Evening star., 1922-10-20
INDUSTRIAL COURT
FRIEND OF: LABOR
Hostile Attitude of Kansas
Unions May Change,
/ Says Lawrence.
WORKINGS ARE Defined.
Public Utilities Involved With
Question of Collective
Bargaining.
WORKINGS ARE DEFINED
RY DAVID LAWRENCE.

Kansas court of industrial relations
grew out of Il coal famine two years
ago. Labor has been hostile from the
start. In this dispatch the writer
will attempt to give some of the rea-
sons why labor looks with distrust
on the Kansas law of compulsory
adjudication of disputes in essential
industries.
Labor feels that the strike weapon
is an Indispensable part of collective
bargaining and contends that there
is no such thing as a negotiation on
even terms if one side knows the
other has no leverage with which to
enforce its terms.
Gov. Allen and his associates in the
Industrial court experiment answer
with the statement. first, that strikes
are permissible in all industries ex-
distress. and that there is no need
of the strike weapon when the state
itself undertakes to enforce laborS
side of the controversy if it is just
Broadly speaking, labor has little
confidence i'll courts of any kind and
is suspicious of most tribunals set up
to settle industrial conflicts. Labor is
partisan-or. rather, labor leaders
are-and hence fear of an adverse
verdict often actuat.S the SpokeSmeE
OF organized ldDoF "htn lNty lHSiSl
on using the strike weapon. Instead
of reSCrting to tribunals, they argue
thar there is no restraint on the bar
gaining powers of the employer when
he takes advantage of economic con-
ditions to enforce lower wages.
Clarity in Court Ruling.
Perhaps the cIearest exposition of
labor's philosophy is contained in the
decision of the supreme court of
Kansas which upheld the conviction
of Alexander Howat on charges OF
contempt, but which had this to say
on the attitude of labor:
The mining industry is not guilt
less. Some who have engaged in it
had no conception of public service.
They mined coal for profit. They
We're interested in limited production
high prices. They were not greatly
concerned about cost, because the
public paid the bills. This attitude
resulted in chronic mismanagement.
and they had no part in what they
regarded as sentimental movements
ed through overWork and underpay,
through company stores and oppres
siVe regulations, through inadequate
safeguards and accidents which took
the form Of holocausts, through bad
sanitation and bad housing. and
through long and unnecessary periods
of enforced idleneSS.
The miner had no capital except
his capacity to labor. His situation
was such that he was obliged to ac-
cept whatever terms and working con-
ditions were offered him. His liberty
to quit work and go elsewhere if not
satisfied with his employers terms
was pure myth and mockery. He
could not even get in touch with the
superintendent to talk over his griev-
ha
so and contended too long or too
strenuously. he was discharged and,
if an American citizen, it was likely
his place was taken by a foreign i'm
migrant AS an individual he was
helpless. But he had to live. His
only remedy appeared TO be to fed
crate with others and take such dras-
tic action as would eXtort from his
employer some measure of relief from
conditions which could not be endured
Intended for Justice.
The Kansas court of industrial rela-
tions Is an attempt to get justice
for the workman in his relations with
the employer. and the law is power
full enough to make the employer
obey. too. Then why is labor hostile?
Mostly because the leaders have i'm
planted a belief that the Kansas
court will not do what it says it will
1t is true that 80 per cent of the
cases before the Kansas court of in
dustriaI relations have been brought
by employers. and that out of forty
five cases forty-three have been ac-
cepted without further argument.
though there are no court costs for
employer or employee in appealing
the case to the supreme court of the
state.
The rank and file of labor is in
receptive mood. Champions of the
industrial court have found attentive
audiences of workingmen ready to
hear the true objectives of the
new law: The labor leaders have
a natural fear that if the Kansas
court can represent the cause of the
workingman equitably there will be
no further need for them. This is
also a fallacy, for the Kansas court
doesn't take cogniZance of disputes
in most non-essential industries. and
there always has been and always
will be need for spokesmen to argue
the case of organized labor and con-
duct negotiations for large groups
of workers.
The new law simply says that
inasmuch as public utilities had to
be regulated by commissions and
boards in order that the public might
not be gouged on such necessities as
heat, light and power, SO also must
the public be protected by state in
dustrial boards or commissions-for
istrative commission and judicial tri-
bunal combined-in order that there
may be continuous production of the
necessities of life.
Utilities COmmissiOns.
Public utilities commissions have
been created by practically all the
states of the Union. Industrial boards
have been provided by several states.
The Kansas pattern is being studied
from coast to coast.
collective bargaining" says the
Kansas supreme court. "is bargain
ing by an organization or group of
workmen on behalf of its members
with the employer That privilege is
not only protected, but may be exer-
cised, and is expected to be exercised
even to the extent of altering orders
of the court of industrial relations.
What the defendants Cthe labor lead
ers) contend for is license to conspire
to injure the public"
In that last sentence may be read
the whole point of the controversy.
Labor contends it has no intention of
injuring the public any more, to be
sure, than has the employer whose
attitude may bring on a deadlock in
negotiation. The intent of both Is to
drive a bargain favorable to them
selves They each admit that, as an
incident to their bargain. the public
may be harmed. Labor considers it's
vast army of workers a part of the
public and feels that toilers must
protect themselves from starvation.
Again, the Kansas court would step
in and say there is no intention OF
permitting labor to starve. In fact,
the state law provides that labor
must be paid "a fair and just wage"
In a recent case the Kansas court