———————————————————————————————————————————————————

———————————————————————————————————————————————————

Rose Manufacturing Company Investigation Case File Exhibits

( 1 : B 43) March 31, 1939: Rose Manufacturing Company Inventory

( 2 : C 61-62 ) August 31, 1939: Memo by Raymond Lewis, Inspector, "Clue to proof that the payroll submitted by Rose Manufacturing Company of $1,800.00 may be false and inaccurate"

( 3 : C 59 ) September 1, 1939: Telegram from Edward Fruchtman to George McNulty, General Counsel, advising that Rosen was indicted and would probably be arraigned September 5th.

( 4 : C 60 ) September 1, 1939: Wage Hour Press Release announcing that the Federal Grand Jury in Brooklyn indicted Irving Rosen for violating the federal Wage Hour Law by paying industrial homeworkers wages of from 3¢ to 10¢ an hour instead of the required 25¢ an hour.

( 5 : C 58 ) September 11, 1939: Form CE 30A - Memo by Raymond Lewis, Inspector, summmarizing an interview of Charles A. Houston, Attorney for Columbia Mills, Inc., in which Inspector Lewis wrote that "...at present there was considerable stock on hand at the various factories of Columbia Mills, Inc., which were "contraband" in that they could not move in interstate commerce having been made in violation of the Wage and Hour law."

( 6 : C 57 ) September 13, 1939: Telegram to George Kelley, Regional Director, New York, from Irving Levy, Assistant General Counsel, advising that the attorney for Rose Manufacturing Company indicated a change of plea.

( 7 : C 56 ) September 13, 1939: Memo by Raymond Lewis, Inspector, explaining the method by which the payment of back wages by Columbia Mills to the homeworkers of Rose Manufacturing Company were computed.

( 8 : C 53-54 ) September 18, 1939: Memo reporting that the Attorney for Rose Manufacturing Company had withdrawn from the case. The memo also noted that an Information had been filed against Harry Edelman with September 20, 1939, set as the date on which Edelman was to plead.

( 9 : C 55 ) September 18, 1939: Memo from Raymond Lewis, Inspector, to Irving Levy, Assistant General Counsel, regarding the estimated back wages due, and noting that Columbia Mills, Inc. had agreed to pay $1,944 toward the back wages owed by Rose Manufacturing Company.

( 10 : C 49-50 ) September 20, 1939: Memo from Edward J. Fruchtman, Attorney, reporting on a telephone conversation with Leon Morris who stated that "...he had been retained as attorney by Rosen and possibly four or five others in the industry." Furchtman also noted that "Morris emphasized his feeling that the status quo in the shade pull industry should not be upset" because if employers had to pay the minimum wage it would result in "...a substantial amount of unemployment which, he was sure, the Government was anxious to avoid."

( 11 : C 51-52 ) September 22, 1939: Memo by Mollie Scheiner, Inspector, about interviews she conducted with homeworker employees of Rose Manufacturing Company. One of them "stated that many of the other women who had done homework for this company were afraid to turn their books over because Mrs. Rosen threatened to report them to the Home Relief Bureau if they gave information about their earnings."

( 12 : C 63 ) September 28, 1939: Form CE 1930, Regular Inspection Report of the Cooperation & Enforcement Branch, Wage Hour Division. In the "Remarks" section the Inspector noted "Reinspection made in connection with grand jury criminal indictment. Purpose was to ascertain if there were any homeworkers still employed & possible factory violations."

( 13 : C 48 ) October 9, 1939: Memo noting that Mr. Maurer of F. W. Maurer & Sons, Inc., of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, complained about unfair competition from competitors including Rose Manufacturing Company."

( 14 : C 47 ) October 13, 1939: Memo concerning a telephone call in which Rosen asked if he purchased goods that were produced by employees paid less than required by the Fair Labor Standards Act if the seller gave him "...a written statement to the effect that such goods will be sold for consumption withing the state."

( 15 : C 46 ) October 20, 1939: Memo from Charles M. Joseph, Senior Attorney, advising that Columbia Mills, Inc., agreed to pay $1,944 in restitution "...was arrived at in a converence between Frucht, Lewis, Mr. Houston of Otterbourg, Steindler & Houston, and two members of the firm."

