Montana labor news., 1935-11-28
SHALL WE ORGANIZE
THE UNORGANIzED?
(By Charles P. Howard, President,
international Typographical Union)

The question which created the great
est interest in the recent convention of
the American Federation Of Labor at
Atlantic City appeared to be how shall
the mass production and corporation
controlled industries be organized =
upon a craft or industrial union basis
However, the real question in its most
concrete form was and is: Shall we
organize the unorganized in these in
dustries?
Efforts to organize these workers in
to the craft unions have not met with
success. The records are conclusive
upon this point. Management in these
industries is under centralized control
There has been the fullest degree OF
cooperation in opposing organization
of the workers, and it is only logical
to conclude that any form of organiza-
ton which will result in division OF the
workers into classes and destroy their
opportunity to act as a unit will meet
the same degree of failure in the flu
tare that it has suffered in the past.
ITO be successful, organization in these
industries must recognize the principle
that a grievance Of n class becomes
the grievance Of all the workers in that
industry.
Organization OF the workers in such
industries as steel, rubber, automobiles,
utilities, and others, upon an indus
trial basis does not necessarily mean
that all classes of workers in a plant,
or community, must be grouped in a
single local unit. Where conditions
justify, different classes may group
themselves into separate units, recog-
nizing similarity Of work, if that ac-
ton is best to secure results, or all
employees OF a plant may be grouped
into one unit. But to be successful,
administration must be centralized.
There must be no jurisdictional lines
set up TO Interfere with continuity OF
employment or permit OF disputes about
jurisdiction over work and there must
be the guarantee that at some future
time unity OF action will not be des-
troyed by dividing up the membership
OF these unions to satisfy the jurisdic-
tional claims Of craft organizations.
Among those who advocate a change
in organization policies to meet new
conditions in industry, there has been
no suggestion Of raiding the member
ship OF existing craft unions. There
is no intention to interfere with craft
organization in those industries where
that form OF organization has been ef-
f%ective. The purpose and intent is to
organize the unorganized and extend to
them the benefits of collective bargain
ing and concerted action.
Each passing year makes the unor-
ganized workers more and more Of a
menace to the organized minority Of
wage workers. 1t becomes increasing
~ difficult for existing unions to main
tain established standards at a time
when the national interest demands in
creased wage rates and reduced work
ing hours. The three and a half mil
lion organized workers cannot con-
tinue to carry on their backs the mil
lions Of unorganized. The new indus
tries that have been and are being
developed do not require the same de-
gree Of skill or the term Of apprenti-
ceship that was necessary when craft
unions attained their greatest measure
of success. 1t is more important that
these workers be effectively organized
under proper leadership than it is to
continue our efforts to force them TO
accept a form OF organization which
reason and logic indicate will not pro-
tect them.
The desire to retain what they term
jurisdictional rights over a potential
membership which the craft unions
have never been able to organize is
not sufficient reason for compelling the
workers in mass production industries
to remain unorganized or force them
to organize and accept a destructive
philosophy under subversive leadership.
What organization collects the per
capita tax and how these members vote
upon questions Of union policy is not
the dominant factor. They must be
organized and the form Of organiza-
ton must be one they will accept.
Statistics Of the Resettlement Ad-
ministration show that 3~,000,0OO,0O0 tons