whether this was the operator's resolution and Trustee Van Horn replied that it was part of it.

Trustee Bridges stated he felt that there was a legal obligation for the trustees of the 1947 fund to take over payments of the beneficiaries of the 1946 fund after the latter fund's money became exhausted.

The chairman (Mr. Lewis) inquired of Trustee Van Horn if he was formally offering his resolution for vote. Trustee Van Horn replied that he was. A vote was then taken on the resolution proposed by Trustee Van Horn, said vote being as follows: Trustee Lewis, "Nay"; Trustee Bridges, "Nay"; Trustee Van Horn, "Aye" (fourteenth meeting of the trustees, UMWA welfare and retirement fund of 1947, June 11, 1948, Washington, D. C.).

TWENTY-SEVENTH DISAGREEMENT

On June 11, 1948, the chairman (Mr. Lewis) called for a vote on the resolution read by counsel concerning the assumption of payments by the 1947 fund to the beneficiaries of the 1946 fund upon exhaustion of the 1946 fund.

Trustee Van Horn then stated that the 1946 fund trustees had obligated themselves beyond their income; that a large number of their grants had gone to the people not eligible to receive any benefits under the 1947 contract.

The resolution read as follows: "Resolved, That the trustees of the United Mine Workers of America welfare and retirement fund of 1947 do hereby authorize payments of grants to members of the United Mine Workers of America, beneficiaries of the welfare fund, upon the expiration and exhaustion of the United Mine Workers of America welfare and retirement fund of (1946); said payments are to be in accordance with the rules and regulations prescribed by the trustees of the 1946 welfare fund.

"The trustees recognize the right to revoke, amend, rescind, or modify this resolution at any time in accordance with their discretion as experience may dictate."

The Chair called for a vote on the proposed resolution which was as follows: Trustee Lewis, "Aye"; Trustee Bridges, "Aye"; Trustee Van Horn, "Nay."

Trustee Lewis then emphasized that the 1947 trustees were bound to carry on for the beneficiaries as of when and where the 1946 fund ends, but that having once assumed the continuity of payments, they are not bound on the same basis as the 1946 fund (fourteenth meeting of the trustees, UMWA welfare and retirement fund of 1947, June 11, 1948, Washington, D. C.)

TWENTY-EIGHTH DISAGREEMENT

On April 7, 1949, Trustee Bridges submitted a resolution in the form of an amendment to a former resolution, said amendment reducing the eligibility age for pensions for the members of the United Mine Workers from 62 years of age to 60 years of age.

Trustee Van Horn inquired about expenditures and receipts for the month of March. Trustee Van Horn then remarked that "we were spending beyond our income."

Chairman Lewis reverted to the resolution introduced by Trustee Bridges which was presently before the trustees.

Trustee Van Horn stated that he saw no reason to reduce the age limit from 62 to 60, and that he did not think the resolution would do any good and should be held in abeyance.

Trustee Lewis stated that the resolution was timely, essential, constructive, and would place the administration of the fund in relation to pensions in good order. He further cited that the trustees should meet contingencies as they arise and that he personally was for the resolution and only regretted that the age was not placed at 60 when the fund was first initiated; that it had always been the position of the mine workers that 60 years of age should be the age of eligibility, and the entire trend of the time is toward 60 years.

Trustee Bridges stated that the welfare phases of the fund are even less determ.. inable than pensions, without more experience as to their requirements. We now can tell a little about pensions, and it is readily apparent that the change from the age of 62 to 60 will not make any appreciable difference in the pension load. The chairman (Mr. Lewis) called for a vote on the resolution and the vote was as follows: Trustee Lewis, "Aye"; Trustee Bridges, "Aye"; Trustee Van Horn, "Nay" (eighteenth meeting of the trustees, UMWA welfare and retirement fund. 1947, April 7, 1949, Washington, D. C.).

TWENTY-NINTH DISAGREEMENT

On April 7, 1949, Trustee Van Horn stated that he had misplaced his copy of the minutes of the eleventh meeting of the trustees and requested that he be furnished another copy of the same. The chairman (Mr. Lewis) ruled that the minutes of the meetings were the exclusive property of the trustees as such, and not in their individual capacity, and that the minutes would be available to the trustees in the office of the welfare fund, but copies would not be made and sent to the trustees. He stated that this is necessary in order to protect the fund and its beneficiaries and that, moreover, irreparable injury would be caused by any loss of the copies of the minutes of meetings by any one trustee. It was pointed out by the chairman that he did not have copies of the minutes, nor did he ever feel that he was entitled to copies in his individual capacity.

