 
approval of the National Recovery Administration. It is mv opinion that 
no further order is xreouired to mahe this ^lan effective. 

November 20, 1934, letter to A. J. Doyle, Executive Secfetary 
from H. Newton whittelsey, i^ssistant Deputy Administrator. The following 
is an excerpt from the letter. 

"The Legal Division has examined the foregoing matter and authorized 
me to advise your CoriTnittee that the Plan as now received has the 
approval of the National Recovery Adminis^'ration and that no frorther 
Order is required to make the Plan effe tive." 



9732 



"369- 

Cojiiec of the cJoove cited con-:-uni cat ions fo\.-uio. in Orc.sr 2-23 
Voliiue, InCusti-ial lielations Co)rnittee Folder, Depixtj-'s Files and 
Code Zecord Section. 

Tiiv.s, the Industrial I'.elations Comittee ras rinallj- established 
eijht nonths after the resol.ition of the Code Authority i.arch 15, 1934. 



^732 



2. Activit ies and Ac comrlishiuents of the Indp-strial Relations 
Committee for the Sh i .oruilding and Shi'-jr epairin f; Industry 

The meetings of tre Industrial Relations Com-iittee were characte- 
rized hj efficiency, sorious thinking, tolerance and a real effort on 
the part of all iueraters to be fair. They were exceedingly well conduct- 
ed. The liinutes of the Meetings are briefed as follows to include im- 
portant actions and discussions. (Reference: Minutes, Industrial Re- 
lations Co^jnittee Files). 

Meeti n g of March 28, 1934 . 

Those present were Lawrence Y. Soear and John B. Woodward for In- 
dustry; Arthur 0. V/harton, Jose-oh S. McDonagh and William A. Calvin for 
Labor, and Charles B. Winshiu, Jr., Howard E. Ralph and Patrick Conway 
for I.R.A. 

Meeting called by J. B. V/eaver, De'outy Administrator. Mr. A. 0. 
Wharton elected te.iioorary Chairman. Mr. J, B. Woodward elected tem- 
porary Secretary. After full discussion the By-Lav/s were ado-oted. Meet- 
ing adjoua-ned subject to call of J. 3. Weaver, Deputy Administrator. 

Meeting of Aijril 2, 1934 

Those present were Lawrence Y. S'^ear a.nd John B. Woodwa.rd for In- 
dustry; Arthur 0. 'iTliarton (Chairman), Joseph S. McBonagh, and Williain 
A. Calvin for Labor, and Charles E. Winship, Jr., for IT.R.A. 

Mr. Winship reported "that the Code Authority Organization Commit- 
tee of E.Il.A, had recommended that, the Industrial Relations Committee 
be given aiithority for a period of sixty days to adjust complaints on 
references and disputes. (The Author points out that the Code Autho- 
rity Orgaiiisatior. Committee recommended that the Code Authority be gi- 
ven this authority) (Leference: Administrative Order 2-9A Vol-ume, 
Code Record Section and Indiistrial Relations Committee Folder, Deputy's 
Files). 

Re;i'ional Adjustment ^Igencies were discussed and it V7as tentative- 
ly agreed that five district should be set up as follows: 

1. Atlantic Copst North. 2. Atlantic Coast South. 3. Gulf Coast. 
4. Pacific Coaist. 5. Grea.t Lal^es. The Secretary was requested to 
obtain fron H. G, Smith, Chairman of the Code Authority, a list of the 
plants in the Industry with location of each, present number of employees 
and capacities. ReGolu.tions passed to permit testing installations, 
machinery and equipmenc for ships, deck trials and sea trials. 

Request of certain concerns, represented by Harrison S. Robinson, 
doing shiprepair work in San Francisco Bay for exemption from the wage 
provisions of the Code was considered and the decision was against 
granting su.ch exemption. (T''-is request had reference to exemption from 
part 4, para.gra-oh (b) v/hich required that employees be paid a weekly 
wage for 36 hours not less than they were paid for 40 hours urior to 
July 1, 1933. 



9732 



-r.71- 

Meeting; Apr il l'\ 1 954 

Lator Members of the Co::i:aittee hctd been aD'oointed April 5, and James 
Swan, Industry Member, had been a:)nointed in olace of George H. Bates, 
recigned. 

Those present were Jjawrence Y. Spear, John B. Wood.vard and James 
Swan for Industry; Arthur 0. Wliarton (Chairman\ Joseph S. KcDona;3h, 
and William A. Calvin for Labor and Charles E. Winship, Jr., for "J.H.A. 

The Comittee ratified the actions ta'cen at the previous meetings 
of March 28, 1934 and April 2, 1934. Committee of Messrs. Wharton and 
Woodward appointed to call upon the National Labor Boa,rd to leern their 
attitude toward the Comiiittee's Responsibility in the matter of Labor 
disputes. 

Copy of letter of Anril 4, 1934, from Hugh S. Johnson, Administra- 
tor, requesting the Committee to study wage problems arising frou the 
establishment of 36 hoiir week, and to equalize by negotiations any un- 
fair com-oetitive inequalities. Action was referred. Letter of April 
9, 1934, from William H. Davis, National Compliance Director, enclosing 
a letter from Captain Henry Willia,ns (CC") USIT in reference to labor un- 
rest at Bath, Maine and the 4'1 hour v/eek question. Plan for adjustment 
of complaints and disputes was submitted, discussed and approTed. Al- 
leged violations of the Code by United Dry Dock Corporation, who were 
requested to submit a sts-teinent relative to the circumstances of the 
case. 

Meeting of April 25, 1954 

Those present were Lawrence Y. Spear, James Swan, and John B. Wood- 
v/ard for Industry; 7^illia,m A. Calvin and Joseph S. McDonagh for Labor, 
and A. J. Doyle, Executive Secretary. In the absence of Mr. Wliarton, 
I.Ir. Calvin was elected acting Chairvnan. 

Letter from H. G-. Smith, Chairman of the Code Authority, dated 
April 1'.), 1934, regarding San Francisco Bay case before national Com- 
pliance Director. 

The following complaints were received and the Executive Secreta- 
ry instructed to acknowledge and proceed with investigation of the 
cases: Tom 2ay, International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, re welders 
e:.Tployed by certain firms in the Oregon District; J. N. Davis, Inter- 
national Brotherhood of Boilerr-iakers re disagreement wages and working 
conditions Gulf Coast District; J. lI. Davis re preferential rate recent- 
ly established Buffalo Dry Dock Company, and letter of April 23, 1934, 
from Deputy Administrator relative to the complaint against Todc. Ship- 
building and Dr:/ Dock Company. Complaint of April 14, 1934, Cowmcil 
of Carpenters alleging violations in the San Francisco Bay Area. Al- 
leged unfair differential in wages between the Bethlehem Shipbuilding 
Corooration and repair shops San Francisco Bay District. It was de- 
cided the matter would be considered along v^rith the general question 
of unfair competitions. The Cojimittee was advised by telephone that 
the Code Authority had been allocated $3,000 for its exoenses. 



Committee interviewed two prosoective Executive Secretaries ?.no. 
en motion engaged A. J. Doyle of WaEhin;r^ton at $5, HO') a year, effective 
April 24, 1934. 

Meeting Aoril 26. l v;34 

Those present were John B. Woodward end James Swrn for Industr--; 
Uillian A. Calvin and Jose-oh S. McDonagh for Labor, and A. J. Dovle, 
Executive Secretary. 

Extension of 3 (c") of the Code was considered and recorimonded. 
The following corn'olaints were considered and the Secretary instructed to 
a,claiowledge their receipt: E. H. Iv:ills, International Brotherhood of 
Boilermakers, re: Reestablishment d.ouols time for all overtime work as 
prevailing custom up to April, 1933, in the Fort of New Orleans; P. A. 
33elcuze, International Brotherhood of Boilerna-cers , re: Code complaints 
at Me\7 Orleans and Mobile, and E. A. Howard, International Brotherhood 
of Boilermakers, re: Galveston Ship Repairers. Letter fro a Code Autho- 
rity quoting' resolution of the Code Authority to the effect that the 
strike situation of the New York Shipbuilding Corapajiy be placed in the 
hands of the Industrial Relations Committee l.Iessrs. McBonagh and Wood- 
ward a-Dpointed to interview L!essrs. iuiller and T/olf of the National 
Labor Board in reference to *the situation. Meeting adjourned and recon- 
vened. 

Committee of Liessrs. McDonagh and Wood'rard reported that the Nation- 
al La.bor Board ha.d assumed no jurisdiction, the matter being in the hands 
of the Labor Deoartment. Mr. Elliott of the Labor Department thought 
that the situation ?/as bad, not much could be done by the Committee, or 
any other body. liir. Cha.^pell of the Labor Deoartment had been in Cam- 
den, was liked by both officers an.d employees, but had no success. I,;r. 
Elliott suggested that Lr. Chaooell be contacted. Comiolaint of Adolph 
■JQereng, discharged by the Ne^oort News Company "to give certp.in men 
longer working hours." ExeC'.itive Secretary directed to proceed xiith the 
C£ise. Com-olaint a.gainbt United Dr/ Doc':.s. Nc reoort from inquiry that 
had been received. 

Meeting of liay IS, 1934 

Those present v^ere Lawrence Y. Spear, John B. Woodward, and James 
Swan for Industry; Arthur 0. V.liarton ( Ci-xairman\ William A. Calvin and 
Jose-oh S. McDcnagh for Labor and A. J. Doyle, Executive Secretary. All 

members present. 

San Friancisco Bay Area case^ considriT'ed. A protest of unfair wage 
inequality existing in San Francisco Bay Area. Resolution of the Code 
Authority April ^4, 1934, relative to the establishment of the office 
of the Coraiaittee at 11 Broadway, Ne'.' York City. No action talcen. lir. 
Svfan submitted Code Authority's Flan for adjustment of comolaints and 
disoutes. Executive Secretary instructed to make a study of the plan 
in comoarison with the Comiaittee' s plan of April 11, 1934. 

Resolution of the public Works Administrator discussed. Committee 
was instructed to make a study of wages soecif led under Public Works 



9732 



-^'"''S- 



Program No. 51. 



Secretary of Labor desired three Governmental reoresentatives ap- 
poihted to the Committee. The Co:i!iittee felt that no additional mem- 
hers should be aioTDointed. Letter written to J. B. Weaver, Deputy Ad- 
ministrator. Amons'st ether things was set forth the following: "It 
is the further belief of this Committee that is f )rmation should con- 
stitute it as an independent judicipl body for thu -our^TOses set forth 
ahove; a Committee not subject to the authority or revievr of aiiy &o- 
veriiinental Agency or body other than the Adniaistrp,tor or subordinate 
to the Code Authority in its handlings of jroblems ororerly suomitted 
to it. The Committee then returned to the consideration of a resolution 
of the P. \7. A. Board. Committee called on Deouty Administrator J. E, 
Ueaver to learn if its authority and scope had beei; accurately defined, 
nothing definite was learned. 

San Francisco Bay Area case again discussed. Fi^rther information 
requested. Two protests of designers and loftsraen of the extension of 
3(c) of the Code received from emoloyees of United Drv Dock Inc. and 
the Hew York Shipbuilding Comoany. Executive Secretary em-oowered to 
secure such clerical aid 'as necessary. 

Meeting of June 6, 1934 

Those Tjresent ¥/ere Lawrence Y. Suear, John B. Woodward and James 
St/an for Industry; Arthur 0. Wharton (Chairman^ and Joseph S. McDonagh 
for Labor; A. J. Poyle, Executive Secretary; J. B. Weaver and H. Hewton 
whittelsey, forU.l.A., and Arba B. Marvin, Administration Member to 
the Code Authority. , , 

Conraittee discussed Public Worlcs Board Resolution and acted as fol- 
lows: 

"Whereas, Hesolution of the Public Works Board, adopted Hay 9, 1934, 
provided in effect that the rage rates on existing projects financed 
with funds alloted by the Public Works Administration should he adjusted 
hy the Industrial Relations Cor.Tmittee, such rates to be determined. 
"before June 15, 1934, 

"Therefore, be it resolved by recomnendation of the Industrial Re- 
lations Coiiiittee that all existing contracts which were entered into 
under the provisions of p. W. A. Bulletin Ho. 51, and on which the hour- 
ly wage provisions thereof, and it is so recom jended. " 

Letter, June 5, 1934, extension of authority from C. ■^. Ad?jns, 
Division Administrator, authorizing Committee *,o Jxine 30, 1934 (Ad;,ii- 
nistrative Order 2-17A, Cede Record Section, and Industrial Relations 
Committee Folder, Deoiaty' s Files). 

Reouest for reconnendation on exemioticn from maximum hour provisions 
of Code oertaining to trial trros. Ho action ta-^en -oending examination 
of "orevious orders on the subject. 

The "plan" for "Adjustment" discussed. !:r. Wiiittelsey submitted 
suggestions as to the ooeration of the Co'-.ton Textile Industrial 

9732. 



-374" • 

Relations Coianittee. lir. '7ea,ver stated that the Tjanel system contaixied 
in "Flan of Auril 24. of Code Authority" was unsatisfactory. ' Ccrauttee 
further disc\issed "Flan of jVpril 11 of the Comiiittee" and "Flrn of 
April 24 of the Code Authority/" and appointed Sub-Corainittee of Messrs. 
i.iCDcnagh and Woodward to attemot to formulate a plan which might meet 
ell objections. 

Committee adjourned, and re-convened Jiine 7 at 8::30A.ivi., the scne 
nemters were present. 

Committee recom.iended Exemption for trial trips,- and adjourned 
1'3:')) A.Ii. to attend hearin,i' on San Francisco Bay Area cases conducted 
""oy lir. Weaver. 

Meeting of June 21, 1954 

Letter, June 18, 1934, from Hugh S. Johnson, Administrator, autho- 
rizing the Conmittee, and reauiring that the 7th memher "be aooGinted, 
S2id a Plan of orocedure be submitted by June 30, 1934. Discussion as 
to Regional Committees. 

The situation &f the Bethlehem Shrobuilding ComiDany, Fore River 
Plan discussed, with reference to co::r-ilaint of Fhilin H. VanG-elder, 
letter dated June 19th, 1934. ' Mr. Smith axivised the Committee, that 
no investigators should be seat to the "olant uiitil the "Plan for Ad- 
justments" had heen accented and was in operation. The Committee had 
received a wire from the Chair'ian of the Code Authority to transfer the 
office to New York. Messrs. Wharton and licDonagh emohasized that the 
headquarters should not be at the national Council of American Shio- 
iDuilders . 

The "Flan" again discussed with particular reference to Regional 
Comr.ittees and in viev; of the Committee's inability to reconcile the 
tro positions of Industry and ?Labor, it waa decided to eliminate the 
provision for Regional Committees. 

The case of Bath Iron Works discussed re: comolaint of Industrial 
Union of Marine Workers. Matter left in abeyance in view of the Com- 
mittees inability to act in the Fore River case. 

Application of the St. Louis Car Company for exemption. It was 
decided the Code Authority ccuid handle the matter. The "Plan" was 
again considered and ado^Tted as of June 21, 1934. Several names were 
discussed in connection v/ith tlTe aupointment of the 7th member. 

(Author's note: d-ue to the attitude of Lir. Smith at this meeting 
respecting the oosition of the Cede Authority, the Laior members of the 
Cormaittee ap-oarently believed that the Code Authority iitended to in- 
terfere with the indeoendent action of the Com. littee, and that the 
Committee was more or less "oowerless in view of the fact that the Code 
Authority was oayiiig the bills. Following the adoption of the "Plan" 
on June 21 the Code Authority drafted an amended "Plan" of June 25. 
There v/as an ■ interchange of serious comj-iunications between the Code 
Authority and 11. R. A. 



)732 



— O I D— 

Meeting of Se - ot ember 1 5, 1534 

Those present were ilessrs. John B. Woodr,'-.rd and James Swaai for In- 
dtistry, Arthur 0. '.iliartoa ( Caairruan'* , and Josemh S. McDonagh and Uilliam 
A. Crlvin for Labor, and H. ilevton Tfhittelsev, for M.R.A... and Captain 
Henry "illiams, for U.S.U. 

iir. LIcDonagh celled attention to resolution of Code Authority oer- 
taining to Order 2-21, August 15, 1934, in which the Code Authority 
resolved to take no action on the "Flan of Au£;ust 28." Industry raemhers 
not authorized by Code Authority to take action on "Plan." Mr. McDo- 
nagh felt a deliberate effort had been made to obstruct the setting 
uo of the Coniniltee by Industry and Mr. Vfliarton that if Code Authority 
wanted the Committee to function it could have been done' so in two weeks. 
Discussion lasted several hoiu-s. (This subject set forth in detail in 
previous title. ) 

Complaint of Anderson who had been discharged by Todd Shrobuilding 
and Dry Dock Comoany, Ivlobile, Alabama. Comnittee unable to act imiiedia- 
tel3'-. Secretary instructed to request that the reports on Emergency 
work, received by Code Authority, be sent to the Committee. Letter fro?) 
iir. Whittelsey asking if Com.-nittee v/ould be willing to. act, for Boatbuild- 
ing Industry if IT.R.A. duly authorized. Committee favorable. Charles- ■ 
ton Dry Dock Company request for e:-:emjtion for welders. No action pend- 
ing receipt, of further information. 

Leeting of September 17, 1934. 

Those present: Messrs. John B. Woodward, James Swan for Industry; 
ArthujT 0. Wharton, Joser.h S. McDonagh, William A. Calvin for Labor; H. 
iTerton T/hittelsev, for ¥.,3.. A., and Capta.in Henry Williams for U.S.iT., 
and A. J. Doyle, Executive Secretary. 

Chr.rleston Dry Dock Company recmest for exemption for v/elders. Ho 
action taken pending further develoonents . Serious long discussion bet- 
ween Industry and Labor centers to "Plan" and attitude of Industry. 
Inc.ustrj'' members were oropared to walk out followed by Labor Members. 
Conference of H. Kewton Whittelsey with Industry members, who agreed to 
"plan of September 6" with t"'0 -unimportant dele,tiono. Labor members 
would not imnodiately agree, principally because of attitude of the 
Code Authority. (Labor members agreed the following da.yi (This sub- 
ject set forth in detail under previous title"!. Meeting adjourned 6:00 
P.l.i., after being in session since 10:00 A.M., except lunch hour. No 
other business considered. (Code Authority authorized Industry members 
to approve "Plan of September 6" as modified, Committee re-authcrizcd 
by Order 2-22, November 1, 19S4, and Plan approved Administrative Order 
2-23, November 7, 1334, all as set forth in detail under previous title). 

The following briefs of the minutes of meetings that followed the 
complete setting uo of the Cojmiittee November 7, 1934, were made by A. 
J. Doyls, Executive Secretary, in memorandum, July 5, 1935, addressed 
to ?I. Newton Whittelsey, Assista:at Deputy Administrator. (Reference: 
Industrial Relations Conmittce Polder, Deputy' s Files) 






When the "Plan" of June 21 was submitted to the Advisory Boards 
and Compliance Division, the Labor Advisory Board recommended many 
changes which made it necessary fo-r the Author to redraft the "plr.n" 
under date of June 18th, Messrs. Wharton and Calvin, La.bor members of 
the Committee, appeared before the Walsh Comraittee of the Senate and 
made complaints. Senator Walsh addressed the Secretary of the ITav;"-. 
Conferences were held and finally the Order 2-31, dated August 15, made 
the Industrial Relations Com^iiittee independent of the Code Authority 
by IJ.R.A. paying the expenses; the order also eliminated the necessity 
of apiDOinting the seventh member. 

