Lapas attēli

damaging effect it would have to eliminate the manufacturing clause of the copyright law. It should be remembered also that the above quoted statement by Dr. Solberg referred only to Great Britain and her colonies.

The natural consequence of Dr. Solberg's statement is to conclude that "fully three-quarters of the books published from year to year in Great Britain and her colonies," which failed to be copyrighted, would be copyrighted if we joined the Copyright Union, and therefore would be sold in the United States without being printed here. Then the number of English books by foreign authors sold here would be multiplied by four. Thus, the Labor Department's estimate of 410 workers would become 1,640 workers displaced every year by not manufacturing in the United States books from the British Empire alone.

The more books in the English language by foreign authors sold to Americans (at cheap prices), the less opportunity for sale of American-written and Americanproduced books.


Certainly the entire printing industry of employers and employees alike should be given credit for knowing as much about it as two or three assistants in the Department of State.

Is it more important "to allay the increasing irritation" of a few foreign authors than to prevent breaking down proper safeguards to the printing industry?

If foreign authors get access to our market without producing their books in this country, the next step naturally will be the complaint of American authors that they are suffering from unfair competition and want the manufacturing requirement removed from their books. Such action would be disastrous to the American printing industry.

For over 100 years the American printing trades workers have set an example of constructive trades-unionism. We have built up standards that need more protection rather than the destruction of the small amount of protection we have at this time in the copyright law.

It is noted throughout the published record of previous hearings that both Dr. Solberg and Dr. McClure, of the State Department, insist that the principal obstacle to our entry into the International Copyright Union has been the stipulation that before an American copyright can be issued the applicant must show that the copyrighted book was produced in the United States.


Thus the issue is clear. Shall we adhere to the copyright convention because, as Dr. Solberg says, it is "desirable as a diplomatic measure tending to allay the increasing irritation of foreign authors, especially English authors," or shall we refuse to adhere to the copyright convention until such time as our manufacturing clause is acceptable to other countries, thereby protecting the interests of 175,000 American printing trades workers, and also thereby "tending to allay the increasing irritation" of that large number of American citizens who are compelled year after year to oppose the State Department in this particular "diplomatic measure?"

It would seem that it was incumbent upon the State Department to make some intelligent effort to find out what the conditions would be if adherence to the copyright union was accomplished. This the State Department failed to do. On the contrary, the gesture of producing figures through the Department of Labor created the impression that they had made proper investigation while, as a matter of fact, the figures were based on a false premise and were wholly misleading.

The proponents of adherence to the copyright convention (State Department) state frankly,

"Unfortunately, reliable statistics directly answering this inquiry appear to be unobtainable * * * Nevertheless, there are pertinent facts from which to elicit discussion."

Notwithstanding such a definite statement, they then offer statistics, from which much is assumed but nothing proven. No break-down of exports and imports as to class of books or countries is made. Truly, the supporters of the copyright convention have no reliable figures or facts upon which to base their predictions or wishful thoughts.


The effect of adhering to the copyright convention was described by the Honorable Clarence C. Dill, United States Senator from the State of Washington, at a committee hearing in May 1934, as follows: "The thing I want to discuss most about this bill, about this whole proposition, is the part of the bill which, in the beginning, provides that all alien authors not domiciled in the United States by virtue of the adherence of the United States to the convention, and so forth, will have their works protected, and then section 2 provides that from and after the date upon which adherence to said convention of 1908 becomes effective, copyright protection shall be accorded without compliance with any conditions or formalities whatever for works by such alien authors who are nationals of any country which is a member of the International Copyright Union.

"Now, what does this mean? That simply means that they propose by this bill to wipe out 140 years of consistent legislation on the part of the United States in regard to copyright. They must do that, because the Berne Convention forbids any formality as to copyrights."

In the printed record of that committee hearing will be found statements and information submitted by Dr. McClure, of the State Department, containing an opinion by Attorney General C. Cushing, clearly indicating that the above quoted statement from Senator Dill is quite true.

Senator Dill also said, "We have the greatest market for copyrights in the world. I think it is equal, probably, to that of all of the rest of the world. We have a market, not only for copyrights, but we have for patents. We found that the rest of the world was so anxious to have the right of foreigners in their patents protected that they modeled their statutes to meet ours, rather than for us to repeal ours to meet theirs."