( 16 : C 24-43 ) October 26, 1939: Supplementary comments by 18 employees of Rose Manufacturing Company to statements they provided in the prior week, that the bookeeper "was a party to the changing of the time slips so that the amount earned would conform to 25 cents an hour."

( 17 : C 44-45 ) October 26, 1939: Memo from Charles Joseph, Senior Attorney, to Irving Levy, Assistant General Counsel, regarding when the trial should be held, the need to gather additional evidence regarding interstate shipment of manufactured goods, and the continued violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act by the firm.

( 18 : C 23 ) October 30, 1939: Interoffice Communication from Charles Joseph, Senior Attorney, to Barbara McLoney, Acting Field Supervisor, noting that employee statements indicated continuing violations, and asking her to arrange for "...a complete inspection inspection which might look toward possible criminal action as a second offense."

( 19 : C-22 ) October 31, 1939: Memo from Charles Joseph, SeniorAttorney, to Irving Levy, Assistant General Counsel, about evidence that the product manufactured by Rose Manufacturing Company was sold in interstate commerce.

( 20 : C 21 ) November 1, 1939: Memo from Irving Levy, Assistant General Counsel, to Charles Joseph, Senior Attorney, noting that the trial was adjourned to December 6th.

( 21 : C 20 ) November 27, 1939: Memo by Raymond Lewis, Inspector, regarding employee statements about their period of employment and work assignments.

( 22 : B 45 ) November 30, 1939: Wage Hour Press Release announcing that Columbia Mills, Incorporated, agreed to pay about $2,000 to about 100 homeworkers of Rose Manufacturing Company.

( 23 : B 44 ) December 7, 1939: Analysis of the case in light of a delay to January 3, 1940.

( 24 : B 44 ) December 11, 1939: Form CE 30A - Documenting that an Inspector for the New York State Umemployment Insurance Department had been informed that Rose Manufacturing had not paid unemployment insurance.

( 25 : C 10-16 ) December 11, 1939: Memo from Raymond Lewis, Inspector, to Charles Joseph, Senior Attorney, reviewing request to get conclusive evidence of interstate shipment of the goods worked on by homeworkers employed by Rose Manufacturing Company.

( 26 : C 5-9 ) December 28, 1939: Dun & Bradstreet Report on Rose Manufacturing Co.

( 27 : B 39-41 ) January 18, 1940: Two Wage Hour Press Releases announcing that the Federal Grand Jury in Brooklyn indicted Irving Rosen and his wife for violating the federal wage and hour law by paying industrial homeworkers wages as low as three cents an hour.

( 28 : B 11-14 ) January 18 to March 15, 1940: Clippings of newspaper articles about the indictment of Irving Rosen and his wife.

( 29 : B 38 ) January 23, 1940: Dun & Bradstreet Report on Rose Manufacturing Co.

( 30 : B 36-37 ) January 24, 1940: Memo from Charles Joseph, Senior Attorney, regarding statements by employees of Rose Manufacturing Company that Mrs. Rosen had asked them to visit the shop to receive their wages.

( 31 : B 31 ) January 29, 1940: Memo by Charles Joseph, Senior Attorney, Wage and Hour Division, summarizing statements by employees that the firm had demanded they sign papers before receiving payment of their wages.

( 32 : B 28 ) January 31, 1940: Memo from Roy Corrigan, Inspector, to Charles Joseph, Regional Attorney, reporting that during a visit to Rose Manufacturing Company on January 30 no employees were observed crocheting, and that the room in which they ordinarily worked was padlocked. He concluded with the comment that "There is a strong possibility that the girls are still crocheting in some other building someplace in Brooklyn."

( 33 : B 29 ) January 31, 1940: Rose Manufacturing Company Balance Sheet (1 page)

( 34 : A 67-68 ) January 31, 1940: Rose Manufacturing Company Balance Sheet (2 pages)

( 35 : B 11-14 ) February 16, 1940: Wage Hour Press Release announcing that the first criminal Wage Hour trial ended when the defendants pleaded guilty.

