Mr. MARCANTONIO. You know that Mr. Richberg has been placed at the head of the N. R. A. Of course, you are familiar with Mr. Richberg's interpretation of 7 (a)?

Mr. DILLON. Ÿes.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. What benefit can labor derive if that interpretation of 7 (a) is going to be the yardstick by which the N. R. A. is going to proceed as far as labor is concerned?

Mr. DILLON. No, sir; 7 (a) is a joke and a farce under that interpretation. That is the reason, Congressman, that we are trying to get it made the law of the land, as I understand it.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. Through the Wagner-Connery bill?
Mr. DILLON. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. If the gentleman will yield there.
Mr. MARCANTONIO. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. So far as needing to pass the Wagner-Connery bill just to take care of labor disputes is concerned, you know that the Ñ. R. A. got rid of the child labor and the yellow-dog contracts. You know that your hours of labor have been taken care of under the N. R. A. You know that previously the textile industry of the South were working from 50 to 60 hours a week. Now it has been cut down to 40. If you did away with your N. R. A. entirely, you would have to come in and fight for those hours all over again under the Wagner-Connery bill.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. My personal opinion is that labor would be better off on the economic battlefront than by submitting to regimentation under the N. R. A. The way the N. R. A. is now proceeding, it is going to proceed to protect the interests of the large industrialists of this Nation. It is going to continue to be used as a weapon against labor. And in 2 years' time organized labor, and American labor in general, will be worse off under the N. R. A. than it is today. Nothing will be gained through the N. R. A.

If you take the workings of the N. R. A. up to now, with the exception of improvements in wages in certain isolated instances, what actual benefit has the N. R. A. done to the workers?

The CHAIRMAN. Why ask me?

Mr. MARCANTONIO. I will ask that of Mr. Dillon.

Mr. DILLON. I think the N. R. A. has made a substantial contribution to labor. I think it would be a tragedy to discontinue it in its entirety. Rather, I think it should be strengthened and improved.

I think it has brought the people to realize better their responsibility to their Government. It has organized business on a more sane basis. It has taught the citizens to utilize that agency and not proceed in classes or in groups.

There is no question but what the employers and the financial interests will endeavor to monopolize it and use it as they have tried to do with every agency that has ever been set up by the Government.

Thousands of people have organized under the inspiration of this philosophy and this principle; and I think, whether we call it N. R. A., or whatever you may call it, in some form it is here to stay. Mr. MARCANTONIO. You say if it is improved. What if it is not improved?

Mr. DILLON. Well, I think it would be too bad for our Government.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. I mean, if this instrument, this N. R. A., is not improved. And all indications are they are not going to improve it as far as labor is concerned by the appointment of Donald Richberg.

I have known Mr. Richberg personally. I think he is a very capable person. I simply disagree with his views. If men like Mr. Richberg continue at the head of this N. R. A., the result is going to be that the N. R. A. is going to continue to be used as an instrument for the exploitation of labor.

Mr. DILLON. I think the answer to that is this: Unfortunately, the President of the United States, in some manner, or by some body or some group of people, has been surrounded by and been advised by people who are not in harmony with or who don't understand what is transpiring in this country with reference to the problems of labor.

My personal opinion is that it can be laid squarely on the Department of Labor. That is what I personally think, and I am responsible for that statement.

I think what we need is a new Secretary of Labor.

Mr. EAGLE. There are two of us who would like to have that.
Mr. LESINSKI. I am with you, also.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Marcantonio.

Mr. RAMSPECK. I would like to ask a question if Mr. Marcantonio will yield.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. Yes.

Mr. RAMSPECK. Don't you think that under the present set-up in the N. R. A. Mr. Richberg's influence has been lessened rather than increased?

Mr. MARCANTONIO. I don't think so. Knowing Mr. Richberg as I do, I think that with his charming personality and his superior intellect, he is as a matter of fact going to have a dominating influ

ence.

I think that whenever Mr. Richberg sits down at a table with the three or four other gentlemen, it is Mr. Richberg's opinion that is going to dominate, plus the fact that he has the backing of the administration. He speaks as the spokesman of the administration, and his word is going to be law.

