The Papers of Clarence
Mitchell Jr.
and of the NAACP
Washington Bureau 1942 - 1978
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Synopses
Documents
Background
|
(Proposed Program) July 25, 1946 NAACP LABOR DEPARTMENT OBJECTIVES
1. Elimination of: discriminatory employment practices in industry
and government which result in refusal to hire colored workers, wage
differentials based on race, 2. Greater participation of colored persons in the trade union movement. 3. Ending of segregated locals, auxiliaries and other discriminatory practices in labor unions. 4. Passage of state and federal FEPC legislation 5. Inclusion of non-discrimination clauses in state and federal laws pertaining to the employment of persons in the execution of government contracts. 6. Joining with labor unions for the enactment of legislation favored by labor and for the repealing of unfavorable legislation. 7. Expanding and improving opportunities for vocational training on the basis of non-segregation.
The Secretary of the Labor Department is responsible to the Executive Secretary of the Association. The work of this department shall be coordinated with the activities of the Legal Department and the Branch Department by regular meetings with the Secretary and these department heads. There shall be formed a labor committee of Board members and such other persons as may be needed to further the objectives of this program. Labor committees shall also be formed in local branches.
DUTIES The National Committee shall work with the Secretary in achieving the objectives of this program. This committee shall also make recommendations to the Board on the labor policy to be followed by the NAACP. This shall include recommendations on the endorsement or rejection of proposed labor legislation. Local committees shall initiate, within the framework of a specified operating procedure, positive action to achieve the objectives of this program. Branch labor committees shall also receive and investigate complaints alleging discrimination because of race in hiring, upgrading, wage payments, training, or dismissals from employment.
RELATIONSHIPS WITH UNIONS It shall be the duty of branches to keep informed on the local practices of labor unions. This includes giving assistance in building the membership of these unions organizing on a non-segregated basis. Some unions such as the United Automobile Workers have extensive machinery against discrimination. Branch labor committees should become familiar with their machinery and urge local union officials to make it work. In other cases locals of international unions with discriminatory policies are working to eliminate such policies. This is true in the case of the International Association of Machinists.[2] Although the union has a prohibition against Negroes in its ritual, many locals have actually included colored persons and in recent conventions of the machinists, the vote to eliminate the color bar has gained new support. The branch committee can speed up this type of progress by informing the National Office of liberal persons in such unions who may be counted on to give support to a plan of ending discriminatory features. Whenever local unions are negotiating contracts with management, the branch committee should seek the inclusion of non-discrimination clauses in such contracts both as to hiring and conditions of employment. Whenever such requests are made, the National Office should be advised in order that it may obtain assistance from the international union on this matter. It is important that branch labor committees promote a more active participation of Negroes in local unions. This means that committee representatives should meet with local union officials to study ways of increasing those meetings during which important policy questions are being discussed or elections are being held.
The labor committee of the branch shall have the responsibility of reporting to the National Office any proposed city ordinances or state laws which are against the best interest of labor. Also favorable legislation proposed shall be submitted to the National Office in order that the Association may have a uniform policy on such matters throughout the country. Such legislation shall be studied jointly by the labor and legal departments of the National Office. In submitting matters of this kind the recommendations of the branch shall be included. It is important that this phase of the program be given careful attention. Numerous state bills and proposed city Fair Employment Practice are being submitted in various parts of the country. The NAACP should endorse only the strongest and best of such legislative proposals. In addition, various state legislatures undertake the passage of hostile labor laws which should be defeated because of the adverse effect they have on the progress of organized labor with the resultant ill effect on colored persons. By showing its recognition of the common objectives existing for both colored persons and labor, the NAACP will promote increased harmony between these groups.
VOCATIONAL TRAINING The branch labor committee shall work with the education committee (where the latter exists) in evaluating local tax supported vocational programs. Where such programs fail to offer equal opportunity for colored and white students, the labor committee shall take action to eliminate such inequality. The National Office labor department shall be kept informed on such matters in order that it may give advice and assistance in handling them. MS: copy, NAACP II: A-662, DLC. The date of this document, Mitchell’s second draft, is based on that of his cover letter to Walter White, which is 7/25/46. Mitchell explained to White that he had omitted the operating procedure because he was revising them and hoped to have them ready for him in a few days. (See 8/1/46.) He said he was also circulating the proposed program to other staffers to solicit their ideas for strengthening it. Among the persons, he said, he wanted to invite to participate on the planned NAACP National Labor Committee were Eleanor Roosevelt, Fiorello LaGuardia, George L.P. Weaver, Willard Townsend, Boris Shishkin, Palmer Weber, Father Francis J. Gilligan, Harry L. Kingman, Thurgood Marshall, and Charles L. [H.] Houston. He noted that White knew all of them, except Gilligan, who was chairman of the Governor’s Interracial Committee in Minnesota, and Kingman, who had been FEPC West Coast regional director in California. Mitchell letter to White, 7/25/46, NAACP II: A-337, DLC. For the actual list of members of the NAACP National Labor Committee see, in appendix, Operating Manual, 3/7/47. Responding in a letter of 8/8/46 to the proposal, which Mitchell had circulated, Robert L. Carter, NAACP assistant special counsel said that he and Marian Wynn Perry, another member of the legal staff with whom he had shared the draft, felt that it was excellent and would fill a gap that badly needed to be bridged in the organization’s program respecting the full cooperation with trade union activity. To strengthen the program, Carter suggested that Mitchell also make aiding the veteran in getting rehabilitated and reintegrated into the economic and social life of the country a major objective. “This means that we must assist the veteran in obtaining his old job under existing laws and in obtaining new job opportunities in all forms of industries,” Carter said. He also suggested that the NAACP’s labor program should be “drilled” into the organization’s youths. “Your program and policy should be made a part of the program and policy of the Youth Department and major effort should be made to indoctrinate members of our Youth Department in the wisdom and necessity of NAACP having an effective workable labor program,” he said. Carter to Mitchell, 8/8/46, NAACP II: A-662, DLC. [1] See, in appendix, 6/5/41 for origin of the idea for a NAACP labor secretary; and 8/1, 11/30, 12/30/46 for subsequent comments. [2] See FEPC and Unions headnote and texts related to the IAM in Vols. I and II.
