Mr. HILL. I really believe that they would license, that most of them in the State of Ohio would license for the maximum 80,000 pound gross weight.

Mr. MCCOLLISTER. So that when they do go to New York, there is an element of cost in that load

Mr. HILL. Really, yes.

Mr. MCCOLLISTER [continuing]. for the license fees that they cannot use because of the laws not permitting the 80,000 pounds.

Mrs. FENWICK. Would the gentleman yield?

Mr. MCCOLLISTER. Yes.

Mrs. FENWICK. On Saturday also I heard the most interesting case. The owner-operator had a chance for a very good load to go into another State. And he was a little bit over the load in that State and had a fine slapped on him right that minute of $225. If he had not had it with him, he would have been held up. So we got to have uniform standards.

Mr. HILL. That was a very low fine I believe.

Mrs. FENWICK. $225?

Mr. HILL. Oh, yes.

Mr. MCCOLLISTER. I don't have any more questions. Mr. Hill has been an excellent spokesman for his point of view.

Mr. HUNGATE. Yes. Mr. Hill, we appreciate your contribution. Could you tell me how many members are in your association? Mr. HILL. In our association?

Mr. HUNGATE. Yes, sir.

Mr. HILL. Actually in the fraternal association of steel haulers, which is one organization, we keep the number of members confidential because of the problems we have been having with the Teamsters' Union. And in the Special Haulers, which is another organization, that the labor union part of it and I would say there is approximately 305. They are under contract with the carriers.

Mr. HUNGATE. Would you say all areas of the country are represented, or is it pretty much local or regional?

Mr. HILL. Our association has chapters in Wisconsin, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Ohio. Also we have representation in New York and in New Jersey.

Mr. HUNGATE. I see. Anything in the West Coast?

Mr. HILL. No.

Mr. HUNGATE. Well I think your testimony has indicated to us that we may need to hear ultimately from and talk to the Interstate Commerce Commission and the National Labor Relations Board about some of the problems you raised.

Mr. HILL. By the way, Mr. Chairman, in my statement that I prepared for the subcommittee in article 11 of the list of exhibits, Mr. Chairman, I do not have that copy with me. Something came up and I looked through my file last night and I forgot it. So I will have to send it.

Mr. HUNGATE. Fine. Unless there is objection, the subcommittee will receive the list of exhibits to which you referred in your prepared statement, Mr. Hill. They will be filed today with the exception of exhibit 11. Can you file that within 1 week?

Mr. HILL. Yes; I can.

Mr. HUNGATE. Unless there are further questions, we will proceed. We have a number of witnesses to accommodate. We thank you again. [Mr. Hill's prepared statement and attachments follow:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF WILLIAM J. HILL, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL INDEPENDENT TRUCKERS UNITY COMMITTEE

My name is Bill Hill of 821 East Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. I am Chairman of the Fraternal Association of Steel Haulers, which might be described as a trade association of independent truckers-men who own their own rigs and haul principally in the steel industry; and also President of the Fraternal Association of Special Haulers, which is constituted as a trade union and seeks to represent its members in their relationship with carriers to whom they contract their trucks and services. I was an owner-operator and hauled steel and other commodities from 1958 until 1968 when then I became a fulltime employe of F.A.S.H.

As an outgrowth of this activity, I am Chairman of the National Independent Truckers Unity Council, heretofore known as the National Independent Truckers Unity Committee. In accordance with its long-range plans, NITUC recently adopted the word Council in its name as being more descriptive of its goals and program.

NITUC is, in fact, a council of independent truckers associations, and thus is the forum in which most owner-operators' associations from many parts of the country meet quarterly to deliberate, to debate issues, and to chart programs which we hope will remedy the acute problems confronting independent truckers and thus save this hard-working, constructive and valuable segment of the transportation industry from extinction. We estimate that at least 50% of the products produced in this nation are transported by independent truckers. The Associations in NITUC are the ones which urged upon you the holding of these hearings, and we hope today to present briefly-but in compelling language the complex problems confronting us and outline some of the solutions which we think are imperative for the survival of free enterprise in this industry. It is my purpose to outline briefly the general situation confronting us. Others, representing some of the strongest associations in the Unity Council, will follow with more detailed discussions of particular practices and regulations which threaten the extinction of the independent truckers.

