The times-news. [volume] (Hendersonville, N.C.) 1927-current, 1938-06-23

Southern opponents OF the pili "oh iHsN'-'.
all points, which caused cries by advocates 1ioi
Northern States that the South is still IN the sau
die 1t is difficult to sustain this OPINION ny
literal reading of the statute, and lnipossioe "
sustain it by commonsense interpretation ~ I m
manner in which it will doubtless be poiit'eany
administered
at is true that the original House bill lncluaeu
no provisions for wage differentials, ana IL IS aiSo
true that the persistent protests OF southern eo"
ferees caused the compromise bill to provide Una.
an industry committee and the administrator Shaii
consider competitive conditions as atectea ny
transportation, living and production costs III ue
termining minimum wage standards. But tne Id"
is nevertheless perfectly clear in its provision that
no classification shall be made, and no MINIMUM
wage rate shall be fixed, solely on regional oasis
More significant than the precise terms OF the pl'
however, is the wide latitude permitted the Fedefai
bureau in its administration of the law, and there
is no justification to believe that the South, over
whelmed in political influence by the numerical
and financial domination of the North, will SUDDEN
ly be accorded an economic equality under thls
law when cit has been perennally deprived OF 1t
under other laws like the protective tariff
"Even if We presume that the labor standards
bureau will ignore the prohibition against regional
differentials and permit lower mnima in the South
because of competitive conditions as affected by
transportation, living, and production COSTS there
is no reason to hope that these differentals VIII
be economically equitable and just. The average
wages in the manufacturing industries OF the
Southern States in 1885 only SO per cent OF
the average wages in the manufacturing industries
of New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan
This was the differential determined by the opera
ton of normal and unfettered economic forces
and no one can be sangune as to believe tnas
a political bureau in Washington will hereafter
permit wages in the South to be only slightly more
than half those in the manufacturing States OF the
North No matter whether regional ditferentlals
are created not the law cannot fail to crush
the industrial development of the South. what
has the South won in the enactment OF TINS Dill
Nothing demonstrates the political motives be-
hind the enactment of this law clearly as Its list
of exemptions from compliance with it. All those
employed in executive administrative, professional
or local retailing capacities are exempted Ali en-
ployes engaged in any retail service establishment
are exempted. All farmers, seamen, fishermen,
dairymen, streetcar motormen, ETC., are exempted
In fact, virtually everybody except the manufac-
turing worker is exempted. The question is, why
Why must the manufacturing worker in a small
and the plight of an empoye in large chain gro
Gerry store or laundry across the street be com
pletely ignored? Why must employer be forced
to raise wages and shorten hours and another be
exempted from the obligation to do so, simply be-
cause thew happen to be in different kinds of bust
ness and regardless of the fact that the latter
might be ruthlessly exploiting his labor and the
former might be doing nothing of the kind!
Advocates of the law may respond readily to
these questions that the difference is the partclpa-
ton in interstate commerce, that the manufactur-
ing concern engages in interstate commerce and
that the retail establishment does not, and that
Congress can thus regulate the former and not
the latter But is this true? If the various retail
establishments exempted in the law could not pos
sbly come within the provisions of the law, why
was it necessary specifically to exempt them? Them
too: why were those retail establishments which do
engage in interstate commerce specifically exempt
ed in the law? The statute exempts amy employe
engaged in any retail service establishment the
greater part of whose selling servicng is IN IN
trastate commerce. Thus large retail establish
ment may do substantial business across State
lines and not be affected by the law, while small
manufacturing industry may not transport single
item of goods across State line without fully COM
plying with all of its provisions.
eve have no complaint, of course against the
exemptions in the bill The more that are exempt
ed, the better the bill is; and if everybody had
been exempted and there were no bill at all, that
would be better STILL But it is impossible to study
the exemption clause without realizing that those
most interested in the passage of this measure
were not at all concerned With the humanitarian
purpose of protecting American labor, because the
law frankly protects some laborers and ignores
Others regardless of the extent to which their firms
participate in interstate commerce. The bill was
ranrodded by labor leaders and Northern pohtl-
clans, and the ends of both were served: the po-
liticai demagoguery of the unions was strength
ened and Northern industry was shielded from falr
and effective competition in the South
"Other political and economic iniquities in the
law too numerous to explain here, but few
might be mentioned in conclusion. The bill pro-
jects the protective tariff principle into interstate
commerce. and will lead to subtle erection of trade
barriers between the States in conravention OF the
Constitution and to the smuggling of contrapana
goods across State lines 1t will produce mlgra-