December 30, 1946ANNUAL REPORT OF NAACP LABOR DEPARTMENT The NAACP's Labor Department was set in July 1946.[i] Its objectives are: 1. Elimination of discriminatory employment practices in industry and government which result in refusal to hire colored workers, wage differentials based on race, unequal opportunities for training and promotion, unfair dismissals, and segregation in employment because of race. 2. Greater participation of colored persons in the trade union movement. 3. Ending of segregated locals, auxiliaries, and any other discriminatory practices in labor unions. 4. Passage of state and federal FEPC legislation. 5. Inclusion of non-discrimination clauses in state and federal laws pertaining to the employment of persons in the execution of government contracts. 6. Joining with labor unions for the enactment of legislation favored by labor and for the repealing of unfavorable labor legislation. 7. Expanding and improving opportunities for vocational training on a non-segregated basis. To assist in implementing these plans, we have formed a National Labor Committee[ii] made up of the following persons: Board Members[iii] Charles H. Houston Alfred Baker Lewis Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt A. Philip Randolph Palmer Weber Public Member Father Francis J. Gilligan Chairman Governor's (Minnesota) Interracial Commission CIO Members AFL MEMBERS Walter P. Reuther Boris Shishkin President of UAW-CIO Economist, AFL George L. P. Weaver Frank Fenton Director, National CIO Committee Director of to Abolish Discrimination Organization, AFL Willard S. Townsend Nelson Cruikshank President, Transport Service Director of Social Employees of America Insurance, AFL
Each branch is asked to organize a labor committee, especially in the strategic industrial areas. To assure a uniform approach, we have prepared a manual which has been sent to key branches for criticism and revision. Ultimately, this document will be printed and available for general distribution among the branches. At its first meeting in October, the National Labor Committee agreed upon the following major legislative goals on which there should be joint NAACP and labor union action:
Cooperation with Labor The July NAACP conference adopted a resolution supporting the organizing drives of the AFL and the CIO in the South.[iv] From time to time we have received reports of cooperation extended to unions by our local branches. For example, the Pulp and Sulphite Workers of the AFL, the Steel Workers of the CIO, and others report cooperation of branches both in organizing and strikes. The weeks ahead hold many severe tests for labor and minority groups. The NAACP's Labor Department will oppose with vigor any attempts in Congress to saddle on the American working people legislation designed to curb the effectiveness of trade unions.[v] We shall combat also the more insidious propaganda campaigns which are aimed at driving a wedge between various groups of our citizens by making it appear that interests of consumers and working people are different. Since the great majority of consumers are also wage earners, the fight for better wages and greater security is the fight of the majority of the American people. Employment Problems Although we now have less than two million unemployed in the country, the meager information at hand seems to indicate that, even at this time, colored persons are disproportionately unemployed. Studies made by the Bureau of Census for the Final Report of the FEPC showed unemployment of colored persons to be approximately two and a half times as great as among whites.[vi] Since these figures were samples only, it is difficult to draw important conclusions from them. However, we do know that in many major cities pre-war patterns of discrimination are again asserting themselves. For example, in Washington the Capital Transit Company which for years defied the government in its efforts to obtain employment for colored workers as operators now boldly advertises for such persons and still refuses to accept colored employees for this type of work.[vii] In far too many industries, colored persons find opportunities for promotion and still subject to rigid limitations. All of this points to the importance of the FEP legislation and the NAACP will work with other groups for the enactment of this type of law in the new Congress.[viii] In addition, the state branches in California, Minnesota, Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Indiana, and Wisconsin should work vigorously for desirable legislation in their states. (The present Wisconsin and Indiana laws are not effective.) The Labor Department will assist them in this regard. We are fortunate in having a Director of Branches who is from an important industrial area of the country.[ix] He has given valuable aid in promoting the department's program. In the following fields, our branches will play an increasingly important role. Tax Supported Employment Services When the USES was returned to the states by Congress, the NAACP saw the importance of seeking the establishment of standards which would provide for minority groups protection against discrimination because of race, creed, color, or national origin. The employment service makes approximately 500,000 placements a month throughout the country. For the next two years, although it is under state control, it will be supported by millions of dollars out of the Federal treasury.[x] In September at the request of the NAACP, a number of national organizations joined in a conference with the Secretary of Labor, Lewis B. Schwellenbach.