MANUFACTURERS OF SOCKET SCREW PRODUCTS Allen Mfg. Co., Post Office Drawer 570, Hartford, Conn. The Bristol Co., Post Office Box 1790, Waterbury, Conn. The Cleveland Cap Screw Co., 4444 Lee Road, Cleveland, Ohio. Holo-Krome Co., Post Office Box 98, Elmwood Branch, Hartford, Conn. Mac-it Parts Co., Lancaster, Pa. George W. Moore, Inc., 100 Beaver Street, Waltham, Mass. Parker-Kalon, Division of General American Transportation Corp., Clifton, N.J. Set Screw & Manufacturing Co., Bartlett, Ill. Standard Pressed Steel Co., Jenkintown, Pa. The Standard Screw Co., 2701 Washington Boulevard, Bellwood, Ill. MANUFACTURERS OF SELF-TAPPING SCREWS American Screw Co., Wytheville, Va. Anchor Fasteners, Inc., Post Office Box 2029, Waterbury, Conn. Atlantic Screw Works, Inc., 85 Charter Oak Avenue, Hartford, Conn. Camcar Division, Textron Industries, Inc., 600 18th Avenue, Rockford, Ill. Continental Screw Co., 459 Mount Pleasant Street, New Bedford, Mass. Elco Tool & Screw Corp., 1111 Samuelson Road, Rockford, Ill. Great Lakes Screw Corp., 13631-51 South Halsted Street, Chicago, Ill. Midland Screw Corp., 3129 West 36th Street, Chicago, Ill. National Lock Co., 1902 7th Street, Rockford, Ill. The National Screw & Manufacturing Co., 2440 East 75th Street, Cleveland, Ohio. Parker-Kalon, Division of General American Transportation Corp., Clifton, N.J. Pheoll Mfg. Co., 5700 Roosevelt Road, Chicago, Ill. Pioneer Screw & Nut Co., 2010 North Ruby Street, Melrose Park, Ill. Reed & Prince Manufacturing Co., 1 Duncan Avenue, Worcester, Mass. Southern Screw Co., Box 68, Statesville, N.C. Screw & Bolt Corp. of America, Southington Plant, Drawer 271, Southington, Conn. United Screw & Bolt Corp., 2513 West Cullerton Street, Chicago, Ill. MANUFACTURERS OF CAP SCREWS Allied Products Corp., 12677 Burt Avenue, Detroit, Mich. Chandler Products Corp., 1491 Chardon Road, Cleveland, Ohio. The Cleveland Cap Screw Co., 4444 Lee Road, Cleveland, Ohio. E. W. Ferry Screw Products Co., Inc., 5240 Smith Road, Cleveland, Ohio. Ferry Cap & Screw Co., 2151 Scranton Road, Cleveland, Ohio. Kerr-Lakeside Industries, Inc., 21850 St. Clair Avenue, Cleveland, Ohio. National Lock Co., 1902 Seventh Street, Rockford, Ill. The Wm. H. Ottemiller Co., Pattison St. & M. & P.R.R., York, Pa. Pheoll Manufacturing Co., 5700 Roosevelt Road, Chicago, Ill. Reed & Prince Manufacturing Co., 1 Duncan Avenue, Worcester, Mass. Rockford Screw Products Co., Rockford, Ill. Standard Screw Co., 2701 Washington Boulevard, Bellwood, Ill. Chicago Screw Division, 2701 Washington Boulevard, Bellwood, Ill. Western Automatic Machine Screw Division, Post Office Box 280, Elyria, Towne-Robinson Fastener Co., 4401 Wyoming Avenue, Dearborn, Mich. United Screw & Bolt Corp., 5800 Denison Avenue, Cleveland, Ohio. MANUFACTURERS OF MACHINE SCREWS American Screw Co., Wytheville, Va. Anchor Fasteners, Division of Buell Industries, Inc., Box 2029, Waterbury. Conn. The Blake & Johnson Co., 459 Thomaston Avenue, Waterville, Conn. Camcar Screw & Manufacturing Co., Division of Textron Industries, Inc., 600 18th Avenue, Rockford, Ill. Central Screw Co., 600 South Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Ill. Great Lakes Screw Corp., 13631-13651 South Halstead Street, Chicago, Ill. Illinois Tool Works, Inc., 2501 North Keeler Avenue, Chicago, Ill. The National Screw & Manufacturing Co., 2440 East 75th Street, Cleveland, Ohio. Pawtucket Screw Co., 133-143 Hughes Avenue, Pawtucket, R.I. Pheoll Manufacturing Co. Division, Allied Products Corp., 5700 Roosevelt Road, Chicago, Ill. Pioneer Screw & Nut Co., 2010 North Ruby Street, Melrose Park, Ill. Reed & Prince Manufacturing Co., 1 Duncan Avenue, Worcester, Mass. Screw & Bolt Corp. of America, Southington Plant, Drawer 271, Southington, Conn. Southern Screw Co., Statesville, N.C. Thompson-Bremer Co., 228 North LaSalle Street, Chicago, Ill. United Screw & Bolt Corp., 2513 West Cullerton Street, Chicago, Ill. MANUFACTURERS OF WOOD SCREWS American Screw Co., Wytheville Pa. Atlantic Screw Works, Inc., 85 Charter Oak Avenue, Hartford, Conn. Elco Tool & Screw Corp., 1111 Samuelson Road, Rockford, Ill. National Lock Co., 1902 Seventh Street, Rockford, Ill. The National Screw & Manufacturing Co., 2240 East 75th Street, Cleveland, Ohio. Whitney Screw Corp., Nashua, N.H. MANUFACTURERS