Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1922-09-24
GOMPERS DECLARES COMPANY UNIONS,
SHOP COMMITTEES, SUBSTITUTE FOR GENUINE


between workers and employers un-
less there Is on each side perfect
freedom of selection of spokesman.
/ There must be also on each side per-
feet freedom in determining upon
the method and character of organi-
! cation.
All Industries National.
There is further fact which must
never bc forgotten In connection
| with the formation OF what arc
! known as shop committees and en-
p!oye representation systems as fos-
tered by employers Practically every
| Industry today is national IN scope.
The formation OF shop committees
or So called employe representation
schemes independent OF the unions
! OF the workers always leaves out Of
| consideration the fundamental fact
| that the different employers IN n
! given industry arc competitors and
/ that unless there is a fined standard
! OF minimum wages. maximum hours
OF work and working conditions TO
/ prevail throughout the industry. the
whole process becomes anarchical
prejudicia TO the welfare OF the in
! dustry and, therefore. prejudical to
| Industrial progress and common well
/ fare In general. ! don't know that
employers fail To see this or whether
reactionary opposition to trado
unions blinds them TO everything hc-
Eond that opposition. do know that
| tho welfare of industry is general, as
we'll as the welfare OF workers in
| particular, demands tho existence and
continued growth OF the trade union
! movement. The trade union move
ment and its philosophy of voluntary
cooperation offers progress to in
! dustry and Justice TO the workers
II SO happens that the workers In
tho United States believe in trado
unions and organize In trade unions.
II is neither the right nor the pro-
vince OF employers to attempt to say
bow the workers shall organize. That
Is. and must remain the unabridged
right OF the workers themselves.
Joker in rront-Sharinx.
Analysis Will show that every
proposition Put forth by employers
and not accepted 10y the workers.
having for It's ostensihle purpose the
business of dealing with the relations
| between employers and workers, is mt
heart proposal for some sort of
/ Limitation upon the rights aud activi-
ties OF tho workers.
The profit sharing idea Is an OK
ccllcnt example. This idea has been
! before the public for number of
/ years. The American labor move
] i'''llA il'iS 'PI'pScu II from the outset.
The labor movement naturally wants
every WORKER to receive the highest
possible return for his labor. II Ia
Dor therefore. opposes the profit
sharing System. It must be because
1t does something more than bring
money return TO tho workers.
BrInEs No Money Return.
The truth about the profit sharing
system Is that is does not even bring
a money return 10 the workers in
most cases. and that It's main object
is 10 throw around tic workers an
influence which seeks to bind them
lates almost invariably that Il worker
VIII not insist upon his rights or
Will not participate IN a protest
against unjust conditions. II no
thinks that such action Will leopard
lie n possible share In whatever
p-ohts may accrue AT the end of the
year. III great many cases. the
employer Is right IN this thought.
] The vast majority of American work
! ers. however, have not been dcluded
! by the ofit-sharinE idea. They
know that when an employer inauEu-
rates protit-sharlnE system. he also
endeavors TO formulate a wage scale
accordingly. They know that in
practically every case whore an en-
! ployer inauRurates proat- sharing
! system he also formulatcs rules and
! regulations providing for forfeiture
OF participation, so that It IS rem
/ dered practically impossible for the
worker to make any protest OF To
! mako any demand IN connection
! with wages or working conditions.
Conditions Are Different.
The conditions are vastly different
I IN ln as ha
whore many OF the workers arc oon-
stantly moving from ono scene OF
I operation 10 another.
/ In tho clothing industry, there has
hecn stnl different experience to
/ guide both workers and employers in
tho creation o. machinery through
which the problems OF the industry
may he dealt with. One of the great
evils which IN earlier days confront
I'd tho workers on ladies' garments,
was that OF d!scharging without
adequate cause 1t was weapon re-
sorted TO by employers TO break tho
spirit az the workers. One OF the re-
! suits OF this has been the creation
Of the oitice OF Impartial! chairman.
and a discharge IS not effective until
81 has been ratified by this impartial
/ chairman. There IS. / believe. an APP
peal even from hts decision.
In addition TO ALI original conten-
t!one against tho profit sharing
theory thore is another consdcrn-
t!on which probably counts as heavily
as any ether among American work
men, and that is the !wpraincd feel
ing on the part of American work
men that they want to know definite
ly what their wage is going 10 be.
ana they want no element OF specu
!stion In that connection. They are
not gamblers where their wages arc
concerned. They have an almost uni
ytTsHl desire TO agree - cNpcnd their
effort for a definitely established
wake. II will he a long time before
amy employer produces II profit shar-
Ing proposal that will Overcome this
ever ,ommcndab!c phycholoSical OBJ
stacl.
Ih">" Who Ought Ia know.
a irw DAYS A@o l had the pleas
ure 90 reading an account of how
Ir Edison Invented the phonoEraph.
p lie worked out a theory which had
uocn developing I'm his mind and then
ae made certain drawings which he
sent go an Instrument maker. when
certain materials were pu; together
IN accordance with tho drawings.
i'or" wts produced AN instrument