(It is as follows:)

APPENDIX A. WORK OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD IN RELATION TO THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND THE CONGRESS FOR INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS

LENGTH OF TIME IN WHICH A. F. OF L. AND C. I. O. CASES WERE DISPOSED OF

APPENDIX B. PROPORTION OF NUMBER OF WORKERS INVOLVED IN STRIKES TO TOTAL NUMBER OF GAINFUL WORKERS, 1880-1938

Source: 1880-1937-John I. Griffin, Strikes, A Study in Quartitative Economics, Columbia University Press, New York, 1939, p. 61. 1938-Derived in the same manner as figures for previous years in the Griffin study. (Strike data from Bureau of Labor Statistics; gainful worker data from U. S. Census of Occupa tions.)

APPENDIX C. TREND OF MAN-DAYS OF IDLENESS DUE TO STRIKES COMPARED WITH TREND OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY, JANUARY 1937 TO FEBRUARY 1939

Sources: Strike data: 1937, U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Monthly Labor Feriew, May 1938, p. 1188. 1938-39, U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Division of Industrial Relations.

Production indexes: 1937-38 and January 1939, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System, Federal Reserve Bulletin, March 1939, p. 214. February 1939, U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, Survey of Current Business, Weekly Supplement, Mar. 30, 1939, p. 3.

APPENDIX D

TABLE 1.-Comparison of number of cases brought before the National Labor Relations Board and total number of strikes, beginning in each month, October 1935-February 1939

1 Strike data for monthly figures released by the U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Division of Industrial Relations, Annual revised figures are not broken down by causes each month. • Preliminary.

TABLE 2.-Comparison of number of workers involved in cases brought before the National Labor Relations Board and number of workers involved in all strikes, beginning each month-October 1935-February 1939

1 Strike data for monthly figures released by the U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Division of Industrial Relations, annual revised figures not broken down by causes for each month. 1 Preliminary.

TABLE 3.-Comparison of number of cases brought before the National Labor Relations Board and number of organization strikes, beginning in each month, October 1935-December 1938

1 Strike data for monthly figures released by the U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Division of Industrial Relations. Annual revised figures are not broken down by causes for each month, Break-down as to causes of strikes in January and February 1939 are not yet available.

TABLE 4.-Comparison of number of workers involved in cases brought before the National Labor Relations Board and number of workers involved in organization strikes, October 1935-December 1938

1 Strike data for monthly figures released by the U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Division of Industrial Relations. Annual revised figures are not broken down by causes for each month. Break-down as to causes of strikes in January and February 1939 are not yet available.

Senator ELLENDER. Chairman Madden, there is one more question I would like to ask with reference to these independent unions. Have you had many cases wherein the so-called independent unions were formed long before the act, and probably under company's domination at that time, but thereafter where the company separated, as it were, from the union and let the employees handle their own business?

Mr. MADDEN. We have had a great many cases in which, shortly after the 12th of April 1937, the employer called together the representatives of what had before that time been a rather plainly company-dominated union, but which the employer had kept on maintaining because he had thought that this act was unconstitutional, and that he didn't need to obey it, and after April 12, 1937, the employer has done something or other in the direction of taking his hands off the control of the organization.

Now, in a good many cases, unfortunately, he has not adequately taken his hands off the controls and so in spite of that gesture there the union has, in the opinion of the Board, continued to be a company-dominated union.

Senator ELLENDER. To what extent would the Board go in disestablishing such a union if proof only were shown of domination prior to the act and later on there is no domination shown?