Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
4526420
label
West Michigan Chapter of Delta Nu Alpha Transportation Fraternity, Grand Rapids, MI, April 10, 1972
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4526420
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
West Michigan Chapter of Delta Nu Alpha Transportation Fraternity, Grand Rapids, MI, April 10, 1972
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Speeches
subjects
Grain sales
Industrial relations
Labor disputes
Legislation
Railroads
Transportation
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4526420
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1972-04-30
month
4
year
1972
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1972-04-01
month
4
year
1972
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
4ba12b78890941a4
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D32, folder "West Michigan Chapter of Delta
Nu Alpha Transportation Fraternity, Grand Rapids, MI, April 10, 1972" of the Ford
Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential
Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. The Council donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box D32 of The Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
WEST MICHIGAN CHAPTER OF DELTA NU ALPHA
TRANSPORTATION FRATERNITY, GRAND RAPIDS,
MICHIGAN, 7 P.M. APRIL 10, 1972.
GENTLEMEN, IT'S A GREAT PLEASURE
TO BE HERE. IT IS AN INTERESTING
EXPERIENCE FOR ME TO BE TALKING TO A
TRANSPORTATION FRATERNITY. SPEAKING OF
TRANSPORTATION, DID YOU EVER GET THE
FEELING THAT YOU'RE GOING NOWHERE -- AND
HAVE ALREADY ARRIVED?
THAT, OF COURSE, IS THE KIND OF
FEELING WE ALL GET AS INCOME TAX DAY
APPROACHES. APRIL 17 IS INCOME TAX DAY.
THAT'S WHEN YOU'RE HAUNTED BY THE GHOST
OF EARNINGS PAST.
YOU REMEMBER THE INCOME TAX.
IT'S LIKE A DO-IT-YOURSELF MUGGING.
YOU SHOULD SEE THE TAX FORM S
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
THEY USE IN LAS VEGAS.
-2-
THEY HAVE THREE BOXES YOU CAN CHECK.
REFUND, APPLY TO NEXT YEAR'S TAXES, AND
DOUBLE OR NOTHING.
I ALWAYS GET AN ACCOUNTANT TO DO
MY TAXES. THROUGH THE YEARS I HAVE FOUND
THAT A FORM 1040 IS EASIER READ THAN DONE.
MY ACCOUNTANT ALWAYS PUTS AN
X WHERE I'M SUPPOSED TO SIGN. I THINK IT
STANDS FOR THE LANGUAGE I USE WHEN I SIGN
IT.
I HAVE A WONDERFUL ACCOUNTANT.
WHAT HE DOESN'T KNOW ABOUT INCOME TAXES
WOULD FILL A JAIL CELL.
I KNEW I WAS IN TROUBLE WHEN HE
Mr.
2.R.5.
HAD TO LOOK UP THE INSTRUCTIONS TO FILL IN
Bevenport
ONE SPACE. WHERE IT SAID DATE:.
INCOME TAX TIME BRINGS US THE
MISERIES. BUT I CAN TELL YOU ONE THING,
GERALE FORD JERARY
-3-
LEISURE TIME IS NO LONGER A PROBLEM FOR
ANY OF US. THANKS TO MODERN METHODS OF
TRANSPORTATION, WE USE IT ALL UP GETTING
TO AND FROM WORK.
BUT, SERIOUSLY, WE DO HAVE
TREMENDOUS PROBLEMS IN TRANSPORTATION
TODAY, AND THESE PROBLEMS HAVE NOTHING TO
DO WITH GETTING TO WORK. THEY HAVE TO DO
WITH KEEPING THE TRANSPORTATION INDUSTRY
WORKING, KEEPING IT FROM SHUTTING DOWN.
AS YOU KNOW, THE PRESIDENT
RECENTLY INVOKED THE RAILWAY LABOR ACT TO
DELAY A THREATENED RAIL STRIKE FOR
60 DAYS -- UNTIL MIDNIGHT MAY 31.
IT WAS ALSO NOT LONG AGO THAT
THE LONGEST DOCK STRIKE IN THE HISTORY OF
THE COUNTRY -- THE WEST COAST WORK
STOPPAGE -- FINALLY ENDED. THE DOCK
WORKERS WENT BACK TO THEIR JOBS ONLY AFTER
-4-
THREE-QUARTERS OF A BILLION DOLLARS IN
AGRICULTURAL EXPORTS WERE LOST, AND ONLY
AFTER CONGRESS HAD ADOPTED EMERGENCY
LEGISLATION TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR WEST COAST
PORTS WOULD BEGIN OPERATING AGAIN.
WHAT THIS DRAMATIZES IS THE
FACT THAT LABOR DISPUTES IN THE
TRANSPORTATION INDUSTRY ARE BRINGING
CRISIS AFTER CRISIS TO OUR NATION. AND
THESE CRISES ARE REPEATEDLY WINDING UP
IN CONGRESS' LAP.
NINE TIMES IN THE LAST NINE
YEARS CONGRESS HAS HAD TO ENACT SPECIAL
LEGISLATION TO RESTORE THE FLOW OF
COMMERCE.
THERE WAS THE 1963 RAILROAD
OPERATING EMPLOYES MANNING DISPUTE, WHEN
CONGRESS CREATED A BOARD OF ARBITRATION
TO RENDER A BINDING AWARD DISPOSING OF
-5-
FIREMAN MANNING AND CREW CONSIST ISSUES.
THERE WAS THE 1966-67 RAILROAD
SHOPCRAFT EMPLOYES WAGE DISPUTE WHEN
CONGRESS ON APRIL 12, 1967, PROVIDED FOR
A 20-DAY EXTENSION OF THE PERIOD OF
STATUTORY RESTRAINT
AND ON MAY 2, 1967,
PROVIDED FOR A 47-DAY EXTENSION
AND
ON JULY 17, 1967, ESTABLISHED A SPECIAL
BOARD TO MEDIATE THE DISPUTE AND, FAILING
SETTLEMENT OF THE DISPUTE THROUGH
MEDIATION, ISSUED A DETERMINATION
IMPLEMENTING EMERGENCY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS.
