Evening star., 1938-10-12

Lewis type And, second, Mr.. Lewis
says he will resign if Mr.. Green will.
This idea of mutual resignation. OF
course, is meaningless, because when
Mr.. Lewis steps out of the chairman
ship of the C. I. o. he still remains
president of the United Mine Workers
of America, which is the most power
full unit inside the c. I. o. and domi-
mates its policies.
As for Mr.. Green, if he stepped out
the men behind him are just as vehe-
ment in their opposition to the G. l. Q.
as he Is, so nothing in particular is
gained by the shift in personnel.
What might be introduced into the
controversy, somewhat meekly, to be
sure. is the suggestion that maybe
neither Mr.. Lewis nor Mr.. Green rep
resent truly the public interest in the
matter of labor power in America. 1t
might be timidly advanced that when
two organizations can be built up
which involve such concentration OF
economic power, possibly it's fit sub
ject for inquiry by the new congress
sional committee which is supposed to
. look into all manner of activity by
those who WELD concentrated power.
Up to the Workers.
Whether Americas unions should be
Of the craft or industrial type or
combination of both is something
which the workers themselves now
have right to decide for themselves,
but when two huge monopolies of the
workers organizations undertake to
carry on war which leads to strikes
and jurisdictional squabbles that i'm
pair, If they do not interrupt, produc-
ton, then something is bound to come
out of public authority to restrain
such unlimited power.
The A. F. of L. group maintain that
theirs is a democratic organization in
which the various constituent locals
and national organizations have real
voice in the affairs Of the organization
as a whole, whereas the c. l. o. still
has to draw up a constitution which
will give the member organizations
local autonomy. Maybe here in the
struggle are some ingredients Of the
Fascist versus Democratic idea, for GER
tainly there is a good deal thus far in
the c. I. o. which savors of one-man
control.
Contention of C. 1. o. I
The c. l. O., on the other hand, has
through its member organizations
adopted a much more radical and
aggressive course toward workers prob
lens and the increase in c. I. o.
membership could not have been at
tained unless many workers found
advantages which they did not enjoy
before under A. F. of L. rule.
1t has been said in objective mo-
ments by labor leaders that there is a
way by which the respective c. I. O..
and A. F. of L. concepts can be recon-
ciled in a peace formula, but that
the politics of labor prevents. This is
to say that distribution of the offices
at the top and near the top and the
power over locals has much to do
with the prolongation of the war be-
tween c. I. O. and A. F. of L.
Looked at from the employer view
point opinions differ. Some think the
friction is a break for them because in
disunion there is an advantage.
Others think the friction prevents
a well-co-ordinated labor movement
with discipline and experienced labor
leadership, and that employers lose
through the loss of time and money
in Interruptions to production and
through narrowing negotiations and
near-strikes.
Certainly so far as Congress and the
executive branch Of the Government
are concerned, labor legislation and
the operations of labor tribunals would
be simplified If there were labor peace
instead of war.
(Copyright, 1889