Document RjqqOjvZ3yGGKQvvmBYeg0NLn

12/04/01 TUB 17:11 FAT 6072559641 CATHERWOOD LIB. @006 `V33J l INTERNATIONAL | OFFICERS THE IRONWORKER Volume 72 Number 9 September, 1972 First of Two Special Convention Issues ; JOHN H. LYONS ; General President ; Suite 300 j Continental Building ! 3615 Olive St i St Uuit, Mo. 6310B : JOEL 0. DRAKE i Oinnf Secretary ; Suite 300 i Continental Building < 3615 Olivi Street ] St Unit, Mo., 63103 FEATURES Our ''Hallmark" 34th Convention--the Largest Ever Scenes from Our 34th Convention' 2 6 Elected General Officers General President John H. Lyons' Address 8 10 AFL-CIO President George Meany's Address "I Am An American" Speech at the Convention Opening Ceremonies Iron Workers' Political Action League Formed Official Convention Photograph Resolutions Submitted to Convention Yesteryear in the ironworker IS 19 20 78 136 156 Editor's Notei This September issue of the Ironworker is the first of two special issues to be issued deseribini In full. In both written word and color and black and white photographs, the ac complishments and decisions mads at our International Associa tion's 34th Convention in Bai Harbour, Florida, August 28. September 1, 1972- The sacond convention issue of the ironworker, dated October, should be in your hands in several weeks. JAMES V. COLE . General Treasurer ; Suite 300 i Contlnintal Building > 3615 Olive St j St Louis, Mo,, $3103 1 John l McCarthy : Firet General Vlei-PreJkteat . 23 Snirclfffe Drive s Collinsville, minus, 62234. LAVERNE SMITH I Second General Yice-FreeMeet Suite 163 : 8161 Airline Hlghwy j Baton Reuse, In., 7M15 _ Tel.: 304 928-9399 ! ROBERT V. P00l > Third General Vice-Presdsnt 422 L Levs11 St . Charlotte, Mich., 48813 . Tel.: AC 517, 543-5881 ! ROBERT E. P. COONEY Fourth General Vice-PltSidint I Suite 621 400 First St., N.W. j Washington, D.C., 20001 EDITORIAL COMMITTEE J. W. Hardesty, Executive Director, Apprenticeship & Training Calvin L Walker, Genera! Organizer Joseph F. Maloney, General Organiar List L Field, General Organizer ON OUR COVERS--All four covers of this issue of the Ironworker contain color photo graphs depicting some of the many scenes, speakers, and events which occurred during our five-day convention In Sal Harbour, Florida. The front cover shows an overview of the 1,039 accredited delegates in con vention session, opening ceremonies, and our President, Secretary, and Treasurer ad dressing the convention. : HUGH WILLIAMSON I fifth General YIei-Preeldent J AFL-CI0 Building I 308 W. Uth St., j Austin, Texas, 78701 j TjI.: 512 GR 6-7621 'j JOHN F. NALSH Sixth General viee-Prisideat : Suite 312-Giuranty Ufa Bldg 137 E. Forsyth St , JacksorvilJe, Fla., 32202 LEONARD P. MAHONEY I Seventh General Vice-President 260 South Ninth St ' Philadelphia, Pi.. 19107 TiIj 2l5-WA-2-1953-54 A. 3. GOODWIN Eighth Genera) Vice-Prasldint Suite 300 Continental Building 3615 Olive St St Louie, Mo., 63108 POSTHASTES!--ATTtMTIQMi Clup If Mdracs tins on form ftttlenil AnociitiM oT Bridie, Sinutunl rod OrauncAUl Iran " S<atu. Lmouiilst, Mmuo*. qjiuv* WPitptUbtlitioiobfttdaRnhm,eodn0dO. itiysCla.onpdPtrklaA--divvMlmm'oti-n, af"tm*lo. iso"inl.,-AraWusokicsllipitdioifnt'nsts,of 0"s.rld~Ci.a,201 DALE M. RAY Ninth General Vice-President Suite 1404 395 Market Street San Francisco, Cilifbmlt 94103 DMART 127 12/04/01 TUB 17:43 FAX 6072559641 CATHERWOOD LIB. @007 It was unnecessary for the International Association JUegtfl [0 file an answer since Local Union No. 16 and the 'een coav. plaintiff settled the matter between themselves. Jt EDWIN C. CURETON v. INTERNA brined j coutinut , pending TIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BRIDGE, STRUCTURAL AND ORNAMENTAL IRON WORKERS. IRON WORKERS LO CAL UNION NO. 495, JACK MARTIN, FRANK RECH and CLIFF HUGHES. lent A. S. > reached This is an action brought by a member of Local ismisijuj Union No. 495 in 1972, in the District Court of the sodatioo Eleventh Judicial District, in and for the County of San Juan, State of New Mexico, against all of the CIES. of the the I and defendants, including the International Association, seeking $100,000 actual damages and $250,000 puni tive damages. The basis of the action is. as alleged in the com piling that pursuant to a conspiracy entered into between all oE the defendants, the plaintiff was ff in the assaulted. Nevada, tshoe, in An answer has been interposed by the International ggregate Association and the action is being defended. XXI BETHLEHEM STEEL CORPORATION v. liesynski t No. , beat, DIVISION OF LABOR LAW ENFORCEMENT, a subdivision of the Department of Industrial Relations of' California, etc., IN TERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BRIDGE, STRUCTURAL AND ORNA tl Notice MENTAL IRON WORKERS, LOCAL UN ce upas ION NO. 433 thereof, ET AL. on will This is an action brought by the Bethlehem Steel Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, in the Superior tACT.L ASJRAL CERS. Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, for a declaratory judgment seeking to have the Court declare that the plaintiff was not liable for * day's pay for all of its employees as found by the of the Division of Labor Law Enforcement because it laid and off its employees for a day during which the hoisting af Lo* ' elevators were being erected- The International Association has filed a Special Whiting- Notice of Appearance with a motion to dismiss the d State* complaint against it, which is pending. ainstall XXII MARIE TEUTEMACHER v. INTERNA ain the i TIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BRIDGE, 3X com i STRUCTURAL AND ORNAMENTAL IRON WORKERS. INTERNATIONAL AS- tiff and lacional id lock* 'ntiff SOCIATION FULL-TIME SALARIED OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES OF OUTSIDE LOCAL UNIONS AND DISTRICT COUN CIL PENSION FUND, ET AL. o. This is an action brought by Marie Teuteraacher, 3 former employee of Local Union No- 63, Chicago, Illinois, in the Circuit Court of Cook County, against a number of defendants, including the International Association, its General Officers and the International Association Full-Time Salaried Officers and Em ployees of Outside Local Unions and District Council Pension Fund and other defendants for a judgment to declare that the plaintiff was a covered employee under the said Pension Fund. The plaintiff is not covered by the Pension Fund because for tire purposes of retirement, she was receiv ing U.S. Treasury Bonds monthly during her employ ment in accordance with the collective bargaining agreement between Local Union.No. 63 and the Office" Employees Union. The action is being defended. XXIII MARTIN & METTROUR CONTRACT ING COMPANY v. LOCAL UNION NO. 769 of the INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION and the INTERNATIONAL ASSO CIATION OF BRIDGE. STRUCTURAL AND ORNAMENTAL IRON WORKERS. This is an action brought in May of 1972, by the Martin & Mettrour Contracting Company against Local Union No. 769 of the International Association and the International Association in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky for an illegal stoppage of work under which the plaintiff seeks to recover $500,000 damages. An answer has been filed by the International Association and the case is being defended. XXIV JOSEPH LEE MOORE ET AL. v. LOCAL UNION NO. 483, INTERNATIONAL AS SOCIATION OF BRIDGE, STRUCTURAL AND ORNAMENTAL IRON WORKERS and the INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIA TION OF BRIDGE, STRUCTURAL AND ORNAMENTAL IRON WORKERS. This is an action brought by eleven (11) plaintiffs, each of whom is a member of the International Association, against Local Union No. 483 of the International Association and the International Asso ciation in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Sussex County, to compel the defendant Local No. 483 to accept die plaintiffs into member ship in Local No. 483, and for damages and counsel fees. A petition has been filed to remove the case from the State Court to the United States District Court in the District of New Jersey. The facts in this case are similar to the facts in the case of NICHOLAS PHIUPCHUK ET AL. Re ported under No. 8 above. iKER SEPTEMBER, 1972 53 12/04/01 TUE 17:46 FAI 6072559641 CATHERW00D LIB. @006 Recapitulation 164,9qo. V -Total number of new members initiated, July 1, 1968 to June 30, 1972 .................. '* -f0tai number of reinstatements, July 1, 1968 to June 30, 1972 ............................... Total number of Withdrawal Cards deposited, July 1, 1968 to June 30, 1972 ......... 88,407 15,359 1,232 TOTAL .............................................................................................................. 104.998 Total number of members suspended, July 1, 1968 to June 30, 1972 .................... Total number of expelled, July 1, 1968 to June 30, 1972 ........................................... Total number of members deceased, July I, 1968 to June 30, 1972 ............................ Total number of Withdrawal Cards Issued, July 1, 1968 to June 30, 1972 ............... Total number of revoked members, July 1, 1968 to June 30, 1972 ........................ 82,646 1 7,198 3,802 426 TOTAL ...................................................................................... ....................... 94,073 NET INCREASE IN MEMBERSHIP JULY 1, 1968 to JUNE SO, 1972 ................ 104,998 94,073 10.925 Membership Record for Fiscal Years 1904 to 1972 . 1904-1905----- ... 1905-1906.... .. 1906-1907.... .. 1907-1908.... .. 1908-1909.... .. 1909-1910.... .. 1910-1911.... .., 19I1-I9I2----- .. 1912-1913.... .. 1913-1914.... .. | 1914-1915.... .. } 1915-1916.... .. ! 1916-1917.... .. . 1917-1918.... 1918-1919.... .. 1919-1920.... .. 1920-1921.... .. 10,216 1921-1922.... .. -9,776 1922-1923.... .. 11,574 1923-1924.... 10,422 1924-1925.... .. 9,607 1925-1926.... .. 10,872 1926-1927.... .. 12,230 1927-1928.... .. 10,928 1928-1929.... .. 12,222 1929-1930.... .. 13,184 1930-i931___ .. 12,334 1931-1932.... .. 14,209 1932-1933.... .. 15,985 1933-1934.... .. 1934-1935.... .. 24,047 1935-1936.... .. 27,560 .1936-1937.... .. 22,418 1937-1938..,. .. 15,113 17,021 19,572 19,310 21,474 21,639 22.547 22,471 19,112 14,504 10,318 11,731 13,220 17,222 31,678 42,263 1938-1939... ... 38,765 1939-1940... ... 41,261 1940-1941... ... 62.651 1941-1942... ... 94,364 1942-1943... ... 115,607 1943-1944... ... 100,492 1944-1945... ... 94,409 1945-1946... ... 93,079 1946-1947... .... 98,918 1947-1948... ... 104,901 1948-1949... ... 103,481 1949-1950... ... 101,093 1950-1951... ... 114,674 1951-1952... ... 130,928 1952-1953... ... 138,245 1953-1954... ... 140,789 1954-1955... ... 135,563 1.955-1956... .. 139,469 1956-1957... .. 151,551 1957-1958... .. 156,028 1958-1959.... .. 148.767 1959-1960... .. 146,362 1960-1961.... .. 138,416 1961-1962... .. 136,610 1962-1963... .. 136,616 1963-1964... .. 138,366 1964-1965... 1965-1966... .. 156,172 1966-1967... .. 162,354 1967-1968... .. 164,902 1968-1969.... .. 169,657 1969-1970.... .. 175,646 1970-1971.... .. 176,808 1971-1972.... .. 175,827 Number of Delegates Allowed Each Affiliated Local Union as Provided for Under Section la-lb Article VI of the International Constitution in Accordance with Membership Record July 1, 1968 Through June 30, 1972. 