How ironic that your Page 12, Oct. 14 Viewpoint diatribe quoting the New York Times' ``reported problems'' of Landis Plastics at its Solvay, N.Y., facility is on the same page, side by side, with a Perspective headlined ``Lawmakers don't know plastics.'' It is obvious to the rigid plastic container industry — competitors and shared customers alike, who are well-acquainted with Landis Plastics and the highly respected Landis family who has established enviable positions of respect in the plastics industry nationwide — that ``Plastics News does not know Landis.''
Customers, competitors, trade associations and industry professionals retain the highest regard for the Landis family, for its integrity, consideration and concerns for human values, business ethics and the basic problems that plague our industry.
As a weekly source of industry information that has come to be accepted as a well-informed, reliable bellwether of matters affecting our industry, it is regrettable that your publication has used ``reported,'' unauthenticated charges to impute the reputations of not only the Landis organization, but the entire plastics industry, apparently with no independent investigative effort whatsoever or opportunity for a Landis response to the charges.
The Solvay rumors are not the attack on the plastics industry that your article proclaims. It is your acceptance and publication of unsubstantiated ``charges'' that constitute an unacceptable attack on our entire industry, for which you should be the advocate, not the accuser.
More and more your editorial posture seems to be evolving into an antiplastic accuser rather than the pro-industry advocate of the past, the position on which your acceptance as the voice of our industry has been based.
Landis a quality firm
I feel that it is crucial your readers know and understand the type of company that Landis Plastics Inc. is and has been. I worked directly with Landis officials as they located their facility in Richmond, Ind.
I was involved in their site search, construction and operational phases, and at all stages of the project, emphasis was on safety and personnel. I and my economic development team worked with Landis managers to produce a quality training format which would allow for a highly trained work force.
Through their work and dedication to their work force, turnover was virtually nonexistent and productivity was high. This counters the comments in your Oct. 14 editorial, ``The treatment of women and questions about pay, safety and the dignity of individuals in the workplace are [in dispute] — and they are issues the [United Steelworkers] union understands resonate well with the public.''
I can say, without hesitation, that the Landis Plastics I know is not the type of company you make it out to be in your editorial.
I believe it to, indeed, be dedicated to safety and its work force.
James R. Kinnett II