The potters herald. [volume] (East Liverpool, Ohio) 1899-1982, 1939-05-04

his union. In recent decision (Finch
case) the Board went SO far as to hold
that carpenter who had voted for
his A. F. of l.. union could not refuse
to be represented by c. l. O. liquor
distillery workers organization. Every
one knows that in this country there
are countless plants where single A.
F. of l.. craftsmen, such as stationary
engineers, electricians, carpenters and
the like, are employed.
This holding of the Board not only
denies the A. F. of L. worker the
right to be represented by his union,
but also forces him to be represented
by "group known to be hostile" to
his interests.
Moreover, without invoking the ma
jority rule, an individual craftsman in
such a case can be forced to abandon
his membership in the union with
which he has been affiliated for years
and be compelled to surrender any in
surance benefits he has, by closed
shop contract entered into by the COM
pany and the union which has been
forced upon him. Chairman Madden
vigorously dissented in this case.
Obviously the majority decision is
devised and intended to permit rival
and dual unions to invade craft fields
which they are otherwise unable to do.
Boards Assumed Discretion to Pre-
scribe lndustry-Wide Bargaining Unit
Threatens to Destroy AFL Unions
Finally the Board has in one case
established a precedent by which it
can destroy existing A. f. of l.. unions,
prevent effective unionization in the
future and eliminate the A. +. of l..
from entire industries.
In the Longshoremen's case, the
Board ruled that all Longshore en-
ployes of all employers on the Pacific
Coast constituted the bargaining unit
AS result of that decision many A.
F. of l.. locals, some having almost
100 per cent membership in entire
cities, were denied the right to be bar
gained for by the A. F. of l.. and COM
PEELED to be represented by the c. |
o. 1t is impossible to fully describe
the viciousness of that decision.
The very Board that justifies many
of it's actions on the theory that ii
wishes to preserve the right of free
choice to employees has, by that de-
cision, imposed it's will on thousands
of A. F. of l.. employees, through this
device of "industry wide" units. More
reprehensible is the adroitness witt
which the Board conjures up reasons
for denying or granting the applica
ton of the rule in other cases.
Our amendments effectively elimin
ate a repetition or extension of the
kind of decision we have discussed
Under them craft units will be pro
tected However, the workers in {
: craft can still be represented by what
ever union they wish, be it industrial
or craft.
The amendments prevent repeti
tion of the Boards arbitrary and de
structive Longshoremen's decision. The
Board will no longer be able to sub
: stitute its chosen representative TO
the one chosen by the employees.
The A. F. of l.. recognizes that il
many instances it is desirable to bar
gain on an industry-wide basis. In
deed such industry-wide bargaining
!. when it is done on voluntary basis
is encouraged. We welcome that typ
!, of bargaining but insist that it b
done voluntarily and in a spirit of co
operation and not by compulsion. Th
y amendments permit voluntary indus
! try-wide bargaining.