« PreviousContinue »
B20,- Safety code for conveyors and conveying machinery.
Only two of the subcommittees appointed to prepare drafts of sections of this
No revision of this code is under contemplation at this time.
No new standards are under consideration, and no revisions of existing stand-
All sections of this code have been completed for several years. A mimeo graphed copy of the draft of the proposed code, based on these reports, was distributed to the sectional committee in 1932 for criticism and comment.
No revisions of this code are under consideration at the present time.
No revisions of this code are under consideration at this time.
No revisions of this code are under consideration at the present time.
tory organs of industrial workers.
Three standards have been approved under this project as reported last year.
The subcommittee on fundamentals under this project had made one report to
The work on this project has definitely progressed during the past year. A number of subcommittees, covering various industrial processes, have been authorized by the sectional committee and are now being organized to develop standards in their respective fields. The subcommittee on fundamentals has prepared a report which has been tentatively approved by the sectional committee.
A final draft of this report is now being prepared and will be printed for general distribution by the subcommittee under the power granted to it by the sectional committee. This document will be printed as a report only and not as a standard. The National Advisory Committee on Toxic Dusts and Gases, which was appointed on the recommendation of the sectional committee of the exhaust-code project, has held one meeting and has started the preparation of a bulletin covering the use of threshold limits of toxic dusts and gases in regulations and by industrial groups. It is also studying the question of the possibility of studying nomenclature in the field of occupational diseases, and as soon as additional information has been
received from the various subcommittees of the exhaust-code project, the advisory
While no new standards have been submitted under this project during the past
During the past year continual efforts have been made to revive the work on
Inasmuch as it was not possible completely to harmonize the differences of
Financial Statement Covering Period Since Asheville Convention
25. 00 25.00 10. 00 25. 00 25. 00 25. 00
25, 00 Oct. 10. Iowa Bureau of Labor, 1936 dues.
10.00 10. Illinois Department of Labor, 1936 dues-Nov. 7. Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry, 1936 dues..
7. Maryland Commissioner of Labor and Statistics, 1936 dues.-
13. Puerto Rico Department of Labor, 1936 dues.
22. Kansas Commission of Labor and Industry, 1937 dues. July 1. Virginia Department of Labor and Industry, 1937 dues.
1. Kentucky Department of Agriculture, Labor, and Statistics,
Financial Statement Covering Period Since Asheville Convention-Continued
$25. 00 28. Wisconsin Industrial.Commission, 1937 dues.
25. 00 28. Puerto Rico Department of Labor, 1937 dues
25. 00 Aug. 12. Missouri Department of Labor and Industrial Inspection, 1937 dues
25, 00 28. Rhode Island Department of Labor, 1937 dues
25. 00 Sept. 8. Ohio Department of Industrial Relations, 1937 dues
10. 00 8. North Dakota Minimum Wage Department, 1937 dues.
10. 00 15. Iowa Bureau of Labor, 1937 dues
25. 00 21. Oklahoma Department of Labor, 1937 dues.
25. 00 Total receipts.
1, 428. 15
returned for signature.
bonding secretary-treasurer for $1,000
5. 00 16. 50
10. 00 76. 20
5. 10 5. 00 5. 00 11. 25
Report of the Executive Board
By A. W. CRAWFORD, President, I. A. G. L. 0.
At a meeting of the executive board held at the Hotel Jayhawk on Wednesday, September 23, the following report was unanimously agreed upon for recommendation to the convention;
(1) In view of the fact that among the purposes of this association, as defined in its constitution, is:
To encourage the cooperation of all branches of Federal, State, and Provincial Governments who are charged with the administration of laws and regulations for the protection of women and children and the safety and welfare of all workers in industry; to maintain and promote the best possible standards of law enforcement and administrative method; to act as a medium for the interchange of information for and by the members of the Association. The executive board unanimously recommends that your president confer with the Secretary of Labor with a view to eliminating the duplication of functions of the standing committees of this association and those of the Division of Labor Standards. Your executive board also recommends that the cooperation of the Department of Labor be further sought to the end that in setting up committees by the Department of Labor which duplicate the work of existing committees of this association, the standing committee of this association be made use of by that Department and supplemented if necessary. It further recommends that in the event of the establishment of a committee by the Department of Labor to deal with standards not already covered by existing standing committees of the association, such committees be established by the Department of Labor through the medium of this association.
Your executive board further recommends that the association give careful consideration to the question of retaining the existing policy of holding its meetings in the same city with and immediately following the adjournment of the annual convention of the International Association of Accident Boards and Commissions. Although this question was given careful consideration at Asheville in 1935, it is your board's confirmed opinion that the question should be reconsidered at this time.
Mr. WALLING (Rhode Island). Would it not be helpful to the memers if you would outline some of the points relative to the possibilities of enlisting the cooperation of the Canadian Provinces and the Federal Department of Labor? I think that most of the members do not understand the background of the recommendation as to next year's meeting
President CRAWFORD. I have been coming to the association meetings for some time. Other Provinces have not been participating. It is my opinion that some reorganization is essential within the Association if we are to function properly. One of the chief purposes
of this Association is to stimulate cooperative action between Federal and State departments. The Department of Labor in Washington has set up a division for that purpose. Last year there were some overlapping committees. One committee in particular was established by this Association, and a committee for identical work was estab
lished in Washington. There were two separate reports. It seems to me that, without any blame attached, the mere set-up of this Association--the fact that it is called International-should justify its being the official mouthpiece of the State labor departments on all cooperative matters, so that the Department in Washington may make full use of the association and the association may make full use of the Division of Labor Standards in Washington. I believe that a similar organization should be developed in Canada. It may mean two separate divisions. I have authority to invite the association to come to Toronto next year, in the hope that, immediately following our deliberations there as an association, we may have a couple of days during which the Provinces may fully consider and definitely decide what part we may play in this association. That is the meat of my report, and I should like to hear a frank expression of opinion in connection with it, so that the incoming executive board may take direct action.
[Mr. Davie moved that the report of the executive board be accepted as read. Motion seconded and carried.)
Mr. Lubin. At the meeting last year very careful consideration was given to the question of where to meet. Although no definite action was taken, it appeared to be the consensus of opinion that it would be best to meet after the I. A. I. A. B. C. in the same city--because many of the people want to attend both meetings but cannot afford to go to two different cities. The question was raised again this year. Two aspects were considered: (1) The Canadian Provinces felt that there were specific problems that they had to cope with which could not very well be handled through an international association such as ours; and (2) it is their opinion that they could learn a lot from American experience by being affiliated with such an association and that the American States would benefit tremendously from the experience of the Canadian Provinces. I propose that we maintain the present set-up of the association-namely, having membership open to Canadian Provinces—but, that there be established in Canada a branch, as it were, which would be made up of Canadian Provinces, so that they could meet by themselves, say, every other year, to discuss problems of particular concern to Canada, and every other year the international meeting would be made up of the Provinces and States of both countries. Another alternative would be for the Canadian Provinces to meet for a day or two by themselves, and the American States to do likewise, and then hold a joint meeting. In view of the fact that there is a question as to whether or not Canadian Provinces will continue to affiliate themselves with our association, I think it is vitally important that we make some decision on this matter.