[xi] At this time, we proposed that the Department of Labor require in its operating standards that no discriminatory orders should be accepted by states, that there should be no segregation in offices, and that all persons should have a full opportunity for employment on the staff of the agency. We also asked that states be required to make positive efforts to obtain the full utilization of minority groups by employers on a non-discriminatory basis. As a token of good faith, those present at the conference asked Secretary Schwellenbach to agree to the immediate abolition of segregation in the District of Columbia Employment Service which, at that time, had colored applicants stand in separate lines and had separate files for their records. The Secretary agreed that the system of segregation in the District should be abolished and announced, for the first time, that this would take place in a few days. He kept his promise in this regard and did end segregation in the District of Columbia.[xii] For this, he deserves commendation. On the other hand, the Department of Labor completely bowed to the states in that it established a general policy against discrimination, but did not accept the specific recommendations made in the conference of September 11. The Labor Department of the NAACP then took this matter up with the governors of individual states. New York was the only state which specifically indicated the following: "No discriminatory job orders will be accepted and . . . job referrals will be made on the basis of the applicants' skills, abilities, and occupational classification." Presumably Massachusetts and New Jersey will also follow this policy since they have FEPCs. Other states vary from friendly interest to vague promises. The friendly interest states include Illinois, West Virginia, Nebraska, South Dakota, Connecticut, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Washington, Arizona, and Ohio. In the group which seemed to be evading the problem we find Indiana, Nevada, Kentucky and Montana. The most hostile reply came from Colorado. The Governor, while expressing sympathy for minority groups and opposition to discrimination, stated, "We would only be restricting the overall effectiveness of our service by refusing to accept orders from or make referrals to employers who indicate a racial preference . . . we do not feel that it is a proper function of the employment service actively to promote the full utilization of minority groups and thereby become identified with those groups in the sense of discriminating in their favor." The diverse attitudes of governors on this problem show that minority groups will have little benefit from the employment service under state operation unless state branches of the NAACP insist that the Service be operated for the good of all persons. In addition, the replies of the governors also show the importance of having a law which will place the employment service under federal control again. Construction Because of the importance of employment in the construction industry, we have established a working relationship with the National Housing Agency and have urged branches to push for the full use of skilled colored persons in this field. We have also asked that our branches be alert to the possibility of securing employment for colored veterans who have skills which they acquired in the armed services. The importance of getting candidates into apprenticeship training has also been stressed in our communication to the branches.[xiii] Communication Branches in certain key areas have asked to take follow-up action on the Labor Secretary's effort to have the American Telephone and Telegraph Company establish a national policy providing for the full use of minority groups on a non-discriminatory basis. Because the NAACP in many places initiated efforts to obtain employment for colored operators by citing cases of discrimination to the FEPC, the Labor Department's action was a logical follow up.[xiv] Branches have received a statement from the Labor Department giving the policy of the Telephone Company: "The companies in the Bell System are quite generally employing a substantial number of colored people and the types of jobs for which such people qualify are continuing to increase. All of the companies are doing what they can for the employment of colored people in the light of conditions in their territories and are treating the matter on a long term basis in order that whatever is done shall be sound and enduring. We feel sure that this course of action over the years will produce the best results."[xv] At the time of the writing of this report, we have received one communication from the West Coast indicating that the telephone company in San Francisco has started hiring colored girls as operators. Although this action is definitely the result of forces in the community which were active before the National Office established a Labor Department, it provides the ground work for follow up action in other cities on the Coast and seems to demonstrate that it is possible to change the employment practices of the telephone company in other cities at this time. However, it is very clear that the company still carries on extensive discriminatory practices against colored job-seekers.[xvi] Government Employment of colored persons in the Federal Government is steadily declining. It was generally predicted that since colored workers made their greatest gains in war-time agencies, the closing of these agencies would mean rapid reconversion to peace-time discrimination among the old line agencies.