6,808 ,27 ^ UNo. city No, of Delegates 1 Chicago, Illinois.......................................... 10 3 Pittsburgh, Pa...............................................10 j 5 Washington, D. C......................................... 7 ! 6 Buffalo, New York..................................... 7 7 Boston, Mass................................................. 8 6 Milwaukee, Wis........................................... 7 9 Niagara-Falls, N. Y..................................... 3 10 Kansas City, Mo........................................... 8 11 Newark, New Jersey.................................... 4 12 Albany, New York...................................... 6 14 Spokane, Wash.............................................. 6 13 Hartford, Conn.............................................. 5 L. U. No. City No. of Delegates 16 Baltimore, Md.............................................. 7 17 Cleveland, Ohio............................................11 21 Omaha, Nebraska....................................... 4 22 Indianapolis, Indiana ............................... 6 24 Denver, Colorado ....................................... 6 25 Detroit, Michigan ............ 10 27 Salt Lake City. Utah................................... 5 28 Richmond, Virginia................................... 4 29 Portland, Oregon ....................................... 7 33 Rochester, N. Y............................................. 3 36 Easton. Pennsylvania ................................. 3 37 Providence, R. 1............................................ 5 SEPTEMBER, 1972 105 12/04/01 TUB 17:48 FAI 6072559641 CATHERWOOD LIB. @009 L. U. No. City No. of L. U, Delegates No. City 40 New York, New York.................................. 8 357 Springfield, Mass. ... 44 Cincinnati, Ohio........................................... 5 361 Brooklyn, N. Y........... 45 Jersey City, N. J............................................ 3 372 Cincinnati, Ohio 46 Springfield, Illinois....................................... 4 373 Perth Amboy, N. J. 48 Oklahoma City, Okla................................... 6 55 Toledo, Ohio................................................ 6 377 San Francisco, Calif. 378 Oakland, California . 57 Worcester, Mass.............................................. 2 379 Lafayette, Indiana ... 58 New Orleans, Louisiana............................... 6 380 Champaign, Illinois . 60 Syracuse, New York................... '.............. 5 63 Chicago, Illinois ......................................... 7 66 San Antonio, Texas..................................... 8 383 Madison, Wisconsin . 384 Knoxville, Tennessee 386 LaSalle, Illinois ----- 67 Des Moines, Iowa ...................................... 3 387 Atlanta, Georgia .... 6B Trenton, New Jersey :................................. 4 392 East St. Louis, 111......... 70 Louisville, Kentucky.................................... 5 393 Aurora, Illinois........ 75 Phoenix, Artfona........................................... 7 395 Hammond, Indiana . 79 Norfolk, Virginia...................... ................ 5 396 St. Louis, Missouri .. 81 Anaconda, Montana ...................................2 397 Tampa, Florida........ 84 Houston, Texas.............................................10 399 Camden, New Jersey 86 Seattle, Washington.................................... 7 401 Philadelphia, Pa......... 89 Cedar Rapids, Iowa.................................... 3 402 West Palm Beach, Fla. 92 Birmingham, Alabama................................ 5 404 Harrisburg, Pa............ 97 Vancouver, B. C,, Canada ....................... 8 103 Evansville, Indiana...................................... 5 405 Philadelphia, Pa. .... 408 Amarillo, Texas .... 111 Rock Island, Illinois .................................. 3 413 Charlotte, N. C.......... 112 Peoria, Illinois......................................... 4 416 Los Angeles, Calif. .. 114 Tacoma, Washington.................................. 2 417 Newburgh, N. Y. ... 118 Sacramento, Calif......................................... 7 420 Reading, Pa................. 125 Beaumont, Texas ....................................... 6 424 New Haven, Conn. . 135 Galveston, Texas........................................... 5 426 Detroit, Michigan ... 136 Chicago, Illinois............................................. 4 433 Los Angeles, Calif. .. 147 Ft. Wayne, Indiana.................................... 3 436 Elmira, N. Y............... 155 Fresno, CaliE................................................. 4 439 Terre Haute, Indiana 158 Binghamton, New York.............................. 4 440 Utica, N. Y................. 161 Philadelphia, Pa............................................. 2 444 Joliet, Illinois............ 167 Memphis, Tennessee.................................... 4 451 Wilmington, Delaware 170 New York, N.Y.............................................. 3 454 Casper, Wyoming ... 172 Columbus, Ohio........................................... 6 455 New York, New York 184 Sioux City, Iowa ....................................... 2 464 Rochester, New York 197 New York, N.Y................................... 2465 Kankakee, Illinois ... 201 Washington, D. C........................................ 5 468 Cleveland, Ohio .... 203 St. Louis, Missouri...................................... 1 469 Jackson, Miss............... 207 Youngstown, Ohio........................................ 5 470 Jamestown, New York 228 Portsmouth, Virginia .................................. 1 471 Milwaukee, Wisconsin 229 San Diego, California................................ 7 473 Chicago, Illinois .... 263 Fort Worth, Texas...................................... 