It may well be that after the conclusion of the present world war the American market will be the only one which can afford the luxury of many books protected by copyright laws. It seems decidedly unreasonable to turn that market over to foreign authors who not only know more about what is happening now but who could have the added advantage of printing their works at a fraction of the cost of manufacture in this country and thus not only work a hardship on the American printing trades workers but upon the authors as well.


Executive Report No. 4 of April 1935, quotes the text of the convention, as of June 2, 1928, article 4, sections (1) and (2) are as follows:

"(1) Authors within the jurisdiction of one of the countries of the union shall enjoy for their works, whether unpublished or published for the first time in one of the countries of the union, such rights, in the countries other than the country of origin of the work, as the respective laws now accord or shall hereafter accord to nationals, as well as the rights specially accorded by the present convention. "(2) The enjoyment and the exercise of such rights shall not be subject to any formality; such enjoyment and such exercise are independent of the existence of protection in the country of origin of the work. Consequently, apart from the stipulations of the present convention, the extent of the protection, as well as the means of redress guaranteed to the author to safeguard his rights, shall be regulated exclusively according to the legislation of the country where the protection is claimed."

If it is possible to wipe out all of our copyright laws by adhering to this convention, would it not be possible also to describe as a "formality" the imposition of tariff duties on imported books? It would seem exceedingly dangerous to take on vague obligations, the interpretation of which may be determined by other than American courts.


If the cost of printing in foreign countries were such as to exceed the cost of production in the United States, there would be no objection on the part of the foreign nations to the manufacturing clause of our present copyright laws. The fact that the reverse is true indicates quite clearly the reason for wanting to destroy our manufacturing clause. Competitive conditions do have a great bearing on the question of our joining the copyright union.

The condition as regards competition from foreign countries varies only in degree but not in effect. European workers in all except dictatorship countries work 48 hours per week or longer; in Asiatic countries approximately 66 hours,

for a fraction of the average American wage. The American workweek is generally established at 40 hours. As regards dictatorship countries it is needless to say free enterprise cannot compete with a wholly government-controlled economy.

The secretary-treasurer of the association by governmental appointment served as workers' delegate to the Tri-Partite Conference on the Printing and Kindred Trades held in Geneva, Switzerland, preparatory to consideration by the International Labor Office of a 40-hour convention for that industry.

The attitude of the European and Asiatic printing employers was so hostile to any reduction in the work-week that no favorable action could be taken. The same hostility was manifested during the second conference as reported by Delegate Frank X. Martel of Detroit, Michigan, who says:

"The attitude of the employing printers of the civilized nations at the Geneva Conference clearly indicates they intend to resist all efforts to the establishment of a uniform 40-hour workweek in the printing industries.

"The provisional record of the 1937 conference, issue No. 31, page 514, gives the roll call on the convention for the 40-hour workweek in the printing and kindred trades. This roll call will show that out of 115 votes cast representing the Governments, the employers and the workers, there were 72 votes in favor of the convention and 43 against it, or 4% votes short of the required two-thirds majority. The roll call discloses that the employers' representatives from the United States and the Soviet Russia were the only ones that voted in favor of the 40-hour workweek.

"The opposition to the 40-hour convention was led by the employing printers of the British Empire who had the solid support of the Government delegation of the British Empire and the Scandinavian countries who are under the domination of British influence.

"At the first session of the committee on the shorter workweek for the printing industry, the employers' representatives with the exception of the United States, Belgium, and Russia, voted to discard even consideration of a 40-hour convention during the 1937 conference. A majority vote, however, ordered a convention and the employers' delegates sat through the proceedings for a period of 2 weeks and then registered their vote in committee against the convention arrived at by the workers and governmental delegates. The official record of the remarks of the employers' delegate as printed in the provisional record clearly indicates the hostility of the European printing employers to the shorter workweek in the printing industry.

"Any thought entertained at this time permitting European printers to compete with American printers for the American market is indefensible."

It is thus plain that the European and Asiatic printing employers have a great advantage in production costs over American employers and they fully intend to maintain that advantage. The workers are not in a strategic position to engage in strikes for the reason that in most countries they are afraid of their governments or as in England feel the pressure of employer influence determined to keep trade advantage.

The printing trades workers in the United States have been successful in reducing hours and raising wages only because the market could stand the resultant increase in costs. To subject our printing industry to increasing burdens of foreign competition will destroy opportunity for progress and drag down established conditions which are the result of long years of patient effort.


