Montana labor news., 1937-12-16
ADVERTISING IN LABOR PRESS
HELD NOT VIOLATING WAGNER ACT

Opinion Submitted to Inter
national Labor News Service
by Attorney Taft, Expert ON
National Labor Relations Law.
Pernicious propaganda to cripple
the labor press was given a body
blow here in a legal opinion rendered
for the benefit of international Labor
News Service and papers using
ILNS.
Action was taken by international
Labor News Service on the basis of
a report published in News & Opin-
ion, the official organ of the Building
Trades Employers Association of
New York. The employers publica-
ton urged, in guarded and carefully
constructed language, that employers
are running the risk of violating the
National Labor Relations Act if they
advertise in labor newspapers. In
ternational Labor News Service
points out that this is but another in
a long series Of such suggestions cal
culated to damage the labor press
Of the nation and clear the road of
this strong arm of the labor move
ment.
In order to bring the matter to a
head definitely, Chester M. Wright,
editor of International Labor News
Service, submitted the whole ques-
ton to Patrick J. Taft, counsel for
Chester M. Wright and Associates,
and an expert on the National Labor
Relations Act. Attorney Taft sub
mitted to International Labor News
Service a written opinion which is
here quoted in full:
Dear Mr.. Wright:
Il have your letter Of the Bird, re-
questing an opinion in the matter of
employers buying advertising space
in labor publications, and the news
item from the employer publication,
to which you invited my attention,
containing the statement that Section
8 ~, of the Wagner Act providing,
1t shall be an unfair labor practice
for an employer to dominate or in
terfere with the formation or adj
ministration of any labor organiza-
ton, or to contribute financial or
other support to it, renders an en-
ployer who buys space in a labor
publication guilty of violating the
Act.
'"That statement might be excused
on the ground of an amazing inabil-
ity to read and understand simple
English, until n considers its
source. Clearly, the statement is in
tended to furnish employers a lame
excuse for refusing to buy bona fide
services offered by labor publies-
tions, and thus throttle the news
disseminating agencies Of labor.
Il have no hesitancy in stating it
as my opinion that neither the Ian
guage of the provisions of Section 8
(2) of the Wagner Act, or any other
of its provisions, separately or in
combination, may be construed or in
terpreted to prohibit an employer
purchasing any service of any enter
prise conducted by a labor union, adj
vertising or otherwise, and that the
Congress did not intend it that the
Act should contemplate such a pro-
hibition.
Furthermore, a reading of the
language of Section 8 ~ should be
sufficient to settle it that the Con-
gress specifically intended to relate
financial or other support to the
question of whether an employer in
financially contributing to a labor
organization did so for the purpose of
attempting to dominate or control its
formation Or administration. To read
the words or to contribute financial
or other support to it as non-con-
~junctive to the entire sentence max
ing up the provision of Section 8 ~
is to read words with no meaning as
a prohibition established against en-
ployers.
"Bona-fide purchases of serv-
ices offered by enterprises con-
Quoted by labor unions are not,