Memorandum from Harold Enarson to John R. Steelman

FILED BY Jrs. fill DR. STEELMA April 17, 1952 JUL 2 9 1952 Memorandum to Dr. Steelman From: Harold L. Enarson Subject: Needed Goldfish Bowl for Handling Appeals for Price Increases The Steelworkers' petition for a wage increase has been a matter of great public attention and concern for over four months. This is because their petition took the form of a labor dispute and was therefore the subject of open public hearings. At every stage of the process, the union's appeal for a wage increase was the object of intense public attention and discussion. Exactly the reverse has happened on the price side. The steel companies request for a price increase has never even been formalized in writing in a public document. The appeal for price increases has never been considered in open, public hearings. Discussions with the steel companies on price have been in the nature of private negotiations. Not until yesterday--four months after the steel companies publicly announced that they would insist on price increases equivalent to any wage increases they might grant-were the essential facts on prices and profits set out publicly for all to see. Even then, Arnall's story was disclosed before a Senate Committee, and the full transcript will be seen by very few people. This points to a very serious defect in the organization and operation of the Economic Stabilization Agency--a defect made apparent in the steel case. If the labor union were to reject the wage rules applied to it by the WSB, the public would know it instantly. The issue would be clear. Can a union in effect strike against the Government? The answer is that it cannot. This is what Feinsinger has in mind when he asserts that labor's participation in the WSB amounts to a virtual no-strike pledge. But if a company (or an industry) rejects the rules applied to 10 by the OPS, it can easily confuse the public and make it appear that it is resisting a wage