Trustee Van Horn stated that he always had felt that he had a right to copies of the minutes.

Trustee Bridges stated that he had never asked for copies.

The chairman (Mr. Lewis) stated that his action in ruling as he had in relation to the minutes was wholly justifiable in view of the loss of the copy by one of the trustees and the fact that there was constant danger of copies of the minutes falling into the hands of persons who were hostile to the interests of the fund and its beneficiaries. Chairman Lewis directed counsel to forward a duplicate copy of the eleventh meeting to Trustee Van Horn (eighteenth meeting of the trustees, UMWA welfare and retirement fund, 1947, April 7, 1949, Washington, D. C.).

(The following exhibits were submitted for the record by Mr. Van Horn :)

EXHIBIT No. 1

LABOR'S PARTICIPATING ROYALTY

For each ton of coal mined, for use or sale, the producer thereof, by agreement, shall pay to the United Mine Workers of America in behalf of its members a participating royalty of 10 cents per ton.

Such royalty shall be deemed partial compensation in equity to the mine worker for the establishment and maintenance of his ready-to-serve status, so vital to the profit motive of the employer and so imperatively essential to public welfare.

Funds resultant from accrued royalties will be available to the union to provide for its members modern medical and surgical service, hospitalization, insurance, rehabilitation and economic protection.

EXHIBIT No. 2

THE OPERATORS' NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE REJECTION OF LABOR'S PARTICIPATING ROYALTY FOR FOLLOWING REASONS

First, that it is not vested with authority to make a commitment for the industry of this character and that this matter does not go to the question of wages, hours, or working conditions.

Second, that the plan constitutes double taxation on the industry for social welfare, for which it is now paying approximately 10 cents per ton, as follows: Social security__

Compensation insurance_.

Unemployment tax.

Vocational disease insurance.

Total----

$0.0174 .0351

. 0468

.0004

. 0997

which in 1944 amounted to more than $61,000,000. This amount was contributed solely by the operators.

Third, that it is a matter of public concern and is therefore a problem that should be considered not by this wage conference but by public legislative bodies and then only after a complete and thorough investigation by such legislative bodies of all the problems involved.

This proposal presents to the conference a new social theory and philosophy, the effect of which would extend to every industry in America, and as such must be considered and acted upon as a national problem and not as one relating to the coal industry alone, and in the judgment of the committee, we repeat, is one to be considered by public legislative bodies. Without consideration of the cost

to the industry and indirectly to the public, it proposes the imposition of what in effect is a large tax upon the industry and the public by a private enterprise, the United Mine Workers of America. It encroaches directly upon the function of government by usurping the taxing powers and the problems of social welfare and would result in increased cost of coal and lessen the tax income of government.

On the matter of the participating royalty, so-called, requested by the United Mine Workers, the operators have rejected the proposal. As we have called to your attention heretofore, we are now paying approximately 10 cents per ton for social-welfare taxes, which is exactly the amount that the miners are asking us now to contribute. The amouunt of money that we are now paying in socialwelfare taxes is supplemented by vast sums of money raised in local communities for medical and surgical service, hospitalization, and in some places some insurance, and in some places also some rehabilitation. We believe that the raising of funds of this character, provided by local communities, is a matter of public concern and affects alike all citizens in a given community.

We deny the allegation that the mining industry lacks or fails to maintain in communities proper hospitalization, effective and efficient surgical and medical service. In many places these institutions and services are supported jointly by the miners and operators in those communities. Hospitalization in many mining communities is provided at rates substantially less than can be secured in any other industrial community.

We believe that these services are a common obligation upon all citizens in communities. Miners do not, in the main, live in isolated communities. They live in communities where other people live, among and with other people, and receive the same treatment in matters of this kind that the citizens of their communities receive.

We are now paying in social-welfare taxes about $150 per year per man and this would add to it another $150 per man, making a total contribution from the coal companies of $300 per year, to which must be added the great amount of money that is contributed and sustained locally.

We believe it is the imposition of a tax on an industry by a private enterprise. The entire obligation rests upon the party who pays the bill and not upon the one who receives it. We have rejected it as a matter of principle. We have rejected it because we believe that these problems must be worked out as they now are, through Government taxation and implementation of those sums by the respective communities.

