us that as an industry the two meet together and attempt to obtain the same objectives on an industry-wide basis.

Now, let us say in the city of New York, or we can take a smaller town, that there are a lot of IV-F's, men who have been called to the draft, excused on various accounts, primarily because they do not make good soldiers or excuses perhaps for occupational reasons. Still, they do not stay on the farm and they do not stay in their occupation. These people are gaining advantages. They tell us that patriotic soldiers are not able to get these advantages and the hard-working laborers, mothers, and the rest of them cannot get those advantages. How do you suggest we reach those individuals who are not doing their part in the war effort but who are gaining definite advantage through not doing their part?

Mr. LUHRSEN. Well, I was so sold on what Mr. Lawrence has said in his article I want to give it to you as my answer to your question, if I can locate it.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not want to reflect on Mr. Lawrence, but I would rather have your answer than his.

Mr. LUHRSEN. Well, I am not in favor of excusing anyone in New York or any other city in IV-F if he does not do something to help win the war, if he would rather be in a poolroom, or let us say do something in private business for himself when he really ought to be in the war effort. But, I do not think that the trouble is there entirely. I think we have bungled too much in the past.

The CHAIRMAN. Assuming that, what we want to do is win the war

now.

Mr. LUHRSEN. Well, I do not know how you are going to force him, as you say, unless you compel him, but I think that that man perhaps can be brought into industry if you have a level standard of wages instead of having a wage of 46 cents in one place, 45 cents in another, 48 cents in still another, for the same work and yet in another place

55 cents.

He is human and he wants to go somewhere where he can make as much as anyone else makes.

The CHAIRMAN. A lot of them are not making money at all, they represent the type of man who is perfectly happy without making very much money.

Mr. LUHRSEN. If he is not doing anything then I would not classify him as a worker in the first place, and I would say he is a drone, nothing else but a drone.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, he is a man.

Mr. LUHRSEN. A man not fighting for his country, not contributing to it, is not a real good citizen.

The CHAIRMAN. That is what the authors of this bill say, we must get them. Can you help us?

Mr. LUHRSEN. You say there are 4,000,000 of those?

The CHAIRMAN. I do not know how many. If there is only one we ought to get him.

Mr. LUHRSEN. I do not see why you need any further legislation. I think they have already got the authority if they will just use their heads. I do not think you need additional legislation to accomplish the purpose set forth in this bill by inaugurating what I think is going to be the inevitable result once you get compulsory legislation, you

are going to create slave labor after the war is over. You just give them a taste of blood as Hitler has had over there in Europe, it will just be a stepping stone for compulsory labor and slave labor when once we get it on our books. I do not like Hitler, I do not like what he has done. I do not know what we ought to do with him; it suits me whatever they do with him.

Senator KILGORE. Frankly, from the correspondence I have been getting from men in service, particularly from men abroad, I think the best way to get at that drone and the only way to get at that drone, if he is within the draft age and if he is physically capable of working, is to induct him into the United States Army and put him out in a warehouse or installations where there will be somebody that will make him work. I do not think that man will do anything in free labor, in a plant, because if it takes compulsion to get him into that plant it is going to take compulsion every minute to get him to work.

The question of morale has been very frequently mentioned here and I find the greatest morale builder would be for the Army to put these fellows of that type in uniform and then the soldier would feelby golly, they are doing just the same as I am doing.

Mr. LUHRSEN. Senator, the point is, as I gather from the testimony that I have read at least, the Army does not want those fellows. They say they do not need them. They are trying to put them in industry. If they are trying to put them into industry that is all right with me, but you will have to have two men stand over them to make them do one man's work. Therefore, you will decrease your available manpower. Well, put them in-I do not know what to say and I do not want to say a concentration camp, because I do not believe in that-but I think there is a way to make that fellow work. Senator KILGORE. I would like to go off the record.

The CHAIRMAN. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

Senator O'MAHONEY. On the record, Mr. Chairman, I would like to have Mr. Luhrsen make some comment on the operations of labormanagement committees.