[xvii] It is safe to say that wherever our flag files over a Federal establishment there also do we find job discrimination. From occupied Germany to Japan, the American pattern of discrimination is in full force and effect, if one judges by the nature of complaints received. * * * * * * * * * From Germany we received a letter from a young man who stated in part: "Although I am classified as a stenographer, I am assigned to a non-stenographic position even though stenographers are still greatly needed here in Berlin. I have been doing stenographic work for the past ten years, both as a civilian and in army life. . . . Another incident of gross discrimination is the housing one as it is impossible here for two groups to live in the same billets. This, in view of the fact that both white and colored employees requested the sharing of the same accommodations." We took this matter up with the War Department and obtained correction. The complainant's latest letter states: "I am (now) in the administrative section -- acting chief clerk. This job is very suitable for me and gives me the opportunity to excise my administrative and clerical abilities . . . . I want to express my appreciation for the work the Association has done . . . I sincerely believe the other conditions I mentioned in my letter are improving somewhat." * * * * * * * * * A young couple traveled nearly two thousand miles to take a job on an Indian reservation in Montana. When they arrived they were refused the work on the ground that the Indians were prejudiced against colored people. We obtained correction of this through the Indian Service and the complainants, who indicated they would not be available again for work until January, are to begin duty at that time. * * * * * * * * * Some of the Japanese are being required to follow the American pattern of racial discrimination, if the statements of another complainant are correct. This man charges that colored civilian employees, at an air base in Japan, must sit at a special table and when they enter the dining room the Japanese waiters are not permitted to let them use tables designated for whites. We have been informed by the War Department that this is contrary to Army policy and will be corrected.[xviii] * * * * * * * * * An employee of the Federal Communications Commission complained to us about an attempt to bar her from the cafeteria in the main Post Office Department Building. We took this matter up with the Acting Postmaster General, Mr. J. M. Donaldson. He asserted that it was the policy of the Department to serve all employees without discrimination. The Labor Secretary and a newspaper reporter visited the cafeteria to check on the policy. They were served without trouble. Every other colored person went to a small cafeteria beside the main eating place. We have sent a report on this matter to the National Alliance of Postal Employees and will join with them for any necessary future action. * * * * * * * * * Currently we are investigating charges of wholesale discrimination by the Social Security Administration and the War Department in recruiting former employees of the Office of Dependency Benefits at Newark, New Jersey. Statements from Secretary Patterson, War Department, and Commissioner Arthur Altmeyer, Social Security Administration, deny the charges. The Social Security Administration is vulnerable because its policy does not prohibit discrimination because of race. It provides that: "Disqualification of any person from taking an examination for appointment, from promotion, or from holding a position because of political or religious opinions or affiliations will be prohibited." We expect to have further follow-up on these matters. * * * * * * * * * The State Department, which has a reputation in Washington of being the source of some of the worst discrimination against colored workers, is presently assembling information to offset foreign propaganda about racial discrimination in America. There is nothing to indicate, however, that this activity will make more liberal employment policies in the State Department or any other old line Federal agency. A conference with the President on this problem is most essential. The White House must issue and provide for the policing of a stern order against discrimination because of race. Textiles Within the next six months it is expected that 30,000 new workers will be recruited for work in the Textile Industry. A large part of this industry is in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. We are alerting our branches in these areas to the importance of working for greater inclusion of colored persons. This will be an extremely difficult job in view of the gross discrimination against colored workers in the southern plants. However, it is a real challenge to those branches which are determined to gain greater work opportunities in their communities.[xix]
Transportation The railroads of the nation have done much to create and perpetuate patterns of job discrimination against colored employees. To hold those jobs now open and break the barriers which prevent promotion, those who believe in fair play must work through unions and in the courts.[xx] In addition, it appears that the Supreme Court decision in the Morgan Case has pointed up the need to safeguard the colored railway employees in the South who will not be used as pawns to deny colored passengers their civil rights.[xxi] Currently we have before us the case of a train porter on the Illinois Central who was assaulted by a white conductor because of a disagreement which arose when the former did not insist that colored passengers accept segregated seating arrangements. The victim was beaten with a black jack in Memphis while a guard stood by " with his hand on his gun as if to shoot." Later this porter was dismissed by the company for "promoting social equality." A second porter was shot in Mississippi while fleeing from a conductor. This man states that the issue of segregation did not arise in his case, but the argument did begin because he did not force colored passengers into a certain coach. The car they entered was also occupied by colored persons, according to his statement. An agent of the company offered him money after the shooting, according to the information before us, but he refused to accept it. At the time of the writing of this report these cases before the Department of Justice, but it does not seem that action will be taken on them. These forms of persecution show the great need for a strong civil rights law and ample machinery for rapidly bringing
