Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1936-12-21

4llsy tlIdt tklOoS CSOiiobhS weapons "a
necessary in order to get better wages
and working conditions.
Significance Deep.
On the surface, 1t would appear
that there must be much in the union
argument. Why, 1t Is asked. do not
the manufacturers recognize the
unions and be done with it? After
all. it is contended, collective bar
gaining Is here to stay. the principle
is even recognized by Federal statute
and the trend of the times Is toward
unionization anyhow.
But the proposition is not as easily
disposed Of by such a naturalization
of the issues. These 60 far deeper
and involve something more than the
question of who shall represent the
workmen in their negotiations with
employers.
The paramount issue is whether
management must surrender a part
of its control without getting in re-
turn q corresponding sense Of respon-
sibility If the labor unions just want
recognition, they can get 1t tomorrow
from almost all of the so-called nom
union industries in the country, in
Guiding steel.
Responsibility Is Key.
The executives Of such businesses
are not stubbornly trying to inter-
fere with the making of their own
profits just for the doubtful pleasure
of refusing the men an abstract right
or privilege. Certainly the economic
loss suffered by tie-up Of an indus
try is much more ruinous to the man.
agement and stockholders than 1t is
to the workmen. especially since the
Federal Government now finances
strikers when they get to the end Of
their strike-fund resources.
Why then do not the industrialists
yield? They would in minute If
the labor unions would agree to ac-
cept corporate responsibility so that
the leaders would be responsible and
the unions would be responsible for
the contracts and the activities which
they carry on.
The usual answer to this made by
the labor leaders is that they can
always be prosecuted under the COM
mon law and that incorporation Of
labor unions Is not needed.
The truth Is labor has such po-
litical influence and control these
days that local prosecuting attorneys
and even the Federal attorneys do
not. except under the pressure Of an
outraged public opinion, or in ex-
IRENE cases only, attempt to prose-
cute labor unions or their leaders.
The statutes and laws are there, but
criminal proceedings are seldom be-
gun. It is the possibility Of COL
lecting civil damages that would in
troduce real responsibility for labor's
acts.
Relations Often Pleasant.
Union labor, in many instances,
gets along splendidly with employers.
Thus, many of the American Fedora
ton Of Labor unions enjoy the finest
kind Of relations with their employers
and there is among them the great
est fidelity to the observance of con-
tracts.
But the intersection Of the John
Lewis idea of labor warfare, whereby
q whole industry Is to be put at the
mercy of single leader of labor,
means a virtual monopoly over the
lives Of the workmen.
Since public opinion has been un-
willing to allow captains of industry
to maintain monopolies. 1t might be
assumed that public opinion would
not tolerate monopolist practice on
the part Of labor leaders either. But
labor has had enough influence at
Washington and in various State gov
ernments for three decades past to
secure the passage Of laws specifically
exempting labor unions from the
operations Of antitrust or monopoly
statutes.
In Great Britain, no such analogous
exemptions exist. Labor unions are
responsible to public control, espe-
cially as to what they do with their
finances. Likewise, general strike
or q strike in sympathy may be de-
clared unlawful. It Is clear that the
strikes now being undertaken in the
auto industry with the purpose Of
tying up the larger units of produce
ton would be clearly held unlawful
under the British labor disputes act.
Public Opinion Quiet.
America, OF course, has no such
restriction. and. like the experience
in Great Britain, there win be none
till the public realizes the extent q
the economic damage which Is being
permitted to q small group OF labor
leaders in the name Of collective
bargaining"
Public opinion viii be aroused some
day when the full implications Of
what Is happening comes clearly into
view. Thus. John Lewis has achieved
o virtual monopoly in the coal fields.
He dictates wages and hours and that
means he dictates prices. He has
the cost Of coal up to such q point
now that substitutes come into COM
petition. Likewise, steel companies
that own their own coal mines must
be got under MIR. LAWS control or
he cannot manage to keep selling