The midland journal. (Rising Sun, Md.) 1885-1947, 1921-01-14
Ways Suggested
to End Capital
Union Warfare
BY 3 c. FORBES

BY 3 c. FORBES
The revelation that steel companies
refused to supply steel for buildings in
New York which were to be erected
by union labor has been called Shock
ing" "scandalous," "monstrous" and a
lot of other adjectives. The question
Indignantly asked has been, What
business is it of the steel companies
whether building is to be erected by
union men or on the open shop pol
icy?"
At first glance it does SUI gest high
handed autocracy, an undemocratic
conspiracy against unionized labor
The effect produced upon ones mind
is ugly.
A little reflection, however, brings
to mind that the steel companies in
acting this way are only taking leaf
out of unionized labor's own book.
How often have we seen union mem
bers throw down their tools and go on
strike until every nonunion worker
was dismisstd? Again we are accus-
toned to seeing union labor refuse
positively to handle nonunion-made
material
When you analyze the matter, is
there any essential difference in prin-
ciple between the conduct and ethics
of the steel companies and the con-
duct of ethics of the unions?
The whole thing amounts to this:
Warfare is being carried on between
employers and labor. For years the
stronger unions have not hesitated to
boycott nonunion workers in their line
and to lay down the law dogmatically.
Only recently most employers scrupu-
lousy avoided disputes over the open
shop" Now, however, many employ
ers feel emboldened to throw down a
challenge to the unions.
| War is always destructive. It be-
gets wounds and woes and bitterness
and revenge. 1t is to be avoided wher-
ever possible without sacrifice of prin-
ciple and justice.
Is there way out of this capital
versus-union warfare?
l think there is.
to find a solution for any problem is
firm realization of the fact that Moth
ing is ever settled until it is settled
right"
Unions embarked on a path which
could lead only to disruption and dis
aster when they sought to limit I'M
duly the output of their members
This policy meant that union workers
would produce less than the nonunion
workers of average industriousness.
1t meant, too, that in time employers
would prefer nonunion to union work
men. Unreasonable limitation of out
put is wrong economically, wrong So
cially, wrong morally. 1t stultifies the
growth and development of every one
indulging in it. To do less than ones
host NOT 0Y,1xy int, ano,e clyiIl hut
sears ones soul. To receive a full
days pay for less than full days pro-
duction is equivalent to stealing.
To reach satisfactory solution both
sides must have a spirit of fairness
and sincerity.
First, union leaders must adopt poll
cies and principles which will inspire
their members to become superior
workers, more skillful and mort pro-
ductive than the average nonunion
worker. Union members must be en-
couraged to give the best that is in
them and the most that is in them.
There must be less solicitude for
drones and for incapables and more
encouragement for efficient workers to
demonstrate their full worth.
In this way employers would come
to prefer union men to nonunion men,
because under such a method of con-
Quoting unions the majority of expert
workmen would be attracted to them,
not. as is too often the case at pres
ent, repealed by them.
Employers, ON their part, should be