MS: copy, MP. [i] Mitchell was appointed director of the newly created NAACP labor department, working out of the NAACP Washington Bureau, effective in July 1946. The Baltimore Afro-American, 6/22/46; Crisis (August, 1946, 251; Watson, Lion in the Lobby, 145-47. [ii] See 8/31 and 9/30/46 for members whom Mitchell previously named. [iii] These committee members are on the NAACP National Board of Directors. [iv] The Pulp, Sulphite and Paper Mill Workers, which was organizing in North Carollina, was an example of unions organizing in the South. Mitchell’s letter to Frank Fention, director of organization, AFL, 11/25/46, NAACP WB-183, DLC. [v] Mitchell was referring to what would become the Labor-Management Relations Act of 1947, otherwise known as the Taft-Hartley Act, which repealed much of the National Labor Relations (Wagner) Act of 1935 in reaction to the widespread labor unrest caused by the end of price controls and other government regulations over the economy in the post-war period. NYT 10/20/44, E4, 1. The Taft-Hartley Act nullified parts of the Federal Anti-Injunction (Norris-Laguardia) Act of 1932 and established new control of labor disputes by enlarging the National Labor Relations Board and providing that the union or employer must, before terminating a collective bargaining agreement, notify the other party and a government mediation service. http://print.infoplease.com/ce6/bus/A0847620.html In his testimony opposing S. 55, S. 360, S. 105, S. 133, and other related measures, Mitchell charged that the bills nullifying the National Labor Relations Act represented: a throw-back to a period of industrial strife which would gravely affect the welfare of all of our people. These bills are an invitation for management to renew espionage systems and physical attacks upon both the organized employees and those seeking to form labor organizations. They put labor on notice that the power of the Government of the United States will be used to crush the wage earners seeking to safeguard their rights and deprive them of their civil liberties. In short, the combination of these bills would snatch away the protection of the Clayton Act, the Norris-LaGuardia Act, and the Wagner Act. . . . If it is the purpose of the framers of this legislation to promote harmony between labor and management, they should take into consideration the fact that the majority of strikes of 1,000 or more persons which have occurred in this country since VJ-day came because wage earners, faced with a cost of living which has risen better than 50 percent since 1939, were seeking to obtain additional money with which to buy the necessities of life, to pay their rents, and to establish some small measure of economic security for their families. [Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, 2/20/47, Hearings, 1255, 1258.] The bills were sponsored by Republican Senators Joseph H. Ball of Minnesota, Robert A. Taft of Ohio, and H. Alexander Smith of New Jersey. People’s Voice, 3/1/47. See also Mitchell, “The Negro and The Taft-Hartley Act” in the appendix. [vi] See the discussions of employment challenges posed by the reconversion period in FEPC Final Report, 41-48; the Reprint from Lawyers Guild Review, Volume V, No. 2 (Mar.-Apr. 1945), “Legislation Outlawing Racial Discrimination in Employment,” Reprinted by N.A.A.C.P. Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. This monograph is a comprehensive review, with detailed footnotes, of existing legislation on the subject. [vii] See the headnote on Street and Local Railways in Vol. I and Epilogue, 7/46, in Vol. II. [viii] Reinforcing the FEPC’s intrinsic support for a permanent existence, the agency at its close said: “Nothing short of congressional action to end employment discrimination can prevent the freezing of American workers into fixed groups, with ability and hard work of no account to those of the ‘wrong’ race or religion.” Final Report, viii. The latest battle for a permanent FEPC was waged unsuccessfully in 2/46, when a minority of senators, using the filibuster, defeated efforts for the immediate consideration of S. 101. Telegram from A. Philip Randolph and Alan Knight Chalmers, co-chairmen of the National Council for a Permanent FEPC (NCPF), in NAACP II A266, DLC. Unlike during his tenure at the FEPC, Mitchell was now working closely with the NCPF, which involved some 75 pro-civil rights organizations. See extensive collection of materials in NAACP II A266, DLC. See also Maslow, “FEPC—A Case History in Parliamentary Maneuver”; Maslow and Robinson, “Civil Rights Legislation and the Fight for Equality,” 1862-1952. [ix] Mitchell was referring to Gloster B. Current, executive secretary of the Detroit NAACP Branch, who also, in 1946, was appointed national director of branches. Crisis (September 1946), 279. [x] See also, among others, 11/30/46, 5/2/47. [xi] For the meeting with Schwellenbach that Mitchell arranged, see 9/30/46. At another meeting on 12/11/46 on FEPC legislation, Mitchell again brought up the problems with the employment services, specifically a proposed NAACP lawsuit against the agency, which the secretary favored. Mitchell memorandum 12/11/46, marked “confidential,” with no designated recipient, but most certainly to Walter White. MP. See also Watson, Lion in the Lobby, 156. [xii] See 8/31/46, and 9/30/46.
[xiii] See 7/31, and 10/31/46. [xiv] See headnote on Telephone Companies in Volume I. [xv] This quote was not found. [xvi] That struggle was led by the war-time FEPC on the West Coast under the direction of Harry L. Kingman, director, Region XII. See headnote on The Telephone Industry in Vol. 1. [xvii] See 1/25/47 for a comprehensive review of this problem. [xviii] This report was based on complaints from Henry Conyers, civilian instructor for the Army Air Force at Johnson Air Base. See 7/3/47. [xix] See Mitchell’s continuing efforts in this area at 2/1, 6/2, 7/3, 9/312/1/47, 3/1/48.
[xx] See the introduction to Volumes I and II for extended background on the importance of the struggle against discrimination by the railroads. [xxi] Morgan v. Virginia, 328 U.S. 373 (1946).
February 1, 1947
MONTHLY RPORT OF THE LABOR DEPARTMENT
The Labor Committee held its quarterly meeting on January 14 in New York. A number of important matters discussed in the meeting have bearing on items in this report and they are mentioned in the appropriate places.