Executive Secretary attempted to get a meeting on August 6, 1934, 
but without success. The CoLimittee members considered it useless to 
hold meetings through this period through lack of authority and inabi- 
litj;- to apparently act. The Author redrafted the "plan" August 28, 1934 
to comply with the new condition of the Committee as established August 
15, 1934, "by Administrative Order 2-21. The Committee was brought to- 
gether at the meeting of September 6, 1934.) (This subject is set forth 
in detail under previous title.) 

Meeting of September 6, 1934 . 

- Present: Messrs. John B. Woodward and James Swan for Industry, 
Arthur 0. Wharton (Chairman), and* Joseph S. McDonagh and William A. 
Calvin for Labor, and A. J. Doyle, Executive Secretary. Also present 
were Colonel ViT. W. Rose, Deputy Administrator, H. Newton Whittelsey, 
Assistant Deputy Administrator, and Captain Henry Williams (CC) U.S. 21. 

Order 2-21, August 15, 1935, read; Letter from C. C. Knerr, Se- 
cretary-Treasurer of the Code Authority, requesting the return of an^r 
money left in the petty cash fund as of Augast 15, 1934, was read. Exe- 
cutive Secretary, A. J. Doyle rea^-oointed. 

"Plan for Adjustment," dated August 28 received from H. NevTton 
W'iittelsey, Assistant DeT3iity Administrator, with letter. It was stu- 
died and discussed, and compared with "Plan of June 21, 1934." "Plan 
of August 28" read article by article, some modif ic§.tions made and 
adopted by the Labor members, Industry members not voting, as they 
considered they lacked authority from Industry. Secretary directed 
to draw new plan from "Plan of August 28" as modified, which was hnown 
as "Plan of September 6." (This subject is set forth in detail under 
the previous title) 

Committee authorized a Budget of $25,000 to be submitted to I^.R.A. 
(Ko attempt made to do other business, during the four hours of the 
meeting^i . 



9732 



Meeting of No vember 7th 

Those present v/ere John B. 7/ooclw;;.rd and James Sv-'pn for Industry; 
Arthur 0. T/haxton (Chair-aan) fnd; Joseph S. I cDona.'^h for Labrr; A. J. 
Doyle, Executive Socrjtr.r-/, find Captain H^.nry Williams, U. S. U. , and 
H. ilewton Whittelse'"", Assistant De-'Utv Administrator, for S.l.A. 

Comroitteo revised and adopted nov.' s 't of By-Laws, Conraittee ap- 
proved changes in Flan for Adjust-aent r!.coni.ionded b^ national .Recovery 
Administration. ComiTiittee noted reruost of 'I.E. A. for recommendation 
on designer, mold loftraan exccT)tion which had been requested bv the 
Industry. Committee voted to send L'r. r'cDona.r^h a.nd 'Executive Secreta- 
r;'' to the yards concerned to determine coiiditions and whether such an 
exem-^tion was warranted.' Code cora-jls.int against Moore Dry Dock of 
San Francisco passed tam.porarily in view, of inability to secure further 
details from complainant. Appointment of John J. Lane as Special As- 
sistant. 

Miscellaneous complaints against Newport News Company of date 
February, 1934, Mr. Calvin, origina.l complainant, in view of age of 
complaints, agreed that alleged conditions might not now exist and re- 
quested opportunity to check. Complaints therefore passed. Complaint 
against Great Lakes Engineering lYorks re working oower hour firemen 
and oilers 84 ho'irs per week. Company adiaitted, but stated that all 
such emploj^ees sr^laried men and therefore not londer the Code. This 
claim apparently correct, using strict interpretation of the Code, and 
Com:.iittee powerless to act. Reconi.iendation to ?T.R.A., however, that 
this situation and others IVre it bo given immediate considerstion a^nd 
that the Code be so revised and a.niended as to eliminate the possi'&ility 
of such excessive hours. 

,"L.. M. Hills, Internationa,l Brot'iierhood of Boiler Makers, Wev/ Or- 
leans, charged Warren Johnson wifn abuse of his office as Area Chair- 
man. Passed for f^orther consideration. New York Marine Workers \Iq~ 
tal Trades District Co'ijicil' s request for collective bargaining. Se- 
cretary instructed to take uo with all concerned. Gulf Coast collective 
TDargaining requests. Secretary also instructed to take up with all 
concerned. 

December 13, 1934 . 

Those present were Lawrence Y. Spear, John B. Woodward, and James 
Swan for Industry; Arthior 0. 'Wharton ( Chairman ">, Joseph S. i.cDonagh 
and William A. Calvin for Labor; A. J. Doyle, Executive Secretary, John 
Lane, S-oecial Assistant; H. Hewton Whittelsey, Assistant Deputy Admi- 
nistrator, for IT.R.A, 

Heport of sub-committee on desi.gner, mold loftman exception. Com- 
raittee recommended to 1^1. R. A. denial of blanket extensio'n, but approval 
where exceptions are justified, the burden of proof in such cases to 'be 
placed on the emolover. II. R. A. having requested recommendation on 
Industry's petition for testing installations exemption. Committee rec- 
cojnmended 60 day extension of present stay. Compliance Division, b3'- 
letter, called attention to inadequacy of present Code. Committee 
noted. Chairman of Code Authority fijrnished copy in order that a 

9732 



-578- 

revision of Code might be hastened. 

Code violations against Charleston Dry Dock CcraiDany, excecdii"-g 
\7eelcly maximum without authority in order to comolete contract. Recom- 
rae:idaticn ^lade to Com-oliance that Com-oany "oay all emplo'^'^ees worked over- 
time, time and one-half for all hours in excess of 36, such -oay-ient to 
"be made "before Januar^A .,1st, 1935, a.nd such an adjustment to close the 
case. Request of Charleston Dry Dock Con-any for exemotion frora maai- 
mwn hour provisions of the Code for welders. In view of all circum- 
stances in case, and fact that Com 'any had exceeded maximum hour^ with- 
out authority, recommendation made to H.R.'l. that exemotion be denied. 

Code complaint against Todc. of Alabpma. Treviously sent to Cora- 
pliance and that body hpd case almost ready for final disposition. Code 
Authority, by letter to Mr. Swan, requested Committee to get it back. 
This request denied. In connection with comiDlaint in G-ulf Coast District, 
• iessrs. Swan, Calvin, and Lane appointed sub-committee to -oroceed there 
and make adjustments if possible. Comolaint against three com-oriiies in 
Portland, Oregon, for not having paid 40 hours for 36 hoiirs work, passed 
for further information. 

Petition of Mills for removal of Vi'arren Johnson denied in viev; of 
fe^ct that this Committee has no authority in -Dremises. Code com-olaint 
against Lykes Bros. - Ripley. Company states not under Shiobuilding 
Code. Voted to ask interpretation of IT.R.A, Industrial Union asks 
election at Electric Boat. Voted to request statement of representation 
from £ill parties concerned. On Ilew York Ivlarine Workers' request, voted 
to advise Bennett, president, Committee v/ould be glad to hear him. 

January 24th Meeting 

Those loresent were John B. Woodward and Joseph W. Hart for Indus- 
try; Arthur 0. Vrharton (Chairman\ Willia::! A. Calvin and Jose^Dh S. 
ilcDonagh for Labor; A. J. Doyle, Executive Secretary, John Lc.ne, S;oe- 
cial Assistant, and Captain Henry Willicms, U.S.N. , and H. Newton 
Whittelsey, Assistant Deouty Administrator, for IT.R.A. Representing 
the i.Iarine Workers Trade Council Herbert Bennett, President, and eight 
re"oresentatives . 

Bennett, New York i.Ietal Trades, and officers of his Council, given - 
hearing by Conmittee on their reouest for collective bo.rgaining with 
firms in tha.t Port. Unanimous resolution nassed directing firi.is to meet 
him for purposes of collective bargaining, resolution being based on the 
uj.i6.er standing that if a meeting with Mr. Bennett devcloned any facts, 
the Committee's services would be available. Renuest of Industr^' for 
emergency vifork exem"otion noted. Coiaolaint of International Brotherhood 
cf Boiler Makers against Todd of New York, for formation of Comiany 
Union. Apioroved that it be ps.ssed in view of CoKimittr-u' s Actic:^ in 
whole New York area. 

Resolution def ini :g eiaergencv work ariroved, and recommendation 
made that same be granted Industry. Tenoorar^/- sub-com-iittee of ilcDonagh 
and Ha,rt appointed to handle emergency matters between meetings. Com- 
plaint noted that United Desic'^^a had jlaced men on 4'"i hour salary basis. 



9732 



Passed to await reioly of resDondent. 3.e; solution on service of i;r. Jaines 
Sv/ai, whose resignation became effective. 

K.H.A. having advisjed tint Lyices Bros. - Rir)ley SteoinSh'io Comoaiiy 
cpjae ■under Shipbuilding Code in certain of its work, resolution passed' 
requesting this Cora-oanj'- to maJce certain adjustments. International 
Brotherhood of Boiler Makers against Defoe, of Bay City, i ichigcn, for 
for-aation of Company Union. In viev; of Comoany being closed dovai, no 
action could be talcen. 

Meeting of March 1st in Hew York City 

Those present vera Lawrence Y. Spear, John B. 'VJoodward and Joseph 
W. Hart for Industry; Arthru 0. Wharton (Chair.nan\ Jose-^h S. McDonagh 
and William A. Calvin for Labor; A. J. Doyle, Executive Secretary and 
John Lane, Special Assistant. 

For purpose of hearing all oarties in iiarine Workers Metal Trades 
District Council case. Upon coirmletion of this hearing, Committee cori- 
. sidered request of N.R.A. for recommendation in connection with tiue 
and one-half for overtime after v^eekly narciraum hours. Labor members 
recorded themselves as in favor of siich overtime, Industry Tnembers re- 
solved against it. 

Extension of Section 3 (c) for certain Shipbuilding Com'ocnies on 
1934 naval program aporoved, not to exceed 44 hours, Labor mem.bers' ap- 
•Drcval being based on the understanding that not less than time and one- 
half being paid for all hours in excess of 36. I'.r . Gibbs of United 
Design De-oartment, 45 Broadway, was interviewed by Comraittee in connection 
with comnlaint against his Company for placing emoloyees on weekly sa- 
lary basis. No immediate action tal:en. 

Meeting of March 8th 

Those present were Lawrence Y. Spear and Joseph W. Hart for In- 
dustrj''; Arthur 0. Wharton (G-iairman\ Joseph W. McDonagh and YiTilliam A. 
Calvin for Labor; A. J. Doyle, Executive Secretary; John Lane, Special 
Assistant; James Swan, Ex-L'ember; Cr.ptain Henrv Williams, U.S.H. and 
H. ITewton Whittelsev, Assistant De'outy Administrator. 

Committee ap-oroved and forv/arded to I\:R.A. forms to be subinitted 
by Industry where testing and emergencj'' exefmotions utilized. G-ulf Coast 
sub-ccniiiittee reported. Discriminator''' discharge of one Quibbedeaux 
by Todd Galveston Dry Dock Company considered. Company requested to 
return Q,uibbedea''jx to work and jjay him such coraoensation as he had lost 
'bj reason of his unemployment. Discriminatory discharge of J.T. John- 
son by same Company. Evidence not conclusive. Comoany requested to c6- 
operate with Committee by giving further consideration to this case. 

Complaint that certain emoloyees cf this Company were not recei- 
ving a fair proportion of work handled. Resolution passed requesting 
CoH9?,ny to remedy this. Another cor.olaint of discri-ainatorj?- discharge 
denied in view of fact it aooeared this employee had vcluitarily left 
service. Hew Orleans - Complaint that for many years previous to Code 



9732 



^so- 



double time for overtime had been paid in this port but that shortly 
before Code time and one-half custom established. Committee voted inter- 
pretation be requested of U.R.A. on the basis of all the facts loncovered 
by the sub-committee. , 

Mobile - Complaint noted a.5ainst Alabama Dry Dock because of tv/o 
rates of pay for mechanics. Company requested to cooperate by abolish- 
ing maintenance rate. Complaint that Alabama Dry Dock does not recog- 
nize New Year's Day as holiday. Company requested to cooperate with 
Committee by establishing this day as holiday. Complaints against both 
Todd and Alabama Dry Dock re application of calendar day in their work. 
Voted to advise II. R. A. thereof and request that remedial action be taken 
in order that employees might not be worked excessive hours under the 
term "day" without overtime. 

Complaint that certain firms on G-ulf Coast refused to meet repre- 
sentatives of employees. Secretary directed to prepare from letter 
which might be utilized as a first step. Code Authority's protest 
against submission of emergency work reports to this Committee. Com- 
mittee unanimously voted this a proper procedure. Gulf Coast stenographic 
bills approved. Industrial Union's request for election at Electric 
Boat denied in view of its failure to cooperate with Committee by fur- 
nishing statement of strength o'r even acknowledging Committee's letter. 
Industrial Union's request for election at Bethlehem of San Francisco 
noted, and Secretary directed to secure further information. 

Wehner, complainant against Lykes Bros.-Hipley, of Galveston, ad- 
vises that adjustm:ent has been made with him and thanks Committee for 
its assistance. Complaint of Machinists and Boiler Makers against 
Dravo of Pittsburgh for violation of Section 7 (a). Ho adjustment 
possible by correspondence, sub-committee of McDonagh, Hart and Lane, 
directed to proceed to Pittsburgh to handle situation. In connection 
with threatened Camden strike. Committee considered protest of Copper- 
smiths Union of Philadelphia and Vicinity against Industrial Union 
action for them. 

Meeting of April 23rd 

Those present were Lawrence Y. Spear, John B. Woodward and Joseph 
W. Hart for Industry; Arthur 0. Wharton (Chairman) and William A. Calvin 
for Labor, and Captain Henry Williams, U.S.H., and H. Newton Whittelsey, 
Assistant Deputy Administrator, for II. R. A . 

Prior to this meeting, Chairman, at request of N.R.A. , had appointed 
Messrs. Hart and Lane to proceed to Camden in connection with threatened 
strike at New York Ship. Form letter approved where meetings requested 
between employers and employees. New York Marine Workers Metal Trades 
District Council - Com-^ittee offered its services to Companies in Port 
of New York, in order that the truth or falsity of Bennett's claims of 
representation m.ight be established. Report received from Camden sub- 
committee. Voted to add Mr. Calvin to the sub-committee and that it 
should return to Camden immediately, to use its good- offices in averting 
strike. 



9732 



-SSI- 



Alleged discriminatory discharge of Quibedeaux against Todd Galveston 
Dry Dock - Company having ;refused to make adjustment. Secretary directed 
to refer entire record to Compliance Division. San Pedro Painters and 
Scalers strike. Bethlehem Company and Los Angeles Company advised no 
members of this union in their employ. Four other smaller shops concerned. 
Labor Department advised men had returned to w ork. Secretary advised to 
confirm this and close case, ; ■ • 

Industrial Union's request for election at San Francisco plants of 
Bethlehem. Full information having previously been .sectored, Committee, 
in vioT of all circumstances, denied request. Seven complaints against 
St. Louis Car Company for excessive ^ hours and improper rate of compen- 
sation. Proper rage adjustvnents haying been determined, Company requested 
to adjust complaints by such payment. Complaint received by Gulf Coast 
sub-comn^ittee that Ingalls Iron Works, of Birmingham, performed work 
under other than the Shipbuilding Code. That Company advised that such 
was not the case. The Complainant, Alabama Dry Dock Company, notified 
and called upon for any further facts which'.TOuld assist the Committee. 

He^uest m.ade of Alabama Dry Dock that it recognize Nev? Year's Day 
as a holiday in its plants and thus elimiinate certain labor complaints. 
This Company also requested to abolish its maintenance rate of pay, it 
being alleged that such rate was Utilized ' for production work. Company 
refusing, interpretation requested of II. R. A. as to whether it constituted 
Code violation. United, Design Department called upon for final state- 
ment before Com.mittee acted upon complaint againsfit. ■• - 

As. a.. summary, I might say that in all 42 complaints of Code viola- 
tion were received. In addition, 14 complaints 'were" received which ' 
alleged violation of Section 7 (a). Miscellaneous matters presented to 
the Committee numbered 9. 

3,-. ?|c s(e 3*( >!.;*;■.* ^ s;, >.- s(< sic >|e jJE ;+: sjc ^ jji jj< jl; 5fc »|e 

Schedules .of Complaints, etc. ' . , 

There follows hereafter schedules; (l) Complaints based on wage and 
hour provisions of the Code; (2) Complaints based on Section 7 (a); (3) 
Request for recommendations and action of the Committee. These are copied 
direct froni the journals of 'the Industrial Relations Committee.. . (Ref . 
Industrial Relations Committee Files, front second drawer) 

J 

1 



9732 



zzu 



\r\ 



o 
o 



o 



o 

n 
W 
I— I 
> 



O 



o 
p 

pq 

en 

:^ 

l-H 
<^ 

o 
o 



+= 


^_ 








































r<^ 












0) 











































r^ 






« 






£) 


iH 








• 
































OJ 






-^ 






^ 


•ri 








i^ 






























• 












m 


«H 








o 

■H 
















J- 




^-t 




_-j. 






4^ 


,-J- 




+= 


S 






rH 


Q) 


^ 


^ 


^- 


+:> 












^J- 




r^ 




K^ 




r^ 






4= 


u 




c-3 


o 






-H 


<U 


r^ 


t~r- 


r^ 


t," 












l^' 








^-^^ 










Cj 


o 






+2 






e5 


-|J 


cr 


CT- 


0"^+= 












CT 




bO 




CCj 




to 








4^ 




4^ 








-p 


4^ 


rH 


r-\ 


r< 


CD 












r-i 




rH 




rH 




H 






m 


l+H 




ri 


•zi 









•H 








^ • 




















^^^ 




— -^ 






•d 


c3 







o 






^ 


r3 






A 


f^ "-i 












• 




CVJ 




CM 




OJ 


• 


• 


• 






E 


o 




1 




'^ 


r^ 


1^ 


K" 


u o 












K 




rH 




<-\ 




<-^ 


H^ 


4^ 


o 


b! 




4= 


u 






^ 


O 


rH 


r-\ 


1 — i 


CD O 












rH 














a 


ri 


o 


ri 




cn 


fiO 






CO o 


o 








+^ M 
















EH 




EH 




EH 


CD 


CD 




■H 




p) 


rj 






M ts 




• 


• 


• 


a 












• 




CO 




CO 




CO 


s 


G 


fH 


4J 




•ra 








m 1) 


in 


o 


o 


o 


•H U 












O 




g 




% 




pq 


H^ 


4^ 


o 


CD 




T=l 


• 








C 


w 


w 


W 


CD 












PI 








[3 


m 


cn 


Vh 


CD 




oJ 


o 




1 


."S CD 


o 


H 


B 


a 


fH > 












Pi 




01. 