This proposal was a new one in this conference. It was unexpected so far as I know by the operators. It presented this committee with a problem which it was not prepared to handle and which it believed it lacked authority to settle on the basis requested by the mine workers. However, since we have been here we have canvassed sentiment in the industry as carefully as we could and as rapidly as we could and we find unanimous opposition in the industry to this proposal.

EXHIBIT No. 3

PROPOSALS

That a health and welfare fund for mine workers be created; adjustment of controversy affecting supervisory, technical, and clerical employees; increase of wages and reduction of daily and weekly working hours, affecting all classifications of inside and outside employees; adjustment of vacation, holiday, and severance compensation; improved safety and compliance with mining, compensation, and occupational-disease laws; adjustment of intradistrict and interdistrict differentials and local inequalities affecting classification and compensation; elimination of inequities and abuses of existing fining and penalty provisions of basic and collateral agreements; amendment of rules and practices to promote mutual accord, increased efficiency, and elimination of the small tyrannies of management; adjustment of controversy incident to unilateral interpretation of existing agreement by operators.

These proposals are submitted constructively and in good faith, and each and all of them are negotiable suggestions.

JOHN L. LEWIS,

President.

JOHN O'LEARY,

Vice President.

THOMAS KENNEDY,

Secretary-Treasurer.

EXHIBIT No. 4

FULL TEXT OF A RADIO BROADCAST, TITLED "THE COAL STRIKE A PUBLIC ISSUE," BY CHARLES O'NEILL, SPOKESMAN FOR THE OPERATORS' NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE OF THE NATIONAL BITUMINOUS COAL WAGE CONFERENCE DELIVERED WEDNESDAY, MAY 1, AT 10 P. M., OVER THE AMERICAN BROADCASTING SYSTEM

The strike of 400,000 coal miners, beginning April 1, is in full force and no progress has been made toward a settlement. This is the most costly strike ever perpetrated against an industry and the American people.

This strike, the first in our history to establish the right to a "dole," is now wrecking the country. It has stopped progress toward reconversion. Hundreds of thousands of employees in other industries are being put out of work. It is depriving the people of the goods they need after 4 years of war. It has stopped the housing program, the production of automobiles, washing machines, radios, and the construction of great power and industrial projects. The country is now on the brink of a disaster greater than anything since Pearl Harbor. From all sources come reports of depletion of coal storages; railroads and public utilities are alarmed and the complete stoppage of essential public services is now in sight. The danger is great and the operators' committee feels impelled to call it to your attention before trains actually stop running or gas and electricity are cut off from homes, hospitals, and schools. It is impossible to visualize the full danger that is directly in front of us. Mr. Lewis calmly awaits these events to happen and proudly boasts of their inevitability. Prolongation of this strike means a great calamity to our Nation's economy.

How did we get into this desperate situation? Mr. Lewis simply refused to negotiate on any questions involved as to wages, hours, or conditions of employment unless the operators surrendered their rights of ownership as a condition precedent to collectively bargaining for a new agreement. Pursued on this subject of real negotiations, Lewis picked up his papers and bolted the conference April 10. He now has returned to the conference, by Government invitation, but he continues to demand that the operators agree in principle upon his request for a royalty tax on coal, without specification or explanation.

The operators charge that John L. Lewis, president of the union, deliberately provoked this strike to seize and demonstrate the power to levy a tax upon the coal production of America and to take over these taxes to the estimated extent of 50 to 60 millions of dollars per year; to spend this money in accord with his desires, without consulting the operators whose money he would use for his own purposes. This deliberate act could only result in a strike of the mines, which he desired.

Mr. Lewis alleges this money is to establish a health and welfare fund for the miners. Up to the present he has refused to show the operators its provisions or explain how it is to be set up and administered, except that the operators are to furnish the money and it is to be administered solely by him. Present social security and unemployment tax and compensation insurance and vocational diseases insurance charges now cost the operators approximately 10 cents per ton, or $57,000,000 in 1945. In 1945 Mr. Lewis named it labor's participating royalty, and set it out in part in the following language:

"(a) For each ton of coal mined the operators to pay a participating royalty of 10 cents per ton.

"(b) Such royalty shall be deemed partial compensation in equity.

"(c) Funds resultant from royalties to provide medical, surgical, etc., services, and economic protection."