( 36 : B 15-20 ) February 16, 1940: Interoffice Communication from Raymond Lewis, Inspector, to Brunson MacChesney, Special Assistant to the Attorney General, "Proof of Interstate Shipment of Goods Produced by Nicoletta Venturino During the Count Week, May 2, to May 8, 1939."

( 37 : B 21-23 ) February 16, 1940: Interoffice Communication from Raymond Lewis, Inspector, to Brunson MacChesney, Special Assistant to the Attorney General, "Proof of Interstate Shipment of Goods Produced by Mary Di Pietro During the Count Weeks, April 18 to April 24, 1939, and May 2 to May 8, 1939."

( 38 : A 78-80 and B 1 ) February 24, 1940: Interoffice Communication from Raymond Lewis, Inspector, to John F. Carroll regarding back wages found due to employees of Rose Manufacturing Company, and the basis by which they were computed.

( 39 : B 2-6 ) February 28, 1940: Wage Hour Memorandum by Raymond Lewis regarding the financial condition of Rose Manufacuring Company, with attached Dun & Bradstreet Reports dated February 23, 1940 and February 19, 1940.

( 40 : A 77 ) March 4, 1940: Dun & Bradstreet Report on Rose Manufacturing Co.

( 41 : A 76 ) March 13, 1940: Memo from Irving Rosen, Senior Attorney, to Irving J. Levy, Assistant General Counsel, regarding a recommendation that the Court impose a fine of up to $2,500 on Rose Manufacturing Company.

( 42 : A 75 ) March 15, 1940: Letter from Saul M. Mann, Counselor at Law, to Jacob B. Steinfeld, Esq., regarding the foreclosure of a mortgage that had gone into default.

( 43 : A 74 ) March 21, 1940: Dun & Bradstreet Report on Rose Manufacturing Co.

( 44 : A 66 ) March 25, 1940: "Dear Irv, I enclose this schedule which came to light today. We have a 15 minute headway on witnesses thru the evening - hence brevity at its classic best. Yours etc. John"

( 45 : A 69 ) March 25, 1940: Memo documenting a telephone call to Inspector Raymond Lewis from Mr. Berger of the Standard Shade Pull Company of Chicago, who allegd that he "was obliged to lay off half of his staff because he could not pay them the legal rate and compete against" completitors who were failing to comply with the law.

( 46 : A 65 ) March 26, 1940: Letter from Irving Rosen, owner of Rose Manufacturing Company, to the Wage and Hour Division, attesting that he had opened an account with the Brookly Trust Company for paying the back wages due to his employees.

( 47 : A 70-73 ) March 28, 1940: Form letter, and list of employees of the Rose Manufacturing Company who were sent this letter, asking them to be at the Wage and Hour office on April 1, 1940, to receive back wages due under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

( 48 : C 20 ) March 28, 1940: Dun & Bradstreet Report on Rose Manufacturing Co.

( 49 : A 49 ) April 1, 1940: Memo noting that on March 25, 1940, Irving and Ada Rosen made the first payment toward the $3,268 due to their homeworkers, and that back wage checks totaling $1,900 had been distributed in the New York regional office.

( 50 : A 29-42 ) April 1, 1940: List of employees of Rose Manufacturing Company, the back wages due to those employees, and signed copies of the Receipt for Unpaid Wages verifying their payment.

( 51 : A 64 ) April 2, 1940: Letter sent to a former homeworker employee of the Rose Manufacturing Company asking him to be at the Wage and Hour office on April 1, 1940, to receive back wages due under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

( 52 : C 19 ) April 9, 1940: Dun & Bradstreet Report on Rose Manufacturing Co.

( 53 : A 43-48 ) April 15 to 26, 1940: Correspondence regarding a request by the Rose Manufacturing Co. to be issued a learners permit.

( 54 : A 62-63 ) April 25, 1940: Correspondence regarding a request by the Rose Manufacturing Co. to be issued a learners permit.

( 55 : A 56-59 ) May 3, 1940: Agency record of an inquiry regarding back wages from an employee of Rose Manfacturing Company

( 56 : A 53-55 ) May 16, 1940: Wage Hour Press Release announcing that the owners of Rose Manufacturing Company were fined a total of $2,000.

