You say three labor organizations are represented among the crew members of your association?

Mr. NIZETICH. Correct.

Senator BARTLETT. Will you name those, in addition to local 33? Mr. NIZETICH. Yes. There is a San Pedro independent union, fishermen's union, I think they are now affiliated with the ILWU Local 33 and commonly known as 33-A, and also the Seine and Line Fishermen's Union, AFL-CIO.

Senator BARTLETT. What is the second one again, please?

Mr. NIZETICH. The Seine Line Fishermen's Union, AFL-CIO. Senator BARTLETT. The last two are AFL-CIO?

Mr. NIZETICH. No. That is one. Seine and Line Fishermen's Union, AFL-CIO, is one union, and the San Pedro Independent Fishermen's Union is, I believe, an affiliate of local 33.

Senator BARTLETT. Which local is the biggest, numerically?

Mr. NIZETICH. I believe they are about distributed equally here locally. John may know that better than I. I believe they are just about equal.

Senator BARTLETT. What was the impact on the boatowners when they learned that first the packers were going to cut and did cut the price by $20 a ton and followed it up with a like reduction?

Mr. NIZETICH. The impact was great. It was tragic.

Senator BARTLETT. Tell us what the boatowners have done to try to restore the original price.

Mr. NIZETICH. Upon learning of this price drop-and my sequence of events may not be categorically correct-however, we met with the unions regarding this situation. We recognized the problems that existed at the time of the price drop; namely, the drop in the marketing on a consumer level of fish products caused by things beyond our control, and we recognized this. We met with the canners, and we insisted with the canners individually-I went personally with members of my group to the various canners and indicated to them that we recognized the problem that was confronting them, that we would appreciate and we desired and we demanded that they not cut the price of fish while a vessel was out at sea. This they indicated to us they were unable to do because of the condition of the market and that they could not guarantee anything because they even anticipated that the price of fish would go lower because of this problem.

Now, there is really nothing that we can do at this point. When a boatowner has $100,000 of fish in the hold of the ship, it is detrimental to him, and also to the crewmembers, to stay as a free cold storage for months on end. Not actually admitting the fact that if we did reduce the price that it would unload our catch any faster, we just rolled with the punches and tried to unload our fish as conditions warrant.

I don't know if that is an explanation.

Senator BARTLETT. Yes, it is. I know the market conditions to which you refer, and I don't think we need to go into the reasons for that here in the present record. But you have hope that the demand for the product on the grocery shelves will be soon restored to its former position?

Mr. NIZETICH. I am very optimistic in that respect.

Senator BARTLETT. I guess you have to be in your business.

Mr. NIZETICH. Especially with fish tied up alongside the dock.

Senator BARTLETT. Do you know if the packers have sought to impose any reductions at all upon the Japanese? Because the housewife doesn't know whether she is buying tuna caught by a Japanese boat or an American boat.

Mr. NIZETICH. I think you know this, Senator-and I only say this through conversations with various packers-I would say the majority of the packers on Terminal Island here in southern California have not purchased Japanese fish since late in January. Now, this is what they have told me. Now, I have no way of checking that, and I have reason to believe that they are not telling me a story.

Senator BARTLETT. Did they say why they have not purchased any since late in June?

Mr. NIZETICH. The primary reason is because of their inventories being high, and this problem had occurred in the marketing on consumer levels.

Senator BARTLETT. Now, let me ask you this: $40 a ton on a percentage basis represented a very radical price drop, of course. Can your boats afford to go out at the price now offered?

Mr. NIZETICH. I think that this is a very difficult question to answer. You have to weigh the factors of a vessel that is worth $150,000, whether it is economically sound for him to tie up his vessel and not sail until the price of fish returns to a normal level, or that he take the vessel, go out fishing, catch another load, and come in and unload it at the depressed price. This is, I think, variable with each individual boat. I think that at a time such as we have right now, what purpose will be gained because of the conditions of the market by tying up our fleets and waiting for the market to recover a loaded boat with fish is better than an empty boat standing alongside the dock.

Senator BARTLETT. Except I imagine there would be a limit? Mr. NIZETICH. Yes.

Senator BARTLETT. There would be a limit if he were selling the fish at a price less than the cost of production.

Some people are likely to infer-and that is why I am really asking this series of questions-that your price was too high when it was $10 above what it is now. What would your response be to

that?

Mr. NIZETICH. I would say no, that is not true. In other words
Senator BARTLETT. I thought you might so answer.

Mr. NIZETICH. Like I say, each vessel is in a different category. One vessel may have made a successful two or three trips prior to this glut of fish, or whatever you want to call it, this problem that is confronting us today. Others may have only made one trip. It may be economically sound for this man that has made two or three trips to go out at the depressed price, and in the long run, at the end of the year, the total receipts may be indicative of the fact that that crewmember made a reasonable wage for that year because, if you recall and I am sure that you have had enough experience in the fishing business-it is not the price of fish that counts; it is the amount of fish that you catch and the volume that you catch, and the percentage that you make on that total amount of receipts. This

is a philosophy of fishing that is not accepted in the union circles. However, at the end of the year, it is the end-of-the-year earnings that count. Our fishermen and there are many of them here in the audience today-have made good money; boatowners have made good money, when the price of sardines was $11 a ton. That is because they were able to bring in a load every night. But today the price of sardines is $60 a ton, but they can't catch a hundred tons all year. So the price of fish is not indicative of the true method of determining whether or not a crewmember is making a living, a decent living, or a less than decent living, I guess you would call it. Senator BARTLETT. In another frame of reference, I think some witnesses earlier today said practically the same thing.