THERE WAS THE 1969-70 SHOPCRAFT
EMPLOYES WAGE DISPUTE WHEN CONGRESS ON
MARCH 4, 1970, PROVIDED FOR A 37-DAY
EXTENSION OF A COOLING OFF PERIOD AND ON
APRIL 9, 1970, IMPLEMENTED THE PARTIES'
"MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING" WHICH
FORD LIBRARY R DERALD
-6-
MEMBERS OF ONE OF THE FOUR UNIONS INVOLVED
HAD FAILED TO RATIFY.
THERE WAS THE 1970-71 RAILROAD
WORK-WAGE RULES DISPUTE WHEN CONGRESS
PROVIDED FOR AN 81-DAY EXTENSION OF THE
PERIOD OF STATUTORY RESTRAINT AND ALSO
IMPLEMENTED THE FIRST-YEAR WAGE INCREASES
RECOMMENDED BY AN EMERGENCY BOARD.
THERE WAS THE 1971 RAILROAD
SIGNALMEN'S DISPUTE WHEN CONGRESS ON
MAY 18, 1971, EXTENDED THE PERIOD OF
STATUTORY RESTRAINT AND ALSO IMPLEMENTED
THE FIRST-YEAR WAGE INCREASES RECOMMENDED
BY AN EMERGENCY BOARD.
MOST RECENTLY, THERE WAS THE
1972 WEST COAST LONGSHOREMEN'S DISPUTE
WHEN CONGRESS PROVIDED FOR AN IMMEDIATE
END TO THE WORK STOPPAGE AND ESTABLISHED
FORD LIBRARY
-6-A-
A THREE-MEMBER ARBITRATION BOARD TO ISSUE
A FINAL AND BINDING RESOLUTION OF THE
CONFLICT.
CONGRESS IS NO PLACE TO SETTLE
INDIVIDUAL LABOR DISPUTES, AND NOBODY
KNOWS THIS BETTER THAN MEMBERS OF THE
-7-
HOUSE AND SENATE.
SO WHY IS IT THAT CONGRESS HAS
BECOME A DUMPING GROUND FOR LABOR DISPUTES
IN TRANSPORTATION?
FIRST OF ALL, OUR LABOR LAWS
ARE OLD AND INADEQUATE.
IT IS NOW 46 YEARS SINCE
PASSAGE OF THE RAILWAY LABOR ACT AND
25 YEARS SINCE TAFT-HARTLEY AMENDED THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT.
THESE TWO LAWS UNDERPIN
LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS IN THE UNITED
STATES. THEY PROVIDE THE FRAMEWORK FOR
OUR COLLECTIVE BARGAINING SYSTEM.
IT HAS BECOME OBVIOUS THAT BOTH
OF THESE LAWS CONTAIN DEFICIENCIES --
ESPECIALLY DEFICIENCIES IN DEALING WITH
LABOR DISPUTES THAT PRODUCE NATIONAL
EMERGENCIES. THIS IS PARTICULARLY TRUE OF
-8-
THE RAILWAY LABOR ACT.
MEANWHILE OUR ECONOMY HAS EVOLVED
INTO A COMPLEX SYSTEM WHOSE PARTS ARE
CLOSELY INTERMESHED. WHEN A KEY PART STOPS
FUNCTIONING, THE ENTIRE ECONOMY IS OFTEN
DAMAGED. YET WE HAVE A SITUATION TODAY
WHERE A PRIVATE GROUP WITH FULL LEGAL
PROTECTION CAN ACT TO PRODUCE A NATIONAL
EMERGENCY. AND WE ALSO HAVE A SITUATION
WHERE THAT SAME PRIVATE GROUP HAS SUCH
TREMENDOUS INFLUENCE IN CONGRESS AS TO BE
ABLE TO BLOCK REMEDIAL ACTION.
THAT'S THE SITUATION WHICH FACES
US TODAY. MEANTIME THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
ARE DEMANDING AN END TO LABOR DISPUTES
THAT ENDANGER THE WHOLE ECONOMY AND CAUSE
WIDESPREAD DISRUPTION OF AMERICAN LIFE.
UNFORTUNATELY THE DEMANDS WAX
FORD LIBRARY
GERA
-9-
LOUD WHILE THE DISRUPTION CONTINUES AND
THEN SUBSIDE AFTER LABOR LEADERS AND THEIR
ALLIES IN CONGRESS MANAGE TO BULL THEIR
WAY THROUGH ANOTHER CRISIS.
WHILE THE NATION DEMANDS ACTION,
ORGANIZED LABOR FIGHTS ANY LEGISLATION
THAT MIGHT RESTRICT THE STRIKE RIGHTS OF
ITS MEMBERS.
WHAT ALTERNATIVES DOES CONGRESS
HAVE. ? IT CAN, OF COURSE, DO NOTHING -- AND
THAT IS PRECISELY WHAT IT HAS BEEN DOING.
BUT THE TRUTH IS THAT CONGRESS
DOES NOT REALLY HAVE THIS ALTERNATIVE
UNLESS IT WANTS TO DEAL WITH NATIONAL
EMERGENCY DISPUTES IN TRANSPORTATION ONE
AT A TIME, AND AGAIN AND AGAIN.
THE ONLY REAL CHOICE CONGRESS
HAS IS TO ENACT BASIC LEGISLATION WHICH
FORD LIBRARY
-10-
WILL PROVIDE NEW AND BETTER METHODS FOR
HANDLING NATIONAL EMERGENCY LABOR DISPUTES
IN TRANSPORTATION.
WHY DO THESE DISPUTES KEEP ENDING
UP ON CONGRESS? DOORSTEP? THE ANSWER IS
SIMPLE. TODAY'S BARGAINERS HAVE LOST THEIR
OLD FEAR OF LETTING THEIR LABOR DISPUTES
GO TO CAPITOL HILL. IN FACT,
CONGRESSIONAL ACTION OFTEN PROVIDES
BARGAINERS TODAY WITH AN ESCAPE FROM THE
CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR OWN ACTIONS.
