Evening star., 1941-01-31
BY the Associated Press.


son testified today that the War
Department was considering inclu-
sion in all Army contracts of a
provision requiring compliance with
all labor laws, but was not ready to
recommend "coercive" legislation to
curb labor disputes on defense
projects.
He made the statement to the
House Military Affairs Committee
during questioning as to why the
Ford Motor Co. was refused con-
tract for Army trucks to cost about
S10,00000O.
That's one of my particular
headaches" Mr.. Patterson said
when Representative Thomas, Re-
publican, of New Jersey asked him
about the Ford matter.
After repeated questions, Mr.. Pat
terson testified that the labor pro-
vision to which Ford objected had
been included in the contract pros
pectus at the request of Sidney
Hillnan. associate director general
of the Office for Production Manage
ment.
Policy Not Decided.
"Why was it included in that con-
tract and not in the others awarded
to the Ford company?' Representa-
tive Thomas asked.
The others were negotiated con-
tracts" Mr.. Patterson replied.
He referred to a S120,000000 con-
tract for airplane engines and a
smaller award for midget scout cars
for the Army
THE matter is still in the max
ing" Mr.. Patterson continued, "as
to whether those provisions should
be put uniformly in all contracts"
But in this particular contract,
it was included because Sidney Hill
man wanted it, wasn't it?" Repre-
sentative Thomas asked.
Yes, he wanted it," Mr.. Patter-
son replied
In awarding a contract for 11,781
half-ton trucks to the Fargo Motor
Corp. of Detroit, rather than to Ford.
the low bidder, the War Depart
ment announced last night that the
latter firm had excepted as to the
labor clauses" which have been
written into Army contracts since
mid-December.
Fargos bid was Sl0,298,128. I. A.
CapizZi, Ford attorney, said at De-
troit that his firms bid was S250000
lower, and declared that labor
groups have the ear of certain Of
ficials in Washington, whereas the
Ford Motor Co. does not"
The Labor Clause.
issued governing contracts for mill
itary supplies, asserting that the
work "s will be carried out in
compliance with the provisions Of
the statement of labor policy rela-
tive to overtime pay and in COM
pliance with Federal statutory pro-
visions affecting labor wherever
such provisions are applicable, as
well as with State and local statutes
affecting labor relations. hours of
work, wages, workmen'S compenSa-
ton, safety and sanitation"
1t was not Immediately revealed
which section of the labor clauses"
was Objectionable to Ford. But Mr..
Capizzi declared:
1--WE would have had to assign a
watchman for every two employees.
A violation of any of the laws, by
any one in the plant, might have
been cause for cancellation of the
contract"
Ford Already Has Contracts.
Before the>labor clauses became
part of the contracts, Ford was given
a S122 1923, ,030 order for airplane
engines, and s1,387 500 order for
1.500 midget scout cars-the latter
over the objection of Mr.. Hillman,
who contended the contract lacked
certain labor safeguards.
At Detroit, Michael F. Widman,
jr., chairman of the Ford organizing
campaign of the United Auto Work
ers &C. 1. o. termed the Ford Co.
"the most fragrant violator of labor
legislation" and declared that the
defense contracts earlier awarded
to Ford should be cancelled.
Mr.. Widman said Ford was able
to underbid Fargo by S250,000 on the
truck order because he ForO pays
lower wages"
The National Labor Relations
Board recently held that the Ford
Co. had violated the Wagner Labor
Relations Act. The case now Is be-
fore the SIlpreme Court.