The Washington times., 1934-07-13


In d ustrieS or >>'S'S'''S
trades as do not Lewis Haney
get In under the codes Of related
trades, are likely to be forced
under q new blanket code. This
will serve as a sort Of standard,
and its terms are, therefore, Of
great interest. In brief summary,
they are as follows.
/. minimum wages and
hours are prescribed for labor.
2. Child labor Is abolished,
and wOman'S wages are pro-
tected.
3. Collective bargaining is
provided as under Section IA
Of NRA.
4. Open prices are to be re-
Quired.
S. "WilIfully destructive price
cutting is an unfair method of
competition"
6. Minimum price-fixing Is
provided in case Of . declared
emergency"
One interesting fact is that
after all the roaring and teeth
gnaShing by johnson and Rich
berg, the position taken by Dar-
row and the Federal Trade Com
mission is practically sustained.
Thus, instead of the scheme of
"seR government" by industry, sub
ject to regulation only by NRA,
and virtually replacing the anti
trust laws, we are apparently
going back to antitrust law en-
forcement and fair competition.
Much solicitude is shown for
"Small enterprise" and it is pro-
vided that "no member of the
industry shall enter into any
, agreement, understanding, COM
bination or conspiracy to fix or
maintain price terms" (The lat.
ter provision should be quite un.
necessary, since it is existing
law.
This, I think, is a step in the
right direction (for reasons set
forth in my book on Business
Organization and Combination).
Other good features are some
flexibility in wages and hours,
the apparent requirement of an
agreement by IS per cent of a
trade for the adoption of fair
trade practices, and the possibil-
ity that a reasonable "open
price" system may be more
widely adopted.
There seems to be much lack
of clarity in some provisions,
however, and some are probably
bad.
Thus the rule against reduc.
tions in wages. if clear, is drastic
and inflexible. Section Ia of
NRA collective bargaining) is
to apply, with all its uncertain.
ties. "a case initiated by build.
ing material concerns is now
pending to determine whether
NRA codes allow the "closed
shop" and the exclusion of non.
union workerS)
We find the vicious ten.
dency, which is 50 character.
istic Of the New Deal, to force
code signers to agree to things
not specified. Thus Art. Va
says, ut shall be an unfair
method Of competition to vic.
late any rule Of fair trade
practice even IL not herein con-
tanned" There is also the queS-
ti0n whether anyone who is
virtually compelled to sign the
code gives up his cOnstitu-
tiOnal rights.
The Code Authority is empow-
cred to require burdensome re-
ports.
Apparently certain new tests Of
''urfair competition" are set up
which are likely to be dangerous.
These are Cd "imperiling small
enterprise" and (2) ''impairing
code wages" Regulations, Z, 1a).
II competition is to be restricted
when it hurts an inefficient bust.
ness because it is small, or be-
cause it threatens a code wage
even though that wage is too
high, the thing will be bad.
The whole scheme of "emer-
gency" price-fixing is perhaps the
most dangerous part. The Code
Administration is TO decide when
an emergency exists, and then
may fix q minimum price. Its
decision is to be based upon a
finding of any adverse effect up
on Cd small enterprise, or (2)
wages or labor conditions, or 90
any tendency toward monopoly
or a. "other acute conditions
which tend to defeat the purpose
of the act"!
Surely that is broad enough!
The code authority can fix a
price just about wherever it
wants to.
This is distinctly a piece Of
radical legislation by the execu-
tive. It usurps the powers Of
Congress. It should be promptly
Withdrawn Gas the General has
10 often done) and be limited
and clarified.