LOOK, FOR INSTANCE, AT WHAT
HAPPENED IN DECEMBER OF 1970 WHEN CONGRESS
ACTED IN THE RAILWAY DISPUTE. A
PRESIDENTIAL BOARD HAD RECOMMENDED BIG
WAGE INCREASES FOR FOUR UNIONS AND HAD
COUPLED IT WITH SOME WORK RULE CHANGES
DESIGNED TO HELP MANAGEMENT IMPROVE
-11-
PRODUCTIVITY. WHAT DID CONGRESS DO?
CONGRESS PUT THE PAY INCREASES INTO EFFECT
BUT NOT THE WORK RULES. WHEN ONE OF THE
CARRIERS CONTENDED IT LACKED THE CASH TO
PAY THE INCREASE, CONGRESS SIMPLY EXTENDED
THE CARRIER A LOAN TO PAY IT.
THE CASE OF THE WEST COAST DOCK
STRIKE DEVELOPED ALONG DIFFERENT LINES.
IN THAT CASE, THE UNION FOUGHT SPECIAL
ACTION BY THE CONGRESS BECAUSE THE
LEGISLATION CALLED FOR BINDING
ARBITRATION. AND LABOR'S CLOSEST ALLIES
IN CONGRESS DRAGGED THEIR HEELS AS HARD
AS POSSIBLE TO AVOID CONGRESSIONAL ACTION.
BUT THE TEMPER OF THE TIMES
HAS CHANGED. NOT ONLY DID WE GET BINDING
ARBITRATION APPROVED IN THE WEST COAST
DOCK STRIKE AS AN INSURANCE POLICY AGAINST
-12-
RESUMPTION OF THAT STRIKE BUT WE ALSO
CAME CLOSE TO GETTING PERMANENT
LEGISLATION REPORTED OUT OF A HOUSE
SUBCOMMITTEE.
UNFORTUNATELY, LAST MARCH 1
SIX DEMOCRATS ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE OVERRODE
THE EFFORTS OF FOUR REPUBLICANS AND
SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN JOHN JARMAN OF
OKLAHOMA TO ADOPT A BILL WHICH WOULD HAVE
EASED THE IMPACT OF EMERGENCY
TRANSPORTATION STRIKES AND WOULD HAVE
IMPOSED EVENTUAL MANDATORY SETTLEMENT
IF NECESSARY.
THE BILL THE SUBCOMMITTEE VOTED
ON WAS A COMPROMISE OFFERED BY REP. JIM
HARVEY, REPUBLICAN OF SAGINAW. IT WAS
A COMPROMISE BETWEEN THE ADMINISTRATION)S
PROPOSAL FOR PERMANENT STRIKE PREVENTION
GERAL FORD LIBRARY
-13-
LEGISLATION AND LABOR'S OPPOSITION TO
COMPULSORY ARBITRATION.
HARVEY'S BILL PROVIDED FOR
SELECTIVE STRIKES, WHICH IN THE RAILROAD
INDUSTRY WOULD BE LIMITED TO 20 PER CENT
OF REVENUE TON MILES OR TO ONE CARRIER
IN EACH OF THREE SECTIONS OF THE COUNTRY.
A KEY FEATURE OF THE HARVEY BILL
WAS A MAJOR PROVISION ALSO CONTAINED IN
THE ADMINISTRATION BILL. THIS PROVIDED
THAT CONTESTING PARTIES IN A MAJOR LABOR
DISPUTE WOULD SUBMIT PROPOSED CONTRACT
SETTLEMENTS AS A LAST RESORT. AND ONE OR
THE OTHER OF THOSE SETTLEMENTS WOULD BE
SELECTED BY AN ARBITRATOR AND IMPOSED ON
THE PARTIES UNCHANGED.
ORGANIZED LABOR INSISTS THAT
THIS FINAL OFFER PROPOSAL AMOUNTS TO
GERALD LIBRAGA
-14-
COMPULSORY ARBITRATION. I DO NOT SEE IT
THAT WAY. THE FINAL OFFER PROCEDURE DOES
NOT INVOLVE COMPULSORY ARBITRATION
ALTHOUGH IT DOES INVOLVE LIMITED
COMPULSION.
THESE LIMITATIONS ARE NOT "ANTI"
ANYONE. THEY ARE SIMPLY "PRO" PUBLIC.
WHAT I AM SAYING IS THAT THE
ADMINISTRATION'S CRIPPLING STRIKES
PREVENTION ACT HAS ONE PURPOSE ONLY -- TO
PROTECT THE PUBLIC WELFARE.
IT MAKES CHANGES IN COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING AS IT IS NOW PRACTICED IN THE
TRANSPORTATION INDUSTRY -- LIMITED CHANGES
THAT DO PLACE SOME ULTIMATE LIMITATION ON
THE FREE ACTIONS OF BOTH LABOR AND
MANAGEMENT. ANY LAW THAT IS DESIGNED TO
PROTECT THE PUBLIC WELFARE MUST NECESSARILY
-15-
PLACE SOME LIMITATIONS ON SOMEONE.
HERE IS WHAT THE BILL DOES:
IN ONE INDUSTRY ONLY --
TRANSPORTATION -- IT GIVES THE PRESIDENT
POWERS TO AVOID A WIDESPREAD CRISIS CAUSED
BY A LABOR DISPUTE.
THE PRESIDENT WOULD HAVE THREE
OPTIONS IN DEALING WITH DISPUTES IN THE
RAILROAD, AIRLINE, MARITIME AND TRUCKING
INDUSTRIES. HE COULD EXTEND THE LENGTH
OF EXISTING COOLING-OFF PERIODS. HE
COULD PERMIT SELECTIVE STRIKES OR REQUIRE
SOME FORM OF PARTIAL OPERATION OF THE
TROUBLED INDUSTRY. OR HE COULD NAME A
NEUTRAL PANEL TO CHOOSE BETWEEN THE FINAL
OFFERS SUBMITTED BY EACH SIDE.
