|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
00:00
|
Introduction
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
00:30
|
Biographical Information
: Born in Hungary.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
02:05
|
Education
: During World War I, Benet's mother kept him out of school because of the prevalence of anti-Semitism in Hungary. He attended classes with a rabbi and spoke only Yiddish. In New Jersey, he attended a public school until he was into the seventh grade, when he dropped out of school to help run a second bakery which his father had purchased. He attended continuation school until age 16.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
04:30
|
In 1926, Benet Became a Boy Topper in a Hosiery Mill
: He did not like working in the bakery, quit the day after his sixteenth birthday, and went to work at the Interstate Hosiery Mill in Bloomfield, New Jersey. He started at 12 dollars a week to learn the trade and then went on piece rate. Most toppers were girls. Description of his work and the role of the toppers in the hosiery manufacturing process.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
06:20
|
After Working as a Boy Topper for about One and a Half Years, Benet Began Training to Become a Knitter
: Since there was a shortage of knitters at the time, the American Federation of Hosiery Workers (AFHW) waived the four-year apprenticeship period. Until this time, boy toppers had not been allowed to join the union. Benet attended a meeting of Branch 11 and stated that he felt it was unfair to prevent boy toppers from joining. The union decided then to permit boy toppers to join because they, with the formal apprenticeship waived, were training to be knitters.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
08:30
|
Description of His First Knitting Machine
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
10:00
|
Benet Became a Shop Steward, Then Vice President of Branch 11, and Then President
: In 1934, at one of the few meetings he did not attend, the president resigned, and Benet was elected to replace him. He thought, because of his age, that he had been elected as a joke, but he took the job seriously. He studied all of the decisions of Dr. George W. Taylor, Impartial Chairman for the AFHW and the industry, and all of AFHW Secretary-Treasurer William Smith's voluminous letters to the local branches. He became involved, by virtue of the presidency, in grievances and arbitrations.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
12:20
|
Benet Elected a Vice President of the District Council
: This council comprised the New York, New Jersey, and New England branches of the AFHW. Carl Holderman was the business agent, or district manager, for the council until he resigned in 1937 and was replaced by Ed Kronick, who had been president of Branch 11 before Benet.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
13:30
|
Benet Named District Manager
: In late 1937 William Smith charged Kronick with mismanagement and not conducting his office properly. Benet and council president Paul Vogel pleaded with the AFHW Executive Board not to take disciplinary action against Kronick because conditions in the industry were tough and publicity of the situation would not be good for the union. Charges were not filed, but the Executive Board ruled that Kronick would have to give up his job as district manager. At AFHW President Emil Rieve's suggestion, Benet was appointed to replace Kronick. He was later elected to the job by the council. As district manager, Benet's salary was paid by the Federation, and his expenses were paid by the district council. He serviced the locals within the district until late 1939, when the position was discontinued due to lack of funds.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
17:35
|
In January, 1940, Benet Was Put on AFHW Staff
: He was sent to Virginia at first and in early 1942 was assigned to eastern Pennsylvania and Martinsburg, West Virginia.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
19:10
|
From September 1942, until November 1945, Benet Served in the Army
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
20:30
|
Benet Returned to the Federation Staff in January 1946
: He was assigned to servicing and organizing in Virginia, West Virginia, Delaware, and Maryland.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
22:30
|
In July 1950, Benet Was Appointed AFHW Director of the Deep South
: He was headquartered in Pulaski, Virginia, and also managed the staff and serviced mills in Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
23:15
|
In 1957, Benet Was Elected First Vice President of the Hosiery Federation
: Andrew Janaskie was elected president, and Major Banachowicz was elected secretary-treasurer. The three ran as a ticket. The position of first vice president was not a paid position.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
24:45
|
Also in 1957, Benet Was Appointed Director of the Upper South (The Carolinas) in Addition to the Deep South
: He combined the two offices into one office in Chattanooga, Tennessee.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/1
Time
25:40
|
In 1963, Benet Defeated Janaskie for President of the Hosiery Federation by a Two to One Margin
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
00:00
|
Introduction
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
00:30
|
Why Benet Chose to Run Against Janaskie for the Presidency of the AFHW
: Merger discussions with TWUA had begun, but Janaskie seemed to be dragging his feet, and the discussions had lapsed. Benet was aware that some kind of a merger was necessary because the Federation was shrinking quickly. Staff had been cut back seriously, membership had declined, and financial resources were suffering. Thus he decided, upon advice from both staff and rank and file, to run for the presidency of the Federation on a platform that called for merger with honor with the TWUA and a southern organizing drive.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