The operators rejected this proposal and stated that it was not vested with authority to make such a commitment for the industry; that the plan constituted double taxation on the industry for social welfare; that it was a matter for legislative action and then only after complete and thorough investigation by such bodies; that it presented a new social theory in industry which, if adopted, would extend to every industry in America.

However, the operators, in a desperate effort to prevent a shut-down of the mines, offered to explore the establishment of a reasonable fund to help in unusual hardship cases arising directly out of accidents in coal mines and to pay half the cost; the union to pay the other half; the investigation to disclose the facts and the fund to be based on its findings.

The miners are the highest paid workers in any large labor-employing basic industry. The average daily earnings are $11.50 for every person employed at the mines. Reports to the United States Treasury for withholding taxes

show actual average earnings in 1945 to be $2,885. Adjusting this for 18 percent absenteeism shows an average potential wage of $3,500 per year. Some mine workers actually made over $7,000 in this same year. The operators assert that men earning such high wages can amply support and maintain their families in the same manner as other citizens of the country. There is no necessity for these citizens being accorded different treatment or being furnished special privileges greater than those received by other citizens in the same community. The operators know the miners. The miners are not objects of charity. Miners do not want charity from the public treasury, or from bona fide welfare organizations, or from the expropriated moneys of coal operators doled to them in "hand-outs." The miners are able with their present earnings to maintain a very high standard of living and a first-grade order of citizenship without a dole. It is acknowledged that coal mining is a most hazardous occupation, but there is hazard to safety in all industrial employment and every industry furnishes its quota of pitiful cases.

The union, wealthy as it is, could easily support one-half the cost of the reasonable fund proposed by the operators to help the helpless without increasing the check-off assessment to its members.

If Mr. Lewis is sincere, let him work with the operators jointly in a genuine effort to assist the helpless injured coal miners, thus assuring them protection, with the union and the operators joining to encourage self help, or let him cease shedding crocodile tears because coal operators will not agree to permit him to extort their money for his self-willed expenditure.

Mr. Lewis has been in the industry for a great many years and his sudden interest in safety is suspect by the operators. The so-called investigation that he and his employees presented to the conference was found to be exaggerated 100 percent when the number of fatalities in the 14-year period used by him was really only one-half as large as stated, by figures of the Bureau of Mines. Lewis' proposal to substitute recommendations of the Federal inspectors service, lacking police powers, for the State laws is unsound. The exaggerations and distortions, isolated instances, and part truths used by Mr. Lewis to bolster his assertions about safety, are denied by such authorities as Dan Harrington, Chief of the Safety Division of the Bureau of Mines, who said in February 1946:

"The over-all picture in health and safety in coal mining (both anthracite and bituminous) in the United States in 1945 is one of outstanding accomplishment and of hope for the future, immediate and distant. The trends, with few exceptions, chiefly promise continued reduction of accident rates (fatal and nonfatal)."

The Pennsylvania Department of Mines states that over the period 1940-45 coal mining shows an improvement of 57.4 percent over the 1900-09 period.

A well-known radio commentator recently quoted Mr. Lewis as saying that 25 percent of the men working in the coal mines were injured each year. This is also 100 percent exaggeration.

Records also show that 35 percent of the fatalities result from violation of the law or safety rules and regulations by the victim or the victim and fellow employees; 14 percent result from violations by the victim and mine officials; 20 percent result from carelessness of mine officials, and 31 percent were completely accidental. The operators, however, welcome Mr. Lewis' belated interest in safety and hope his interest will continue. It will be a real help toward improving the accident record in coal mines if the policy of the UMWA at last becomes one of cooperation and responsibility with management to promote safety.

On safety the operators offered the most constructive proposal ever presented this harassed and bedeviled industry. This was to work out a uniform code of safety standards for the Nation; to be supported by miners and operators and jointly recommended to the legislatures of the several coal-producing States. This total prestige and support of the miners and operators in favor of such a genuine proposal assures consideration of it in all quarters and it would certainly become law in the coal-producing States. The operators also proposed to give the miners at each mine the right to have a safety committee vested with power under proper circumstances, to examine places, make effective recommendations and assist in the preparation and enforcement of safety rules and regulations. If Mr. Lewis is really concerned with the promotion and advancement of safety, he would join in the movement, but we fear the discussion of safety is only a smoke screen to fool the public.