Back to National Right to Work Committee (1)

Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page

doc

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

1506595

label

National Right to Work Committee (1)

core

doc

dtoType

document

citationUrl

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1506595

pageCount

Source metadata

1506595

sourceUrl

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1506595

contentType

document

title

National Right to Work Committee (1)

citationUrl

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1506595

collections

John C. Vickerman Files (Ford Administration)

John Vickerman's Meetings and Briefings Files

subjects

White House briefings

Civil service

Right to labor

Labor unions

iiifBase

https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0166/645344/1506595.pdf

thumbnailUrl

https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0166/645344/1506595.pdf

largeImageUrl

https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0166/645344/1506595.pdf

imageCount

hasImages

yes

source

import

hasTranscription

Source extras

url

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1506595

naId

1506595

coverageEndDate

logicalDate

1975-10-31

month

year

1975

coverageStartDate

logicalDate

1975-01-01

month

year

1975

languages

English

levelOfDescription

fileUnit

recordType

description

ocrSource

nara-archive

Single page context

seq

pageIndex

type

document

url

https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0166/645344/1506595.pdf

mediaId

bdf026993e8a6a42

ocrText

The original documents are located in Box 19, folder "National Right to Work Committee (1)" of the John C. Vickerman Files 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. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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. Some items in this folder were not digitized because it contains copyrighted materials. Please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library for access to these materials. PUBLIC ATTITUDES TOWARD UNIONISM IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR January 1975 Research Findings Prepared for NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK COMMITTEE DERARP 1080 0.74 Caravan Surveys TABLE OF CONTENTS Page FOREWORD 1 INTRODUCTION TO DETAILED FINDINGS 2 DETAILED FINDINGS 4 TECHNICAL APPENDIX A-1 ( 1 FOREWORD This report presents the findings of a personal interview research survey conducted among 2,038 men and women, 18 years of age or over, living in private households in the continental United States. Interviewing for this Caravan survey was completed during the period January 10 through February 3, 1975, by members of the Opinion Research Corporation national interviewing staff. All interviews were conducted in the homes of respondents. The most advanced probability sampling techniques were used in the design and execution of the sample plan; therefore, the results may be projected to the total U.S. population of men and women 18 years of age or over. Only one interview was taken per household, regardless of the number of people 18 years of age or over in the household. Weights were introduced into the tabulations to ensure proper repre- sentation in the sample. The Technical Appendix at the end of the report describes in detail the sampling methods and other procedures employed in the survey. Also described are characteristics of the sample and sampling tolerances of survey results. As required by the Code of Ethics of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, we will maintain the anonymity of our respondents. No information can be released that in any way will reveal the identity of a respondent. Also, our authorization is required for any publica- tion of the research findings or their implications. Caravan Surveys, a division of Opinion Research Corporation, is a syndicated, share-cost data collection vehicle. Caravan reports, such as this one, are presented in tabular form. Inter- pretive analysis is provided by Caravan only if specifically contracted for by the client. 2 INTRODUCTION TO DETAILED FINDINGS The tables read across. Except for the first two columns, all figures in the body of the tables are percentages. The unweighted number of interviews appears in the column headed "UNWTD" and the weighted numbers -- tabulation units resulting from the weighting process -- appear in the column headed "WTD." Throughout the tables, an asterisk (*) signifies any value less than one-half percent. The weighted numbers for sex and region of country may not add to the total because they are subject to the limitation of the computer to round weighted numbers. In all demographic groups other than sex and region -- the unweighted numbers may not add to the total number of respondents because they are dependent upon a respondent's answer and, therefore, do not include the "Not Reporteds." The following definitions are provided for some of the sidebreaks by which the data are analyzed. Other sidebreaks are self-explanatory. Occupation refers to the occupation of the chief wage earner in the household. City Size is based on interviewer observation of the respondent's location in terms of area, and the age and type of dwelling. This sidebreak does not add to the total number of inter- views, as some respondents simply do not qualify within a definition. For example, a suburban garden apartment does not fit the description "single family dwelling." For those categories that are not self-explanatory, the following definitions are provided: Old Suburb -- single family dwelling in a small town or suburb built prior to World War II New Suburb -- single family dwelling built since World War II City 1 Family -- single family dwelling within a metropolitan area City Multifamily -- multiple family dwelling, which would include a duplex, double house, residential house with more than one family living in it, etc., within a metropolitan area 3 Geographic Regions include: Northeast: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania North Central: Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas South: Delaware, Maryland, District of Columbia, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas West: Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, California Income is total family income in 1974, before taxes. INTRODUCTION TO DETAILED FINDINGS enoigal read Incept for the first two columns, all figures in the body OF the :Istine) Throughout the 57 percent drink Presented because 8 To all desographic other the total number of to do not :320W simolifie) The following for some of the data are malyzed. Other ,ATES nt VIlmat Injos ai omoonI DETAILED FINDINGS Occupation to the occupation City Size is on of the Ts location in terms of area, and the age and type of dwelling. This does to the number of views, as respondants simply do qualify definition. For a submitted fit the For those categories that are not E-explainatory, the following definitions are Old Suburb Femily in a town or built prior to War IL New Suburb family dwelling since World War II City 1 Femily family dwelling within a metropolitan area City multiple family dwelling, which would include 3 doplex, house, residential issue than one family living in it, etc., within a netropolitan area 4 QUESTION N1 71026 JANUARY 1975 SHOULD THE U.S. CONGRESS PASS A LAW WHICH WOULD ALLOW AGREEMENTS REQUIRING EMPLOYEES TO JOIN OR PAY DUES TO A UNION IN ORDER TO WORK FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NUMBER OF INTERVIEWS NO UNWTD WTD YES NO OPINION TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC 2038 6707 11 79 10 MEN 1031 3233 12 80 8 WOMEN 1007 3475 9 78 13 18 - 29 YEARS OF AGE 522 1918 14 77 9 30 - 39 421 1145 12 78 10 40 49 328 1117 8 84 8 50 - 59 311 1041 9 84 7 60 YEARS OR OVER 456 1487 10 74 16 LESS THAN HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 666 2395 13 72 15 HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 712 2502 11 81 8 SOME COLLEGE 648 1776 8 86 6 PROFESSIONAL 270 772 9 85 6 MANAGERIAL 242 696 8 85 7 CLERICAL, SALES 207 677 9 86 5 CRAFTSMAN, FOREMAN 378 1288 12 80 8 OTHER MANUAL, SERVICE 473 1731 14 75 11 FARMER, FARM LABORER 42 181 6 86 8 RURAL 297 940 11 80 9 OLD SUBURB 1 FAMILY 362 1286 8 80 12 NEW SUBURB 1 FAMILY 260 731 6 86 8 CITY 1 FAMILY 619 1976 14 77 9 CITY MULTIFAMILY 122 425 13 78 9 CITY APARTMENT 200 804 16 67 17 NORTHEAST 537 1552 14 74 12 NORTH CENTRAL 583 1900 11 78 11 SOUTH 630 2136 9 82 9 WEST 288 1120 9 82 9 UNDER $5,000 FAMILY INCOME 349 1653 14 69 17 $5,000 - $6,999 229 705 15 75 10 $7,000 - $9,999 346 943 12 78 10 $10,000 - $14,999 464 1420 10 82 8 $15,000 OR OVER 595 1831 7 87 6 NO CHILDREN IN HOUSEHOLD 1003 3525 10 78 12 WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 1035 3182 12 80 8 WITH TEENAGERS 12 - 17 507 1622 12 82 6 WHITE 1803 5874 9 81 10 NONWHITE 226 810 23 65 12 OWN HOME 1388 4292 9 82 9 RENT HOME 630 2361 14 74 12 ВЕИД HOME 830 3391 TV 14 ORM HOME 1309 4505 GS a MOMMHILLE sse 810 22 15 MHILE 1803 MILH LEENVOE#2 TS TS 201 FPSS IS 85 MILM CHICOKEN ANDEN 18 1032 3185 IS 00 S 00 CHILDREN IN ИСПОБНОГО 1003 3252 TO 10 212*000 08 DAEW 200 1831 BS 10'000 214'830 ver 7450 03 #1*000 20'380 3⑈8 073 IS 10 12'000 10'300 SSA 102 ПИОЕК 12'000 EVNICA ТИСОИЕ 348 1923 ME21 508 1130 85 голдн 930 SI39 95 MOXIN СЕИДИУГ 283 1800 10 HOY1HEY21 235 TR28 3⑈ CITA 500 sov PA CIA ADDITEVNICA ISS VSR 18 CILA LYNIFA VIA Taje 13 исм 2110080 I БУНЕГА seo 197 80 3 ord 200088 T EVHICA 305 90 JARUS 503 80 LYUR ГУРОКЕК vs T81 80 8 OTHES КУМПУГ* SENAICE #13 TAST ЕОКЕНУЙ CTENICY 24022 303 ess ses 8 22 1 БКОКЕ2210ИУГ 113 ZONE CORRECE 940 L 84 6 1850 E09 INDEPENDENT HICH 2CHOOL СОНЬГЕТЬ ot « ET 600E 882 DEMOCRAT ΓE22 MAHT RICK It 78 11 1174 368 REPUBLICAN 20 AEVES 08 OЛЕК 120 11 18 8 OILL GEST FAMILIES NOINONON 20 20 311 E 74 17 EE61 185 FAMILIES NOINO vo 10 358 ot 12 61 176 2966 MEMBERS NOINO PC DE VST 18 $0 ACY82 OF Yes 255 01 79 II 67077 2038 TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC MOMEM 5001 OPINION ON YES UNWTD WTD иеи 1031 ON INTERVIEWS 1019Γ 0*2* BARRIC BEOS TOTA IT NUMBER OF OURLD MID AE2 ИПИЗЕВ DE ORDER TO WORK FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD THE U.S. CONGRESS PASS A LAW WHICH WOULD ALLOW AGREEMENTS REQUIRING EMPLOYEES TO JOIN OR PAY DUES TO A UNION IN 5775 JANUARY 72026 IN ONDER 10 BOBK ECM THE EEDEBYT S 280050 n°2" V MAICH MONED VETOR 10 W ONERATION us 7012 QUESTION N2 71026 JANUARY 1975 6 SHOULD THE U.S. CONGRESS PASS A LAW WHICH WOULD ALLOW AGREEMENTS REQUIRING EMPLOYEES TO JOIN OR PAY DUES TO A UNION IN ORDER TO WORK FOR STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS NUMBER OF INTERVIEWS NO UNWTD WTD YES NO OPINION TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC 2038 6707 10 79 11 MEN 1031 3233 11 81 8 WOMEN 1007 3475 8 78 14 18 - 29 YEARS OF AGE 522 1918 11 79 10 30 - 39 421 1145 10 81 9 40 - 49 328 1117 8 81 11 50 - 59 311 1041 9 82 9 60 YEARS OR OVER 456 1487 8 76 16 LESS THAN HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 666 2395 10 73 17 HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 712 2502 11 80 9 SOME COLLEGE 648 1776 7 87 6 PROFESSIONAL 270 772 11 83 6 MANAGERIAL 242 696 5 87 8 CLERICAL, SALES 207 677 6 89 5 CRAFTSMAN, FOREMAN 378 1288 11 80 9 OTHER MANUAL, SERVICE 473 1731 11 78 11 FARMER, FARM LABORER 42 181 7 74 19 RURAL 297 940 8 79 13 OLD SUBURB 1 FAMILY 362 1286 7 81 12 NEW SUBURB 1 FAMILY 260 731 5 86 9 CITY 1 FAMILY 619 1976 12 79 9 CITY MULTIFAMILY 122 425 13 77 10 CITY APARTMENT 200 804 12 71 17 NORTHEAST 537 1552 12 77 11 NORTH CENTRAL 583 1900 12 77 11 SOUTH 630 2136 6 82 12 WEST 288 1120 9 82 9 UNDER $5,000 FAMILY INCOME 349 1653 10 71 19 $5,000 - $6,999 229 705 11 79 10 $7,000 - $9,999 346 943 11 79 10 $10,000 - $14,999 46't 1420 11 81 8 $15,000 OR OVER 595 1831 7 86 7 NO CHILDREN IN HOUSEHOLD 1003 3525 10 77 13 WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 1035 3182 9 81 10 WITH TEENAGERS 12 - 17 507 1622 9 82 9 WHITE 1803 5874 9 81 10 NONWHITE 226 810 13 69 18 OWN HOME 1388 4292 9 81 10 RENT HOME 630 2361 11 76 13 HOME 5381 HOME 339 201 18 1032 ИО $12'000 ON OACH 202 T831 3⑈2 ore 588 2001H СЕЙДВУГ 500 800 TSS EVNICA PTA MEM T EVNICA SPO 131 3PS #5 TSI TABT 2VTE2 TOS CONTECE L 84 6 1850 E09 INDEPENDENT 11 79 ot 600E 882 DEMOCRAT 12 8L OI 1174 898 REPUBLICAN 12 18 L 4710 6339 NONUNION FAMILIES 20 6 SL 91 1933 181 FAMILIES NOINO 8 73 61 941 2966 MEMBERS NOINO 30 11 79 ot 67077 2038 TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC NOININO ON YES UNWTD WTD ON INTERVIEWS NUMBER OF ORDER TO WORK FOR STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS SHOULD THE U.S. CONGRESS PASS A LAW WHICH WOULD ALLOW AGREEMENTS REQUIRING EMPLOYEES TO JOIN OR PAY DUES TO A UNION IN JANUARY 1975 72026 ZN NOIS3000 L QUESTION N3 71026 JANUARY 1975 8 SHOULD YOUR STATE LEGISLATURE PASS A LAW WHICH WOULD ALLOW AGREEMENTS REQUIRING EMPLOYEES TO JOIN OR PAY DUES TO A UNION IN ORDER TO WORK FOR THE STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS NUMBER OF INTERVIEWS NO UNWTD WTD YES NO OPINION TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC 2038 6707 10 78 12 MEN 1031 3233 12 80 8 WOMEN 1007 3475 8 77 15 18 - 29 YEARS OF AGE 522 1918 12 78 10 30 - 39 421 1145 10 80 10 40 - 49 328 1117 9 81 10 50 - 59 311 1041 11 80 9 60 YEARS OR OVER 456 1487 8 75 17 LESS THAN HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 666 2395 10 73 17 HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 712 2502 11 79 10 SOME COLLEGE 648 1776 8 85 7 PROFESSIONAL 270 772 10 83 7 MANAGERIAL 242 696 5 85 10 CLERICAL, SALES 207 677 7 88 5 CRAFTSMAN, FOREMAN 378 1288 10 80 10 OTHER MANUAL, SERVICE 473 1731 14 75 11 FARMER, FARM LABORER 42 181 7 72 21 RURAL 297 940 10 78 12 OLD SUBURB 1 FAMILY 362 1286 7 81 12 NEW SUBURB 1 FAMILY 260 731 6 85 9 CITY 1 FAMILY 619 1976 12 77 11 CITY MULTIFAMILY 122 425 16 74 10 CITY APARTMENT 200 804 15 69 16 NORTHEAST 537 1552 14 74 12 NORTH CENTRAL 583 1900 12 78 10 SOUTH 630 2136 7 31 12 WEST 288 1120 9 80 11 UNDER $5,000 FAMILY INCOME 349 1653 12 70 18 $5,000 - $6,999 229 705 14 75 11 $7,000 - $9,999 346 943 10 80 10 $10,000 - $14,999 464 1420 10 80 10 $15,000 OR OVER 595 1831 7 86 7 NO CHILDREN IN HOUSEHOLD 1003 3525 11 76 13 WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 1035 3182 10 80 10 WITH TEENAGERS 12 - 17 507 1622 10 81 9 WHITE 1803 5874 9 80 11 NONWHITE 226 810 19 63 18 OWN HOME 1388 4292 9 81 10 RENT HOME 630 2361 13 74 13 230 S3PT T390 vsas ST 338 970 Ta MHILE 283⑈ 201 Tess TO at 1032 TO 80 HD In 1003 3252 #121000 or DASK 202 T831 1 #10*000 ⑈⑈⑈ 7450 21'000 3⑈0 0⑈3 TO 00 550 102 TO ПИДЕК 340 1923 MESI 500 TTSO a 2001H 830 ST39 3. SI WORTH СЕЙДКУГ 203 1800 IS T2ASHTROM 231 Tees CISA 500 sor ISS #52 CIIA EVHICA PTA TAAD IS 590 ART 395 1589 BT sas and #5 TOT s is 413 7131 318 TS88 SOS PAS 99 505 POP (L) $10 115 Pre ATS 5205 8 88 6 1850 E09 INDEPENDENT 000 11 78 IT 600E 882 DEMOCRAT 12 78 ot 1174 89E REPUBLICAN BIT 7001 12 08 8 47100 1439 NONUNION FAMILIES 350 7173 6 75 9T EE61 181 NOINO VST 8 74 8T 1441 296 MEMBERS NOINO 12 78 ot 67077 2038 TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC NOINIdO ON YES UNWTD WTD ON INTERVIEWS NUMBER OF IN ORDER TO WORK FOR THE STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS SHOULD YOUR STATE LEGISLATURE PASS A LAW WHICH WOULD ALLOW AGREEMENTS REQUIRING EMPLOYEES TO JOIN OR PAY DUES TO A UNION JANUARY 1975 72026 EN NOILS3N0 6 QUESTION N4 71026 JANUARY 1975 WHICH OF THESE ARRANGEMENTS DO YOU FAVOR FOR FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES 1. A PERSON CAN WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT WHETHER OR NOT HE BELONGS TO A UNION 2. A PERSON CAN GO TO WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT IF HE DOESN'T ALREADY BELONG TC A UNION, BUT HAS TO JOIN AFTER HE IS HIRED TO HOLD HIS JOB 3. A PERSON CAN GET A JOB WITH THE GOVERNMENT ONLY IF HE ALREADY BELONGS TO A UNION NUMBER OF 4. NO OPINION INTERVIEWS UNWTD WTD 1. 2. 3. 4. TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC 2038 6707 83 10 1 6 MEN 1031 3233 83 11 2 4 WOMEN 1007 3475 82 9 1 8 18 - 29 YEARS OF AGE 522 1918 82 11 1 6 30 - 39 421 1145 84 11 1 4 40 - 49 328 1117 84 9 1 6 50 - 59 311 1041 86 8 2 4 60 YEARS OR OVER 456 1487 30 8 2 10 LESS THAN HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 666 2395 77 11 2 10 HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 712 2502 84 10 1 5 SOME COLLEGE 648 1776 89 8 * 3 PROFESSIONAL 270 772 90 7 # 3 MANAGERIAL 242 696 90 7 0 3 CLERICAL, SALES 207 677 87 7 1 5 CRAFTSMAN, FOREMAN 378 1288 83 11 * 6 OTHER MANUAL, SERVICE 473 1731 81 12 2 5 FARMER, FARM LABORER 42 181 76 2 4 18 RURAL 297 940 81 10 3 6 OLD SUBURB 1 FAMILY 362 1286 82 8 2 8 NEW SUBURB 1 FAMILY 260 731 87 8 * 5 CITY 1 FAMILY 619 1976 85 10 1 4 CITY MULTIFAMILY 122 425 71 20 0 9 CITY APARTMENT 200 804 78 10 3 9 NORTHEAST 537 1552 78 13 2 7 NORTH CENTRAL 583 1900 79 12 1 8 SOUTH 630 2136 88 5 2 5 WEST 288 1120 87 7 * 6 UNDER $5,000 FAMILY INCOME 349 1653 76 11 3 10 $5,000 - $6,999 229 705 80 12 * 8 $7,000 - $9,999 346 943 80 11 1 8 $10,000 - $14,999 464 1420 86 9 2 3 $15,000 OR OVER 595 1831 89 7 * 4 NO CHILDREN IN HOUSEHOLD 1003 3525 82 8 2 8 WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 1035 3182 84 10 1 5 WITH TEENAGERS 12 - 17 507 1622 86 10 1 3 WHITE 1803 5874 85 8 1 6 NONWHITE 226 810 70 21 1 8 OWN HOME 1388 4292 85 9 1 5 RENT HOME 630 2361 79 11 2 8 11 QUESTION N4 71026 JANUARY 1975 WHICH OF THESE ARRANGEMENTS DO YOU FAVOR FOR FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES 1. A PERSON CAN WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT WHETHER OR NOT HE BELONGS TO A UNION 2. A PERSON CAN GO TO WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT IF HE DOESN'T ALREADY BELONG TO A UNION, BUT HAS TO JOIN AFTER HE IS HIRED TO HOLD HIS JOB 3. A PERSON CAN GET A JOB WITH THE GOVERNMENT ONLY IF HE ALREADY BELONGS TO A UNION NUMBER OF 4. NO OPINION INTERVIEWS UNWTD WTD 1. 2. 3. 4. TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC 2038 6707 83 10 1 6 UNION MEMBERS 296 941 77 17 2 4 UNION FAMILIES 581 1933 77 16 2 5 NONUNION FAMILIES 1439 4710 85 7 1 7 REPUBLICAN 368 1174 85 7 2 6 DEMOCRAT 882 3009 81 11 2 6 INDEPENDENT 603 1850 87 9 * 4 This, the the moiniq9, Бетварта B DO beasd г'лойзвтосто) noiniqO end one date to prit yours ad R YITE to The or do not the list be on the wag 101 edit accu bascob Laste and from To 300 STD sd dquos -Taque one tao wan eill .reditom 03 amo moth 298289 smit 26 28 vd YJ Lidadorq [suoitibert to amoldong Instroqui R Ub to medica A as bris ritod el TECHNICAL APPENDIX nevig VIIB not Bisb The and ni 088 to ejatenoo signsa TOJERM ЭЯО off pearlt 00 30 1953 the 082 to and * Youte VIID to Lededorg S Heati EL .bsau ed one VIIS ed Terasm book has of to TSDTO as begnatts STOW esste done niddiw estimoo edit add oT 03 agreM mod bequory SPATE and 118 bas 100 naiselucog over Jant yd neds sitt XL 03 patasger staib is conducted is the household immediately to the left of the 004 to book as the Thus, the household can be one 9dt at to of 26W ngreeb gnilquese ent ni goda adT S Contract none Joefer of beeu asw borttem gnilqmse 8 nissA .eIques ed year yonim eda do BG (004) livis to S .nolaivib zonim 1801 of households. A-1 Opinion Research Corporation's Master Sample Opinion Research Corporation's master sample is based on a new probability sample design, prepared in consultation with J. Stevens Stock of Marketmath, Inc., and modified and updated by ORC. The essential characteristic of probability sampling is that, for each person in the population under study, the probability that he will be included in the sample can be specified. This means that the degree or reliability of any finding from a study based on a probability sample can be estimated mathematically. This new sample design is a major improvement over standard areal probability designs now in common use. These areal methods depend upon the use of maps showing geographic segments for which rough population estimates can be made. These maps are often out of date and otherwise inaccurate, and population estimates are frequently unreliable for small geographic areas, par- ticularly as time passes from one census to another. The new sampling method eliminates these important problems of traditional probability sampling by using current address directories as the basis for a system of defining interviewing starting points -- a system which, of course, includes in the sample those households which are not in the directory as well. The new method is both statistically and administratively as efficient as possible, providing the most reliable data for any given expenditure. The ORC master sample consists of 360 counties in the contiguous United States. This master sample of 360 counties comprises, in fact, six subsamples of 60 counties each. Each of these subsamples is itself a national probability sample. Depending on the needs of any particular study, the master sample can be used as a whole, or any combination of the six subsamples can be used. To construct the sample, the counties within each state were arranged in order of descending population size; and all the states were grouped in geographical order from Maine to California. Sixty counties were then chosen by statistical procedures that insure representative geographical distribution. This process was repeated to obtain the six subsamples that make up the master sample of 360 counties. The next step in the sampling design was to select an area from each of the 360 counties in the master sample. Again, a probability sampling method was used to select, within each county, a minor civil division (MCD) as defined by the Bureau of the Census. A minor civil division may be a town, township, city, or part of a city. The probability that any particular minor civil division was selected in a county was proportional to the population of that minor civil division. A-2 Thus, the larger a minor civil division, the greater the likelihood that it be selected. The minor civil division, then, is the primary sampling unit. Once the MCD has been selected, the next step is the determination of those households where interviewing is to take place. Under the ORC National Probability Sample procedure, any current listing of household locations, even if incomplete, constitutes the first stage of the sampling plan. From this list of households one or more addresses are chosen at random. Each of these addresses defines the place that the interviewer begins following the interviewing site selection process. The interviews in a cluster or "neighborhood" do not begin at the household selected from the list, but at the adjacent household, which may or may not be on the original list. Thus, the list does not define the universe of households in an MCD, but rather the list of house- holds adjacent to possible starting points. Depending on the number of households contacted from each starting point, the number of starting points chosen, and the criteria for being included on the original list, every household in the MCD has a known, or knowable, probability of being included in the ORC sample. Because they are the most up-to-date and the most complete listing of addresses available, tele- phone books are the sources of locations next to interviewing starting points when general public surveys are being done. The specific persons to be interviewed are selected as follows: (1) A certain number of starting points are selected from the telephone books covering the minor civil divisions, or communities, selected. The starting points are chosen in a manner that each household, within the minor civil division, listed in the phone book has an equal chance of being selected. (2) Each starting point selected determines a group of households, called a "cluster," in which interviews are conducted. This cluster of households includes households both with and without listed telephones. The first household in which an interview is conducted is the household immediately to the left of the household selected from the telephone book as the starting point. Thus, the first household can be one either with or without a telephone. (3) The interviewer conducts an interview in the first household and then works through the group of households following a prescribed rule. The interviewer continues working through the cluster until interviews have been completed in a preassigned number of households. A-3 (4) A respondent-selection procedure determines for the interviewer which person to interview in any given household. Every eligible respondent in the household has the same chance to be interviewed as any other eligible respondent. The interviewer is not allowed to make any substitutions. Once all interviews have been completed, weighting procedures are employed to insure that the sample properly represents the population from which it was drawn. This sampling procedure is rigorous in concept and practice and allows for the exact determination of the statistical precision of any finding. A-4 Sample Characteristics, January 1975 Caravan The data in the table below compare the characteristics of the weighted Caravan sample with those of the total population, 18 years of age or over. The table shows that the distribution of the total sample parallels very closely that of the population under study. Total Men Women Popu- Caravan Popu- Caravan Popu- Caravan lation- Sample lation- Sample lation- Sample Age 18 - 29 years of age 29% 29% 30% 30% 28% 27% 30 39 17 17 17 17 17 17 40 49 16 16 17 17 16 16 50 - 59 16 16 16 16 15 15 60 years or over 22 22 20 20 24 25 Race White 89% 88% 89% 88% 88% 88% Nonwhite 11 12 11 12 12 12 Geographic Region Northeast 23% 23% 23% 23% 24% 24% North Central 27 28 28 29 27 27 South 31 32 31 31 32 33 West 19 17 18 17 17 16 1/ Weights were introduced into the tabulations to ensure proper representation of the inter- views in the sample. 