The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1921-09-10
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING.

The principle of collective bargain
ing since it's establishment in the labor
world has been of great service both
to employe and employer. 1t seems
unfortunate, therefore, that it is fall
ing into disrepute with one of the
parties thereto.
A primary purpose of an associa-
ton of workmen, says Law and La
Dor, organ OF heFLeague for Indus
with employers. The occasion for
such an association is the inequality
of bargaining power between the av-
erage employer and the average indi-
vidual workman. The idea of equal
ity of bargaining power appeals to the
moral sense. 1t tends to a guaranty
of fairness. The moral strength of
in this purpose to establish equality
Of bargaining power.
The moral destruction, and follow
ing it the physical destruction, of the
trade union movement is threatened
by its apparent purpose to substitute
domination for equality of bargaining
power. The trade unions seek to
make it a condition of every contract
between employer and employe that
none shall be allowed to work who are
not members of the trade union max
ing the contract. Unless the employer
consent to this he is threatened by
strike and boycott and the destruction
of his business. If he consent to it the
much talked of and long desired equal
ity of bargaining power may be
thwarted. He is then in the position
where he must bargain with a partic-
ular labor union or go without en-
ployes.
When the employer must deal with
a particular labor union and has no
alternative, bargaining is annihilated,
for he must deal with that union re-
gardless of it's terms. The employer
in such a predicament is as much at
the mercy of the trade unions as any
workman could possibly have been the
victim of the employer. without
trade unions, if the employe were not
satisfied with his employment, he
l.
but under a national closed shop sys-
tenn the employer will have nowhere
to turn. He must deal with a partfc-
ular union, whether it is differed by
good men or criminals, whether 1t
keep its contracts or repudiate them,
whether it destroy efficiency or pro-
mote it.
~ f1a
trade unions upon a national closed
shop regime that they would destroy
the very doctrine that has been the
basis of their existence and the
strength of their appeal for the moral
support of the public. Seeking to es-
tablish equality of bargaining power
they would succeed in destroying it.
There is unhappily no, convincing
evidence that this mistake is apparen.
to, or admitted by. the trade union
men, but even if trade unionists are
slow to learn this lesson, it will not
be lightly passed over by others.
The law will protect freedom OF
contract against Interference by class
legislation. 1t remains for the en-
dom of contract against class warfare
This can be done by granting to work
men freedom to associate in the max
ing of bargains in which they are mu-
tually interested and at the same time
preserving their freedom to select
such associations as they may choose
or to abstain from all associations
Only those associations which are fair
to others can be fair to their own
members The hope for fairness lies
in the freedom of workmen to accept
or reject organization.
If, as is charged by labor unionists.
employers have combined to destro.
labor unions, responsibility for such
action lies at the door of labor unions
themselves. NThey can still restore
their organizations to their former
places in public favor by returning TO
the principles upon which labor
unionism was founded. Union labor
is fighting with its back to the wall
because of attempts of its leaders at
a misuse OF power.
The foundation of the existing labor
situation was laid when the railroad
brotherhoods blackjacked congress
into passing the Adamson law.