CJP 




a 


^ 


•^ 




e 






o 




1 




•H 








O 1) 




















W 




P-!,--- 




CD 






Ti 








+2 


ci) 


CS 


ci) 


=n >:: 












cp 




Ph 




rt 




Pi 


nj 


"5 


^c:! 


o 




CD 


• ' 








nJ 


S 


Jr;^ 


S 














1^ 














03 


o3 


Oi 


la 




rcl 


\r\ • 




1 


C) 


rH 


1— 1 


t-H 


1— 1 


2 o 












hH 




■^ 




^ 




1 






E 






c 


ro LT^ 




-p 


0) 


&H 


[IH 


EH 












EH 




g 






'M 


<« 








CD 


— .1^ 






o 


Ph 


p^i 


M 


W 












\A 






Esi 




o 


u 


o 


• 




E 


r^-^ 


CO 


!» 


rt 




w 


H 


pt^ 


+^ 












H 


















4J 


r' 




E 


Csi CM 


r-i 


rH 


tH 


r-\ 






O Cti 
















© 




CS 




© 


in 


tfl 


ri 


E 




o 


^.-..^-^.^ 


~riU 


* 




03 








+J +i 


























w 


CO 


CD 


o 




V ^ ir^ 






rH 


•H 


R 


S 


g 


U> fH 


R 


a 


g 


S 


@ 







r^ 




i 




1 


CD 

o 


CD 

o 


E 

CD 


o 


PI 


CD 
^1 


&j3 • 


CD 

cn 


CD 
05 


pj 


+^ 


E-i 


ti^ 


EH 


r^ a 


Eh 


EH 


EH 


EH 


EH 


EH 




t^ 






^ 


o 


o 


W) 


CD 


EH 




ri 4^ 


03 


03 


<H 


m 


CO 


CO 


CO 


^-, !H 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


02 


CO 




B 






ei 


in 


fH 


p 


Jh 


CO 


• 


•H O 


O 


O 




?! 


t-1 


& 


fD 


rH CD 


H 


t) 


|o 


&■ 


1^ 


D 








[5 


P 


Ph 


c^ 


o 


.■-D 


E 


4J rH 






^1 


-a 


H-D 


1-3 


t-D 


r-{ -P 


>-j 


f-i 






i-s 




EH 




EH 




EH 






'rH 


tn 


•-D 


E 


O 


CD 


CD 


O 


C 
n 


% 


C5 


TH 




S! 


q 


% 


^ 


Q 


^ 




s 




^ 




Ph 




HH 






9 


o 
o 


>. 
E ,£2 


O 
CO 


CD 
CO 


*• •• 


• • 
• 


• • •• 

t)0 


«• 

M 


• • 
bO 


•• •• 


•• 


• • 


• • 


• • 


• • 


• c 

rH 


• • 


• • 
CVJ 


• • 


• • 
CM 


•• 


• • 

CM 


• • 


• • •(> 

.CT- 


• • 


• • 


• • 


• • 


• • •• 


• • 


*• 


g 


^ 


. 


^ 




OJ 


rvj 










r-\ 




r-\ 




rH 




rH 




LT- 


CM 
















d o 


g 


r^ 


rH 


rH 


r-l 


*-^ 


^^ — 










■- — ^ 




- — 




~~^ — , 








r^ 


~~^~- 
















O tH 


o 


CT> 


r-^ 


H 


r-\ 


t-A 


r-^ 










C\J 




CVJ 




CVJ 




OJ 




CJ1 


r-i 
















rt 


o 


rH 




• • 


o 


• • •• 


rH 




• • 


• • 




r-K 
• * 


• • 


rH 

• • 




• • 


• • 


r-H 

• r 


CO 


H 




• • 


• • 


• • 

o 


• • 

o 


«• •• 


• • 


»• 






** 




to 


, ffl 




^ 






ai 


r-\ 


1-1 


rH 


rH 


r-i' 


H 
















CJ 


LO rH 






^-^ 


CM 




CM 


LT 


4^ 


+= 


f-o 






-- — 


--^^ 


■--^ 




•--.^ 


■~--, 


















— ^ 


l-^ ^~-^ 








^ 




■-^ 


*-*^ 


■cti 


;:i 


CT 






o 


rH 


rH 


o 


r-\ 


r-i 


rH 
















r-i 


C/ rH 






rH 


'."M 




CM 


r^ 


1=1 


u 


rH 






iH 


•-\ 


rH 


rH 


rH 


r-'. 


rH 
















r-\ 


rHJ ^^ 
















'! 


" 




• • 


O 


• • •• 


LT 


rH 


ir 


IT 


L'" 


^D 


** 


o 


" 


" 


** 


q 


w 


r- 


OJ 


** 


U3 


c" 


** 


h^ 


ir- 


CD 


rd 


^ H 


CM 


H 


^-.^ 


-~ — . 


r-\ 


^- — 


■^~^ 




CM 




rH 




H 




t — i 


rvi 


LT 


1—1 


r^' 




ai 


CM 




OJ 


CM 


•P 


o 


r^ --> 




~^-^ 


r^ 


rH 


-^ — , 


r-{ 


rH 


r-i 


-^^ 








^^ — 






— ^ 


r^ 


^ — , 


*-^ 






^ — . 




■~-H 


**^ 


c5 


(D 


o^ <-{ 


,^ 


O 




<-{ 


o 


rH 


rH 


rH 


r-\ 




CM 




OJ 




cv 


H 


cr 


rH 


r-i 




r-i 


CM 




CM 


ru 




• • 


• • •• 


CD 


rH 

• • 

cn 


•• •• 

(A 
o 


• « 

S4 


r-i 

• • 


• • 


• • 


• • 




• • 


• • 


0) 


r-\ 


•• 




rH 

£1 


rH 


• • 
CD 
CJ 


«• 


« • 


«• 


• • •• 


•• 


•• 






(4 


p! 


03 


M 


o 


tH 


o 


s::; 










CD 






o 


o 




ri 




m 














o 


CD 


< 


+^ 


d 


J_3 


o 




l+H 






^1 






rr 


o 




CD 






■ri 












Vl 


Pi 


rH 


jj; 


m 


Oj 


en 


4J 




o 


r-\ 




<A 








K 




Ti 




ri' 







t 


r: 






o 


• 


U 




(D 


r-\ 


(D 


Cfl 


tr 




<A 












CH 


•H 




r-r 


o 














rt 


O 


n^ 


> 


M 


,>> 







a 


V) 




<-\ 








•J 


> 




t^ 








EH 




• 






o 


rH 


"oj 


rH 


> 




Ph 


o 




03 








O 




^i 






t: 






Fh 


'iri 


E5 




03 


O 


cj 


,— ' 


«■ 




^ 




CJ 






z= 


u 




O 


• 






« 




• 


W 


QJ 


IS, 


a 




cis 03 


I--- 


•4 






o 








Crq; 


^••H 




O 


+3 




tz 


S 


l;^ 




<lj 




^=5 


o 




•■ 


!CJ3 


p] 




^ 




i-q 






o 


t-5 








U 


m 






^ 






i_d 




1— 1 


» 


V-; 






c/:i 


..> 


W 


• 








tl' 






^ 




PI 






* 


m 




s' 


«3i 


.. 


EH 


rt pql 


p:;' 


... 


^^ 


;>^ 


^i 


% 


M 






EH 


■ 




UJ 






M 




1^ 


o 


H^ 




n 




CO 


p< ,r2,,p 


Fm 


M 


!-'| H 


m 






!-H 


F-i 


c/a 


M 




• 


r-q 




^ 


Es; 


^. 




> 


• 


h3 




.-1 


1-7, 


> ^ 


O 


E'l 






K 




t> 


pq 




k A 


M 




3 








n 


v^ 


pq Khr-i 


i3 


^ 




'-3 


CO 




H-j 






' 'i 


O 


3 




1 H 




o 


• 


o 






M 


n .Ml 


i-i 


F6 


f,-l 


• 


Cj 




• 




t 


*^'t 




• 




M 


o 




P 


Ph 


o 




o 


• 


' "* 


1-1 




r^ 


C'5 


O 


H 


CD 


'co 


s 




;~i 


1^ 


|h 


o 




Ph 


IH 












• 


Ph 


• 


• 





• 


f-i 


* 


• 


in 


* 




• 


1-1 




• 






n 






• 






'^l 


: T 


•^-i 


• ,1^1 


r^l 


1^ 


'T 


o 


■'-1 


c:!-! 


■A 


Cj 


o 




C^ 


hT 


o 


CO 




A 






rn 


t= 






• 


O 


• 


'■A ' * 


• 






r^i 


o 






> 






• 


:-H 


«• »r 


o 






• 




■^ 


Pi 


• • as 


• » 


• • •• 


Pi 

• • 




« „■ «' 


CO 


cb 

• 


o 


cj 


t: 

»« 


[3 

• * 


• • 




eo 


*• 


• • 


< 




• ■ 


• 




»• •• 


Ph 

• • 


p:i 

•• 










• 


i 
















CD 
rH 








• 

O 


o 


« 


















# 




c\3 




















CD 








c > 


r'H 


o 


















n 


(. 


i-:i 


sr 














ca 




CD 




CD 






t:^ 


CJ 


















• 


CO 


















k 1 




+i 




a 




.:) 






















Pi 


^l 


• 














^ 


"S 




CO 




•H 




f; 


• 


Q 


















oS 


o 


C: 


>a 








• 


o 


o 








A 




•H 


■P 


HJ 


















• 






« 


CD 




P 


p 


o 


o 


l-^ 




t>8 




O 




r^Cl 


Ph 


O 






• 




• 


• 


EH 




w 


• 


',-i 


rt 


rH 




O 


O 


CD 


o 










03 




o 


CD 


fd 




X 


o 




o 


o 


•^ 




• 


fX 




en 


P- 




.-cl 


.iH 






f! 




fl 




S 




cj 


O 


-3 




tn 


CJ 




o 


o 


M 




CO 


a 


rt 


05 


•H 


^ 


CO 


CO 


« 


>-, 


O 




o 








g 




o 




O 
















w 


o 


•=^ rt 


o 






o 


^ 


U 




u 




<^ 






ri 


Pi 




r*"' 


u 




u 


u 




tfl 




m 




I 


o 


© 


CD 


H^ 


R 


I— 1 




v~\ 








r-1 


!lO 


Ph 






c^ 




03 


a 


O 




fe^ 


m 


a 


P4 


» 


n 


(^ 


S 


w 












• 




rH 


•H 






E- 


o 




o 


o 


Ph 




QJ 


O 


^ 


o 


Oi 




■H 


•H 


o 


S 


rH 




CD 




W) 




ri 


CO 


• 




CD 










W 




s 


^ 


o 


(-H 


Ci 


th 


Xi 


<-* 


>> 


o 


CO 




+3 




a 




(^ 


CD 


4^ 




^ 


GQ 




tn 


w 


g 






»^ 


CO 


p 


r-< 


o 


"cj 


rH 


+= 


•H 




4^ 




pq 






PI 


o 






•H 




•H 


•ri 




+^ 


^A 






m 


Pi 


,o3 


rt 


cj 


w 


O 




CD 








^ 




Ph 




t)-l 


■3i 




rd 


pi 






f^ 




p! 


ffl 










ci 


CD 


f-: 




E^ 




ct3 


_ 




-cJ 






o 


b 




o 


o 






o 


4J 


CD 


s^ 


CT 


CD 








r-l 


CD 




03 




& 


V. 


W 


'D 


• 






I-:? 




PI 


1^ 






p 


ru 


Th 


■H 


CD 


U 


CD 


CD 


li 


rH 


r:; 




rH 




•H 


'-' 


^' 


-1-= 


ri 




t! 














& 


OJ 


fn 


Jh 


I- J 


o 




E" 


■c^ 


03 


E 




r-\ 




^Q 


& 


T) 


•H 


ri 




'^ 


• 




• 


• 






o 


?H 


,5 


03 


■>: 


o 


G 


O 


o 


^ o 




■H 




rH 




•H 


C 


CD 




o 


.+■■' 




4^ 


4J 


• • •• 


• • 


.. s 


ci 

• • 


• • 


"?. 


• • 


^ 


■A 


<^ 


tt 


o 


o 


• b 


B« 


• • 


«« 


• • 


p.; 

6 J 




Pi 


^^ 




• • 


• • Al- 


CO 

« • 


CO 


CO 


O 


rH 


C\J 


r^ 


^ 


ir> 


UD 


r— 


CX) 


o> 


o 


r-l 




CM 




r^ 


, 


_-^ 


LO 1 


CO 
rH 




I-- 


r.o 




CT> 


o 


^ 


■^ 




1 


















rH 


rH 




rH 




H 


1 


1 — ' 


rH 


1 




rH 


H 




rH 


I'M 



22<L6 



^ 














• 


^ 






1 












• 














+= 


^-^ 








• 


m-i 









CD 


^ J 


• 








'd 














(D 


(D 








G 


s 


C."' 


t 




Vi 


li 


■ci 




^M 


^ 















I 


(P 


rH 








e 


r- 




pi 














to 


!>5 


<D 












e • 


^ 


•H 

















r-! 







] 







■'i 


d 


F-i 















02 


tH 














+5 





• 


4= 




?4 




,'h to 
45 (D 


5J 


1. 












to 


rH 


CD 








''i 


•^ 


• 


CD 


',■'. 


;~^ 


ri 


V 




4-3 




rH 












<X) 


■H 


Q) 








H--' 




p.; 


6 


•H 


•in 


rH 




S^J CJ 


'-■^ 


p 












X\ ^c! 


tl 


-|J 








•iH 


'm 




c. 


t. 


' 1 


r> 




fH 


Th 















T) 


4^ 


4J 








S oJ 


r , 


r-( 




T-i 


r-i 


't: 


6 






CD 


fH 












e 


O 


■H 












'M 




g. 





f-i 




• : 


4^ 














4J 


'd 










■H C 


>: 








».., 










f? t 

















4= 




g 








« c\; 


^( 


CO 


H^ 


1 — ; 


6 


• 







•H 4^ 


>= 


t- i 












CO rd 


r^ 


O 








cti 





c:- 


rO 











r^t 




rH 


'H 














d (D 


OQ "b 


O 








S s^ 


g' 





•H 


0) 











g^ 


•H 


• 












C' rH 


S 0) 


















rH 


Fh 







• 




J-l 


to 












•H 


cn 








>1-H 





CD 


•H 




■H 





■d 




•H 


Cb 


CD 












fH :^ 


5i 


C 








rH +3 




fH 








<M 


4J 


CD 




fH > 


rH 


f. 












CD Cn 


i: <u 


o 








^ p3 


ElO 


•H 


C 


I^H 


•H 




d 




CT* 


















^:^ 




•H 








CD Td 


S 


4J 










• 







=)H .i:^ 




r-. 












U (D 


4J 








0) c! 


■H 


d 







ID 





•H 






■d 


f^i 












m 




^i: 








& CD 


m 


Q) 




• 


Pi 


CO 


4^ 




'd ftH 


(D 


d 












Ph 


w 


rH 








r • 







«k 





td 


CD 


fH 




(DO. 


X 


p 












• 


+= 


O 








U B 'ti 


tH 


c 


^ 







!H 







^' >• 


CO 














T^J C(-H 


o 


rt 








CD (D 


CD 












P 




CO 0) rH 


cd 


CD 


» 


• 


• 


• 


* 


ID rH 


cd 




K) 


CO 


to 


4^ 43 


^1 


•H 


C(-l 





',2; 


>^ 


P 




cti p 




e 


w 


UD 


ivJ3 


VjJ 


UD 


CO CD 


«H 


rH 


rH 


rH 


r-^ 


Ch (D .H 




4= 


4^ 


4^ 




U 


CC 




•H CD 




• H 


rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 


rH 


■H CO 




a 


-1!= 


* 


=*= 


C^ fH Cti 


• 


r 


^ 













<i; 4^ jh 


4^ 


' lU 


^-It= 


H|- 


^H* 


> s 


rH 


•H 








r-: 





■d 


P* 


4J 


• 


4^ 


>: 


• 


P4 tJ 














■d -H • 


rH 


^1 


0) 


CD 


<D 


0) (D cti 





P! 





C 


R 


r^' 


r-i 







Jh 


CD 


CD 





CD 


CD 


cd ^ 


,1! 


-P 


0) 


CT 


w 


S ■ri 







^C- 


« 


M 


■H 


t! 


r 1 


u ',-; 


ir^ 


0) 


CQ 


CO 


CO 


CO 


02 


H 


«H 


0:1 


cti 


Ct 


cti 


•H a r--~. 


10, 


■■; 




U 


FH 


rH 


ClJ 


bH 


LCA Ph 


K^ 


t> 


Cd 


cd 


Cj 


Cd 


Cd 


S 4= EH 

cd fl 




;ri 











■!J n 


r^^ 


n Pi 


CO 




M 


•H 


> 


UJ 


r^i 






















fn 


-S 








S4 -H 




c3 


4^ 


(-1 


r^ 





a) 


^^ 


^- — a c 


K^, 














M .H M 


O 


fi 


CD 


CD 


0) 


1' 'd rH 


;^ — . 


t) -H 








•-D • 


s 




to - >, 


rH 


U 


CD 


CD 





CD 


(D 


fn a' t-3 


Cm 


HH 


CD 


(D 


(D 


> c-j 


-^^ 


CD rH 


r' 


•H 


n ■d 





CD 


n 


-^ & 







0) 


CD 


CD 


0) 


CD 


5 '"< 9 


^-^ 


' 


Ul 


C/2 


t/D 


^; P 


LC-. 


rl S 


fin 


4:> 


■aj CD 





rO 


."?. 


!r\ cL"! p 


To'^' 


CO 


CO 


to 


CO 


CO 


>^, " 


• 


" 


" 


'* 




" 




*■ 


** 




** 








> •'« 




■'' 












Tj ;h 


^ 


LOf 












































CS o 


B 


r^ 












































0) Vl 





CT 












































Pi 





rH 












































• • •• 


• • 


• •> •• 


• • 


>• 




• • 


• • •• 


•• 


•t 


• • •• 


• • 


«• 


•• 


9*- ••. •.♦ 


• •, 


"t 


• « 


• • 


• ■ 


• • 


• • 




CD 




IT 


LT 


LP 


tr 






































-p 


4^ 


l^~ 












































rj 


ri 


O' 


|V- 


r^ 


7^ 






































f-"l 





rH 












































• • •• 


" 


• • WW] 


■^ 


vo 


h- 


^ 


• ■ •• 


•• 


*' 


#• •• 


" 


" 


" 




•^ 


*■'• 


ir 


" 


^'^ 


h" 


CKI 





CD 


t:) 


LT 


OJ 


C\J 


OJ 


rH 


^■", 




N-, 




I 


I 




I 


1 


I 




rH 


rH 


H 


rH 


<x 


1^^ 


+^ 





h~ 


--^ 






-'-.^ 


■ — ^ 




^^ 






























^ 


CD 


O" 


OJ 


0: 


OJ 


OJ 


r-i 




rH 




rH 


r-i 




rH 


r-i' 


r— 1 




OU 


K^ 


fV^ 


r^ 


rH 


tH~\, 


fP 


^ 


rH 






.. 


rH 


r-i 




rH 










EH 








CO 






















Cfl 








" 








'35 






•ri 










■ - t 






[« 






^1 










^-^ 






M 


W 


^-^ 




d 










Ph 






■H 






<u 










c 






fi 


n 


e 




b 


• 


rr 






n 






fi 






-^ 










s 






r^ 


E 




1-^ 


> 








Erf 









:z 


^ 













^ 







b 












E-i 




a 


Th 






1-a 






S 


txj 















Ph 


o, 







• 


f-1 


S 




^ 









* 






?-. 