I will have to say in passing that the descriptive phrase "Independent Truckers" represents a hope more than a reality, and I am tempted at this time to say that the term "independent truckers" should not be applied to our people, because in reality at this time the majority are NOT.

In fact, they find themselves today in a virtual no-man's-land without a real stake in this nation's transportation system. They are in a position where they have no control over their destiny.

If they try to bargain collectively to better their position with the trucking companies, that hold Interstate Commerce Authority, who the independent truckers must lease their rigs to, they find themselves threatened with antitrust litigation-both criminal and civil-because in most cases they are considered to be independent contractors by both the industry itself and the federal regulatory agencies.

But, if they try to work as truly independent contractors and haul directly for the shippers, they are adjudged to be in violation of the Interstate Commerce Act.

They are, in fact, slaves to a firmly established system which offers special protection to many of its elements, such as its trucking firms, but which gives them absolutely no power to gain an equitable position in that system. Many of the owner-operators-that is, independent truckers-believe that the government could and should protect them from the many injustices and unfair practices which will be described to you today.

However, it is my opinion that if they had the right to bargain collectively, our people could negotiate with the carriers effectively regarding their conditions of work and pay, and thereby have a hand in the direction of their destiny. I believe it is important for the Congress to know that if we were given the right to bargain we would not have to go to the government to correct most of our problems. We could do this on our own, collectively, like other American workers do.

All of this leads me to what I consider to be the most important point for owner-operators which I have to make at this hearing. In the opinion of many of us who came up as drivers in the trucking industry, the National Labor Relations Board-though conceived for lofty and worthy purposes-has in reality become a tool of big business and big labor unions to be used against the rank-and-file workers in this nation, especially workers who do not fall into stereotype categories.

I base my opinion of the National Labor Relations Board on the experience F.A.S.H. has had with the Board and its various bureaucrats. It is safe to say that of all the vacillations of federal agencies with respect to the identity and status of independent truckers, the on-again, off-again policy of the NLRB over the years has been most flagrant of all. Most of us feel that the inconsistent NLRB decisions have been caused by political influence exercised by the various national administrations. More particularly the influence generated by the NixonTeamster alliance put together a number of years ago.

As a result of such political alliances, this nation's steel haulers and other owner-operators have been denied the procedures of the NLRB under which they otherwise would have had the right of electing their representatives and bargaining for their own working conditions. Only the other day I received word from the NLRB denying the Fraternal Association of Special Haulers, a union agency, even a hearing regarding fourteen petitions we filed on behalf of many hundreds of the steel haulers who want the right to vote on who they want to represent them in collective bargaining.

In any event, the latest NLRB denial of the right of the steel haulers to shape their own destiny has effectively frustrated the will of thousands of steel haulers by denying them the opportunity to democratically elect their own bargaining agent and to vote on their own contracts.

Did the NLRB discuss the legal and philosphical background of its latest denial of the just and fair hopes of the steel haulers? Not at all! Its ruling was curt and I would say-insulting, in that it gave no inkling of NLRB's reasoning or the basis for its decision.

The Board simply said: "Having duly considered the Petitioners' request for review of the Regional Director's dismissal of the instant petitions, the Board concluded that insufficient grounds have been alleged to warrant reversal of the Regional Director."

This decision by the NLRB dooms approximately 15,000 steel haulers and other owners to remain as captive members of the Teamsters, who we believe, as a matter of their policy, has been working for years to eliminate all independent truckers.

Probably, the best example of their policy is their recently negotiated contract which reduced the pays of their owner-operator members, and hammered another nail into their coffin.

I have included a copy of our appeal which will give this committee a better understanding of our problem with the Labor Board.

I have covered so far two aspects of the problems confronting us-the threat of anti-trust action when our members undertake to better their working conditions collectively and the failure of the NLRB to afford relief to the workers we represent by making available to them NLRB certification for collective bargaining.

Both of these problems are related to the no-man's-land in which the independent truckers find themselves, as regards their status as "employees”.

