The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1891-09-28
TRADE AND LABOR.
WHY Union Men Strike Against
NOn-UniOnists.
UNIONS COST WORK AND MONEY.
Non-Unfon Men Denounced for Break
ing Down Wages-Notes of the
characterization OF Work.

How do you justify union men in arbi-
trarily compelling non-union men to join
the union or deprive them of work, as is
frequently done by the refusal of the
union men to work with them?" was
asked by PosT-IsTELLIGEscER reporter of
q number of members of different trade
unions, who were discussing various So
cial and economic questions in the West
ern Central Labor Union hall few even
ings ago. The question brought on an
interesting discussion. in the course of
which T. f. Burns, member of the Cigar
makers Union, gave the following an
swer:
81 belong to one of the broadcast trades
unions in the country" said he. ''In
fact, I know.of no other as liberal in its
principles. Yet it forces its members not
10 work with non-union men, and | think
is justified in doing so. because every one
who considers the question in a spirit of
fairness admits the absolute necessity for
unions as a means of protecting the work
ing people against the inevitable conse-
quences of our competitive system OF
business, which forces fair-minded and
welI-disposed employers to adopt the same
standards of wages, hours and conditions
competitors. The trade unions and other
labor organizations have a mighty in
fluence in checking the operations of this
selfish class of employers and thereby keep
ing wages up and making the general con-
ditions for men employed in well organ
lied trade much better. This requires
time and money from the men belonging
to the organization. They devote many,
many hours to the welfare of the union
when they would prefer TO be at home,
perhaps; and they contribute financially
besides. Then if unions are an absolute
necessity for the protection of the
tollers and require time and money
Tor their members to maintain
them and the benefits go out
to all employed in the trade, union and
non-union alike, can union men be blamed
for their bitterness against non-union
men who persist in remaining at the
mercy of the class of INSCRIPTIONS en-
ployers referred to-their very tools, in
fact2 | know the methods employed to
convert those men TO look favorably upon
the union are often crude and frequently
offensive to sensitive men, but that does
not change the case in the least. Indi-
vidually | do not confiDe myself to the
simple trade union, which at best is but a
very imperfect form of organization; but I
favor the trade union because, with all its
imperfections, my experience has taught
me it is immeasurably better than none
and is today the only thing standing be-
tween wage-workers and abject servitude.
i do not see any more injustice in forcing
man to join union and contribute his
share of time and money than there is in
compelling him by law to pay tax. I
would like to see condition of society in
which every man would be allowed the
widest possible scope of individual liberty,
so long as he did not interfere with the
personal rights and liberties of others. but
our competitive system of industry and
business forces us TO adopt expedients for
self-preservation. 1t makes us the chill
dren of circumstances, and we ouild with
the materials those circumstances afford.
Unrestrained competition and individual
ism are incompatible"
w. Fitzgerald, of the 'Longshoremen's
Union, expressed the opinion that: ''The
best mechanics and workmen usually be-
long to the union. They have had to lose
some time in acquiring proficiency in
their work and it would not be right to
allow men coming in from the country,
unfamiliar with the work altogether, to ii K
the rates of wages, as they frequently do,
and force the skilled workman to accept a
reduction to what they are willing to work
for or quit and go on tramp for another
job or change his vocation. 1t is all right
to talk about individual liberty but gem
eral welfare, it seems to me, is paramount
10 individual liberty
G., Snider, of the Linemen's Union, said ::
position of unions in antagonizing
pou-union men is one in which the public
Will never sustain them. But those who
belong to unions, and believe in their
necessity. know that it is absolutely USE
less to try to do anything rs long as there
Is a class of men ready and willing to work
for the lowest wages that will afford them
any sort of a living. Men who fight the
union before they join it, usually make
the poorest kind of members after they
join: but they can be handled easier on
the inside than they can on the outside"