Montana labor news., 1936-05-21
The Labor Relations Act In
The Courts

The (Wagner) National Labor Relations Act
is Justly regarded as a forward step in the legal
recognition of labors' right to organize and to
demand recognition and collective bargaining
from employers. The act was designed to help
create an equal balance between employers and
EMPLOYEES, to offset the excessive concentra-
ton of power and wealth in the hands of en-
ployers. To equalize the position between EN-
ployer and employee, the act establishes the
right Of employees to organize into unions -ot
their own choosing in order to prevent econo-
mic exploitation at the hands Of those who own
the machinery of production.
Under our form of government, Congress had
power to regulate interstate, but not interstate
commerce. 1t is recognized that modern in
dustry is so complex and ramified, that a dis
ruption in industry may directly effect the flow
Of interstate commerce. On that basis, Con-
gress has stated that in order to preserve the
free flow of interstate commerce, employers are
prohibited from engaging in certain practices
which provoke strikes and industrial unrest.
The act specifically declares that an employer
is guilty of an unfair labor practice if he in
t%erferes with the right of workers to organize
and to bargain collectively through their repres-
entatives; or if he in any way sponsors a COM
pany union; or if he in any way discourages un-
ion membership in a bona fide labor union; or if
he discharges or discriminates against an en-
ployee because the employee has filed charges
or testified in a proceeding under the act; or if
he refuses to bargain collectively with the re-
representatives. of his employees. 1t can be seen
that insofar as an employer can be said to be
o.-c~oJ -, o+a~r+o+a r,,,a he ar101Ovaac
must be guaranteed complete freedom of or
ganization and collective bargaining, a sacred
right which the united forces of organized la
Dor must fight to preserve.
In case of any doubt as to the representatives,
means are provided for impartial elections in the
appropriate factory units. The principle of ma
jority rule is now the law of the land. In the
event that an employer is found guilty of one
of the above unfair labor practices and refuses
to obey the decision of the Board, the Federal
courts are empowered to issue an appropriate
legal and enforceable order.
The role OF the courts in labor disputes is too
we'll known to require extended discussion. The
latest example of judicial sabotage comes from
Judge John P. Barnes Of the United States Dis
trict Court for Northern Illinois. Judge Barn
es, in common with many other judges who
look with disfavor upon any change in status
quo, has held the entire Labor Disputes Act un-
constitutional. Judge Barnes, in common with
so many of his fellow-members Of the judiciary,
has acted true to form. This decision is anoth-
er example of the continuous throttling of social
legislation by our %jurists.
The decision takes the form of an injunction
against the Regional and National Labor Re
lations boards and was granted at the request
of the Bendix Products Company. 1t restraints
the board from conducting an election among
the $500 employees Of the company to determ-
inc whether the workers shall be represented by
Local 9 of the United Auto Workers of Ameri-
ca or by the Bendix Employees Association, a
company union. The decision states that the
principal Of majority rule interferes with free
dom of contract and that Compulsory u%nilater-
al bargaining" will result in CLOSED shops"
The court refused to consider the Texas and
New Orleans case applicable. This latter case
is one in which the United States Supreme Court
held the Railway Labor Act, which contains sim
liar provisions, constitutional.
In other words, it is quite obvious that what
we have here is another example of the opera
ton of the marchinery of a judicial property
protecting oligarchy. American workers will
bitterly resent this judicial economic Dictator
ship, of which this decision is an example. In
further articles other examples of labors' fate in
the courts will be discussed.
An enlightened labor opinion must inevitably
demand a full degree Of protection against judi
cial dictatorship and will demand that social leg
~islation be protected from judicial sabotage.