I predict that that is what is going to happen, and 6 months from now the gentleman from Georgia will agree with me.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Gildea.

Mr. GILDEA. Isn't it a fact that Dr. Wolman went on this Board as an adviser to labor?

Mr. DILLON. On the Automobile Labor Board?

Mr. GILDEA. On the National Labor Board.

Mr. DILLON. No. That is not my understanding. He is a member of the Labor Advisory Board, but he was not in any sense an adviser to the American Federation of Labor. He has maintained himself on the Advisory Board, I believe, by the aid of the Secretary of Labor and inspired by her, as I understand it.

Mr. GILDEA. But at the time that he was appointed his appointment was hailed as a victory for labor. I remember reading so at the time he was appointed.

The CHAIRMAN. Not by the Federation of Labor.

Mr. DILLON. No.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. You mean, when he was originally appointed? Mr. GILDEA. When he was originally appointed. I remember that by the papers of the country his appointment was hailed as a triumph for labor.

Mr. DILLON. We misjudge things occasionally, too, Congressman. Mr. GILDEA. Let us get to this misjudgment. When they established this Board, as you say, of reformers and welfare workers, or surrounded the President with them we established this Board; and the first adverse decision will also be a slam at whoever makes it. When they don't decide 100 percent for labor, they are going to be slammed.

Mr. DILLON. The record does not reveal that to be true.

Mr. GILDEA. We will take the record. Mr. Thompson was the third party in a code settlement some years ago, and the statement was made that Thompson sold out. We have to look at the third body as sitting in there trying to settle differences between the other

two.

Mr. DILLON. That is right.

Mr. GILDEA. And wherever a decision is adverse, instead of trying to give credit to Richberg, Wolman, Thompson, or whoever happens to be the third party, you immediately start pulling the pins from

under him.

Mr. DILLON. There is no one who cooperated with Dr. Wolman more than I did. I worked with Wolman and insisted that our people everywhere conform to his rulings. I went into union meetings and insisted that our people refuse to do other than to conform to the rulings of his Board.

We did give Wolman support. We never pulled a pin out from under him or anybody else.

Labor never expected a decision of any council or any board that was ever set up through my knowledge in the 25 years of my experience to be perfect. We will break even with any employer or any group when we don't get a square shake from this board.

The first thing that they did was to crucify the labor member. And they have never made a decision. The record shows that this Board never did. It was only a board of mediation. They consulted General Motors; and, if it was agreeable to General Motors, that was the ruling of Mr. Wolman.

The Detroit Free Press yesterday held Dr. Wolman out as a possible candidate for Secretary of Labor, saying that he had great things coming to him for the service that he had rendered.

We never criticized the Board. Twenty-two years ago President Wilson appointed a board. It was not prolabor. It was not proemployer. The records show, Congressman, that we worked with that board.

We have conformed to every rule that was ever set up by any commission that we agreed to. We went down the line with this board, even if we didn' like it, and never complained until they just simply made it impossible for us.

Mr. GILDEA. I think that with Mr. Phil Murray associated with Mr. Richberg on this new Board, I am convinced that labor is going to be represented.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Richberg represented railroad labor organizations for years.

Mr. GILDEA. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. In the United States Senate, the deliberative body of the Congress of the United States, three notable Senators, namely, Wagner, of New York, Norris, of Nebraska, and, I think it was, Hatfield, of West Virginia, and Wheeler, of Montana, set out exactly what they meant, what Congress meant, by 7 (a). They set it out very clearly.

They said that it meant abolition of company unions. That is what they were trying to do when they wrote 7 (a).

Then Mr. Richberg, who was general attorney for railroad labor organizations, who appeared before congressional committees any number of times fighting for labor, when he is put in the position of interpreting that, he interprets it exactly against what Norris, and Wagner, and Wheeler, and Hatfield said was the wish of the Senate of the United States, which they voted upon, and the House voted upon; and he says, "Congress is all wrong. This is what 7 (a) means "; and as a result of that you had your automobile trouble, your textile strike, your longshoremen strike. All the strikes of labor today have been caused by Mr. Richberg, and he is no friend of labor.