04:40
|
Position of AFHW Secretary-Treasurer Major Banachowicz on Merger
: At first he had mixed feelings about the merger although he knew it was a necessity. He had had his differences with Janaskie and ran on the ticket with Benet.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
05:55
|
There Was Not Much Opposition to Merger
: Benet was elected 37-17, but the 17 who voted against Benet for President were not anti-merger; they were just loyal to Janaskie. There was no anti-merger feeling of any prominence.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
06:40
|
Janiskie's Unwillingness to Proceed with the Merger
: There was an issue over what his salary should be, and he also wanted assurance that he would have a job for the rest of his life. He wanted $18,500 in salary, which approximated his AFHW constitutional salary of $13,200 plus the expenses he received as President of AFHW's Carl Mackley Apartments. “And (William) Pollock says, 'Andy, you'll be getting more than I would if I paid you that kind of salary.' He (Janaskie) declared that then there wouldn't be any merger. This is what set me off.”.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
09:20
|
After Janaskie Was Defeated for the Presidency of the Federation, He Stayed on the Staff as an International Representative
: Benet's presidential acceptance speech called for unity, rejected recriminations against his opposition, and offered Janaskie a staff job at the highest salary then paid any regional director.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
11:05
|
Shortly after He Was Elected President of the Hosiery Federation, Benet Reopened Merger Discussions with TWUA
: Benet first met with John Chupka in May 1963. By November 1964, a merger agreement had been worked out, and Benet issued a call for a special convention in February, 1965. At the convention the membership voted overwhelmingly in favor of the merger. The merger agreement was then submitted to a referendum of the locals and was again overwhelmingly approved. The merger agreement was officially signed April 15, 1965.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
14:50
|
The 1962-1964 Internal Dispute in the TWUA Delayed Merger with the AFHW
: Rieve approached Benet and advised him to hold off until after the 1964 TWUA convention because it would be embarrassing to Benet and the AFHW delegates to appear at what promised to be a messy convention. Pollock and Chupka were also of the opinion that the merger should be concluded after the 1964 convention was finished. There was no attempt by Pollock to speed up the merger in order to have the merger as another factor on his side at the convention.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
17:20
|
Benet Would Have Proceeded with the Merger with TWUA No Matter Which Side Had Won at the 1964 Convention
: Benet deliberately stayed away from the 1964 TWUA convention even though he had been invited to attend.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
17:55
|
Rieve Made No Effort to Persuade Any Federation Staffers to Stay with TWUA in 1948
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
19:45
|
Why the Federation Left TWUA in 1948
: Benet, as a staff person, used to attend AFHW Executive Board meetings; so he witnessed first hand why the AFHW leadership left TWUA. The TWUA took a position that the AFHW members would have to pay the same per capita as all other members. The AFHW, however, was different from the other industrial divisions of TWUA. It was almost autonomous; it had its own officers, its own building, and its own staff. AFHW President Alexander McKeown and William Smith felt the Federation could not afford to pay the increased per capita and still maintain its facilities, staff, and organizing. There was no bitterness and no falling out with Rieve. It was simply an economic situation. Rieve, for his part, was being pressured by the other divisions to make Hosiery pay equal per capita, and he had no alternative but to take the position he took. Relations with Rieve remained good. There was, however, too much pride in the AFHW for it to give up its independence and become merely another division of TWUA.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
23:30
|
Differences Between the Dyers and Hosiery Federations
: Benet thinks the Dyers Federation was more like a division of TWUA at the time and did not have its own staff and its own organizing drives.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
24:20
|
More on the Reason the Hosiery Federation Left TWUA
: If there was to be a raise in dues, the Federation wanted the money itself in order to do its own organizing.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
24:50
|
The Federation Had Always Been a Progressive Union Which Could Point to Many Collective Bargaining Firsts
: Amongst other things, it was the first union, in 1929, to sign a national labor agreement with uniform rates throughout the country.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
26:25
|
Benet Was Never a Member of the Socialist Party
: He was not active politically.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
1/2
Time
26:55
|
Impartial Chairman Taylor
: He was the final arbitrator of shop grievances as well as interpretations of the agreement.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/1
Time
00:00
|
Introduction
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/1
Time
00:30
|
The Hosiery Industry in the 1920s
: Migration began about 1925. Prior to that the Federation had about 95 percent of the full-fashioned knitting machines organized. At the same time, new equipment - longer section machines, faster machines, etc. - were introduced, and production per worker was doubled with these machines. The hosiery industry was hit harder by the Great Depression than most other industries. Manufacturers overproduced by six and a half million dozen in 1929. Cutthroat competition set in and, in order to get cheaper labor, migration south accelerated. By 1929 the Federation controlled about 50 percent of the full-fashioned machines, but only about 30 percent of the production.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/1