4 474 Manchester, N. H. 272 Miami, Florida............................................ 7 476 Muskogee, Okla......... 290 Dayton, Ohio .............................................. 5 477 Sheffield, Alabama .. 292 South Bend, Indiana.................................... 4 480 Elizabeth, N. J........... 301 Charleston, W. Va............................................4 481 Dallas, Texas............ 321 Little Rock, Arkansas .......................... 5 482 Austin, Texas .......... 340 Battle Creek, Michigan................................ 6 483 Hackensack, N. J.----- 348 Erie, Pennsylvania........................................ 5 486 Washington, D. C. 350 Atlantic City, N. j........................................ 1 489 Scranton, Pa................ 351 Lawrence, Mass................................................2 492 Nashville, Tcnn......... No. oj 1.0- ftp- 2 7 0 <95 Des Albu | ; 3 Portl 3 $8 Rock I 7 199 Tole 9 New | 3 501 Bost< 3 502 Phih 4 05 Mt. 506 Seatt 2 507 Deni 7 508 Detr 6 .509 Los 3 510 ' Corf 8 411 Spol ..8.. 412 Min 5 514 Peoi 8 516 Fort 8 518 St. I 8 519 Rea< 4 520 Kan 4 521 Sera 522 Cin4 525 Paw 9 524 Wai 4 526 Cha 2 > 527 Pitt 5 529 Ind 6 1 532 Net 11 S34 Alb 1 535 st.: 4 536 Dal 5 539 Bir 3 541 Spr 5 i 544 Spr 2 ' -545 Ne' 6 546 Ok 1 547 Wi 1 } 548 All 4 [ 549 Wl 5 ' 550 Ca: 1 553 On 3 555 Ha 5 558 M< 2 562 Sal 1 4 563 Du 6 & 565 Mi 2 i 568 Cu 6 ] 575 Dt 3 i 576 Be 2 S' 577 Be 2 $ 579 Ti 3 I 580 N< 5 1 58i -j-. 106 THE IRONWORKER SEPT 12/04/01 TUE 17:50 FAI 6072559641 CATHERWOOD LIB. No. of L. U. No. of City Delegates No. City Delegates 193 Des Moines, Iowa ...................................... 2 195 Albuquerque. N. M...................................... 4 196 Portland, Maine .......................................... 3 |9S Rockford, Illinois ....................................... 3 199 Toledo, Ohio .............................................. 1 iOO New Orleans, Louisiana............................. 3 J01 Boston, Mass................................................. 2 i02 Philadelphia, Pa............................ ,............ 4 i05 Me. Vernon, Wash........................................ 2 m Seattle, Wash................................................. 3 107 Denver, Colorado ....................................... 2 >06 Detroit, Michigan.............................. . 4 109 Los Angeles, Calif. ...................................... 6 110 Corpus Christi, Texas............................... 4 ill Spokane, Washington ................................ 1 >12 Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota ....... 7 >14 Peoria, Illinois ............................................ 1 582 584 585 586 587 590 591 592 593 594 597 598 601 606 607 611 612 >16 Portland, Oregon ...................................... S (18 St. Louis, Missouri...................................... 2 615 616 >19 Reading, Pa.................................................... 1 619 >20 Kansas City, Missouri.................................. 1 620 >21 Scranton, Pa................................................... 1 621 322 Cincinnati, Ohio ........................................ 3 623 >23 Pawtucket, Rhode Island............................ 1 >24 Waukegan, Illinois...................................... 1 624 625 Chattanooga, Tenn....................................... 1 626 Pittsburgh, Pa............................................... 4 627 529 Indianapolis, Ind.................................... 1 633 >32- New Haven, Conn........................................ 1 636 >34 Albany, N. Y................................................. 1 637 >35 . St. Paul-Minneapolis, Minnesota............... 3 642 536 Dallas, Texas .............................................. 1 643 >39 Birmingham, Alabama............................... 4 647 >41 Springfield, Mass.......................................... 1 657 544 Spring City, Pa............................................. 1 660 >45 Newark, New Jersey................................... 3 662 546 Oklahoma City, Okla................................... I 665 >47 Wilkes-Barre, Pa....................................... 1 666 >48 Allentown, Pa................................................ 1 >49 Wheeling, W. Va................ ;..................... 5 550 Canton, Ohio .............................................. 4 >53 Omaha. Nebraska ........................................ 1 >55 Hartford, Conn............................................. 1 >58 Manitowoc, Wise................................ >62 Salt Lake City, Utah.................................. 1 163 Duluth, Minnesota..................................... 5 >65 Mechanicsburg, Fa....................................... 1 >68 Cumberland, Md........................................... 3 575 Detroit, Michigan ..................................... 6 576 Buffalo, New York..................................... 3 577 Burlington, Iowa ....................................... 2 579 :o^ Trenton, New Jersey................................. 1 New York, New York................................. 8 678 680 681 682 688 1 691 692 694 696 697 698 700 701 702 704 Tacoma, Washington.................................. 1 706 Kansas City, Kansas.................................. 1 Tulsa, Oklahoma ....................................... 5 Vincennes, Indiana ................................... 1 Manchester, N. H........................................ 1 Akron, Ohio ............................................... 1 Aurora, Illinois........................................... 1 Shreveport, Louisiana................................. 3 Wichita Falls, Texas................................... 