In view of all facts it is to be expected the printing trades unions will be alarmed by any law or treaty which will still further reduce the earnings of the members, place our standards of employment, wages, and hours in direct competition with low-paid labor in foreign countries and further contribute to an already aggravated unemployment problem.

It should be clear to all persons concerned that the letting down of existing bars against those conditions prevailing in foreign countries would bring about a chaotic condition. Even with the present protection, there has been and is continuing a very decided problem of unemployment. Any further moves in that direction must of necessity be opposed for the welfare of our own people.

The International Typographical Union keeps a complete record of employment and earnings and publishes full information for its membership, Similar records are kept by other printing trades unions but rather than cause confusion with too many statistics we will refer only to the Typographical Union records, which are typical.


That an aggravated condition of unemployment existed even in 1929, which is generally referred to as a high point in industrial conditions, is proved by the following table of actual earnings as compared with the weekly wage provided in the contracts.

It will be noted that in 1929 the average weekly contract wage was $49.31 while the actual average earnings were only $44.76, or only 90.77 percent of the wage which would have been received for full-time work.

As of June 20, 1940, that percentage of possible full-time weekly earnings has been further reduced to 80.67 percent. The actual average earnings have dropped to $38.02 as compared with $44.76 in 1929. Present actual earnings are only 88.87 percent of those in 1929.

[blocks in formation]


We submit still further enlightening facts to show the total annual earnings of typographical union members in 1921 and from 1929 to 1940. During this period we saw the total annual earnings increase from $141,964,382 for the fiscal year 1921, to $183,874,801 for the year ending June 20, 1930, with substantially the same membership. Then this total annual income and purchasing power dropped almost precipitately to $116,505,212 for the year ending June 20, 1934, a reduction of approximately $67,000,000.

As of June 20, 1940, the total annual earnings have recovered to only $156,876,281, which is yet $27,000,000 under 1929-30.

[blocks in formation]

We do not believe it is the desire of any Member of Congress to add further to this story of lost earnings and reduced purchasing power of many substantial citizens of this Nation for the possible benefit of others, and we do not believe this will be permitted once the actual facts are known.

To reduce the workday and workweek of its members the International Typographical Union from 1891 to 1922 expended nearly $24,000,000 in industrial conflicts in order to provide work, to improve working conditions, and to increase purchasing power.

With this tremendous effort we still are confronted with unemployment, and decreasing earnings due to some extent to foreign competition in imports of printed matter.


In 1933 the members of the International Typographical Union voluntarily divided their available work and thereby reduced their weekly earnings by 16% percent, which was and is an additional loss to those regularly employed which does not show in total earnings, but does definitely affect each contributor and helps the recipient.

Since 1933 the members employed on newspapers have directly contributed in division of work to those who would otherwise be unemployed a total exceeding $58,000,000, not including 1937. In addition to the division of work the total benefits to members have exceeded $27,000,000, or a grand total of all benefits of $86,144,367.52. The table showing these expenditures by years ending April 30 of each year follows:

Total financial benefits, International Typographical Union

[blocks in formation]

1 day's work per week contributed to the unemployed by approximately 35,000 of its members on newspapers at average wage of $8 per day for years 1933 to 1936, inclusive.


3, 179, 749. 24

4,496, 301.80

$27, 904, 367. 52


86, 144, 367. 52

Surely Members of Congress will take no action which will nullify or make ineffective the degree of social welfare developed, established, and maintained by the members of the International Typographical Union and other printing trades



The Typographical Union pioneered in social security, establishing in 1908 a pension for its members, the experience of which was given serious consideration in the development of the present Federal social-security program.

For pensions alone in 32 years the union has expended $31,376,675.

The union pioneered in funeral benefits and in this activity has during the past 49 years expended $12,283,759.46.

For education of apprentices the union has expended more than a half million dollars.

To maintain one of the finest sanatoriums and a haven of refuge for aged and incapacitated members the International Typographical Union has expended more than $9,000,000 in the past 50 years.

There can be no real desire to establish a condition in the printing industry which will in any manner interfere with, restrict, or discourage the continuance of such welfare activities.

With this record of continuous constructive progress and caring for our members we should not be required to defend the industry and our membership against the competition of foreign nations whose wages, hours and conditions of labor are not comparable in any respect with the conditions of this Nation. And we do not believe we will be so required when you know the actual facts.

For 100 years progress has been made. The life expectancy of printing trades workers has increased from 28 to 62 years. The average annual earnings have increased from $897 in 1909 to $1,977.09 in 1940. But the present annual aver

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »