Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1921-04-24
AlBuquerque Morning Journal Sunday, April "a, 1921

of the fire department From that decision, the
more aggressive labor leaders of the city are APP
pealing. They seeking to remove the three
men who made the peoples fight and allow the
two who voted for a unionzed fire depart
ment to select the three commissioners They
also seek a charter amendment prohibiting the
city manager from discharging employe be-
cause of membership in union.
Can that issue be compromised by voting
against the recall of the commissioners and for
the amendment? We think not.
Should three who took a deliberate stand
be continued in power and forced to countenance
the thing that they would not tolerate? There is
celebrating that question. You understand
it, They of backbone. They did what they
thought and still think was right. How long would
you remain member of city commission if the
citizens swept the ground from under your feet and
invited a recall election after your every act?
Therefore, do not believe that vote against
the recall of the commissioners is support of
the commission when it is coupled with vote
for the amendment. 1t may be tolerance it may
be charity; it may be pity; but it is not support
The commission must be sustained!
What do they tell us-they who would divide
the question and slap the labor agitators by voting
to retain the commissioners and slap the COM
mssioners by voting for the amendment? They
tell us that non-strike unions possible and
that they do work successfully.
The charter amendment provides that it shall
be unlawful for the city manager to discharge an
employe or group of employees for membership in
an organization not prohibited by the laws Of New
Mexico or the federal constitution Its sole pur-
pose is to make it unlawful for the city manager
to discharge a union fire department because of
the acts of its members union men.
Some point out that the present bylaws Of
the firemen's union contain a non-strike clause.
True, but the first draft did not The change from
inadvisable to strike to unlawful to strike" was
made in few minutes last Sunday afternoon.
Suppose the amendment carries. What is to
prevent those bylaws from being changed again,
making it not unlawful" but compulsory" to
strike? What is to restrain the insertion of a
clause making it necessary for the union to strike
when ordered to by the central labor council?
Assume that the change is made. altering the
union into strike union, just as it was changed
last Sunday into non-strike union. The city
officials would view this course with alarm. Every
property owner would have reason for worry.
Those men who have supported the open shop"
would have cause to fear fire losses.
And what would be the citys recourse? Dis
charge the men? Not chance, if the amendment
carries The charter would plainly make that I'M
lawful. Courts could not refuse to grant injunc-
tons restraining the discharge of the men.
If the charter is left as it is, it would be
possible for the firemen to form non-strike and
non-affiliated union AS long as it remained so.
the city manager could retain the men in the
city's employ. When the union changed it's charac-
ter, the city manager could discharge the Offend
ing members.
We want those who feel the question can be
divided to think this over. We want them to
realize that union can be formed now if it is
non-strike and non-affiliated. We want them also
to see that if the amendment carries and a strix-
ing union is formed, the city is powerless to rid
itself of the dangerous organization.
Weigh this matter and see which course offers
the greatest protection to the greatest number
we believe that you will agree with us that
THE COMMISSION MUST BE SUSTAINED