WAYNE PLASTIC CORP., Fort Wayne, Ind., April 7, 1959. Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, Chairman, Ways and Means Committee, DEAR SIR: Our cherished freedoms would certainly be endangered by the Kennedy-Karsten measure, known as H.R. 3547. In my estimation, it is an insult to right-thinking employees and employers alike. A brief perusal of the arithmetical and psychological results that could follow passage of this measure, are truly hair raising. Insurance is a fine thing, including unemployment compensation. This measure, however, cannot be thought of as insurance. The United States of America did not get where it is today, nor will we catch up with our cold-war enemies by placing a premium on idleness, whether it is voluntary or involuntary. My sincere hope is that you do not pass H.R. 3547. Very truly yours, WAYNE PLASTIC CORP., W. W. BURHOP, President. GUTHRIE MAY & CO., INC., Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, Chairman, Ways and Means Committee, DEAR SIR: I would like to give you my views on the unemployment compensation proposals for which hearings are scheduled for the period of April 7 through April 15. Apparently, a number of these proposals provide that Indiana reshape its unemployment compensation program along the lines specified in the proposals. The amount of weekly benefits proposed, the duration of the payments, and the elimination of any disqualification, even for fraud, seem to me to go far beyond the purpose of unemployment compensation. If such proposals became law the idea of providing temporary compensation for persons unemployed through no fault of their own will be changed to a system which encourages people not to work. I am sure that with such a system in effect many people would work just enough to become eligible for unemployment compensation and then purposely quit or arrange to be discharged in order to be able to collect. In addition to the obvious objections such an arrangement would also be so expensive as to be dangerous to our economy. I urge you to oppose such legislation. Yours truly, GUTHRIE MAY. Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, Chairman, House Ways and Means Committee, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. INDIANAPOLIS, IND., April 6, 1959. DEAR MR. MILLS: I am vitally interested in H.R. 3547 and S. 791 from two standpoints: 1. As an employer now of approximately 50 persons this will make a certain percentage of the people we employ work long enough to qualify for this being paid for loafing. 2. Coming from the South these bills will practically wreck the economy of the South because, with this amount of pay for loafing, you won't be able to get anybody to work down there. Another point, these two bills are pushing us more and more into socialism and, as one southerner to another, I hope you will do everything in your power to try and defeat them when they come up for discussion. This is the same type of thing that in earlier days wrecked the old Roman Empire. I am enclosing this letter in triplicate so that you can make it a part of the record. Most cordially yours, ROSCOE TURNER. Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, CODDINGTON PACKING CO., INC., Chairman, House Ways and Means Committee, DEAR SIR: We feel it imperative that we voice our objections to the proposed legislation known as the Kennedy-Karsten measure. In the first place we are a small company struggling for existence. Through the years we have kept our periods of unemployment to a minimum and have established a very good experience rate with our State employment security division. We feel that this rating should not be eliminated or made subject to Federal control. Secondly, we feel that unemployment benefits are being placed so high that workers are not even seeking work as long as they can loaf and draw benefits. And along this same line the duration of benefits should be made for shorter rather than for longer periods. Certain disqualifications (fraud, admitted or proven dishonesty, quitting work without good cause, misconduct) must be maintained to provide benefits only for those who are jobless under conditions beyond their control and who are able and willing to work and are seeking employment. Lastly, we feel that employment security legislation should be handled by the separate States as provided by the Constitution of the United States. We respectfully request that this letter be made a part of record of the hearings. Yours very truly, Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, Chairman, House Ways and Means Committee, A. E. CODDINGTON, Jr. BRAZIL, IND., April 6, 1959. DEAR SIR: I am opposed to the Kennedy-Karsten measure, H.R. 3547: 1. It will take authority away from the States and centralize it in the Federal Government. Then some day the States will have no authority for one such law will lead to another. 2. It will increase employer taxes and that cost will be passed on to the consumer. More inflation. 3. Many habitual absentee workers will find some excuse to draw the benefits most all their life. Will you please make these a part of the record of your hearings? PHIL H. ADAMSON. INDIANAPOLIS, IND., April 14, 1959. Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, Chairman, House Ways and Means Committee, DEAR MR. MILLS: In regard to the Kennedy-Karsten bill, H.R. 3547, concerning unemployment compensation, I would like to go on the record as opposing such a measure. I am forwarding this letter in triplicate and request that it be made a part of the record of the hearings. As I see the bill, it would impose rigid Federal controls on what has been primarily a State function. Thus it would contribute to the trend of everincreasing centralization of government. Must our Federal Government follow the pattern of the welfare state, which leads to bankruptcy? In Indiana this bill would 1. Increase our costs approximately 70 percent. 