Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1919-06-06
THE RIGHT TO QUIT

Quitting and striking are two different things. They
are often confused. Defenders of the strike as a means
Of adjusting labor differences frequently make the state
ment that a man has the right to quit his employment if
he wishes to do so.
AS to the right to quit there can be no question. ex-
cept in those cases in which the individual has, for a
specified time, entered into a definite contract not to quit.
In that case it is his business to fulfill his contract, Just
as he expects contracts made with him to be fulfilled.
But, aside from that. the right of the individual to quit
is not debatable. 1t is a right which is unquestioned and
inherent.
But the striker does not quit, in the ordinary sense
Of the term. He has no desire to leave his employment,
either to engage in another or to remain idle. He discon-
tinues his work. in company with others with whom he
has a definite understanding to that effect. in order to
force compliance with the demands which he or others
have made. He expects and intends that his abandon
ment of his work shall be only temporary. He intends
that the pressure which he and his associates bring to
bear through the injury caused by the shutting down of
Industries will be sufficient to force the desired conces-
sions, and that then he will resume his employment with
out prejudice to his standing as a member Of the force
Of employees. That is a very different matter from the,
mere quitting Of a job.
In the Winnipeg strike We see many Of the processes
of government suspended entirely or partially because
employees of the government. general or local, have Joined
in a strike. These persons dc not desire or intend to quit
the public service. Policemen who had contemplated
joining in the strike, but whose action has been post
poned because of the orders or permission of strike COM
mittees, local firemen. postofhce employees. and others
engaged in the public service expected to resume work
after the strike is over, and to retain unim paired what
ever rights they had acquired through long and contin-
uous service. They are Tot quitting their jobs. They
have no intention of doing so. They are simply seeking,
by embarrassing and injuring the institutions by which
they are employed, and through them the general public,
to force the settlement of an existing controversy in a
particular way. and it happens that this controversy is
one which has no bearing on the compensation OF work
ing conditions of any public servant in Canada.
Winnipeg officials some days ago demanded that
members of the police force sign an agreement not to
participate in a sympathetic strike. For the time being
that has been waived, and the waving Of the condition
is certain to be interpreted as a sign Of conscious weak
ness on the part of the administration. But the provi-
sion against a sympathetic strike, proper though it is, is
only partial. The government has the right. and should
exercise it, to demand that it's employees engage in no
strike of any kind 1t is difficult for government to pre-
scribe conditions as between private employers and their
employees. But government as an employer itself owes
it to the great public whose servant 1t is to protect the
public interest by requiring abstention from strikes of all
kinds on the part of its employees to the end that the
public may be served capably and uninterruptedly. The
government employe has a right to quit his job. He
should understand that when he strikes he has quit. and
for keeps.