Captain WYMAN. I think it may be said that it was well understood that the corporation would desire point no. 1 and that the workers would not desire it.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. And on August 9 she said that point no. 1, which was submitted by the corporation, is point no. 1 made by herself.

Captain WYMAN. She listed them in the same sequence.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. As the corporation characterized as welcome. Captain WYMAN. In its subsequent letter, yes.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. It seems that the corporation is utterly opposed to the recognition of the present representatives of the union as representing the workers. That is correct, is it not?

Captain WYMAN. Yes; it would seem so to me.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. Is there anybody else that is disputing, to your knowledge, that the officials of the union now are the true and constituted representatives of the workers?

Captain WYMAN. The Navy Department has received a few letters along that line from individual employees, but very few.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. You would regard them as very much in the minority, would you not?

Captain WYMAN. No; I would not necessarily say that.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. How many such letters have you in the Department received?

Captain WYMAN. The letters received by the Department are, of course, insignificant when we consider that there are more or less than 4,600 workers in that plant. I should say that less than half a dozen of these letters have reached the Department.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. Do you mean to convey to this committee the impression that those letters represent, say, 600 workers? Captain WYMAN. No

Mr. SCHNEIDER. How many workers do those letters represent? Captain WYMAN. I do not know. I have no means of knowing. These letters generally refer to their wanting to go back to work, and they say they did not vote for the strike.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. What is the opinion of the Navy Department as to whether the present representatives of the union properly represent the workers according to trade union customs and practices?

Captain WYMAN. I do not believe that I am competent to answer that question for the Navy Department.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. Have you any opinion as to that?

Captain WYMAN. That is a matter of opinion and therefore I think that Colonel Roosevelt, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, should answer such a question.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. When the last proposal was submitted to the Corporation and the men, just who represented the Navy Department in that conference when the document was decided upon and drawn? Captain WYMAN. I was present as a representative of the Navy Department. Colonel Roosevelt was in and out of the conference. Mr. SCHNEIDER. You heard all the argument and you are perfectly familiar with the whole controversy, you have heard the corporation's and the workers' sides, you know the positions of the Navy Department and the Department of Labor, when you as one of the parties that agreed upon that proposal as an instrument for the proper settlement of the strike, did you believe that the document was right and

25507-35-10

proper, and that the corporation should accept it as a basis for settlement?

Captain WYMAN. I believed that the whole set-up was correct. My idea was that the Government in connection with arbitration was in the position of a neutral and that the Government sought to have both parties come to an agreement that would permit this arbitration to go on or forward.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. Then you agreed that the representatives of the union should represent the workers now on strike?

Captain WYMAN. I do not understand the question.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. Being a party to the proposal submitted, you naturally believed as one of the parties that the present representatives of the union should be those to represent the workers?

Captain WYMAN. It never occurred to me but what the present representatives of the union would be the ones who would appear to argue their cases before the arbitration board.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. There was no question but what they would.
Captain WYMAN. That is in my mind.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. You believed that would be right and proper; that they should under the circumstances?

Captain WYMAN. I thought so. I think so.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. The policy of the Government is to give the workers the right to organize unions without interference and to give the workers the right to be represented by anybody chosen by the workers, without interference, coercion or intimidation from any source, is it not?

Captain WYMAN. Yes.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. Do you regard the effort of the Corporation to interfere with, intimidate and coerce its workers, by forcing or trying to force them to be represented by somebody not of their choice as proper?

Captain WYMAN. I do not see that the corporation can force these workers of the union to designate other representatives than those of their own choice. The corporation's claim, as I understand, is that the present officers of the union do not represent the majority of the workers of the corporation, those who were on the pay roll of the corporation at the time the strike commenced

Mr. SCHNEIDER. But the Department of Labor and everybody else believes that the present officers of the union are the proper representatives of the workers in that plant?

Captain WYMAN. No; I cannot have a belief. It is not fair for me to have a belief in that matter as a representative of the Navy Department. One side makes its case very plain and the other side also maintains its case, but I cannot assume to take sides. I have no opinion as to that.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. The corporation naturally makes that contention, because it probably believes that with a change in personnel of the union officials the corporation may be able to drive a better bargain. That is one among other reasons for the corporation's attitude. If the corporation refuses to proceed with this conciliation and proposed arbitration because of an arbitrary or prejudiced position, it, I say, is responsible for the continuance of the strike. Is that your opinion or not?

Captain WYMAN. No; I have not really formed an opinion as to that. If I had an opinion it would not be worth while for me to express it, in that it would not be a departmental expression of opinion.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. Did you ever urge the workers to accept point no. 1?

Captain WYMAN. No; I think not. We have repeatedly asked both sides to this dispute to fix this matter up so that they might sign an agreement.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. You say that you never took any position as regards point no. 1?

Captain WYMAN. No; we took point no. 1 on this basis: I have taken the corporation's contention at par.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. And you have not urged the workers to accept it?

Captain WYMAN. No; I have kept clear of that, I think.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. In regard to this last proposal submitted to the workers, and which the corporation refuses to accept, have you prevailed upon the corporation to accept that proposal as a basis of settlement?

Captain WYMAN. The final draft?

Mr. SCHNEIDER. Yes.

Captain WYMAN. There was every possible indication given to the corporation to go ahead aside from point no. 1-to go ahead and discuss the other points, and come back to point no. 1. The corporation maintained that that point was very vital.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. Do you not think that position of the corporation was arbitrary and artificial in view of all the facts? After all, you know the facts there, especially with reference to point no. 1. Do you not think the position of the corporation is arbitrary?

Captain WYMAN. As I have said, my idea has been that we should take the corporation's contention at par, just as we should take the contention of the workers at par.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. You do not think that is an answer to my question, do you, Captain?

