reason for the proposed enactment does not exist, the proposal should not be made into law. All of the burdens complained of herein operate most rigorously and disastrously against small business. Congress should not add to the momentum of forces constantly discriminating against small units in the fish-processing industry that necessarily tend to force monopolistic conditions. The small fish processor cannot stand additional regimentation. Respectfully submitted. CALIFORNIA SARDINE PRODUCTS INSTITUTE, By DAVID V. OLIVER, Secretary. STATEMENT OF WILLIAM S. SNOW, PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN FISHERIES ASSOCIATION COOPERATIVE, IN OPPOSITION TO THAT PORTION OF SENATE BILL No. 1349, WHICH SEEKS TO EXTEND THE WAGES AND HOURS LAW TO PERSONS EMPLOYED IN PROCESSING, HANDLING, LOADING, AND UNLOADING, ETC., OF SEA FOOD AND FISHERY PRODUCTS THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEE ON LABOR, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: The writer has been closely connected with the fishing industry in practically all its branches for more than 40 years and is familiar with the sea-food industry in all sections of the United States. It is my humble opinion that any person who is reasonably informed as to the facts will readily realize that the peculiar nature of fishery products would require that exemption from the Fair Labor Standards Act should extend to all operations upon fishery products until such products have reached a state of processing that will insure their preservation. In support of this belief I suggest to the committee the following reasons: 1. Fishery products are probably the most perishable of all foodstuffs and in order to insure the consumer a healthful and nutritious product it is necessary that all processing operations of whatever kind, including canning, salting, reduction, or other forms of preservation, take place within a few hours after these products reach the shore. 2. The uncertainty that is inevitable in the taking of fishery products is recognized in the bill under consideration at the present time by continuing the exemption of persons employed on fishing vessels. The present bill takes cognizance of the fact that the taking of fishery products from the sea is dependent upon weather, tide, water conditions, temperatures, phases of the moon and various other natural phenomena over which man has no control, and for this reason, it is not practical to fix the hours for the performance of this work. It is, therefore, inconsistent to extend the exemption to the catching of fishery products and to fail to continue the exemption to the loading, unloading, processing, canning, etc., of such products. 4. The four largest fisheries in the United States are the pilchard, salmon. tuna, and menhaden. In most of these industries the workers are paid a fixed salary by collective bargaining contracts with active labor unions of national scope, and in many instances, the workers' pay is at a rate in excess of the minimum fixed by the Fair Labor Standards Act. 5. Where fish processing plants are located in populous communities and come into competition with other industries for labor, the fisheries industry has found it necessary to pay a higher wage scale in order to obtain labor by reason of the fact that the handling of fishery products is not considered the most pleasant of occupations. 6. In most of the smaller processing plants, the workers' pay is fixed on a weekly, monthly, or yearly basis. This has been found necessary in order to insure to the worker a steady take-home pay. 7. Where fish processing plants are located in isolated places, it is necessary for the employer to provide dormitories, mess halls, and other necessary living quarters in order to insure a steady level of employees ready at all times to process the catch upon arrival at the shore station. 8. To require that workers in fishery processing plants be employed on an 8-hour basis would result in either of two systems: the employers would be required to maintain three shifts of workers at all times, or else, would be obliged to pay employees for 8 hours on a basic wage scale and for 16 hours on an overtime basis. This statement can be readily borne out by anyone who is familiar with the fisheries industry and who is aware of the fact that the time of arrival of the vessels at shore stations is as uncertain as the elements that govern the taking of fishery products. 9. The result to the workers would necessarily mean a reduction in takehome pay because of the small margin of profit upon which the processing plants are obliged to operate and the uncertainty as to the catch. Many of the smaller processing plants would be obliged to go out of business, and the larger processors would be obliged to arrange for the presence of the workers only at those periods when there were fishery products to be processed; thus, the relationship between employer and employee whereby the employee is guaranteed a steady pay envelope would be destroyed. 10. During the poor seasons when the catch of fishery products fell below normal, processing plants would hesitate to risk operations on a basis of overtime pay for 16 hours, or else would be unable to obtain a sufficient number of em ployees to operate on a three shift basis. 