AFTER THE FINAL OFFERS ARE SUB-
MITTED, THERE WOULD FOLLOW A FIVE-DAY
-16-
PERIOD DURING WHICH THE SECRETARY OF LABOR
COULD ENGAGE IN MEDIATION ACTIVITY AND
THE PARTIES COULD HAVE ONE FINAL GO AT
SETTLING THE DISPUTE THEMSELVES.
THE FINAL OFFER CONCEPT IS THE
KIND OF INNOVATIVE PROPOSAL WE NEED IF
WE ARE TO STRENGTHEN COLLECTIVE BARGAINING.
REMEMBER, IT REQUIRES SELECTION
WITHOUT MODIFICATION OF THE MORE
REASONABLE OFFER OF THE TWO PARTIES
THEMSELVES. THIS REQUIREMENT WOULD PUSH
THE PARTIES TOWARD A MIDDLE GROUND,
BECAUSE IF EITHER PARTY'S OFFER WERE
EXTREME, IT WOULD BE REJECTED IN FAVOR
OF THE OTHER. THE PRESENCE OF THIS PROCEDURE
AS A FINAL OPTION WOULD ENCOURAGE COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING IN EVERY STAGE OF NEGOTIATION.
THE PENALTY FOR UNREASONABLENESS WOULD BE
LIBRARY
139
-17-
IMPOSITION OF THE OTHER FELLOW'S LAST
OFFER.
THIS APPROACH IS DESIGNED NOT
ONLY TO SOLVE EMERGENCY WORK STOPPAGES
BUT TO PREVENT THEM FROM OCCURRING.
THE UNIONS CONTEND THE
ADMINISTRATION'S CRIPPLING STRIKES
PREVENTION ACT WOULD DESTROY THE RIGHT
TO STRIKE. BUT IS THAT A REALISTIC VIEW?
DOES THE RAILROAD WORKER NOW HAVE AN
UNLIMITED RIGHT TO STRIKE? OF COURSE
NOT. THAT RIGHT IS ONLY ON PAPER. WHEN
A NATIONWIDE RAIL STRIKE OCCURS, CONGRESS
IMMEDIATELY GOES INTO ACTION AND PASSES
A LAW THAT SENDS THE STRIKER BACK TO
WORK.
IS ANYTHING MORE REQUIRED TO
FORD LIBRARY
ESTABLISH THE NEED FOR CRIPPLING STRIKES
-18-
PREVENTION LEGISLATION IN TRANSPORTATION?
OUR FARMERS MAY FEEL THE EFFECTS
OF THE WEST COAST DOCK STRIKE FOR
10 YEARS OR MORE. GRAIN FARMERS LOST
OVER A BILLION DOLLARS IN INCOME BECAUSE
OF THE WEST COAST STRIKE AND THE STRIKES
BY DOCK WORKERS ON THE EAST AND GULF
COASTS.
THESE STRIKES ERODED OUR
OVERSEAS AGRICULTURAL MARKETING POTENTIAL
FOR YEARS TO COME BECAUSE MANY GOOD
CUSTOMERS WERE FORCED TO LOOK TO OTHER
NATIONS TO SUPPLY THEIR FEED GRAIN NEEDS.
OTHER NATIONS NOW ARE SKEPTICAL ABOUT
MAKING LONGRANGE PURCHASES FROM THE UNITED
STATES BECAUSE WE SEEM TO LACK THE
ABILITY TO HANDLE TRANSPORTATION
FORD LIBRARY
EMERGENCIES LIKE THE WEST COAST DOCK STRIKE.
-19-
TAKE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE
JAPANESE. THEY HAVE BEEN BUYING WHEAT,
TOGETHER WITH CONSIDERABLE QUANTITIES
OF OTHER GRAINS, PRIMARILY FROM THE UNITED
STATES. BECAUSE OF THE WEST COAST DOCK
STRIKE, THE JAPANESE SHIFTED THEIR GRAIN
PURCHASES TO CANADA AND AUSTRALIA. IF
WE ARE EVER TO GET THIS BUSINESS BACK,
IT WILL ONLY BE AFTER YEARS OF EFFORT.
CONSIDER THE RUSSIANS. LAST
FALL, THE UNITED STATES ANNOUNCED AN
AGREEMENT FOR THE SALE OF ABOUT
$150 MILLION WORTH OF GRAIN TO RUSSIA.
SINCE THEN, SOVIET OFFICIALS HAVE
QUESTIONED WHETHER THE U.S. CAN BE
DEPENDED UPON AS A SOURCE OF GRAIN IN
VIEW OF OUR DOCK STRIKES.
IT IS TIME CONGRESS ACTED TO
IBRARY
-20-
CHANGE THIS SITUATION.
IT IS MORE THAN TWO YEARS NOW
SINCE THE ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDED A
MEASURE DESIGNED TO PREVENT CRIPPLING
STRIKES IN TRANSPORTATION. IT IS
INTERESTING TO NOTE THAT MEMBERS OF THE
HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE WHICH KILLED THE
MEASURE FOR THIS YEAR RECEIVED MORE
THAN $40,543
MILLION
IN UNION CAMPAIGN
CONTRIBUTIONS. THAT'S ACCORDING TO THE
CITIZENS RESEARCH FOUNDATION OF PRINCETON,
NEW JERSEY.
LET'S PUT AN END TO THIS
SITUATION WHICH HURTS US ALL.
THIS MAY BE TOO POLITICAL A YEAR
TO SEE WORKABLE LEGISLATION IN THE NATIONAL
EMERGENCY STRIKE FIELD. BUT NEXT YEAR
WON'T BE IF WE HAVE A CONGRESS WHICH IS
ALD LIBRARY FORD
-21-
RESPONSIBLE -- AND RESPONSIVE TO THE
PUBLIC WELFARE.
