SUNT TIA IO Wa1d0dd JS4 iva . } LIBRARY) OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY. 185555 CLEVELAND’S GREATEST PROBLEM RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED TO THE PEOPLE OF CLEVELAND BY THE BUILDING TRADES EMPLOYERS’ ASSOCIATION 4 Key " Mh. N GEBVELAND’S ~ GREATEST PROBLEM RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED TO THE PEOPLE OF €LEVELAND BY THE BUILDING TRADES EMPLOYERS’ ASSOCIATION Ee is a 4 .-. ANIC ALU A FOREWORD MMU NOT MERELY PUBLICITY BUT THE FACTS Cleveland building contractors in various lines have since March 1 been involved in a controversy with unions in the Building Trades Council which has resulted in a partial tie-up of building operations. Most of the contractors involved are members of the Building Trades Employers’ Association, an organi- zation composed of representatives of associations of contractors in diversified lines. It has been pointed out that this situation is por- tentious of the most serious and far-reaching labor struggle Cleveland has ever had. In the end, no matter what the outcome of such a struggle may be, the public will be the judge of the right and wrong in the case. How the public stands in any labor con- troversy has been aptly stated by Henry Demarest Lloyd, a widely known writer. In an article printed in “Labor and Capital,” a recently published book, Mr. Lloyd says: “Whenever there is a strike or lockout the chief party in interest, the people—drift helpless in the cross currents of a choatic sea of public opinions, which struggles in vain to be sound public opinion. All we have is a muddle of hearsay, street talk, NHK Page four] THE BUILDING TRADES MTCC OOOO CCC CCC newspaper reports and statements put out some- times in unscrupulous desperation by beth con- testants. This we must swallow without the possi- bility of disinfection by true publicity.” Whatever Mr. Lloyd means by “true publicity,” the Building Trades Employers’ Association believes with him that the public is entitled to all the facts at issue in the present controversy. The presentation of such facts, vouched for by men of established reputation in the business life of Cleve- land, as briefly and still as completely and accurately as possible, is the purpose of this pamphlet. UM EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION [Page five COCO ee COCO COCO Cee COCO CUCU LLL THE BUILDING INDUSTRY IN CLEVELAND, PRESENT AND PAST On March 1, members of the Building Trades Em- ployers’ Association refused to longer employ mem- bers of Local No. 10, International Hod Carriers’, Building and Common Laborers’ Union. Repeated and persistent violation by the laborers of arbitration clauses in working agreements was the cause of this drastic action. The enforcement of this order was immediately followed by the declaration by the Build- ing Trades Council of a strike of all union workmen on buildings where the laborers had been denied em- ployment. Prior to May 1, 1915, the building business in Cleveland was operated on an open shop basis, though some of the employers had been making agreements with several of the individual organizations of skilled workmen. Not until the date mentioned, however, was there any general action toward making working agreements in writing. Cleveland One of Few Cities To Recognize The Laborers At that time a majority of the employers in the building trades, entered into an agreement with the Building Trades Council covering concrete construc NK Page six] THE BUILDING TRADES CUCU Cee eee eee tion work and recognizing the International Hod Carriers’, Building and Common Laborers’ Union, Local No. 10, then a new union in Cleveland and recognized by scarcely any other city in the United States. Since that time it has been the general prac- tice to make written agreements with the various trades unions in the building industry and these con- tracts have always contained specific clauses provid- ing for the arbitration of any differences which might arise so as to protect both parties to such agree- ments as well as the public, against the economic loss incident to stoppage of work through strikes. Situation Changes With a New Policy by Unions Not a single violation of these written agreements by members of the Building Trades Employers’ Asso- ciation has been charged and until a few months ago the various labor organizations generally kept their agreements. A new element entered into the situation, however, with the announcement by Charles Smith, business agent of the Building Trades Council, that all agree- ments made between local unions and employers must be contingent on the will of the council, to be abro- gated on the orders of the council whenever such action shall be deemed expedient. This announcement, published in the Cleveland NUL EMPLOYERS’ ASSOCIATION [Page seven urvvvereeveeecueevvansuevenvveueseeeunceevacuecceseuuaeceeeuaeeeeeeuceeeeeggeeees ee eee eee ee Federationist, local organ of the American Federa- tion of Labor, said in part: “The Building Trades Council has decided to insist on a section in all agreements between locals and employers giving the men the right to strike at any time when the entire Council votes a strike. We are in favor of the locals making the best agreements they can with the employers but no individual agreement can be permitted to preju- dice the general movement. The first duty of any man associated with the labor movement is to the organization.” Strikes Are Outward Expression of Change This definite announcement of policy was pre- ceded by a growing disposition on the part of various unions in the Building Trades Council to ignore con- tracts and specifically to disregard clauses in such contracts providing for meetings of joint arbitration boards when differences should arise. Strikes have been called on various pretexts and in at least eight instances since Dec. 1, 1916, and before the present trouble, work has been abruptly stopped on large buildings in spite of the existence of arbitration con- tracts in working agreements. The violation of specific clauses has aggregated at least twenty-five if based on individual trades involved in these strikes. The International Hod Carriers’, Building and Common Laborers’ Union has been most persistent in violations of their signed agreement and as a result of EA Page eight] THE BUILDING TRADES HOCTUTECUCUCU TUVALU eee the flat refusal of this union to attend regularly called sessions of the joint arbitration board provided in their contract, the Building Trades Employers’ Association decided to no longer recognize this union. Here Is The Agreement Laborers Have Violated The present working agreement with Local No. 10, was entered into on May 19, 1916, by the Mason Contractors’ Association, (members of the employ- ers’ body) and remains in effect until May 1, 1917. Section 12, in this contract reads as follows: “For the purpose of administering this agree- ment a joint arbitration committee shall be estab- lished by the appointment of five (5) members of the Mason Contractors’ Association and an equal number of members of Local Union No. 10. In case any dispute or disagreement shall arise be- tween such parties, the same shall be reported at once to the chairman of such joint committee who shall call a meeting of the entire committee within twenty-four hours of the receipt of such informa- tion. Should the joint committee be unable to agree upon a decision in the matter each side shall appoint a referee and these two referees shall appoint a third to act with them in consideration of the matter of dispute or disagreement, the deci- sion of this board of referees to be final and bind- ing upon both parties to this agreement. “It is understood and agreed that there shall be no stopping of work through strike, lock-out or any cause whatsoever at any building operation by either of the parties to this agreement, the method FLT EMPLOYERS’ ASSOCIATION [Page nine OUeeeerececcovcscaeecee cucu acccceeeeces cca ceecen eee eteeagceeeeee cane ceeecereauiiieereeseneaicieeeerneieimmeianan of arbitration above referred to being adopted in all cases by the parties hereto in lieu of any other method, insuring to the public the continuous operation of building projects controlled by said parties. It is agreed, however, that members of Local Union No. 10 may, if they so desire, remain away from any building where police protection is employed.” Signed Agreements Fail To Protect Contractor Among eight specific instances of recent building © strikes in violation of the above agreement is the strike which commenced January 13 on a building being erected at W. 93rd St. and Detroit Ave., by the Reaugh Construction Company, a member of the Building Trades Employers’ Association. W. M. Pattison is the owner of the building and the Ohio Blower Company has leased the same on a rental basis. | The Ohio Blower Company operates the sheet metal department in its factory on the open shop plan. For some time the Building Trades Council has been seeking to compel the Blower Company to unionize its shop in response to a demand from the sheet metal workers’? union. A general strike was called on the building January 13, and this strike has been in effect since that date. The Reaugh Construction Company HAS AT ALL TIMES BEEN FAIR TO UNION LABOR and neither non-union sheet metal workers or any HAA Page ten] / THE BUILDING TRADES VOC MTCC other non-union men were employed on the Pattison building. The Building Trades Employers’ Association be- lieves THE UNIONS HAVE TAKEN AN UN- JUST AND UNFAIR POSITION IN THE MATTER. SUM MUMCCAUUOCUTUUTCTUCC EMPLOYERS’ ASSOCIATION [Page eleven SET TACO VUE TUCO U0 OO Th THE “ASK US” POLICY IS LATEST ANNOUNCEMENT Not only has the Building Trades Council pro- mulgated a new platform as to its future attitude toward working agreements, but Business Agent Smith has been quoted in the daily newspapers as de- claring that the members of the Council will in the future erect no buildings to be occupied by individ- uals or firms not approved by union labor. In other words contractors must come to the Building Trades Council for permission to accept contracts and may accept contracts only on condition the Council grants such permission. The decision to refuse to longer recognize the Hod Carriers’, Building and Common Laborers’ Union was not made until after that union had flatly re- fused to attend sessions of the joint arbitration board called in an effort to settle the Reaugh Company strike. Neither was the order to no longer treat with this union put into effect until the Building Trades Council had declined to agree to mediation efforts made by the labor disputes committee of the Cham- ber of Commerce. Unions Reject One of Own Leaders as Mediator In the first mediation proposal, the Chamber of Commerce committee offered the services of Warren NCCU MCMC UMUC Page twelve] THE BUILDING TRADES PU UCC CPUC eee UUCUTOR TER ERPEUEE S. Stone, grand chief of the Brotherhood of Loco- motive Engineers; J. B. Perkins, president of the Hill Clutch Company and W. B. Stewart, attorney, as mediators. ‘The Employers’ Association agreed to this but Charles Smith, business agent of the Building Trades Council, opposed, it declaring that Mr. Stone was the only member of the proposed mediation committee which would be acceptable to labor. The Chamber of Commerce immediately altered its proposal, offering a plan by which Mr. Stone would be the sole mediator. While the Building Trades Employers’ Association announced that it was per- fectly willing to submit its facts to Mr. Stone and abide by his decision, the Building Trades Council reversed its former attitude and flatly refused to enter into mediation with even Mr. Stone, himself a labor leader. The Employers’ Association it will thus be readily seen, exhausted every effort to adjust the differences amicably and took no drastic action until it was cer- tain all other means had failed. Will The Public Permit Throttling of Industries The points now at issue are simple. Contracts must be mutually observed as binding documents to be worth the paper they are written on. The Em- HN EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION [Page thirteen CCC Oe ee we ployers’ Association cannot negotiate with any labor body which persistently ignores contracts made in good faith. If the rank and file of the men in building trades unions are willing to heed the orders of a coterie of business agents blinded by the possibilities of self aggrandizement and permit these leaders to obscure the real issues, the situation cannot easily be ad- justed. If, however, the enlightened among the union workmen heed the call of justice, and recognize the simplicity of the points at issue, the results may be different. The building contractors are but the agents of building owners and the building owners represent the public. Fundamentally the public is a party to the controversy. Will it permit Cleveland’s growth to be throttled at the will of a business agents’ combination? Will it see new industries driven away and placidly watch Cleveland drop behind in the race among cities? BUILDING TRADES EMPLOYERS’ ASSOCIATION Executive ComMmirtrr Grorcr F. Tuesmacuer, President Sam W. Emerson, Vice President Harry Gittert, Treasurer Tra S. GrrrorD C. W. Lunporr H. C. Masters E. Kostrrz A. E. A. Roserts, Executive Secretary W. F. Hennessy, Secretary * ifm | 402 CLEVELAND'S GREATEST PRO | Ml | 2435 01 [ @ pas @ r i= : @® ~~ 2 ” 2 = Oo ® = ~ | HD5325B9C6 Il