The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1926-05-02
The "AdUGnce" Tries to Explain
Away the Nash Agreement
~ r. kATz, WORKER CORRESPONDENT.

BY r. KATE, Worker Correspondent.
THE famous Nash agreement that
was recentlyBigned between the
Amalgamated Clothing Workers and
the Nash Clothing Co. Of Cincinnati
has aroused a lotoof discussion in the
ranks of the Amalgamated as we'll as
in the labor movement as a whole. It
was very clear to- the class-conscious
workers that this agreement means
that the A. c. W oflcialdom has
turned definitely to the road of "class
collaboration" This agreement caused
quite lot of discomfort among the
members of the Arnalgamated. The
editor Of the Advance" official organ
of the A. C. W. found a unique way
of convincing thefmembers that this
agreement is notSa class-collaboration
agreement. a
In the last ISSUE of Advance" April
%, the editor publishes a would-be
conversation between a representative
of the Amalgamated and, as he terms
it, lone of a political group displeased
with most things9in the Amalgamated
as they run today" He uses an old
trick. He puts iup-a STRAW man" and
puts arguments An his mouth that IN
themselves are correct, but that don't
prove the point: that the Nash agree
ment is a DISQUALIFICATION" agree
ment. He can thus easily gain a vic
tory over such an opponent.
NOW let us see what is the differ
I ence between the Nash agreement
and other agreements and what makes
the Nash agreement a class-collabora-
ton agreement.
1t is true that you don't choose
agreements as you do flowers for your
girl at a florists shop, but you try to
get the best you can, and to make the
best of a given situation" Therefore
the Amalgamated has had to accept
many agreements that include such
clauses as the right to hire and fire
placed in the hands of the employers,
etc. Such agreements were signed
because the union in that particular
period or in that particular shop was
too weak to force, the employers to
grant better terms. Therefore the
union had to acceptthese terms.
But in the days when the Amalga-
mated was young and militant it was
made plain to the members, 1--WE are
accepting this agreement because we
are at present not strong enough to
get better one. But as soon as we
are better organized and we will feel |
hat we are strong enough to take up |
he fight against our enemy, the EN-.
'loyer, we shall fight" In other words,
he bad agreement would be used as a
means to instill class-consciousnes in
he minds Of the workers.
IAN you say thedsame thing about
- the Nash agreement? Certainly
rot. The whole spirit Of the Nash
agreement is a spirit OF class-collabo-
alton from start to finish. You only
lave to read over the preamble OF that
lgreement TO see this very plainly.
Here is what the preamble says: ut
s the expectations nd intention OF the
PARTIES to the agreement to achieve
hru its operation a state of industrial
democracy In the factory and shop.
Both parties will contribute without
tint to impart a true dignity TO labor
md to bestow on all those who work a
cal and effective citizenship in indus.
ry, thru which alone 1t will be posi-.
lie to attain true citizenship in the
community. II is the hope and belief
Il the parties to this agreement that
heir progress in achieving this end of
! working democracy In industry can
10 so striking as to make II an ex-
nipple for all those who wish to fol-
ow."
This agreement is accepted, not as
. breathing spell TO prepare for an.
'ther fight. but as an example for