OF TUBULAR AND SPLIT RIVETS Aluminum Co. of America, Fruitville Pike, Lancaster, Pa. American Rivet Co., Inc., 11330 West Melrose Street, Franklin Park, Ill. Chicago Rivet & Machine Co., 950 South 25th Avenue, Bellwood, Ill. (plants at Bellwood, Ill., and Tyrone, Pa.). Miami Rivet Co., 5667 Northwest 35th Court, Miami Fla. Milford Rivet & Machine Co., 857 Bridgeport Avenue, Milford, Conn. (plants at Milford, Conn.; Elyria, Ohio; Hatboro, Pa.; and Aurora, Ill.). Judson L. Thomson Manufacturing Co., Post Office Drawer 149, Waltham, Mass. Townsend Co., Box 370, Beaver Falls, Pa. Tubular Rivet & Stud, Division of Townsend Co., 530 West Street, Braintree, Mass. MANUFACTURERS OF ALUMINA CERAMICS American Lava Corp., Cherokee Boulevard and Manufacturers Road, Chattanooga, Tenn. The Carborundum Co., Latrobe, Pa. Coors Porcelain Co., Golden Colo. Diamonite Products Manufacturing Co., Shreve Ohio. Frenchtown Porcelain Co., Frenchtown N.J. Globe-Union, Inc., Centralab Division, 900 East Keefe Avenue, Milwaukee, Wis. U.S. Stoneware Co., Orrville Plant, Box 350, Akron, Ohio. Western Gold & Platinum Co., 525 Harbor Roulevard, Belmont, Calif. MANUFACTURERS OF DRY PROCESS CERAMICS Akron Porcelain Co., Cory Avenue, Akron 14, Ohio. Louthan Division, Ferro Corp., 2000 Harvey Avenue, East Liverpool, Ohio. Metsch Refractories, Inc., Post Office Box 193, Chester, W. Va. New Jersey Porcelain Co., Post Office Box 908, Trenton, N.J. Star Porcelain Co., Muirhead Avenue, Trenton 9, N.J. Universal Clay Products Co., Post Office Box 1631, Sandusky, Ohio. MANUFACTURERS OF STEATITE PRODUCTS American Lava Corp., Cherokee Boulevard and Manufacturers Road, Chattanooga 5, Tenn. The Carborundum Co., Latrobe, Pa. Globe Union, Inc., Centralab Division, 900 East Keefe Avenue, Milwaukee 1, Wis. Clowes Ceramic Corp., 37th and Calhoun Avenue, East Lake, Chattanooga 7, Tenn. Du-Co Ceramics Corp., Saxonburg, Pa. Isolantite Manufacturing Corp., Warren Avenue, Stirling, N.J. National Ceramic Co., Brunswick and Hunt Avenues, Trenton 2, N.J. Saxonburg Ceramics, Saxonburg, Pa. Superior Steatite & Ceramic Co., 250 Humphrey Street, Englewood, N.J. Wisconsin Porcelain Co., Main and Lincoln Streets, Sun Prairie, Wis. STATEMENT BY EDWARD H. LANE, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF THE LANE CO., INC., OF ALTAVISTA, VA. When Senator Taft and Congressman Hartley proposed the Taft-Hartley Act to the Congress, they and their supporters realized that the pendulum of power had swung too far toward giving the labor unions greater power than they should have. Congress over the years had been trying to create a fair balance between the powers of the labor unions and the powers of the employers, and the TaftHartley Act was designed to bring about a better balance. This was conceived as much for the protection of the members of the union against power-mad, and in many cases uscrupulous, union leaders as it was to protect the general American public. Our Federal Union was founded on the theory that the Federal Government would be one of delegated powers, and all other powers not so delegated to the central government or prohibited to the States should be reserved to the States. The repeal of section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act will be another serious blow to States rights and, in my judgment, would be ruled unconstitutional by any fairminded court or courts. I do not know of anything that has been proposed in recent years more completely un-American than to withdraw from the free workers of this country their right to choose a union or not choose a union. This will be just another step in taking away from the people of this country one of their freedoms, for which they have fought so hard. The heads of the labor unions today already have too much power. The balance of power between the unions and employers is swinging very heavily in favor of the labor union leaders, and I think if the Congress of the United States should repeal section 14 (b) of the Taft-Hartley Act they would be taking away from the people of this country another one of their precious freedoms, the right to work. Nationwide polls conducted on compulsory unionism (including one by the Gallup organization) show that 67 percent of the people of the United States are