of steamship terminal operation. The steamship lines with whom we contract at this port operate invariably from terminals owned by or served by one of the railroads serving the port, and our duties in the various elements of terminal operation include the sorting, segregating, coopering, and watching of cargo, and at times the loading of water-borne freight to railroad cars or the discharging of freight from railroad cars for water-borne shipment.

We are employed by steamship companies, or by the owners of the cargoes who charter the vessels, and our charges are at times divided between the vessel owners and other interests who employ us to perform various services in the terminals "beyond ship's tackle." This may, on occasion, include some service for the railroad involved. We are in most cases separate and independent business entities, and the proposed provision in the law exempting persons holding themselves out directly to the public as a common carrier by water, etc., would not exempt us from its application.

Any attempt by us to segregate the wages and time of such of our employees as might become involved in some incidental service subjecting us to the requirements of the proposed bills would be so cumbersome as to be impracticable. Our employees are to a very large extent members of the various locals of the International Longshoremen's Association and are paid the wages provided for in our agreements with those locals. The work is performed by employees traditionally employed on a casual basis. The men consider themselves as free agents as to employers and shift from one contracting stevedore to another at will. They are under the provisions of the Federal and State social-security and unemployment laws.

It is the apprehension of the members of our industry that, if these bills are enacted in their present form, we will be subject to contradictory rulings as to jurisdiction between the Railroad Retirement Board and the Federal and State Social Security Boards, and become involved in litigation with our employees over the question of jurisdiction, making for chaos in our established labor relations.

The operation of these bills could result in discrimination against the members of this industry in that water carriers might be exempt, their employees remaining under the Federal and State social-security laws, while we, as independent contractors, would be subjected to the Railroad Retirement Act. This, carried to its logical conclusion, would result in all steamship companies employing their stevedoring personnel directly, eliminating us as contractors.

We are informed that the proponents of these bills have indicated that it is not their intention to extend the coverage of these bills to the maritime industries. If this be true, then the bills should be written to specifically include those extensions of coverage intended.

We, therefore, ask that these bills be so written or amended that contract stevedoring and steamship freight terminal services conducted by contract stevedores be specifically and clearly exempt from their provisions.

STATEMENT OF STEVENSON MASSON, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL COUNSEL, STEAMSHIP TRADE ASS CIATION OF BALTIMORE, INC.

This association is composed of steamship agents, the contracting stevedores, and other persons and firms, employing water-front labor in operating ships, loading and discharging ships and servicing ships in Baltimore Harbor, Baltimore, Md. We believe that this bill, S. 293, as presently drawn, is too broad in its coverage and will permit the administrator, the Chairman of the Railroad Retirement Board, to interpret it so as to include employers such as our members described above and their employees.

Baltimore is an important port, ranking second or third in the United States. There are four railroad terminals and several private terminals. The railroad terminals are composed of groups of piers with double tracks down the center of the pier and in some cases with tracks down an apron alongside the pier. Some piers are single and others double deck. These piers accommodate approximately 50 ships.

The contracting stevedore is under contract with the steamship owner or agent to load and/or discharge its ships.

The contracting stevedore in this port employs labor from the membership of the International Longshoremen's Association. A closed-shop agreement has been in effect for some 30 years. This labor is paid a higher scale of wages than

The

the labor employed by the railroads for loading and discharging cars. labor from the International Longshoremen's Association are not employed by the railroads because of the higher wage scale and the additional fact that the railroad labor jealously regard the loading and unloading of freight into and/or from cars as their prerogative.

When cargo arrives prior to the arrival of the ship into which it is to be loaded, the railroad at whose pier the ship will berth unloads the cargo onto the pier, using its own labor. After the ship starts loading, the railroad continues unloading cargo from cars unless there is no space, or no available railroad labor, or the operation will interfere with the contracting stevedore, or where the contracting stevedore can make a quicker operation by taking the cargo direct from the cars into the ship. In such cases the railroad asks the contracting stevedore to unload the cars. This only applies to cargo which arrives at the railroad where the ship is berthed. Cargo arriving at another railroad is loaded by that railroad with its own labor into lighter or on car float.

