The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1930-02-26
STARVE OR FIGHT!.
A CHALLENGE to the Unemployed

ance, $50 were bought off-paid $500 piece
--one-half this sum being contributed by ens
remaining employees Vho forfeited their un.
employment insurance for that purpose. -
"This unemployment insurance" frankly
states Prof Commons who was the first chair
man of the insurance fund, 'is directed toward
bringing about the part of the wage earn
ers favorable attitude towards increasing eff
ficiency The union has lost its ginger, its
pep, and is turning to try to help the manufac-
turers make profits . and the interesting
thing about it is that the union points to the
financial statements of the company as justi-
fication for their participation in these various
increases in efficiency"
Legislative Defeats.
Fifteen bills dealing with unemployment in
surance to be administered by the various
states have been introduced in six legislative
bodies since 1915. None of these measures
passed All were grossly inadequate. The HUI
Der Bill, drafted by Prof. Commons himself
and the model for most of the other bills, was
admittedly halfway measure, 'the benefits
small, dollar a day, they barely pay the
rent, the idea being that the employers, who
operate under the system would then develop
cooperative schemes and get contributions
from labor or, increase their contributions
What can be expected from the employers is
indicated in the private schemes discussed
above ..-,44 ...~;. f-7-
It is fact worth noting that the New York
bill which was introduced by Assemblyman
Orr. socialist. places one-third of the financial
burden of the insurance fund on the workers.
All other insurance measures proposed provide
that the funds be paid entirely by the employ
ers. The general features of the bills are:
A E1v cf co
s1.5O day-limited to IS weeks a year.
A waiting period of from three to six
days before payments begin.
Certain exempted persons and 4occupa-
tons, for instance, farm laborers, casual
workers and domestics.
Certain exempted employers, those, for
example, employing less than three work
ers.
No payments of benefits during strikes
and lockouts.
Administration by dependents of labor
mr. industrial commissions.
There has been little agitation for national
legislation on unemployment. A resolution was
introduced into the House of Representatives
by Meyer London following the Unemployment
crisis of 1921. and bill introduced by Victor
Berger following the unemployment crisis Of
1929. Both failed to pass.
Although the Berger bill was the usual social
reformist gesture, the A. F. of L. strenuously
opposed the measure. Berger relied solely on
the liberals for the support of his bill, which
was certainly liberal and not workers
measure While admitting that ''the earnings
of American workers are insufficient to enable
them to save enough from their earnings dur
ing periods of employment to tide them and
their dependents over periods of unemployment
'''d economic depression" Berger recommended
that these mea gre earnings be further reduced
by assessing the workers for one-third of the
cost of the insurance. The bill provided sal
airy of $4,000 year for the proposed Director
of the Bureau of Unemployment Insurance,
but unemployed workers were to receive no
payments during the first two weeks of unenl-
| ployment, and only one-half of their average
weekly wages for maximum of six months
unemployment. The administration of the act
was left to the politically corrupt and anti
| quated United States Employment Service. No
| provision was made for workers control
| Such are the schemes for unemployment in
surance legislation proposed by the liberals and
socialists. According to Prof. Commons these
| bills are "as dead as anything could be- Dead
! or alive, they were never meant to give real
help to the unemployed They would have
| penalized workers on strike and assisted en-
| ployers during lock outs. They debar millions
of farm laborers, domestic workers and casual
workers from receiving benefits They give
special privileges to employers of child labor
| by reducing the rate of payment to so cents
| day-for workers / 7 years old or younger. The
| maximum benefits proposed-$9 a week-are
| so far below the amount required for worker
| to live, that they leave no alternative for the
unemployed but charity or starvation.
ITO Be ContinuedD eas