{ — ) 








t 






CO 


CO 


I 




4J 


Ph 


■^ 







Ph, 


E^ 




+3 






Q) 


<; 








^ 






w 


s^ 


r" 




CO 




> 




1-H 




^ 




C/3 


z: 


n 


H 


N 








pi 


— 




P-; 


d 








M 




lg 


tH 


s 




d' 






•H 












c!o 






F-H 


F'H 


l53 




CO 


f:^' 


S 

(--' 


B 





rH 

cd 


n 




(i. 




ffl 


ffl 




S 




















1=3 


l~^ 


^ 




^ 


<■; 




§ 


s 




v_^ 


B 









;2; 


^ 












I A 




EH 


• 


CD 


i-:i 









C/3 




W 







b 




to 


CO 


CO 




'-C 


3 


w 


w 


tA 


^ 


h 







K^ 


tn 


(-H 


& 




^2; 




CO 


n 




n 


1^1 


M 




EH 


P 




n 


















>■ 






K 




C/3 


rn 




r 1 


H 


1^ 




::h 








to 


•« 


O 







» 


1"^ 


< 


f-i 












,i5 




K•^ 


i-H 


1-1 




'-I 


• 




>, 


["^ 


1" H 


o 




.— . 


' ^^ 


b 


!-l 


H 




i-j 






1 -t 




CJ 










1 




n 




?^, 


•=1! 






• 




n 


» 


r '' 




• 






• 




hi 


1 "l 


i-T 






• 


rn 


Ci 






•^ 


^ 






1 
•• 




EH 




• 


1-3 




(-) 


l"^' 


f^ 




• 





i 


M 


, 1 


Th 






• 





• 


• 




• 




Ci 


« 








_) 


N 


i-i 


!3 


t--l 


p 


•• •• 


• » 


• • •• 


•• 




1^ 


• • •• 


>-7, 

• • 


• • 


• • •• 


• • 


• • 


F-1 


?. .. .. 


•• 


• • 


•• 






Ci) 

•• 




• • 








































■ 






















































• 


• 






























• 


« 




















































• 






U 


■n 




















. 


m 




» 




• 


• 










to 






P 


c 












• 


• 


• 
































• 


■H 


•H 


CO 


to 




EH 





























U 




^ 


^ 










•"ti 


'd 


4J 


+= 




3 










































Ci 


<* 










S 










a 


Ci 




S 




c 


fl 










cd 






f-H 


fH 


rW 


p! 




O 




!h 


^ 


^< 























ri 





t: 




r4 


EH 


EH 


'S 


t:! 


Ph 


^^ 




Cd 


ct; 


Rj 


4^ 


4J 




H-:* 




4^ 


4^ 








p' 




Cd 












•H 


o 







c:> 





CO 


GQ 




(/J 




tn 


CO 




,^; 


>i 


^ 













rH 


fH 


^ 


Ph 










CD 


CD 









CD 


CD 




u 


u 


c^ 






•H 


■H 


Ph 


Ph 


c/3 


to 




10 


CO 


ca 


> 


> 




i> 




l> 


> 




( 1 


n 


,—1 




CO 


4J 


4^ 


t 


• 




^ 




•H 


*H 


•H 


H 


r-! 




r-i 




rH 


r-f 








-=3; 




■ H 


n 


D 


H-5 


4^ 


k>J 




:=! 


^ 


;=i 


Cl 


oj 




a 




rj 


,CC 




cS 


nJ 






d 


Cb 


cj 





(D 


Ti 















ci 


e> 




C!) 




Ci 


C!) 






E 


t\j 







rH 


rH 


Pi 


Ph 









1-^ 


i-q 


H^l 


















& 


CV? 






l-^ 


4^ 


4-> 


t 


• 


>-i 












■^i 


'd 




-d 




-d 


nd 




rO 


-Q 


-d 






■=ll 


^-r; 


g 


C! 








• 


• 


• 


'xi 


r^ 




T.^ 




-d 


-d 






Ci . 


'd 




• 


• 


• 


a 


^ 






-p 


4^ 


4^ 























H 


rH 







4^ 





,5 


(D 


q 


CD 


•• •• 


• • 


CO 
• • •• 


CO 

• • 


• • 


EH 


E-i 

• • 


• • •• 


E( 

• • 


• • 


EH 

• • •• 


e-i 

• fe 


*• 


• • 


!^ ,. 


El 


• • 


CO 

• • 


• • 


• • 


Ph 

• • 


Ph 

• * 


S 


K 


P 


rH 


OJ 


(sr> 


-+ 


LT. 




VO 




r-- 


CO 




cr 





rH 




OJ 


r^ 


^ 


fC- 


^ 


[. 




f^i 




C\J 


OJ 


CVJ 


CJ 


CM 




00 




0.' 


00 




OJ 


.-^ 


1-^ 




r-^ 


K". 


r^^ 


(^ 


fv-. 


r^ 



-23£- 



22^6 



o 
o 



o 
w 
o 

l-H 

w 
I— I 

> 



o 






w 

H 

<^ 

O 

o 



















• 


p: 
















> 


W O 






>J 


• 








L rH 


-p -H 






rH 


f! 








S P 


O -4^ 






rH fi 


• O 


-P 






O CD 


CC EC 






■H O 


CD -H 


S 






o u 


=H Pi Pi 






-P 


^d -P 


CD 


CD 






'J CD 






p: tH 


O C'j 


■"d 


p! 




^ o 


i-d -P P 






ri o 


O !'j' 


<zj 


•H 




■p >^ 


PI -P O 






0) 


■ H 


o 


!« 




•H 


CG CD O 






. ^ 


O -P 


ft 






f!:; • 


rH O 






'd 0) 


-P m 


m 


CD 




-p 


-P 






o ^ 


a) 


CD 


p! 




CD Pi 


Pi >•, Pi 
•H Pi O 






CD -P 


-p > 


rt 


g 




-P CD 






!h 


u a 




•H 




ct i_; 


Ct O CfH 


w 




-P 


CD .H 




-P 


• 


Pi 4J 


rH -P 


M 




-P Pi 


•1-3 


• 


c 


>- 


CD m 


ft tv^ W 


s 




O CD 


^ fH 


-p 


O 


iH' 


ft pi 


S -H PI 


<^ 




^ a 


fi (D 


p; 


o 


ft 


O •?=: 


O rH -H 


^ 




cn ^ 


o 




CD 


o 'd 


O -H X 


pT-T 




^^Td 


-p 


Pi 


o 


Ph 


O cti 


O cn 


pq 




rH CD 


tJ Pi 


CS 


-p 






CO Pi CC 






ft r-H » 


CD ;d 


ft 




o 


o K 
-p pT 


p) O 






CD !n sH 


•H ft 


ft-d 


J^ 


o O >-, 






MOO 


C 


n3 


CD 




■H 


E g 






a -H 


CD t)-( 




^ 




TIJ M 






W Jl^ -P 


-d o 


p; 


o-j 


c 


CD tu 


rt CD p 

O rH H 






- q o 




o 


r:: 


p: 


.y E 






-p -^ nS 


+3 m 


•H 




o 


ui 


PI rCl O 






!=: 


fi tn 


-P 


oC; 


■H 


TO f^ 


Cti Cti O 






CD CD 


CD CD 


Cti 




•P 


rQ 


Pi 






-d • rH 


nd O 


rH 


TJ 


cti 


^0> 


to o o 






s ir^ ,o 


P! O 


o 


(D 


Pi 


•H -H -P 






O tv~\ .H 


O Pi 


•H 


C« 


CD 


a? CD 


^ -P 






Ph~~~-. '.'^ 


Pi P 


l> 


•H 


P 


ft +^ 


-p ta -p 






W LOi tfl 


cn 




> 


o 


e -p 


CD p! 






CD --^ O 


CD .p; 


o 


tJ 


o 


O -H 


CO pi CD 






rt^ P 


rt H 


'^ 


Cli 


o 


O E 


;ij C' CO 


>i 


• 
















■& u 


E 
















c6 O 


!-"-• 
















Q) tfH 


o 


















o 


































4J 


-p 
















Co 


?! 












* 




r-. 


o 


















* 


to 


U5 


r^ 






k6 


^ 


0) 


rd 


^^ — ^ 


-^^ 


cv 






r-i 




-p 


o 


^ 


ur\ 


■-^^ 








LO 


nj 


CD 






^ 






L^. 




n 


^H 




















S 


















o 


















CO 


















\=4 


















o 
















E^ 




w 










< 






■^ 




M 


1— 1 














Is; 




1— 1 


CO 














n 




rt 


I— t 








CJ 






■< 




o 


o 


o 










g 




1 


1 






1^ 


t3 






N 




g 








P 


O 








r1 






CO 




o 




pq 


o 








-1 
-~l 


M 






o 


rt 


H 






' -? 


I- . 






'■^ 


r-H 






o 


p 






.— H 


n 


o 








I'j 






f^ 




•-D 






tH' 






• 

O 




^ 






^ 


• 
o 
o 






o 


% 


cd 






cti 










ft 






ft 


• 






^ 


e 


S 






e 


ft 


EH 




Pi 


o 






D 


0) 


"^ 




■H 


< 


o 






O 


Pi 


g 




-d 


















rH 


p; 


Pi 






Pj 


o8 


^ 




■H 


a 


a 






td 




O 




pi 


> 


O 






o 


• 


FM 




rCl 












n 


CO 




ft 


• 


CO 






tn 


• 


^ 




•H 


> 


•H 

pi 






•H 

pi 


fi 






CO 


CD 


o 

1-^ 






O 


m 
P! 






W) 


d 










•iH 






^^ 


Pi 


• 






o 


,a 






CD 





+J 






•P 


O 






m 


>-:> 


ro 






CO • 


Ph 


H 


• 












.. 




CO 


p 


CO 


(T\ 


o 






>H 


rj 


■< 


r— * 


K^ 


K> 


J- 






^ 


^t 


o 
















1 





c^.l 



•^82- 



seiG 




~St 



82^5 



O 

n 

E-i 
O 



CO 

EH 

h 
o 

o 





t:! 




(D 




> 




•H 




(D 




O 




fi Q) 




CD fn 




S 




fH 




t(H a> 




o > 









m 




0) >; 




S rH 




cti P- 




C 0) 




fH 




u 




o o 




tH ^ 




id • 




CD -P 


(73 


^ CO 




C\3 -rH 


3 


cti 


^ 


C! tl 


§ 


O cti 

•H 




p! 'Ci 




lb CD 




+J 




rH Ct! 




cS CJ 




•H -H 




fH E 




•P -H 




to Jh 




pi O 




•Q V) 




C -H 




HH -CJ 




Ln 




^-^ 


(D 


•^-..^^ 


-P -4^ 


CJ 


ci5 ;:! 




R o 


To 


• 


LO 


Q) t:) 


I^ 


+J O 


-~ — _ 


Oj <D 


O 


R U 


t•'-^ 




5^ 




rt 


EH 


o 


1 


•H 








1-J 


M 




< 




^ 


I— 1 


i-T 


cl 


(^t 


•H 




r-l 


O 


4J 


o 


t,^ 




n 




■•o 




rt 




1-H 


EH 




rg 




w 




n 


cn 


^g 


g 


o 


a) 


FM 


!2; 


CO 




s 


+3 




O 




& 




CD 




t- ■-• 




f^-t 


id 


rH 


c3 ^ 


^ 



<U 




+3 




+3 




•H 




^ 




g 




O 




O 




w 


m 


Pi 


CD 


o 


CD 


•H 


-P 


■P 


-P 


crt 


•H 


H 


H 


O 


t^: 


P\ 


O 




(_> 



rJ CO 
•H rf 
Ph o 



^-3 


H 


rt 


CD 


n 


P--I 


I 


rH 




nl 


CD 


•H 


rH 


Ph 


•H 


-P 


tH 


M 




:D 


I 


Ti 




rt 


■P 


H 


n) 




Cl) 


1 


.d 




CO 


• 




Ul 


H 


CD 


•H 


-P 


CTJ 




■P 


C 


0) 


•H 


ai 


e 


o 


'<D 


Cl) 


CD 


CO 


C/J 


* 


* 




* 



-98t 



* 




* 


* 


:n 


C/J 


(D 


CD 


CD 


CD 


r! 


pJ 


H- 


m 


s 


r+ 





■0 


Tt 


H- 


(!) 


M 


M 






W 


1 


'P- 




CD 


1-4 


Q 


3 


c+ 


P* 







1 


CI 




c+ 


1-t) 


l-J 


H- 


H- 


M 


^ 


CD 




I-) 


W 


3 


tn 


-^ 


M 


fi 


P 


to 


c+ 


c+ 


H- 


^i 


O 


H- 


t"! 


''.J 


M 


M 


O 


td 


O 


m 


pi 

.J 


P 


H- 


c+ 


c1- 


H- 


c+ 


O 


Cf 


3 


CD 


cn 


m 


o 


H- 


o 


1--' 


B 


CD 


;^ 




H- 




c+ 




<r+- 




CD 




CD 



9732 















-387- 
















V 




r 




r 


r 


V 


t' 


r 




t' 




T 





v-> 




C3 






CT^ 


'^■n 


P- 


^_kJ 


IVi 




\-' 


CO 




























r. .? 


' ' ^ ^ 


O 


H- o 


D5 


"i ^ 


^4 c-;- hd 


CD CD W 


J H- "j 


" ^ 


hi) 


" bd 


CD 


" "j 




H- H- l-i 


c+ 


y o 


X^ 


^-^ CD 


CD H- l-J 


3 B CD 


H- 3 M 


P CD 





X 




X 




c+ 3 O 


t." 


CD « 


H- 


O ►D 


CD 3 o 


CD "td lO 


4 0^1 c+ 


3 0>1 .Q 


<-i 


cl- 





■^ S 




c+ CD <r^ 


CD 


D' 


•d 


^-^ P 


rr CD <-!■ 


l-i c+ t:J 


CD (D 


c+ CD fd 




P CD 


CD 


3 




CD CD 


4 


CD fi 




C 


M CD 


JI3 H- CD 


tn CD 3 


*-i CD 


P^ 


hH 3 


cn 


^ '5 




pj i-s cn 




^ M- 


r>> 


l-lj CO 


■ij {u to 


CD to 


y, to 


p i-^ tn 


CD 


M tn 


m 


ct- 




(D et- 


O 


f:; H- 




O c-t- 


3 c-b 


3 3 ch 


}-• }-•• 


p C+- 


CO 


H- 




4 H- 




ch f-ci 


o 


\->- Pi 


Ld 


hj 


.3 r-i- 


^ 


l\j 3 


c1- c+ 


H- 


-^ 





fr 




O O CD 


pj 


'd w 


M 


-f-' 


P o 


=< F cl- 


^n:-i 3 


CD 


r; 


3 


>-+> 


H- 3 


fe; 


i-J S 


CD 


3 


CD 


tJ 


!<! O ^1 


3 CD 


OJ ct- 


tn 


3 


^. 




3 


>»=■ 


H c+ (D 


• 


CD t-t, 


o 


cr^ 3 


H- 3 P- 


^ p- ;i; 


-J h'- l-J 


^ P 








1-^ 1-j 


h3 


3 10 hi 




P M 


c+ 


c+ O 


g T ^ 


CD 'J 


~-- ra 


fd 3 
3 • 


l-i 


CD 





CD 


i 


p' C': 




c+ O 


i-J 


fi^ 


t-i l-i 


^jj 3 ►□ 


'P 


3" ►Q 


P- 


■4 hO 


• cy CD 




p 


H' 


■-: 3^ CO 


W l-i 


-P' fd 


p. 'p. 


J 


►i F 


CD 


CD fd 


Id CD 3 


^ 


F "^ 


O 


CD cr. 


to p 


• C3 P 


• Uj CD 


CD CD 


H 


to CD 




h-J CD 




O H- O 




P H' 




r-'- X 


• (-■ '-d 


pu'^ 


fj' CO 


hi c+ 





• to 


3" 


pJ CO 




.^J^'^ 




p. 3 


trf 


CD H- 


1-1, i-j 


H- H- 


. , ro 


hb 


'd ch 





CD c+ 






O 0>3 


O 


S CD 


o 


CD 





►t) 4 


d- 


CD 


fd 


f-J 




o o 




hi 


P 


- 3 


P -.1 





3" ct 


^ 3 


trf 


4 'v^ 


'-i 


to ch 




o CO <; 




n 


c+ 


r/5 


Mj H- 


S^T 


CD 


^ M- 


g 




m 







g ji; o 




EU p 


• 


►^ o 


c+ pj 


Q CO 


3 


^ '-^ 


• 


H- 




E3 o- -;J 




? "^^ 




CD H- 


hi 


t;i "^ 


CD 


• 


?r 




3 P 




• 1 1 




1 1 




3 


Cj 




t > 






• N — y 




..t 




o 




l-H 




f:^' Ki 


t"j 








Ej 







** 





** 


o 


' ^ 


!-• 




3- 


o 








P 









hJ 




^■^ ^^. 


*~* 


H- c-; 


^— ^ 


f-; CD 


'-^ pj 


^-^p. 


^-—^ (-Ij 


ct- n, 




X— N r-)j 




'"^p 




tl 


o 






p 


^CD 


9^ 

^ 


td CD 
^ 




fe! CD 

^ 




a ►d 
It- CD 




o 


\-' 


p en 




o 


o 








rt 









t'.' 




»i n 


O 


*-i 


hi 


L-i O 


1-J ', -^ 


►^ i:3 


"^ 3 


1— » 




i-j r" 




hi ct- 




CD :: 




^ M 


O 


CD r: 


o '": 


CD r^ 


CD 5 


t::. 




CJ 2 




CD 




Hj H- 


'-j 


. 4 


i-b 


'r; ^d 


l-j H- 


h'j H- 


I-+) h"- 


■-1 p 




Hj H- 




^ 3 




CT- 


(D 


?S§ 


CD 


ct- P 


O c+ 


CD c+ 


CD c1- 


CO 




CD d- 




CD 


hd 


l-J cf 


d 


4 


• b 


•-i c+ 


l-i ci- 


i-i cl- 


« 3' 




^i ci- 




l-i U 


fe 


i-J CO 


03 


!^ -, 


i-i 


H- 


f-i CD 


H^ CD 


^i CD 


H- 




i-i CD 




hi Hj 


CD CD 


H- 


• a 


CD 


CD 


CD CD 


CD CD 


CD CD 


3 




CD CD 




CD =<: 


^ 


■S- 


>-J 


o 


fi- 


to 


-£i 


fi- 


fi- 


CD 




fi. 




