Evening star., 1936-07-07

selected, whether
the choice is influenced by employers
and finally, whether rival employe
organizations can influence, intimi-
date or coerce workmen into joining
one type of union in preference to
another
The New Deal platform says:
1--WE have written into the law OF
the land the workers right to collec-
tive bargaining and self-organizatiop
free from the interference of en-
ployers."
The Republican platform says:
I'VE pledge ourselves to protect the
right of labor to organize and to
bargain collectively through repre-
sentatives of its own choosing with
out interference from any source"
Favors No One Union.
President Roosevelt is public
statement on March 25, 1884, after a
threatened strike in the automobile
industry, had been averted. said:
'The Government makes it clear
that it favors no particular union or
form Of union or particular form Of
employe organization or representa-
tion. The Governments only duty is
to secure absolute and uninfluenced
freedom of choice without coercion,
restraint, or intimidation from any
source"
Thus Mr.. Roosevelt himself first
used the famous phrase without
coercion from any source" which is
even stronger than without inter-
ference from any source"
In any event, Mr. Roosevelt did not
consider the interference OF only one
side, namely the employers, but took
into account the actualities Of mod
ern labor disputes wherein warning
factions of employees coerce or inter-
fere with one another while the en-
ployers often have no part in the
strife.
Such a situation exists in many an
industry where shop unions occur.
These organizations of employees
elect their own representatives for
collective bargaining, but they have
no affiliation with outside unions in
other companies or plants. A So
called national union will send its
membership advocates to plant and
secure nucleus Of members. These
members will begin missionary work
inside the plant to get more members.
Finally, when a substantial number
of members has been attained, not
necessarily majority, strike will
be threatened and demands will be
presented.
Employer Capitulates.
If the employer capitulates because
he does not want an interruption of
production at a busy time, the move
is promptly interpreted as the result
of the superior bargaining skill of
the group or faction which success
fully presented It's demands. If
strike does occur the minority put
out their pickets and begin to inter-
fere with those workers who insist
on working. The pickets and often
strong arm men watch the workers as
they go to and from plant, call them
''scabs" and often visit their home
neighborhoods to continue this form
OF intimidation.
These tactics are not unusual and
are part Of the membership drives
of national unions. To protect the
worker in his right to work, employ
ers have insisted that the collective
bargaining laws should be worded so
as to prevent coercion from any
source
The answer to this usually made is
that such wording will be used to get
court injunctionS against labor un-
ions. The labor viewpoint is that the
common law protects the working man
and that he therefore needs no pro-
lection specifically in the statute
against the tactics of overzealous fel-
low employees. If that be true, then
the mention of employers is equally
unnecessary. Certainly if the law is
ever tested in the Supreme Court Of
the United States this inequality of
protection may be factor in invali-
dating the national labor relations act,
which contains almost the exact
phraseology Of the New Deal platform
plank on this point.
There is no authority in the Fed
eral Government to regulate employer
and employe relations, according to
many decisions of the Supreme Court
of the United States, but a legislative
declaration in favor of collective bar
gaining has in itself no objection and
has merit as forwarding the cause of
democracy in the ranks Of labor.
Plank Direct Reversal.
The New Deal plank is a direct re-
versal of the position taken by Mr.
Roosevelt, not only in his public state
ment of March, 1894, but Of the pro-
visions of the automobile code which
he promulgated on August 26, 1888, as
part of the national industrial re-
covery act. That code said:
Employees shall be free from inter-
ference, restraint or coercion of en-
ployers Of labor or their agents in the
designation Of such representatives or
in other concerted activities for the
purpose of collective bargaining"
At that time, and in connection
with the code. Donald Richberg, gen.
eral counsel for the N. r. A., issued a
statement as follows:
"The recovery act and its admin
istrators do not contemplate that any
particular labor organization should
be enthroned by Government fiat or
by Government aid and invested with
power to control destinies of any in
dustry or all industries. The guiding
principle is written in the statute that
employees shall have the right to or
ganize or bargain collectively through
representatives of their own choos-
ing"
Now it is claimed by national labor
union spokesmen that the shop, or
plant, unions are often creatures of the
employer and that officers are paid
out of company funds. Doubtless in
some cases this is true, but there are
other cases wherein the men in q shop