Captain WYMAN. You have asked me for a personal opinion.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. I am asking you for an opinion in your official capacity. You have engaged in your official capacity in the hearings incident to this strike; you have gone into and know the facts. Do you not think you are in position to give a sound official opinion as to whether the corporation's position in regard to point no. 1 is arbitrary?

Captain WYMAN. No.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. You do not?

Captain WYMAN. I am not authorized to express such an official opinion. My position in the Government does not warrant that.

Mr. GRISWOLD. Going back to the original proposals by Miss Perkins and the reference here to the alleged fact that it was a capitulation to the corporation to offer section 9 (a) of the National Labor Relations Act as it was offered by Miss Perkins, I have gathered a very clear and definite understanding from the testimony adduced here in all the hearings, especially that of Mr. Kaltwasser and Mr. Metten, and the first officer who appeared for the Navy Department, Captain DuBose, of the Construction Corps, as well as from references to the testimony of Mr. Green, Mr. Gallagher, and others,

that the corporation was very emphatically in all the negotiations and its appearance before this committee against submitting the matter to arbitration. Is that not right?

Captain WYMAN. I think it is.

Mr. GRISWOLD. I want to be fair in this matter; but by the same process of reasoning one would have to say that the forcing o arbitration at all is a capitulation to the union, and on the other hand one would say as to the other that there might be a capitulation to the corporation.

Captain WYMAN. I do not think that any of these points were put in with any idea of their being a forced capitulation to one side or the other. The object was to present what was in dispute.

Mr. GRISWOLD. If one reasons from one premise in one case he will have to use the same premise in another case.

Captain WYMAN. If this is a capitulation to the corporation, the other is a capitulation to the union.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. The record is clear that point no. 1 was welcomed by the corporation in its letter to the Navy Department on August 7.

Captain WYMAN. Yes; there is nothing doubtful about that.

M. MARCANTONIO. And point no. 1 on August 9 was submitted as part of the Government's proposal by Miss Perkins. That also is a matter of ecord, and there is no question about it.

Captain WYMAN. That is when she wrote the letter as to the points that the Navy Department had presented.

Mr. GRISWOLD. The last proposal was the one entered in the record today. It transcends the proposal of Miss Perkins, being a later proposal. We entered the second one into the record this morning. Captain WYMAN. You mean the draft with the elimination of point no. 1?

Mr. GRISWOLD. Yes.

Captain WYMAN. No. It appears that I have not made that clear. That so-called "draft" was an attempt to learn whether a proposal would be acceptable to both sides with the elimination of the point The Government has learned that by no means can the company be prevailed upon to date to accept that elimination.

no. 1.

Mr. GRISWOLD. Evidently I have been at sea and laboring under a misapprehension. This first proposal was submitted by Miss Perkins, then I gathered that a second draft was submitted and it really amounted to something; but you now give me the impression that it really was not anything, that it is, in the language of Shakespeare, "a tale told by an idiot and is good for nothing." It is just something that you put up for somebody to shoot at-this second draft.

Captain WYMAN. The Government cannot go to both sides and say, "Here are the terms for arbitration; sign them."

Mr. GRISWOLD. But it did in Miss Perkins' proposal say, "Here are the terms."

Captain WYMAN (reading):

The Corporation has agreed, if the employees promptly agree likewise, to submit to a board of arbitration the following issues.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. She subsequently told the workers that "this is the Government's proposal." Subsequently she sent a telegram to the workers.

Captain WYMAN. That was the Government's proposal, yes, as distinguished from being a so-called "corporation plan."

Mr. GRISWOLD. This second proposal had no more nor less than the first proposal contained?

Captain WYMAN. That is correct.

Mr. GRISWOLD. Then the second proposal if placed on the basis of the first proposal would be the same as the first, except it is of later date and transcends the first one; it is the final proposal to date. Captain WYMAN. Yes.

Mr. GRISWOLD. It supersedes and transcends Miss Perkins' original proposal.

Captain WYMAN. I think it does.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. And up to date the corporation has rejected that. Captain WYMAN. Yes.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. Have you any knowledge of the contents of the corporation's letter to the Navy Department?

Captain WYMAN. Yes; I have read it.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. Can you give us the tenor of that last letter of the New York Shipbuilding Corporation to the Navy Department? Captain WYMAN. It is a long letter.

(There was discussion off the record.)

Mr. MARCANTONIO. Do you understand that this letter has appeared in the public press?

Captain WYMAN. I picked up a newspaper only this morning that contained parts of the letter in question.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. The corporation turned the letter over to the press?

Captain WYMAN. Partly, I think.

Mr. GRISWOLD. Captain, insofar as an election is concerned, have the representatives of the union at any time in the negotiations or in the conferences held ever expressed a fear that an election would show that they do not represent a majority of the workers in the plant of the New York Shipbuilding Corporation at Camden?

Captain WYMAN. No; quite the contrary.

Mr. GRISWOLD. They have always said they were properly elected and did not fear an election, have they not?

Captain WYMAN. I do not think the question as to whether they were properly elected representatives of those workers has ever come up. I do not think that particular feature has been mentioned. They have repeatedly claimed that they represent 96 percent or thereabouts of the employees of the New York Shipbuilding Corporation at Camden.

Mr. GRISWOLD. And they have not at any time expressed a fear that an election would show anything to the contrary, before your committee?

Captain WYMAN. Positively not. It is the other way.

Mr. GRISWOLD. The present representatives of the workers have always contended to your Department that they are the bona fide representatives of the workers in that shipbuilding plant?

Captain WYMAN. They have contended that it would be absurd to have an election because it is so manifest, so obvious, that they represent a majority of the workers.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. Which shows that the position of the corporation is rather arbitrary.