Mr. WOOD. And his decision was absolutely contrary to an Executive order of the President.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. WOOD. Which interpreted section 7 (a).

Mr. MARCANTONIO. If you read his speech which was delivered . yesterday, which was mentioned in the morning papers, you will find that he makes a speech in which he says that the wealthy alone can save the N. R. A.

Mr. WOOD. I would just like to make an observation in connection with Mr. Marcantonio's statement about the N. R. A. and its position on labor.

Labor does not hold the same fear as Mr. Marcantonio. Labor is not at all disturbed about the detrimental features of the N. R. A. We realize that it has abolished child labor to a large extent. It has to a large extent abolished the yellow-dog contracts. It has raised from absolute and abject wage slavery millions of workers who have now had an opportunity to organize.

For instance, the cotton-textile workers of America. It has elevated their living standards. And the labor movement is not at all jealous about who is responsible for elevating the conditions of mankind. Labor does not want to take all the credit themselves. They are not jealous at all about who gets the credit. But they do know that the National Recovery Act has been a great blessing to the workers of this Nation.

But the only criticism that labor has toward the National Recovery Act is the manner in which it has been administered. So far as the administration of section 7 (a) is concerned, labor does feel-and I believe I am in a position to state how they feel about it, because I have talked to numbers of them since the new set-up-insofar as Mr. Richberg is concerned, as has just been well stated here-as representing 21 central railroad organizations for nearly 20 years as their well-paid legal counsel, he did in his decisions betray labor. John L. Lewis, president of the United Mine Workers, in his language said that Richberg sold organized labor down the river.

Now, Mr. Richberg changed his view. Whether he changed his principles or not I don't know.

But I am sure that labor feels sure that with Phil Murray, the vice president of the United Mine Workers, upon that Board labor is going to get representation there, and that there will be a great balance there; that Mr. Richberg is not going to be the dictator; that Mr. Richberg's decisions and his actions will be largely governed by a decision of that Board and not the decisions of Mr. Richberg.

Mr. RAMSPECK. Don't you think that his influence will be lessened in the present set-up?

Mr. WOOD. In a large degree. Indeed it will. He is not the Donald Richberg that he was prior to this set-up. He is not the czar now. He was considered the czar.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. WOOD. Yes.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. There is such a thing as an instrument like the N. R. A., after having accomplished certain benefits, that that instrument can be used to the detriment of the American working class, can it not?

Mr. WOOD. I will be frank with you, Mr. Marcantonio, that the organizations of employers and the forces of big business have exerted every possible human effort in the past 12 months to destroy the N. R. A.

After they have taken the advantage of the 4 or 5 sections that have helped them, or, rather, I might say, which were a practical. mandate that every employer in the country would have to belong to their trade association; or, if they did not belong, they were compelled to agree to abide by the decisions of the majority of the members of the trade association in their trade-it is generally understood that they have done everything possible within their power in the last 12 months to destroy the effect of the National Recovery Act insofar as labor is concerned. And I don't think that they or any other group of men will ever become so powerful in the future that they will destroy the benefit of the N. R. A. or turn its purpose and meaning and effect toward the enslaving of the worker.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. The point is this: The N. R. A. is a good thing if it is handled properly; and it is a bad thing if it is handled improperly. It all depends on who is going to control the N. R. A.

You will find that the manufacturers associations and the other employers' associations are not going to show much opposition to the continuation of the N. R. A., because they are going to realize that if they can control the N. R. A. they are going to use the N. R. A. to regiment labor to a low economic status in the United States. If you find any opposition you will find that the real opposition to the N. R. A. is going to come from the militant workers of the United States.

Mr. DUNN. I want to substantiate the statement that was just made. I have received already letters from my district-I represent a big steel district-from corporations to continue the N. R. A. Mr. MARCANTONIO. So have I. I have received a telegram from the Endicott-Johnson Co. yesterday saying that they wanted the N. R. A. continued.