The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1934-01-25
Letters from Our Readers
E.U.U.C. Answers Question on Needle Trades and
Cleaners and Dyers' Situation

of the organizer Of the Needle Trades
Workers Industrial Union who told
the writer, owe have no department
for this line" 1t is true that at the
time the Needle Trades Workers In
dustrial Union was engaged In few
major struggles such as the strike
OF the furriers, custom tailors, wlssch
occupied a great deal of the atten-
ton Of the union. However, this does
not mean that the union should not
give Its assistance TO any group OF
workers who desire to organize in
order to improve their conditions, re-
gardIess OF whether the union Nh to
that particular time has undertaken
any campaign In that branch of the
trade or not, especially when there
are group Of workers who take the
Initiation In coming down TO the
union TO ask for their assistance.
With reference to the cleaners and
dyers, we also agree with the writer
that it was not the best time to refer
him to the Cleaners and Dyers Union
because Of the condition Of the strike.
although there are much closer con-
nections between the taiI0rs in the
retail stores ard the workers in the
cleaning and dying trade than with
he needle trades workers generally.
AS to the second point raised In
the letter, with regard to the retail
cleaners and dyerS, we wish to tate
the following: AS far as we know
the leadership of the Cleaners and
Dyers Union did not by any means
Orientate itself on the retail taiIors
and cleaners, but, on the contrary.
carried on q militant struggle In
which the masses of the workers were
involved. However, this union, as the
writer no doubt Is aware, was the out
growth of revolt ON the part Of the
workers against the A. F. of l.. and
had not as yet sufficiently developed
its work so as to embrace all branches
connected with the cleaning and dye
ing and tailoring trade.
Due to the weakness In the lead
ership, the union was not able to
defeat the wholesale strikebreaking
activities of the ALL, which resulted
in the loss of the strike. 1t Is never
theless an established fact that this
strike was the most militant ever con-
busted in the history Of the union
FOR the past Is years.
AS far as the relation of the clean
ers and dyers union to the retail
storekeepers is concerned, we want
to state that while 1t is the policy
of the class struggle unions to base
themselves entirely on the mobiIiza-
ton Of the workers against the boss
es, there are certain situations where
it is permissible for militant unions
to take advantage Of the division that
exists in the rar'- 4 the bosses, II
such divisior. help to advance
the interest of the workers, provid-
ing this does not constitute the ma jor
policy of the union. This particu-
larly applies TO the cleaning and dye
ing trade where the wholesale BUSH
ness Is in the hands of group of
racketeers who are exploiting the
workers most ruthlessly and at the
same time are also depressing the
petty retail tailor and cleaner.
In this situation the union did not
go to organize the retail stores, but
merely ATTEMPTED to broaden the
fight against the main bosses in the
trade by trying to shut down the
retail stores. The criticism should be
made not against the attempt to
broaden out the struggle, but against
the failure Of the union to carry on
activities among the workers in the
stores at the same time when the
movement Of the retailers was de-
veloping.
Our advice TO the writer Is NOT to