Time
03:10
|
The National Labor Agreement, Instituted in 1929
: The agreement was between the Federation and fifty-two full-fashioned hosiery manufacturers. Both sides made some concessions. The union permitted some “doubling up” (increased work loads), and the manufacturers granted a uniform wage scale. The Federation, in the annual agreements for 1930-32, granted wage reductions in order to keep the union employers competitive. The Impartial Chairman was set up to resolve disputes over the agreement's language and over disputed rates. A wage tribunal was also set up to settle on wage increases or decreases. The agreement also had a no-strike, no-lockout clause, one of the first in the country. The Federation was also one of the first unions to get vacation and holiday pay and also employer-paid hospitalization insurance.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/1
Time
08:40
|
Causes of the Decline of the AFHW in the 1920s and Early 1930s
: “...Largely the result of the keen competition and overproduction on the part of the full-fashioned hosiery manufacturers, the reluctance on the part of the union manufacturers to keep up with the times and put new equipment in their northern mills. Later some of them started branching out into the South themselves in non-union areas.” While the union continually accepted reductions in pay, the industry continuously declined.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/1
Time
09:45
|
The Creation of the National Recovery Administration (NRA) Helped the Hosiery Industry
: The Federation reached its peak during this period of time.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/1
Time
11:15
|
The Introduction of Nylon in 1937 Greatly Affected the Industry
: Nylon wore much better than silk. In 1939 American women purchased, on the average, sixteen pairs of hosiery per year, but by 1956, they only purchased twelve pairs per year because nylon wore so much better. Nylon also made it possible for seamless hosiery to make inroads into the full-fashioned market. Nylon could be formed into a stocking that would narrow at the ankle whereas silk required a seam to do this. The bulk of the Federation's membership was in full-fashioned.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/1
Time
15:45
|
Why Seamless Hosiery Took Over the Full-Fashioned Market
: It was not for fashion reasons, but rather because seamless was so much less expensive. Seamless was less expensive because its manufacturing process did not require nearly as many different skilled workers.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/1
Time
18:20
|
Figures on the Shift from Full-Fashioned to Seamless Hosiery
: In 1954 seamless hosiery accounted for only sixteen percent of sales. By 1963 it accounted for eighty-five percent.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/1
Time
19:50
|
More on the Causes for the Decline of the Hosiery Federation
: Prior to the mid-1950s, when full-fashioned still dominated the industry, the key to the decline was the development of the industry in the South. The newer, faster, finer-gauged machines were being built in the South. Meanwhile, the northern, organized industry attempted to remain competitive through wage reductions and other artificial methods rather than through modernization of its machinery.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/1
Time
21:15
|
Wage Reductions in the Northern Industry
: The northern industry took wage reductions of as much as thirty to thirty-five percent in one year. In the 1920s knitters could make 100 to 125 dollars per week. By the late 1930s wage reductions had made serious inroads on this standard, but hosiery knitters were still relatively well paid for industrial workers and were paid considerably more than their counterparts in the non-union southern mills.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/1
Time
23:20
|
Benet Attempted in 1938 to Force the Northern Industry in His District to Modernize
: As business manager for the New York-New Jersey-New England District Council, he asked AFHW General Counsel Isadore Katz to draw up a contract clause that would require the industry to invest in new equipment a sum of money equal to a percentage of the amount saved by that year's wage reduction. He was able to get this into some of the agreements, but it was very difficult to enforce.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/2
Time
00:00
|
Introduction
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/2
Time
00:30
|
Statistical Description of the Decline of the AFHW
: Organizers: in 1946, twenty-seven, mostly in the South; in 1965, only six organizers. Net worth: in 1948, $724,593; in 1964, $108,065. Per capita receipts: in 1948, $722,000; in 1964, $104,748. Mills under contract: in 1948, 186 mills; in 1965, 39 mills. Membership in 1948, 29,000 members; in 1964, 4,000 members.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/2
Time
03:05
|
How the Taft-Hartley Act Affected the Federation's Organizing Attempts in the South
: With the southern migration of the industry, the Hosiery Federation attempted to gear its organizing to the South. During World War II the Federation was able to organize a few southern plants, but this changed after the Act went into effect. After Taft-Hartley was passed, card signing was no longer sufficient to organize a mill; employers used delays to erode a union majority before the election. “And then you filed charges against the employer because he flaunted the law, discharged employees; and, if you were lucky, you got some employees back with back pay, but it took years to do that, and your organization was gone. This was the continuous thing that we were faced with in the South, and that's why we could never recoup what we had prior to the Taft-Hartley going into effect. It was just one thing right after the other.”