The railroad makes the request to the contracting stevedore to permit the movement of the cargo across the pier uninterruptedly and to prevent congestion on the pier which would retard the unloading and/or loading of the ship. None of the piers are sufficient in area or size to permit all the cargo for a ship to be laid out thereon either in a loading or discharging operation. Therefore the railroad exercises a cooperative discretion in asking the contracting stevedore to unload such cars, the contents of which are needed by the ship and which the railroad is unable to unload.

In the case of a discharging ship the contracting stevedore will be able to land. the ship's cargo on the pier more rapidly than the railroad labor can take it away, and if there are no orders from the shippers to load cars for movement the cargo must be stowed on the pier awaiting such orders. Consequently if the railroad refuses to use the services of the contracting stevedore unloading the ship in moving the cargo directly from the ship to cars, congestion will result and the pier loses its utility. The railroad does not call on the contracting stevedore for the purpose of contracting out the work but solely for the purpose of more efficiently using the terminal pier space, for the handling of cargo to and from the ship.

The contracting stevedore has in and alongside the ship a closely integrated group of labor skilled in the movements of cargo to and from the ship. They are paid a higher scale of wages than the men regularly employed by the railroad in loading and unloading cars and due to the higher scale of wages and the value of the ship, no operations by other persons, or the failure of railroad labor should be permitted to conflict with or impede the operations of the contracting stevedore's employees.

By permitting this closely dovetailed operation, there is an economy of time, money, and manpower allowing the contracting stevedore to more efficiently and economically meet the obligation to the ship, which is to load or discharge its cargo with minimum time and expense. The more rapidly the ship can be loaded or discharged the more rapidly the railroad can put another ship into the berth. This increases the utility of the pier and increases the capacity of the terminal. The railroads utilize their own employees for loading or unloading cars when such labor is available or when the use of such labor will not interfere or impede the contracting stevedore's operations.

It would be practically impossible to determine with definiteness what part of the contracting stevedore's employees' time was used in loading or unloading cars in this port. A longshore gang employed by the contracting stevedore to load or discharge a ship would be assigned to a hatch and would be composed of between 21 to 25 men. If this gang is required to continue the movement of the cargo from or to cars, it would put several men to trucking to the car or additional men would be ordered. These would be generally 2 to 4 men. These men might be working on loading or unloading cars for part of a day or part of an hour and the balance of the time might be spent on the ship. It can readily be seen that this 20 percent of the men in the gang would involve a tremendous problem in segregating the time and wages which would be subject to the taxes prescribed by the Railroad Retirement Acts and the taxes prescribed under the Social Security Act.

Another problem will arise, inasmuch as the contracting stevedore cannot draw his employees from any group except the International Longshoremen's Association. The result will be that these several men, who may by chance be employed in this gang and, in order to facilitate the loading or discharge of the vessel, may be assigned the loading or unloading of cars, would have to pay through with

holding from their wages the tax of 54 percent, whereas the balance of the men in the gang would only have withheld from their wages the 1 percent prescribed under the Social Security Act.

This situation would result in tremendous confusion and would have the effect of forbidding any stevedore from loading or unloading cars in connection with his loading or discharging ships. This would cause a dislocation in this smoothly operating cooperation between the railroad, contracting stevedore, and the shipowner. The members of the International Longshoremen's Association would refuse to work in gangs where they might be called upon to pay the higher taxes under the railroad retirement acts. These employees would have considerable difficulty in understanding why they alone out of all their fellows should pay this disproportionate tax.

The ships and their cargo would suffer, for it would slow the turn-around and the ports such as this one would see its efficient capacity reduced. It would be an unnecessary burden on the employees, the contracting stevedores, the ships, cargo, and the owners of the ships.

The Railroad Retirement Board might conclude, under the vague terms of this bill, that it should tax all the employees of the contracting stevedores, regardless of where they were employed.

The railroads do not ask the contracting stevedores to load lighters or carfloats for them.

Cargo arriving before the ship for which it is intended is unloaded on the ship's berth and the contracting stevedore loads this cargo into the ship without any contractual relations with the railroad, and the railroad pays the contracting stevedore no compensation.

The present railroad retirements acts, as their names quite clearly show, were intended only for application to railroads and railroad employees. The employees of the contracting stevedores have no relation to railroads or railroad employees. The railroads do not care to have the contracting stevedores perform the services for them, but do so only in such cases where it enables the ship to obtain better dispatch and to obtain the most efficient use of the pier space.

