I would like at this time to identify my associate, Mr. William E Dunn, who is the assistant executive director of the Associated Ge eral Contractors of America.

If I may, Mr. Chairman, I would like to briefly go over a few of these items.

On the first page, as you will see, we have outlined there, beginning at the bottom what we think would be legislation that we think should be put into some new bills that are coming up before both these Houses. We think there are many places that the Taft-Hartley Act instead of being weakened, as some bills that are before you would do, we think it should be strengthened.

The full legislative program of our association is outlined on the first two pages.

We would particularly like to comment on the provision of the socalled Kennedy-Ervin type bill and many other bills of similar nature, some of which are before this committee at this time.

We think that labor reform is certainly needed. We feel there are many good bills on labor reform. However, we feel that there are some bills that not only are labor reform, but they also propose some changes in the wording of the Taft-Hartley law which we do not believe are good; we believe are bad, such as the prehire agreement section.

We do not think there is any reason for prehire, 7 days compulsory, other than organization.

We do not think that the employers should be any part of organizing labor.

We think that is labor's problem and that is labor's duty to organize.

We do not think that any law should be passed that would force the employer to help organize, where the employer, even though he has no men on the job, he could be forced to sign a labor contract for men that he will eventually hire.

He does not know who these men are, but he can be struck for this: he can be forced to sign a contract because of pressures that would be put on him.

Now, of course, the people say, well, that has to be done because that has to be legalized.

Actually, we don't believe that. We believe that it is legal to sign a contract right now as a multiemployer and in most city areas that is the way it is handled. It is done by a group of contractors and they sign for all of the men in a labor pool and, therefore, it is legal to make that sort of agreement right now.

We do not need this prehire.

To obtain some of the advantages that we could have if we could get certified-you know in a construction business we cannot hold an election because of the type of industry it is. It is too widespread. The men do not work for us long enough. It is not like a factory where you hire a man, he works year round for you; it is not that way in the construction business.

We believe that we can get certification without an election and accomplish many things that this prehire will not do for us. If we can get certified without an election, then we could go before the NLRB on the same status, that other unions, industrial unions, do.

it is now, without being certified, we cannot go before the o we think the answer is not in prehire; we think the answer fication.

bills, the administration bill, have the certification in. the administration Senate bill and like bills in the House, secondary boycott.

esident has said that the secondary boycott is indefensible the construction business. We do not believe that.

nk it is just as important in the construction business as in ⚫ business. We do not believe that the secondary boycott legalized in the construction industry. That is one thing believe in.

go through the statement prepared here, we have given our hy we think this prehire with the 7-day compulsory union o is wrong. We have gone through many of the points of ink this. We have quoted Mr. McClellan.

ng about this bill, the proponents say it is not controversial. controversial.

te Mr. McClellan here where he says that he could not be f this sort of thing on prehire.

e quite a few quotations from him.

wide bargaining I have just explained; that that is the way ing now, where a group of employers band themselves tosign an overall contract with a pool of union labor workers. ar as we can find out through our legal staff, is perfectly 1 legal, so we do not need this prehire to help us out in that

FFIN. Mr. Chairman, has the Chair decided that the witness ad his statement?

KINS. It was suggested by Mr. Hoffman that in order to atters that we insert the statement as if read in full and ald summarize the statement.

FIN. I see. I am sorry I am a little late. I have not had read the statement before.

NEY. I will be happy to read it, Mr. Chairman, if that is -r wish.

FMAN. Mr. Chairman, that was made at my suggestion. reason at that time was that there were only two here. no evidence that anyone else was going to appear. I know read it while I was waiting and I thought the chairman no use in anybody reading.

EVELT. I have read it, Mr. Chairman.

INS. Mr. Barden, how do you feel about it?

n BARDEN. To summarize, it is perfectly OK with me. NEY. I think I may miss something in summarizing, Mr. If you want me to read it, I would like to.

MAN. Apparently I misled you again. If we could have ght before we could go over these things.

INS. Run through your statement and the parts that you ould read and omit the others.

EY. All right, sir.

d the first page here where I did identify myself. As I the second page the listing of the legislation that we think

would be necessary to help the construction industry, both labor management.

We speak of the different bills, the Barden bill, the McClellan bille page 3, and go through that.

I have already talked about the things that we do not like in the Kennedy-Ervin type of bill, which is the prehire agreement and 7-day compulsory signing up of a man.

On page 4, we have listed the wording in the bill that we object ta May I say at this point, Mr. Chairman, we do not object to prehr as such, but we would like some safeguards put into this bill so that we won't have any of the sweetheart deals and these Johnnie D deals that we have had in the construction industry and which have been brought out in all of these Senate investigating committees.

We think that this opens the door to many of these sorts of things When this came up before, we asked that some safeguards be put in there. Make it voluntary. Don't make it mandatory, but make it voluntary.

We think there ought to be many safeguards put in there. We think the safeguards that we suggested and that were suggested be put in the bill the last time it came up, was the Kennedy-Ives bill We think they are good and they are needed.

On the Senate floor the proponents of the bill said "Yes, of course, they cannot strike against this."

But when they write this new bill, the same sort of thing, we don': find that there are any safeguards written in it.

We would like to see some safeguards written in here.

Prehire does not matter with us. We will live with whatever you write in.