EMPLOYMENT
At the request of the Atlantic City Branch, the Labor Secretary held a conference on January 23 with the Atlantic City Transportation Company. The company indicates that under its policies colored operators will be hired.[1] However, because of the seasonal nature of employment in Atlantic City, it will be difficult to test this until the peak hiring period of the company is reached. This will be in May or June, and an additional meeting is planned at that time. The branch is also working on a plan to secure employment opportunities for sales clerks in the 5 and 10c stores which are currently advertising for help.
Additional replies have been received from branches on action in the telephone industry. The following branches indicate that operators are now employed: Ventura, San Francisco and Los Angeles, California; Long Branch and Atlantic City, New Jersey and Reno-Sparks, Nevada. Los Angeles and San Francisco indicate that employment of operators was the result of action by a number of community agencies, including the NAACP. San Jose, California reports that it is still at work on employment of persons in this capacity and the Reno-Sparks, Nevada Branch has obtained an agreement for the employment of operators. The branch reports that in the district covered by the company, colored operators are being used, but an effort is being made to get them in Reno at this time. Replies from Philadelphia and Blair County Branches state that the telephone company contends it does not discriminate, but it has not yet put women on the job. The Philadelphia Branch stated that an unconfirmed report indicated that a survey was made of operators by the company and they expressed the willingness to work with colored girls but on a segregated basis. Such a plan, of course, will be absolutely unacceptable and unnecessary. The Labor Committee discussed this problem at its meeting and agreed that a subcommittee would visit top officials of the AT & T in an attempt to obtain a positive, clear cut statement of no discrimination. This meeting will be arranged when we have a more complete picture from other branches which have not yet communicated with the National Office.[2]
In November, the Labor Department requested the National Housing Agency to investigate discrimination against construction workers in Baltimore. At that time we stated, "The Baltimore branch of the NAACP (indicates) that minority workers are receiving no placements in the construction industry through the Maryland Employment Service. The branch also states that approximately 78 firms in the construction industry are accepting apprentices, all of those accepted are white." On January 23, the National Housing Agency arranged a meeting in Baltimore between community agencies and government representatives. In addition, the National Housing Agency had follow-up conferences with contractors. Baltimore is to be used as a test area by the Housing Agency in attempting to obtain full use of the supply of colored, skilled construction workers.[3]
Branches in Raleigh, Charlotte, Columbia, Charleston, Spartanburg, Macon, Atlanta, Columbus, and Danville have received the following suggested plan of action on employment in the textile industry: "Since a great part of the textile industry is in your state, it would be a good idea to urge your local state employment service to work for the placement of colored persons in this industry on a non-discriminatory basis. If you do not have any success with the employment service, a visit to some of the leading firms by members of your Labor Committee would be advisable. If these plants are part of national companies, we shall be happy to take follow-up action with their central offices if you request it." This problem was discussed in the Labor Committee Meeting and it was agreed an effort would be made to concentrate on areas of relatively lower resistance first in any move to accomplish the integration of colored persons in the industry. It was also agreed that we would solicit assistance in selection of the areas from the Textile Workers of the CIO.[4]
Through the efforts of the NAACP and the United Public Workers, discriminatory tactics which would have barred colored employees from the Federal Trade Commission were stopped.[5] These employees were transferred from the Office of Price Administration by an executive order to the Federal Trade Commission. Some of the supervisors in the FTC advised OPA that colored and Jewish employees were not desired. The union began work on the matter immediately and the NAACP also took it up with the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission. After a conference with the union, the NAACP arranged a meeting with the Chairman of the Commission. In addition to union officials, some of the employees discriminated against were also present at this conference. Prior to the meeting, the Chairman of the Commission informed the NAACP that ten colored persons would be hired. After the conference, eleven additional persons were offered employment. However, four of these declined to accept it. The others went on the job.[6]
The Labor Secretary also joined the Public Workers as a representative of a veteran who had been dismissed from employment as a dishwasher in the Veterans Administration Facility, Jefferson Barracks, Missouri. The union alleged that there was general discrimination in the Veterans Administration Facility and its charges seem supported by evidence produced before the regional office of the Civil Service in St. Louis which had recommended reinstatement of the employee. At the hearing before the Civil Service Commission, the Labor Secretary made the following statement for the record: "The Veterans Administration was surprisingly vigorous in pressing charges against this man and apparently much less eager to take positive action to remedy discrimination in its St. Louis Facility. Although the Veterans Administration was represented by an official from St. Louis and three other Washington officers at the Civil Service hearing, it could shed no light on the grades of colored employees, but did contend that a great many were employed. Questioning by the NAACP revealed, however, that these persons were all in low grade jobs.[7]
The general question of discrimination in the federal government was discussed at the Labor Committee Meeting and it was agreed that an effort would be made to get this problem before the President's Committee on Civil Rights.[8]
LEGISLATION