opposed to compulsory unionism. No leading Western World democratic government has yet seen fit to adopt a national policy of compulsory unionism. The consequences of such a policy are clear-it would be a terrible and tragic mistake for our country. The individual-the little man-would have no choice under compulsory unionism, and would lose any and all effective control over his union organization. I prayerfully hope that there will be sufficient Members of the Congress of the United States who recognize that this is another grab for power by the labor union leaders, and that they already have too much power for the good of their members and the people of this country. Hon. FRANK THOMPSON, Jr., MAY 26, 1965. Chairman, House Special Labor Subcommittee, With reference to H.R. 1151 and several other bills seeking to eliminate from the Taft-Hartley Act a provision, section 14(b), at our convention last week our national affairs committee passed a resolution opposing this legislation which was approved by our board of directors. We request that you show in the records of your hearing that this association asks that this legislation be not changed. GEORGE D. HOLIMAN, Executive Director, the Associated Cooperage Industries of America, Inc. [From Factory magazine, March 1965] SHOULD "RIGHT TO WORK" LAWS BE REPEALED? (By Milton J. Shapp, president and board chairman, Jerrold Electronics Corp., Philadelphia) Advocates of right-to-work laws claim they are trying to protect the rights of the individual worker. An altruistic motive, to be sure. But have you ever heard of any workers' group sponsoring a right-to-work law? On the contrary, you usually find management-misguided management-backing these laws. I think it is time we got rid of the phony issues. The primary motive behind right-to-work laws is union-busting. They aim to weaken strong unions, destroy weak unions, and exert enough pressure in nonunionized areas to prevent unions from starting. Now, let me tell you my own experience with unions. Things went along pretty smoothly until we had a union raid. There I was, sitting on the sidelines, watching two unions battle it out on the floor of my shop. People were distracted; productivity sagged. It wasn't until after the election, giving one union the right to represent all the workers, that things returned to normal. It took a long time to rebuild company morale and productivity. Thus, I found out from actual experience how badly both workers and management need peace and harmony on the floor of a shop. If you're going to have a union, go all the way. Don't open your shop to the battle. Twenty States presently have right-to-work laws on the books. Most of the laws were passed before 1954. During the last decade, four States have repealed right-to-work laws; only three States have passed them. I'd like to quote the commissioners of labor from a few of these States. Tennessee: "The initial effect of these laws was to disturb labor relations that had been in existence for many years. Even the most avid supporter of the right-to-work law makes no claim of it having any value to the State." Indiana: "If there are any assets to right to work, we are not familiar with them." (Repealed.) Iowa: "It undoubtedly has brought in some small plants that were after cheap labor, and we have some plants paying only the Federal minimum wage. It is my opinion that the State would be better off without these. ***” I agree. As a manufacturer, I'm not especially eager to compete with a factory that pays substandard wages. Some employers don't care how their employees live. They use low wages as a tool to cut prices. I call this unfair competition. A strong union that forces our competitors to pay just as much for labor as we do, actually protects us. It compels companies to compete on quality and efficiency-not on the privation of their employees. Now, I'd like to explore the subject a little from the viewpoint of the worker. Nobody deplores the chicanery and gangsterism of certain unions more than I. Yet nobody can say the growth of unionism as a whole has not greatly improved the worker's lot. No country in the world lacking strong labor unions is prosperous. If you'll agree that freedom from labor strife benefits the employer, that good unions