Mr. LUHRSEN. On the railroads wherever we have had the labormanagement committees we have tried to work them out. For instance, when the Service Act was first passed in 1940 we immediately had a conference with the presidents of the railroads. We went to the top, we do not go the schedule busters, as we call them. A committee was appointed on their side and a committee on our side. We agreed to 13 points with reference to the Selective Service Act, as to what we would do to the man that went into service.

We did not say that he will come back and he will get his job back. We put it in writing, and practically every railroad in the United States agreed to it with the individual organizations, that is, that they will make that serviceman "whole" when he returns. That means he not only accumulates seniority but he is entitled to any promotion that has intervened while he was gone, provided he can pass a qualified examination. We work out these things and the railroads generally agree to put it into an agreement. If it is a good thing it is passed on down and the individual organizations go to the management and tell them that is what they would like to have, they want it in writing, and it is usually an agreement. That is cooperation.

They do not always agree with us on everything and we do not always agree with what they want. They do not always get what they want and we do not always get what we want. But I think we have closer cooperation because we have recognized it as one industry. You have not got the Bethlehem Steel, the United Steel, and the various other steel companies dealing separately.

Senator O'MAHONEY. I was referring more particularly to the labormanagement committees which have been set up under the War Manpower Commission. Mr. Cashen represents the Railway Labor Executive Association.

Mr. LUHRSEN. You mean that committee of 12 men?

Unfortunately I cannot give you much enlightenment on that. Mr. Cashen had an accident on a train, he fell out of a sleeper and hurt his back, and he has not attended any one of those meetings as yet. He is now at Hot Springs, and expects to be back about the 21st of this month. Now, what has transpired there I can only give you second-hand information as to that. So far, I do not think there has been much progress made, if I understand correctly. But I would rather let those who have attended answer that question.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Well, it was testified here that these committees have been meeting every 2 weeks for 2 years and that there has been only one instance in which they were not able to solve the problem that was before them.

Mr. LUHRSEN. That is wrong; there has been no such committee for 2 years.

This committee that I have in mind has been in existence only for 4 or 5 months.

Senator KILGORE. Let me get Mr. Luhrsen straightened out on that. The Manpower Commission set up a committee on a national scale and committees on an area-wide basis, that is what Senator O'Mahoney is talking about.

Mr. LUHRSEN. You threw me off when you mentioned Mr. Cashen's name. He is not on the Manpower Commission, he is on the Presidential Committee of Twelve.

I

On that Manpower Committee we had three from labor, three from industry, and three from agriculture, and when I was on it, it must have been a year ago, we changed it and put on the top keymen, like William Green and Murray, and Harry Frazier for our crowd, and then there was one from the Farm Bureau, you know the names. got off that committee at that time because I think I was quite obstreperous in fighting against some of the things there presented, such as freezing railroad men, which I did not agree with. I told them I would vote "no" as long as I was there and I did vote "no," so I was not much of a help on that proposition.

Senator O'MAHONEY. The story the committee has, of course, is that this advisory committee has worked efficiently and beneficially, that is from the point of view of some people, at least. It is preferable to the compulsory approach on which this bill is based.

Mr. LUHRSEN. It is, and I think the Manpower Commission, if its views were not interfered with by some higher power, I think it would work a lot better than it has, and I am talking plain English. Senator O'MAHONEY. That is what we like.

Senator KILGORE. And also if it had some powers to carry out its function.

Mr. LUHRSEN. That is right.

I think much of it is interference, and it was not altogether from administration. A lot of it was military and also Navy, as they had entirely different ideas, for instance. than I did, insofar as railroad work is concerned, and I think I know a darned sight more about railroads than they could ever learn in the next 10 years, because I have been in it 51 years and I ought to know something about railroading. But, they were discounting anything I might say.

Let me give you an illustration. I would like to do this off the record.

The CHAIRMAN. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

Senator O'MAHONEY. I think it is important to compare what the railroads are doing this year under voluntary system of management and labor as compared with what was done in World War No. 1.

Mr. LUHRSEN. I will be glad to put it on the record. I thought perhaps it was not ethical, I just wanted to be fair about it.