However, we don't want to live with a deal where you get the unscrupulous contractors too, and the union people, too. Thank goodness, there are not too many of them.

Most people we deal with, and contractors we know, are good businessmen and real honest, upright citizens, but we do have in both houses of management and labor-these few unscrupulous people that will take advantage of this type of thing.

Mr. WIER. Mr. Rooney, I think the meat of your appearance here is around this prehire.

Mr. ROONEY. Partly that, and partly around secondary boycott. Mr. WIER. Those are the two points that the construction industry continues to labor on.

You must admit you are comparing your industry with permanent employment industries. Now, there is division among the general contractors, that I know, in my city. There are contractors who prefer the pool hall; that is, the pooling of the labor where they are available.

Now, you have to recognize and admit-and let us take any one of the construction trades-in the subcontractors, electricians, plumbers, plasterers, their employers prefer the hiring hall because that is the available source of skilled employees.

You represent a minority of what we call the construction industry. You represent the ironworkers, we represent the excavating workers, the bricklayers, and ironworkers. All of the rest of it is subcontracted. Is that correct?

ONEY. We represent seven basic crafts. That is, we hire ic crafts directly on our own payroll.

t out the laborers, teamsters, and carpenters.

ER. That is right. You represent seven?

ONEY. They are the major ones, of course, but the general hires the whole thing. He takes the contract for the whole en be subcontracts some.

ER. Let us take a typical union. Whether it is electricians, m, whether it is carpenters, whether it is bricklayers, or any rger ones, the painters, let us take a union of 2,500. How those 2,500 experienced, skilled painters, carpenters, elecave a permanent job?

NEY. Very few.

ER. Very few is right.

have to be assembled someplace to keep them available tractor who gets a big job.

is true right around the Capitol here we have two or three gon that give employment, let us say, for 2 years.

e two or three projects around here that seem to be d. There is about 2 years' employment on some of this ntracting. When you are through with these men, if you tractor, where do they go? They go back to the union y expect a call from another contractor who has been big contract.

ll worse in the housing field. The home construction inhere the carpenter, painter, electrician only has a week of work in that home.

om one contractor to another contractor to another conit not?

NEY. Yes, sir.

CR. He is not employed steadily like the electrician for the

te.

NEY. Quite right.

CR. That is what makes the question of controversy over

my city most of the contractors, general and subcontractors, union hall as the outlet for skilled mechanics and even have had before. I may have worked for 5 weeks. You he job. So Contractor Řing has our big Federal building olis now; he has been awarded a contract; Contractor Ring enlist a whole new crew.

e, he will have his skeleton leadman, his foreman, and so he has to hire a new crew. Where does he go to get those? the union hall?

EY. Yes, sir.

R. That is what makes the hiring hall in the construction portant. It is the same thing with the maritime industry. out on this ship, come back, and you are off looking for a ou go to work on another ship. There has to be a hiring

nt to point out here that you are not talking about perployment; you are talking about periodic employment. NEY. You and I are saying exactly the same thing. We nd I have since 1935, recognized that the pool of qualified

construction workers is in a union. There is no question about th I have used union men since 1935, 100 percent.

So we are in full agreement on that.

The hiring hall, I don't think I brought that up, that is anothe subject altogether.

In talking about prehire, I want to maintain the kind of contra: that I have had since 1935, where I am a part of a multiemploy group who has signed contracts all over these years with the entir pool of all the people that we work.

In my State and city the subcontractors do the same thing. T National Electrical Association-they bargain there the recognize bargaining agency for the management and union is the recognize. bargaining agent for labor and they sit down and they bargain and they come to agreement and they sign a contract.

It has been that way traditionally over the years. I want to mai

tain that.

I think that is the way it should run. I don't know any other bass to get a good carpenter unless I go to the union because they have the best carpenters. That is why I work them. Because we pay good wages, but we get good men.

Now, what I am saying this bill does is, with this prehire it is going to upset that. Some wildcatter can come into Miami, Fla. and he can get together with some unscrupulous labor leader. We don't have too many, but we do have a few

Mr. WIER. I was going to point that out. You have not seen many of the construction trades involved in the McClellan hearings, no on labor relations. You may talk about carpenters that got involved in a land sale deal down in the State of Indiana, but that is about all I have heard.

Mr. LANDRUM. You had better be careful. They are still running those hearings over there.

Chairman BARDEN. This is very interesting.

Now, why are you differing with him?

Mr. WIER. We are differing on this position. He will agree, and I think subscribe, to the man that he employs out on the street. Let us say the laborers-that is your problem, laborers?

Mr. ROONEY. They are no problem. They are in the union. They are just like the teamsters.

Mr. WIER. But you are gambling a little more in the unskilled labor field. So what I think he wants to do-I do not think he has any quarrel with the skilled trades because the only available source in most of the United States is in the unions.

Now he differs from me. He subscribes to the hiring hall, but he does not like to have within that agreement that these men he is going to hire in other words, he is going to run a union shop to avoid diffculty.

Chairman BARDEN. Wait a minute. One of us is off the track. Now go back and point out why it is that you do not agree with the very plausible statement that the gentleman has made.

Mr. WIER. That is the only disagreement I find. He wants the men to join the union after he has had them and tried them. Mr. ROONEY. Of course not, Mr. Wier.

Mr. WIER. But you say—