2/ Source: Latest data from the U.S. Bureau of the Census, regular and interim reports. (1) A-5 Reliability of Survey Percentages Results of any sample are subject to sampling variation. The magnitude of the variation is measurable and is affected by the number of interviews and the level of the percentages expressing the results. The table below shows the possible sample variation that applies to percentage results reported from the Opinion Research Corporation sample. The chances are 95 in 100 that a Caravan survey result does not vary, plus or minus, by more than the indicated number of percentage points from the result that would be obtained if interviews had been conducted with all persons in the universe represented by the sample. Approximate Sampling Tolerances Applicable to Percentages at or Near These Levels Size of Sample on Which Caravan Survey Result is Based 10% or 90% 30% or 70% 50% 2,000 interviews 2% 3% 3% 1,000 interviews 2% 4% 4% 500 interviews 3% 5% 5% 250 interviews 5% 7% 8% 100 interviews 7% 11% 12% A-6 Sampling Tolerances When Comparing Two Samples Tolerances are also involved in the comparison of results from different parts of any one Opinion Research Corporation sample and in the comparison of results between two different ORC samples. A difference, in other words, must be of at least a certain size to be con- sidered statistically significant. The table below is a guide to the sampling tolerances applicable to such comparisons. Differences Required for Significance at Size of Samples or Near These Percentage Levels Compared 10% or 90% 30% or 70% 50% 2,000 and 2,000 2% 4% 4% 2,000 and 1,000 3% 4% 5% 1,000 and 1,000 3% 5% 6% 1,000 and 500 4% 6% 7% 500 and 500 5% 7% 8% 500 and 200 6% 9% 10% 200 and 200 7% 11% 12% 200 and 100 9% 14% 15% 100 and 100 10% 16% 17% Based on 95 chances in 100. A-7 Quality Control Measures Quality control measures are applied in every phase of the Caravan survey. Specialists in many fields are available for consultation with the Caravan survey director in the development of the questionnaire. Interviewers are hired and trained, in person, to staff the probability sample, and their work is regularly checked for accuracy and validity. Questionnaires are prepared for data processing by experienced coders, under the supervision of the survey director. The processing of data is subject to rigorous internal checks designed to detect both machine and human error. PUBLIC ATTITUDES TOWARD UNIONISM IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR January 1975 Research Findings Prepared for NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK COMMITTEE ARY Caravan Surveys Opinion Research Corporation TABLE OF CONTENTS Page FOREWORD 1 INTRODUCTION TO DETAILED FINDINGS 2 DETAILED FINDINGS 4 TECHNICAL APPENDIX A-1 1 FOREWORD This report presents the findings of a personal interview research survey conducted among 2,038 men and women, 18 years of age or over, living in private households in the continental United States. Interviewing for this Caravan survey was completed during the period January 10 through February 3, 1975, by members of the Opinion Research Corporation national interviewing staff. All interviews were conducted in the homes of respondents. The most advanced probability sampling techniques were used in the design and execution of the sample plan; therefore, the results may be projected to the total U.S. population of men and women 18 years of age or over. Only one interview was taken per household, regardless of the number of people 18 years of age or over in the household. Weights were introduced into the tabulations to ensure proper repre- sentation in the sample. The Technical Appendix at the end of the report describes in detail the sampling methods and other procedures employed in the survey. Also described are characteristics of the sample and sampling tolerances of survey results. As required by the Code of Ethics of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, we will maintain the anonymity of our respondents. No information can be released that in any way will reveal the identity of a respondent. Also, our authorization is required for any publica- tion of the research findings or their implications. Caravan Surveys, a division of Opinion Research Corporation, is a syndicated, share-cost data collection vehicle. Caravan reports, such as this one, are presented in tabular form. Inter- pretive analysis is provided by Caravan only if specifically contracted for by the client. 2 INTRODUCTION TO DETAILED FINDINGS The tables read across. Except for the first two columns, all figures in the body of the tables are percentages. The unweighted number of interviews appears in the column headed "UNWTD" and the weighted numbers -- tabulation units resulting from the weighting process appear in the column headed "WTD." Throughout the tables, an asterisk (*) signifies any value less than one-half percent. The weighted numbers for sex and region of country may not add to the total because they are subject to the limitation of the computer to round weighted numbers. In all demographic groups -- other than sex and region -- the unweighted numbers may not add to the total number of respondents because they are dependent upon a respondent's answer and, therefore, do not include the "Not Reporteds." The following definitions are provided for some of the sidebreaks by which the data are analyzed. Other sidebreaks are self-explanatory. Occupation refers to the occupation of the chief wage earner in the household. City Size is based on interviewer observation of the respondent's location in terms of area, and the age and type of dwelling. This sidebreak does not add to the total number of inter- views, as some respondents simply do not qualify within a definition. For example, a suburban garden apartment does not fit the description "single family dwelling." For those categories that are not self-explanatory, the following definitions are provided: 01d Suburb -- single family dwelling in a small town or suburb built prior to World War II New Suburb -- single family dwelling built since World War II City 1 Family -- single family dwelling within a metropolitan area City Multifamily multiple family dwelling, which would include a duplex, double house, residential house with more than one family living in it, etc., within a metropolitan area 3 Geographic Regions include: Northeast: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania North Central: Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas South: Delaware, Maryland, District of Columbia, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas West: Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, California Income is total family income in 1974, before taxes. INTRODUCTION TO DETAILED FINDINGS :sbulori глотуе The tables Except for the first two bolume, all figures in in the FUNNTO and the process appèar in the column hended swol ,aiontIII airlo :Istine) Изтой Throughout the tables, one-half percent. dtress addition as himly total because/Bbo2 In 1122 desographic groups other add to the total number OT they a and, showelle well ,obsto[o] grimoyW odsbl :faoW simollis) ,nogero notgridesW The Following definitions ded for some of the the data are analyzed Other an ,Aver nk emport vlimst Intot #1 smoon] DETAILED FINDINGS Occupation refers to the househeld. City Size is based C. interviewer observation of the respondent location in of and the age and type of dwelling This sidebreak does to the number of views, as solue do - definition. For example, a suburban garden fit the description For those categorion that are not df-aplimatory, the milowing 01d Suburb single dwelling In a small town or built prior to Mar N New Suburb family dwelling built World Ner 11 City Family family dwelling a merropolitan City Multifani mitiple family dwelling, which would duplex, double house, with more than qui Imily living in it, & QUESTION N1 71026 JANUARY 1975 4 SHOULD THE U.S. CONGRESS PASS A LAW WHICH WOULD ALLOW AGREEMENTS REQUIRING EMPLOYEES TO JOIN OR PAY DUES TO A UNION IN ORDER TO WORK FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NUMBER OF INTERVIEWS NO UNWTD WTD YES NO OPINION TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC 2038 6707 11 79 10 MEN 1031 3233 12 80 8 WOMEN 1007 3475 9 78 13 18 - 29 YEARS OF AGE 522 1918 14 77 9 30 - 39 421 1145 12 78 10 40 - 49 328 1117 8 84 8 50 - 59 311 1041 9 84 7 60 YEARS OR OVER 456 1487 10 74 16 LESS THAN HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 666 2395 13 72 15 HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 712 2502 11 81 8 SOME COLLEGE 648 1776 8 86 6 PROFESSIONAL 270 772 9 85 6 MANAGERIAL 242 696 8 85 7 CLERICAL, SALES 207 677 9 86 5 CRAFTSMAN, FOREMAN 378 1288 12 80 8 OTHER MANUAL, SERVICE 473 1731 14 75 11 FARMER, FARM LABORER 42 181 6 86 8 RURAL 297 940 11 80 9 OLD SUBURB 1 FAMILY 362 1286 8 80 12 NEW SUBURB 1 FAMILY 260 731 6 86 8 CITY 1 FAMILY 619 1976 14 77 9 CITY MULTIFAMILY 122 425 13 78 9 CITY APARTMENT 200 804 16 67 17 NORTHEAST 537 1552 14 74 12 NORTH CENTRAL 583 1900 11 78 11 SOUTH 630 2136 9 82 9 WEST 288 1120 9 82 9 UNDER $5,000 FAMILY INCOME 349 1653 14 69 17 $5,000 - $6,999 229 705 15 75 10 $7,000 - $9,999 346 943 12 78 10 $10,000 - $14,999 464 1420 10 82 8 $15,000 OR OVER 595 1831 7 87 6 NO CHILDREN IN HOUSEHOLD 1003 3525 10 78 12 WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 1035 3182 12 80 8 WITH TEENAGERS 12 - 17 507 1622 12 82 6 WHITE 1803 5874 9 81 10 NONWHITE 226 810 23 65 12 OWN HOME 1388 4292 9 82 9 RENT HOME 630 2361 14 74 12 HEML P30 S391 1398 MOWAHILE sse 970 MHILE 1903 MIJH LEEMY0652 IS 11 201 Jess MISH CHICONEN ПИДЕК 18 1032 MO 114 HOOSEHOFD 1003 3232 232'000 ON OAE¥ 202 THAT $10'000 TPP IVSO 21*000 - 3⑈9 003 2'000 - 35d 102 ПИОЕВ 340 ME21 588 TTSO гопдн 930 5739 MOBIH СЕЙДКИГ 233 1000 таавнтьом 231 Taes CASA 500 904 CILK ISS ETWITA MEM ETHICA 131 oro znening 305 JARUR EVROKEN MS TST сичьтемуи" ВОКЕНУЙ TS80 501 PAS ses ZONE corress eve L 78 6 1850 09 INDEPENDENT ot 77 ET 600E 882 DEMOCRAT It 8L tt 1174 89E REPUBLICAN It 18 8 OILL 1439 FAMILIES NOINONON E 74 Lt 1933 185 FAMILIES NOINO ot IL 61 141 2966 MEMBERS NOINO 01 79 It 67077 2038 TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC OPINION ON YES UNWTD WTD 1031 ON INTERVIEWS 9101 NUMBER OF ORDER TO WORK FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD THE U.S. CONGRESS PASS A LAW WHICH WOULD ALLOW AGREEMENTS REQUIRING EMPLOYEES TO JOIN OR PAY DUES TO A UNION IN JANUARY 1975 72026 IN NOISENO S QUESTION N2 71026 JANUARY 1975 6 SHOULD THE U.S. CONGRESS PASS A LAW WHICH WOULD ALLOW AGREEMENTS REQUIRING EMPLOYEES TO JOIN OR PAY DUES TO A UNION IN ORDER TO WORK FOR STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS NUMBER OF INTERVIEWS NO UNWTD WTD YES NO OPINION TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC 2038 6707 10 79 11 MEN 1031 3233 11 81 8 WOMEN 1007 3475 8 78 14 18 - 29 YEARS OF AGE 522 1918 11 79 10 30 39 421 1145 10 81 9 40 49 328 1117 8 81 11 50 - 59 311 1041 9 82 9 60 YEARS OR OVER 456 1487 8 76 16 LESS THAN HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 666 2395 10 73 17 HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 712 2502 11 80 9 SOME COLLEGE 648 1776 7 87 6 PROFESSIONAL 270 772 11 83 6 MANAGERIAL 242 696 5 87 8 CLERICAL, SALES 207 677 6 89 5 CRAFTSMAN, FOREMAN 378 1288 11 80 9 OTHER MANUAL, SERVICE 473 1731 11 78 11 FARMER, FARM LABORER 42 181 7 74 19 RURAL 297 940 8 79 13 OLD SUBURB 1 FAMILY 362 1286 7 81 12 NEW SUBURB 1 FAMILY 260 731 5 86 9 CITY 1 FAMILY 619 1976 12 79 9 CITY MULTIFAMILY 122 425 13 77 10 CITY APARTMENT 200 804 12 71 17 NORTHEAST 537 1552 12 77 11 NORTH CENTRAL 583 1900 12 77 11 SOUTH 630 2136 6 82 12 WEST 288 1120 9 82 9 UNDER $5,000 FAMILY INCOME 349 1653 10 71 19 $5,000 - $6,999 229 705 11 79 10 $7,000 - $9,999 346 943 11 79 10 $10,000 - $14,999 46't 1420 11 81 8 $15,000 OR OVER 595 1831 7 86 7 NO CHILDREN IN HOUSEHOLD 1003 3525 10 77 13 WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 1035 3182 9 81 10 WITH TEENAGERS 12 - 17 507 1622 9 82 9 WHITE 1803 5874 9 81 10 NONWHITE 226 810 13 69 18 OWN HOME 1388 4292 9 81 10 RENT HOME 630 2361 11 76 13 L 78 6 1850 E09 INDEPENDENT II 62 ot 600E 882 DEMOCRAT 12 8L OI 1174 89E REPUBLICAN 12 18 L 47100 1439 NONUNION FAMILIES 6 GL 91 EE61 181 FAMILIES NOINO 8 73 61 145 2966 MEMBERS NOINO II 6L ot 2010 2038 TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC NOININO ON YES UNWTD WTD ON INTERVIEWS NUMBER OF ORDER TO WORK FOR STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS SHOULD THE U.S. CONGRESS PASS A LAW WHICH WOULD ALLOW AGREEMENTS REQUIRING EMPLOYEES TO JOIN OR PAY DUES TO A UNION IN 5765 JANUARY 72026 ZN NOIS3000 L QUESTION N3 71026 JANUARY 1975 8 SHOULD YOUR STATE LEGISLATURE PASS A LAW WHICH WOULD ALLOW AGREEMENTS REQUIRING EMPLOYEES TO JOIN OR PAY DUES TO A UNION IN ORDER TO WORK FOR THE STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS NUMBER OF INTERVIEWS NO UNWTD WTD YES NO OPINION TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC 2038 6707 10 78 12 MEN 1031 3233 12 80 8 WOMEN 1007 3475 8 77 15 18 - 29 YEARS OF AGE 522 1918 12 78 10 30 - 39 421 1145 10 80 10 40 - 49 328 1117 9 81 10 50 - 59 311 1041 11 80 9 60 YEARS OR OVER 456 1487 8 75 17 LESS THAN HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 666 2395 10 73 17 HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 712 2502 11 79 10 SOME COLLEGE 648 1776 8 85 7 PROFESSIONAL 270 772 10 83 7 MANAGERIAL 242 696 5 85 10 CLERICAL, SALES 207 677 7 88 5 CRAFTSMAN, FOREMAN 378 1288 10 80 10 OTHER MANUAL, SERVICE 473 1731 14 75 11 FARMER, FARM LABORER 42 181 7 72 21 RURAL 297 940 10 78 12 OLD SUBURB 1 FAMILY 362 1286 7 81 12 NEW SUBURB 1 FAMILY 260 731 6 85 9 CITY 1 FAMILY 619 1976 12 77 11 CITY MULTIFAMILY 122 425 16 74 10 CITY APARTMENT 200 804 15 69 16 NORTHEAST 537 1552 14 74 12 NORTH CENTRAL 583 1900 12 78 10 SOUTH 630 2136 7 81 12 WEST 288 1120 9 80 11 UNDER $5,000 FAMILY INCOME 349 1653 12 70 18 $5,000 - $6,999 229 705 14 75 11 $7,000 - $9,999 346 943 10 80 10 $10,000 - $14,999 464 1420 10 80 10 $15,000 OR OVER 595 1831 7 86 7 NO CHILDREN IN HOUSEHOLD 1003 3525 11 76 13 WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 1035 3182 10 80 10 WITH TEENAGERS 12 - 17 507 1622 10 81 9 WHITE 1803 5874 9 80 11 NONWHITE 226 810 19 63 18 OWN HOME 1388 4292 9 81 10 RENT HOME 630 2361 13 74 13 sse MHILE MIJH IS TA 203 TO MD #12*000 08 OASK 810*000 23*300 NMDE8 12'000 INCONE СЕЙТКУГ MONIHEVEL COFFECE 8 88 6 1850 603 INDEPENDENT IT 78 IT 600E 882 DEMOCRAT 12 78 ot 1174 89E REPUBLICAN 12 08 8 0110 1439 FAMILIES NOINONON 6 52 I 1933 185 EAMILIES NOINO 8 74 81 1441 2966 MEMBERS NOINO 12 82 ot 2070 2038 TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC NOININO ON YES UNWTD WTD ON INTERVIEWS NUMBER OF IN ORDER TO WORK FOR THE STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS SHOULD YOUR STATE LEGISLATURE PASS A LAW WHICH WOULD ALLOW AGREEMENTS REQUIRING EMPLOYEES TO JOIN OR PAY DUES TO A UNION JANUARY 1975 72026 QUESTION N3 6 QUESTION N4 71026 JANUARY 1975 WHICH OF THESE ARRANGEMENTS DO YOU FAVOR FOR FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES 1. A PERSON CAN WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT WHETHER OR NOT HE BELONGS TO A UNION 2. A PERSON CAN GO TO WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT IF HE DOESN'T ALREADY BELONG TC A UNION, BUT HAS TO JOIN AFTER HE IS HIRED TO HOLD HIS JOB 3. A PERSON CAN GET A JOB WITH THE GOVERNMENT ONLY IF HE ALREADY BELONGS TO A UNION NUMBER OF 4. NO OPINION INTERVIEWS UNWTD WTD 1. 2. 3. 4. TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC 2038 6707 83 10 1 6 MEN 1031 3233 83 11 2 4 WOMEN 1007 3475 82 9 1 8 18 - 29 YEARS OF AGE 522 1918 82 11 1 6 30 - 39 421 1145 84 11 1 4 40 49 328 1117 84 9 1 6 50 59 311 1041 86 8 2 4 60 YEARS OR OVER 456 1487 30 8 2 10 LESS THAN HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 666 2395 77 11 2 10 HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE 712 2502 84 10 1 5 SOME COLLEGE 648 1776 89 8 * 3 PROFESSIONAL 270 772 90 7 # 3 MANAGERIAL 242 696 90 7 0 3 CLERICAL, SALES 207 677 87 7 1 5 CRAFTSMAN, FOREMAN 378 1288 83 11 * 6 OTHER MANUAL, SERVICE 473 1731 81 12 2 5 FARMER, FARM LABORER 42 181 76 2 4 18 RURAL 297 940 81 10 3 6 OLD SUBURB 1 FAMILY 362 1286 82 8 2 8 NEW SUBURB 1 FAMILY 260 731 87 8 * 5 CITY 1 FAMILY 619 1976 85 10 1 4 CITY MULTIFAMILY 122 425 71 20 0 9 CITY APARTMENT 200 804 78 10 3 9 NORTHEAST 537 1552 78 13 2 7 NORTH CENTRAL 583 1900 79 12 1 8 SOUTH 630 2136 88 5 2 5 WEST 288 1120 87 7 * 6 UNDER $5,000 FAMILY INCOME 349 1653 76 11 3 10 $5,000 - $6,999 229 705 80 12 * 8 $7,000 - $9,999 346 943 80 11 1 8 $10,000 - $14,999 464 1420 86 9 2 3 $15,000 OR OVER 595 1831 89 7 * 4 NO CHILDREN IN HOUSEHOLD 1003 3525 82 8 2 8 WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 1035 3182 84 10 1 5 WITH TEENAGERS 12 - 17 507 1622 86 10 1 3 WHITE 1803 5874 85 8 1 6 NONWHITE 226 810 70 21 1 8 OWN HOME 1388 4292 85 9 1 5 RENT HOME 630 2361 79 11 2 8 11 QUESTION N4 71026 JANUARY 1975 WHICH OF THESE ARRANGEMENTS DO YOU FAVOR FOR FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES 1. A PERSON CAN WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT WHETHER OR NOT HE BELONGS TO A UNION 2. A PERSON CAN GO TO WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT IF HE DOESN'T ALREADY BELONG TO A UNION, BUT HAS TO JOIN AFTER HE IS HIRED TO HOLD HIS JOB 3. A PERSON CAN GET A JOB WITH THE GOVERNMENT ONLY IF HE ALREADY BELONGS TO A UNION NUMBER OF 4. NO OPINION INTERVIEWS UNWTD WTD 1. 2. 3. 4. TOTAL U.S. PUBLIC 2038 6707 83 10 1 6 UNION MEMBERS 296 941 77 17 2 4 UNION FAMILIES 581 1933 77 16 2 5 NONUNION FAMILIES 1439 4710 85 7 1 7 REPUBLICAN 368 1174 85 7 2 6 DEMOCRAT 882 3009 81 11 2 6 INDEPENDENT 603 1850 87 9 * 4 the the bezagerq no el dorsess W TO the or be the mso signing wen of erto 202239 and 26 as vd gallque V3 vilidadora to emeldong instroqui do de bas at TECHNICAL APPENDIX nevig yre The to be as ni 000 to ОЯО VIIS 301 E 21 of the has an of to ni riass edd expire oT group bren is as dow is is the household to the of the book as the Thus, the be one nt with to: assis of 28W edit ni que Jxem offT B done of beau borbrem B nissA Via 4dd B A-1 Opinion Research Corporation's Master Sample Opinion Research Corporation's master sample is based on a new probability sample design, prepared in consultation with J. Stevens Stock of Marketmath, Inc., and modified and updated by ORC. The essential characteristic of probability sampling is that, for each person in the population under study, the probability that he will be included in the sample can be specified. This means that the degree or reliability of any finding from a study based on a probability sample can be estimated mathematically. This new sample design is a major improvement over standard areal probability designs now in common use. These areal methods depend upon the use of maps showing geographic segments for which rough population estimates can be made. These maps are often out of date and otherwise inaccurate, and population estimates are frequently unreliable for small geographic areas, par- ticularly as time passes from one census to another. The new sampling method eliminates these important problems of traditional probability sampling by using current address directories as the basis for a system of defining interviewing starting points a system which, of course, includes in the sample those households which are not in the directory as well. The new method is both statistically and administratively as efficient as possible, providing the most reliable data for any given expenditure. The ORC master sample consists of 360 counties in the contiguous United States. This master sample of 360 counties comprises, in fact, six subsamples of 60 counties each. Each of these subsamples is itself a national probability sample. Depending on the needs of any particular study, the master sample can be used as a whole, or any combination of the six subsamples can be used. To construct the sample, the counties within each state were arranged in order of descending population size; and all the states were grouped in geographical order from Maine to California. Sixty counties were then chosen by statistical procedures that insure representative geographical distribution. This process was repeated to obtain the six subsamples that make up the master sample of 360 counties. The next step in the sampling design was to select an area from each of the 360 counties in the master sample. Again, a probability sampling method was used to select, within each county, a minor civil division (MCD) as defined by the Bureau of the Census. A minor civil division may be a town, township, city, or part of a city. The probability that any particular minor civil division was selected in a county was proportional to the population of that minor civil division. A-2 Thus, the larger a minor civil division, the greater the likelihood that it be selected. The minor civil division, then, is the primary sampling unit. Once the MCD has been selected, the next step is the determination of those households where interviewing is to take place. Under the ORC National Probability Sample procedure, any current listing of household locations, even if incomplete, constitutes the first stage of the sampling plan. From this list of households one or more addresses are chosen at random. Each of these addresses defines the place that the interviewer begins following the interviewing site selection process. The interviews in a cluster or "neighborhood" do not begin at the household selected from the list, but at the adjacent household, which may or may not be on the original list. Thus, the list does not define the universe of households in an MCD, but rather the list of house- holds adjacent to possible starting points. Depending on the number of households contacted from each starting point, the number of starting points chosen, and the criteria for being included on the original list, every household in the MCD has a known, or knowable, probability of being included in the ORC sample. Because they are the most up-to-date and the most complete listing of addresses available, tele- phone books are the sources of locations next to interviewing starting points when general public surveys are being done. The specific persons to be interviewed are selected as follows: (1) A certain number of starting points are selected from the telephone books covering the minor civil divisions, or communities, selected. The starting points are chosen in a manner that each household, within the minor civil division, listed in the phone book has an equal chance of being selected. (2) Each starting point selected determines a group of households, called a "cluster," in which interviews are conducted. This cluster of households includes households both with and without listed telephones. The first household in which an interview is conducted is the household immediately to the left of the household selected from the telephone book as the starting point. Thus, the first household can be one either with or without a telephone. (3) The interviewer conducts an interview in the first household and then works through the group of households following a prescribed rule. The interviewer continues working through the cluster until interviews have been completed in a preassigned number of households. A-3 (4) A respondent-selection procedure determines for the interviewer which person to interview in any given household. Every eligible respondent in the household has the same chance to be interviewed as any other eligible respondent. The interviewer is not allowed to make any substitutions. Once all interviews have been completed, weighting procedures are employed to insure that the sample properly represents the population from which it was drawn. This sampling procedure is rigorous in concept and practice and allows for the exact determination of the statistical precision of any finding. A-4 Sample Characteristics, January 1975 Caravan The data in the table below compare the characteristics of the weighted Caravan sample with those of the total population, 18 years of age or over. The table shows that the distribution of the total sample parallels very closely that of the population under study. Total Men Women Popu- Caravan Popu- Caravan Popu- Caravan lation- Sample lation- Sample lation- Sample Age 18 - 29 years of age 29% 29% 30% 30% 28% 27% 30 39 17 17 17 17 17 17 40 49 16 16 17 17 16 16 50 59 16 16 16 16 15 15 60 years or over 22 22 20 20 24 25 Race White 89% 88% 89% 88% 88% 88% Nonwhite 11 12 11 12 12 12 Geographic Region Northeast 23% 23% 23% 23% 24% 24% North Central 27 28 28 29 27 27 South 31 32 31 31 32 33 West 19 17 18 17 17 16 1/ Weights were introduced into the tabulations to ensure proper representation of the inter- views in the sample. 