The Labor Secretary represented Mr. Walter White at a Policy Committee Meeting of the National Council for a Permanent FEPC.[9] The Committee visited Senator Morse who agreed to introduce the revised FEPC Bill on Friday, January 24. Unfortunately, additional Republican sponsors could not be obtained in time for the introduction of the bill on that date.[10] The state FEPC legislation was discussed at the Labor Committee Meeting and it was agreed that branches should concentrate on state FEPC in those areas where there is a maximum chance for success. The Labor Secretary was designated to talk with other organizations on which states would be desirable. Since the meeting, I have talked with the AFL and the National Catholic Welfare Conference. It appears that the states in which there is the best possibility are the following: Connecticut, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, California, and Washington. The AFL has prepared a model bill which is being sent to its state federations. Its Washington federation was especially anxious to push this legislation. The CIO also has a model bill which was prepared last year. Word has come from West Virginia that the NAACP is making a vigorous effort to have FEP Legislation considered there. The Labor Secretary requested Senator Taft to provide an opportunity for the Association to be heard on the numerous anti-labor bills now under consideration by the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare.[11]
COMMUNICATIONS TO STATE OFFICIALS
The Labor Department requested the FEPC in New Jersey and Massachusetts to seek the elimination of racial discriminatory practices among labor unions in their states. We cited the action of the New York State Commission Against Discrimination which recently announced progress made with unions in New York. While it is never possible to know whether a commitment means anything until it is actually tried out, such action should have important educational value.[12]
The new Governor of Maryland indicates that NAACP's request for the adoption of employment service standards against discrimination is under consideration. A similar letter from the new Governor of New Jersey indicates that no discriminatory orders will be accepted by the employment service in that state.[13]
OTHER ACTIVITY
The Labor Secretary was called on to extend greetings at one of the sessions of the National Farm Labor Union's Convention in Washington this month.
MS: copy, NAACP II: A-341, DLC. [1] See headnote on Street and Local Railways in Vol. I. [2] Battling employment discrimination in the telephone industry was an important part of the FEPC’s war-time mission. In addition to Mitchell’s reports and memoranda in Vols. I and II, see the headnote on the Telephone Industry and related reports in the appendix there. [3] See headnote on Segregation in Federal Housing Programs.
[4] See 12/30/46, 6/2, 7/3, 9/3, 12/1/47, and 3/1/48 for continuing activities in this area.
[5] See 3/1/47. [6] Mitchell met with Garland S. Ferguson, chairman of the FTC, on 2/20/47 to discuss the charge by UPW that there had been racial discrimination by the FTC against African American and Jewish OPA employees. In a memorandum to Walter White, he explained that FEPC records showed that this agency employed only 13 persons and all of these were in CPC (Craft, Protective, and Custodial) classifications.” Earlier, Mitchell had expressed to Arthur S. Flemming, commissioner, CSC, the NAACP’s deep concern about discrimination against black government employees, who, upon being laid off by war agencies, were refused employment in other government establishments solely because of their race.” Mitchell’s letter to Fleming, 1/21/47, and memorandum to Walter White, 2/5/47, both in NAACP IX: 32, DLC. [7] Despite Mitchell’s involvement here, veterans affairs matters were normally handled by Jesse Dedmond, secretary of Veterans Affairs. His reports were included in Reports of the Secretary to the Board. For a history of the Veterans Administration, anf for a Chronology of Veterans’ Legislation, see Congress and the Nation, 1338- 41. [8] The President’s Committee on Civil Rights was appointed by Truman on 12/5/46. To Secure These Rights, vii. See 11/1/47. [9] Attached to Mitchell’s report of 2/17/47 to White was also a comparison of the new FEPC bill with earlier ones. NAACP II: A-257, DLC. [10] In a letter of 2/5/47 to Walter White, Mitchell explained that there had been a hitch regarding the “mechanics” of getting the bill introduced. At a meeting of representatives of the National Council for a Permanent FEPC on 1/20, Mitchell explained, Morse said that if the committee got the sponsors for the bill, the committee’s representatives could notify him and he would call the sponsors about attaching their names to the bill. Subsequently, Mitchell said he was informed that Morse said he did not want to call the bill’s sponsors together. Consequently, it would be necessary for the council to find another senator to call the meeting of the sponsors. Mitchell called White’s attention to his memorandum of 2/4 in which he provided a detailed report on “Meetings with Senator Taft and Others on FEPC Legislation” on 2/4. The council’s delegation sought Taft’s support and advice regarding the introduction of the council’s fair employment practices bill. Mitchell reported that while Taft said “he was very much interested in the FEPC idea,” he “could not under any circumstances endorse or sponsor the bill proposed by the Council.” Nevertheless, according to the council’s minutes of its meeting on 2/6, Taft said he would: appoint a subcommittee of the Senate Labor Committee to hold public hearings on the bill, neither would he introduce a bill himself, and he would discourage any other bill from being introduced in the Senate. Taft added that he would not regard any other Republican who was sponsoring the bill as violating the party platform or loyalties, so “it was okay for the Council to approach any Senator for sponsorship of the bill.” Roy Wilkins, assistant executive secretary of the NAACP who was also very much involved in the struggle for a permanent FEPC, in a memorandum to White on 2/3 had urged White to have Mitchell represent him at the meeting with Taft because he “would be a good man to sit in since, unlike some other persons on our staff, he is not ‘soft’ on Taft.” That jab was clearly at Leslie Perry, administrative assistant in the NAACP Washington Bureau, who was also participating in the lobbying for a permanent FEPC. Mitchell’s letter and memorandum to White, Wilkins’ memorandum, and two sets of the minutes of the Council’s meeting on 2/6 are among a large file on this struggle in NAACP II: A-266, DLC. [11] On the anti-labor bills, see 3/1, 6/2/47.