YOU CAN DO SOMETHING TO SOLVE
THIS CRUSHING PROBLEM. YOU CAN BE PART
OF THE SOLUTION. YOU CAN EXERCISE YOUR
RIGHT TO HELP DETERMINE THE SHAPE OF THE
BODY WHICH WILL MAKE LAWS FOR THE NATION
FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS. THAT JOB IS IN
YOUR HANDS.
-- END --
GLRALD FORD LIBRARY
CONGRESSIONAL ACTION IN RAILROAD DISPUTES
Five railroad disputes have resulted in enactment of legislation
by the Congress. These disputes are as follows:
1. 1963 Operating Employees Manning Dispute
- Public Law 88-108 (August 28, 1963)
- Created Board of Arbitration
to render binding award
disposing of fireman
manning and crew consist
issues.
2. 1966-67 Shopcraft Employees Wage Dispute
- Public Law 90-10 (April 12, 1967)
- Provided for 20-day extension
of period of statutory restraint.
- Public Law 90-13 (May 2, 1967)
- Provided for 47-day extension
of period of statutory restraint.
- Public Law 90-54 (July 17, 1967)
- Established Special Board to
mediate dispute and, failing
settlement thru mediation,
issue determination imple-
menting Emergency Board
recommendations.
3. 1969-70 Shopcraft Employees Wage Dispute
- Public Law 91-203 (March 4, 1970)
- Provided for 37-day extension
of period of statutory restraint.
- Public Law 91-226 (April 9, 1970)
- Implemented parties "Memo- -
randum of Understanding"
which the members of one
of the four unions involved
had failed to ratify.
4. 1970-71 Wage-Work Rules Dispute
- Public Law 91-541 (December 10, 1970)
-
Provided for 81-day extension
of period of statutory re- -
straint. Also implemented
the first year wage increases
recommended by Emergency
Board.
- 2 -
5. 1971 Signalmen Dispute
- Public Law 92-17 (May 18, 1971)
- Extended period of
statutory restraint.
Also implemented the
first year wage increases
recommended by Emergency
Board.
Congressional Action in Longshore Dispute
1. 1972 West Coast Longshore Dispute
- S.J. Res. 197 (February 21, 1972)
- Provided for immediate
ending of the work stoppage
and established a three-
member arbitration board
to issue a final and binding
resolution of the conflict.
April 3, 1972
SERALD R. LIBRAR FORD
Moffice Copy
A SPEECH BY REP. GERALD R. FORD, R-MICH.
REPUBLICAN LEADER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
BEFORE THE WEST MICHIGAN CHAPTER OF
DELTA NU ALPHA TRANSPORTATION FRATERNITY
GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN
7 P.M. APRIL 10, 1972
Gentlemen, it's a great pleasure to be here. It is an interesting experience
for me to be talking to a transportation fraternity. Speaking of transportation,
did you ever get the feeling that you're going nowhere and have already arrived?
That, of course, is the kind of feeling we all get as Income Tax Day
approaches. April 17 is Income Tax Day. That's when you're haunted by the Ghost
of Earnings Past.
You remember the income tax. It's like a do-it-yourself mugging.
You should see the tax forms they use in Las Vegas. They have three boxes
you can check. REFUND, APPLY TO NEXT YEAR'S TAXES, and DOUBLE OR NOTHING.
I always get an accountant to do my taxes. Through the years I have found
that a Form 1040 is easier read than done.
My accountant always puts an X where I'm supposed to sign. I think it stands
for the language I use when I sign it.
I have a wonderful accountant. What he doesn't know about income taxes would
fill a jail cell.
I knew I was in trouble when he had to look up the instructions to fill in
one space. Where it said DATE:.
Income tax time brings us the miseries. But I can tell you one thing.
Leisure time is no longer a problem for any of us. Thanks to modern methods of
transportation, we use it all up getting to and from work.
But, seriously, we do have tremendous problems in transportation today, and
these problems have nothing to do with getting to work. They have to do with keeping
the transportation industry working, keeping it from shutting down.
As you know, the President recently invoked the Railway Labor Act to delay
a threatened rail strike for 60 days -- until midnight May 31.
It was also not long ago that the longest dock strike in the history of the
country the West Coast work stoppage finally ended. The dock workers went
back to their jobs only after three-quarters of a billion dollars in agricultural
exports were lost, and only after Congress had adopted emergency legislation to make
sure that our West Coast ports would begin operating again.
(more)
GEBALO FORD LIBRARY
-2-
What this dramatizes is the fact that labor disputes in the transportation
industry are bringing crisis after crisis to our nation. And these crises are
repeatedly winding up in Congress' lap.
Nine times in the last nine years Congress has had to enact special legisla-
tion to restore the flow of commerce.
There was the 1963 railroad operating employes manning dispute, when
Congress created a board of arbitration to render a binding award disposing of
fireman manning and crew consist issues.
There was the 1966-67 railroad shopcraft employes wage dispute when Congress
on April 12, 1967, provided for a 20-day extension of the period of statutory
restraint
and on May 2, 1967, provided for a 47-day extension
and on July 17, 1967,
established a special board to mediate the dispute and, failing settlement of the
dispute through mediation, issued a determination implementing Emergency Board
recommendations.
There was the 1969-70 shopcraft employes wage dispute when Congress on
March 4, 1970, provided for a 37-day extension of a cooling off period and on
April 9, 1970, implemented the parties' "Memorandum of Understanding" which
members of one of the four unions involved had failed to ratify.
There was the 1970-71 railroad work-wage rules dispute when Congress
provided for an 81-day extension of the period of statutory restraint and also
implemented the first-year wage increases recommended by an Emergency Board.
There was the 1971 railroad signalmen's dispute when Congress on May 18, 1971,
extended the period of statutory restraint and also implemented the first-year wage
increases recommended by an Emergency Board.
Most recently, there was the 1972 West Coast longshoremen's dispute when
Congress provided for an immediate end to the work stoppage and established a
three-member arbitration board to issue a final and binding resolution of the
conflict.
Congress is no place to settle individual labor disputes, and nobody knows
this better than members of the House and Senate.
So why is it that Congress has become a dumping ground for labor disputes
in transportation?
First of all, our labor laws are old and inadequate.
It is now 46 years since passage of the Railway Labor Act and 25 years since
Taft-Hartley amended the National Labor Relations Act.
(more)
-3-
These two laws underpin labor-management relations in the United States.
They provide the framework for our collective bargaining system.
It has become obvious that both of these laws contain deficiencies --
especially deficiencies in dealing with labor disputes that produce national
emergencies. This is particularly true of the Railway Labor Act.
Meanwhile our economy has evolved into a complex system whose parts are
closely intermeshed. When a key part stops functioning, theentire economy is often
damaged. Yet we have a situation today where a private group with full legal
protection can act to produce a national emergency. And we also have a situation
where that same private group has such tremendous influence in Congress as to be
able to block remedial action.
That's the situation which faces us today. Meantime the American people
are demanding an end to labor disputes that endanger the whole economy and cause
widespread disruption of American life.
Unfortunately the demands wax loud while the disruption continues and then
subside after labor leaders and their allies in Congress manage to bull their way
through another crisis.
While the Nation demands action, organized labor fights any legislation that
might restrict the strike rights of its members.
What alternatives does Congress have? It can, of course, do nothing -- and
that is precisely what it has been doing.
But the truth is that Congress does not really have this alternative unless
it wants to deal with national emergency disputes in transportation one at a time,
and again and again.
The only real choice Congress has is to enact basic legislation which will
provide new and better methods for handling national emergency labor disputes in
transportation.
Why do these disputes keep ending up on Congress' doorstep? The answer is
simple. Today's bargainers have lost their old fear of letting their labor disputes
go to Capitol Hill. In fact, Congressional action often provides bargainers today
with an escape from the consequences of their own actions.
Look, for instance, at what happened in December of 1970 when Congress acted
in the railway dispute. A Presidential Board had recommended big wage increases
for four unions and had coupled it with some work rule changes designed to help
management improve productivity. What did Congress do? Congress put the pay
(more)
-4-
increases into effect but not the work rules. When one of the carriers contended
it lacked the cash to pay the increase, Congress simply extended the carrier a
loan to pay it.
The case of the West Coast dock strike developed along different lines.
In that case, the union fought special action by the Congress because the legisla-
tion called for binding arbitration. And labor's closest allies in Congress dragged
their heels as hard as possible to avoid Congressional action.
But the temper of the times has changed. Not only did we get binding
arbitration approved in the West Coast dock strike as an insurance policy against
resumption of that strike but we also came close to getting permanent legislation
reported out of a House subcommittee.
Unfortunately, last March 1 six Democrats on the subcommittee overrode the
efforts of four Republicans and subcommittee chairman John Jarman of Oklahoma to
adopt a bill which would have eased the impact of emergency transportation strikes
and would have imposed eventual mandatory settlement if necessary.
The bill the subcommittee voted on was a compromise offered by Rep. Jim
Harvey, Republican of Saginaw. It was a compromise between the Administration's
proposal for permanent strike prevention legislation and labor's opposition to
compulsory arbitration.
Harvey's bill provided for selective strikes, which in the railroad
industry would be limited to 20 per cent of revenue ton miles or to one carrier
in each of three sections of the country.
A key feature of the Harvey bill was a major provision also contained in
the Administration bill. This provided that contesting parties in a major labor
dispute would submit proposed contract settlements as a last resort. And one or
the other of those settlements would be selected by an arbitrator and imposed on
the parties unchanged.
Organized labor insists that this final offer proposal amounts to compulsory
arbitration. I do not see it that way. The final offer procedure does not
involve compulsory arbitration although it does involve limited compulsion.
These limitations are not "anti" anyone. They are simply "pro" public.
What I am saying is that the Administration's crippling strikes prevention
act has one purpose only -- to protect the public welfare.
It makes changes in collective bargaining as it is now practiced in the
transportation industry -- limited changes that do place some ultimate limitation
(more)
-5-
on the free actions of both labor and management. Any law that is designed to
protect the public welfare must necessarily place some limitations on someone.
Here is what the bill does:
In one industry only -- transportation -- it gives the President powers
to avoid a widespread crisis caused by a labor dispute.
The President would have three options in dealing with disputes in the
railroad, airline, maritime and trucking industries. He could extend the length
of existing cooling-off periods. He could permit selective strikes or require
some form of partial operation of the troubled industry. Or he could name a
neutral panel to choose between the final offers submitted by each side.
After the final offers are submitted, there would follow a five-day period
during which the Secretary of Labor could engage in mediation activity and the
parties could have one final go at settling the dispute themselves.
The final offer concept is the kind of innovative proposal we need if we
are to strengthen collective bargaining.
Remember, it requires selection without modification of the more reasonable
offer of the two parties themselves. This requirement would push the parties
toward a middle ground, because if either party's offer were extreme, it would be
rejected in favor of the other. The presence of this procedure as a final option
would encourage collective bargaining in every stage of negotiation. The penalty
for unreasonableness would be imposition of the other fellow's last offer.
This approach is designed not only to solve emergency work stoppages but
to prevent them from occurring.
The unions contend the Administration's Crippling Strikes Prevention Act
would destroy the right to strike. But is that a realistic view? Does the
railroad worker now have an unlimited right to strike? of course not. That
right is only on paper. When a nationwide rail strike occurs, Congress immediately
goes into action and passes a law that sends the striker back to work.
Is anything more required to establish the need for Crippling Strikes
Prevention legislation in transportation?
Our farmers may feel the effects of the West Coast dock strike for 10 years
or more. Grain farmers lost over a billion dollars in income because of the West
Coast strike and the strikes by dock workers on the East and Gulf coasts.
These strikes eroded our overseas agricultural marketing potential for
years to come because many good customers were forced to look to other nations
(more)
-6-
to supply their feed grain needs. Other nations now are skeptical about making
longrange purchases from the United States because we seem to lack the ability
to handle transportation emergencies like the West Coast dock strike.
Take, for example, the Japanese. They have been buying wheat, together
with considerable quantities of other grains, primarily from the United States.
