Evening star., 1939-11-28
Sidney Katz Differs
With Star Editorials.
To the Editor Of The Star:

To the Editor Of The Star:
Your editorials in The Evening Star,
Novemt.r 10 and November %, entitled
Charity Checkoff" and Executive Con-
citation" draw conclusions about the
collective bargaining agreement between
the c. l. o. Cafeteria and Office Workers
Unions and the Welfare and Recreation
Association which are based on only
partial statement of facts.
BY mysterious twist of reasoning you
conjure up "a semi-governmental agency"
out of an association whose trustees
happen to be Government officials The
implication you try to convey is that
this cafeteria chain has in reality some
kind of governmental status.
If group of men who happen to work
for the Government get a concession
from the Government to conduct a
lunchroom business in Yellowstone Park,
that enterprise would be no more
semi governmental agency that these
cafeterias. The Welfare and Recreation
Association is private corporation. The
contract it has entered into with the
Federal Government does not change it's
private status any more than that of the
Bethlehem Steel, which contracts to sup
ply battleships to the United States Navy
Your editorials express concern about
employees being "coerced" into joining
the c. l. o. union as result of the
checkof. Star readers should in all fair
ness have the following facts at their
disposal:
AS result of an election in which the
c. I. o. received SAL votes, with about
100 cast against it, the union was certi-
fled as collective bargaining agent for all
employees in that establishment.
All the cafeteria workers whose dues
are checked off, in secret ballot signed a
card authorizing such deduction Instead
of requiring union membership of all
employees, the contract this year, as well
as last year, gives an out to those who
wish it by permitting them to elect the
seduction to the Community Chest.
In the course of the negotiations, the
union offered several alternatives which
did not contain the checkoff. To cite
one example, the union proposed that
the wage increases and other provisions
favorable to the workers accrue only to
union members. This, along with other
proposals, was rejected, despite the fact
that before the first union contract there
did exist the greatest wage differences
for men doing the same work at the
same place.
To make the dollar month deduction
only from union members would be
grossly unfair. The contract established
new and splendid conditions of employ
ment-higher wages, paid holidays, vaca-
tions and arbitration procedures-none
of which existed heretofore. Unfortu-
nately there are human beings graceless
enough who, in the face of the most
obvious advantages union can win for
them, will accept everything and yet
refuse to share in the responsibility of
maintaining that union.
It is good thing to believe, as do,
that the human race has a relatively
small number of such persons, and their
lluA1OC1 Will OWlLlulc DIS dIlGl-ulllOIl prop.
aganda decreases.
Your editorials imply that you would
have been more pleased with strike of
the 700 cafeteria workers than a peace
full settlement. Would that have been
more in the interest of the TOO cafeteria
workers, the Government employees and
the general public? The union receded