P' 




CD 
03 


IV 

M 




O 

o 

CD 

o 
o 

3 











• 

CD 
f 












• 






o 


cp ** 










• • •• •• 


M 














o 


• 




ro 


rv) 


M 


H 


rv) 










■-i 


>^ 


Tl 


O ^M 








---^ 


ro 












CD P 


***^ 


fj 


• "'''■^^- 




I-- 


M 


rv) 


■*-— ^ 


M 










ch 


OJ 


• 


g"^ 




cr\ 


M 


■p- 


cw 


-p:- 










Ph CD 


V,sl 








>.>j 


'^ 


v^ 


v^ 


^.^ 












yj\ 






>^ 


>jn 


VJ1 


■f=- 


-pr- 












Ui o 




> 




C/l 


ai 


" " s 


" " '^ 


•^M 




" 




*j 




W O 




o 




i-ti 


'Td 












bd 




o rr; 




1-3 




t-" 


lr< 












1-3 




t'"* 




c! t: 




1-1 




l-H 


n 


g 


p 


t>^ 




l-H 




M 








o 




1-3 


1^ 


t .' 


i- I 




1-3 









@ 




© 
o 

Ed W 




1^ 




o 


o 


Ed 


a 


l-H 




h3 











Xk 




9 


o 


fe 


- I 










H 




t-3 




O 






— " 


hH 




bd 




M 




td 




1-3 n 




1-3 




I'd 


l?d 





© 


JO 




t-d 




h3 




o t; 




bd 




g 




fel 




c! 




h3 




hH 




cp 




W 




Q 




?~" ' 


n 




h-1 




h_' 




1-1 








!> 


> 


® 


tTd 


^d 




g 




cp 




w rr: 




© 




1-3 


1-3 




W 




c;3 








H O 








1— ( 


n 


"r^ 


h3 


a 








td 


g 


C/J K 




"-=* 

S 




O 


O 


w 


1-1 


• 




^d 




W 


• 






!s! 


S 


K 


^ 













o 




W 








h3 


Q 


"Tl 









• 


P 


O 01 




1-3 




© 


® 


IH 




51 




• 






P 


i •< 




I— ( 
'si. 






►ts' 




^ 


!> 




h-J 




\j4 


05 


• o 




cp 




H 


, gJ 







K 




>^Jsl 




» 




1-3 








W 


w 


Ch 


• 


> 




<* 








* H 




^^ 




1-3 


1-3 






cn 








M 




O 




o 




h- 1 


l-H 


^ 


M 






M 




V,0 








:t! 




^ 


!z; 


• 


VjJ 


ch 




>vD 




'v-nI 




* C/3 




• 




Q 


p 




^ 


( j 




^>J 




-p' 




* CJ 












ro 




^ 




-pr 




• 




o 




as 




^^ 


s 


-p- 


h^ 


h-i 




• 








W 




" 




o 


o 


*• 




CO 

Id 




» 




* 
* 




W 




M 




• 


• 


M 


r — 


HH 




* 








pH 




^r> 








'..0 


• 















Hj 




'^ 




M 


M 


^.J 




1-3 












o 




VJl 




^ 


w 


VJl 


* 


l-H 












w 




• 








• 


* 


■ 












H3 




* 




M 


M 


* 




'^ 












M 








v.O 

V--1 

'jri 
* 

* 


* 


* 




• 













i 

CO 
h3 

i=d 
o 
W 



o 

o 



td 

hH 

g 

•—I 

CO 



«3,3S- 



S'oeci'c.l Invosti r ations .and Acoiang of the -Indxistfial Relations 
Commit tee 

Deteriaination on P. "J, A. contracts as -orovided. in the resolu- 



tion of the llrticnal Lb^oot 3oard 

Pu.rsuaj.it to the reanest of Preside;it Franlclin D. Roosevelt that the 
national Labor Board study the relationship- between the Havy Yards and 
private shipbuilding concerns in regard to wages, hours of employment 
and siuilar natters, the Board reported its findings liarch 22, 1934, 
In paragraph five of the findings, the follovdng provision was set 
forth.-. (Ref. P. 'W. A. folder, De-buty's Tiles) ^ . . , 

"5, That a Board upon which employees and employers are 

equally represented be esto^blished to study wage problems 
which arise from the estc?blislinent of tlie thirty-six (36) 
hour weel: provided for in Sections 1 and 2 hereof, and 
that it shall be a, ftuiction of this Board to equalize by 
negotiation' an.y unfair competitive inequalization in wage 
rates that nay exist as a result of the past application 
in the Industry of the vra.ge and hour provisions of the Code 
plus the present application of the hours and V7age rates 
provided for in Sections 1, 2 and 4 hereof." 

* - c ' 

The Prerident 'acce-oted the repqrt and accordingly instructed the 
Directbr"'of the" Publib'Wotit's 'AcUnihlstl-ation'by letfer-oT llaT'ch 27, 1934. 
In due course the 'S-oecial Board for Public IJorks, I.iay 9, 1934, passed 
the following resolution: (Ref, P. U, A. folder, Deputy's files) 

"Be It. Resolved , That. on. all .projects fiAaAced .with 

funds allotcd by the Public Works Administration, where 
the hours and v.'a:';^r,ates provided for in Bulletin No, 51 
are in effect, such hours and ?/age rates shall remain 
in effect until J\ily 1, 1934: Provided, That on July 1, 
1934 end thereafter the hours of employment on such 
projects shall be thirty-six per week or such other 
hours per weeJr as may be authorized by the Administrator 
for Industrial Recovery under the Code' for the Shipbuilding 
and Shiiorepairing InduGtr;r, ■ 

"Be it Resolved further, That the wage rates on such 
projects in private shipyards sha,ll be adjusted by the 
aforesaid Industrial Relations Committee, such wage rates 
to be determined by that Committee before Jime 15, 1934: 
Provided, That in the event the said comnittee fails to 
mc'Jce such adjustments shall be made by the National Labor 
Board, 

"Be it Resolved further, That the wage rates on shipbuilding 
and shinrei"0,iring projects in -private shipyards financed 
with fionds alloted by the Public Works Administration, where 
Public Wor!.:s Adriinistration Bulletin No. 51 has not been 
applied shall likewise be determined by the aforesaid Indus- 
trial Relations Co.imittee whenever such adj-astment may be 



9732 



. ■ . -589-. 

hereafter adjudged by cuch connittee to be necessary," 

The Industrial Relations Conmittee at meeting of May 16th, 1934, 
received the foregoing re;olution and gave it consideration and study. 
Again at meeting June 6th, 1934, the Committee proceeded fiirther with 
the discussion 'and passed on the folloi-'ing resolution: (Ref,, Minutes, 
Industrial. Relations Connittec Files) 

"Therefore, be it renolved by recommendation of the 
Industrial Relations Conmittee that all existing 
contracts i^hich were entered into under the provisions 
of P. U, A. Bulletin No. 51, and on vhich the hourly 
wage rates prescribed in that Bulletin are in effect, 
shall be completed in accordance with the hourly wage 
rate provisions thereof, and it is so reoonraended," 

Investi£;ation regarding designers and loftsmen 

The Code Authority at the request of iirivate shipyards building 
Naval vessels requested an extension of Section 3 (c) of the Code to 
permit designers and loftsmen to vjork in excess of the maximum hours 
of the Code oh Naval vessels -under construction, A 30 day extension 
was granted, Administrative Order 2-24, signed by W. .A, Harriman, 
Administrative Officer, based on the reconnendation of the Industrial- 
Relations Committee, effective November 5th, 1934, during which 30 days 
it was planned to prcoerly investigate thir- subject. 

The Industrial Relations Committee for its part passed resolutions 
at the meeting of November 8th, 1934,. whereby a sub-conmittec consisting 
of J, S, Ivic Donagh, Labor Member, and A. . J. Doyle, Secjretary, were to 
proceed to the private shipyards building Naval vessels and malce an in- 
vestigation of the actual conditions, (Ref, fiinutes, Industrial Rela- 
tions Committee Files) Among the plants visited by this Committee \7ere 
the follor-ing: 

Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation, Quincy, j.iass. 
Electric Boat Company, Groton, Conn. 
United Dry Docks, Inc. New York', N. Y. 
New York Shipbuilding Corp., Camden, N. J* 
, N.e\Tport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company, Newport News, Va, 

The sub-committee duly reported to the Industrial Relations Committee 
at meeting .of Dcccmb.er 13th, 1934, This report is embodied in i.iinutes 
of this meeting, (Ref. Minutes, Industrial Relations Committee Files) 

f 

The Industrial Relations Committee, after discussion of the subject, 
passed a resol-o.tion (Ref, page 19, ]Iinutes December 14th, 1934) which, 
among other things, recommended that a blanket extension of 3 (c) be not 
granted. However, the Committee recognized there was cause for certain 
exceptions and set forth a plan calcul!.atea to be- clastic in nature and 
well fitted to the Industry, 

9732 



-3:30- 

Investigptions of Comr)laints from the Gulf District 

For a consideraole period of tine there wr.s much unrest in the 
principal t)orts of the Gulf District, particularly in the repair yards. 
The situation had been grooving steadily worse for a year. 

The Conrnittee took under consideration at its meeting of November 
8, 1934, several of these coraplairlts and on December 13, 1934, passed 
the followin;g resolution: 

"MOTION: That a sub-coranittee be apiDointed to proceed to 
the Gulf Coast District, as soon as' possible, for the 
purpose of investigating complaints in that area. That 
the sub-committee be instructed to investigate complaints 
noted in the agenda for meeting of December 13, 1934, 
as "8 (d) New Orleans Overtime rates", "10 (a) Todd of 
Ilobile", "10 (b) Alabama Dry Docks"; such other com- 
plaints in the area as are pending before the Committee, 
and such other matters as may be called to their 
attention, initiating from that territory, T7hich the 
sub-committee can handle on the same trip." 

The Committee a,TDoointed via.s \filliam A. Calvin for Labor, James 
Swan for Industry, p.s the sub-committee, and John Lane, Special 
Assistant. (Ref. Minutes, Industrial Ftelations Covimittee Files) 

•The sub-connittee "oroceeded to the Gulf District January 4, 1935, 
arriving in Galveston, Texas, Janua.r;/ 6, 1935, and held a hearing on 
three complaints against the Todd Galveston Dry Dock Company, which 
had acauired the old Galveston Dry Dock Com-oany business and plant. A 
full report was made to the Industrial Relations Committee at meeting 
March 8, 1935, by William A, "Calvin, 'concurred in by James Swaij.. The 
Industrial Relations Committee took action on each of these cases as 
set forth in the Hinutes of this meeting. 

The sub-committee then proceeded to New Orleans to investigate the 
controversies pertaining to overtime. It was contended, in the 
New Orleans District thpt double the hourly rate for overtime had been 
paid for a period of years, but beginning 1933 mo'st of the yards had 
paid one and one-half times the regular hourly ra.te for overtime. Hear- 
ings were held, all of which is^duly recorded and set forth in the 
meeting of the Industrial Rela.tions Committee of March 8, 1935, and the 
action takeii by the Committee. 

The sub-committee then proceeded to Mobile, Alabama, and held hear- 
ings on several cases of complaints against the Alabama Dry Dock Company, 
all of which was duly reported to the Conmittoe on March 8, 1935, as 
contained in the Minutes of the meeting, together with action tal:en by 
the Industrial Relations Committee. 

The result of this sub-committee work was constructive and created 
a good impression among both the Industry and Labor i-epresentatives in 
the Gulf District. It is the Author's understpjiding that in each of the 
ports visited that the principal operator's of the shipyards and 
shiprepair plants were contacted by the Committee and also the principal 

9732 



rspresentatives of Labor. Tae suo-conudttee work in tjie Gulf District, 
tosetj.ier wita the actions of tie Industrial Relations Com.Tiittee, substan- 
tially ended L^e t.ireat of general strikes that had been pending. 

Investigation of co.r.plaints of the Marine .Yorker s 
Metal Trades Distric t Co-u-ncj]^ Kew' JT ork .with "niprep"i!ir plants of t 
of taat area 

At the meeting of the Coinmittee of December 13, 1934, this com- 
plaint was presented and given consideration, a motion was passed to re- 
quest that Mr. Herbert Bennett, President of the Marine Workers Metal 
Trades District Council, supply satisfactory evidence to the effect, 
that his Council's Conference Board iiad in fact been delegated and 
authorized by the employees set forta in his letter. (Hef. Page 22, 
Minutes Industrial Relations Coninittee File) 

In reply the Marine lorkers I.ietal Trades District Council request- 
ed a hearing before the Industrial Helationis Committee, which was grant- 
ed and held January 24, 1935, in the Albee Building, lashington , D. C. 
The entire Com^nittee was present, except Lawrence Y. Spear, Industry 
Member, and there was al so present John Lane, Special Assistant to the 
CDmmittee, Captain Henry "JilliaiTis, U. S. N. and H. Newton Faittelsey, 
W.R.A. The Marine 'Jorkers Metal Trades was represented by Herbert Bennett, 
President, and eiglit representatives. Transcript of this hearing is 
filed in the Minutes of January 24, 1935, of the Industrial Helations 
Cora.nittee. (Hef. Industrial Relations Comnittee File) 

The Corainittee held a meeting on the saine day, January 24, 1935, and 
recessed the following day, Jpnua.ry 25, 1935. On the latter day it 
gave consideration and study to the subject hearing and passed the fol- 
lowing resolution: 

"ma, THEREPCR3, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Indus- 
trial Relations Committee, recognizing the said 
Conference Board as a properly constituted and 
authorized agency for collective bargaining be- 
tween the five ship yards and these groups of 
taeir employees, directs each of the said ship 
yards to receive, witnin fifteen (15) days from 
date of this decision, the said Conference Board 
as representing these employees for tae purpose 
of collective bargaining, and to grant to the 
said Conference Board axi opportunity to present 
to each of tie five above named employers, in- 
dividually or jointly as the parties may elect, 
such matters affecting employee relationships 
as may reasonably and properly be dealt with in 
such meetings. 

All Industry and Labor members were present, except Mr. 
Lawrence Y. Spear for Industry; also pre-ent was l.ir. John Lane, Special 
Assistant. All members voted affirmatively for tae resolution. (Ref. 
Minutes, Industrial Relations COiTunittee i'ile) 



9732 



-392- 

Tiie Commttbe receivsd a protest fr^m the Todd 3iiip;rard Corporation, 
United jjry Docks, Inc. , Atlantic 3a?in Iron lorks, Ira Bushey & Sons, 
and Brewers; Dry Dock ati,'ainEt tae Coin^mittee's action and as a result held 
a hearing in New Y.rk City at 46 Broadway, March 1, 1935, and neard the 
representatives cf the shipyards which had protested. All members of 
the Coimnittes were present; also A. J. Doyle, Sxecutive Secretary and 
John Lane, Special Assi strait. 

Stenograi'ihic report of the hearing is in the Industrial Relations 
Committee file known as X-3. 

Meeting, of April 23, 1935 in Washington. All members of the Com- 
mittee were present except Joseph 3. i.icDonagli for Labor. 

T.?-e following a,ction was tak-sn: 

"EESGLVED, that the Comm.ittee offer to each of 
the following: Todd Sliipyards Corporation, 
United Dry Docks, Inc., Atlantic Basin Iron 
\7orks, Ira S. Bushey & Sons, and Brewer Dry 
Dock, and to tho Marine Worlcers Metal Trades 
District Council of t.ie Port of !-Iev; York and 
vicinity, its services for tho purpose of de- 
termining' by investigation the question of the 
authority of the Marine Yorkers Metal Trades 
District Council of the Port of Now York and • ' 
vicinity to represent employees of 'all or any 
of the said Companies for the purpose of col- 
lective bargaining, it being londerstood that 
a Condi ti'on precedent to any sucn investiga- 
tion oy this Committee is the prior agreement 
of both of the parties to sucia investigation 
to coopera-te fully v;ith the Conimittee, and to 
make available to the Conimittee' s representa- 
tives all records, data and information perti- 
nent to the subject, and to a^bide by the Com- 
m.ittee' 3 decision. 

"B3 IT FJRTIES SZSOLVSD, that it bein^ incunbent 
upon tiiis Corainittee to dispose of t.iese cases 
promptly, each of the above-named parties be 
advised tnat nis acceptance of rejection of the 
above offer of the Committee must be in its 
hands by May first. 

"Without objection, the Secretary was directed, 
in tne event that tne Marine Workers Metal 
Trades District Council accepted the Coimnittee' s 
offer and any of the shipyards noted declined, 
or failed to make reply by the date set in the 
resolution, to advise the Council that the Com- 
mittee would receive a formal complaint or 
complaints cliarging violation of Section 7 (a) 
by those yards. Upon receipt of such complaint, 
the Secretai-y should then call on the Company 
concerned for a statement of its position, within 

9732 



. -595- 

five days, as provided in the Plan for Adjustment." 

r\ill corresnondence relating to this case if filed in the 
Industrial Relations Committee folder marked Case D-1, Ilarine Workers 
Metal Trades District Council of the Port of Nev; York and Vicinity. 
The correspondence is coniDlete and instructive pertaining to the 
apt)licr.tion of 7 (a) of the Act, 

Investig' tion of the United Design Denrrtment, United Pry Docks , 
Inc. -'ith reference to chajigin.-.; designers from an hourly ^7age basis to 
a veekly salary oasis 

The United Design DeiJartment cane into "being by reason of a contract 
between the United Dry Docks, Inc., 3pth Iron V/orks Cornorp.tion, and 
Federal Shiiobuilding and Dry Dock CohToany, thereby the Design Department 
V7as set up under W. F. Gibbs of G-ibos and Cox, for the puroose of 
designing a class of 1500 ton destroyers, t'^o of each of this class 
contracted ^ere to be built by e^ch of the shipjrards named for the 
ITavy Department. 

There v/as considerable unrest amongst the employees due to their 
reduced earnings caused loy the enforcement of the 36 hour provision 
of the Code, after the last extension of 3 (c) of the Code terminated 
December 5, 1935, -^hich permitted the '-'orking of designers up to 44 
hours. 

At the suggestion of the United Design Department, the employees 
held several meetings and considered a proposal by the company for an 
increase of pay of 5fo and the change-over from an hourly ^Tage basis to 
a salary basis of 40 hours per week. The employees voted in favor of 
this and on January 2, 1935, the change-over was made. 

In due course a complaint 'vas filed against the United Design 
Department and they were notified by the Executive Secretary of the 
Committee, Under date of January 24 a very complete reply was made by 
the United Design Department, (Complete file, Industrial Relations 
Committee) This reply set forth the full history of the situa,tion 
including the minutes of the meetings of the e:iployees and in conclusion 
set forth the following: 

"(a) The question which must be decided in this matter 
is whether the United Design Department is violating 
the Code on account of placing certain of its enployees 
on a weekly salary basis and ^-^orking 40 hours per week. 

"(b) The United Design Department takes the position 
that nothing in the Code reouires th-^t if a man starts 
to work on an hourly basis, that he must continue to 
work on an hourly basis so long as the Code is in effect, 

"(c) The United Design Department n^iintrins thrt it 
therefore has a right to change men from an hourly to 
a salary ba.sis, provided that by such change, the men 
are as '^ell or better off a.s they '"ould be under the 
hourly basis. 

9732 



-394- 

"(d) It is 'ivia.intain'ed tliat a.3 salaried employees 
are not montioned in tiie Code, it follows taat 
under .the Code, the nours of salaried emplbyees 
are subjecl: to umtup.l contract between e.nployer 
and employee. 

"(e) Considered by these standards? t^ie change in 
the status of the ..len from hourly to weekly 
Dala.ry basis, working 40 hours, has placed them 
distinctly better off than required by a strict 
interpretation of the Code, including the rul- 
ings protested by the Shipyards in respect of 
overtime, in that the men receive the same week- 
ly pay as tuey would on the overtime basis and 
that there are other advantages, well known to 
the men which follow from a salaried basis', in- 
cluding excuses, for meritorious absences, etc. 