Because of the West Coast dock strike, the Japanese shifted their grain purchases
to Canada and Austra lia. If we are ever to get this business back, it will only
be after years of effort.
Consider the Russians. Last fall, the United States announced an agreement
for the sale of about $150 million worth of grain to Russia. Since then, Soviet
officials have questioned whether the U.S. can be depended upon as a source of
grain in view of our dock strikes.
It is time Congress acted to change this situation.
It is more than two years now since the Administration recommended a measure
designed to prevent crippling strikes in transportation. It is interesting to
note that members of the House subcommittee which killed the measure for this year
received more than $40,543 million in union campaign contributions. That's according
to the Citizens Research Foundation of Princeton, N.J.
Let's put an end to this situation which hurts us all.
This may be too political a year to see workable legislation in the national
emergency strike field. But next year won't be if we have a Congress which is
responsible -- and responsive to the public welfare.
You can do something to solve this crushing problem. You can be part of
the solution. You can exercise your right to help determine the shape of the body
which will make laws for the Nation for the next two years. That job is in your
hands.
# # #
A SPEECH BY REP. GERALD R. FORD, R-MICH.
office Copy
REPUBLICAN LEADER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
BEFORE THE WEST MICHIGAN CHAPTER OF
DELTA NU ALPHA TRANSPORTATION FRATERNITY
GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN
7 P.M. APRIL 10, 1972
Gentlemen, it's a great pleasure to be here. It is an interesting experience
for me to be talking to a transportation fraternity. Speaking of transportation,
did you ever get the feeling that you're going nowhere - and have already arrived?
That, of course, is the kind of feeling we all get as Income Tax Day
approaches. April 17 is Income Tax Day. That's when you're haunted by the Ghost
of Earnings Past.
You remember the income tax. It's like a do-it-yourself mugging.
Gogs
You should see the tax forms they use in Las Vegas. They have three boxes
you can check. REFUND, APPLY TO NEXT YEAR'S TAXES, and DOUBLE OR NOTHING.
I always get an accountant to do my taxes. Through the years I have found
that a Form 1040 is easier read than done.
My accountant always puts an X where I'm supposed to sign. I think it stands
for the language I use when I sign it.
I have a wonderful accountant. What he doesn't know about income taxes would
fill a jail cell.
I knew I was in trouble when he had to look up the instructions to fill in
one space. Where it said DATE:.
Income tax time brings us the miseries. But I can tell you one thing.
Leisure time is no longer a problem for any of us. Thanks to modern methods of
transportation, we use it all up getting to and from work.
But, seriously, we do have tremendous problems in transportation today, and
these problems have nothing to do with getting to work. They have to do with keeping
the transportation industry working, keeping it from shutting down.
As you know, the President recently invoked the Railway Labor Act to delay
a threatened rail strike for 60 days until midnight May 31.
It was also not long ago that the longest dock strike in the history of the
country - the West Coast work stoppage finally ended. The dock workers went
back to their jobs only after three-quarters of a billion dollars in agricultural
exports were lost, and only after Congress had adopted emergency legislation to make
sure that our West Coast ports would begin operating again.
(more)
GERALD FORD LIBRAR.
-2-
What this dramatizes is the fact that labor disputes in the transportation
industry are bringing crisis after crisis to our nation. And these crises are
repeatedly winding up in Congress' lap.
Nine times in the last nine years Congress has had to enact special legisla-
tion to restore the flow of commerce.
There was the 1963 railroad operating employes manning dispute, when.
Congress created a board of arbitration to render a binding award disposing of
fireman manning and crew consist issues.
There was the 1966-67 railroad shopcraft employes wage dispute when Congress
on April 12, 1967, provided for a 20-day extension of the period of statutory
restraint
and on May 2, 1967, provided for a 47-day extension
and on July 17, 1967,
established a special board to mediate the dispute and, failing settlement of the
dispute through mediation, issued a determination implementing Emergency Board
recommendations.
There was the 1969-70 shopcraft employes wage dispute when Congress on
March 4, 1970, provided for a 37-day extension of a cooling off period and on
April 9, 1970, implemented the parties' "Memorandum of Understanding" which
members of one of the four unions involved had failed to ratify.
There was the 1970-71 railroad work-wage rules dispute when Congress
provided for an 81-day extension of the period of statutory restraint and also
implemented the first-year wage increases recommended by an Emergency Board.
There was the 1971 railroad signalmen's dispute when Congress on May 18, 1971,
extended the period of statutory restraint and also implemented the first-year wage
increases recommended by an Emergency Board.
Most recently, there was the 1972 West Coast longshoremen's dispute when
Congress provided for an immediate end to the work stoppage and established a
three-member arbitration board to issue a final and binding resolution of the
conflict.
Congress is no place to settle individual labor disputes, and nobody knows
this better than members of the House and Senate.
So why is it that Congress has become a dumping ground for labor disputes
in transportation?
First of all, our labor laws are old and inadequate.
It is now 46 years since passage of the Railway Labor Act and 25 years since
Taft-Hartley amended the National Labor Relations Act.
(more)
-3-
These two laws underpin labor-management relations in the United States.
They provide the framework for our collective bargaining system.
It has become obvious that both of these laws contain deficiencies --
especially deficiencies in dealing with labor disputes that produce national
emergencies. This is particularly true of the Railway Labor Act.
Meanwhile our economy has evolved into a complex system whose parts are
closely intermeshed. When a key part stops functioning, theentire economy is often
damaged. Yet we have a situation today where a private group with full legal
protection can act to produce a national emergency. And we also have a situation
where that same private group has such tremendous influence in Congress as to be
able to block remedial action.
That's the situation which faces us today. Meantime the American people
are demanding an end to labor disputes that endanger the whole economy and cause
widespread disruption of American life.
Unfortunately the demands wax loud while the disruption continues and then
subside after labor leaders and their allies in Congress manage to bull their way
through another crisis.
While the Nation demands action, organized labor fights any legislation that
might restrict the strike rights of its members.