2/ Source: Latest data from the U.S. Bureau of the Census, regular and interim reports. (1) A-5 Reliability of Survey Percentages Results of any sample are subject to sampling variation. The magnitude of the variation is measurable and is affected by the number of interviews and the level of the percentages expressing the results. The table below shows the possible sample variation that applies to percentage results reported from the Opinion Research Corporation sample. The chances are 95 in 100 that a Caravan survey result does not vary, plus or minus, by more than the indicated number of percentage points from the result that would be obtained if interviews had been conducted with all persons in the universe represented by the sample. Approximate Sampling Tolerances Applicable to Percentages at or Near These Levels Size of Sample on Which Caravan Survey Result is Based 10% or 90% 30% or 70% 50% 2,000 interviews 2% 3% 3% 1,000 interviews 2% 4% 4% 500 interviews 3% 5% 5% 250 interviews 5% 7% 8% 100 interviews 7% 11% 12% A-6 Sampling Tolerances When Comparing Two Samples Tolerances are also involved in the comparison of results from different parts of any one Opinion Research Corporation sample and in the comparison of results between two different ORC samples. A difference, in other words, must be of at least a certain size to be con- sidered statistically significant. The table below is a guide to the sampling tolerances applicable to such comparisons. Differences Required for Significance at Size of Samples or Near These Percentage Levels 1/ Compared 10% or 90% 30% or 70% 50% 2,000 and 2,000 2% 4% 4% 2,000 and 1,000 3% 4% 5% 1,000 and 1,000 3% 5% 6% 1,000 and 500 4% 6% 7% 500 and 500 5% 7% 8% 500 and 200 6% 9% 10% 200 and 200 7% 11% 12% 200 and 100 9% 14% 15% 100 and 100 10% 16% 17% Based on 95 chances in 100. A-7 Quality Control Measures Quality control measures are applied in every phase of the Caravan survey. Specialists in many fields are available for consultation with the Caravan survey director in the development of the questionnaire. Interviewers are hired and trained, in person, to staff the probability sample, and their work is regularly checked for accuracy and validity. Questionnaires are prepared for data processing by experienced coders, under the supervision of the survey director. brts The processing of data is subject to rigorous internal checks designed to detect both machine and human error. 00S 001 00S 001 TO: DEPARTMENT THE WASHINGTON CARD WHITE HOUSE Ce WCB) qr 3/20 FROM: DONALD A. WEBSTER FOR YOUR INFORMATION FOR APPROPRIATE ACTION FOR YOUR COMMENTS OTHER call for Coved quek - THE white HOUSE WASHINGTON DATE: 3/12 FORD TO: F. DEBACA PAM POWELL JEFF EVES STAN SCOTT VIRGINIA KNAUER WAYNE VALIS PAT LINDH DON WEBSTER TED MARRS FROM: WILLIAM J. BAROODY, JR. FOR YOUR INFORMATION FOR APPROPRIATE ACTION FOR YOUR COMMENTS/ RECOMMENDATIONS OTHER: Bosis 7050 Don Webster THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON March 7, 1975 MEMORANDUM TO: BILL BAROODY FROM: JACK MARSH July Bill, I would appreciate having you ora member of your staff contact Hugh Newton directly concerning the attached. Thanks. 410 FEB 25 1975 HUGH C. NEWTON AND ASSOCIATES Ach 10 PUBLIC RELATIONS (703) 573-8555 618 SOUTH LEE STREET (OLD TOWNE), ALEPHONES: (703) 549-5825 M ALEXANDRIA. VIRGINIA 22314 - I timp February 25, 1975 may Mr. John 0. Marsh Jr. Counselor to the President The White House Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear John: Despite the phone call (which I really didn't arrange!), I do appreciate your taking a few minutes to talk with me following your talk at last week's Labor Relations luncheon group meeting. As I mentioned, I do hope you will find the time to meet with several key people on the subject of public employee bargaining legislation (more appropriately described by noted Labor Law Professor, Dr. Sylvest Petro, as compulsory public sector bargaining laws). While what I am talking about here may not be as immediately important as the "energy crisis, a growing body of Americans believe that the single most destructive element in today's economic and political affairs is the monopoly power of giant labor unions, fostered and protected by special privilege legislation. Last fall's election results furthered the possibility of extending such a destructive element in the private field to the public employmen field. Evidence of this can be seen in the front page, 8-column article in the Star last month. What I have in mind is a briefing team composed of Dr. Petro, Reed Larson of the National Right to Work Committee and David Denholm of Public Service Research Council. I am confident that the dialogue opened up by such a briefing will make a substantial contribution to a better public understanding of the fundamental issues involved in so-called public employee collective bargaining labor legislation. By the way, the growth of that understanding should be helped considerably by a pending Senate floor discussion by several U.S. Senators on the meaning and ramifications of the enactment of compulsor sector bargaining laws. Mr. John 0. Marsh, Jr. February 25, 1975 Page Two I look forward to hearing from you and working with your Russ Rourk in setting up this session. Sincerely, Hugh C. Newton P.S. By the way, that daughter I mentioned who lives in Harrisonburg is the goddaughter of a fellow W & L'er -- Gil Bocetti, the football star. Gil now runs his own substantial title insurance company in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. enclosures HCN: 1h CC: Reed Larson, Andy Hare, National Right to Work Committee UNDAY JANUARY 12, 1975 The New York Times/Mike Lien President Ford meeting with staff in Oval Office of the 0. Marsh Jr. and Robert T. Hartmann. In photo at far White House last Friday morning. From left are Ron left, Mr. Rumsfeld, the Presidential assistant in charge Nessen, Donald H. Rumsfeld, Max L. Friedersdorf, John of White House operations, confers with Mr. Ford. chases had to be mailed. Office. He has Cabinet rank. P2 House deals with the new Con- lative Affairs, the Pentagon Mr. Marsh, by contrast. is as supervises recruitment of high gress and its predominance of lobbyist on Capitol Hill. He wa folksy as a lawyer from the Vir- Administration officials Democrats. one of the few aides Mr. Fords ginia apple country is expected has placed associates in a num to be. He is friendly and open ber of key positions. Mr. Marsh is also in charge of consulted in naming a commis and seems a little harassed by He participates in most 00 1- the Office. of Public Liaison, sion to study reports of illegs business in and out of the Oval voice in how the Ford White secretary of Defense for Legis seems to like him all the more are TEMPLE ISRAEL OF JAMAICA I THUR THUR 10:00 am JAN 16 JAN 23 THE NEW YORK TIMES, S Rumsfeldand Marsh Emerge AsKey White House Powers By JOHN HEREERS Special to The New York Times Democratic Action gave him a they. have a strong respect for WASHINGTON, Jan. 11-Two zero rating in evaluating his the full range of public institu- men President Ford got to support of A.D.A. interests. tions. and private interests. know and like when all three Agreeing on issues most of the Both are accessible, and both were in the House of Represen- time, Mr. Ford and Mr. March fit the requirement proposed by tatives-Donald H. Rumsfeld became good friends. George Reedy, the one-time and, to a lesser extent, John O. When Mr. Ford took office. Johnson press secretary, that Marsh Jr.-have emerged wich there was speculation that his all White House aides be over major authority on the newly old friends from Michigan 10 with hard experiences of life Government Employee Relations Report BNA Number 591 SUMMARY February 3, 1975 Professor Sees Bargaining Laws Threatening Sovereignty: Sylvester Petro, Profes- sor at Wake Forest University School of Law, believes that legislation to require governments to bargain collectively with unions would lead inevitably to public em- ployee strikes and, beyond that, to loss of both popular and governmental sovereign- ty. Petro was luncheon speaker at seminar on proposed public employee bargaining legislation sponsored by National Right-to-Work Committee in Washington on Janu- ary 30 (AA-1). FEDERAL DEVELOPMENTS STATE & LOCAL DEVELOPMENTS Court Voids Employee's Removal For Milwaukee Teachers Strike Extends False Travel Vouchers: More than four years Into Third Week: Strike by members of after action became effective, U.S. District Milwaukee Teachers Education Association, Court for Maryland says removal of high- closing schools to 118, 500 students, continues grade Department of the Army employee for into third week as negotiators fail to resolve padding his travel vouchers by more than salary, workday length, transfer, and evalua- $2,000 was not proven by substantial evidence tion policy disputes. School Board has voted and must be voided. Judge James R. Miller, to seek injunction, while MTEA is taking Jr., says agency did not prove that employee counter legal measures. Concurrent strike intentionally attempted to defraud government by school engineers tentatively ended after even though charge of fraud lay at core of all-night bargaining (B-9). offense for which he was removed. Employ- ee's principal defense was that errors were New York Courts Differ On Legality Of inadvertent, and occurred because he was Police/Firemen's Binding Arb Law: Amend- preoccupied with his high-pressure job on ments to New York's public employee bargain- important project. Though he orders employ- ing law sending police and firemen's bargaining ee to be reinstated, Miller says agency may impasses to compulsory binding arbitration impose lesser penalty for failure to submit are held violative of one-man-one-vote princi- timely and accurate vouchers; just what penal- ple and equal protection clauses of state and ty would be is left to agency discretion (A-3). U.S. Constitution by one supreme court justice --but legal by another who finds local govern- Clause Blocking Permanent Promotions ment's constitional "home rule" grant cannot Struck Down By FLRC: Federal Labor Rela- be used in way inconsistent with "any general tions Council says that union proposal which law" which may circumscribe local authority would prevent Air Force facility from filling (B-1); Text of companion decisions (E-1). job vacancy on permanent basis until any grievance concerning the action had been fi- Wurf Attacks "Recycling" Of Public nally resolved is non-negotiable. Union had Jobs, Asks Federal Funds For Cities: attempted to bring proposal under umbrella of AFSCME President Jerry Wurf attacks "job Council's decision in Veterans Administration recycling" which lays off public employees Research Hospital case, claiming that pro- while hiring less experienced at lower wages. posal did not seek to impede management's Such recycling doesn't touch unemployment right to promote but only to regulate the pro- rate, only puts different people out of work, cedures by which that right will be exercised. Wurf says, proposing $5-$6 billion emergency Council distinguishes facts of that case, how- federal funds be sent to states and cities to ever (A-7). maintain present services (B-6). (Contd. p. 2, col. 1) (Contd. p. 2, col. 2) Copyright © 1975 by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS, INC., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20037 LISBARY Don - THE WHITE HOUSE John U. washington I talhed to Hugh Dewton and told lim I would try to line up some kind of a meeting when L got bach- probably with Domestic Council people. He Dent the attached you may hold John. want to to This, on National Right To Work Committee A COALITION OF EMPLOYEES AND EMPLOYERS HEADQUARTERS AT THE NATION'S CAPITAL FORD March 24, 1975 cell LISBARY Mr. John Vickerman Office of the White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. Dear John: I do appreciate your calling and your interest in arranging a briefing on so-called public employee bargaining legislation. As I said we would hope that such a meeting would involve key domestice council people. We believe it is quite important for the administration to get some input on the fundamental issues involved before the battle heats up on the "hill". As I said, we feel that the lack of meaningful communication and understanding led to a legislative battle in 1970 that might have been avoided. On that point I have attached a brochure which you may find of interest. I am also attaching some other background material including a copy of the resolution passed unanimously earlier this year at the Governor's Conference. By the time you get our press conference on political spending public employee legislation will have taken place with our first ad on the subject scheduled to run on Friday, March 28 in the WASHINGTON POST. I look forward to your call Monday April 7 or early that week to discuss a time and details of a briefing that I believe will be helpful to all. Best wishes. Sincerely, Hugh Newton Director of Information HCN/sd Enclosures WASHINGTON D.C. HEADQUARTERS: 8316 ARLINGTON BOULEVARD (U.S. 50) SUITE 600 FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA 22030 TEL. (703) 573-8550 "Americans must have the right but not be compelled to join labor unions" PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RELATIONS The United States Congress is considering legislation which would provide to State and local government employees the right to organize and collectively bargain. This legislation would substan- tially replace individual state laws and procedures which now regu- late these activities with a uniform federal law. The National Governors' Conference opposes federal inter- vention in this area. It is the belief of the Nation's Governors that matters relating to the employees of State and local governments are within the sole jurisdiction of these units and are not properly the subject of federal legislation. The National Governors' Conference, in adopting this state- ment, takes no position on the principle of collective bargaining for public employees but states its firm commitment to the view that this is an area which should be left to the discretion of the several States. RESOLUTION BY: Committee on Executive Management and Fiscal Affairs National Governors' Conference Adopted - February 20, 1975 National Right To Work Committee A COALITION OF EMPLOYEES AND EMPLOYERS HEADQUARTERS AT THE NATION'S CAPITAL FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hugh C. Newton or Herb B. Berkowitz (703) 573-8555 IF $134,000 WILL HELP PASS A HIGHWAY BILL WHAT WILL HALF-A-MILLION ACCOMPLISH? WHAT -- News Conference WHEN -- Tuesday, March 25, 1975, 3:00 p.m. WHERE -- National Press Club, Capitol & Executive Rooms WHO -- National Right to Work Committee -- Reed Larson, Executive Vice President; Andrew Hare, Legislative Director WHY -- Full disclosure is meaningless unless the public's right to know is fulfilled. National Committee will release total union contributions to 33 members of the House Education and Labor Committee, names of unions and how much they contributed to each member and position of Congressmen on special interest public employee legislation supported by donors. Committee will also release new and comprehensive public opinion attitude study on compulsory unionism in the public sector. At a news conference in Washington, Tuesday, March 25, the National Right to Work Committee will reveal that 33 members of the House Education and Labor Committee received $429,632 in campaign contributions from Big Labor and will point out that most of these members support legislation establishing public sector compulsory unionism -- urged by the union officials who approved contributions to help elect them And compare all this with results of new public opinion poll that shows 83% of the American public opposes compulsory union WASHINGTON D.C. HEADQUARTERS: 8316 ARLINGTON BOULEVARD (U.S. 50) SUITE 600 FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA 22030 TEL. (703) 573-8550 "Americans must have the right but not be compelled to join labor unions" membership for public employees -- a provision in all public employee bargaining legislation supported by these members and Big Labor. It is interesting to note that a number of major national news stories in February were devoted to the $134,000 contributed to 126 House candidates by the trucking lobby and the $16,500 in last minute contributions to 14 key members of the House subcommittee on transportation One highlight of the material to be revealed at the RTW news conference shows that Big Labor contributed hundreds of thousands to 14 members of the Labor and Education Committee and of these 14, all but one are on record as in favor of one of the bills legalizing compulsory unionism for public employees, voted for forced membership in 1970 for postal workers or received 10% or more of their total campaign contributions from unions in favor of such legislation. Myc.Nex Hugh C. Newton Director of Public Relations Truckers Gave Candidates $75,000 By George Lardner Jr. gest single contribution, $3,- last August, but the truckers, Mich.) to put a 10,000-pound feated in their re-election Washington Post Staff Writer 000. began lobbying to reverse that limit on the weight trucks bids; Roncalvo voted against The trucking lobby made The contributions were dis- decision after the Senate ap- could carry on their front ex- the highway legislation. last-minute campaign contri- closed yesterday in the year- proved the bigger rigs in Sep- les. Four other members of the butions of almost $75,000 to end report of the Truck Oper- tember. The conferees included parent House Public Works THE WASHINGTON POST January 31, 1975 Congressional Record United States of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 94th CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 121 WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 1975 No. 36 Senate The Senate met at 12 noon and was The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- Department claimed yesterday that the called to order by Hon. GARY W. HART, pore. Without objection, it is so ordered. August 1973 halt of U.S. bombing in a Senator from the State of Colorad Cambodia, which Congress ordered-and I did not vote for that particular pro- PRA' The Chaplain, the L. R. Elson, D.D., O. prayer: Hear the words Proverbs: Keep thy heart for out of it are t Proverbs 4: 23. o Lord, our God, k with the divine spirit On March 6, eight U.S. Senators, led by work better for the N former Salt Lake City mayor Jake Garn, held ing kingdom. Amen. a lengthy colloquy on proposed compulsory public sector "bargaining" legislation. We APPOINTMENT OF DENT PRO feel their remarks deserve your attention, The PRESIDING ( even though the colloquy received little, will please read a CO if any, media coverage. (See next page.) Senate from the Pro (Mr. EASTLAND). The legislative clei -- Reed Larson letter: Executive Vice President PRESIDE NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK Washington To the Senate: COMMITTEE Being temporarily al on official duties, I a HART, a Senator from to perform the duties absence. JAI Pt Mr. GARY W. HART thereupon took no vire рибис TO registrate potro 10- the chair as Acting President pro resumed the consideration of legislative sues relating to Indochina. And blames- business. tempore. manship will not help to build a coop- erative working relationship between AID TO CAMBODIA Congress and the executive branch on THE JOURNAL foreign policy matters. The question is Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, on Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President. I ask not who lost Cambodia, if the present February 25, in a letter to the Speaker unanimous consent that the reading of government falls, but who got us into of the House, the President said that "an the Journal of the proceedings of Cambodia, for what purpose and what independent Cambodia cannot survive" Wednesday, March 5, 1975, be dispensed its cost in men, money, refugees, and with. without the supplemental aid he re- destruction has been. quested and posed the question: "Are we The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- to deliberately abandon a small country pore. Without objection, it is so ordered. in the midst of its life and death ORDER OF BUSINESS struggle?" The day before, Assistant Sec- COMMITTEE MEETINGS DURING retary of State Philip Habib told a Sen- The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- SENATE SESSION ate Foreign Relations Subcommittee that pore. Under the previous order. the Chair only if the aid requested was provided recognizes the Senator from Michigan. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask can "that nation survive." Now Secretary (The remarks made by Mr. GRIFFIN unanimous consent that all committees Habib has made a "summary of negoti- at this point appear in today's RECORD may be authorized to meet during the ating efforts on Cambodia" available to under Statements on Introduced Bills session of the Senate today. the Congress and the media. The State and Joint Resolutions.) S 3181 March 6, 1975 CONGRESSIONAL 31 3182 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD March 6, 1975 employees, compulsory arbitration and are rights inuring to each citizen. All citi- pulsory public sector collective barga ORDER OF BUSINESS of any of the sovereign functions and cent years in Philadelphia, Baltimore, the role of individual freedom in an or- zens have the right to associate in groups to ing that it would not only be a gra The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- powers of government to a private, inde- Albuquerque and dozens of other major derly society. advocate their special interests to the gov- pendent organization not subject to pub- This discussion will also define the dis- ernment. It is something entirely different error for us to legislate such a syst cities. pore. Under the previous order, the Sen- to grant any one interest group special status for the States and their political su ator from Utah is recognized for not to lic control and rarely subject to public Further, the majority of economists tinctions between the public sector and and access to the decision-making process. divisions, but an equally grave error scrutiny? recognize the power of labor unions to the private sector. The public and the exceed 15 minutes. this body to approve any system whe The answer can be found in the enor- force up wages and costs year after year private sectors are as different as night It is our hope that the discussion today Mr. GARN. Mr. President, I ask unani- by the agencies of the executive bran mous growth of employment in Federal, without corresponding advances in pro- and day. And, a fundamental problem will generate a serious national dialog mous consent that a member of my staff, of the Government of the United Sta State, and local governments. The Bu- ductivity. This monopoly element, as we lies in the fact that private sector models about compulsory public-sector bargain- Daniel Wall, may have the privilege of would be compelled to bargain W reau of Labor Statistics estimates that have recently seen first hand, is a prime are being applied to the public sector ing laws and governmental sovereignty. I the floor during the colloquy this unions representing its employees. public employment has grown faster cause of inflation. where they are not appropriate. By defi- would like to suggest that the American morning. I wish to say at the outset that I than any other sector of the economy. Moreover, it is widespread knowledge nition collective bargaining suggests a people and their representatives take a The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- not believe that this position reflects There are now some 14 million govern- that many candidates and elected offi- parity of powers which is essential to the hard look at the validity of legislation pore. Without objection, it is so ordered. my part or on the part of my colleag ment workers-three million Federal em- cials have depended on contributions bargaining process. In the public sector that sanctions compulsory unionism. I, any antiworker sentiment whatsoev ployees and 11 million State, county, and from labor organizations. Many newly this parity is nonexistent. Management for one, intend to introduce legislation We are faced with a very difficult qui GOVERNMENTAL SOVEREIGNTY OR municipal employees-and their number elected Members of Congress are in- in the private sector is granted a greater to protect this country against universal tion of public policy, and I believe COMPULSORY PUBLIC SECTOR is growing by leaps and bounds. Public debted to organized labor for their finan- degree of economic leverage than its adoption of compulsory public sector bar- interest of the entire public, including BARGAINING employment unions, having discovered cial backing that helped them win elec- counterpart in the public sector. Because gaining laws, and I urge my colleagues the employees of Government at that government unionism holds the tions. All unions including public em- of market restraints, it is possible for an to support it. Mr. GARN. Mr. President, in a letter levels in America, is best served by S) most lucrative potential of all, are the ployee unions are out for political con- employee of private industry to negotiate I want to make it clear that I am not to L. L. Stewart, president of the Na- tems of redress of grievances and ter fastest growing and best organized labor trol. Yet, the implications of political himself out of a job. However, because opposed to voluntary unionism, or the of employment under which elected re tional Federation of Federal Employees, unions in the country. From 1951 to 1972, power in the hands of the public sector government supplies essential services right of individual public employees to President Franklin Roosevelt said: resentatives hold and retain comple government work forces grew by 151 per- are far more threatening than for other for the public, it is not possible for him organize and join unions if they so desire. and ultimate control of the decisionma militant tactics have no place in the cent, payrolls by 596 percent, union mem- unions. to "lock out" the employees or go out of But I am a great believer in the right of ing process. Employees of Governme functions of any organization of government bership by 130 percent, and strikes by And of course there is the funda- business. free people to decide whether they wish like all employees, have the right of employees. A strike of public employees public employees by 1,000 percent. And, manifests nothing less than an intent on mental question of whether employees The most fundamental question we to do that or not. I am also a great be- their part to obstruct the operation of gov- I might add that one need not be a should be forced to relinquish their bar- will address in this dialog is whether liever in the right of the States to decide sociation in unions to present their po tion on these matters. However, becau ernment until their demands are satisfied. Philadelphia lawyer to realize the cost of gaining rights to unions which they do government sovereignty can survive in whether they shall have compulsory of the uniquely different character Such action, toward the paralysis of these strikes to the taxpayer both in not want. the wake of compulsory public-sector unionism or not. Government employment, it is clear th government by those who have sworn to terms of higher taxes and in terms of Contrary to the evidence, a wide range bargaining. Noted law professor Dr. Syl- I am not proposing or intending to collective bargaining is a system con support is unthinkable and intolerable. disruption to the community. of proposals will be presented for our vester Petro states: propose national right-to-work laws. pletely inappropriate to determining For 200 years Americans have recog- Therefore, it is hardly unexpected consideration based on the hypothesis There is an absolute and ineradicable in- There are only 14 States that do so, and terms and conditions of employment. nized and fought for the representative, that Americans have begun to take a that compulsory collective bargaining for compatibility between government sovereign- that is their right, to make such decisions However, the question is sovereign ordered, and sovereign government that closer look and active interest in labor government employees "safeguards the ty and compulsory public-sector bargain- on their own. They should not be man- and the different nature of governme relations of State, local, and Federal public interest and contributes to the ing, an incompatibility which must neces- President Roosevelt stood for in his dated by the Senate or by Congress in Governments. And, as a result, several sarily weaken if not ultimately destroy ef- which makes compulsory collective ba effective conduct of public business." efforts to oppose their will on all the statement. Yet forces are mounting fective governing power and the integrity of gaining completely out of the question. States and legislatures have passed leg- Despite the profound differences between local governments of this country. As a which threaten this Government and the government vis a vis the general citizenry, islation governing labor relations of pub- former mayor, I could not tolerate that First of all, Government is a monopo elements which support it. I refer to the the public and private sectors, there are since the necessary consequence of according There is not, and there cannot be, a drive to carry compulsory bargaining lic employees. What have we reaped from those who approve extension to the pub- public-employee unions exclusive bargaining intrusion into my ability as the chief competition with Government in its even deeper into the public sector. The this activity? Where has it left us and lic sector of the same kind of compulsory status is to encourage among government administrative officer of a city to make tivities. There are those who will arg employees a tendency to repose their loyal- such decisions, and be held accountable battle cry has reached Capitol Hill, and where will it take us? collective bargaining legislation which that Government is engaged in many as all of us in Congress know, a serious Legislators have usually been persuad- has been operative in the private sector ties primarily in the units which they have to the citizens of my city for those deci- tivities in direct competition with legislative drive will soon be underway to ed to adopt the "orderly process" of for some 40 years. been induced to believe are their protago- sions. nists. private sector. However, rather than collective bargaining from the private When the Federal Government sanc- The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- enact compulsory bargaining laws-laws ing an argument against the concept that any objective analysis will show to sector. The enactment of such laws are tion was given to exclusive union repre- Obviously, what we need asked and pore. The Senator's 15 minutes have monopoly in Government, this should be violently incompatible with a sover- sentation and compulsory unionism in answered is whether the government- expired. usually justified in the name of peace and considered an argument against the eign, responsible government. private employment for private industry by its nature, a monopoly and the pro- Mr. GARN. I ask unanimous consent tranquility. Union supporters assure the activities of Government, and we shou The key ingredients we will doubtless public employee/employer conjugal bliss in 1935-through the National Labor tector of all citizens' rights and liberties, that Elizabeth Yee be accorded the privi- leges of the floor during the remainder reserve that discussion for another da see in forthcoming public sector collec- and reduced "industrial strife." Yet the Relations Act-it thereby extended to a has the authority legally or morally, to facts support the contrary. transfer any of its functions to a private, of the discussion on this subject. I do not think anyone will seriously que tive bargaining legislation are: private organization-a union-the pow- tion the necessity of a government First. Federal imposition of compul- Virtually every "solution" has created er of government. independent organization. When public The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- monopoly on national defense, law e sory public sector bargaining on all gov- more unionization problems than have officials acting under authority granted pore. Without objection, it is so ordered But several public employee legislative forcement, judicial proceedings, taxatio ernments-in other words, the law would been solved. Conflicts, unrest and illegal proposals would go far beyond NLRA. to them by other public officials, give un- Under the previous order, the Senator from South Carolina is recognized for the coinage of money, or a long list force a sovereign government to negoti- strikes continue to mount. Moreover, the Bills suggested by the American Federa- ion organizers the right to say who will functions which belong entirely to t ate as an equal with a private organiza- concessions employees are not able to tion of State, County, and Municipal Em- perform public service and how those not to exceed 15 minutes. services will be performed, do not we Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, my people through their elected represen tion-in this case, a labor union. get at the bargaining table they fre- ployees and the National Education As- atives. quently try to get from the legislatures. sociation would force a wide aggregation have a situation in which the authority colleagues here today will address the Second. Monopoly bargaining privi- The solutions, for the most part, often of union power and special privilege on of government has been divested from question of whether the Federal Govern- Second, in Government, as opposed leges-that is, individual public em- the private sector, there is no profit m ployees would be compelled to accept un- do nothing more than merely add to the every government unit in the country the public? ment should impose upon the States and tive. I regard the profit motive as o wanted union officials as their "exclusive power and privileges of union organizers, outside of the Federal Government. Unwelcome as it may be in many quar- their political subdivisions a system of of the single most important forces representatives" in dealing with their The prohibition of public employees ters, and unrealistic as it may seem in compulsory public sector collective bar- Among a long list of special privileges giving America its tremendous produ gaining. More broadly, we will be con- own government employer. from striking is based on a sound premise these proposals would: grant monopoly others, the proper labor relations policy tive capacity. It is at the very heart Third. Compulsory membership where which recognizes their unique position status to a union without secret ballot for any government might well be one sidering whether it is in fact in the our system of competitive free ente all public employees, including those who elections, authorize strikes of public em- which rejects collective bargaining in public interest and is sound public policy and potential ability to paralyze the com- prise, a system which has produced do not want the alleged "services" of the munity by a strike action. However, the ployees, permit union officials to engage every form. for any government to be compelled to higher standard of living and more goo recognize and bargain with unions. union, will have to join or pay money to record shows that officials of public em- in coercive acts, authorize and approve Last September, the U.S. District Court and services at lower prices than an I believe that in consideration of this the union-or lose their right to work for ployee unions openly flout laws which full compulsory union membership and for the Middle District of North Caro- other economic system, but we must su stand as obstacles to their quest to take obligate every State, political subdivi- issue, we must pay careful attention to their own government. lina held constitutional a State law mit that the profit motive is absent fro the question of the effect that such a It is my purpose and that of several of over control of public services-openly sion, town, city, county, borough, district, which declared contracts between gov- considerations of Government employe my colleagues to take a careful look today school board, board of regents, public or system of compulsory bargaining would flout them and then brag about their ernment and unions in that State to be employee relations. In short, if we or a at a wide range of legislative proposals quasi-public corporation or any other en- have on the sovereignty of government. illegal actions. Seldom has this resulted void. In its decision the Court said: other body of elected officials pay O covering public employees. We contend in any significant legal penalty, however, tity which is tax supported to abide by In this area, I would like you to con- employees less money, not 1 cent of th to the extent that public employees that these proposals, if enacted, will se- because of fear on the part of public its provisions and to obey the decisions of sider what sovereignty consists of, gain power through recognition and collec- money goes into our pockets. Our con verely damage the public interest. Our officials that strong punishment will be a national public employment relations tive bargaining, other interest groups with whether it can exist where government mission, as is that of every other elect quality of life will be diminished through met with even more intensive retaliation. commission. a right to a voice in the running of the is forced to submit itself and its decision- public body, is to provide necessa the wanton disregard of the individual In New York City a few years ago, offi- Today's discussion will look into all government may be left out of vital political making processes to the negotiating services to the people in the best ar rights of millions of Americans. And, the cials of public employee unions convinc- decisions. Thus, the granting of collective table. I hope that at the conclusion of aspects of these various legislative pro- most efficient manner possible To pr free spirit of democracy will be crushed bargaining rights to public employees in- these remarks, it will be crystal clear ingly proved that they can put a major posals as well as the development of a vide those services, we must employ pe volves important matters fundamental to by those who seek to compromise it. U.S. metropolis out of business whenever new spoils system through public em- that governmental sovereignty is ab- ple, and the better people we employ, tl our democratic form of government. The set- What has led us to the point where we they choose to do so. What happened in ployee political action, the rights of State solutely essential and that it is so dia- ting of goals and making policy decisions better service we can provide. Thus it can actually seriously discuss the transfer New York City has also happened in re- and municipal governments and their metrically opposed to any system of com- in our interest and in the public intere 3184 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD March 6, 1975 March 6, 1975 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 3185 to employ and keep in our employment everything in our power to resist any Mayors to heel-with or without a law- ment the right to refrain is just as basic stand what is happening. They are the posite and would take the time off dur- the very best employees. In order to do attempts to institute a system of com- raised new doubts that the general welfare and precious as the right to join, and the ones that have made the decisions as to ing the summer. So it enabled us to bal- this, we must keep ever mindful that the pulsory public sector collective bargain- would benefit from a Federal mandate to Commission supports this position. what to be done in their particular total compensation of our employees and ing at any level of Government. I do not strengthen civil service unions. Some authorities contend that State legis- ance our work force. The employees lation should not include language that gives States, particular localities. loved it. As I said, it was voluntary and their working conditions must be com- doubt for a moment that the future of On November 11 the New York Daily employees the option of not joining an em- Mr. President, I think it would be 85 percent of the employees chose to parable with those in the private sec- our system of government depends on it. News editorialized as follows: ployee organization. They point out that the highly irresponsible for us to take an work in that manner. It saved the tax- tor. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- The 94th Congress must screw up its States should not mandate the "choice" pro- action that is contrary to their best in- payers some money. Now we come to the last and most pore. Under. the previous order, the Sen- courage and take a firm stand against such vision since it would preclude employer and terest. Now, because Congress, due to the in- crucial difference between public and pri- ator from Arizona is recognized for not reckless labor adventuring. Government employee representatives from negotiating I yield the floor, Mr. President. fluence of the national labor organiza- vate employment. That is the very nature to exceed 15 minutes. workers are entitled to representation and union and closed shop agreements. The pref- The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- bargaining. But strikes against the public tions, has decided to ignore all of the of Government itself. The ruling prin- erable approach, according to this argument UNIONIZATION OF FEDERAL, STATE, COUNTY, AND should be taboo-period. And that goes also pore. Under the previous order, the Sen- is for the State laws to remain silent on this mayors and Governors of this country, ciple of action in the private sector is MUNICIPAL EMPOLYEES for compulsory union membership. We simply matter, thereby providing a greater degree ator from Nevada is recognized for not because I do not suppose we have as free contract. That is, every action that Mr. FANNIN. Mr. President, I com- cannot afford these callous, indefensible of flexibility for public agencies and em- to exceed 15 minutes. much political power, they changed takes place between free individuals in a mend my colleagues, the Senator from threats to the health, safety and economy ployee organizations to arrive at agreements Mr. McCLURE. Mr. President, I ask those rules and said that you cannot free society is done by mutual agree- of the nation. Nor should civil service workers South Carolina and the very able and tailored to fit their own special circum- unanimous consent that the time allotted grant compensatory time off unless you ment. This is true in employment, in be compelled to pay tribute to unions to hold distinguished Senator from Utah; the stances. to the Senator from Nevada under the grant it during the week in which the purchase, in all of our obligations. How- jobs won on merit. The Commission believes these contentions Senator from South Carolina, who served special order be allotted to the Senator overtime was incurred, or the following ever, the ruling principle of action in Mr. President, I think that illustrates ignore the fact that in the public service with distinction as Governor, and who from Utah (Mr. GARN) the right to join an employee organization week, or you have to pay it in cash in Government is force. Government is has great knowledge in the field which exactly what we are discussing today. must be accompanied by the right not to The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- time and a half. government only because it and it alone he is discussing, and who has worked with These people are proud public serv- has the power to rule by compulsion. join. When the right to join becomes a duty, pore. Without objection, it is so ordered. That is an imposition of another half the employees both at the State and the ants. They want to hold their jobs on obviously freedom of choice becomes merely Mr. GARN. Mr. President, I wish to million dollars of cost on Salt Lake City This is the way it must be because only local levels. I am very pleased to follow the basis of their merit, their work, they a catchword. amplify my previous remarks with some government. through compulsion can Government him in discussing this subject, so impor- want to go forward, they want to earn The union shop and the closed shop may specific examples of the effect of laws Congress in their great wisdom passed insure the ordered, peaceful society upon tant to all the people of America, and a right to go forward. or may not be appropriate for various crafts passed by Congress that are not nearly revenue sharing. Salt Lake City received which all other segments of society de- my colleague from Utah, the former Mr. President, today public employees and trade portions of private industry. But as severe as the matter we are condemn- $4 million in revenue sharing. Because pend for their existence. in 34 of the 50 States are shielded from given the size of many governmental juris- mayor of Salt Lake City, that great city ing today, that being mandatory collec- of the imposition of the Fair Labor This is the crux of the question, can dictions and agencies the diversity of em- that stands as a symbol of good govern- compulsory unionism by constitutional ployee skills, and the intense competition tive bargaining and binding arbitration, Standards Act, Congress has taken $3.5 any government exist as government once it has lost its sovereignty? Further- ment in this country of ours, and who provisions, laws and executive orders. between and among public employee orga- and the effect these laws have had on the million of it away. But more importantly, performed admirably as its mayor, and Those States are Alabama, Arizona, nizations, this arrangement is wholly un- cities and States of this country. I refer it has taken away the right of an elected more, can any government retain who is now a U.S. Senator. We are proud Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Dela- suitable in the public service. specifically to the imposition of the Fair mayor and a city council to make deci- sovereignty when it must submit im- that we have him with us, with his knowl- ware, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Labor Standards Act upon municipal and portant decisions of public policy to col- Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Mississippi, A similar view of impropriety of com- sions in their own community, in their lective-bargaining negotiations with edge of the affairs of municipalities that State and county governments of this pulsory unionism in the Federal serv- own sovereign community, and he held has proven to be very helpful to us, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hamp- country last year, despite the position of unions? shire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New ice was expressed 13 years ago by then- accountable to the voters of that com- having had recent experience in these the National League of Cities Board of York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Secretary of Labor Arthur Goldberg. He munity for their actions. So the Congress The answers to these questions are particular fields, because we are in a Directors representing 15,000 cities across Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode spoke out in defense of prohibition giveth and they taketh away. We have a simple and clear, because of the very nature of unions and collective bargain- period of changing times, some better this country, despite the fact that the net of a half million dollars left. Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, against the union shop and the closed and some otherwise. However, we know Governors' Conference took a similar po- that there are different issues that face Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and shop in Executive Order 10988, issued Well, we were ignored. We were not ing. sition in opposition to the Congress of A collective-bargaining relationship- Wyoming. by the late President John F. Kennedy listened to by the Congress. A small any and every collective bargaining re- our municipalities today than, perhaps, the United States imposing the Fair to authorize collective bargaining in the group of labor leaders obviously had when some of us served in our particular Mr. President, the people of these Labor Standards Act and the provisions lationship-depends on establishing an States have afforded their friends and Federal service. more effect on the outcome of this im- States several years ago. of it on local government, despite the adversary relationship between em- neighbors that work for their govern- Addressing members of the American position of the Fair Labor Standards Act Mr. President, Congress is now con- fact that we testified opposed to it- ments this protection that is so vital to Federation of Government Employees, than the representatives of all of the ployer and employee. Unions, in order fronted by demands from union spokes- Mayor Tom Bradley of Los Angeles and cities in this country. So we decided to to win and hold the loyalty of their their State and the future of their par- Secretary Goldberg said: men to sanction the forced unionization I, he being a Democrat, I being a Re- take it to court. We did, and we have re- members, must demand more than the of the 14½ million individuals employed ticular communities, and certainly vital I know you will agree with me that the publican-despite the fact that the Na- to this great Nation of ours. union shop and closed shop are inappro- ceived an injuction, a restraining order, employer is willing to offer. If a union were to accept only what the employer by the States, local jurisdictions, and the tional League of Cities Board of Direc- priate to the Federal government. And be- from the imposition of this law. We are Federal Government. These incredible Obviously, the safeguards now en- cause of this, there is a larger responsibility tors representing 15,000 cities, both lib- going to find out whether the Congress offered, it would serve no useful purpose demands were dramatized last Novem- joyed by civil servants in those States for enlightment on the part of the govern- erals and conservatives, Republicans and of the United States has the constitu- for its members and soon it would have ber 6 by the first meeting of the AFL- would be eliminated by a new Federal law ment union. In your own organization you Democrats, came back and testified be- tional right to impose their will on the no members. So unions by virtue of their CIO's new Public Employees Department. authorizing the forced unionization of have to win acceptance by your own conduct, fore House and Senate committees in locally elected officials of this country. very nature and to preserve their ex- That meeting was featured by an address citizens employed by the States and their your own action, your own wisdom, your own opposition, so that a very united bipar- The Governors Conference is support- istence, must make demands. The only political subdivisions. responsibility, and your own achieve- by the labor federation's president, tisan, nonpartisan effort opposed this, ing the National League of Cities and the instrument that unions have at their dis- Mr. President, the erection of barriers ments so you have an opportunity to posal to support their demands is the George Meany, who said: nevertheless it was imposed upon the against involuntary union membership bring into your organization people who U.S. Conference of Mayors in this effort. Certainly, it's against the law to strike the come in because they want to come in and cities of this country at a tremendous I wish to add that I hope the American withdrawal of the services of their mem- civil service, but it's AFL-CIO policy to ig- in the public sector was strongly recom- who will participate, therefore, in the full cost to the taxpayers of this country. I people will wake up to what is being bers-the strike. The strike is, even when nore those laws. mended by the Advisory Commission on activity of your organization. use my own city as an example. done, to demonstrate the arrogance of it is peaceful, the use of force. It can- Intergovernmental Relations. In March It will require us to pay time and a some people in the labor movement to not be defined or construed any other Now, just imagine that. 1970, that distinguished bipartisan body Now, Mr. President, that was Secre- half to firemen for sleeping. There will impose their will, despite the feelings of way. No government can call itself Mr. President, I was appalled by the published its recommendations dealing tary Goldberg addressing this Govern- be no additional firemen, no better qual- the elected representatives of this coun- sovereign if it permits the use of force irresponsibility of that statement. with employer-employee relations in the ment employees' organization, SO this ity of fire service, and just in my rela- try. to enforce demands against it. We can Mr. Meany advised our 14½ million public sector. is not a partisan issue, this an issue tively small city a cost of $3 million a I wish to report to the Senate a meet- see from this that there can be no true civil servants to "quit working for the Mr. President, it is advantageous for us of righteousness, this is an issue of year to the local taxpayers for nothing. ing held this week with the Congres- collective bargaining without strikes and guy who's kicking you around." Is that to recall that this Commission was freedom. There is an additional half million dol- sional Cities Conference Workshop on there can be no true government with not a fine way to address these people? created by the Congress in 1959. Its mem- Significantly, the ban on forced union- lars because of rules that are involved Collective Bargaining held March 3, strikes. You stop the job. You shut it down. You bers represent the general public and the ism in the Federal service has been with telling us how to run our personnel 1975, 2 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., at the Inter- This is the essential question we must take the consequences, and you fight. And if legislative and executive branches of maintained by President Kennedy's management system. national Ballroom East, Washington face. Are we to have sovereign govern- the guy happens to be the mayor of a city Federal, State, and local governments. three successors. A similar prohibition or the governor of a state, it doesn't make I will put in a specific example here. Hilton Hotel, Washington, D.C. ment, or are we to have public sector The Commission overseees the operation was incorporated by the Congress in the a damn bit of difference. Most people know that in Salt Lake City I refer to a memorandum addressed collective bargaining? We cannot have of our federal system with its division of Postal Reorganization Act of 1970. you have very distinct seasons. You have to me from Commissioner Jennings both. I am confident that the vast ma- That is the end of the quote, that par- powers, and it submits carefully studied Mr. President, if we permit ourselves to hard winters and warm summers. So our Phillips, Jr., of Salt Lake City, Utah. jority of the American people will agree ticular quote. I think that is a shameful recommendations relating to improve- be stampeded on the issue of authorizing park department employees would work with this position. quote. involuntary unionism in the public sec- This concerns the Congressional Work- ment of the system. a lot of overtime on the parks and golf For us, my colleagues, the question is tor, exposing 14½ million public em- shop on Collective Bargaining held dur- It was reassuring to note that Mr. In their 1970 report members of the Meany was censured on the editorial ployees to union coercion, then the courses during the summer and build up ing the League of Cities Conference at equally simple. We must decide whether Advisory Commission on Intergovern- overtime, I might add this was on a vol- the Washington Hilton Hotel. we as the elected representatives of the page of the New York Times. That news- mental Relations declared: American people will recognize clearly people are going to continue to run our paper is influential. I do not always agree that the Congress merits their contempt. untary basis. They enjoyed taking that Present were: Robert LaFortune, may- While recognition of the right to mem- compensatory time off in the middle of Government, or whether we are going to with it, but it observed in its edition of Mr. President, we should listen to the or, Tulsa, presiding; Robert Moss, Gen- bership is fundamental, of equal importance the winter when they were not needed. eral Counsel, House Subcommittee on turn it over to a relative handful of pro- November 10: is the principle that no public employee voice of the American people. We should They would take 5 or 6 weeks off at a Labor of the House Committee on Edu- fessional union organizers. The accent Mr. Meany chose to put on should be required or coerced into joining take the actions by the people that are time and enjoy the long periods. The I am firmly convinced that we must do militant action to bring Governors and close to the scene of activity, to under- cation and Labor; and George P. Sape, an organization as a condition of employ- snow removal crews would do the op- Associate Counsel, Senate Committee on 3186 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE March 6, 1975 March 6, 1975 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENA Labor and Public Welfare, representing jor concern has to be the question of "hypocritical" those who believe strikes We, as legislators, have a responsibil- Mr. President, I find it disturbing to Donald Elisburg. strikes. can be prevented through the enactment ity to our constituents to see that public read predictions in the newspapers that I want the arrogance of this statement The undesirability of public sector of legislation which obligates govern- safety is maintained and that Govern- this Congress will soon enact what is de- to be carefully noted in the RECORD: strikes and the reasons for this are obvi- ment to bargain with unions. ment services continue uninterrupted. To scribed as "a new Federal law granting In the introductory remarks, both Mr. ous to all of us. One needs only to look Labor leaders have echoed this and, fulfill this responsibility, we must oppose collective bargaining rights" to the more Moss and Mr. Sape advised those present at the havoc wrought by these strikes- as their actions demonstrate, have shown the injection of compulsory public sec- than 11 million employees of the Na- that regardless of what the Supreme Court's such as those in San Francisco and Bal- a total lack of regard for the law and tor collective bargaining into our society. tion's States, counties, cities and towns. decision was on the suit brought by the timore-to realize their danger. society by engaging in illegal strikes. SUMMARY During the current session numerous League of Cities contesting the right of Con- In Baltimore-police, prison guards, gress to interfere with the employment prac- George Meany, speaking at the founding bills have been introduced here for the Faced with increasing union demands and sanitation workers on strike at the convention of the AFL-CIO's new Public purpose of mandating collective bargain- tices of the cities and counties of this coun- for compulsory public sector collective try, it was their opinion that Congress would same time. The result: Garbage piled in Employee Department, said: ing at all levels of government. Such bargaining, a major concern has to be move ahead to impose such regulations on the streets; individuals attempting to If you just quit working for the guy who's legislation was submitted to the 93d Con- the question of public sector strikes. the cities and counties. take their own garbage to the dumps kicking you around. And if that guy happens gress and to several of its predecessors. The undesirability of public sector After questions by those present, Mr. Moss harassed and physically threatened by to be the mayor of the city or the Governor and Mr. Sape stated Congress could very of a State, it doesn't make a damn bit of strikes and the reasons for this are ob- But somehow, we are seeing steam strikers, in one instance fired upon-an generated behind them. well make collective bargaining and the right difference. vious. uprising of inmates at the city prison I recognize that this legislation has to strike a condition of getting a federal We have been unable to prevent them. subdued only with the assistance of non- grant. Actual experience with public sector Experts on labor relations and union been the subject of public hearings con- rebellious inmates-looting and arson collective bargaining further verifies leaders have declared them unavoidable. ducted by committees and subcommittees That is really something, when em- erupt within hours after the police walk this. The State of Michigan, for exam- Actual experience has echoed this. Strike of the Senate and House of Representa- ployees of the Senate and the House of off the job, resulting in millions of dol- ple, enacted public sector bargaining tives. Representatives of the United States are bans and penalties have been ineffectual. lars of property damage and at least one legislation in 1965. In the 7 years prior The reason for public sector strikes is It would be a grave mistake, in my telling mayors of this country that even death. And the national president of the to this, they had experienced one strike. view, for the Federal Government to at- if we win a suit in the Supreme Court public sector collective bargaining. The union threatens Governor Mandel that In the 3 years that immediately followed, rational course is to oppose compulsory tempt to dictate to the States and their of the United States declaring the very Baltimore City would burn to the ground there were 103 illegal strikes. In fact, a act of the Congress to be unconstitu- public sector collective bargaining. political subdivisions with respect to unless their demands were met. statistical compilation of all States Mr. President, I was very much in- their own employees. tional, that Congress will go ahead and In San Francisco-the city crippled by shows an average of 1.92 strikes per terested in the observations of the dis- If a given State bargains, or refuses stuff it down our throats anyway. a massive strike of its employees. Public State per year before the enactment of tinguished junior Senator from Utah. to bargain, with its own civil servants, Mr. Moss and Mr. Sape were extremely transportation shut down-schools ex- compulsory collective-bargaining legisla- Here is a man who has had firsthand ex- that is the State's business and not the arrogant and in essence said that we periencing 25 percent attendance and on tion and 6.58 strikes per State per year perience in the managing of a great city. business of the Federal Government. could do nothing to stop it and had just a half-day schedule-San Francisco thereafter. He is a man who knows what he is talk- If a given State grants monopoly bar- as well sit back, relax, and enjoy it. General Hospital operating on an emer- Let me repeat those figures: The aver- I submit that it is time the American ing about. He is a man who has experi- gaining privileges to labor unions com- gency-only basis, all but 150 critically ill age statistical compilation of all States enced firsthand what some of the laws prised of its own employees, or withholds people awakened to what is being im- patients moved to other locations-over prior to the enactment of this legislation posed upon them. If they want to have that are passed by Congress can do to a such privileges, that is the State's busi- 100 million gallons of raw sewage a day was 1.92, and after the enactment of city in America. I am a believer in the ness and not the business of the Federal Government close to the people, if they being pumped into the bay. After the compulsory collective-bargaining legisla- Government. right of people to join unions. I am well want their local mayor and city council, settlement, a local labor leader tells the tion, that figure rose to 6.58 per State aware, as every interested American must If a given State either prohibits or county commissioners, Governors, and strikers: per year thereafter. be that unions have moved the standard sanctions the mandatory unionization of legislators able to be anything but local I want to compliment you on the way you Legislated strike bans have proven in- of living and the welfare of workers for- State workers who do not want to be stooges for the Federal Government, then mounted your picket lines-the way you kept effectual, as have penalties for illegal ward in a very marked fashion in this represented by labor unions, that also we cannot tolerate further extension of this city in turmoil until our demands were strikes. The vast majority of public the power of the Federal Government country in the last 100 years. is the State's business and not the busi- met. sector strikes have been and continue to into the internal affairs of local and I think the words of the distinguished ness of the Federal Government. One would think that something real- be illegal. The penalties against both the junior Senator from Utah and others If a given State decides to permit em- State government. We cannot tolerate a bill that imposes mandatory collective ly terrific had been accomplished, with- union and the individuals striking have here today who have talked on this sub- ployees of the State and its political sub- out ever giving a thought to the havoc rarely been enforced, even in those bargaining and binding arbitration on ject ought to be listened to by every divisions to engage in strikes, that, too, and the pain and suffering that resulted States where the law has been written Member of this body. They ought to be is the State's business and not the busi- the cities and counties of this country. from this illegal strike. so as to make these penalties automatic We need to work to repeal the imposi- read by every Member of the other body, ness of the Federal Government. tion of the Fair Labor Standards Act The scene has been repeated arcoss and mandatory. Prime among the rea- and before we pass legislation that guar- Several proposals now pending in the the country: a firemen's strike in Albu- sons for this has been the tendency to which interferes with the sovereign right antees public employees the right to Congress would compel all of the 50 querque that resulted in residents at- include in the "negotiated" settlement strike, we had better see what we are States and their political subdivisions to of a mayor or a Governor to administer of a strike a clause granting amnesty to the affairs of his own city or State. tempting to put out fires with garden doing. I hope that this Congress will act recognize and bargain with unions pur- hoses; a prolonged teacher strike in Wis- the strikers and their union. responsibly in this area and not take a porting to represent their employees. I yield back the remainder of my time. consin that led to deep divisions and out- The simple fact is that collective bar- step that, some say, would be a step for- These proposals would also extend mo- The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- breaks of violence within the community; gaining and strikes are inseparable. Pub- ward, but, in fact, would be a very sad, nopoly bargaining privileges to recog- pore. Under the previous order, the Sen- a recent bus strike in Washington that, lic sector unions are going to strike when step backward for America. nized unions. They would legalize the ator from Wyoming is recognized for not as reported in the Washington Post, most and where they feel like it. This is a great country. The rights of practice of requiring workers on public to exceed 15 minutes. adversely affected low-income individ- The recent trend has been to give up individuals are protected here as they are payrolls to pay dues or fees to labor Mr. HANSEN. Mr. President, I have uals that relied on the buses to get jobs the fight altogether and legalize public nowhere else on Earth. unions as a condition of employment. consistently supported efforts to require far from their homes; a recent case in sector strikes, much to the delight of the I yield the floor. And the measures to which I refer would private sector unions to conduct a secret New York City where the leadership of unions. The State of Pennsylvania un- Mr. McCLURE. Mr. President. put the Federal Government's stamp-of- ballot vote among their members before the firefighter's union called a strike dertook such a course of action in 1971, The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. approval on strikes by State, county, and calling a strike. I have also supported after the membership had voted against and in 1972 had the dubious honor of FORD). Under the previous order, the Sen- municipal employees-including public efforts to require that each new offer it. leading the Nation in the number of pub- ator from Idaho (Mr. McCLURE) is rec- schoolteachers. from management be voted on by the lic sector strikes. As a rule, have we been able to prevent ognized for not to exceed 15 minutes. The very fact that serious considera- membership. I believe that these meas- The point being conveniently ignored these work stoppages? Experience shows Mr. McCLURE. Mr. President, I ask tion is likely to be accorded-in fact. is ures are necessary to instill the greatest that we have not. Learned opinion holds by the proponents of compulsory public unanimous consent that the order of ap- being accorded-these proposals illus- amount of democracy into union affairs. that under a system of compulsory public sector collective bargaining is that pub- pearance between Mr. BUCKLEY and my- trates how far we have strayed from the Under this system, a strike could not be lic sector collective bargaining is the rea- sector collective bargaining these strikes self be reversed and that he be recognized principles which guided the Nation's called unless a majority of members de- son for public sector strikes. This fact is at this time. Founding Fathers. are, in fact, unavoidable. sired it, and union leaders would not inescapable. A union must satisfy its The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without The men who established our form of Experts in the field of labor relations be allowed to reject management offers membership. To do this, that union must objection, it is so ordered. The Senator have reached this conclusion. Theodore government sought to diffuse sovereign without first consulting the member- make demands. This establishes the ad- from New York is recognized. H. Kheel, the well-known arbitrator, has power. George Washington said: ship. This would go a long way toward versary relationship that unions thrive Mr. BUCKLEY. I thank the distin- said that "collective bargaining and Government is like fire, a dangerous ser- placing control of their own affairs back on. To maintain this adversary relation- guished Senator from Idaho. vant and a fearful master. in the hands of the workers instead of a strikes are like siamese twins." Robert ship and insure the success of their de- few union leaders. Hillman, former labor commissioner for Mr. President, I wish to address, in my mands, the union must show a willing- the city of Baltimore, at a conference on remarks, one aspect of this discussion, Students of our country's history well Mr. President, in the public sector we ness to strike, for the strike is their public sector labor relations held this namely, whether or not the Federal Gov- remember that ratification by the States are faced with increasing union demands equalizer. The establishment of a will- ernment has any authority or any right of our Constitution was assured only by past December at the University of Mary- for a federally mandated system of ingness to strike necessitates actually to intervene in what is basically the busi- adoption of the first 10 amendments to land said, "collective bargaining means going on strike when the situation de- compulsory collective bargaining. A ma- ness of the States and their political that document. Throughout our national strikes." He further characterized as mands it. subdivisions. life those amendments have been popu- larly known as the "Bill of Rights" and $ 3188 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE March 6, 1975 March 6, 1975 CONGRESSIONAL SENATE conducting a 1-year study of employer- Employee Relations," and reads as on this concept of government and the It is important to stress here again unanimous consent that the order for These pro employee relations in the public sector. follows: governed. that government, by definition, is unique. the quorum call be rescinded. Federal actio In unmistakable language, the Commis- The United States Congress is considering Yet, I am afraid, we have wandered far It is a uniquely privileged and powerful The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without ees to accept sion's report expressed vigorous opposi- legislation which would provide to State and astray in the field of labor relations law; monopoly, whose very existence is de- objection, it is so ordered. "exclusive tion to: local government employees the right to and, if we are careless in our actions to rived from the consent of the governed. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under with their Any Federal effort to mandate a collective organize and collectively bargain. This leg- come, we might not only jeopardize the As the distinguished scholar Russell the previous order, the Chair will rec- likely-as a bargaining, meet and confer, or any other islation would substantially replace indi- freedoms we are supposed to protect, we Kirk wrote last year in Education ognize the Senator from North Carolina vidual state laws and porcedures which now monopoly r labor-relations system for the employees of regulate these activities with a uniform fed- might even jeopardize the Government magazine: (Mr. HELMS). workers to p State and local jurisdictions or for any sector eral law. itself. By its nature, government is a monopoly. Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask in order to thereof. Little would be left of the Federal The National Governors' Conference As we have already noted, union pro- In any community nowadays, ordinarily, unanimous consent that I will be allowed Antistrike principle of divided powers were such legis- lation enacted. No interpretation of the com- opposes federal intervention in this area. It fessionals are trying to build a case for there exists but one police force, one fire de- to yield 2 minutes of my time to the dis- other technic merce power, of the State as proprietor, or of is the belief of the Nation's Governors that Federal legislation affecting labor rela- partment, one department of sanitation, one tinguished Senator from Nebraska. pose really o) the "general welfare" clause can, in our opin- matters relating to the employees of State post office system one apparatus for the tions in the public sector-in the Federal The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without collection of revenue and the disbursing of lems-each ion, serve as a legitimate constitutional basis and local governments are within the sole Government, as well as every State, for this kind of drastic infringement upon jurisdiction of these units and are not prop- public funds. objection, it is so ordered. dividual and erly the subject of federal legislation. county and borough across the country. If the people employed in such a monopoly Mr. CURTIS. I thank my distinguished Mr. Presi the basic authority of the States and locali- They will undoubtedly attempt to sell are subject to the will of officers in a union, friend. ties as governments in a federal system. The National Governors' Conference, in among us. I adopting this statement, takes no position on these proposals to us in the name of lib- in some emergency the authority of govern- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The these other Mr. President, it is germane to observe the principle of collective bargaining for erty and worker rights. ment might be defied successfully by the Chair might inform the Senator from That strik men who dominate the union. that agencies of the Federal Government public employees but states its firm commit- They will discuss the right to join a North Carolina that the quorum call was cannot be to are not yet obligated by law to engage in ment to the view that this is an area which union-and it must be noted here that Then he warned, even the most essen- taken from his time of 15 minutes. That gov bargaining with their employees. Under should be left to the discretion of the several that is a right already protected by the tial public services, including the ordi- Mr. HELMS. Very well. tion-be resp the prevailing circumstances, imposition States. U.S. Constitution-and various other nary enforcement of law and keeping of The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- able to the by the Congress of such an obligation on Mr. President, I know it has become claimed rights, such as the "right" of the peace- ator from Nebraska. That the the States and their political subdivi- unfashionable in this body to suggest Government employees to strike against Would depend upon the mood and the am- Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President, I wish to ernment is t) sions would be anomalous-not to say that there are any constitutional limita- their Government. bitions of the people controlling the union. join with the distinguished Senator from And that gratuitous. tions remaining to Federal action. The But they will ignore other rights, The real government might be the union Utah and others in calling attention to indeed differ The failure or refusal of the Congress rights which may not seem too import- itself. courts have cooperated in a gradual ex- the Senate the problems involved in these in industry, to apply a labor relations law to its own pansion of the commerce clause, so that ant to them, but which in one way or an- Harsh words, but not unrealistic if we efforts for unionization of Government and privileg agencies and departments and their em- it bears no conceivable relationship to other affect all of us. While it is true that fall into the trap of granting to public employees at all levels of Government. ture of the ployees was not overlooked by the Ad- what our founders intended, and the each person has a different focus and sector union officials monopoly control of Within the last day or two, there was ment. visory Commission on Intergovernmental same thing has been said about the gen- perspective on his own and the Nation's the public sector workforce through the an account that appeared in the Wash- I believe t1 Relations. Its report concluded: eral welfare clause. And although each needs, there are some insights common concession of monopoly representation ington Star concerning what has hap- without pass In the absence of overwhelming evidence one of us is sworn to defend the Consti- to all. Everyone will agree that the pro- privileges and compulsory union shop pened in the State of Illinois. preserve gove of the unwillingness or inability of State and tution, I believe we ought to remind tection of his freedom is basic to all other taxing powers, coupled with the right to I believe in the right of people to join dividual free local governments to act, the Federal Gov- ourselves once in a while as to what is propositions. Most people see that the strike in those unions. the union, I do not think that should be without bein ernment should refrain from preemptive ac- in the Constitution. best way to protect their own freedom is If we grant them monopoly status, we interfered with. I do not believe in the without bein tion. Such evidence clearly is lacking at The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time to insist on the protection of freedom for have, as Dr. Kirk has eloquently pointed principle of compulsory unionism either ployees. present. States and localities have developed of the Senator from New York has ex- others. and are developing their own response to the out, in effect, created a system of dual by coercion or by a matter of law. In fact. in challenge of employee militancy, especially pired. Under the previous order, the Sen- For many, the most precious freedom governments-one legitimate, appointed I also wish to point out that there are we have devi teacher militancy. Given the nature of this ator from Idaho (Mr. McCLURE) is of those guaranteed by the Constitution by the authority of the people, and the certain essential services of Government able solution challenge, experimentation and flexibility are recognized. is that of religion. They insist that with- other a de facto government, account- which by their very nature call for re- lic-sector co needed, not a standardized, Federal, pre- Mr. McCLURE. Mr. President, let me out it any adherence to freedom in other able to no one except possibly the politi- straint. hibited in the emptive approach begin by expressing my commendation forms is folly. Representatives of several cal system it feeds on. So, whatever might be our attitude We recogn The Federal Government clearly has an in- to those who have already spoken, religious groups have come to me ex- The citizen taxpayer, subject to abuse toward strikes involving nongovernmen- ees-and all terest in the development of stable and particularly to the freshman Senator plaining that compulsory unionism by both governments, could exercise tal activities, I am of the opinion that it their right to equitable labor-management relations at the from Utah (Mr. GARN). the former mayor would force them to violate their relig- some control over the one, but would be is not according to sound public policy ciations by tl other levels. This interest can be best served. of the great city of Salt Lake City, and ious convictions. Because of this I offered virtually powerless to control the that these Government unions should be We have re however, by avoiding actions that would ex- to the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. an amendment to the 1970 Postal Reor- monopoly of the other. allowed to strike. acerbate these relations and by focusing on that governn ways and means of directly encouraging the THURMOND) for his comments, and also ganization Act providing that: As union officials gain a bigger and We will be faced with this problem in to recognize establishment of strong, innovative person- to commend the additional comments by No individual who is a member of a relig- mightier foothold, and are able to exer- reference to the postal service before ciations. Exp nel systems. the Senators from Arizona, Wyoming, ious sect or division thereof, the established cise more control over the selected gov- long and I think it is important that we the one thin and New York, who have just concluded. and traditional tenets or teachings of which ernment, we could be faced with the look at all of the problems involved and strength and The Commission, whose members rep- Mr. President, the nature of our dis- oppose a requirement that a member of such actual day-to-day operation of vital gov- not permit this to further deteriorate a is to recogniz resent the public and the executive and cussion here today brings to mind an sect or division join or financially support ernment services at the whimsy of a very poorly administered and run postal and enter int legislative branches of Federal, State and any labor organization as a condition of em- enduring observation by the 17th cen- union bureaucracy. service. it. Each such local governments, is a respected and ployment, if such individual pays to the tury philosopher, Baruch Spinoza, on Government is unique. Its function is In saying that, I want to set the rec- permanent bipartisan body. Among its Treasurer of the United States a sum equal successive members who fashioned the 1970 report the role of government in a free society: to serve the cause of liberty. We cannot ord straight, I am sure that there are to the initiation fees and periodic dues uni- tions, and a The object of government is not to formly required as a condition of acquiring have liberty and compulsory monopoly just countless honest and dedicated grows to bec on employer-employee relations in the change men from rational beings into beasts and retaining membership in a labor orga- unions in control of the public service postal workers. Yet there is something controllable. public sector were Senator MUSKIE of or puppets, but to enable them to develop nization which is representative of the em- workforce, coupled with the right to wrong somewhere. Our Postal Service Maine, former Senator Ervin of North Now. Mr. I their minds and bodies in security, and to ployee unless said individual and said labor strike. The measure of any proposition continues to deteriorate. Carolina, the late Senator Karl E. Mundt employ their reason unshackled in fact, organization mutually agree upon some must be its impact upon a free people. I want to again commend the distin- lina General of South Dakota, Congressman ULLMAN the true aim of government is liberty. other condition of employment. It would be ironic if we were to move guished Senator from Utah for taking reads as follo of Oregon, Congressman FOUNTAIN of North Carolina, and the former Con- This philosophy quickly found its way This amendment was accepted by the into the bicentennial period by inaugu- the lead in promoting thought on this Contracts be into our own national law and discourse. House Committee on Post Office and important subject. and labor unio rating a program so alien to all that our nizations conc gresswoman from New Jersey, Mrs. Flor- ence P. Dwyer. It is not a long step from Spinoza's Civil Service. Although the section to Founding Fathers fought for. I thank my distinguished friend from clared to be ill which it was amended was ultimately Mr. President, I yield back the remain- North Carolina. ideal government to the Declaration of tract. between Mr. President, I appeal to my col- removed from the bill for very different der of my time. I yield back the remainder of my time. city, town, cou leagues to heed the Commission's recom- Independence, in which the Founding reasons, Congress made it clear that it The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under NORTH CAROLINA'S SOLUTION between any mendation. We are bound by our oaths Fathers wrote: did not intend to undermine religious be- the previous order, the Senator from Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, we have tality thereof, to reject all legislation designed to com- That all men are created equal, that mentality, or liefs. It seems to me that those people North Carolina (Mr. HELMS) is recog- pel the States and localities to bargain they are endowed by their Creator with cer- nized. just heard it from our colleagues-about North Carolina tain unalienable Rights, that among these who profess to believe in the separation the threat to the basic political institu- with labor unions purporting to repre- are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Hap- Mr. MANSFIELD Mr. President, I union, or labo of church and state ought to be in the tions of the country posed by the com- agent for any sent their employees. piness-That to secure these Rights, Gov- forefront of this fight to prevent an in- suggest the absence of a quorum on the pulsory public-sector bargaining pro- town. county I might add, Mr. President. that only ernments are instituted among Men, deriving cursion by the state into what is for time of the Senator from North Carolina. posals being offered for our considera- agency or instr 2 weeks ago, at the National Governors' their just Powers from the Consent of the some a religious matter. This will give The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk tion. hereby declare Conference, the Committee on Executive Governed. those people a chance to show that what will call the roll. We have discussed here today, in par- of no effect. Management and Fiscal Affairs adopted Our society, our Constitution, and they really believe in is a separation of The assistant legislative clerk pro- ticular what compulsory public sector Mr. Preside the following resolution, which I shall supposedly every law and statute enacted church and state-not a separation of ceeded to call the roll. bargaining on all levels of Government statute is a go read in its entirety. It is headed "Public by Congress in the past 200 years is built church and people. Mr. McCLURE. Mr. President, I ask by Federal legislators would mean. restrained the 3190 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE March 6, 1975 union power in North Carolina. Yet it has working and value, and I ask unanimous In the instant case, plaintiffs request in- March 6, 1975 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD not led to continuous struggles with consent that the decision be printed in junctive and declaratory relief against the public employee disputes and conflict. the RECORD. statute on the grounds that it operates to ter into contracts with them. The Constitu- The State, as a matter of public policy, has There being no objection, the decision violate their rights of freedom of associ- tion does not mandate that anyone, either chosen not to enter into enforceable con And the statute has withstood challenges ation guaranteed by the First Amendment the government or private parties, be com- tracts with public employee organizations in the courts. was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, of the United States Constitution and of pelled to talk to or contract with an orga- That policy decision cannot be regarded In a September 1974 decision the U.S. as follows: equal protection and due process guaranteed nization. What Judge Craven wrote in Atkins, lightly, or as merely the result of anti-unior District Court for the middle district of [No. C-286-WS-72] by the Fourteenth Amendment. Jurisdiction supra, at 1077, is controlling and bears re- animus. The decision of whether to permit North Carolina held constitutional this IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE is premised upon 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 1343 peating: public employees to engage in collective bar North Carolina law which declares in- DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA, WINSTON- and 42 U.S.C. $ 1983. A three-judge court "We find nothing unconstitutional in G.S. gaining with the government involves fa valid any contracts between a sovereign SALEM DIVISION has been properly convened pursuant to 28 95-98. It simply voids contracts between greater interests than the mere right to as U.S.C. §§ 2281 and 2284. units of government within North Carolina sociation claimed by the plaintiffs here. Pro government and a union in that State. Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Unit of the Plaintiff Winston-Salem/Forsyth County and labor unions and expresses the public fessor Sylvester Petro in "Sovereignty and The court said, that- North Carolina Association of Educators, Unit of the North Carolina Association of policy of North Carolina to be against such Compulsory Public-Professor Bargaining," 10 To the extent that public employees gain an unincorported association, and Jac- Educators is an unincorporated labor asso- collective barganing contracts. There is noth- Wake Forest Law Review 25 (1974), ably and power through recognition and collective bar- queline A. Ballentine, individually and on ciation representing professional employees, ing in the United States Constitution which thoroughly discusses the case against the gaining, other interest groups with a right behalf of other similarly situated teachers including teachers and administrators. The entitles one to have a contract with another recognition of public employee labor to a voice in the running of the government in the Winston-Salem/Forsyth County individual plaintiff is a teacher in Forsyth who does not want it. It is but a step further nizations and bargaining with them. Even may be left out of vital political decisions. School System, Plaintiffs, v. A. Craig Phil- County and a member of the association. She to hold that the state may lawfully forbid in an article more sympathetic to plaintiffs Thus, the granting of collective bargain- lips, State Superintendent of Public In- wishes to represent- all teachers in the such contracts with its instrumentalities. position, Professor Summers discusses seri- ing rights to public employees involves im- struction; Frank Crane, Commissioner of Winston-Salem/Forsyth County School Sys- The solution, if there be one, from the view- ous problems which cannot be avoided if col- portant matters fundamental to our demo- Labor for the State of North Carolina; Rob- tem. The defendants are State officials, the point of the firemen, is that labor unions lective bargaining problems which cannot be cratic form of government. The setting of ert B. Morgan, Attorney General of the Winston-Salem/Forsyth County School may someday persuade state government of avoided if collective bargaining is permitted goals and making policy decisions are rights State of North Carolina; and John C. Kiger, Board, the Forsyth County Board of Com- the asserted value of collective bargaining See Summers, "Public Employee Bargaining inuring to each citizen. All citizens have the Omeda Brewer, Eunice Burge, Richard missioners, and the County of Forsyth. agreements, but this is a political matter and A Political Perspective," 83 Yale Law Journa right to associate in groups to advocate their Janeway, Mary Lauerman, William F. The discontinuation of a salary supple- does not yield to judicial solution. The right 1156 (1974) There the author views collec- special interests to the government. It is Maready, Alan R. Perry, Carol G. Thomp- ment plan in 1972 supplied the irritant to a collective bargaining agreement, so firm- tive bargaining by public employees as part something entirely different to grant any one son, As Members of the Winston-Salem/ which caused plaintiffs to bring this action. ly entrenched in American labor-manage- of the political decision-making process. As interest group special status and access to Forsyth County School Board, and the In 1967, the school officials proposed the plan ment relations, rests upon national legisla- such it cannot be fairly compared with col- Winston-Salem/Forsyth County School the decision-making process. whereby the teachers in the Winston-Salem/ tion and not upon the federal Constitution. lective bargaining in the private sector Board, and David W. Darr, Henry L. Crotts, Forsyth County school district would