The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1925-12-23

of carrying out these principles is
the very union organized by the men
themselves. Whereas the employers
Of the open shop" movement have
been fighting bitterly against recog-
milton of the union, they are now ask
ed to recognize the union as the in
strument for carrying out their own
plans. The full force of this argu-
ment (Which has carried weight with
the employers that the B. & o. plan
is an improvement supon the open
shop" scheme fromIthe employers
point of view, is shown at its best
in the words of VIM. III. Johnston at
meeting of railroad executives in
st. Louis, at the timeICof the launch
ing of the plan. Johnston said:
THE idea underlying our services
to the Baltimore and Ohio railroad
may be compared to the idea which
underlies the engineering services ex-
tended to railroads by large supply
corporations which have contracts
with these railroads to furnish, let us
say, arch-brick, supesa4eaters, stokers,
or lubricating oils.Ho fp
From all the aD6ke, it becomes
clear that the essential difference be-
tween the "company1union" plan of
the National Association of Manufac-
turers (the open shop, movement)
on the one hand, and the B. & o. plan
on the other hand, pfsa simply that in
the latter propositiongthe union Off
Gals enter into a contract with the
employers to use the power of the
labor union itself to establish the
principles of the open shop"
The labor union officials had theil
own reasons for being anxious t.
make this kind of deal with the en-
ployers. Their criminal mismanage-
ment of the great strikes of 1929
had demoralized the unions, to such
an extent that the officials became
alarmed at the danger to their sal
aries. They had to find a new method
OF renewing the flow of per capita tax
into their treasures.
AS for the open shop" employers,
they began to get interested in the
B. & o. plan because, first, they were
having trouble with the operations of
their private company unions" and
second, they realized the need of a
second line of forces inside the work
ers' own organizations to prevent
even the company unions" from be-
inu 20 nfstrad hy fha xs,orLxare the ON,
ployers needed the expert assistance
Of the labor officials
So the union leaders and the "open
shop" employers found a common
platform. And the b e o. plan spread
from the railroad that gave it a name,
first to the Chicago Northwestern, and
then to the great Canadian Pacific
railroad. At Atlantic City the A. F.
Of l.. convention endorsed the idea for
the entire labor movement Capital
lists, liberals, and labor leaders unite
in proclaiming an era of Industrial
peace and well-being as a result of
he new Holy Alliance"
The struggle" Between Company
Unions and "B. & o. Plan"
OF course, there are differences, as
well as points of unity, between the
two plans. These differences bring
about struggle" between them
or, more properly speaking, COMPETE
ton. This competition takes the form
Of struggle to see which can best
serve the interests OF the employer.
VIM. Fl. Johnston, first sponsor for
the b. G. o. plan, but the case as fol-
lows:
II want to emphasize as strongly
as know how, the fact that in the
task of positive cooperation in the
railroad industry there can be no sub
stitute for the genuine unions of the
railroad employessf.a1
81 maintain that, such manage
ment Gas has tried the B. & o. plan)
would never again, las long as II re-
tains its good sense, desire to see the
affiliated shop craft unions effaced
from the scheme OF things on its
road" 1N
On the other side Daniel Willard,