3 Utica, New York ....................................... 1 Bethlehem, Pa.............................................. I Jacksonville. Florida ................................. 3 Kalispell, Montana..................................... 2 Charleston, S. C.......................................... 5 Wichita, Kansas ........................................... 2 Charlestown, Mass........................................ 1 Waukesha, Wisconsin................................. 1 Syracuse, New York................................... 1 Muskegon, Michigan ................................. 1 Atlanta, Georgia........................................... 2 New Orleans, La......... ................... 1 Tulsa, Oklahoma ....................................... 4 Elmira, New York.................... 2 Baton Rouge, La.......................................... 6 Fresno, Calif.................................................. 1 Honolulu, Hawaii....................................... 6 Columbus, Ohio ......................................... 1 San Diego, California................................. 4 Evansville, Indiana.............................. I Durham, N. C.............................................. 4 Decatur, Alabama....................................... 1 Erie, Pennsylvania ..................................... I Victoria, B.C., Canada ............................. 1 Clinton, Iowa ............................................ 1 Baltimore, Maryland ................................. 1 Leavenworth, Kansas.................................. 1 Canton, Ohio .............................. ::......... 1 Madison, Wisconsin ................................... 1 Nazareth, Pennsylvania ............................. 1 Lake Charles, La..................................... 3 Fond du Lac, Wis........................................ 1 Royersford, Pa.............................................. 1 Louisville, Kentucky ................................. 2 Grand Rapids, Michigan.......................... 1 Rock Island, Illinois........ .......................... 1 Atlantic City, N. J........................................ 1 Houston, Texas ........................................ 2 Fort Smith, Arkansas................................. 1 Roanoke, Virginia ..................................... 2 Miami, Florida........................................... 1 Windsor, Ont., Canada............................. 5 Joplin, Missouri........................................ 1 Meridian, Miss............................................. 1 Chattanooga, Tenn. .................................... 5 Savannah, Georgia...................................... 1 SEPTEMBER, 1972 107 0010 12/04/01 TUB 17:52 FAI 6072559641 CATHERWOOD LIB. Oil L. U. No. City No. of Delegates L. U. No. City ' No. of 708 Billings, Montana........................................ 1 793 Fargo, North Dakota.......... 4 709 Savannah, Georgia ...................................... 5 796 Tucson, Arizona .................. 1 . 710 Monroe, Louisiana..................................... 3 798 Prichard, Alabama................ 4 183 - Oe 711 Montreal, Quebec, Can.................................9 799 Lafayette, Indiana .............. 1 1<0 - Shi 712 Vancouver, B.C., Canada .......................... 3 800 Charleston, S. C.................... 1 03 -Tc 714 Port Huron, Michigan............................... 1 801 Reno, Nevada ...................... 1 715 Knoxville, Tennessee.................................. 2 802 Lansing, Michigan .............. 1 716 Philadelphia, Pa.......................................... 1 803 Honolulu, Hawaii................ 1 717 St. Joseph. Missouri .................................... 1 804 Springfield, Ohio ................ 1 718 Wheeling, W. Va........................................... 1 720 Edmonton, Alb., Canada........................... 4 721 Toronto, Ont., Canada .............................. 8 805 Calgary, Alberta, Canada .. 807 Augusta, Maine .................. 808 Orlando, Florida ................ 1 1 182 - Ot 5 141 - Sh 723 Clarksburg, W. Va....................................... 1 725 Calgary, AUa., Canada .............................. 4 809 St. John, N.B., Canada 810 Ashley, Michigan ................ 1 03 I 5 -- N 726 Ft. Wayne, Indiana .................................... 1 811 Wausau, Wisconsin ............ 1 128 727 Johnson City, Tennessee............................ 1 812 Asheville, N, C...................... 1 ,.. 5 -- 0' 728 Winnipeg, Man.. Canada .......................... 2 730 Elkhart, Indiana ......................................... I 813 Memphis, Tennessee .......... 814 Cudahy, Wisconsin ............ 1 323 1 732 Pocatello, Idaho .......................................... 2 815 Great Falls, Montana.......... 1 733 Nashville, Tennessee................................... 2 816 Trois Rivieres, Quebec, Can 1 734 St. Catharine's Ont., Can............................. 1 817 Marseilles, Illinois................ 1 LU.No. 736 Hamilton, Ont., Canada ............................ 7 818 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania . .. 3 689 (Sh 740 Phoenix, Arizona ........................................ 1 819 Wellston, Ohio.................... 1. 785 (Sh 741 Jacksonville, Florida .................. *........... 1 820 Mt. Vernon, Ohio .............. 1 746 (Sh 742 Honolulu, Hawaii ...................................... 1. 822 Lewisburg, Pennsylvania ... 1 806 (Sli 743 Toronto, Ont., Canada .............................. 2 823 Montreal, Quebec, Canada . 3 821 (Sh 745 Portsmouth, N. H................................... 1 824 Gouverneur, New York............................ 1 ` 750 Pueblo, Colorado ........................................ 