2. Allow potential maximum benefits of $2,340 in a year's period. 3. Eliminate any disqualification, even for fraud. 4. Change the present formula of $1 of benefits for each $4 of wages to $1 in wages for $1.56 in benefits, or thereabout. I earnestly request that you do whatever is in your power to defeat this and similar bills on unemployment compensation. Yours truly, WENDELL J. DILLINGER. Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, Chairman, House Ways and Means Committee, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. U.S. SENATE, Washington, D.C., April 8, 1959. DEAR WILBUR: Enclosed is a copy of a letter to me from Fred O. Carey, vice president of the Fred O. Carey & Sons Construction Co., Inc., of Warsaw, Ind., in opposition to H.R. 3547. I will appreciate very much your placing a copy of this letter in the record of your committee proceedings. Thank you very much, and best personal regards. Sincerely, HOMER E. CAPEHART. Senator HOMER E. CAPEHART, FRED O. CAREY & SONS CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CAPEHART: We wish to voice our opinion and feelings against the proposed Kennedy-Karsten measure, H.R. 3547. Such a high rate of benefits would tend to work against the employee, in that many would only work one-third of the year, then loaf the balance of the year at $60 per week. People of this kind would be dropped from our employment and never rehired. We would also be inclined to blacklist people of that sort so that no other employer would get caught the same way. Let's be reasonable about this thing. We have had men leave our nonunion employ and take up employment in the same trade classification for a construction firm who runs a closed union shop. Soon after, he gets fired, or layed off, then he wants to draw benefits from our reserve account but refuses to return to work for the same wages he got before leaving our employ. So far, rulings are in his favor. It doesn't seem to be a matter of the man earning a living so much as it is a feather in his cap to be able to scheme some way to get something for nothing. In this H.R. 3547 you would be paying people for just laying around in the way and under foot. Seems we have enough rackets in our country today without our Government transforming a charitable organization into a firstrate racket. Please make this letter a part of record of the hearings. FRED O. CAREY, Vice President. Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. INTERSTATE FINANCE CORP., MY DEAR MR. MILLS: As chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, you have gained nationwide respect for the intelligent manner in which you have discharged the responsibilities of your office. It has often been expressed that you have viewed the various measures brought before your committee with a great deal of objectivity and have attempted to serve the best interest of the Nation rather than a select influential group. It is for this reason that I would like to express my views to you regarding the Kennedy-Karsten unemployment compensation measure scheduled to come before your committee hearing April 7, 1959, and ask that this letter be made a part of the record. America has become the greatest nation in the history of the world for reasons too numerous to mention, but I feel this greatness has come about primarily as a result of the opportunity for the common man to rise above his environment, ingenuity, and hard work. Most successful people, I am sure, will testify that their measure of success came about as a result of inspiration and perspiration, not through a dole. History has also indicated that a sure sign of decadence is a nation becoming effete. What surer way is there to bring this about than through taking away the incentive to work by making it easy to remain unemployed. One of the primary purposes of my position as a personnel director is recruiting, and I am finding that even in this period of relatively high unemployment good men are just as hard to find as in a tight labor market. While I would hope that Messrs. Kennedy and Karsten have the interest at heart of the unfortunate individuals placed in a situation over which they have no control, I am wondering if they are considering the invitation they would be extending the freeloaders and the unscrupulous to capitalize on the elimination of any disqualifications to draw unemployment compensation, even for fraud. Granting that most people are basically honest, some measures still have to be taken to insure proper compliance with the law. There are many cities throughout the State of Indiana in which $60 a week constitutes a very desirable income. By raising the maximum benefit to this amount or higher, as it is my understanding this bill would do in Indiana, it would encourage an individual not to work. If given a choice most people would refuse a job for a like amount on which taxes would have to be paid. It is also my understanding that this proposed measure is designed to cover business enterprises employing as few as one and two persons. If the Government is interested in encouraging small business to function, this measure is in direct contradiction to its intent as it will place an even greater burden on the small business owner. This measure, in addition to the proposed extended coverage of the wage-hour law, is going to place the small businessman in an even less advantageous position with the large corporations. Of equal importance is the inflationary effect of this legislation. As it applies to Indiana the bill would increase unemployment compensation costs by a minimum of 70 to 75 percent, which is bound to add fuel to the fires of inflation. To top off the many harmful effects of this legislation in our State, it appears to make it possible for a person to qualify for $1.56, or thereabouts, in benefits for every