The labor world., 1922-06-17
MINE men SEE
Silver LINING
IN TAFT CLOUD

ss' ~"~~~
Declare Coronado Decision viii
Be ultimate Labor Victory.
Holding to the same view ex
pressed by The Labor World in the
last issue of this. paper to the effect
that the supreme court decision IN
lining for labor, the United Mine
Workers journal, official organ Of
the union, comments on the decision
and points out advantage it may
hold for the workers.
eff a labor union can be sued,
as was decided by the United States
supreme court in the Coronado case,
then it can also sue," says the edi
torial. IF a labor union can sue,"
it continues, then there is no good
reason why it should not utilize the
law and the courts for the protection
Of itself, it's members and their well
fare against oppression, damage or
outrage. If the law and the courts
afford means by which union
busting employers may harass, tor
| ment and oppress unions and work.
ing people, then unions and working
people should not hesitate to use the
same weapons against thar class Of
| employers.
l. Popular Pastiinc.
1T has long been a popular pas
time with such. employers to rush
| off to the courts and ask for an in
junction every time labor union
dared to make it's appearance in
their neighborhood. And the injunc-
tions have been issued. They have
very seriously hampered the unions
| in their efforts to organize the un-
| organized workers in their particular
| crafts. In West Virginia., for in
stance, injunctions have been issued
at every possible opportunity. If
unions would fight such employers
with their own kind of fire it would
not be long until the injunction pro-
cess would be as unpopular with en-
ployers as it always has been and
still is with employees.
Goal operators secure injunc-
tions to prevent strikes. Labor
unions could ihjunctions to
prevent lockouts.
Numerous coal companies have
sued the union for. heavy damages
for things that happened during
strikes. Unions could sue such en-
ployers for damages for things they
do their employees.
Ignored the Law.
"Without any legal right what
ever. some employees evict families
| of workingmen from their homes
and set them and their household
goods out upon the roadside to be
destroyed by rain and the weather.
Who will say that damage suits
could not be filed against such en-
ployers under such circumstances :?
''Thugs and gunner have been
hired and armed by employers many,
many times, and they have beaten
up, and even killed men whose only
offense was that they were men,
bers of labor unio4- Who will say
that such acts cannot be made the
subject of any injunction and of
damage suits? ...,
1T would not require many such
| Wet 4lo
them that injunctions and damage
suits are unpopular and undesirable.
| "The decision of the supreme
court in the Coronado case opens
the way for labor unions to go into
the courts for just such protection.
This is one of the very interesting
and important features of the de-
cision. The. Injunction cannot be
abolished nor destroyed. Therefore,
| why should labor unions not make
/ use of it, And why should they not
fight damage suits with damage
suits: = ,.. - =. = ass.s !.
| Union May Be Sued.
"The decision says labor union
may be sued for damages to proper
| ~ S1OWlIlS Ouk VI q StIAhSsfEA1 A10G kAAS1V
are limitations and restrictions 70
that rule: that take out some Of its
teeth. FdE1nstance, the decision says
that an INTERNATIONAL union cannot
be held for damages ina local strike
that was; not called, authorized or
ratified by the. international. Union-
/ busting employers have all along
contended that the International was
responsible for every act. Of every
member, and they. have been SUPP
ported in that position BY many
courts. But the rule laid down by
the supreme. court puts q crimp in
that policy. A uni iolsca now be held
for those things for which it is di-
Atlnued opsp aEs 9