<pre style="white-space: pre-wrap">xt7rjd4pkq3q https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7rjd4pkq3q/data/mets.xml Lexington, Kentucky University of Kentucky 1946125 minutes English University of Kentucky Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 1946-12-oct5-ec. text Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 1946-12-oct5-ec. 1946 2011 true xt7rjd4pkq3q section xt7rjd4pkq3q 


     Minutes of Executive Committee, Called. Meeting, October 5,
1946.

     On Saturday, October 5, 1946, the meeting of the Executive Com-
mittee of the Board of Trustees was called to order at 10:30 a.m. in
the Office of the President of the University.

     Members of the Committee present were Richard C. Stoll, Chairman
of the Executive Committee, Lexington; R. P. Hobson, Louisville; and
H. D, Palmore, Frankfort.   Those absent were John C. Everett, Mays-
ville, and H. S. Cleveland, Franklinton.   Also present were H. L.
Donovan, President; Ben Fowler, Assistant Attorney General; Jack
Bryan, Ianaging Director, City of Lexington Municipal Housing Com-
mission; H. W. Richman, Project Engineer for FPHA, and J. Hi. Howard,
Assistant to the Chief Engineer, University of Kentucky.

     In the absence of Frank D. Peterson, Secretary of the Board,
Miss Lucy Hogan was requested to take the minutes of the meeting.


     A. Labor Strike on FPHA Project.

     President Donovan reported that he had asked the Executive Com-
mittee to meet for the purpose of considering what action could be
taken relative to a strike on the housing project for veterans which
the FPHA was constructing.   He told the Committee that on Wednesday,
October 2, at noon, the employees of the Shapiro Construction Company
walked off the job because the University had contracts with the Shely
Construction Company and Clarke, Stewart and Wood for the building of
sewer and water lines to the project.   The latter companies employed
non-union labor.   He reported that,so far as he knew, this was the
reason for the strike.

     President Donovan said that no union official had contacted him.
However, representatives of the FPHA had reported to him that the
union was demanding that the University cancel its contracts with
Shely Construction Company and Clarke, Stewart and Food.

    At this point in the discussion Judge Richard C. Stoll made the
following statement.

          The Lexington Board of Commerce has an Industrial
    Relations Committee.   It has had it for several years,
    My partner, William H. Townsend, has been the representa-
    tive of that Industrial Relations Committee.   Any member
    of the Committee could consult him about his labor affairs.
    Mr. Shely of the Shely Construction Company consulted Mr.
    Townsend when this matter first came up,   I assume he repre-
    sents them,   Thaerefore, I am Disqualified to have anything
    to do with this matter whatsoever.


2


    President Donovan then called the attention of the Committee
to the fact that if Judge Stoll disqualified himself, there would
not be a quorum of the Committee present to take some action.

    Mr. R. P. Hobson made the following statement:

          Upon Judge Stoll's statement to the committee, it is
     evident that Judge Stoll should act in this matter because
     there is no controversial question in which his interest is
     affected one way or the other.


     It was then decided that the Committee should go ahead and
consider the business for which it had been called.

     A lengthy discussion followed in which President Donovan re-
viewed the effort that had been made to acquire a housing project
for the veterans and some of the handicaps that he and other of-
ficials of the University had to overcome in securing living quarters
for the students.   He stated that the University's contract was
with the FPHA to erect these barracks for single veterans and apart-
ments for married veterans on the property of the University; that
there was nothing in the University's contract that required it to
employ union contractors; that the contracts for putting down sewer
and water lines had been awarded, after duly advertised, to the low-
est bidder.   He stated that Mr. Frank D. Peterson had previously
interviewed some union contractors and solicited their interest in
bidding, but that all of them were busy and were not interested in
the Job.   President Donovan also reported that the Shapiro Construc-
tion Company of New York had fifteen or sixteen additional contracts
in Kentucky and that on all of these contracts the sewer and water
lines had been let to contractors employing non-union labor, and that
no striku had occurred on any of these jobs.    The President stated
that it was his opinion that the University of Kentucky could not
legally award a contract to a union operator if a non-union contract-
or had aL lower bid,  He emphasized that the University should not
be drawn into a controversy between union and non-union labor.    He
recommended tha-It the University should consider the contracts with
the Shely Construction Company and Clarke, Stewart and Wood as sacred
obligations and that it should direct these men to finIsh their con-
tracts.

     Mr. Richman, resident engineer on the project, gave a statement
of Just what had occurred and of his efforts to bring about a har-
monious settlement.   Mr. Jack Bryan discussed the problem under con-
sideration, stating that he had been as)ed by the FPHA to gather in-
formation regarding the dispute.

