The Ely miner. [volume] (Ely, Minn.) 1895-1986, 1936-07-30
1lEoIIj'ia2'9q| S5jiqe(1k
National Topics Interpreted "a Ig14@aA&@4lQ
by William Bruckart TnIlalInZ
National Washington, D. C.


of the United States has cast for it
self a role in the
Labor and forthcoming cam
Politics paign-whether it
intended to do so
or not. The same is true of John
L. Lewis and his segment of or
ganized labor-and it is pretty gen.
orally suspected that Mr. Lewis in
tended to get labor questions well
mixed up in politics. 1t is all
more important because of Presi-
dent Roosevelt's attack on "eco-
nomic royalists" in his Philadel-
phia acceptance speech.
Whatever rights the steel indus
| try has or whatever rights Mr..
Lewis and his followers have, the
fact remains that they are all knee
deep in politics and there is every
reason to believe that each side
will suffer in public esteem as a
result. 1t means simply this: each
side is mixing up problems that
are basically economic in charac-
ter with sordid, even unclean, po-
| litical motives.
This outburst is prompted by two
thi-.gs: the gigantic steel industry
has taken the position that it will
defend itself against encroachment
of professional labor leaders like
Mr.. Lewis and President William
Green of the American Federation
of Labor and their satellites from
any source" The steel industry
thereby has thrown down the chal-
lenge and now that such die is
cast, the steel industry will be
compelled to do a number of in
defensible things if it adheres to its
program.
The same condition is to be OBJ
served in the organized labor situa-
ton. Whether Mr.. Lewis is willing
to admit # or not, his declaration
that he will foster, even enforce,
his scheme for organizing the steel
workers is likely to lead to over
jealous acts by his followers-and
overzealous and foolish acts all too
frequently lead to bloodsheu.
For a number of years, steel
companies have refused steadfastly
to recognize un-
Steel Bucks ion labor as rep
Unions resented by the
professional lead
ers in the American Federation of
Labor. They have attempted to
defeat the inroads of that organiza-
ton by forming what is known as
company unions, groups Of employ
ees on the pay roll of each corpora
ton. They have accorded to these
groups the right of collective bar
gaining and have insisted that they
would deal only with the represent
atives of the company unions for
the reason that they believe they
then are dealing with the employ
ees concerned with questions of pay
and working conditions in that par
ticular plant. If the national I'M
ions were recognized, officials of a
given company always have had to
negotiate with the expert union ne
gotiators who are paid by the ma
tional organization. The results
have not always been happy. This
combination of circumstances, to-
gether with a disposition on the
part of the steel companies, / am
afraid, to be rather selfish in their
attitude toward labor has devel-
oped a continuing controversy that
has ragged over the last score of
years.
1t happened that the rather inso-
lent announcement of the steel
companies, their challenge, came
almost simultaneously with the de-
livery of President Roosevelt's
speech accepting the Democratic
nomination for reelection. 1t was
in this speech, it will be remem-
bered, where Mr.. Roosevelt de-
nounced economic royalists," in
which he resorteo to expressions
bound to create class hatred and
in which he used language that is
certainly going to help discredit
corporations which are large
enough to attract national atten-
ton. Of course, I know that Mr..
Roosevelt did not have the steel in
dustry particularly in mind in his
assault on massed capital but the
effect is the same as though he
had been shooting directly at the
steel industry because of the coinci-
dence mentioned above.
The tragedy of the thing is that
the professional labor leaders are
going to use the steel industry's
challenge politically; they are GER
tain to attempt to gain government
interference in their quarrel with
the steel industry and, like all such
conflicts, fairness on the part of
either side to the controversy is
likely to disappear because of the
political mixture.
From all of the inside discussions
that I have heard, it appears that
the issue between
The Real the steel industry
Issue and its workers is
no longer simply
whether the steel industry shall be
unionized. 1t is a question of how
it Shall be unionized. In addition
to this, Mr.. Lewis has been chisel-
ing away for several years in
promoting his labor union idea of
organizing all workers III one unit
instead of the craft union idea that
is basic in the American Fedora
ton of Labor. That is to say, Mr..
Lewis proposes to have a steel un-
ion or a shipbuilding union or tex
tile union instead of organizing the
workers in accordance with the
particular jobs they do, whether
they be engineers. painters. car