Probably, most of our problems could be solved by the Congress through a clear and concise amendment of the Norris-LaGuardia Act adequately including owner-operators in the Act's definition of "employees", and clearly defining disagreements between owner-operators and carriers as coming within the term "Labor dispute". Such a simple amendment would immediately give these fine, independent-American workers the kind of legal standing they need to obtain improved contracts with the trucking companies they must lease their rigs to. Furthermore, haulers of non-regulated commodities, should also be given some kind of exemption from Anti-Trust Laws, allowing them to meet together to discuss their cost of operations and to recommend and publish compensatory rate schedules.

The Congress could also help the independent truckers by amending the National Labor Relations Act to include coverage of owner-operators who must lease their rigs to trucking companies, in order to haul goods for shippers. Congress should also direct the NLRB to abide by the Labor Relations Act which reads in part in Section 7, "Employees shall have the right to self-organization,

to form, join, or assist Labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing."

We urge you as a Committee to strongly recommend to Congress that it take these recommended steps immediately, as a means of saving one of the most valuable elements of the trucking industry—the independent truckers.

The role of the small independent trucker in America's transportation system is more threatened today than at any time in the past.

The questions of anti-trust and of NLRB recognition are by no means all of the problems confronting the independent truckers.

They sometimes are robbed of their rightful share of the freight bill by unscrupulous carriers who "skim" off part of the tariff before figuring the trucker's share under the contract. Recent ICC regulations making the freight bill "available" to the trucker for inspection have proved inadequate. He should have a legal right in every instance to receive an honest, written accounting based on the total freight bill itself, with a copy of the freight bill attached.

Owner-operators frequently are "ripped off" by having to absorb unjust unloading charges. They often are confronted with the choice of paying off somebody for a load, or sitting idle.

They are confounded by a maze of highway use taxes, ton-miles taxes, state registration taxes, permits for this and that-an almost unbearable array of problems, costly both in money and in time.

They are in most cases operating below cost. Hauling rates have not increased proportionately with the ever-rising cost of fuel, tires, parts, repairs, and other operational cost, plus lower speed limits and variant weight laws that also have reduced their incomes.

This nation is indulging in total folly when it allows its magnificent interstate highway system to be clogged and cluttered by an infinite variety of state and local regulations and restraints on interstate commerce-all in the false name of states rights. The system is NOT SAVING Americans money-it is costing them untold millions. It is NOT PRESERVING private initiative-it is destroying it, through a process of forced bankruptcy on some of the hardestworking, most dedicated workers in the country, the independent truck drivers. These drivers must be some of the greatest "romantics" in America, too-otherwise they would not endure the nightmare of unconscionable rules, regulations and rip-offs which so many of them endure on a day by day basis.

Other witnesses will discuss these problems today, in ensuing testimony.

For background history of the independent trucker movement, I am submitting as supporting information, a transcript copy of a speech I was invited to deliver— and did deliver-at Harvard University.

For a truly remarkable summary of the trials and tribulations of owneroperators, I refer you to a statement, made last December by a member of your own House Small Business Committee-Congressman Joseph M. McDade. Mr. McDade shows great insight, and a remarkable grasp of the problems of the independent truckers.

For supportive information on our relations with the Teamsters Union, I am submitting reprints of magazine articles recounting the neglect and abuse the Teamsters have accorded owner-operators in the past, and also setting out in detail how the Teamsters managed to claim a "raise" for owner-operators in their new contract-while actually reducing the owner-operators' pay.

Also submitted as evidence are other documents discussing various aspects of the independent truckers' problems: a synopsis of those problems prepared by Myron C. Grauer in connection with his doctoral study of the subject, with an introduction to and summary of the legal aspects of those problems; copies of a letter bearing on the question of anti-trust prosecution of independent truckers, addressed by our attorney, Paul D. Boas, to Senator Philip Hart-but equally applicable to this hearing; also, a compelling letter to Senator Hart on the same subject, prepared by Arthur L. Fox II, able attorney and executive director of the Professional Drivers Council for Safety and Health, Washington, D.C.; and a synopsis of the legal issues involved in the anti-trust problem taken from a book about independent truckers entitled, "Owner-Operator: The Independent Trucker.” In conclusion, I want to talk about the current Great Debate on the matter of deregulation. As professionals who work on a day to day basis in the transportation industry as drivers and owners of equipment, the independents feel they have a balanced viewpoint on this matter. They believe that in the intricate transportation system that spans this nation, some degree of regulation in the public interest is inevitable, and desirable. They are against the type of deregula

tion that would allow chaos and dog-eat dog competition in the transportation industry.