"(f) finally , the proposed change was presented 
to the men; a period of eight days given for due 
consideration and the proposition voted on by 
secret ballot with an overwhelming majority of 
the men in favor of the pro oo sal. ' 

* 

"(g) The changed basis carries out the wishes of 
the Secretary of t-;e Eavy, and by speeding up 
the. plans uelps to re-employ men in the eight 
■ yards affected.", 

Tliis case is i aportant in tlial it points out the inadequate provi- 
sions of the Code in relation to employees' other' than those on the hour- 
ly wage basis, and also the ei.iect of tue Code in tue delay of the work 
under c:nstruction by the restriction to 36 hours. 



9732 






c. By-Laws 

"By-Laws for administering and enforcing the Shipbuild- 
ing Division of the ShiTjbuilding and Shiprepairing 
Industry" and "?y-L.?,'.'s for adrainistering and enforcing 
the Shipret>airing Division of the Shi-Dbuilding and Shiri- 
re"Dairing Industry" \"'cre submitted with the -DroTJOsed Code 
of Fair Ccm-netition at the time of submission of the 
Code. (Ref. Volume II, Code Record Safe, Exhibits I 
and J , Armx. ) 

The original By-Laws as 'submitted were modified and apriroved 
by Industry as per the folloiving excerpt: from letter of August 
20, 1935, from H. Gerrish Smith, President,, National Council of 
American Shipbuilders, to H. Ne'7ton Whittelsey, Assistant Deputy 
Administrator. (Ref. Sxh. lT-1, A-dox.') 

"By-Laws, Immediately after thfe Codn was signed by 
the President of the United States a meeting was 
called of all shipbuilders and shiprepairers v;ho were 
proponents of the Code, the first meeting 'jRing /i-iel-cl- -on Aug- 
ust 1, 1933 for the discussion and formulation of final 
by-laws for the shipbuilding and shiprepairing division, 
as some of the provisions contained in the original code 
were deleted by the Administration from the Cod.e proper 
but it was understood the nrovisions could be incorpo- 
rated in the by-laws. 

"The by-laws for both divisions were gone over and after 
thorough discussion they were left with a drafting com- 
mittee to smooth them up. This was done and on August 
4th and .8th, at meetings of shipbuilders and shiprepair- 
ers the by-laws were put in form for 'oresentation to 
the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry on August 9th. 

"At the meeting on August 9th, at which representatives of 
the folloT/ing com-oanles were -present: 

The Ma,ryland Dry Dock Comnany 

The Pusey & Jones Corporation 

Alabama Dry Dock & Shipbuilding Comnany 

Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation 

Todd Shipyards Corporation 

Sun Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company 

Norfolk Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Company 

Kensington Ship^/'ard & Dry Dock Corp. 

re'.Tport News ShiPouilding & Dry Dock Co, 

Ira S. Bushey & Sons 

lTationa.1 Coioncil of American Shipbuilders 

the by-lar-s for both the shi-cbuild.ing and snipreprdring 
divisions were finally ironed out and adopted, and made 
effective at 12:01, August 14, 195.. 



9732 



-396- 

"It was the "belief of the pro-oonents of the Code that the ' 
adoption of the ty-laws was within their voviev. These hy- 
laws v^ere submitted to all merahers of the Industry crior 
to the election of a Code Authority, 

"The first meeting with the TeiDuty Administrator v/as on 
August 28, 1935, at which meeting much time was devoted to 
going over the by-laws (effective on August 14th) to see 
if they constituted in any way an amendment to the Code. 
(See ILR.A. Release No. 540 of August 28, 1935). 

"The meetings held on September oth and 11th were devoted 
almost entirely to getting the by-laws in some form which 
would be acceptable to Mr. Davis, and after a public 
hearing held on Tuesday, September 26th, the Rules and 
Regulations dated October 2, 1935, • supplanted- the orig- 
inal by-laws of August 14, 1933, 

"Answering your s-oecif ic question under (c) , the by-laws /■ 

were not put in force by the Code Authority but were 
adopted by the Industry as shown above." 

The By-Laws as revised by, Iq^dustry, effective August 14, 1933, 
were the subject of a hearing August 28, 1933, (Ref. Code Record Sec- 
tion). It was determined to change the title from By-Laws to Rules 
and Regulations. 

The Rules and Regulations were the principal subject of consid- 
eration in meetings of the Shipbuilding Industry Committees (Code 
Authority) held September 6, 1933 and September 11, 1935. (Ref. Min- 
utes, Depaty's Files). They were further the subject of the hear- 
ing of September 26, 1953, (Ref. Code Record Section) and meetings 
of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry Committee (Code 
Authority) held September 7, 1935, and October 2, 1953. They were 
finally approved by the Committee at the October 2nd meeting. (Ref. 
Minutes, Deputy's Piles) of which the following is an excerpt: f 

"Mr. Smith raised the question ps to the propriety of hav- 
ing the Rules and Regulations approved by the President of 
the United States so as to become the "law of the land". Mr, 
Davis reported that he had taken this matter up with Colonel 
Lea and tha.c it was thought that the Code Committee had suf- 
ficient PGWBi- under the code to enforce the Rules and Reg- 
ulations as written and that the approval of our Rules and 
Regulations would establish a precedent. Mr, Davis was of 
the opinion, however, that if the Rules and Regulations 
were fotmd to be unenforceable that he would again take 
the matter up with the Administrator to have them approved 
by Executive Order, 

"Mr, Davis then suggested that the Rules and Regulations be 
signed by each member of the Code Committee and this was 
agreed to. • ■ 

9732 



-397- 



"The Rules and Regulations (Ref, Exh, L, ApT)x, )proraulgated 
under the authority of the Code Co'Tiraitteo were then read and 
upon motion 'by Joseph Haag, seconded by Robert Haig, the 
follcYing resolution was adopted: 

'RESOLVED: That tliese Rules and Regulations 
having been discussed and agreed upon are 
thereby adopted. ' 

A vote was taken by the Code Conraittee and all answered in 
the affirmative, 

"A poll was then taken of the Presidential Appointees 
and they apriroved of the Etiles and Regulations as 
adonted, " 

It is the opinion of the Assistant Deputy (the author) that 
the foregoing recounted advice was one of the two basic unfortu- 
nate incidents that lead to the difficulties of the Industry under 
the Code and the administration of it. As later history proved, 
this instrument should have been immediately submitted to the 
Administration for approval. 

Both the By-Laws (so-called) and the Rules and Regulations 
consisted, in fact, of two parts, "the first part pertained to the 
National, District and Local Area Committees and their functions, 
the second part to Trade Practices. The History pertaining to the 
first part begins with page 177, under TitlR III, B, 5, Field 
Organization, 

The follcv/ing is an excerpt of the second part of the Rules 
and Regulations as approved by the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing 
Industry Committee (Code Committee) as approved October 2, 1933, 
(Ref, EyJi. M, Appx. ) 

.." CREDIT BUREAU 

The National Committee will organize and maintain a credit 
bureau to collect and furnish information regarding the credit stand- 
ing of any customer requesting credit from any member of the In- 
dustry, Fnile due diligence shall be used to collect and impart cor- 
rect information, no liability chall attach to any officer or employee 
of the crc-dit bureau or of the Naticnal Committee or of the Code C m- 
mittee for any errors in the information supplied, 

"UNF AIR COlvrpSTITIVE PRACTIC~S 

1. The Code Committee has the right and assumes the duty, act- 
ing with the advice and asc-istancc of the various committees of the 
shipbuilding and shiprcpaij-ing industry hcrcinDcforc provided for, to 
make recommendations from time to time to the President of the United 
States, through the Administrator of the Nation^s.l Industrial Recovery 
Act 7/ith respect to mo difi cations of and additions to the code which 

9732 



-398- 



it doems desirable for the Glimination of unfair competitive prac- 
tices. But it is understood that no such provision, and nothing con- 
tained within these or any rules and regulations, is to be so inter- 
preted or so applied as to promote or permit monopolies or monopolis- 
tic practices, or to eliminate or oppress small enterprises or dis- 
criminate against them. 

3. For the purpose of administering the provisions of 
Paragraph 7 of • the Code, and subject to the provisions recited in the 
foregoing paragraph, the following rules and regulations are adopted 
and published for the elimination cf unfair competitive practices. 

(a) Each member of the industry engaged in shiprepairing 
shall promptly file v;ith the Secretary of the Code Committee a sched- 
ule showing, for shiprepairing operations: 

1. Minimum labor billing rates; 

2. Minimum billing rates for the use of facilities 
and of m.achine and pcv/er tools; 

3. Minimum billing rates for the use of dr;- docks 
and marine railways; 

and shall certify that such rates, charges and prices are not below 
the reasonable casts of suCh products or services including an adc- 
ouato amount of overhead. 

Ea.ch such schedule shall state the date upon which it shall be- 
come effective, which date shall n'-t be less than thirty (30) days 
after the date of filing such schedule with the Secretary; provided, 
however, that the first schedule filed by aay member of the industry 
as above provided shall take effect on the date of filing thereof, 
and no rate, price or charge shown in any such schedule filed by any 
member cf the industry shall be changed except by the filing of a new 
schedule as herein provided. 

Material supplied b}'- shiprepairers on repair contracts shall 
be charged at not less than the prevailing delivered market price 
plus a percentage determined as follov/s; 

1. Ifhen such material is carried in stock by the ship- 

repairer; 

15 'o for v/arehousing, checking and 

receiving, plus 
Ib"^- for purchasing, accounting and 

handling expenses, plus 
ICj for profit. 

2. 'Then such material is purchased for a particular job and 

reouires processing or manufacture in the shipre- 
pairers yard or on the ship: 

lo'j for purchasin,;: , accovinting and handling ex- 
penses, "olus 
lO'j for proiit. 



9732 



.399- 



3. When such material is -p-orchased as a completely manu- 
factured article for a particular job and requires 
no processing, or manufacture in the shiprepairer ' s 

lOo for handling expense. 
(Provailin^ delivered market price is the manufacturer's 
list price less the putlished discount or price published 
in any recognised trade .icurnal. Delivered price includes 
transportation charges on material to the ship repairer's 
yard. ) 

(b) "Except as hereinafter provided no member of the 
industr," shall make any sale of any .product or service at 
a price or en terms and conditions more favorable to the 
purchaser than the inricc, terms or conditions established by 
such memb'T in his schedule or sch-^aules in effect at the time 
of such sale 

"FOP 'IL SHIP-EP'IP.i:"^G EXCSPT IF TKS C?EAT LAKES 
riST^.ICT, TI-C rOLLC^TII'G- GOi'QIv^IOiJS ("C" TC "I" . 
T'CLusif;) .shall :^P?LY , 

(c'; Penc-in^ the establishment of reco^;nized cost account- 
ing methods, ap-nroved ov the Code Committee, contem-olated by 
Sub-section 1 of Suo-narp.-_-.rf>.ph (a) of para;;;:rar)h 7 of .the Code 
and. unless othci-vise exi^ressly -orovided by .regulations for lo- 
cal areas ap-oroved in v-ritin^; by the Code Committee, ^iddin^: 
on shipreiD-ir work shall be restricted as follows: 

l?hen bids are requested from repairers outside of the 
port in v.'hich the snip is located, no oid except on Federal, 
Stf.te, and i'unicipal v/ork below $7500 shall be submitted by 
aixy repairer within or outside of .the port, but all v/ork be- 
low ■?7300 shall be done on time and material basis in accord- 
ance with the established schedule or schedules of the ship- 
repairer in effect at the time or on an a^fi-reed "orice basis in 
accordance vath sub-oaraf. raph (d) below. When the request for 
bids is confined to rcxiairers v/ithin the port is which the ves- 
sel is located, then no bids except on Federal, State, and 
:.;unicipal v/crk bplo\7 $2-j00 shall be submitted, but a,ll v/ork 
below fc500 shall be done on time and material basis in accord- 
ance y/ith established schedule or schedules of the shiprepairer 
in effect at the time, or on an Pi-reed price basis in accord- 
ance with subparagraph (d) below. In the meaning of this para- 
erapn "rc-oairers" refers to firms enga^^ed in the fenoral re- 
pairing cr dr 'dockin^i: of vessels and the limitations on bidding 
referred t? in this paragraph shall not be construed as applic- 
able to contract 'jrs engr,ged in stiecie.l marine repairs p.nd who 
do not engage in feneral ship repairs. 



9732 



-4C0" 



(d) '.Then a ship ov/ner desires a luiniD siim price for a 
repair job, and when the ship is located in the shiprepairer ' s 
yard or when the owner has declared in writing his intention, 
if the lump sum price suomitteci is satisfactory to the owner, 
to employ said shiprepairer for the job, and not otherwise, 
the shiprepairer may suomit a lump sum price prepared in accord- 
ance v/ith the schedule or schedules of the shiprepairer in force 
at the time the lump sum price is submitted. If the liimp sum 
price so submitted is not satisfactory to the owner, the ov/ner 
may have the worlc done on a time and material basis "by any ship- 
repairer he may desire. 

(c) In the prepara.tion of all /bids, in the determination 
of all 1-ump sum prices, and in the billing of all time ^nd ma- 
terial work, the shiprepairer shall use the follov/ing formula: 

1. Man Hours required to execute the repair; 

2. Eenuired hours for use of facilities and of machine 

and power tools; 

3. Ifeouired period of dr/ dock or marine railway use; 
-. Materials reruired; 

5. Sub-coutr^'Ct v/ork at cost plus 10 ■ profit; 
". InsMrance at cost; 
7. Profit. 

Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 shall be converted into dollars by 
apiolying the unit charging rr.tes specified in the schedule or 
schedules of the shiprepairer then in force and alloivance may 
be m.ade for the size of the contract of not more than 5o if total 
is between $30,000 and $75,000; 7 jo between ■:7j,000 and ^100,000; 
and 10 _. if over .tl0''',000. 

(f) Every bid shall be suomitted to the ovmer at a speci- 
fied time and place and shall all be immediately opened by the 
owners in the presence of the bidders, and thereupon or imiiiedi- 
ately thereafter a copy of the bid shall be filed v/ith the Dis- 
trict Committee, of the District in which- the bids are opened, 
together with an analysis sufficient to enable the District Com- 
mittee to determine v/hcther the several items of the bid have 
been established in s.ccordance ^.'ith the schedule or schedules of 
the shiprepairer then in force, and v/ithout any rebates, refunds, 
allowances, unearned discgunts or special services, direct or in- 
airect. 

(g) All labor, material, use of facilities, and of machine 
or power to --Is, use of dry docks or marine railv/ays or other 
eouipment, miscellaneous services, subcontracts, compensation 
insurance and every other thing used in the performance of, or 
in connection with time and material vrork, shall be charged for 
and no member of the industry shall give or accept any rebate, 
refund, a.llov/ance, unearned discount or specia.l service, directly 
or indirectly in connection v;ith any work performed, or receipt 
any bill for insura/nce v;ork until payment is made. 



9732 



-lUi- 



(li) A sliiprepairer shall not revise his proposal because 
of chanij;.es desired "b.y a shipowner until he has ueen awarded the 
contract. 

(i; All outside contrrct'-^'s used on shipreTiairin._ whether 
selected "by shiprepairer or desi^^nated hy shipovmer and other 
lahor (except the ship's regular crev/ and wor.'.cers on the per- 
manent payroll of the shipowner) when Y/orlcin;- in any shipre- 
pairer 's vard shfdl he eraploved by and suoiect to the control 
and direction of the shipre"oairer. A fee of ten percent of the 
bill rendered by such contractor for the worlc performed while in 
the repairer's yard shall "be ch:--.rged "oj'' the shiprepairer to the 
shipovmer except in the case of i_,uarantee men and v;or].cers em- 
■oloyed on special ..■or..c not ordinarily perforued "by the shipre- 
pairer v.'ho Bhr.ll also "be under the control and direction of the 
Shipretiairer when worTcin^ in his yard. Svery outside contractor 
must furnish a certificate to the shipreppirer that he is fully 
complying with the shi-D"building, and shiprepairing code a,nd v/ith 
these rules and re;.ula.tions so far as they mry be applicable. 
Otherwise he shall not "be cmployeo.. In case of dispute a ship- 
owner who proposes an outside contractor shall "be entitled to 
refer the dispute to the District Coraaittec but in the event 
the District 3ormnittee is not able to dispose of the dispute, 
appeal shall be allowed to the Code Coixriittee, 

"lOR :iL Sr:iP3:2p.".i5.i-.TC' IN TKS GZE;.T l;ic;s LISTP.ICT 

THE rOLLOV;i::G- P-.OVI SIGNS SHALL APPLY 11' LIAU OP 
Sff>IL;;5A£^?APHS Xsl-^o ijAMPJI-;'. 1 . 

F:llowinf.: the eGta"blishei. custom in the Great La^:es District 
8.11 shiT)rGpair wor': shall be done on a tine and material basis ex- 
cept as hereinafter provided and char/^es therefor shall be in ac- 
corde,nce with the established schedule or schedules of the ship- 
repairer in effect at the time. Estimates of prooaAole cost may be 
made for t"hc convenience and assistance of customers but they shall 
not be binding, upon the shiprepairer. 

All laboi', material, ecuip-.ient, raiscellaiieous services, etc., 
used in performia- time and material vror'c, shall be charged for. 

It shall be permissible for a chipre;'^airer to submit bids on 
the fcllo'.ying classes of work: 

(a) liuished pa.rts of machinery, ready 
to install 

(b; Complete units of machinery, ready 
to install 

(c) Boiler accessories, ready to install 

(6.) "Boilers, air heaters, and stac;s in- 
stalled as a complete ■onit, 

(e) Boilers, lieaters, or stac''cs, ready 
to install 



9732 



-402- 



(f) Boiler furnaces anc/or complete set 

of tubes, installed 

( g) l''ev,' tanl"! to'os, including side tarC's 
(h) Hull forcings, castinjr.s, fittings, and 

prrts or units for null, 
readj'" to install 
(i) Any reconstruction of a vessel not in 
the nature of a reDr.ir, 

The ma:cimurn cash discount 6n "bills for repair v/or.: sh-all not 
exceed l.V'i for payment in thirty days. 

No labor of an outside contractor or other lahor shall be 
allowed to work in an.>" ship repair yard, except when employed by 
the OY/ner of the yard. Ship's re^jular ere./ may perform only such 
work on vessels under^coing repairs at a repair plant as mif'ht be 
done in the course of tlie vessel's re^^^ular operation. ■ 

(j) ViJhen cnmDctitive bids are invited shipbuilders will not 
submit bids unless the invitation provides that bids shall be 
opened in puulic axid no bidder shall revise his proposal until he 
is definitely notified by the shipowner that he is the selected 
bidder and other bidders a.re so informed. 

(k) A schedule of credit terms will be adopted and published 
by the Code Cominittee, subject to svich modii ications as from time 
to time as the Code Committee may determine as a fair basis of 
credit for the shiprepa.iring industry to be ap-olicable to all 
credit extended by ;iny shiprcpairer after the date of adoption 
and publication of such schetaile. The grantin . of more favorable 
credit terms than those allowed by the credit schedule then in 
force shall constitute unfair competition. 

