Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-06-06
LABOR'S P[AUDITS
WON BY HUGHES
Opinion on Company Unions
| ExpIodes Human Rights
Criticism in Senate.
BIZ FREDERIC WILLIAM VILE.

When Chief Justice Charles Evans
Hughes takes ship next week for his
annual vacation in Europe, there will
sttll be ringing in his ears the plaudits
of American organized labor. Unbe-
known to the country at large. the man
= who was under heavy fire In the Senate
four months ago as the champion of
property rights" against human
rights" has, in his first major decision,
knocked the pins from under that
charge
On May rs, the Supreme Court. by
unanimous vote, sustained the Railway
Brotherhoods contention that railway
companies have no right to interfere
with workers organizations. The opin-
ion was written and read by Chief JUS
tice Hughes. 1t involved, to consider
able extent, the self-same principle
which proved the undoing of Judge
Parker of North Carolina in connection
with the now celebrated yellow Dog"
miners contract. The Supreme Court,
concurring without dissent in Chief
Justice Hughes opinion, decided for the
railway men and against the railway
operators.
The effect of the verdict is that no
company union. E., a union consist
ing exclusively of men employed on one
single line-can be legally maintained
on any railroad unless the majority OF
the employees wish that kind of an or
ganization. The railway brotherhoods
have been fighting company unionlSm
for years. Some so lines throughout
the country have company unions"
road system being probably the out
standing example. The purpose of
company unions" of course, is to en-
able the rail operators to bargain, on
controversial occasions, with their own
employs only. instead of having to deal
with them through the brotherhoods.
Case Brought by Clerks.
The case just decided concerned the
attempt of the Southern Pacific lines
in Texas and Louisiana to maintain
the principle of company unioniSm."
1t was appealed to the United States
Supreme Court, after the Southern Pa
cific had been defeated in both the
Federal District Court of Texas and
in the Federal Court of Appeals sitting
at New Orleans. The case was brought
by the Brotherhood of Railway Clerks.
In the first trial before the Federal
Court at Houston, Judge Hutchinson
ordered the Southern Pacific to dis
band its company union" and to deal
with the brotherhood until the roads
clerical employees, by secret ballot,
themselves decided otherwise. Judge
Hutchinson took his stand on the pro-
visions of the national railway labor
act. a stand now confirmed by the
Supreme Court.
The entire bench, with the exception
Of Associate Justice McReynolds, who
did not participate because he had not
heard the arguments agreed with Chief
Justice Hughes Interpretation of the
railway labor law. The court held that
when Congress wrote into the act that
both the railroads and their employees
should be permitted to select their rep
resentatives free from coercion and in
fiuence" it meant exactly what it said.
Furthermore, the Hughes opinion point
ed out, the law was not . mere ges-
ture," but was intended TO be enforced,
and that the Federal courts have plenty
Of power to enforce it.
Chief Justice Hughes attitude in the
Southern Pacific clerks case, this writer
learns, was as matter Of fact no sur