However, it is my opinion and many others that if the independent trucker cannot get the right to bargain like other workers regarding their working conditions and rates of pay, then we believe total deregulation might be our only means of survival in this nation's transportation industry.

To the Honorable Members of this Committee, I extend my thanks for your attention to this grave crisis confronting the independent truckers. Thank you.

LIST OF EXHIBITS

1. Paul D. Boas-Letter to Senator Philip Hart, November 7, 1974.

2. Myron C. Grauer-Testimony that F.A.S.H. may present to Congress seeking an exemption from the Anti Trust Laws.

3. Transcript of a speech given by William Hill at Harvard on November 1, 1974.

4. Arthur I. Fox II-Letter to Senator Philip Hart, July, 1974.

5. Chapter on Legal issues taken from the book Owner-Operator: The Independent Trucker.

6. Reprint of an article from October, 1975, Heavy Duty Trucking Magazine "Carving Up The Independent."

7. Reprints of articles from Open Road Magazine, January 1976, Statement by Congressman Joseph M. McDade. March, 1976, N.L.R.B. "Rules Are Changing". May, 1976, "When Is a Raise Not a Raise, Owner-Truckers Angered At New Teamster Contract."

8. Reprint of an editorial from Owner-Operator Magazine May-June, 1976, issue, "Pending Legislation S. 2271.”

9. Howard Grossinger-Letter to N.L.R.B. March 20, 1976. Also appeal to Labor Board April 7, 1976, regarding right to vote for steel haulers.

10. Letters from N.L.R.B. regarding ruling against steel haulers right to vote for collective bargaining agent-dates March 18, March 30, and April 29, 1976. 11. Copy of decision of three judge panel U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, Judges: Bazelon, Tamm, and Robb-April 30, 1975, refers to N.L.R.B. vacillations.

12. Department of Transportation-Report regarding skimming by trucking companies of owner-operator revenues titled, "Owner-Operator Divisions Irregular Route Structure And Carrier Agencies."

13. Governor Milton J. Shapp of Pennsylvania-Letter to Secretary of Labor, William J. Usery (Then Director of Federal Mediation & Conciliation Service) September 19, 1974, calling for an investigation by ICC regarding owner-operator carrier problem.

14. National Governors' Conference memorandum-Calling for Congress and the ICC to conduct an investigation of the problems of the trucking industry, particularly the relationship between owner-operators and certified carriers June 4, 1974.

15. Petitions by N.I.T.U.C. outlining owner-operator problems and calling for an investigation of relationship between owner-operators and regulated carriers August 22, 1974.

16. Copy of mailgram from N.I.T.U.C. to President Gerald Ford asking help for the nation's independent truckers. Also asking for an investigation of trucking industry. Attached news release and resolution by N.I.T.U.C. October, 1974. SPEECH GIVEN BY WILLIAM HILL, PRESIDENT OF THE FRATERNAL ASSOCIATION OF STEEL HAULERS AT THE HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL ON NOVEMBER 1, 1974 Thank you very much. It's really a pleasure to be, here, at Harvard. Myself, I got my education in a trade school and after that I really got educated by way of driving a truck throughout the country. It is a pleasure, and I'll tell all the truck drivers that I talk to at various meetings that I made it to Harvard to talk to the future leaders of the country. There are probably some of the future trucking company owners here, the guys that we don't get along with too good at times.

I was an owner-operator for quite some time, in fact I started hauling steel after I came out of the service. Before I started hauling steel, I managed to work for a time in a graveyard as a gravedigger. I did start hauling steel and by the time our strike came along in 1967 in the steel industry I owned and operated three trucks—I drove one and had 2 employees working for me. I had started out with one truck.