Montana labor news., 1937-12-16

passed for that purpose and shows
much promise of preventing a con
siderable number of such conflicts.
To do this, it has placed mild re-
straints upon employers. Labor
should be vigilant that this fact
should not be used as a pretext for
adding to the already heavy legal
burdens of labor.
Criticism of the Board
I should, perhaps, advert to the
criticism which some officers and
members of your body have directed
at the board. Most of it has been
related to the present division in
the main current of the labor move
ment. That division, the reasons
for it, the merits of the two sides Of
the controversy, are none of our
affair. The division has added some
what to the volume of our work, and
enormously to the difficulty of it.
Situations in which the meaning and
purpose of the law are plain and the
application of it would, in a calm
atmosphere, be easy, become in the
minds of the contestants confused
with hot emotions, and victory over
the adversary is demanded, regard
less of the law and regardless of the
facts.
Some of the hottest controversies
have been fought over the applica-
ton, by the board and its agents, of
Section 8, Subsection 1 of the act,
which reads as follows:
"It shall be unfair labor practice
for an employer
cd To interfere with, restrain, or
coerce employees in the exercise of
the rights guaranteed in section T."
Section 7 says:
Employees shall have the right
to self-organizations to form, join,
or assist labor organizations, to bar
gain collectively through represent
atives of their own choosing = = = ="
The meaning of these provisions
is plain beyond question. They do
not say and they do not mean that
it shall be an unfair labor practice
for an employer to coerce his en-
ployees to join a union unless he
coerces them to join an American
Federation of Labor Union. They
do not say and they do not mean
that it shall be an unfair labor prac-
tice for an employer to coerce his
employees to join a union unless he
shall coerce them to join a Com
mittee for Industrial Organization
union. They say that it shall be an
unfair labor practice for an employ
er to coerce his employees to join
any union. The only exception to
this which the statute t~olerates is
the coercion which results from a
valid closed shop agreement entered
into by an employer with the repre-
sentatives of a majority Of his en-
ployees.
With the division in the labor
movement and with competition be-
tween the A. F. of L. and the C. I. o.
for the right to represent the work
ers in the same plant, the employer,
not unnaturally, may have a prefer
ence for one of the competing I'M
ions. The law forbids him to give
effect to that preference by ~coercing
his employees to join the preferred
union or not to join the other union.
This meaning of coercion has been
made plain by the board in numer-
GUS decisions which antedate the
current division in the labor move
ment. 1t was then common practice
for employers to compel membership
in unions limited to their own en-
ployees, and thus destroy the posi-
bility of growth of unions affiliated
with your Federation. Whenever
this happened to you you complained
to us and we compelled the employ
er to stop this practice. Yet we had