( 57 : A 50 ) May 29, 1940: Dun & Bradstreet Report on Rose Manufacturing Co.

( 58 : A 51-52 ) June 5, 1940: Dun & Bradstreet Report on Rose Manufacturing Co.

( 59 : A 60-61 ) June 11, 1940: Interoffice Communication from Walter C. Bryan, Regional Attorney, to Beatrice Bisno, Supervising Inspector, relating that on May 16th Justice Matthew T. Abruzzo imposed sentence on defendants Irving Rosen and his wife, Ada T. Rosen, and on May 17th he signed an order of judgment and an order of probation.

( 60 : A 22-28 ) July, 1940: Letters from employees of Rose Manufacturing Company inquiring about payment of their back wages, and letters from Wage and Hour acknowledging receipt of their letters.

( 61 : B 47-50 and C 1 ) Undated Form CI-31 A "Summary of Unpaid Wages Under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and Employees' Acknowledgment of Payment" by Columbia to employees of Rose Manufacturing Company

( 62 : A 20-21 ) August 19, 1940: Form CI 30 A: The Court's final determination of restitution of back wages due the employees of Rose Manufacturing Company.

( 63 : A 19 ) August 20, 1940: Memo from Raymond Lewis, Inspector, to Murray Baron, Senior Inspector, summarizing seven cases representing the second stage in the Shade Pull Industry investigation, and recommending that "...they these cases be closed as this is a small,financially weak industry, which does not warrant additional inspection time."

( 64 : A 18 ) December 6, 1940: Memo from O. J. Libert, Chief, Administrator's Analysis and Review Section, to Arthur J. White, Regional Director, New York, reporting that "The subject case has been reviewed by this office and recorded as closed since violations disclosed by the inspection have been corrected and the firm has agreed to make restitution in accordance with the consent decree on an installment basis to its employees in the amount of $3,268.00."

( 65 : A 14-17 ) December 9, 1940: Dun & Bradstreet Report on Rose Manufacturing Co.

( 66 : A 13 ) January 14, 1941: Interoffice Communication from John F. Carroll, Attorney, to Murray Baron, Senior Inspector, advising that the period of probation for Rose Manufacturing Company was extended to May 16, 1941.

( 67 : A 12 ) February 28, 1941: Letter from Consolidated Trimming Corporation to Wage and Hour reporting that Rose Manufacturing Company appeared to be in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act

( 68 : A 11 ) May 19, 1941: Interoffice Communication from H. J. Easton, Inspector, to "File" documenting an anonymous phone from an employee of Rose Manufacturing Company who alleged that the company continued employing homeworkers at less than the minimum wage.

( 69 : A 10 ) June 5, 1941: Interoffice Communication from Roy J. Corrigan, Acting Senior Inspector, to Edith L. Christenson, Senior Inspector, requesting a reinvestigation of Rose Manufacturing Company to determine if the firm is operating in compliance.

( 70 : A 7-9 ) June 17, 1941: Letter from the Rose Manufacturing Company to John Carroll, Attorney with the U.S. Department of Labor, detaiing payment of back wages.

( 71 : A 5-6 ) July 7, 1941: Interoffice Communication from H. J. Easton, Junior Inspector, to Robert Pickard, Senior Inspector, reporting that while no apparent violations were found during an inspection of Rose Manufacturing Company, there were indications that the firm might be engaged in practices designed to hide noncompliance.

( 72 : A 3 ) April 23, 1942: Letter from the American Shade Pull Company to the Wage and Hour office in New York City asserting that Moore Manufacturing and the Rose Manfacturing Company were not in compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act.

( 73 : A 4 ) April 24, 1942: Letter from Standard Shade Pull Mfr's complaining that "...Moore Manufacturing Co. and all other New York manufacturers of window shade pulls" were not in compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act.

( 74 : A 2 ) October 13, 1942: Interoffice Communication from Arthur Monat, Supervising Inspector, to "The Files" documenting that since a reinspection of Rose Manufacturing Company found no evidence of violations, and although letters from competitors alleged continued violations by the firm, no inspection of the firm will be made at this time.

( 75 : A 1 ) March 8, 1946: Form FO-51 - Inspection Report