Evening star., 1937-03-23

any other cir
cumStance of our times.
One of the principal reasons why
labor warfare has been going on for
generations in America without tangi-
BILE progress is that the disputes have
been really examined by only rela-
lively small number of persons and
even when a strike in a particular
industry has been called the issues
usually have been so technical as to
deprive the general public of any acute
interest in the merits of the conflict.
Today the "sit-down" strike is ad-
mittedly an extreme measure, but it
may also be recognized that men do
not go to extremes in such large num-
berS unless one of two things is pres
ent: Either men are doClle and easily
forced by leaders and agitatorS into
acts of illegality or there is something
substantial and primary about their
craving for betterment which has been
too much ignored.
1t is an old rule in labor warfare
that once the pubic-the party of the
third part-really gets interested in a
strike the ending of such a strike in
short order may be foreseen.
Public May Act.
Thus with reference to the "Sit-
down" strikes, the public is deeply
interested and will demand a solution.
Because the public is human, no prog
reSs toward bringing employers and
employees together can be made till
l,o+
are human and until workers recog-
nize that all employers have respon-
sibility to pay wages to the capital
thev hire as well as the Workmen they
employ.
If these basic principles are granted,
start can be made. Many employers
today allow their passions and their
tempers to get the best of them. They
regard a union organizer as a nuisance
and a spokesman for their employees
as an upstart if he speaks emphati
cally, firmly, insistently.
Workmen have a right to talk to
employers through spokeSmen Of their
own choosing This has always been
conceded as an ethical right but not
always legal right. Fifteen years
ago this correspondent argued with
railroad president that a workman
had right to employ a spokesman
from the ranks of labor outside the
plant in which he was working just
as an employer had the right TO hire
any attorney to represent him in nego-
tiating with a union.
Right Becomes a Law.
Today collective bargaining is a
part Of statutory law. The Supreme
Court may rule the Wagner act I'M
constitutional because its provisions
are poorly drawn and capriciouSly ap-
piled, but it never will deny the right
of any workman or group of worAmen
to be represented by spokesman of
his or their own choosing.
But collective bargaining is still
phrase and not a practice. How shall
representatives of the Workmen be
chosen? Shall coercion be permitted
whereby employers prevent workmen
from picking their own agents and
shall coercion be allowed wherein
workmen intimidate their fellow en-
ployeS unless they vote for the same
spokesmen? This is q fundamental
question of how labor shall govern
itself.
The state today declares how stock
holders shall be governed. The char
ter and bylaws of corporations spe-
city the means of holding elections
and allow certain redress in courts if
rights are in any way impaired.
There may be reasons why labor
unions would object to the acceptance
of the status of corporations, BIT there
can be no valid reason why they
should object to the setting up of i'm
partial tribunals of Federal and State
governments to insure the holdings
Of free and uncoerced elections.
Monopoly Defeats Goal.
But how, it will be asked, does this
dispose of the all-important question
of the CLOSED shop or the demand
by majority of the employees that
they become the exclusive or sole bar
gaining agency? Any demand which
seeks monopoly for one organization
as against another and any system
which grants it defeats the purpose of
a democratic choice of agents for
Workmen. The existence of two sets
or even three sets of spokesmen in any
plant is not detrimental but helpful
TO the employees, but it has to be ac-
conpanied by law against dlScrlml-
nation such as business must obey, a
law which states that no employer
can discriminate as between two or
three sets of Spokesmen of employees.
This is nothing but the principle OF
non-discrimination and fair play and
Is being written into the statutes in
distribution businesses today. If it
were applied to collective bargaining
negotiations the need for exclusive
representation would disappear.
But the most imperative need is a
statute which makes it unlawful for
any spokesman of labor to conspire
to persuade members to terminate a
contract without first submitting the
issues In dispute to q tribunal organ
lied In advance to receive and resolve
such disputes within a definite time
limit The right to strike has been
limited in England and it has been
limited in the United States, as, for
instance, in the railroad mediation
act.
While General Motors, for instance,
has signed a contract and the labor
leaders have testified that the con-
tract has been maintained, lots Of
small "sit-doWn" strikes have been
started in the Genral Motors plants
just the same. It is true they are
unauthorized and labor leaders de-
plore them, but no penalty is incurred
by these who arbitrarily use the
strike weapon in defiance of contracts.
Some way to insure employers
against sudden extortion has to be
devised and only in the statutes can
such safeguards be written, especially