dollar in wages earned. This compares to the present ratio of $1 of benefits for each $4 earned. This, in my opinion, is absolutely contrary to the laws of economics. I think it's about time we recognize the fact that all the dips can't be taken out of the business cycle and quit trying to fashion our fine country into a welfare state. If we have to give the people monetary benefits, why don't we do it in the form of a reward for achievement? Maybe if we would reduce the taxes of the people who worked, more would get out and look for employment. As I mentioned earlier in this letter, we are still looking for men, but the effort that is expended is ours, not on the part of the men out of work. Last of all, in addition to my American heritage, I am proud to be a native of the State of Indiana and feel that we as a group of people have demonstrated our ability to provide for ourselves. Until proven otherwise, why not give us the opportunity to continue to do so. Sincerely yours, OWEN M. HAMILTON, Personnel Director. THE KENDALL CO., Boston, Mass., April 14, 1959. Re Proposed Unemployment Compensation Act of 1959, H.R. 3547. Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, New House Office Building, DEAR MR. MILLS: Our company employs some 7,000 persons and has over the years always endeavored to maintain steady employment and a low turnover rate. As a result, the above bill is of great interest to us. We are opposed to the bill for both human and economic reasons. Without reiterating the various technical analyses of the bill which have been made and with which you are familiar, we would like to point out the following: (1) The establishment of such high rates of unemployment compensation serves to destroy the incentive of the individual actively to seek new employment. When taxes, social security, and other wage deductions are taken into account, an employed wage earner nets little more than his unemployed neighbor. (2) The financial incentive to employers such as ourselves to make steady employment available is destroyed. By maintaining low turnover rates, our company now saves over $400,000 a year under the existing unemployment tax schedule. In the event this bill is passed and uniform rates are thus applied to all employers regardless of experience, this incentive toward low-turnover rates is destroyed. It will naturally follow that employers such as ourselves will reconsider the need for and importance of maintaining steady employment. (3) By the same token, this bill is detrimental to the employed wage earner in that his likelihood of having steady employment and low turnover is reduced. In short, we believe that this proposed Unemployment Compensation Act will aggravate rather than alleviate the unemployment problem by destroying incentives that make men want to work and that make employers want to provide that work. I would appreciate it if this letter could be considered by the committee and printed in the record of the hearings. Yours very truly, Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, RICHARD R. HIGGINS, President. INTERNATIONAL MINERALS & CHEMICAL CORP., House Ways and Means Committee, Skokie, Ill., April 7, 1959. MY DEAR CONGRESSMAN MILLS: It is my understanding that the Ways and Means Committee plans to hold hearings shortly of Federal unemployment compensation legislation and specifically with reference to H.R. 3547. Our company operates more than 50 plants and mines in 26 States. The management of our company believes that the best long-range interests of our employees, customers, and stockholders scattered throughout the whole United States would be served by continuing the States' control and handling of unemployment compensation and without the establishing of Federal standards. During the history of unemployment compensation, the States have gradually and continuously increased covered workers and benefits. Flexibility should be maintained as is required in the various areas of the country as to eligibility requirements, adequacy, and duration of benefits. Should certain present legislation before the Congress be made law, the majority of the States would be required to pay benefits in some instances in excess of the total wages required to earn them. Also, the present practice of variable scales of benefits within States between single persons and individuals with larger families, such as we have in Illinois, would be broken down. This would have the effect of placing the unemployment compensation program directly into the category of a relief program which, in our opinion, is not consistent with the original or present concept of unemployment compensation. Relief programs should be provided in other ways with proper control and administration for the same. We are appreciative of the opportunity to present our views by letter on this type of legislation to the Ways and Means Committee members prior to completion of hearings and would respectfully request that legislation establishing Federal standards and weakening State control of unemployment compensation not be favorably reported out of the committee. Very truly yours, A. C. THORNTON, Director, Personnel and Industrial Relations. YAKIMA VALLEY TRAFFIC ASSOCIATION, INC., Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, Chairman, House Ways and Means Committee, DEAR CONGRESSMAN: This association which represents fruitgrowers and shippers of the Yakima Valley in the State of Washington would like to go on record with your committee as opposed to the Karsten bill (H.R. 3547), a bill on unemployment compensation. We are against the idea of imposing Federal requirements on State unemployment compensation programs. We believe State governments are in a better position to determine what the needs of their unemployed are than the Federal Government, and should not be deprived of this responsibility. 39678 5974 |