receive The State is within the powers reserved to it While he sees collective bargaining in the Simply put, the court made a very G. P. Swisher, Dr. W. L. Thompson, Jr., and a portion of a school tax as part of their to refuse to enter into such agreements and public sector as giving the public employees affirmative statement of the rights of all Leonard Warner as Members of the For- salary supplement. Since the supplement was so to declare by statute." a chance to give unity, clarity, and persua citizens and groups of citizens to have syth County Board of Commissioners, and tied to a county tax, it would increase along The other cases considering the problem sion in discussing their views with a govern equal access to their own Government. the County of Forsyth, Defendants with the tax base of the county. The school raised here have likewise rejected plaintiffs' mental body, he also notes that, at present, While the North Carolina law puts a Before Craven, Circuit Judge, Gordon, board approved the plan. In 1972, the County argument. Newport News F.F.A. Loc. 794 V. permitting public employee collective bar- Chief Judge, and Ward, District Judge. statutory prohibition on recognition and Commissioners terminated the plan when City of Newport News, Va., 339 F. Supp. 13 gaining might well over-shift the balance Argued July 12, 1974, decided Septem- they adopted the final budget for the county. (E.D. Va. 1972); Hanover Tp. Fed. of Teach. of power because of the inability, in some in- contract-making, it does not preclude ber 17, 1974. Plaintiffs admit that no one source can be L. 1954 V. Hanover Com. Sch. Corp., 457 F.2d stances, of present governmental structure representatives of employee associations William G. Pfefferkorn of Winston-Salem, blamed for the discontinuation of the plan. 456 (7th Cir. 1972). While the First Amend- to effectively deal with a collective bargain- from petitioning their government over North Carolina, for the plaintiff. They say that the determination of local ment may protect the right of plaintiffs to ing situation. Moreover, to the extent that conditions in the workplace. What it does Edwin M. Speas, Jr., Assistant Attorney school salaries results from input by the associate and advocate, not all of their as- the public employees gain power through preclude is government granting monop- General, North Carolina Department of Jus- State Board of Education and the local units sociational activities have the protection of recognition and collective bargaining, other oly status to a particular union, trading tice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for defendants composed of the school board and county that amendment. The State is not required interest groups with a right to a voice in away its own sovereignty, and depriving A. Craig Phillips, Frank Crane, and Robert commissioners. Plaintiffs suggest that one of to provide plaintiffs with a special forum in the running of the government may be left the reasons for the termination of the salary out of vital political decisions. Thus the individual workers of their precious lib- B. Morgan; William F. Womble, Jr., of Wom- order to advocate their views. It is under no erty to deal with their own government. ble, Carlyle, Sandridge & Rice, Winston- supplement was the discovery of the statute, duty to provide a "guarantee that a speech granting of collective bargaining rights to Salem, North Carolina, for Winston-Salem/ N.C.G.S. 95-98, by the governmental officials will persuade or that advocacy will be ef- public employees involves important matters A strict nonrecognition policy, such as Forsyth County School Board; and P. Eu- between 1967 and 1969. Plaintiffs claim that fective." Hanover Tp. Fed. of Teach. L. 1954 fundamental to our democratic form of gov- exists in North Carolina, would prevent gene Price, Jr., County Attorney, Winston- upon this discovery, the school officials be- V. Hanover Com. Sch. Corp., supra, at 461. ernment. The setting of goals and making any compromise of necessary government Salem, North Carolina, for Forsyth County came increasingly intransigent in their dis- Plaintiffs' reliance on Healy v. James, 408 policy decisions are rights inuring to each sovereignty. Board of Commissioners, and the County of cussions with the teachers' association. They U.E. 169, 92 S.Ct. 2338, 33 L.Ed.2d 266 (1972), citizen. All citizens have the right to associ Second, as the court found last Sep- Forsyth. would like to blame a drop in their mem- in support of the request for reconsideration ate in groups in order to advocate their spe- bership to their claimed growing ineffective- tember, it would keep the channels of OPINION OF THE COURT of Atkins is misplaced. Healy concerned a col- cial interests to the government. It is some- ness in discussions with the school officials redress open to all employees-not just Ward, District Judge: lege's denial of recognition to a student thing entirely different to grant any one after the purported discovery of N.C.G.S. 95- group. The Court held that the nonrecogni- interest group special status and access to to a monopoly bargaining organization. This case presents a renewed attack on 98. tion abridged the student group's First the decision-making process. As Professor Third, it would allow government ad- North Carolina General Statute 95-98 which In this case, there never was a signed con- Amendment rights. The college had denied Summers notes at 1193-94: ministrators to create and conduct re- provides that contracts between state gov- tract between the teachers' organization and the group a formal meeting place, and the "In the private sector the parties may sponsible, humane, and effective public ernmental units and public employee labor the school board. Defendants suggest that use of college bulletin boards and the col- agree at the bargaining table to expand the organizations shall be void.¹ Previously, in employee personnel policies-a responsi- plaintiffs lack standing because there is no lege newspaper. Significantly, it had granted subjects of bargaining, but a public em- Atkins v. City of Charlotte, 296 F. Supp. contract which is rendered void by N.C.G.S. those rights to other student groups. The ployee union and a public official do not have bility which, when subject to adversary 1068 (W.D.N.C. 1969), a three-judge court 95-98. We agree that the plantiffs never court noted that "the group's possible ability the same freedom to agree that certain de- collective bargaining, is less imaginative, upheld the constitutionality of that statute had a contract or agreement with the school. to exist outside the campus community does cisions should be removed from the ordinary and less progressive. while declaring related sections to be uncon- However, we read that fact as the basis of not ameliorate significantly the disabilities political processes and be decided by them The attention of government admin- stitutional.² their complaint. They say that the school imposed by the President's action." (408 U.S. in a special forum. The private employer's istrators would thereby be focused-as it refuses to enter into a contract with them, at 183, 33 LdEd.2d at 280). Thus the restric- prerogatives are his to share as he seet fit, N.C.G.S. 95-98 reads as follows: should be-on dealing effectively. with or even engage in meaningful discussion, be- tion in Healy, supra, directly affected the stu- but the citizen's right to participate in gov- "Contracts between units of government cause of the statute. Viewed in this light, dent group's right of advocacy and ability to ernmental decisions cannot be bargained the employees and their interests, rather and labor unions, trade unions or labor or- the question before this court is not moot ganizations concerning public employees de- organize in a situation where the college had away by any public official. than dealing with the union and its and plaintiffs have standing to litigate the clared to be illegal.-Any agreement, or con- granted those rights to other groups. In the "In legal terms the principal question in interests. issue. Among the most important considera- tract, between the governing authority of present case the statute we are concerned the private sector is what the mandatory Plaintiffs allege that the statute is un- any city, town, county, or other municipal- with does not differentiate between public tions, however, is the fact that nonrec- constitutional because of the detrimental employee labor associations, nor does it re- concerning whether a school could penalize ognition would prevent the abuses of ity, or between any agency, unit, or instru- effect it has on their ability to associate in a strict in any material way the ability to a teacher who merely believed that teachers mentality thereof, or between any agency, labor organization. They contend the statute human liberty which has been created by organize. should ge given the right to strike. It said instrumentality, or institution of the State renders nugatory their right to associate at 434: the National Labor Relations Act's "ex- of North Carolina, and any labor union, trade since it voids any contract obtained by the In Healy, supra, the college's action ma- clusive recognition" and compulsory union, or labor organization, as bargaining terially and discriminatorily affected the stu- "Whatever else may be said about the case, association. Thus, they say, it becomes fruit- dent group's right to speak and advocate. it dealt with the question whether a public unionism policies. agent for any public employees of such city, less for the organization to discuss matters Here the statute has no such effect. All that body is under a constitutional duty, apart The North Carolina experience seems town, county or other municipality, or agency with the school, and the individual teachers or instrumentality of government, is hereby it does is to render void contracts between from statute, to bargain collectively with the to be a good place to start. It shows that in turn become disenchanted with their or- declared to be against the public policy of the labor association and the State. As stated labor representative of its employees. There ganization. was no occasion to consider in that case, and the States can handle the problem on the State, illegal, unlawful, void and of no previously, the First Amendment does not Accepting those consequences as true, we their own without Federal intervention. I guarantee that an organization's advocacy the court did not consider, the problem of effect." cannot accept the premise that plaintiffs' commend this law to my colleagues as The statutes declared unconstitutional in alleged right of association requires that will be effective; it only protects the right to this case, that is, whether a public body may speak.3 interfere with its employees' freedoms to the way to go in the States which they Atkins, supra, were N.C.G.S. 95-97, which state governmental units negotiate and en- think and to speak-which from the begin- represent. prohibited fire fighting employees of a gov- ning of time have been recognized as wholly ernmental unit from becoming members of bargaining as one of its purposes, and In Aurora Ed. Ass'n E. v. Board of Ed., different from the freedom to associate and to Mr. President, the decision of the U.S. or from assisting a labor organization which N.C.G.S. 95-99, which provided a criminal Etc., Kane County, Ill., 490 F.2d 431 (7th seek to use the strength which comes from district court on the North Carolina was affiliated with a national or interna- penalty for violation of the related sections Cir. 1973), the court distinguished Hanover union in assembly and action. See Wyzanski, law, provides further insights into its tionl labor organization that had collective of the chapter. Tp. Fed. of Teach L. 1954 v. Hanover Com. "The Open Window and the Open Door," 35 Sch. Corp., supra, from the issue before it Cal.L.Rev. 336 (1947)." S3192 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE March 6, 1975 David W. Darr, Henry L. Crotts, G. P. economy, and the Arab boycott lists are practice of commerce as it has flourished in Swisher, Dr. W. L. Thompson, Jr., and now backed up with massive economic this country"; Leonard Warner as Members of the For- leverage. So it is an entirely new situa- Whereas the Export Administration Act of syth County Board of Commissioners, and tion, Mr. President, and I do not think 1969 declares "it is the policy of the United the County of Forsyth, Defendants States we can afford to silently acquiesce to to oppose restrictive trade prac- ORDER tices or boycotts fostered or imposed by for- these discriminatory tactics. For the reasons set forth in an Opinion of eign countries against other countries I was gratified by President Ford's friendly to the United States and the Court entered contemporaneously here- strong reaction to this situation last Whereas acquiescence, by individuals, in- with, It is ordered that the relief requested by week, and I commend him for it. But I stitutions, or nations, to such discrimi.iation the plaintiffs in the prayer for relief be and think we in the Senate also have a re- undermines international commerce and the the same hereby is denied, and the action is sponsibility to face this issue, and to put fundamental rights of every American citi- zen: Now, therefore, be it dismissed. the world on notice that the full force of Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate For the Court: this Government's influence will be used that- HIRAM H. WARD, to unter discriminatory demands. If (1) Discrimination in international çom- U.S. District Judge. accept these economic strong-arm merce against individuals or institutions on SEPTEMBER 17, 1974. tactics today, I predict we will face an religious, racial, or ethnic grounds must not The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under th uglier choice next month or next year- be tolerated, and all Americans are urged not previous order, the Senator from Perin- and the stakes wil be higher then. to cooperate in any way with such discrim- inatory practices. sylvania (Mr. SCHWEIKER) is nized The Senate can make two responses to (2) Every individual or institution ap- for not to exceed 15 minutes. blacklisting tactics, Mr. President: We proached to participate in any such discrim- can condemn these tactics uncondition- inatory practice shoud be required to make ally and urge individuals and institu- a full report of such action to the appro- SENATE RESOLUTION 100SUB- tions to resist them, and we can prepare priate agency of the United States Govern- MISSION OF A RESOLUTION RE- detailed legislative countermeasures. ment. which should make this information a LATING TO DISCRIMINATION IN The resolution we introduce today ac- matter of public record. INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE complishes the former objective, and I (3) Appropriate agencies of the United States Government should discourage such (Referred to the Committee on Com- hope the Senate moves promptly to con- discriminatory practices and review all forms merce.) sider legislation in this area. of Government support, subsidy, or assist- Mr. SCHWEIKER. Mr. President, on Today's resolution does not push us ance to American companies which acquiesce behalf of myself and Senator WILLIAMS, into any precipitous action in the Mid- in such discrimination. and Senators ALLEN, BAYH, BEALL, BENT- dle East, and it allows sufficient flexibil- (4) The United States Government should SEN, CASE, CLARK, CRANSTON, DOMENICI, ity so current diplomatic efforts are not examine its relationships with countries impeded. which practice such discrimination, and the FONG, GARN, PHILIP A. HART, HARTKE, President should advise the Congress as to HUMPHREY, LEAHY, MATHIAS, McGEE, Mc- But it also suggest very clearly cer- any justification for continuing any foreign GOVERN, MONDALE, Moss, MUSKIE, NEL- tain legislative approaches which might aid, sales of defense articles or services SON, PACKWOOD, PROXMIRE, RIBICOFF, be considered if these tactics continue. (whether for cash or by credit, guarantee, or ROTH, HUGH SCOTT, STAFFORD, STONE, First, individual Americans-and Ameri- any other means) or other assistance pro- TUNNEY, and WEICKER, I submit today a can institutions-must be encouraged to grams for the benefit of any country prac- sense of the Senate resolution con- say "no" to discriminatory demands. One ticing such discrimination. demning blacklisting in international way to accomplish this is to insure that SEC. 2. The Secretary of the Senate shall transmit a copy of this resolution to the trade. those who take discriminatory actions President of the United States. In recent weeks, it has become clear to obtain approval from the blacklisters that Arab investors are using their vast immediately forfeit all U.S. Government Mr. SCHWEIKER. Mr. President, I economic leverage to dictate the ethnic assistance from such agencies as the yield 5 minutes of my time to the dis- composition of international business in- Commerce Department, the Export-Im- tinguished Senator from Florida (Mr. stitutions. Two of Britain's most pres- port Bank and the Overseas Private In- STONE), who is one of the sponsors of tigious investment banking houses N M vestment Corporation. This would give my resolution. Rothschild & Sons and Co., were excluded fr bond issue at the requ Arab Foreign Bank and eign Trading, Contrac ment Co. Lazard Frer banking institution ass ard of Manhattan, wa $25 million bond issue a company funded by E Lebanon. And apparel U.S. companies have I the Arab boycott list, have even tried to ne off. The' standard apolo ing are that companie cannot be denied the 1 who they will do bu anyway, the Arabs h: boycott list for years. ] ourselves, Mr. Presider For additional copies and information write: not simply a business more. It is now an THE NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK COMMITTEE weapon, deployed to ( 8316 Arlington Boulevard composition of inter FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA 22030 firms. And while the Arabs taining boycott lists fc countries were never a ket-until the oil mone denly the Arab countr as the only flourishing M02, Mo3, M07, Mo8, Mll, M13, M14, K01, K02, Ko3 RIGHT TO WORK RIGHT 10 BORK NEWS From the NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK COMMITTEE 8316 Arlington Boulevard Fairfax, Virginia 22030 TELEPHONE: 573-8550-AREA CODE 703 Hold for 3:00 pm Release, Tuesday, March 25, 1975 Contact: Hugh C. Newton Herb Berkowitz Fundamental Conflict of Interest? BIG LABOR CONTRIBUTES HALF MILLION TO 33 MEMBERS OF HOUSE LABOR COMMITTEE Washington, D.C., March 25 -- Members of the House Education and Labor Committee are indebted to union officials to the tune of nearly half a million dollars in "reported" contributions alone, the National Right to Work Committee revealed here today. The announcement by Reed Larson, executive vice president, came at a National Press Club news conference. " The totals do not include the additional hundreds of thousands of dollars which union organizers routinely provide to candidates in cash- equivalent manpower and services," Larson said. "The cost of these 'in-kind' contributions is believed to be in the range of ten times the actual cash contributions. Cash is only the tip of the iceberg." " Under the circumstances, Larson said, "there is no way this committee, as a whole, can objectively sit in judgment of legislation which would grant additional powers and privileges to the men who gave them all that money. "While these contributions presumably were 'legal,' we need to ask ourselves whether Congressmen can judge legislation fairly if that legis- lation involves special interest groups which have provided MAJOR financial help to their campaigns. Or do we have a fundamental legislative conflict of interest here?" (MORE) (2) GROWING CONTROVERSY Larson said the question is not academic, since the Education and Labor Committee currently is at the center of a growing controversy over legisla- tion which would put the federal government in the business of organizing public sector unions, regulating labor relations policies of the states and their political subdivisions, and promoting compulsory unionism at all lev- els of government. He released results of a new nationwide public opinion study showing that 83 percent of the public, including 77 percent of all union members, oppose compulsory unionism in government. PARALLEL SITUATION Only a few weeks ago the WASHINGTON POST and other papers reported that the "trucking lobby" contributed some $134,000 to the 1974 election cam- paigns of 126 House candidates and 10 Senators. The sum included $16,500 in last minute gifts to 14 members of a key House transportation sub- committee. The largest single contribution was $3,000. Following this, Congress passed a controversial highway bill allowing truckers to operate larger, heavier trucks on the Interstate highway system. Expressing outrage, many media opinion leaders accused the trucking lobby of buying the bigger-trucks bill. Big Labor's "reported" contributions to members of the key labor rela- tions subcommittee were six times greater than the trucking lobby's gifts to transportation subcommittee members. According to the National Committee's review of campaign funding reports filed with the Clerk of the House, 33 of the 39 members of the labor committee received union contributions totaling $429,632. The 14 members with the largest contributions received $328,047 alone -- with one Congressman receiving $36,900 from Big Labor. The eight members of the key subcommittee on labor, chaired by Rep. Frank Thompson, D-N.J., ($26,300), received a total of $96,300, and the 17 committee members who are on record in favor of legislation authorizing compulsory (MORE) (3) unionism in government received contributions totaling $204,160. Nineteen members of the committee received contributions of more than $10,000 from union officials, and 22 or more committee members received at least 10 percent of their total reported campaign funds from Big Labor. Larson noted that last year's so-called campaign "reform" law supposedly improved disclosure procedures, but that it "neither provides for disclosure of 'in-kind' contributions, nor guarantees the public's right to know. "Without the public's right to know, even full disclosure would be meaningless." ORC SURVEY RESULTS On the matter of public sector labor legislation, Larson announced new survey findings by Opinion Research Corporation, Princeton, N.J., showing that an overwhelming majority of Americans oppose compulsory unionism in government. In addition to the 83 percent who said they believe a federal, state or local government employee should be able to "work for the government whether or not he belongs to a union," the ORC study showed that: By a margin of more than seven-to-one (79 percent versus 11 percent) Americans feel Congress should NOT "pass a law which would allow agreements requiring employees to join or pay dues to a union in order to work for the federal government. " By a margin of nearly eight -to-one (79 percent versus 10 percent) Americans feel Congress should NOT "pass a law which would allow agreements requiring employees to join or pay dues to a union in order to work for state, county and municipal governments." By a margin of nearly eight-to-one (78 percent versus 10 percent) Americans feel their state legislatures should NOT pass laws which would legalize compulsory government unionism. (MORE) (4) The findings were based on interviews with a scientifically construc- ted sampling of 2,038 citizens conducted in January of this year. Currently, 34 states guarantee public employees the right to either support of refrain from supporting unions. Only a dozen states now permit compulsory unionism. Federal employees are guaranteed freedom of choice by presidential executive orders dating back to John F. Kennedy, as are postal service employees, by a federal law. #### #5 1975 OPINION RESEARCH CORPORATION "CARAVAN SURVEY" COMPULSORY UNIONISM IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR Summary of Findings Question: Which of these arrangements do you favor for Federal, state, and local government employees: 1) A person can work for the government whether or not he belongs to a union; 2) A person can go to work for the government if he doesn't already belong to a union, but has to join after he is hired to hold his job; 3) A person can get a job with the government only if he already belongs to a union; 4) No Opinion. Total North- North- Union Repub- Demo- Inde- U.S. Public East Central South West Members lican crat pendent 1. 