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/2
Time
06:50
|
Southern Organizing
: From the time Benet went to the South in 1950, the AFHW was faced with the same problems now being advertised through the J.P. Stevens campaign - stalling tactics, interference with employee rights by foremen, threats, coercion, captive audience talks, discharges. “The Burlington Mills, the Kayser-Roth mills, the strikes that we had - There was just no beating them.”
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/2
Time
08:35
|
Southern Hosiery Workers Were Receptive to the Federation
: Many election petitions were filed; they were interested, “but they were just beaten down because of these tactics.”
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/2
Time
09:20
|
About 50 Percent of the Southern Hosiery Industry Was Located in North Carolina
: Most of the North Carolina industry was seamless. The remainder was located in Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi. Most of the seamless industry was located in the South.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/2
Time
10:10
|
The Decline of the Philadelphia Hosiery Industry
: At one time Philadelphia had 13,000 full-fashioned hosiery workers. By the time of the merger with TWUA, there was not even a seamless hosiery mill in Philadelphia.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/2
Time
11:05
|
Even If It Could Have Organized the Southern Seamless Industry, the Hosiery Federation Would Not Have Been Able to Maintain the High Wages with Seamless as It Had with Full-Fashioned
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/2
Time
12:05
|
By 1965 the Membership Consisted Mostly of Seamless; Full-Fashioned Was Almost Entirely Gone
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/2
Time
12:35
|
The Strike and Lawsuit at the Kayser-Roth Company, Dayton, Tennessee
: The AFHW had won an election at this seamless mill, but the company refused to negotiate in good faith; it would not agree to either the checkoff or arbitration. The union was, therefore, compelled to strike. The company filed suit against the union, claiming that it was unable to open the mill with strikebreakers because of interference by pickets. “There was some picket line violence, but they never pinned it down to members of our union.” A federal judge awarded damages to the company. An agreement was finally reached, but it permitted employees easy exit from the checkoff and thus union membership. Suing unions is becoming a familiar anti-union tactic today. Prior to this the Federation had been sued by another company under similar circumstances, but the jury refused to award the company any damages.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/2
Time
16:50
|
Making a Breakthrough in the South
: When the AFHW merged with TWUA, Benet resigned his seat on the Industrial Union Department's (IUD) Executive Council. His farewell speech was an impassioned plea for organizing help in the South. “Help little Hosiery organizing some of these vicious, anti-union mills.” In the two years Benet was president of AFHW, the union was able to organize 900 employees. Hence, he felt the South could be organized if the staff and money were put into it. “...Since the IUD had taken over the organizing effort, some of the major unions had not made their share of contributions in staff or in money to put a real effective drive on in the South that would help, not only one particular industry, but organization in general in the South.”