2 751 Anchorage, Alaska ...................................... 3 825 LaCrosse, Wisconsin ................................ 1 Con 752 HaliEax, N, S., Canada .............................. 2 826 Bessemer, Alabama.................................... 1 In co 753 Bristol, Virginia .......................................... 1 for the 754 Flat Rock, Michigan .......................... 1 to refer 755 Colmar, Pennsylvania ................................ 1 Local Unions Organized and Charters ihe dire 757 Toronto, Ont., Can...................................... 2 Installed During Four Year Period -- that pel 759 Thunder Bay, N. Ont., Can..........................2 760 Baton Rouge; La........................................... 1 July-1, 1968 to June 30, 1972 Inc!. On Z vacancy 764 St. John's Newf., Can................................... 4 765 Ottawa, Ont., Canada ................................ 3 L. V. No. ! created Organised ! James E 768 Richmond, Virginia.................................... 1 769 Ashland, Kentucky .................................... 5 771 Regina, Sask., Canada ................................ 2 822 Lewisburg, Pa. (Shop)................ Jan. 25, 1969 / J career. half of Organized by Wm. J. Modell a total t 772 Clearfield, Pa.............................................. 2 775 El Paso, Texas............ ................................. 3 776 Edmonton, Alb., Canada............................ 1 778 Lima, Ohio ................................................. 1 781 Norfolk, Virginia........................................ 1 782 Paducah, Kentucky .................................... 4 783 Marquette, Michigan.................................. 2 786 Sudbury, Ont., Canada.............................. 5 823 Montreal, Quebec, been xc Canada (Rod).......... ...........April 2, 1970 results Organized by Norman Wilson 824 Gouverneur, New York progres i and we Upoi (Shop) ............... Oct. 19, 1971 i accepte Organized by Walter L. Hill tremen 1971 i *hip o 787 Parkersburg, W. Va.................................. 6 825 La Crosse, Wise. (Shop)...............Oct. 27, dbchar 789 Midland, Texas ................................... 1 Organized by Joseph L- Palma integri 790 San Francisco, Calif..................................... 5 791 Flint, Michigan .......................................... 1 792 Los Angeles, Calif......................................... 4 826 Bessemer, Ala. (Shop)............ March 29, Organized by T. W. Odencal Hov\ have c SEP! 108 THE ironworker 12/04/01 TOE 17:54 FAI 6072559641 CATHERWOOD LIB. @012 We still enjoy the maximum experience credit rat ing allowed by the Surety Association of America according to its rating schedule, and because of this favorable rating, we anticipate renewing the present bond coverage from June SO, 1972 to June SO, 1975, again with a substantial reduction in the premium '9% cost. received 93 applications for variances, toler ances or exemptions. 3. Set up a priority list on compliance inspec tions. including a Target Industry Program focusing on five industries with injury fre quency rates more than double the national average. Safety .9% As you are aware, since our last Convention Con gress has enacted legislation which provides the work ers of this International Association with a greater degree of safety than ever before. In submitting my report to this Convention, I will attempt to give you ? brief history of the progress of this Act, since its enactment. * 4. Conducted 9,300 inspections in establishments employing more than 1.5 million workers. These inspections led to the issuance of 5,636 citations alleging violations of standards, and proposed penalties totaling $361,692.00. Of establishments inspected, 1,842 or 20%, were found to be in compliance and another 20% had only minor violations. OSHA received 686 complaints, and all valid complaints have been acted upon or responded to. Sixty per cent of the complaints have involved health. This law, known as the Occupational Safety and .7% Health Act, is administered by George C. Guen ther, Assistant Secretary of Labor. The Act provides certain federal standard regulations on safety and health which the employers are compelled to com ply with for the protection of workers in all indus tries, including the construction industry. It also provides severe penalties for noncompliance. 1-Tt. 5. Developed training and education efforts for compliance officers and state inspectors, trained a cadre of 830 construction safety instructors with a projected multiplier effect of training 12,000 persons, and conducted one-day orientation courses in 31 cities for employee representatives. 6. Encouraged the states co assume full respon Following is a news release from the U. S. sibility for administering and enforcing stand Department of Labor iri December 1971: ards "at least as effective as" the federal. All 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Job Safety and Health Agency Reports On First Six Months of Operation Rico and Guam have given preliminary in dication of their interest. Agreements have been reached with 47 states, the District of The new Occupational Safety and Health Ad Columbia, Puerto Rico and Guam, allowing 3% ministration (OSHA) issued a report to Congress them to continue enforcing their own stand today on its progress in its first six months of oper ards while developing their state plans. ations seeking to assure safe and healthful working conditions for more than 57 million employees On January 10, 1972, Assistant Secretary Guen across the country. 