    After considerable discussion by members of the Committee, the
following motion was made, seconded and passed, Judge Stoll not vot-
ing,


3


1, It appears to the Committee that the University
  has a contract with Shely Construction Company
  and another contract with Clarke) Stewart and
  Wood for the construction of certain sewer and
  water lines and accessories, and that Shapiro
  Construction Company has a contract with FPHA
  for the construction of certain buildings spe-
  cificAly designated for the housing of veterans
  on the property of the University into which the
  water and sewer lines are being built; that the
  employees of Shapiro Construction Company have
  refused to work while employees of the Shely
  Construction Company and Clarke, Stewart and
  Wood are working, because Shely Construction
  Company and Clarkle, Stewart and. Wood employ
  non-union labor, and the suggestion has been
  made that the work heretofore done by Shely
  Construction Company and Clarke, Stewart and
  Wood be dug up and redone by union labor, and
  that the employees of Shapiro Construction
  Company will not continue to work on the Shapiro
  contract as long as Shely Construction Company
  and Clarke, Stewart and W.7ood are working on
  their respective contracts; that the employees
  of the Hargett Construction Company, a union
  company, engag ed in building the men's dormitory,
  have refused to work in sympathy with the refusal
  of the employees of Shapiro Construction Company,
  and thus all work in connection with the housing
  facilities has been stopped; and it further
  appears that Shely Construction Company can complete
  its contract vrith the University in a few days,
  and Clarke, Stewart and Wood can complete their
  contract within two weeks, now, therefore, the
  Executive Committee of the University of Kentucky,
  at a special called meeting on October 5, 1946,
  resolves:

        1. The refusal to work by the employees of
   the Shapiro Construction Company is a serious
   detriment to the educational program of the Uni-
   versity of Kentucky, and unnecessarily delays the
   program of the University in furnishing accommo-
   dations for veterans now in attendance at the
   University and those who desire to attend in the
   future.

        2. The refusal of the employees of the Shapiro
   Construction Company to work under the conditions
   set out herein is a strike against the United States
   and the State of Kentucky, the University of Ken-
   tucky being an administrative arm of both govern-
   ments.


4


                    3. The University of Kentucky is con-
               templating and is now engaged upon a def-
               inite construction program to further the
               educational facilities at the University
               in the face of a present dire need for this
               expansion.   It cannot tolerate or permit any
               group pretending to have a complaint against
               the University to interfere with this program.

                    4. The University of Kentucky has at all
               times recognized the right of any man or
               group of men to Join and be bound by the
               rules and regulations of any legitimate labor
               union.   It Elso recognizes the right of any
               man or any group of men not to belong to any
               labor union.

                    5. The Shely Construction Company and
               Clarke, Stewart and Wood are requested to pro-
               ceed as promptly as possible with the completion
               of their contracts with the University.


     The Executive Committee requested representatives of Shely Con-
struction Company and Clarke-Stewart and Stood to come before the
Committee, at which time they were directed to proceed to complete
their contracts at the earliest possible moment.

     The representatives of these firms were questioned with respect
to the wage scale they were paying and this subject was thoroughly
reviewed.   It was found that the wages being paid by these Indepen-
dent contractors were in no case lower than the prevailing wage scale
of the community at the time the contracts were made.

                         * * * * * * * * * *

             2.. It appearing to the Executive Committee that
                the contracts with the Shely Construction Com-
                pany and Clarke, Stewart and Wood were er-
                roneous in that the prevailing wage scale was
                inadvertently omitted from each of said con-
                tracts, it was moved, seconded and unanimously
                adopted that the prevailing wage scale existing
                at the time of said contracts be attached to
                and made a part of said contracts, to which the
                respective contractors agreed, and they also
                agreed that the prevailing wages in use be
                paid.
                         * ** ** * ** X*


5


         Brick Tender *....................   .90
         Carpenters  ................. 1042t
         Cement Finishers ................ 1.42-s
         Engineers (Class A) ** ........ 99* 1.65
         Engineers (Class B)  ........... .  1.45
         Laborers (Common)    ...............  .80
         Laborers (Sewer Man) .      .............90
         Laborers (Water Boy) ...    .      .80
         Laborers (Air Hammer Operators),. .90
         Laborers (Rock Drillers)          1.00
         Laborers (BlastersT Helpers)  ..    80
         Laborers (Pipe Layers) .... ...... .90
         Laborers (Labor Foremen)          1.05
         Mason Tenders     ...................  .90
         Brick 11ason ......      .............. 1,65
         Truck Drivers (Less than 1-1/2t=n) .75
         Truck Drivers (1A- and including
                     5 tons) .......,.....  .90


B. Adjournment.

                    * * * * ** * * ,* *.

     3. Upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, the
        Executive Committee adjourned at 1:15 p.m.
                    * * *** ** * **


                                       Lucy Hogan
                                       Temporary Secretary


</pre>