"SPECiriGATIONS , " 

It in reco.2:nized by 'the Code Com..iittee that indefinite, 
am.bif-uous a,nd unfair general clauses of specifications cover- 
ing shipbuilding v/ork and shipTepair worfc "may leave room for 
evasion of the provisions of Section 7 of the Code and of the 
provisions of those rules and regulations adopted for the pur- 
pose of administering that section of the Code. The National 
Shipbuilding Committee, the local shiprepairing committees, the 
district shiprepairing committees and the National Shiprepair- 
ing Committee, v/ill bring to the attention of the Code Commit- 
tee such general clauses of specifications as may, in their 
opinion, have that tendency. From time to time, as occasion 
may require, the Code Com^nittee will issue reg^jilc'tions v/ith re- 
spect to such general clauses. 



9732 



-4n?- 



ITOTE:- Proper provisions for the handling' of 
questions anO, complaints arisin^^ lut of labor 
conditions are nov/ Tinder consideration "by the 
Code Connittec, and the wstional Recovery Ad- 
ministration and Avill be incorporated in the 
rules and regulations Avhen such provisions have 
been adopted and a-nproved. 

The above Eulcs and Peculations were 
adopted by Resolution of the Code Coimnittee on 
October 2, 1933, and are effective as of that date. 

jIE!.I3E?.S ELECTED 3Y THE INDUSTHY 

/s/ H. 3-. Smith, Chairman 

/s/ Joseph Haag, Jr., President, 

Todd Cr-- Dock 

E;itC,ineerins & Repair Corporation 
/?/ S. "7. ^axeraan 

Vice PrcFident, Bethlehem 

ShipouilcUng Corporation, Ltd. 

/s/ Rc{^er '"illiaras 

Vice President, Kevroort IJews 
Shi-obuilding & Dry Dock Company 

/c/ Robert Haig 

Vice President, Sun Shipbuilding & 
Dry Dock Comioany 

/e/ U, H. Gerhauser, President, , 

;j-p.erican Shipbuilding Company 

APPROVED: 



/s/ 'Tilliaru H. Davis 

JTational Recovery Administration 
Renresentative 

/s/ R. L. Hague 

Industrial and Consumer Advisor 

/z/ Joseph S. McDonagh 
Labor Advisor 

/s/ Henry Williams 

Representative of the Secretary 
■ of the 'ssayy 
ATTEST:' 

/s/ C. C. Knerr 

Secretar^^, Code Coiiiittee 



liJEMSE - S 
/J'ROINTED 

BY THE 

PRESIDENT 

OF THE 

UNITED STATES 



9732 



-404- 
Shipbuildint--; and Shiprepairing Incmstry 



"schedule a 
(for?/; of letter of assekt to the code) 



(Date) 

To The Secretary of the Code Committee 

Room 661 

Eleven Broadv/ay 

New York City 

Dear Sir: 

The undersigned, desiring to become a member 
of the Code of Fpir Competition for the operation 
of the Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry, 
approved by the President of the United States 
on July 26 , 1933, hereby assents to all of the 
provisions of said code and hereby agrees to 
accept and abide by the terms and conditions of 
the code, and to bear his proportionate share, 
as determined by the Code Comjnittee, of the 
expenses of maintaining the Code Committee and 
its activities. 

The address of the undersigned, until it shall 
file with the Secretary of the Code Cominittee 
written notice of change of such ac' dress, shall be as 
set forth at the foot of this letter. 

Very truly yours. 



(Name of Firm) 



(Name and Title) 



(street and Address) 



(City and State) 



9732 



The Code Authority with the cooperation of the District and Local 
Committees, vhich are set forth in pages 195-1D9 hereof, promptly put 
the lules and Reculations into effect. 

The Report of the Secretary of the Code Authority as of Decemher 
9, 1933, showing status of Firms Engaged in Shipbuilding and Shipre- 
pairing with respect to the filing of schedules required under the 
Rules and Regulations, Letter of Assent and Letter of Compliance is 
summarized as follows: 

Letters of Compliance 34 

" " Assent 184 

Lahor Billing Schedules 359 

Tool " " 334 

Docking Charge " 191 

I 

(Ref. Com.pliance Folder, Deputy's Files) 

, Previous to October 24, 1933, there had been received 78 compliance 
letters on a form, other than that attached to the Rules and Regulations. 
(Ref. Compliance Folder, Deputy's Files) The final list of members of 
the Industry as of June 11, 19,:'5, was 234, (Ref. List of Members, Deputy' 
Files) which did not contain the many members of the Boatbuilding and 
Boatrepairing Industry who 3ri;;inally reported to the Shipbuilding Code 
Authority and included in the summarized list. 

It is evident from the foregoing that the entire Industry sub- 
stantially complied witn the filing requirements as set forth in the 
Rules and Regulations. 

The Shipibuilding ana Shiprepairing Industry Committee (Code Au- 
thority) m.ade a n-omber of Interpretations of the Rules and Regulations, 
listed as follows: 

Meeting Novem.ber 6, 1933 (Reference: Minutes, page 4, Deputy's 
Files). 

. ■ .INTERPRETATION NO. 1, 

November 15, 1933 
RULES AND REGULATIONS, Section VIII 

PAEAGRAPE (i) 
Pertaining to Guarantee Men (Ref. Ezh. I-i, Appx) 

Meeting January 4, 1934 (Reference: Minutes, page 5, Deputy's 
Files) . 

INTERPRETATION NO. 3, 
January 4, 1934 
RULES AND REGULATIONS, Section VIII 
Paragraphs (c) , (d) f^ (e) 
Main Contracts (Ref. Exh. 1-^3, Appx) 
9732 



. . -403- 

Meetin^ January 4, 1934, (Heference: Miiiutes, juif^e 1, Deputy' a 
Files) . 

IKTERFHETilTIOW NO. 4, 
January 4, 1934 
RULES AIID REGULATIONS, Section VIII, 

Paragraph (d) ' 
Lump Sum Price (Ref . Exh. 1^-4, Appz) 

Meeting; January 4, 1934 (Reference: I/'inutes, page 4, Deputy's 
Piles.) 

INTERPRETATION NO. 7 

January 4, 1934 

RULES AND REGULATIONS, Section VIII 

Paragraph (i) 

- Pee - 

(Ref. Exh. 1-7 Appx) 

Meeting January 4, 1934 (Reference: Minutes, page 5, Deputy's 
Piles). 

INTERPRETATION NO. 8 

January 4, 1934 

RULES AND REGULATIONS, Section VIII 

Paragraph ( i) 

Compliance Certificate 

(Ref. Exh. 1-6 Appx) 

Meeting January 4, 1934 (Reference: Minutes, page 5, Deputy's 
Piles) . 

INTERPRETATION NO. 9 

January 4, 1934 

PULES AND REGULATIONS, Section VIII 

Paragraph (i) 

Exception Denied 

(Ref. Exh. 1-9, Appx) 

Meeting January 4, 1934 (Reference: Minutes, page 10, Deputy's 
Piles) . 

INTERPRETATION NO. 10 
January 4, 1934 
RULES AND REGULATIONS, Section VIII 
Paragraph 3 (c) 

Shipping Board Bureau Vessels under 
Private Operation 
(Ref.' Exh. I-IO, Appx.) 

Meeting January 4, 1934 (Reference: Minutes, page 10, Deputy's 
Piles) . 

9732 



IlITERPHETATION NO. 12 

January 4, 1934 

HULS3 Al^ RF.GULATIO.JS, Section VIII 

Paragraph 3 (c) 

Special Iv,arine Repairs 

(Ref. E-d-L. I-IS, Appx.) 

Interpretation by H. G-errish Smith, Chairman of the Shiphuilding and 
Shirrepairing Industry Committee, and confirmed by inference at meeting 
March 2, 1934 (Reference: liinutes, pa^e 6, Deputy' s Files) . 

I NTE"'? ROTATION NO. 15 
January 15, 1334 
RULES MID IlEGULATIOrlS , Section VIII 
Paragraphs (c), (d) and (e) 
Shiprinr Board Vessels Under Private Operation 
(Ref. E:-±i. 1-15, Appx.) 

Unfortunately, the Rules and Regulations, not having been approved by 
N.R.A.. the question of legality arose. Reference is made to memorandum 
February 6, 10O4, to Geo. H. Shields III, Assistant Deputy Administrator, 
Shipping Sectirn Tiv. I, from Ko-ward F. Ralph, Assistant Counsel. (Ref. 
Rules and Regulations Folder, Deputy's Files) However, jao record can 
be found where Industry vas advised of the contents of tne subject mem- 
orand-oin until the letter of May 18, 1934, 'to H. Gerrish Smith, Chair- 
man of the Code Authority, from H. Newton \rittelsey, Assistant Deputy 
Adm.inistrator. (Ref. Rules and Regulations Folder, Deputy's Filea) . 

I.'l eating. March 15, 1934, the Code Authority acted as follows: (Ref. 
Pages 4, 5, and 6 !\'inutfs. Deputy's Files). 

" Revision of Rules and Eegulations and Code 

The Chairman reported that the Cods Committee had passed 
a resolution on Iv'.arch 2nd. -laying on the table certain resolu- 
tions pertaining to changes in the Rules and Regulations and the 
Code. The three resolxiticns were taken off tne table and dis- 
cussed. The resolutions r.r? as follov^s: 

Resolution fl - 'That action be taken 'instituting 
lump sura bidding on the Atlantic 
Coast on Steamship work on a basis 
of Labor, Material and seventy-five 
percent Overhead on Direct Labor, - - 
as a minimum price, plus Drydocking, - 
to go into effect promptly and re- 
main effective until such time as the 
Code Comndttee decides otherwise. 

Resolution tt? - That the limitations in bidding shown 
in the Rules and Regulations under 
Section VIII, socond paragraph of 2 
(c) be increased. 



9732 



„408~ 

Resrlution #3 - Tnr.t the thirty d.-i^y provision as 
to filing of rates "be eliminated 
from Section VIII, Farafraph 2 (a). 

The Clia.irman stated that tno following- 
actions cou-la he taken: 

1, Disapyrove the Resolution, or, 

2, Approve the Resolution, or, 

3, Pass them along to the Administrator 

with comrnents, 

Mr, R. L. Hague, the constiraers' re]3resenta.tive » 
stated tuat if such resolutions were passed on to 
the Aconinistration in the absence of his luwing statis- 
tical data, especiall;> on Resnliition #1, he, as a con- 
sumer, woulc- ha,ve to object to the formula set-up. Mr, 
Ha£:ue stated th,-\t siace the operation of tnc Code his 
hill for re;;airs reanged from 15 to ,30 "oercent higher, 

Mr, Robert riaig stated that practically no one was 
bidding the ciiarging rates estahlished in the Rules and 
Regulations and t]it.-.t "by using them the estimates lool:ed 
ridiculously high, A reviev; of a considerahle nuin"ber 
of estimates indica'ted tliat the formula under Resolu- 
tion Tfl seemed fair to "nis company, 

Mr, Joseph Eaag was of the opinion that Mr, Robert 
Haig's statement th^at the Rules and Regulations are 
quite generally being broken was too 'broad. 

Opinion v;as voiced tha.t the three resolutions 
should he adopted and put into effect during the period 
the code is rewritten "but Mr. R. L. rlague offered his 
objection o:i behalf of the Steamship Owners as to #1 
and ij=2; rs he did not .'-T.ow what the effect would be. 

Mr, J. B.Yfeaver v/as of the opinion that the code 
should be amended and rewritten as there are n lot of 
loose ends v^hich coulc be rectified vmer- the code was 
"being redrafted, Mr. Roger Williams in speaking of 
the resolutions vra.s of the opinion that no action be 
taken on them but stick to the ■•irovirions of the code 
until the code is rev.'ritten and tlia.t it should be re- 
written iiYimediataly, 

Mr, Gerliauser su^^gested tlmt a sub-committee of the 
Code Conunittee be apuointed to ainend t"ne code and he 
therefore made the fnllov/iug motion: 

"That the Chairman be enTpowered to appoint a com- 
mittee to ForlT wifa the Administration represen- 
tatives in redrafting the code, taking infcO accotait 
the three resolutions tabled at the meeting of 
March 2nd. , together with all the matters wnich 



9732 



-409- 

have oeen discur>sed from time to tine and which 
should "be considerRd in connection with redraft- 
ing the cede and farther tn-'t the Chairman oe 
authorized to euploy Counsel if found necessary, ' 

liotion T;as seconded by Roger '■I'lllinms and carried 
aiid the Chairman announced he \.'Ould make these a'D-ooint- 
ments T)rorat)tly. " 

" Enles and RepiJ-lptio ns, Section YIII i 
Prraif'Tai^h 3 

The Connittee p.^ain took uv discussion of Resolu- 
tion #3 tabled at the Coae liesting of March 2nd, a.nd 
after discussion^ ¥.r, Rof^er Villiams moved, seconded by 
I/Ir. Robert Hri^;; 

That the thirty (30) days notice reouirement 
for the filint-s.of schediiles of Billing R.ites 
under section VIII, Parp^ra.^oh 2 of the Rules 
and Retaliations be rescinded. 

All 'lemlerc, voted in favor of this resolution and 
the industry i-'ill be notified accordingly." 

Meeting Ariril 24, 1924, the Code Authority acted as follows: (Ref. 
Pages 13 and 14 Iiinutes, EeiTuty's Files) 

" Status o f t he Rules and Reg^alstions 
Effective lJ/2/33 

The Chairman reported that the Code Authority 
is in receipt of a comnixnication from a shiprepair- 
ing firm as to the status of, the Rules and Regulations 
'and requesting an interpretation as to 'whether failure 
to comiDly with the requirements of the Rules and 
Regulations incapacitates yards in this area from 
bidding on any T'ork covered by Bulletin No, 3, Executive 
Order TTo, 664C, issued from your office -^onder date of 
March 19t,h, 1934, so long as they fail to live up to 
■ the Rules? If they bid on such work are they liable 
to fine and innrisonnent? ' 

In view of the action of t;ie Trade Practice 
Coranlaints Comnittee in referring to the Code Authority 
the ouostion as to the legalitj'' of the Rules snd 
Reg-alp.tions and the By-La"s nreviously adopted for the 
industry and which coinnittee asked the Code Authority 
to secure a ruling from the Administrator as to their 
legality, the following resolution was offered by 
Mr. S. w, "./akeman and seconded 'oy Mr. Robert Haig. 



9732 



"Ths,t action on this ;;varticular request for 
in*:er;'"'retation be deforred pending ruling as 
to the legality of tlie Rules anc Regulations • 
and Bj-Lav's a;nd "be iu further resolved tliat ' 
the inouirer should he so informed' 

The motion was carried." 

Letter April 30, 1254, to J-. 1, Weaver, Deputy Acijninistrator 
from H. C-arrish Suith, Chairman, of the Code Authority made the follow- 
ing request: (Ref. Rules and Regulations Polder, Deputy's Piles) 

"T/ith the facts as submit ted aho-tto will you 
please ohtain from the legal Division of the 'J.R.A. 
an official interpretation as to the legality of 
these Rules and Re^TLilations , and the validity of 
tra,de racticc coiirolaints 'based on the Rules and 
Rc;3ulacions as such." 

The reply writ ten "by the au.thor v'as as follows: 

"Iviay 18, 1934 

Div. rl 

"Mr, H. G-errish Smith 

Chairmo,n, Code Authority, 

Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry,' 

11 Broad\7ay, 

New York, 'v. Y. 

"Dear iir. Snith: 

"In reply to your letter to Mr. J. S. Weaver 
dated April 30, vjhich has just come to my liands , 
in regard to the Trade Practice Committee on 
questions arising pertaining to the Code of Fair 
■'Competition and Trade practice of the Shipbuilding 
and S'niprepairing Industry, 

"This matter was the subject of a letter I wrote 
to Mr. Ar"ba B. Marvin on May 10 as follovrs: 

'I am informed "by our Assistant Counsel as follows: 

"1. Replying to yo-uj- question num'ber one it is o"b- 
vious tho.t the Committee should not talce action on 
complaints filed solely on the By-Laws that were in 
effect for a few weeks in the summer of 1933 and were 
wholly discarded and a'bandoned, 

"2. Replying to your question num'ber two t'te.t Com- 
mittee should only take action on complaints filed on 
the Rules and Regulations as issued where such com- 
plaints are "based on provisions within the Code, 



9732 



-411- 

"In view of the fact tliat the Ind-astry is moving 
ahead v/ith the nuv; shipbuilding code and that this 
code .7/111 lesally covur ail of these questions and 
provide prpper limitations for such matters as are 
intended to be covered by the Rules and Htgilations 
tiiat it would be unwise at this time to put these 
P.ules and Ke.'i'tilations throtJgh for final approval 
by the Administrator, The time required v.-ould 
probably be comparable to the time of bringing the 
code, through. 

■"^e arc informed th:-t t.ie C«r.imittco working on this 
Code sent out a questionnaire lately to the Industry 
and tk-.t replies arq com.ing in particularly bearing 
on the question of fair practice. In viev; of the 
general sitioation it would appear that no good end 
v;ould be affected oy notifying the Industry to limit 
their c oiirp laint s withi.i t^ie provision of the Rules 
a.nd Regulations that are -..iohin the ;■ re sent ship- 
builders code, The virol.-. question must be more or 
less involved in the -mind of the individual members 
of the Industry, therefore, I would tnink that should 
complaints cone through to the Trade Practice Com'- 
.plaints Corjnittee on which they cannot legally act 
that then the individur.l of the Industry malzing such 
complaint could be so advised," 

'In order to give you a f-'orther idea in this matter 
I quote from a memorandum by one of our assistant 
counsels: 

"It appears from an examination of the Rules and 
Regulations of the s.bovt. Code tiiat some of the 
provisions are ultra vires; tliat is, Deyond the scope 
of a^it.iority granted the Code Committee by the Code of 
Fair Competition. The Code carries no provision for 
assessing members their joroportionate share of the ex- 
penses of L,3intaining the Code Committee, Thes is no 
provision in the Code authorizing the Code Committee to 
promulgate rules and regulations nor to ap-.ioint agents. 
The aixthority to mahe r-oles and regulations, to assess 
members their share of the expenses, and to appoint 
agents, a,re permissible, as they are necessary in- 
cidents for the proper administration of the Code, 

" In Article VI I of the Rules and Regulations, captioned 
'Credit Bureau"^, this Article is not founded on any 
g^uthority granted by the Code, but I see no objection 
to its remaining in the Regulations. 

"In Arti cle VI II, captioned 'Unfair Competitive 
Practices", there is set out in the last two paragrapns 
on page 8 items calling for ten (lO) per cent for profit 
where material is carried in stock and where material is 
purchased,. These two items do not constitute any part 



9732 



- 412 - 

of cost and have no foundation under the Code to te 
inserted in the Segulations. They tend toward -orice- 
fixing, and it is suggested that they te taken out. 