4% ther announced that a construction industry com Secretary of Labor J. D. Hodgson reported that the agency, in implementing the Williams-Steiger Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, in mittee would be appointed consisting of nine members. On April 17, 1972, Assistant Secretary Guenther announced the decision that the Advisory the period between its official birth on April 28 Committee was being expanded from 9 to 15 mem and November 1 had done the following: bers, and commenced, "There is a clear need for additional construction safety and health standards, 9% 1. Established and staffed a decentralized organ which will require an increase in the number of ization with a network of 10 regional offices, 48 members to serve on subcommittees." area offices and three Maritime District offices, with 500 employees -- about two-thirds When this Committee was expanded from 9 to of the agency's personnel -- located in the field. 15 members we were successful in having one of There are 290 in the National Office. our officers, Robert E. P. Cooney, appointed as a member of the Committee- 2. Adopted occupational safety and health 6% standards against which to measure employer This in my opinion was a step forward for the compliance in 4.1 million establishments, and Ironworkers, as the general rule is to submit any l SEPTEMBER, 1972 131 I 12/04/01 TUE 17:57 FAX 6072559641 CATHERWOOD LIB. @013 applications for variances of the Act to the Ad visory Committee for consideration; however, our major concern at this time is the training of com petent inspectors who should have past experience in the building industry and who will have the knowhow to identify and coixect the hazards and violations that may exist in order to give the worker the full protection of the Act. Our local union officers and shop stewards should take an active part in the administration of this Act. I have always held at least 75% of all on-the-job acci dents can be prevented if the proper precautions are taken, and now that we have the full support of the OSHA it should be much less difficult. Let me quote to you some comments on the position of the AFL-CIO regarding state participa tion in this Act: "The act sets forth the conditions whereby the states may submit plans to the Secretary of Labor to administer and enforce their own occupational safety and health programs. "The federal government has been given the leadership role because most of the states do not have adequate laws or operate adequate pro grams. Therefore, federal jurisdiction should be relinquished to the states only if they provide protections at least as effective as those contained in the federal part of the Act, and demonstrate that these protections are an actuality, not a promise. "On June 28, 1971, the Secretary of Labor published in the Federal Register a rule setting forth the general and particular conditions of ' eligibility for a State plan to be acceptable. The Secretary's revised rule has become effective October 4, 1971. "Although this rule, in-its final form, has been revised, it remains subject to the same criticisms and opposition by the AFL-CIO and many In ternational Unions, as it was when originally promulgated. "A recent survey by the Bureau of Labor Statistics reveals that collective bargaining agree ments tend to include relatively extensive pro visions on general safety rules and regulations. These agreements, however, do not always con tain provisions that give the necessary protection to the members employed in our industry. "Perhaps, too, union contracts in the past have not put sufficient emphasis on safety. As one general contractor said, `If the union bargainer would exert one-tenth of the pressure for safety clauses that he does for pay increases and other wage benefits, we wouldn't have the problem we now have. Union members are satisfied with a negotiator who puts real money in their pockets. Safety features are just so much icing on the cake.' " Our industry has always been regarded as the most hazardous in the building and construction industry. Since the formation of our International Association, the officers and members have coniistently fought for more on-the-job safety and protec tion for our members. Considerable progress has been made in the past few years through state safety codes, local union safety committees, and apprentice training, etc., but much more remains to be done. Finally, after many years of continuous effort on the part of organized labor, we were successful in convincing Congress that the worker must be given better safety and health protection at the work place, hence the enactment of the Occupational Safety and Health Act. This Act, as originally written, does provide con siderable protection for the worker if properly administered, and not mutilated by employers who regard the Act as an additional cost item rather than as protection for the worker. With the Act comparatively new, I am concerned with the many requests made to have the rules revised and varia tions granted without regard and due consideration for the safety of the worker. After all, the intent of the Act is to give the worker more protection, not less -- and in my opinion, any time an em ployer association requests any type of easement of , the Tules, it is .not to give more protection to the worker. A recent example is the position taken by our fair employers in requesting a modification in the rules relating to safety nets on bridge con struction. Let me quote the article appearing in the February 2, 1972 issue of the National Erec tors Association bulletin: "Safety Nets (Section 1518.105(c)) The proposed standard would have