Evening star., 1937-05-25
THE POLITICAL
MILL
BY G.. GOULD LINCOLN,

HAAAeAAAAAAA Wo8Co 0AA AAdAAluulll
legislation for labor has brought to an
issue IN concrete form one of the most
important parts Of his program. At one
time administration leaders were putting
forward the idea that labor legislation
and the Presidents recommendations
therefore would be held up until after
the Presidents bill for the reorganization
OF the Supreme Court had gone through
Congress. If this was the Presidents
idea, he seems to have changed it. Ger
tainly it now appears that the Congress
Is not to wait on the court bill before
tackling the labor program. In the first
place, the court bill may be delayed a
long time and 1t is very doubtful that
1t will ever be enacted into law in the
form originally asked by the President.
In the second place, labor is naturally
anxious that its legislative detectives
shall not be indefinitely postponed.
The Presidents proposals for labor
legislation are in line with his cam
paign pledges. The suggestion has been
advanced in some quarters that they
could not be enacted into law and main
tanned without the infusion of new
blood into the Supreme Court. that
1t was necessary to get court that
VoaAA AlACVAPICC Vic CONSTITUTION more
literally. The alternative was a con-
stitutional amendment, and the Presi-
dent has opposed that.
The labor situation in this country
has been greatly clarified by the Su-
preme Courts decision upholding the
Wagner labor relations act There is
still great deal to be done to bring
about smooth-running operation of
that law. Those are details, though
important details. The concrete gain,
as labor regards 1t, lies in the final
legalization Of the principle Of collective
bargaining. Collective bargaining is not
new. 1t has been going on for years
in this and other countries But law
compelling employers to deal with their
employees collectively makes a very diff
ferent situation. The employers are
criticizing the Wagner act They insist
that the law gives all the advantage
to the workers.
So far there has been no agitation in
Congress and no bills have been intro
duced to place greater responsibility
upon the labor union. Yet such laws
must necessarily be corollary to those
which give the unions great power. In
England, where the struggle of labor for
better working conditions, better wages
and the right Of collective bargaining has
gone on for centuries, laws have been
enacted which place great responsibility
upon the unions and their leaders.
AS labor has progressed into its pres
ent strong position the feeling has grown
among the friends of labor and among
some OF its leaders that labor unions
must assume responsibility for discipline
among their members, for the sacredness
OF contract, for the efficiency OF produc-
ton and the elimination OF waste. Labor
has been given the right to organize and
now it has been, given the right to bar
gain through representatives of its own
choosing on wages, hours and working
conditions. 1t has been contended that
labor unions should be incorporated,
and as such held responsible for con-
tracts and for any damage done to prop
erty or to life when there is industrial
conflict. Labor unions have for years re-
sisted the idea of incorporation.
In England q trade union is neither
. corporation nor an individual, nor a
partnership between individuals 1t is
a voluntary association of individuals
almost invariably owing its legal validity
to the trade union acts, which have
bestowed on 1t capacity to own property
and to act by agents. These are ad-
mittedly essential qualities OF q corpora
ton. They constitute a trade union as
species OF quasi-corporations. The
trade union acts in England create
statutory legal agencies with registration
Of their members. Annual reports to
governmental agency. showing receipts
and disbursements. are matter OF law.
The history of trade union legaliza-
tion In England before 1927 was a
history of liberation for the trade unions.
The same. in measure, may be said
OF the history Of labor legislation in
the United States. In 1926 England
experienced national or general strike.
In this strike the government was chal-
lenged by the unions. 1t was the largest
strike ever waged in British history,
starting with a controversy between the
miners federation. their employers and
the government. The strike was finally
broken by the firmness of the govern
ment and the rising Of the people them
selves.
There followed in 1927 the enactment
Of the trade disputes and trade unions
act. The British people had definitely
determined not to 60 through another
general strike. This act made vital
changes in the earlier trade union laws.
It provides that sympathetic strike
action, whether on national or local
scale, If designed or calculated to coerce
the government, either directly or by
inflicting hardship upon the community,
is illegal, provided 1t is not within the
trade or industry in which the original
dispute arose. Lockouts are also similarly
illegal. Criminal liability is imposed on
union officials who take part in any
way in = strike which is made illegal by
the act. The act takes away the statu-
tory rights Of labor unions to use their
funds for political purposes. Civil serv-
ants are prohibited from joining q
trade union which Is not confined to
employees of the crown or which has
political objects or which IS af1liated
with any outside industrial or political
organization, meaning the Trade Union
Congress or the Labor party.
In this country we have never had
general strike or strike of the proper
tions of the 1926 strike in England. It
may be we will have to go through
such an experience before the demand
for legislation to make labor unions re-
sponsible becomes sufficiently strong to
insure enactment Or 1t may be that
given proper leadership labor will itself