The ambiguity in the definition of “employer” would only produce confusion and present an administrative problem which will burden the railroad-retirement program and also burden the contracting stevedores and their employees and would ultimately bring under the coverage of the act large classes of employees not recognized as railroad employees and having not even remotely any relation thereto.

We do not believe that it is the purpose of the Congress or the Railroad Retirement Board to bring the contracting stevedores, whose purpose it is to load and unload ships, within the scope of the railroad retirement acts.

We do not believe that it is the purpose of the Congress or the Railroad Retirement Board to bring this new class of labor, the employees of the contracting stevedores, within the scope of the act, especially in view of the fact that to do so would bring about a demoralization of this labor.

We do not believe that the contracting stevedores or their employees should be included in the scope of the act, either by direction or indirection.

We therefore respectfully request that appropriate language be included in this bill-S. 293-which will expressly eliminate the contracting stevedore from the category and definition of "employer," as defined in this amendment.

STATEMENT OF DEAN BALLARD, SECRETARY, ASSOCIATION OF WASHINGTON STEVEDORES, SEATTLE, WASH,

The Association of Washington Stevedores is a nonprofit, unincorporated association, organized in 1934, and representing contracting stevedores in the State of Washington, who operate in the ports of Longview, Raymond, Aberdeen, Hoquiam, Port Angeles, Blaine, Bellingham, Anacortes, Port Townsend, Port Gamble, Everett, Mukilteo, Seattle, Tacoma, and Olympia. In addition, the association also represents the interests of stevedoring departments of certain steamship lines doing their own stevedoring.

This association wishes to be placed on record as being vigorously opposed to the proposed legislation listed above. As at present written we believe thatThis legislation will include the operation of stevedoring, and that it will set up inequalities and inequities as between various water-front workers;

It will place terrific costs on an already burdened and overregulated industry; It will necessitate a tremendous amount of additional and technical office work; It will attempt to place on highly casual workers a pattern of social security designed for regular full-time workers for a single company;

It will tax the stevedoring companies and longshoremen to provide pensions for retired railroad employees;

It will further complicate labor relations between stevedoring companies and longshore unions.

One of our greatest objections is saved for the last.

We understand that the present Chairman of the Railroad Retirement Board has made the statement that he did not expect that the present Board would extend the coverage of these bills to the maritime industry. We would respectfully point out that the courts, and not the Chairman, will decide on the matter of coverage.

We would like to call your attention to the bitter experience of the stevedoring industry in a similar case. The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 set up certain regulations regarding the payment of overtime. Immediately upon the passage of this wage-and-hour law the Pacific coast stevedores outlined a complete picture of their methods of paying overtime and submitted it to the Administrator in Washington, D. C., and asked for a ruling from him. He studied the entire situation and went on record in writing that, while our methods of paying overtime were not exactly as set up under the Fair Labor Standards Act, they more than met the requirements of the act.

Seven years later a new Administrator of the Fair Labor Standards Act decides that he does not agree with his predecessor in office, and the entire stevedoring industry is presently in a tremendous turmoil, not knowing where they stand, and with the possibility of retroactive liabilities running into literally millions of dollars-practically enough to bankrupt the entire industry.

In view of this bitter experience, we regretfully are forced to the conclusion that the statement of the kindly Chairman of the Railroad Retirement Board is not worth the paper it is written upon.

STATEMENT OF S. A. LEBLANC, CHAIRMAN, MOBILE STEAMSHIP ASSOCIATION, MOBILE, ALA.

At a special meeting of the Mobile Steamship Association on July 20, 1945, called for the purpose of considering the bill, S. 293, the undersigned chairman of the said association was instructed by unanimous vote to submit this protest against the enactment of the bill in its present form.

The Mobile Steamship Association was organized in Mobile, Ala., more than 20 years ago, and its membership represents the shipping industry of this port. All contracts promulgated with the unions at Mobile for waterfront labor in connection with the loading and discharging of ships, and for the receipt, delivery, and tallying of the cargo, are negotiated and executed by this association on behalf of its members. Such contracts embrace all stevedoring labor employed at the port of Mobile for the loading and discharging of ships.