Do you agree?

Thank you.

Mr. LEVIN. No questions.

Senator BARTLETT. Thank you very much.

Mr. Monti, please.

STATEMENT OF JOSEPH MONTI

Mr. MONTI. Thank you for the opportunity to appear here on behalf of our people.

My name is Joseph Monti. I represent the Fishermen and Allied Workers Union, Local 33, ILWU, formerly the San Pedro Independent Fishermen's Union.

Senator, I wanted to bring back all these problems to the working fisherman. We have been talking about legality and economics, however, and we only can talk in terms of the man with the boots, who wears the boots, and Mr. Nizetich, who represents the boatowners, says that he rolled with the punches when he got the $40 cut. We reeled and staggered from it.

I want to make a fisherman's plea on behalf of my people. I was fishing up to 2 years ago, and I have been fishing for 17 years, and I want to make a plea for the fisherman. I have had to keep patient here for a long time, and built up to a point now where I am nervous. Ours is an honorable calling. We are workingmen, and we feel it has dignity. We take great pride in it, and when we bring a load of fish in, it has a lot of our sweat.

A cloud of distrust and suspicion is over the whole industry, as you have seen, from the history that you have compiled.

I am surprised that you people know so much about the industry that I don't know about it. We feel big now that you people do know something about what conditions we work under. We bring in fish; we feel it is ours. We worked all night for it. And somebody comes along and says he has the exclusive right to sell it to whomever he wants at whatever price he wants. Well, we lose a little bit of dignity. We bring in our fish, and we are the only producer that isn't allowed to weigh his product. We can't say, "Let me look at the scale."

The cannery says, "20 percent of this fish is unpackable." To whom do we complain?

We go to a boatowner. We say he took 20 percent of our fish. Let's sue. Let's do something. They don't sue on our behalf.

Mr. Schellenberger said that the suit was dropped. He didn't say why it was dropped.

Mr. Margolis explained why it was dropped. We had no legal right as crewmen to sue. The boatowner had that right. So we don't want anything from the canners other than to negotiate those conditions that relate to our wages.

We have a good relationship with the boatowners. We are effective with the boatowners in negotiating the operating expenses the boat has to pay in order to go on a fishing venture. We pay our pro rata share of the food. We pay our pro rata share of the fathometer. We pay our pro rata share of the fuel. We pay our pro rata share of the construction of the net, the mending of the net, in physical toil. We do all this voluntarily. We concede to their conditions. We give them the percentages they ask for. We negotiate properly. But it is all meaningless.

Our take-home pay is not determined in that collective bargaining. The take-home pay is determined at the cannery level, and it is our wages, based on a price, as Mr. Margolis so clearly, unemotionally said, which I can't do without getting excited, and we feel those things. We can't talk in terms of economics. We can't talk in terms of prices. All we can do is talk in terms of wages. We don't just urge this here bill; we want it. We want it and we need it. That is all I have to say.

Senator BARTLETT. Thank you very much.

The committee wants to thank the Yugoslav-American Club of San Pedro for having made this very, very fine hall available for the hearing today.

I want to say for the committee, and for myself and for Mr. Levin, I am sure, that we regard this as the most constructive, informative, and helpful hearing. We are obligated not only to each of you who testified but to all of you who attended, in reference to the flattering remarks that were cast toward the direction of this table. I will say for myself, I don't pretend to know much about fishing. I am a gold miner. But we want to learn more about it. We want to help labor; we want to help management; we want to help the American fishing industry. We know it is badly in need of help.

The committee will be in recess, and we will reconvene at 9:30 o'clock tomorrow morning at the United Portuguese Club, 2818 Addison Street, San Diego.

(Whereupon, at 5:15 p.m., Friday, May 24, 1963, the hearing was adjourned until tomorrow, Saturday, May 25, 1963, in San Diego, Calif.)

FISHERMEN'S MARKETING ACT

SATURDAY, MAY 25, 1963

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON MERCHANT MARINE AND FISHERIES,

San Diego, Calif.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:45 a.m., in the conference hall, United Portuguese Club, 2818 Addison Street, San Diego, Calif., Senator E. L. Bartlett presiding.

Senator BARTLETT. The committee will be in order.

This is a session of the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Subcommittee of the Senate Commerce Committee.

The hearing this morning is on S. 1135. Yesterday in San Pedro a number of witnesses interested in the problem of the establishment of fish prices were heard in either support or opposition to this proposal. As a matter of fact, it was rather a lively hearing, and much testimony which will be highly useful to the committee was offered.

The bill which was introduced by Senator Magnuson of Washington State, chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, and cosponsored by me, would exempt both organizations of fishermen and buyers of fish from the antitrust laws and permit them to bargain collectively as they did before 1954.

Today's hearings will most likely conclude the hearings on this bill here in California. It is certain that at least one more hearing will take place in Washington, D.C., because the testimony of the Government agencies particularly interested and concerned, namely, the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice, is yet to be offered.

We have a written report submitted not long ago by the Department of the Interior, but these other agencies which I have named apparently have a more particular concern in this proposed legislation, and we expect to call them before the committee fairly promptly following our return to Washington.

The first witness this morning is Mr. Felando.

Mr. Felando, we are glad to have you here. You can read your statement in full text if you so desire. You can read it not at all and have it filed in the record and speak extemporaneously, or you can read it in part and speak extemporaneously, or you can use any combination of these methods that you choose.