What alternatives does Congress have? It can, of course, do nothing -- and
that is precisely what it has been doing.
But the truth is that Congress does not really have this alternative unless
it wants to deal with national emergency disputes in transportation one at a time,
and again and again.
The only real choice Congress has is to enact basic legislation which will
provide new and better methods for handling national emergency labor disputes in
transportation.
Why do these disputes keep ending up on Congress' doorstep? The answer is
simple. Today's bargainers have lost their old fear of letting their labor disputes
go to Capitol Hill. In fact, Congressional action often provides bargainers today
with an escape from the consequences of their own actions.
Look, for instance, at what happened in December of 1970 when Congress acted
in the railway dispute. A Presidential Board had recommended big wage increases
for four unions and had coupled it with some work rule changes designed to help
management improve productivity. What did Congress do? Congress put the pay
(more)
-4-
increases into effect but not the work rules. When one of the carriers contended
it lacked the cash to pay the increase, Congress simply extended the carrier a
loan to pay it.
The case of the West Coast dock strike developed along different lines.
In that case, the union fought special action by the Congress because the legisla-
tion called for binding arbitration. And labor's closest allies in Congress dragged
their heels as hard as possible to avoid Congressional action.
But the temper of the times has changed. Not only did we get binding
arbitration approved in the West Coast dock strike as an insurance policy against
resumption of that strike but we also came close to getting permanent legislation
reported out of a House subcommittee.
Unfortunately, last March 1 six Democrats on the subcommittee overrode the
efforts of four Republicans and subcommittee chairman John Jarman of Oklahoma to
adopt a bill which would have eased the impact of emergency transportation strikes
and would have imposed eventual mandatory settlement if necessary.
The bill the subcommittee voted on was a compromise offered by Rep. Jim
Harvey, Republican of Saginaw. It was a compromise between the Administration's
proposal for permanent strike prevention legislation and labor's opposition to
compulsory arbitration.
Harvey's bill provided for selective strikes, which in the railroad
industry would be limited to 20 per cent of revenue ton miles or to one carrier
in each of three sections of the country.
A key feature of the Harvey bill was a major provision also contained in
the Administration bill. This provided that contesting parties in a major labor
dispute would submit proposed contract settlements as a last resort. And one or
the other of those settlements would be selected by an arbitrator and imposed on
the parties unchanged.
Organized labor insists that this final offer proposal amounts to compulsory
arbitration. I do not see it that way. The final offer procedure does not
involve compulsory arbitration although it does involve limited compulsion.
These limitations are not "anti" anyone. They are simply "pro" public.
What I am saying is that the Administration's crippling strikes prevention
act has one purpose only -- to protect the public welfare.
It makes changes in collective bargaining as it is now practiced in the
transportation industry limited changes that do place some ultimate limitation
(more)
-5-
on the free actions of both labor and management. Any law that is designed to
protect the public welfare must necessarily place some limitations on someone.
Here is what the bill does:
In one industry only -- transportation -- it gives the President powers
to avoid a widespread crisis caused by a labor dispute.
The President would have three options in dealing with disputes in the
railroad, airline, maritime and trucking industries. He could extend the length
of existing cooling-off periods. He could permit selective strikes or require
some form of partial operation of the troubled industry. Or he could name a
neutral panel to choose between the final offers submitted by each side.
After the final offers are submitted, there would follow a five-day period
during which the Secretary of Labor could engage in mediation activity and the
parties could have one final go at settling the dispute themselves.
The final offer concept is the kind of innovative proposal we need if we
are to strengthen collective bargaining.
Remember, it requires selection without modification of the more reasonable
offer of the two parties themselves. This requirement would push the parties
toward a middle ground, because if either party's offer were extreme, it would be
rejected in favor of the other. The presence of this procedure as a final option
would encourage collective bargaining in every stage of negotiation. The penalty
for unreasonableness would be imposition of the other fellow's last offer.
This approach is designed not only to solve emergency work stoppages but
to prevent them from occurring.
The unions contend the Administration's Crippling Strikes Prevention Act
would destroy the right to strike. But is that a realistic view? Does the
railroad worker now have an unlimited right to strike? Of course not. That
right is only on paper. When a nationwide rail strike occurs, Congress immediately
goes into action and passes a law that sends the striker back to work.
Is anything more required to establish the need for Crippling Strikes
Prevention legislation in transportation?
Our farmers may feel the effects of the West Coast dock strike for 10 years
or more. Grain farmers lost over a billion dollars in income because of the West
Coast strike and the strikes by dock workers on the East and Gulf coasts.
These strikes eroded our overseas agricultural marketing potential for
years to come because many good customers were forced to look to other nations
(more)
-6-
to supply their feed grain needs. Other nations now are skeptical about making
longrange purchases from the United States because we seem to lack the ability
to handle transportation emergencies like the West Coast dock strike.
Take, for example, the Japanese. They have been buying wheat, together
with considerable quantities of other grains, primarily from the United States.
Because of the West Coast dock strike, the Japanese shifted their grain purchases
to Canada and Austra lia. If we are ever to get this business back, it will only
be after years of effort.
Consider the Russians. Last fall, the United States announced an agreement
for the sale of about $150 million worth of grain to Russia. Since then, Soviet
officials have questioned whether the U.S. can be depended upon as a source of
grain in view of our dock strikes.
It is time Congress acted to change this situation.
It is more than two years now since the Administration recommended a measure
designed to prevent crippling strikes in transportation. It is interesting to
note that members of the House subcommittee which killed the measure for this year
received more than $40,543 million in union campaign contributions. That's according
to the Citizens Research Foundation of Princeton, N.J.
Let's put an end to this situation which hurts us all.
This may be too political a year to see workable legislation in the national
emergency strike field. But next year won't be if we have a Congress which is
responsible -- and responsive to the public welfare.
You can do something to solve this crushing problem. You can be part of
the solution. You can exercise your right to help determine the shape of the body
which will make laws for the Nation for the next two years. That job is in your
hands.
# # #