83% 78% 79% 88% 87% 77% 85% 81% 87% 2. 10% 13% 12% 5% 7% 17% 7% 11% 9% 3. 1% 2% 1% 2% - - 2% 2% 2% 4. 6% 7% .8% 5% 6% 4% 6% 6% 4% Question: Should the U.S. Congress pass a law which would allow agreements requiring employees to join or pay dues to a union in order to work for the Federal government? Yes 11% 14% 11% 9% 9% 19% 11% 13% 9% No 79% 74% 78% 82% 82% 71% 78% 77% 84% No Opinion 10% 12% 11% 9% 9% 10% 11% 10% 7% Question: Should the U.S. Congress pass a law which would allow agreements requiring employees to join or pay dues to a union in order to work for state, county, and municipal governments? Yes 10% 12% 12% 6% 9% 19% 10% 10% 9% No 79% 77% 77% 82% 82% 73% 78% 79% 84% No Opinion 11% 11% 11% 12% 9% 8% 12% 11% 7% Question: Should your state legislature pass a law which would allow agreements requiring employees to join or pay dues to a union in order to work for the state. county, and municipal governments? Yes 10% 14% 12% 7% 9% 18% 10% 11% 9% No 78% 74% 78% 81% 80% 74% 78% 78% 83% No Opinion 12% 12% 10% 12% 11% 8% 12% 11% 8% Note: Copies of the full Opinion Research Corporation survey and House Labor Committee financing report are available on request. REPORTED UNION CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 94TH CONGRESS Source: Clerk of the House *Michael Blouin (D-Iowa) $36,900 4 *Paul Simon (D-Ill.) $34,400 4 John Dent (D-Pa.) $29,275 2,3,4 *Robert Cornell (D-Wis.) $29,175 4 Frank Thompson (D-N.J.) $26,300 2,3,4 *Ron Mottl (D-Ohio) $23,830 4 Lloyd Meeds (D-Wash.) $22,550 2,4 Peter Peyser (R-N.Y.) $21,555 4 William Clay (D-Mo.) $18,850 2,3,4 John Brademas (D-Ind.) $18,700 2,4 *Ted Risenhoover (D-Ok.) $18,600 4 William Lehman (D-Fla.) $18,550 5 *Leo Zeferetti (D-N.Y.) $15,062 4 James O'Hara (D-Mich.) $14,300 2,4 Phillip Burton (D-Cal.) $13,050 2,4 Dominick Daniels (D-N.J.) $12,550 2,3,4 *George Miller (D-Cal.) $12,000 4 *Tim Hall (D-Ill.) $11,150 1,4 William Ford (D-Mich.) $10,650 2,3,5 Mario Biaggi (D-N.Y.) 7,400 2,3,4 Joseph Gaydos (D-Pa.) $ 6,450 2,4 Ike Andrews (D-N.C.) $ 6,250 *Edward Beard (D-R.I.) 5,350 1,4 Patsy Mink (D-Hawaii) 3,560 2 Ronald Sarasin (R-Conn.) $ 2,350 Shirley Chisholm (D-N.Y.) $ 2,125 2,3,4 Al Quie (R-Minn.) $ 2,000 Alphonzo Bell (R-Cal.) 1,900 Marvin Esch (R-Minn.) $ 1,900 Augustus Hawkins (D-Cal.) $ 1,400 2 John Ashbrook (R-Ohio) $ 500 *Bill Goodling (R-Pa.) $ 500 Carl Perkins (D-Ky.) $ 500 2,3,4 John Buchanan (R-Ala.) None John Erlenborn (R-Ill.) None Edwin Eshelman (R-Pa.) None *James Jeffords (R-Vt.) None *Larry Pressler (R-S.D.) None *Virginia Smith (R-Neb.) None TOTAL $429,632 * First term Congressman elected in 1974. 1 Public statements indicate support of compulsory unionism in public sector. 2 Voted in 1970 against the Right to Work provision in the Postal Reorganization Act. 3 Has sponsored legislation which would compel federal, U.S. postal service, or state, county and local government em- ployees to support unions in order to work for their own government. 4 Received ten percent or more of total campaign contributions from union sources. 5 Total campaign contributions not available on March 1, 1975. COMPULSORY UNIONISM FOR GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES LEGISLATIVE FACT SHEET THESE BILLS, NOW PENDING IN CONGRESS, WOULD FORCE PUBLIC SECTOR EMPLOYEES TO PAY UNION OFFICIALS FOR UNWANTED "REPRESENTATION AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT WITH THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT. * H.R. 77, by labor relations subcommittee chairman Rep. Frank Thompson, D-N.J., would subject the nation's 11.5 million state, county and local government workers to the provisions of the compulsory unionism-promoting National Labor Relations Act -- which specifically authorizes agreements "requiring member- ship in a labor organization as a condition of employment. A similar proposal, H.R. 1488 by Rep. Edward Roybal, D-Cal., would put the federal government directly into the business of organ- izing public sector unions by 1) forcing public administrators to recognize and bargain with public sector unions; 2) force state, county and local governments to abide by decisions of a federal Public Employment Relations Board; 3) grant monopoly status to unions, and 4) require public employees to support monopoly unions even though they may feel the union's officials are not acting in their, or the public, interest. This bill also is similar to H.R. 8677 by Rep. William Clay, D-Mo., which was introduced in the 93rd Congress and is expected to be reintroduced in the near future. No hearings are scheduled at this time on either H.R. 77 or H.R. 1488. Both bills have been referred to the House Education and Labor Committee. **** * H.R. 56 by Rep. Charles Wilson, D-Cal., would repeal the Right to Work provision of the 1970 Postal Reorganization Act. Hearings on H.R. 56 were recently concluded by Congressman Wilson's subcommittee on postal facilities, mail and labor management. * H.R. 13 by Rep. Robert Nix, D-Pa.; H.R. 79 by Rep. Edwin Forsythe, D-N.J., Rep. Robert Roe, D-N.J., and Rep. Millicent Fenwick, R-N.J.; and H.R. 1837 by Rep. William Ford, D-Mich., would authorize the forced unionization of the federal government's more than two million non-postal, non-military employees. These bills have been referred to the House Post Office-Civil Service Committee chaired by Rep. David Henderson, D-N.C. No hearings have been scheduled yet. Congressman Wilson's subcommittee is a part of this committee. #### (OVER) Truckers Gave Candidates $75,000 By George Lardner Jr. gest single contribution, $3,- Washington Post Staff Writer 000. (OAEK) The trucking lobby made The contributions were dis- MIJSOU,S last-minute campaign contri- closed yesterday in the year- butions of almost $75,000 to end report of the Truck Oper- House members last fall dur- ators Nonpartisan Committee (TON), the political arm of the PELATOS COMMITTEE custing pl BGD DSATG Heugerson' D-M'C' ИО ing a successful drive to put American Trucking Associa- heavier trucks on the nation's tions, Inc. interstate highways. President Ford signed the The donations included $16,- highway bill containing the 500 for 14 members of the key heavier trucking provision House subcommittee on trans- into law this month. It permits portation, which played an im- rigs with gross weights up to реле pessu acpeaning AGE Condresswer PTITE реде 50 fue нолее boef portant role in adoption of the 80,000 pounds on the inter- measure. The House had re- state system in contrast to the jected it earlier in the year. old maximum of 73,280 The subcommittee chair- pounds. man, the late Rep. John C. The House had rejected a Kluczynski (D-III.), got the big- truck size and weight increase THE WASHINGTON POST молта fue forceg прто sug H'K' J831 koperf January 31, 1975 TO SI bsif of FUTB committee WOLS fpsu WITTTON 13 H'B' J3 ph keb. ou board OU H'K' 20 MOLO .gos vd 02 svsd Branc CO MOIX rspor COMMITTEE PIII? 915 Boff 1488' TO fue UGSL no To: john vickerman white house John, wanted to get this down to you in a rush -before your "vacation." I'll follow with a metter and a few more interesting items. we look forward to arranging a briefing with members of the domestic council. thanks for calling From Hugh Newton National Right To Work Committee A COALITION OF EMPLOYEES AND EMPLOYERS HEADQUARTERS AT THE NATION'S CAPITAL FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hugh C. Newton or Herb B. Berkowitz (703) 573-8555 IF $134,000 WILL HELP PASS A HIGHWAY BILL WHAT WILL HALF-A-MILLION ACCOMPLISH? WHAT -- News Conference WHEN -- Tuesday, March 25, 1975, 3:00 p.m. WHERE -- National Press Club, Capitol & Executive Rooms WHO -- National Right to Work Committee -- Reed Larson, Executive Vice President; Andrew Hare, Legislative Director WHY -- Full disclosure is meaningless unless the public's right to know is fulfilled. National Committee will release total union contributions to 33 members of the House Education and Labor Committee, names of unions and how much they contributed to each member and position of Congressmen on special interest public employee legislation supported by donors. Committee will also release new and comprehensive public opinion attitude study on compulsory unionism in the public sector. At a news conference in Washington, Tuesday, March 25, the National Right to Work Committee will reveal that 33 members of the House Education and Labor Committee received $429,632 in campaign contributions from Big Labor and will point out that most of these members support legislation establishing public sector compulsory unionism -- urged by the union officials who approved contributions to help elect them And compare all this with results of new public opinion poll that shows 83% of the American public opposes compulsory union WASHINGTON D.C. HEADQUARTERS: 8316 ARLINGTON BOULEVARD (U.S. 50) SUITE 600 FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA 22030 TEL. (703) 573-8550 "Americans must have the right but not be compelled to join labor unions" membership for public employees -- a provision in all public employee bargaining legislation supported by these members and Big Labor. It is interesting to note that a number of major national news stories in February were devoted to the $134,000 contributed to 126 House candidates by the trucking lobby and the $16,500 in last minute contributions to 14 key members of the House subcommittee on transportation One highlight of the material to be revealed at the RTW news conference shows that Big Labor contributed hundreds of thousands to 14 members of the Labor and Education Committee and of these 14, all but one are on record as in favor of one of the bills legalizing compulsory unionism for public employees, voted for forced membership in 1970 for postal workers or received 10% or more of their total campaign contributions from unions in favor of such legislation. Hugh C. Newton Director of Public Relations Truckers Gave Candidates $75,000 By George Lardner Jr. gest single contribution, $3,- 1 Washington Post Staff Writer 000. k The trucking lobby made The contributions were dis- 0 last-minute campaign contri- closed yesterday in the year- p butions of almost $75,000 to end report of the Truck Oper- t House members last fall dur- ators Nonpartisan Committee (TON), the political arm of the ing a successful drive to put i American Trucking Associa- S heavier trucks on the nation's tions, Inc. ( interstate highways. President Ford signed the e The donations included $16,- highway bill containing the f 500 for 14 members of the key heavier trucking provision in House subcommittee on trans- into law this month. It permits I portation, which played an im- rigs with gross weights up to portant role in adoption of the 80,000 pounds on the inter- a measure. The House had re- state system in contrast to the t jected it earlier in the year. old maximum of 73,280 ( The subcommittee chair- pounds. a man, the late Rep. John C. The House had rejected a I Kluczynski (D-III.), got the big- truck size and weight increase to THE WASHINGTON POST January 31, 1975 RIGHT TO WORK NEWS From the NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK COMMITTEE 8316 Arlington Boulevard Fairfax, Virginia 22030 TELEPHONE: 573-8550-AREA CODE 703 Hold for 3:00 pm Release, Tuesday, March 25, 1975 Contact: Hugh C. Newton Herb Berkowitz Fundamental Conflict of Interest? BIG LABOR CONTRIBUTES HALF MILLION TO 33 MEMBERS OF HOUSE LABOR COMMITTEE Washington, D.C., March 25 -- Members of the House Education and Labor Committee are indebted to union officials to the tune of nearly half a million dollars in "reported" contributions alone, the National Right to Work Committee revealed here today. The announcement by Reed Larson, executive vice president, came at a National Press Club news conference. If The totals do not include the additional hundreds of thousands of dollars which union organizers routinely provide to candidates in cash- equivalent manpower and services," Larson said. "The cost of these 'in-kind' contributions is believed to be in the range of ten times the actual cash contributions. Cash is only the tip of the iceberg." " Under the circumstances," Larson said, "there is no way this committee, as a whole, can objectively sit in judgment of legislation which would grant additional powers and privileges to the men who gave them all that money. "While these contributions presumably were 'legal,' we need to ask ourselves whether Congressmen can judge legislation fairly if that legis- lation involves special interest groups which have provided MAJOR financial help to their campaigns. Or do we have a fundamental legislative conflict of interest here?" (MORE) (2) GROWING CONTROVERSY Larson said the question is not academic, since the Education and Labor Committee currently is at the center of a growing controversy over legisla- tion which would put the federal government in the business of organizing public sector unions, regulating labor relations policies of the states and their political subdivisions, and promoting compulsory unionism at all lev- els of government. He released results of a new nationwide public opinion study showing that 83 percent of the public, including 77 percent of all union members, oppose compulsory unionism in government. PARALLEL SITUATION Only a few weeks ago the WASHINGTON POST and other papers reported that the "trucking lobby" contributed some $134,000 to the 1974 election cam- paigns of 126 House candidates and 10 Senators. The sum included $16,500 in last minute gifts to 14 members of a key House transportation sub- committee. The largest single contribution was $3,000. Following this, Congress passed a controversial highway bill allowing truckers to operate larger, heavier trucks on the Interstate highway system. Expressing outrage, many media opinion leaders accused the trucking lobby of buying the bigger-trucks bill. Big Labor's "reported" contributions to members of the key labor rela- tions subcommittee were six times greater than the trucking lobby's gifts to transportation subcommittee members. According to the National Committee's review of campaign funding reports filed with the Clerk of the House, 33 of the 39 members of the labor committee received union contributions totaling $429,632. The 14 members with the largest contributions received $328,047 alone -- with one Congressman receiving $36,900 from Big Labor. The eight members of the key subcommittee on labor, chaired by Rep. Frank Thompson, D-N.J., ($26,300), received a total of $96,300, and the 17 committee members who are on record in favor of legislation authorizing compulsory (MORE) (3) unionism in government received contributions totaling $204,160. Nineteen members of the committee received contributions of more than $10,000 from union officials, and 22 or more committee members received at least 10 percent of their total reported campaign funds from Big Labor. Larson noted that last year's so-called campaign "reform" law supposedly improved disclosure procedures, but that it "neither provides for disclosure of 'in-kind' contributions, nor guarantees the public's right to know. "Without the public's right to know, even full disclosure would be meaningless.' ORC SURVEY RESULTS On the matter of public sector labor legislation, Larson announced new survey findings by Opinion Research Corporation, Princeton, N.J., showing that an overwhelming majority of Americans oppose compulsory unionism in government. In addition to the 83 percent who said they believe a federal, state or local government employee should be able to "work for the government whether or not he belongs to a union," the ORC study showed that: By a margin of more than seven-to-one (79 percent versus 11 percent) Americans feel Congress should NOT "pass a law which would allow agreements requiring employees to join or pay dues to a union in order to work for the federal government." By a margin of nearly eight -to-one (79 percent versus 10 percent) Americans feel Congress should NOT "pass a law which would allow agreements requiring employees to join or pay dues to a union in order to work for state, county and municipal governments." By a margin of nearly eight-to-one (78 percent versus 10 percent) Americans feel their state legislatures should NOT pass laws which would legalize compulsory government unionism. (MORE) (4) The findings were based on interviews with a scientifically construc- ted sampling of 038 citizens conducted in January of this year. Currently, 34 states guarantee public employees the right to either support of refrain from supporting unions. Only a dozen states now permit compulsory unionism. Federal employees are guaranteed freedom of choice by presidential executive orders dating back to John F. Kennedy, as are postal service employees, by a federal law. #### #5 1975 OPINION RESEARCH CORPORATION "CARAVAN SURVEY" COMPULSORY UNIONISM IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR Summary of Findings Question: Which of these arrangements do you favor for Federal, state, and local government employees: 1) A person can work for the government whether or not he belongs to a union; 2) A person can go to work for the government if he doesn't already belong to a union, but has to join after he is hired to hold his job; 3) A person can get a job with the government only if he already belongs. to a union; 4) No Opinion. Total North- North- Union Repub- Demo- Inde- I U.S. Public East Central South West Members lican crat pendent 1. 83% 78% 79% 88% 87% 77% 85% 81% 87% 2. 10% 13% 12% 5% 7% 17% 7% 11% 9% 3. 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 4. 6% 7% 8% 5% 6% 4% 6% 6%, 4% Question: Should the U.S. Congress pass a law which would allow agreements requiring employees to join or pay dues to a union in order to work for the Federal government? Yes 11% 14% 11% 9% 9% 19% 11% 13% 9% No 79% 74% 78% 82% 82% 71% 78% 77% 84% No Opinion 10% 12% 11% 9% 9% 10% 11% 10% 7% Question: Should the U.S. Congress pass a law which would allow agreements requiring employees to join or pay dues to a union in order to work for state, county, and municipal governments? Yes 10% 12% 12% 6% 9% 19% 10% 10% 9% No 79% 77% 77% 82% 82% 73% 78% 79% 84% No Opinion 11% 11% 11% 12% 9% 8% 12% 11% 7% Question: Should your state legislature pass a law which would allow agreements requiring employees to join or pay dues to a union in order to work for the state, county, and municipal governments? Yes 10% 14% 12% 7% 9% 18% 10% 11% 9% No 78% 74% 78% 81% 80% 74% 78% 78% 83% No Opinion 12% 12% 10% 12% 11% 8% 12% 11% 8% Note: Copies of the full Opinion Research Corporation survey and House Labor Committee financing report are available on request. REPORTED UNION CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 94TH CONGRESS Source: Clerk of the House *Michael Blouin (D-Iowa) $36,900 4 *Paul Simon (D-Ill.) $34,400 4 John 'Dent (D-Pa.) $29,275 2,3,4 *Robert Cornell (D-Wis.) $29,175 4 Frank Thompson (D-N.J.) $26,300 2,3,4 *Ron Mottl (D-Ohio) $23,830 4 Lloyd Meeds (D-Wash.) $22,550 2,4 Peter Peyser (R-N.Y.) $21,555 4 William Clay (D-Mo.) $18,850 2,3,4 John Brademas (D-Ind.) $18,700 2,4 *Ted Risenhoover (D-Ok.) $18,600 4 William Lehman (D-Fla.) $18,550 5 *Leo Zeferetti (D-N.Y.) $15,062 4 James O'Hara (D-Mich.) $14,300 2,4 Phillip Burton (D-Cal.) $13,050 2,4 Dominick Daniels (D-N.J.) $12,550 2,3,4 *George Miller (D-Cal.) $12,000 4 *Tim Hall (D-Ill.) $11,150 1,4 William Ford (D-Mich.) $10,650 2,3,5 Mario Biaggi (D-N.Y.) $ 7,400 2,3,4 Joseph Gaydos (D-Pa.) $.6,450 2,4 Ike Andrews (D-N.C.) $ 6,250 *Edward Beard' (D-R.I.) $ 5,350 1,4 Patsy Mink (D-Hawaii) $ 3,560 2 Ronald Sarasin (R-Conn.) $ 2,350 Shirley Chisholm (D-N.Y.) $ 2,125 2,3,4 Al Quie (R-Minn.) $ 2,000 Alphonzo Bell (R-Cal.) $ 1,900 Marvin Esch (R-Minn.) $ 1,900 Augustus Hawkins (D-Cal.) $ 1,400 2 John Ashbrook (R-Ohio) $ 500 *Bill Goodling (R-Pa.) $ 500 Carl Perkins (D-Ky.) $ 500 2,3,4 John Buchanan (R-Ala.) None John Erlenborn (R-Ill.) None Edwin Eshelman (R-Pa.) None *James Jeffords (R-Vt.) None *Larry Pressler (R-S.D.) None *Virginia Smith (R-Neb.) None TOTAL $429,632 * First term Congressman elected in 1974. 1 Public statements indicate support of compulsory unionism in public sector. 2 Voted in 1970 against the Right to Work provision in the Postal Reorganization Act. 3 Has sponsored legislation which would compel federal, U.S. postal service, or state, county and local government em- ployees to support unions in order to work for their own government. 4 Received ten percent or more of total campaign contributions from union sources. 5 Total campaign contributions not available on March 1, 1975. COMPULSORY UNIONISM FOR GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES LEGISLATIVE FACT SHEET THESE BILLS, NOW PENDING IN CONGRESS, WOULD FORCE PUBLIC SECTOR EMPLOYEES TO PAY UNION OFFICIALS FOR UNWANTED "REPRESENTATION" AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT WITH THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT. * H.R. 77, by labor relations subcommittee chairman Rep. Frank Thompson, D-N.J., would subject the nation's 11.5 million state, county and local government workers to the provisions of the compulsory unionism-promoting National Labor Relations Act -- which specifically authorizes agreements "requiring member- ship in a labor organization as a condition of employment. A similar proposal, H.R. 1488 by Rep. Edward Roybal, D-Cal., would put the federal government directly into the business of organ- izing public sector unions by 1) forcing public administrators to recognize and bargain with public sector unions; 2) force state, county and local governments to abide by decisions of a federal Public Employment Relations Board; 3) grant monopoly status to unions, and 4) require public employees to support monopoly unions even though they may feel the union's officials are not acting in their, or the public, interest. This bill also is similar to H.R. 8677 by Rep. William Clay, D-Mo., which was introduced in the 93rd Congress and is expected to be reintroduced in the near future. No hearings are scheduled at this time on either H.R. 77 or H.R. 1488. Both bills have been referred to the House Education and Labor Committee. **** * H.R. 56 by Rep. Charles Wilson, D-Cal., would repeal the Right to Work provision of the 1970 Postal Reorganization Act. Hearings on H.R. 56 were recently concluded by Congressman Wilson's subcommittee on postal facilities, mail and labor management. **** * H.R. 13 by Rep. Robert Nix, D-Pa.; H.R. 79 by Rep. Edwin Forsythe, D-N.J., Rep. Robert Roe, D-N.J., and Rep. Millicent Fenwick, R-N.J.; and H.R. 1837 by Rep. William Ford, D-Mich., would authorize the forced unionization of the federal government's more than two million non-postal, non-military employees. These bills have been referred to the House Post Office-Civil Service Committee chaired by Rep. David Henderson, D-N.C. No hearings have been scheduled yet. Congressman Wilson's subcommittee is a part of this committee. ####

nara / coll_grf-0166 / doc

National Right to Work Committee (1)

ID: 1506595
Type: document

Citation Image

Metadata

id	1506595
sourceUrl	https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1506595
contentType	document
collections	John C. Vickerman Files (Ford Administration) John Vickerman's Meetings and Briefings Files
subjects	White House briefings Civil service Right to labor Labor unions
iiifBase	https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0166/645344/1506595.pdf
thumbnailUrl	https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0166/645344/1506595.pdf
largeImageUrl	https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0166/645344/1506595.pdf
imageCount	1
hasImages	yes
source	import

Additional Source Fields

url	https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1506595
naId	1506595
coverageEndDate	logicalDate 1975-10-31 month 10 year 1975
coverageStartDate	logicalDate 1975-01-01 month 1 year 1975
languages	English
levelOfDescription	fileUnit
recordType	description
ocrSource	nara-archive

Pages

Page 1 OCR

Survos folio item chat

Ask the Scholar

Scholar Source Context