"In Article VIII, Section 3 (c), page 9, of the 
above Rules and Regiilations, the alternative -oro- 
vision restricting the submission of "bids "below 
stipulated amounts "by members of the Industry, which 
provision is intended to be teraDorary pending estab- 
lishment of a cost accounting system, is in my mind, 
an a.ttempt to legislate on the Dart of the Com^nittee. 
I do not believe that any -oart of sub-section (a), Dara- 
graph 8, could be the basis for such a TDrovision. I 
feel however, that since it is a temporary provision 
adopted pending establishment of a cost accounting 
system, I see no objection to its remaining, so long 
as it is satisfactory to the Industry, 

" Sub-section (e) . page 9. The. fifth (5th) provision 
under this sub-section calls for sub-contract wor^^ at 
cost, plus ten (lO) per cent -Drofit. The words 'nlus 
ten (10) per cent profit' must be stricken; and in the 
seventh (7th) provision of this sub-section the word 
'profit' must be taken out, as profit is no part of cost. 

"On page 10 the first (1st) paragraph begins: 'Units 
1,2,3 and 4 shall be converted into dollars,' etc. The 
provision allowing five (5), seven and one-half (7i) 
and ten (10) per cent for the various sizes of contracts 
can only be justified as an allowance for overhead. If 
this is true, the provision is all right. If, however, 
these various percentage allowances are profit, then, 
of course, there is no basis for allowing them to remain 
in the Regulations. 

"In Sub-section (i), :oa,ge 10, the nrovision that a fee 
of ten (lb) per cent of the bill rendered by an outside 
contractor for work performed while in the repairer's 
yard shall be charged by the ship rerairer to the ship 
owner, is in ray mind, justified as a. charge for the use 
of any plant facilities. 

"On page 11 the provision that the maximum cash dis- 
count on bills shall not exceed one and one-half (l'^) 
per cent for the payment in thirty (30) days, is a 
most desirable -nrovision, and its proper place would 
be iii the Code itself, as there is at the -present time 
no provision in the Code upon which the Code Committee 
can base this provision. 

"The criticism just given relative to t"he discounting 
of bills, holds true in regard to the next -orovision, 
namely, that no labor of an outside contractor shall 
be allowed to work in a ship repair yard, etc. I 
believe this to be a desirable provision but its proper 



place is in the Code, 

"Sub- section (k) page 11. I see no basis wlaatsoever 
for this ■orovision and helicve it to he outside the 
scope of the Code Committee" ' 

"I hope the foregoing will be sufficient information 
to em4e the Committee but if there are any other points that 
you wish settled I will be very glad to have them answered. 



"Very truly yours, 

(Signed) H. IIEWTOM WHITTELSEY 
H. ilewton ''liittelsey, 
Assistant Deputy Administrator, 
Shipping Section," 



"mJW:W 



9732 



-414- 

The f oil o\7ing letter was rfritten: 

"Hoveraber 16, 1934. 

Eiv. 2 

"Mr. K. C-er:'-ish Smith 
Chrirman of Code Comnittee 
Shipbuilding & Shiprepairing Industrj'^ 
11 Bros.dv/a:'- 
Nev,' York City 

"Dear Mr. Snith: 

"I received fro;a Mr. Ti. C. Johnson, Local Area 
Chairman of Galveston, Texas the following tele- 
gram: 

'AS LOCAL CHLUHILAIVT OF SHIP BUILDERS AilD SHIP 
PJIPAIRSRS I ASK THi-lT YOU TJITE '/iS FRA.FKLY IF THE RULES 
AED EECULil-TIONS ADOPTED 3Y THE CODE GOl.l'ilTTEE SFPEG- 
TIVS AS OF OCTOJER SECOIO FII'lETEEIJ THIRTY THREE HAVE 
EVER BEEN ADOPTED BY THE ADMIMT STRATI ON MI) II ANY 
PEIJALTY CAN BE ASSESSED FOR VIOLATION OP SAI.IE STOP . 
THIS IirFORlaTION IS VITAL AND l^IEEDED IN COmJECTION 
UITH Il.iPGRTAlTT I'ffiSTING- OF' LOCAL AREA. ' 

"In reply I wired Mr. Johnson as follorrs: 

'RETEL RULES AND PJlGULATIOrS ADOPTED OCTOBER SECOND 
NIKSTEEN THIRTY TliREE Fu-iVE NOT BEEN APPRO^'^D BY AD- 
MINISTRATION AND APj: OF NO FORCE AND EFFECT IN AITY 
PROVISIONS TaiT .iRE NOT DEFINITELY WITHIN THE PRO- 
VISIONS OF THE CODE STOP NO PEl^^ALTY CAIT BE ASSESS- 
ED FOR AN ALLEGED VIOLATION TII/iT IS NOT A VIOLATION 
OF THE CODE' . 

"Very trulj'- yours, 

"/s/ m^i 

"n. Newton Whittelsey 
Assistant Deputj'" Administrator 
Div. 2, Sec. d. Group 3" 
"IttWtGK 

Meeting December 20, 1934, the Code Authority acted as follows: 
(Ref. Page Minutes, Deputv' s Files) 

" Validity of P-ules and Re(e:ulations 

The Chairman read into the record a letter dated November 
16th from Mr. E. N. Whittelse]'- covering exchange of telegrams 
between the Galveston area and NRA in connection with the validity 
of the Rules and Regulations. '• ' " 

9732 



-415«. 

The Chairman at tuis point referred also to a letter dated May 
18th, 19o4 from Mr. T/'hittelsey iivherein the validity of the Rales and 
HeCTilations v-as commented upon hy Assistant Co-anr,el of NEA and the 
Code Authority at tnis time endeavored to learn from Mr. IThittelsey 
the legality of the Rules and Reguiations adopted October 2, 1933 
as on the date of their adoption the Chairman specifically asked 
Mr. W. H. Davis, Deputy Administrator at that time, as to the pro- 
priety of having the Rules and Regulations approved by the President 
of the United States so as to become 'the law of the land* to which 
Mr. Davis stated that he had taken the matter up with Colonel Lea 
and it was thought the Code Authority had sufficient power under 
the code to enforce the Rales and Regulations as v;ritten and that 
the approval of our Rules and Regulations would establish a pre- 
cedent. 

This matter of the contents of the Rules and Regulations 
will be studied by the Committee acting on code revision and 
nothing will be done at the present to have them approved by 
the Administration as ori/^inally written." 

Meeting Januj-n^ 17, 1S35, the Code Authority acted as follows: 
(Ref. Page , Minutes, Deputy's Piles) 

"This led to a discussion of the Rules and Regulations 
adopted October 2nd, 1933 

"Mr. ffhittelsey stated that these Committees are not recog- 
nized by i..R.A. Tiie Code Authority argued that they should be 
recognized by !^ R. A. because the Rules and Regulations had been 
developed in cooperation with Mr. William H. Davis, our Deputy 
Administrator at the time and that they had been approved by him. 

"Colonel Rose stated that he was unaware of this fact and he 
felt that the matter should be referred to him by letter in order 
that he might definitely ascertain as to whetner the Rules and 
Regulations have a legal standing or not. It was pointed out to 
Colonel Rose that the Rules eaid Regulations had certain fair trade 
practices incorporated in them and that although the matter had 
been previously submitted to N. R. A. for a ruling as to legality 
that it was felt the matter had never been definitely disposed of. 

"The Cliairman was directed to submit this matter to the 
Deputy Administrator for action." 

In accordance with the foregoing, H. G-errish Smith, Chairman of 
the Code Aiithority, in letter dated Janu^^ry 17, 1935, to W. W. Rose, 
Deputy Administrator, set forth a statement regarding the Rules and 
Regulations and made a request as per the following excerpts from the 
letter. (iirf. Rules and Regulations Polder, Deputy's i'iles) 

"The minutes of the meeting of October 2nd also contain on 
on pages 2 rsid 3 the following statement: 



9732 



';.1r. Smith ■ raised the aueption as to the propriety of having 
the Riiles and Regiilations approved by the President of the 
United States so as to "become the "lav; of the land". i.Ir. 
Davis reported tKat he hrd taken this matter uv with Colonel 
Lea and that it wr s thoot'^ht that the Code Committee had s''J.f- 
■' ficient power under the code to enforce the Rules and Regula- 

tions as r/ritten and that the ap"Droval of our Rules aJid Reg- 
ulations would . establirh a precedent. I/ir. Davis was of. the 
o-Qinion, however, that' if the Rules and Regulations were fo^jJid 
to be unenforceable that he would again take the matter up 
with the Adininistra.tor to hrve them approved by Executive Order. 

'Mr, Drvis then suggested that the RixLes and Reg-olations be 
signed by each member of the Code Committee and this was agreed 
to. 

'The Rules ajod Regulations promulgated under the authority of 
the Code Committee were then road and upon motion ^y Joseph 
Haag, seconded by Robert Haig, the follo^ring resolution was 
adopted: 

"R^oOU/ED: That these Rules tjid Regulations having been 
discussed and agreed urion are thereby adopted." 

'A vote was taken ^y the Code Committee and all ans-vered in 
the a-ff irmative. 

'A poll was then taken of the Presidential Api^ointees and 
the;'- approved of the Rules and Re:gulations as adopted. ' 

"In view of the circumstances concerning the preparation of 
these Rules and Regulations consideration bj'- you with a view to 
determining their validity is requeated. " 

The author promptl;'- sent copies of the subject letter and a 
memorandum to Rer^earch and Blanning and Legal Divisions, and to the Indus- 
trial, Labor and Consumers Advisor^'- Boards for comments, but the sub- 
ject of a^Dproval, even in part, of the Rules and Reg'j.lations proved high- 
ly controversial. However, finally'' the memoranda from all but the Legal 
Division v/ere received. 

The case was made up including the memoi-andum to W, A. Harriman, 
Administrative Officer from 11. Uewton Whittelse;^, Assistant Deputy 
Administrator, and the proposed Adiainisti-ative Order, and was sent to 
Angus R. Shannon, Jr., Section Co-'inrel, Divisionll. Mr. Shannon a.pproved 
with cettain excei:itions, v/hich were incorporfted in the Order. The 
memorandiim to the Administrative Officer was a-oiDroved by ^. W. Rose, 
Deputy Administrator, a.nd tiie case Y/ent to Barton U. Murray, Division 
Adininistrator. (The original Voluiae is filed in Rules and Regulations 
Polder, Deputy' s Files) The Order provided as follows: 

"i:OW, THSREPORE, the National Industrial Recovery Board, 
pursua.nt to the aiithority vested in it hy Executive Orders of 
the President, including Executive Order 5859, and otherwise, 
does hereby order; 



That the 'Administrative Rules and 
Ectjulaticns' , adopted ty the Ship- 
buildini, rnd Shipr-^jiairin^, Industry 
Committee and published by said 
Coranittee in paiiiphlet. foiTn, be and 
are hereby a;);nrcved subject to the 
exceptions oT the I'ollcvjin;;; pro- 
visions; 

(a) Delete the subject matter on 
page one, the outsiae cover page of 
the said pamphlet form. 

(d) Delete the subject matter on page 
three of said pamphlet form. 

(c) Delete the Vv-ords 'and Trade 
Practice' f?om the first paragraph, 
line four of pa^e five of said 
pamphlet form. 

(d) ■ Delete the "second paragraph on 
page 5 of said pamphlet form, together 
with Schedule A therein referred to. 

(c) Delete the period at the end of 
paragr^h Article VI, Section 5 and 
add the words 'and the National 
Eocovery Administration' . 

(f) Delete in entirety all pro- 
visions beginning with Article IX and 
further delete note below Article IX 
of said pamphlet form.. 

(g) Delete the words 'and are effective 
of th^t date' in the second line, page 
12 of said pamphlet form." 

The Division Administrator 'sent the case to the Review Division 
for a pre-view, and Alvin Brown, Review Officer, by racmorandvun April 20, 
1935, held that "This Order is not believed to be proper." 

This created a serious situation. The District and Local Comr- 
mittees provided for in the Rules and Re<^ulations and ap-oointed by the 
Code Authority hAd been functioning since October 2, 1933, and had of 
necessity used a considerable sum of money for expenses, therefore, it 
was important to at least recognize these Committees. 

The following memorandum was made by the author after a number of 
conferences and shortly before I.Iay 26, 1935, and is attached to the 
original Volume. 

"This case was the subject of a number of conferences 
with Idr. Jeffrey and Mr. Knight of Review after 

0732 



-418- 
receipt of the memorandum from Review dated April 20. 

"It was finally determined to eliminate all matter 
pertainint^- to Fair Trade Practice in addition to the 
matter that was to te eliminated by the Order as 
originally drawn and attached herein, and further to 
require in the Order that a Plan of Procedure for 
handling Trade Practice complaints be adopted. 

, "Further to amend Administrative Order 3-12A to 
provide that the Distri.ct Gormnittees are appointed 
District Trade Practice Cominittees to handle Trade 
Practice complaints arising in the first instance 
with the provision that the majority of the m.embers 
in each District Committee shall constitute a quorum." 

BY„L.AW5 as usually adopted by Code Authorities and approved 
by NBA were never actually acted UToon by the Code Authority for the 
Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry. Verbal requests were made 
by the author from time tO' time that the Cede Authority adopt suit- 
able By-Laws but the matter was delayed pending the submission of the 
proposed amended Code. 

Request wa.s made by letters a,s follows: (Ref. By-Laws Folder, 
Deputy's Files) 

"November 21, 1934 

Div. 2 

"lir. H. G-errish Smith, Chairman, 

Code Authority for the 

Shipbuilding and Shiprepairing Industry, 

11 Broadway 

New York City. 

"Dear Ur. Smith: Re: By-Laws' 

"Enclosed please find seven (?) c«*pies of 
pr-»posed set of By-Laws of the Shipbuilding and 
Shiprepairing Industry for your Code Committee. 

"This matter v;as under discussion, you will 
remember, several weeks ago, and you told me 
that you would be glad to receive a proposed form. 

"The form being sent to you is in general 
conformity with many by-lav/s which we have passed 
through for approval but of necessity arc modi- 
fied in certain Sections. As far as I know there 
is nothing in them that could be objectionable ta 
your Code Committee. 



3732 



. . -419- 

•'I hope you will take this up at your 
next Code Coranittcc mcctine; and adopt the form 
subject to such modification as your Code 
Committee may consider necessary. There are 
many reasons why it is unwise for a Code 
Authority to take executive actions without 
liaving duly adopted its by-laY/s and having 
same approved by the Adminis '^ration. 

"Executive actions taken by your Code 
Committee might be successfully held to be 
without due legal authority in the absence 
of approved by-laws. In fact, resolutions 
passed for the protection and benefit of the 
Members of your Industry are more or less 
open to attack and it ap;nears that each 
Member of your Code Committee is individually 
liable for the funds that have been expended 
in the absence of pror)er by-laws to govern the 
n,ctions of tlic Committee. 

"Very truly yours, 



"/s/ HM 
H. Newton Wl-ittelsey 
Assistant Deputy Administrator 
Division 2, Section D, Group 3" 

"HlTftY 

CC : Administration Member 
Secretary 

Meetin=3 December 30, 1934, the Code Authority took the 
followine,' action: (Eef. Page 14, Minutes, Deputy's Files) 

"By-Laws - (Code Authority 

(Trade Practice CoiiTTlaints Committee 

"The Chairman ro;i:iorted that Mr. H. I'ewton Whittelscy 
had forwarded to the Chairman of the Cede Authority 
proposed bji-lawc covering the operation of the 
Code Authority and also for the operation of the 
Trade Practice Crmi^laints Committee and upon motion 
by Mr. A. B. Homer, seconded by Mr. Roger Williams 
both subjects wore to be referred to the Committee 
on Code Hevicion for stuc'^y and report thereon." 

F-orther requests were raa.dG by the author for adoption of 
By-Laws of the usual form, but the matter v/as durther delayed by the 
Code Authority pending the submission of the proposed amended Code. 



9732 



-420- ■ 

d. OTHSa - THZ 1TATI0KA.L COLITCIL OF AI-.ERICAI' SE IP-BUILDERS 

The lI'\tional Coujicil of Ainerican Shipbuilders, the principal sponsor 
of the Code, continiaed its activities throughout the life of the Code, 
■aiid is so continuing at present. 

The history of the formation of the Coujicil is as follo\7s: (Ref, 
Pages 5, 6 and 7, Report April 1, 1030, l{ation3,l Co-ur.cil of Ame^'ican Shi-o- 
tuilders Folder, Deputy's Files) 

"The National Council of Aiierican Shroljuilders is composed of 
corfTOrations engaged, in constricting and repairing, vessels and in 
manufacturing engines, hollers and other accessories used in their 
constmctionj rep.air, ond operation* In addition its membership 
includes., as association nemhers, associations v,-hose iuerabers are 
interested in ' the development of an Anerican built and owned mer- 
chant marine; as associate members, persons, copartnerships and 
cor;:)Orations respectively engaged in opera.ting vessels, or in design- 
ing or financing their constraction or in insuring their builders 
or repairers against the risl: involved in their construction or 
rejpair; as personal members persons not included in the preceding 
classes of membership but who desire to aid the Council in the ac- 
complisliment of its objects and purposes; and as honarary members 
persons vlio have contributed distin.'pj.ished service in either the 
development of the art of shipbuilding or the promotion of an 
Anerican merchant marine, 

"The national Council is organized for the purposes of secur- 
ing the cooperation of shipbuilders, ship repairers, manufacturers 
of marine equipment and others in a 'onlted effort to laromote a 
stable shipbuilding industry as the basis of an American merchant 
mg.rine and to ii^prove the conditions under which the industry is 
carried on. It is the outgrov.'th of other attempts to organize an 
association to accomplish .the same objects, as appeo,rs from the 
following statement: 

"The Atl.antic Co.?st Shrobuilders' Association was organized 
at the commencement of the World War to deal with abnormal labor 
conditions th:,t developed during the war in the shipyards of the 
Horth Atloiitic ports. It rendered valuable service to the ship- 
building industry by preserving, so far as it was then possible, 
noiTjal industrial conditions during that period of estraordinary 
ship construction. At the close of the war the association con- 
tinued its work and extended its activities by stud^^'ing proi^osed 
federal and state legislation affecting snipbuilding and compiling 
statistics relating to the industry for submission to legislative 
committees. 

"The New York and llew Jersey Di^^ Dock Association was organized 
more than twenty years ago and is com.posed of corporations in the 
port of Nev.' York which build and re-oair vessels. Its principal 
activities are confined to subjects that are local in their rela- 
tions to its members, although it has participated, in the study of 
legislation affecting them. 



9732 



>-421- 



"Ilie Pacific Coast Dry Dock Associ'ition -^s organized 
about ten y^ars -VTO by the shipbuilders and ship reiDairers 
on the Pacific Coast and performs for them service similar 
to th.-it carried on'by the ilew York and llew Jersey Dry Dock 
Asbociation. 

"V/liile the Ivlerchant Hai'ine 3111 of 1920 "'as pending 
in Congress, a group of shipbuilders organized the Cci- 
mittee of Ir.erican ShiT)builders which studied the bill 
and compiled and submitted to Congress information that 
aided it when acting on the bill, and conducted a nation- 
wide car^paif-n of publicity to create a public opinion 
favorable to the merchant marine and shipbuilding and 
cirected tne attention of the people of the United States 
to the aid that tlxe bill, if enacted, v;ould render these 
industries, 

"After the enactment of the bill, the members of the 
Committee of American Shipbailders disbanded, and, in 
lb 21, incorporated the Council of Aiierican Shipbuilders, 
Inc., •'onder the laws of the District of Columbia to 
continue activities si