The employees of the members of the association and of the stevedoring firms performing waterfront work for account of our members are entirely separate and distinct from railroad employees as they perform an entirely different class of work.

The employees of the members of this association and of the stevedoring firms engaged in the loading and discharging of ships are already fully covered under the Social Security Act as well as all applicable Federal and State statutes relating to unemployment, old-age benefits, and workmen's compensation. The said coverage of these employees has existed for many years.

Generally speaking, all of the waterfront employees are engaged on an hourly basis pursuant to their union agreements, and their employment by any individual employer is very irregular and casual. These employees work for various employers from day to day depending upon where the opportunity for employment is available, and their employment is frequently disconnected with the shipping industry.

On behalf of its members and the contracting stevedores employed by such members in connection with the shipping industry at this port, the Mobile Steamship Association is unalterably opposed to the bill, S. 293, in its present form and respectfully urge that it be amended to specifically and clearly exclude

employees of ship owners, operators, and their agents, and the employees of stevedoring firms engaged in the loading and discharging of ships and otherwise serving the steamship industry.

The bill as now written appears to cover the employees hereinabove mentioned which this association is seeking to exclude from the provisions thereof. There is absolutely no justification for the inclusion in this bill of employees serving the steamship industry.

It is also respectfully urged by this association that the employees of State, municipal, and privately owned and operated steamship terminals should also be excluded from the bill when such employees are not engaged exclusively for account of carriers subject to Part I of the Interstate Commerce Act.

Respectfully submitted for the Mobile Steamship Association by S. A. LeBlanc, chairman.

Mr. AHRENS. Also a letter addressed to yourself, Mr. Chairman, from the Maine Port Authority, and letters from various stevedoring contractors.

Senator JOHNSON of Colorado. Thank you very much. (The letters referred to are as follows:)

Hon. EDWIN C. JOHNSON,

MAINE PORT AUTHORITY, Portland, Maine, July 23, 1945.

Chairman, Senate Subcommittee on Interstate Commerce,

Washington, D. C.

SIR: The Maine Port Authority, a body corporate and politic, is constituted a public agency of the State of Maine for the general purpose of acquiring, constructing, and operating piers and terminal facilities at the port of Portland. This Authority owns and, except in wartime, operates a large pier in Portland Harbor for the handling of general cargo, both domestic and foreign. this cargo is interchanged with railroads.

Much of

As the directors of the Maine Port Authority read the provisions of S. 293, a bill to amend the Railroad Retirement Act, they fear that the bill as now worded will include under its provisions its employees who would be engaged in handling cargo to and from vessels which had arrived or would ultimately be forwarded by rail. Therefore the Maine Port Authority is compelled to object to the passage of S. 293 in its present form for the following reasons:

(a) Employees of the Maine Port Authority are subject to retirement benefits provided under the Employees' Retirement System of the State of Maine. Nothing but confusion would result from attempting to segregate the time of our employees when their work would make them subject to the Railroad Retirement Act, etc.

(b) We believe that all marine terminal operations, which are only a link in transportation jointly between water carriers, on the one hand, and railroads or motor carriers on the other, cannot properly be placed in the category of any single type of transportation, and should be excluded from the provisions of the proposed amendment.

(c) Port operations are highly competitive. Port facilities are often financed with public funds for the reason that direct income from their limited operations is insufficient to attract private capital. Trustees of publicly owned facilities continually strive to keep operating costs at a minimum. Passage of proposed legislation would increase cost of port services due to increased pay-roll taxes, not only with respect to the terminal operator employees, but also due to the same effect on the pay rolls of the contracting stevedores and freight handlers who would also be subject to this act on account of at least a portion, and oftentimes a very substantial one, of their work being performed on cargo which has arrived at the terminal, or will ultimately be forwarded from the terminal, in railroad equipment. This port must be kept on a competitive basis with certain Canadian ports, and it would be manifestly unfair to legislate increased costs at this port which would not apply at competing ports.

We therefore respectfully request that the present bill be amended so to definitely and conclusively exclude from its provisions any men engaged by the Maine Port Authority in the handling of marine cargo. Respectfully submitted.

MAINE PORT AUTHORITY,
By NATHAN W. THOMPSON,

Attorney.