|
|
|
Tape/Side
2/2
Time
21:50
|
The AFHW Did Not Have Enough Staff to Organize the South
: The 900 that were organized during Benet's tenure as president were organized with IUD assistance. The union undertook to organize the Hanes Hosiery Mill in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, which had 3,500-4,000 workers. The union got good response from the workers, but it simply did not have enough staff to man the situation, and the IUD at the time was also short of manpower and money due to the failure of the big unions to rally to the cause. The union had also received interest in some Burlington Mills but again did not have the staff. Despite Taft-Hartley and the other impediments, the South can be organized if enough concentrated effort is applied.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
00:00
|
Introduction
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
00:30
|
The Hosiery Division Locals Were Turned Over to TWUA Joint Boards and Regional Directors for Servicing So That the Former AFHW Staff Could Concentrate More on Organizing
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
01:15
|
More on AFHW Merger with TWUA
: Although the merger did not improve organizing, it did result in excellent servicing and agreements. It was “...the best thing that could have happened to Hosiery....” “It was a happy merger,” and to this day members of the Federation are pleased with it.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
03:40
|
There Was Opposition Within the Federation When the Decision Was Made to Pull Out of TWUA in 1948
: Benet felt that something might have and should have been worked out with the TWUA, but there was considerable pressure on Alex McKeown to proceed with the split. Branch 1 and Bill Leader were very opposed to the increased per capita, and McKeown did not want to see a split within the Federation. Rieve was not in a position to compromise. Leaving the TWUA was about the only option.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
06:10
|
There Probably Was an Attempt to Work Out a Compromise on the Second Per Capita Increase as There Had Been with the First Increase, But Benet Was Not a Party to Those Discussions
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
06:55
|
No Effort Was Made to Affiliate with the United Textile Workers (UTW) after the Split
: The Federation did receive a charter from the AFL; Rieve successfully opposed the Federation's attempts to receive a charter from the CIO.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
07:35
|
TWUA Made No Attempt to Organize Hosiery Workers after the Federation Split From the Union, “To the Credit of Emil Rieve....”
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
08:10
|
The Hosiery Federation Did Not Become Involved with the TWUA Internal Dispute of 1950-1952
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
09:10
|
A Small Portion of the Federation Membership Worked in Men's and Boys' Hosiery; the Majority Worked in Women's Hosiery
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
10:15
|
The AFHW and the UTW in the 1930s
: At the Federation's urging, Rieve planned to oppose Thomas McMahon for the UTW presidency in 1934, but he changed his mind at the last minute. Rieve did run against McMahon in 1936, and he would have won if representation at the convention had been proper. The pro-Rieve delegates demanded throughout the convention that they be shown the financial records, which would have shown that the Hosiery and Dyers Federations were entitled to a higher percentage of the delegates. “We had been dissatisfied all those years with the United Textile Workers Union because we felt they were not doing enough organizing in the South....”
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
14:25
|
The AFHW Was Very Much in Favor of TWOC
: It was always assumed that Rieve would become the president of the new organization.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
15:25
|
Anecdote about Rieve Asking Benet's Advice on Whether He Should Accept the Directorship of TWOC
: “He called me 'the Little Hungarian Boy.' I was more or less his protege.” Rieve suggested that Benet might someday become president of the Federation. Benet, although he hated to see Rieve leave the Federation, knew Rieve could do more for the labor movement by heading up TWOC and TWUA.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
17:05
|
Carl Holderman
: “A very capable man” who tutored Benet while he was still in the shop.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
18:15
|
The Hosiery Federation Locals Did Not Join TWUA Joint Boards, 1939-1948
: The Federation had its district council system, but it was not at all equivalent to the joint board system.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
19:00
|
The Hosiery Federation Made No Attempt to Branch Out into Canada
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
20:00
|
The Organizing Climate in the 1960s
: As noted earlier, Benet felt the South was organizable in the 1960s, despite the difficulties. Benet spent over half his time during his presidency organizing in the South. After merging with the TWUA, Benet was often called upon to attend pre-election meetings “to rabblerouse.” He would come in a few days before the election to find out the workers' conditions and complaints and then would point out how these things could be improved by the TWUA.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
25:40
|
Imports Were Not a Problem in the Hosiery Industry
: Employers would complain about it, but imports were always a small percentage of the market.
|
|
|
Tape/Side
3/1
Time
26:15
|
Benet's Opinion of the Merger of TWUA with the Amalgamated Clothing Workers (ACW)
: “The best thing that could have happened to Textile and...to Amalgamated.” ACW was a good choice because it was a democratic organization with very capable leadership. “It was a happy marriage.” The Amalgamated made possible a campaign against J.P. Stevens of a magnitude that TWUA could never have accomplished alone.
|
|