required safety nets in* stalled no more than 10 feet below the work surface. * NEA's Safety Committee strongly ob jected to this proposal, and the new standard has been modified and does reflect our recom mendations. Nets shall be installed as close w 1 the work surface, but in no case more than 25 | feet below the working level, and shall extend j 8 feet beyond the edge of the work surface. > Ad< onl con It i ployet factor when below .drop the b in be that i help po.snl all er more of otn der ti suppe emple NE intr (D< exci u far ing reqi diff. lien tial Thi ployet our >ng a where opinii furthc opposi If t Slippo same i In ( active comm btconi possib accide authoi don't io be, 132 the ironworker SEPi 12/04/.01 TUB 17:59 FAX 6072559641 CATHERWOOD LIB. 014 Additionally, a new Subsection was added that only one level of nets is required for bridge Conclusion construction." In concluding my report, let me say it has been an It would appear from this article that our em honor and a privilege for me to serve as General ployers are actively engaged in reducing the safety Treasurer of this International Association. Despite factor to the worker wherever possible, especially the problems which are encountered daily in the of when the modification grants permission to net 25' fice of die General Treasurer, it has been a most below the working level. This would mean a 50' gratifying experience for me to have been able to ii J drop if the worker came from the top level of meet, work with, and know so many of the officers of the bridge, or an additional drop if it happened our local unions. to be a double deck bridge. So we can agree that modifying the rules does not in any manner help the worker. We also have a legislative pro posal to modify OSHA standards which will exempt all employers from tire Act who do not employ more than 25 workers. You can imagine how many of our employers will be exempt from the Act un der this rule. This legislative proposal was also supported by what we classify as our fair employers. The last four years have been crucial ones in the history of this organization and have demanded many decisions of both the General Executive Board and the General Executive Council. Under the leadership of General President John H. Lyons, a man of bound less energy and foresight, this International Associa tion has thrived. It would be unnecessary for me to describe the attributes and abilities of our General President in this report; however, I feel compelled to bring to the attention of the delegates and the NEA Bulletin of January 1, 1972, states: members the complete and total dedication of Gen eral President Lyons to the interests and welfare of "Ttvo bills (HR 12575 and 12576) have been the members of this International Association. In my introduced in the House by Congressman Taylor humble opinion, this International Association has in (Democrat, North Carolina) which would (1) deed been blessed in having Genera! President Lyons exempt from the federal standards all non-man to lead us in this crucial period in American labor ufacturing businesses, and all businesses employ history. It has been an honor and a privilege to be a ing twenty-five employees or less, and (2) would part of this administration, and I would like to thank require the Secretary oF Labor to recognize the him for his wise counsel and assistance in helping me difference in hazards to employees between the to fulfill my duties and responsibilities as Treasurer. heavy construction industry and light residen tial construction industry." Prior to his retirement, former Genera! Secretary James R. Downes worked untiringly on behalf of The latest is a request by, again, our fair em the members of this International Association. For ployers. to make certain changes in Article 15 of almost a quarter of a century, Jim Downes labored our General Working Ruies relating to the plank to make things a little bit better for the Ironworker. 'i ing and decking of tier buildings and bridges Although he lias retired as General Secretary, it is where the 2-story 25' rule applies. This, in my gratifying to know that his experience and counsel opinion, is just another wedge to open the door to are still available to the Association. J wish to take further easements of the rules, and I strongly this opportunity to thank him for the cooperation oppose it. which he gave throughout the period which I have If this is granted, it will give them the necessary support to make application for a variation in the same rule in OSHA. served as General Treasurer, and to wish both him and his dear wife a long, healthy, and happy retirement. Upon die retirement of former General Secretary In conclusion, let me urge all of you to take an Downes, General President Lyons, with the unani active part in accident prevention, insist that safety mous approval-of the General Executive Council, very committees be appointed in all of youT local unions, wisely selected as his replacement a man who has become active in all training programs wherever served the membership of this International Associa i ipossible, insist chat records be kept of all lost-time tion for more than twenty-five years. Secretary Drake i I accidents, report all job violations to the proper brought with him to the office of General Secretary a i authority at die OSHA office in your area, and vast amount of knowledge and experience gained as a don't ever forget that safety is, and will continue Business Agent, General Organizer, and finally as a .i lt> be, our responsibility. Vice President, who served as head nf the Washing- ,i a (1 SEPTEMBER, 1972 133