Stoppage of Work Is Called 'Demonstration' by C.I.O., 'Sit-Down' by Company
BETHLEHEM, Pa., Jan. 24 - A "shutdown" of the plant here of the Bethlehem Steel Corporation, holder of more than $1,185,000,000 of national defense contracts, was predicted tonight by Howard T. Curtiss, director of the C.I.O.'s Steel Workers' Organizing Committee for the plant, following a "demonstration" this afternoon.
The "demonstration" was described by a spokesman for the company as a "sit-down strike" involving 250 to 300 men. Mr. Curtiss asserted that as a sequel to the "demonstration" there was a lockout involving 4,000 workers.
Mr. Curtiss asserted that company police resorted to brutal tactics, "threw" workmen out of the plant and bruised six of them, with one, Frank Wihalka, requiring medical treatment.
Bittner Aid In Charge
The company's spokesman insisted that only a small number of men in the billet yard, the toolshop and the bridge shop were involved, that they had "quit work" and that work on tonight's shift was "virtually normal."
A few hours after Mr. Curtiss had made his "shutdown" forecast, John Riffe, assistant regional director of the S.W.O.C., declared that there would be no strike or picketing of the plant. Mr. Riffee was left in charge by Van A. Bittner, the regional director, who spoke tonight at a union mass meeting on "S.W.O.C. Cooperates in National Defense."
Mr. Bittner advised the union members to not get "too far out on the limb."
"Stop as often as you want for a s long as you want, but we don't want any general strike in these plants," he said.
"That is just what the company wants. We Expect in the next few weeks that the steel workers in Bethlehem Steel will be in a position to demand contracts or will go to the government and demand that Bethlehem comply with the National Labor Relations Act and meet with the S.W.O.C. and sign wage agreements."
Explains "Demonstration"
According to the union, which for a long time has been seeking to unionize Bethlehem employees, the demonstration was planned in protest against working conditions.
The New York Times
January 25, 1941
No comments:
Post a Comment