[12] Hailed as a milestone in civil rights legislation, the revolutionary New York State Law Against Discrimination in Employment became effective on 1/7/45. It was sponsored by Rep. Irvin M. Ives and Sen. Elmer F. Quinn and was the first law in the country to outlaw discrimination based on race, creed, color or national origin. It had an administrative machinery, the New York State Commission Against Discrimination, with power to compel business, industry, employment agencies, and labor unions to end discriminatory employment practices in hiring, firing, promotion, working conditions, and on application forms or face punishment. Draft Report of the Committee to Support the Ives-Quinn Law to our Three Sponsoring Agencies, attached to letter by Anne Mather, director, to Marian Perry, 1/6/49, NAACP II: A-194, DLC; NYT, 7/1/45, 10E. During its first eight months of operation, the commission won a large degree of cooperation in enforcing the law. Turner, “Tolerance on Trial,” 14-15. [13] See, among others, 8/31, 11/30/46.
REPORT OF NAACP LABOR DEPARTMENT AT THE 38TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE IN WASHINGTON, D.C.
June 26, 1947
The NAACP’s Labor Department was established one year ago. Important national leaders are members of its advisory committee. In quarterly meetings, this committee has been charting broad strategy on labor legislation, employment problems, and matters on which there can be mutual NAACP and labor cooperation.[i] A basic Manual of Operations is now available for the guidance of branch labor committees. For the record it should be stated that branch labor committees are established by the Constitution.
Discrimination in Government
The pattern of racial discrimination in the Federal Government is appalling. Some of the cases we have handled during the last twelve months are as follows:
Approximately twenty colored workers, who had been transferred to the Federal Trade Commission from the Office of Price Administration in January, 1947, were refused employment solely because of their race. At a conference arranged by the NAACP Labor Department with the Federal Trade Commission and the United Public Workers, Mr. Garland S. Ferguson, FTC Chairman, agreed that this discriminatory policy would cease.[ii]
After our intervention, during the month of May, the Chicago Regional Office of the U.S. Weather Bureau agreed to hire as a meterological aide an applicant who had been denied employment in one of the installations. The Bureau had previously expressed the fear that pilots would object to receiving weather information from a colored man.[iii]
In the general wave of discriminatory practices in Washington, sixty colored taxicab drivers who daily reported to the Pentagon faced the loss of this source of income because the Public Buildings Administration had decided to oust them and give the hacking privilege to a single company. The NAACP’s action in their behalf resulted in the Public Buildings Administration’s withdrawal of its plan. These drivers are continuing their service.[iv]
The NAACP Labor Department is presently working on the problem of seventeen colored applicants, including disabled veterans, who have been denied employment in the New Orleans Post Office. One applicant, a former Marine, has an average of 100.2, while the others are in the high 80 and 90 brackets.[v]
We called to the attention of the War Department the complaint of a colored advanced electricity instructor for the Army Air Forces in Japan. This resulted in an investigation which corrected practices of segregation in the dining hall where he was stationed in Japan. In retaliation, however, the Command at the field refused to renew his contract and shipped him home. We are seeking his reinstatement.[vi]
Because discrimination in government employment is so widespread, any attack upon it must be made with the full approval of the President. Therefore, we have asked that there be established by executive order a temporary fair employment practice commission in government. This body would function until the Congress establishes a permanent fair employment practice commission. It is important that something be done in this interim period because agencies have new powers in the hiring of applicants and currently employment is shifting from wartime temporary arrangements to the regular permanent Civil Service System.[vii]
Anti-Labor Legislation
We have been among the leaders of national organizations fighting against anti-labor legislation in this session of Congress.[viii] We opposed these bills in our testimony before the Senate Labor Committee and furnished each member of the House and Senate Labor Committees with copies of the NAACP’s regional conference resolutions against such bills. We urged President Truman to veto the Taft-Hartley Bill. This legislation makes possible suits in the Federal Court against labor unions, undermines union security and seriously interferes with the internal regulations of labor organizations. In short it wipes out most of the gains of labor under the Wagner Act.[ix] The branches have also urged their Representatives in Congress to support the President’s veto.
Private Employment
Building Trades- We have been pushing for the inclusion of colored workers in the construction industry and apprenticeship training. This program will be measurably weakened by the so-called economy drive in Congress which at this writing has wiped out the racial relations advisors in the National Housing Administration.[x] These men are an important link in the NAACP’s effort to obtain full use of all skilled colored building tradesmen.
Telephone Operators- Many of the complaints against telephone companies filed with the President’s Committee on Fair Employment Practice were submitted by branches of our |