11. The catching and processing of fishery products is the greatest gamble in all industry, and individuals engaged in both branches of the industry often hold on in the face of loss by reason of the fascination of chance-taking; however. if the employer is required to operate on a basis of pay that would insure loss except during periods of exceptionally good catches, the element of chance would largely disappear and the business would then be operated of necessity in the same manner as an industry engaged in processing steel, or other manufactured commodities. SUMMARY I therefore believe that the committee should leave the law as it is. I further believe that after a careful study of the facts, the committee will realize that the extension of the wage-and-hour provision to the processing of fishery products will result in harm to both employee and employer, and will further result in a sharp reduction in the amount of sea food available to the consumer. In the United States the fisheries industry receives less encouragement from the Government than in any other maritime nation on earth, and for that reason among others, the fisheries industry has been for many years known as a “sick industry." Any attempt on the part of the Federal Government to fix hours of work in an industry where the element of uncertainty exists as it does in the fisheries industry will in some instances offer additional handicaps, and in others, complete destruction of an industry that furnishes employment and food to those areas of the Nation where food and employment are most needed. I firmly believe that the proposed bill now under consideration will create a chaotic condition far beyond the imaginings of those persons who sponsor the present bill. OCTOBER 18, 1945. AMERICAN FISHERIES ASSOCIATION COOPERATIVE, STATEMENT OF CENTRAL CALIFORNIA SARDINE ASSOCIATION, MONTEREY, CALIF. Central California Sardine Association most respectfully submits its objections to those portions of H. R. 3719, H. R. 3837, H. R. 3839, H. R. 3844, H. R. 3914, H. R. 3928, and H. R. 4222 to the extent that each seeks to eliminate the exemption of employees engaged in the processing, packing and canning, et cetera, of fishery products as set forth in section 13 (a) (5) of the Fair Labor Standards Act. It is submitted that the reasons of policy which first caused the Congress to embody this exemption in the Fair Labor Standards Act are still sound and should prevail. These are: 1. This industry and its employees are engaged in the processing of a perishable commodity by reason of which hours of work cannot be controlled. 2. The operations of the industry and the work of its employees must be integrated with that of the catching of fish which, in turn, is subject to the vagaries and variations of weather, season, tide, evolution and just plain luck. 3. The industry is engaged in converting and rendering into a form suitable for public use an economic asset (fish) which in its natural state is owned by the public. 4. Not only the industry, but primarily the public, has a direct interest in making certain that there is a minimum of economic waste in converting the fish, owned in their natural state by the people, into a form in which the people can utilize this public asset. At the present time the technology of the industry has not progressed to the point when fish can be preserved more than a few hours and still be processed for human consumption. Canned sardines are one of the least expensive methods of getting into the human system calories, certain proteins, and certain important vitamins. It is the poor man's food. If the 40-hour week is imposed upon the industry, the probable consequences will be (a) Fishing for sardines wil be carried on only about 4 nights a week instead of 6 nights a week as at present, thereby diminishing the operations during the legal sardine season by one-third. (b) Because of the fluctuations of supply there will be wastage in the processing of fish in that it cannot economically regularly be handled at overtime rates. (c) If the fish is processed at overtime rates, this will so increase the cost of production that canned sardines will cease to be the poor man's food. The most important byproducts of the industry are fish meal and fish oil, which are very largely used in the feeding of animals. If the exemption is eliminated, there will follow a substantial increase in cost of this food to the farmers whose costs have already been so considerably increased by other factors. Petitioners likewise protest those portions of the above House resolutions which are designed to establish a statute of limitations of 5 years for the commencement of actions under the Fair Labor Standards Act. This would extend by at least 2 years the applicable period of limitation in California. It is a most reactionary proposal. All modern juridical thinking tends to support the shortening rather than the lengthening of periods of limitation on actions. Five years would be far out of proportion to allowable periods for the bringing of other and similar types of actions under modern and revised statutes of limitations. Such an extension would be grossly unfair when coupled with the decisional rule of the Supreme Court of the United States that, in effect, back-wage claims cannot be compromised. It is well inside the truth to say that extending the period of liability, combined with the invalidity of compromise, exposes the most innocent employer to penalties so heroic that any slight mistake in the application of the law, or any of the constant changes in judicial interpretation of the law, may easily carry the employer irretrievably beyond the brink of bankruptcy. Governmental experience has shown that the extent of compliance with any statute is not necessarily in ratio to the severity of the penalty. On the other hand, all governmental experience shows that extending penalties is subjeet to the law of diminishing returns. It is a legal axiom that the law should aid only the vigilant. The extension of the period to 5 years is not to permit wider enforcement but to provide more lethal penalties. This will be its only effect. This protest is filed on behalf of all (25) member operators employing approximately 3,000 workers at the height of the normal processing season, located in and near the port of Monterey, Calif. This is the principal industry of the city of Monterey, which city is one of the leading sardine fish-tonnage ports of the world, as the following figures will substantiate: STATEMENT OF CALIFORNIA FISH CANNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. California Fish Canners Association, Inc., is a trade association composed of canners and processors of fish with its principal office at Terminal Island, Calif. Its members can the major portion of tuna fish produced in the United States, and also can large quantities of mackerel and sardines. They also produce fish meal and oil. H. R. 3719, H. R. 3837, H. R. 3844, H. R. 3914, H. R. 3928, and H. R. 4222, now being considered by the House Committee on Labor, provide among other things for the elimination from section 13 (a) (5) of the sea food and fishery exemption of the Fair Labor Standards Act of the following words: “and including employment in the loading, unloading, or packing of such products for shipment or in propagating, processing, marketing, freezing, canning, curing, storing, or distributing the above products or byproducts thereof." The effect of this amendment will be to subject the canners of fish and processors of the byproducts of fish to the minimum-wage and maximum-hour provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The association is advised that all the time on the calendar of the House Committee on Labor has been allocated and that it would, therefore, be impossible for the association to present oral testimony concerning its position on these bills. The California Fish Canners Association, Inc., therefore, files this against the enactment of legislation changing the present sea food and fishery exemption in the Fair Labor Standards Act. It is elementary that after fish are recovered from the ocean and other waters, the recovery must be followed as rapidly as possible by canning or processing in order to preserve the catch. Canning or processing commences immediately following the landing of the fishing boats. On May 24, 1938, Congressman S. O. Bland, chairman of the Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, United States House of Representatives, speaking in behalf of certain provisions of the bill that is now the Fair Labor Standards Act, said: "By all the rules that apply to agriculture, and then some, the fishery industry ought to be exempted. If there is any industry under heaven that cannot measure its operations by the rules that are applicable under this bill, it is the fishery industry. It is as varied in the different sections of the country, almost, as the different fishing sections themselves, some by reason of participation in the fish caught, some by reason of wages, as well as various other operations. The industry is confronted not alone by the vicissitudes that apply to agriculture, but also wind, wave, action of the tide, fogs, and various other conditions that must, necessarily, determine operations in the fishery industry. You may legislate all you please as to number of hours, 'but the fish that are running will not obey your legislation. You may legislate all you please with respect to any provision in this bill, but when it comes to fogs and waves and wind and tide you are dealing with a situation that is far beyond this bill or the operation of any bill. You are dealing, when you deal with the fishery industry, with a condition that needs assistance, that needs help, and has received just about as little as any industry in the country. "I ask you, in defense of this great interest, that it be given the same benefits that are given to agriculture" - (83 Congressional Record, p. 7408). Fishing, fish canning, and fish reduction are now equally important parts of the same industry. Congress recognized this in joining the treatment for all of these parts of the industry in one exemption to the Fair Labor Standards Act, the sea food and fishery exemption, section 13 (a) (5). The processing and canning of fish, like time and the tides, wait for no man, and the number of hours required to process fish after the landing of a fish boat cannot be forecast. These "facts of life" caused Congress to enact the sea food and fishery exemption (sec. 13 (a) (5)) in the first place. These facts likewise 1 Members of the California Fish Canners Association, Inc., are California Marine Curing & Packing Co., Terminal Island, Calif.; Coast Fishing Co., Wilmington, Calif.; French Sardine Co., Terminal Island, Calif.: Franco-Italian Packing Co., Inc., Terminal Island, Calif.; Sardamack Fisheries, Wilmington, Calif.; Southern California Fish Corp.. Terminal Island, Calif.; South Coast Fisheries, Inc., Terminal Island, Calif.; South Pacific Canning Co., Long Beach, Calif.; Terminal Island Sea Foods, Ltd.. Terminal Island, Calif.; Van Camp Sea Food Co., Inc., Terminal Island and San Diego, Calif., and Astoria, Oreg.: West Coast Packing Corp., Long Beach, Calif. Westgate Sea Products Co., San Diego, Calif.; Western Canners Co., Newport Beach, Calif. caused the operation of fish canneries and fish-processing establishments to be based on (a) Processors ready to process fish as soon as fishing boats land; and (b) Processors and the employees thereof ready and willing to continue processing operations without interruption as long as necessary after the fishing boat arrivals, to insure the preservation of the natural resource—fish, Collective-bargaining agreements negotiated in each and every instance in southern California on the part of the workers by strong unions-either affiliates of the AFL or CIO-provide not for a 40-hour week, but for continuous operation until fish is processed. Congress, in enacting in the Fair Labor Standards Act, sought to eliminate "labor conditions detrimental to the maintenance of minimum standards of liv ing, necessary for health, efficiency, and general well-being of workers” (declaration of policy contained in 29 U. S. C., sec. 202). There are no labor conditions "detrimental to the maintenance of minimum standards of living necessary for health, efficiency, and the general well-being of workers" in the fish-processing industry in southern California. Imposition of the 40-hour week on this industry would actually lower average pay and contribute to a reduction of minimum standards of living of employees. The association also protests the addition to the Fair Labor Standards Act of the 5-year statute of limitations. The members of this association cannot conduct their business in such uncertainty. Congress should not add to the momentum of forces constantly discriminating against small business that necessarily tend to force monopolistic conditions. The small fish processor cannot stand additional regimentation. Respectfully submitted. CALIFORNIA FISH CANNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., By CHAS. A. WINKLER, Secretary. |