mean more prosperious workers, and that the Nation's economy is dependent on prosperous workers, the only issue left is the phony one-rights of individual worker." On the surface, this issue has a lot of appeal. That's why supporters of right to work always ride it so hard. They say, "Those who want to can join the union and those who don't can stay out." The trouble is that there are many people willing to "let George do it." It's pretty soft to be able to enjoy benefits won by the union without paying dues. I'd be in favor of allowing workers to stay out of unions, providing they also work for wages paid before unions were formed. No worker would accept this. A union doesn't have the right to ask for a union shop until the majority of the 48-225-65-pt. 2--28 employees have voted for it. It's reasonable to me that, in a democracy, the majority opinion should prevail. In summary, right-to-work laws are a step backward. We wouldn't install machinery of 1910 vintage, so why install the type of labor-management machinery of that period? It's time for all businessmen to look forward to the needs of this country. TEXT OF AN EDITORIAL BROADCAST OVER WTOP, WASHINGTON, D.C., ON JUNE 3 BY ANDREW J. BIEMILLER, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF LEGISLATION, AFL-CIO In its editorial May 26, WTOP suggested that the whole matter of a legal union shop was "much ado about nothing" that it might be better if we all forget about repealing section 14(b). Well, we think WTOP is mistaken about that. We think so for many reasons; but let me cite only one of them. This country has a Federal labor law. Ever since 1935, the Federal law has laid down rules about what unions can do and can't do, and what employers can do and can't do, in their relations with each other. There are parts of that law that we don't like very much, and there are other parts that employers say they don't like very much. But, by and large, we all respect the law, and we all observe the law, because it applies to everyone, equally, in all parts of the country. It applies equally, that is, with one exception. Since 1947, the States have been allowed to make their own rules about the union shop, as long as they were more restrictive than the Federal law. So we have a situation today in which 31 States are observing the Federal law and 19 States are goin their separate ways, under different laws of their own. Now this is not the way the Federal system is supposed to operate. We are supposed to have uniform laws with respect to general problems. Maryland can't put a tariff on New Jersey potatoes or Maine lobsters. Virginia can'teven though it tried-interpose a State law to prevent the integration of public schools. Why should the labor law be any different? In actual practice, the issue that WTOP so lightly brushed aside has caused legislative and ballot-box battles that have cost both sides millions of dollars; that have caused strikes and bad feeling. All this could be avoided by repealing section 14(b) and by returning to a truly national labor-management law, which applies the same union-shop rules in every State. UNITED TEXTILE WORKERS OF AMERICA, New York, N.Y., June 1, 1965. Hon. J. FRANK THOMPSON, Chairman, Subcommittee, House Committee on Education and Labor, DEAR SIR: The International Executive Council of the United Textile Workers of America, meeting in New York City, voted to register with your committee, in behalf of our membership, our petition for repeal of section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act and relief of the workers in the "right to work" States. We are most seriously affected and injured in the textile mills of the South by these unjust and misnamed laws, resulting in lower and substandard working and living conditions. Repeal would give us equal opportunity with the employers in the collectivebargaining field and correct the false and vicious propaganda that union membership denies the right to work when, in fact, organized labor is in the forefront in the defense of the workers who are denied the right to work because they insist on their legal rights to organize. Your committee and the Congress can right this wrong. Respectfully yours, GEORGE BALDANZI, President. FRANCIS SCHAUFENBIL, Secretary-Treasury. |