In the last war, for example, we had in 1918, 1,841,000 employees; I think that is approximately correct. In 1920 we had 2,022,000 railroad employees. In 1918 we handled 405,000,000,000 ton-miles of freight and we handled 42,000,000,000 passenger-train miles. At the present time we have approximately 1,337,000 employees on the railroads. We handled with that force in 1944, 740,000,000,000 ton-miles, that is nearly double of 1918. We handled 96,000,000,000 passenger-train-miles in 1944, as contrasted with 42,000,000,000 in 1918, which is more than double and you will see with approximately 400,000 lesser employees than in 1918 and 700,000 lesser employees than in 1920. Therefore, I would take the position that certainly the efficiency of the employees has been much greater in production than it has ever been in history. That is one of the reasons we would resent compulsion.

Senator O'MAHONEY. How many dispatchers are employed by railroads now?

Mr. LUHRSEN. I am going to give you that now and I am going to point out some marvelous figures for you that I think will open everybody's eyes.

In the last war, that is in 1918, we had 5,400, and we had 5,976 train dispatchers in 1920. Today we have 4,553. I cannot give you the figures on telegraphers, but I will say we have one-third less communicating stations; that is, people to whom we can issue orders than we had in the last war.

Senator KILGORE. When you remove the number of stations you remove not just one man but three men.

Mr. LUHRSEN. That is correct, three, but not in all cases. Some are 24-, some are 12-, and some are 9-hour jobs, but I will take them as a whole.

Now, let us see how that operates. Sometime, Senator O'Mahoney, I will get a train sheet and come down and explain it to you. Senator MAYBANK. What sheet do you refer to?

Mr. LUHRSEN. A train sheet; that is where we keep a record of all the trains, where they stop and pick up.

We will take a troop train starting right out of here, from Alexandria on a single track rail, for example. Let us say the Ordnance Department wants a troop train moved at 8 o'clock tomorrow morning.

I get that notice perhaps an hour or 2 hours in advance. I then issue an order. I find out what engine that train is going to have and I say that engine 1300 will run, leaving Alexandria on Thursday, February 8 with right over all except first-class trains. When I issue that order I have a train sheet. I have a train here that I want to make inferior and I have another train there that I want to make inferior; in fact, I make everything on that division inferior to this particular train and I give this train right-of-way except for first-class trains. Then I say he will leave Alexandria at 8 o'clock. He will go to the next place where there is a siding at 8:13, 8:25, 8:37, 8:52, and 9:06, and so on. That schedule is distributed from A to Z on that division. Every train must get a copy of that order and the operator delivers it to all trains made inferior.

Now, here is our difficulty. During the nighttime, let us say in Alexandria, and I am not using that as a definite example, but merely as an illustration, and it may be different from what I am saying, but we will say Alexandria has its office where the train is released in the middle of the yard, which is generaly true. The conductor comes up there and he says I want my orders, I am ready to go. All right, he is supposed to leave at 8 o'clock and the operator asks the dispatcher to clear him on all the orders, speed restrictions, whatever they are. I clear him. The conductor walks to the end of the yard down where there is no communication station and he finds a drawbar out of a car and they have to set it out. He is delayed 45 minutes but you have no place where you can restrict him and give the benefit of that 45 minutes to these other trains because you have no communication station at the yard limits. When this fellow is delayed 45 minutes automatically you should have the facilities to change the orders for the benefit of all the trains restricted and made inferior on the line. In the last war under Government operation we paid $970,000,000 rent to the railroads and we had all the communicating stations we needed and some of them where we did not need them. Now why haven't we got them today is my question, in order to enchance these movements of trains more expeditiously, obviate and diminish delays and help the situation.

I put the question to my men while I was on the job and I am still president on leave of absence, and I asked them 15 or 20 questions, and one of the questions was, "Would you improve the efficiency of operations if you had an operator at the end of each yard" and practically every one of them answered "yes."

Now, when you tell the railroads that is what they ought to do and you tell the O. D. T. that is what they ought to do they say that manpower is short and we cannot get them.

My answer to that is give the train dispatcher his choice as to where he thinks that man is of the greatest value to him and if he says it is at the yards, put him there. They have not been doing that.

Senator O'MAHONEY. In other words, put the dispatcher at the end of the yard?

68966-45-16