Evening star., 1939-11-06

Government board in Washington
may be imposed upon them to tell
them what they can do.
Twenty years ago, the employees of
the Western Union Telegraph Co.
formed a union. The labor board
says it is company union in the
sense that the employer is alleged
to dominate it or help finance it.
The law prohibits that type of COM
pany union, but does not forbid
a union of employees wholly inde-
pendent of the employer as well as
of national unions. The only re-
quirement is that the employer shall
not interfere with the freedom of
choice by the employees.
Then there arises minority
group of employees who want to
form another union, usually to be
affiliated or integrated with the A.
F. of L. or the c. I. o. The first
line of attack is to break down the
independent union. The Wagner
labor law furnishes a ready weapon.
If proof can be offered that the in
dependent union at one time-per-
haps as far back as 20 years ago,
long before the law was passed
was formed with the aid of the en-
ployer. it becomes tainted in the
eyes of the labor board and is or
dered to be "disestablished."
Dues Ordered Refunded.
For three years now, the labor
board has been ordering company
unions" in various businesses to be
just decided, the board has ordered
the employer to refund all the dues
collected on behalf of the inGepend-
ent union through the company S
deductions from pay roll each week
since 1885. No consideration IS given
to the fact that the money may have
been legitlmately spent for the car
rying on of the independent unions
affairs. The workers have nothing
to say about the labor board order
and thus a relationship which grew
up long before the Wagner act was
passed is now held to be unlawful.
The penalty or remedy in this
instance need not have been the one
selected by the labor board. 1t
could have selected another means
Of accomplishing the same end.
That it had the right to impose a
penalty of its own selection is con-
ceded because the Congress gave
broad discretionary powers to the
board to fix almost any economic
punishment it pleases, subject to
court review. But Congress also
has the right to amend the labor
law and state specifically just what
the penalties are to be.
In this and other instances, the
question will arise why the labor
board did not merely put the mat
ter up to the workers by a secret
ballot. If the employees felt that
the existing independent union
served their needs, they could say
so in a ballot and give legal ratiti-
cation to the existing union. If the
workers wished to let the dues pay
ments stand and declare a new
slate from fixed future date, when
an election would be held, they
likewise could have been permitted
to express that wish in a secret bal
lot or referendum.
Workers Not Consulted.
The labor board, however, does
not consult the wishes of the work.
ers in that manner. 1t merely Or
ders the union diSestablished and
dues refunded and requires that the
company accord recognition to
new union if one is created repre-
senting a majority or to withhold
recognition from any group until a
union is formed. This usually COIN
cides with the efforts of union Or
ganizers from the outside, who
cajole the workers into setting up
union to be affiliated with either
the A. F. of L. or C. I. O. The
effect usually is to force the workers
into an outside national union.
1t is true that many company
unions do interfere with the free
dom of choice by the workers, but
it also is true that the growth of
the legitimate independent union
has been made almost impossible
by the rulings of the labor board,
which, of course, follow the powers
given the board by Congress.
The average person will wonder
why the power of Government to
intervene should ever go beyond
the fixing of method of permitting
the workers to decide for them
selves in a secret ballot what they
want their arrangement with the
employer to be. Even if the work.
ers wish voluntarily to permit the
management to give them certain
aids, such as dues collection or other
legitimate assistance which facii-
tates their union activities. this is
in the nature of a contract between
two private parties who may insert
in a contract any lawful terms they
mutually agree upon.
Recognized by Congress.
This principle is specifically rec
ognized by Congress under existing
law where voluntary agreements,
covering, for instance, a CLOSED
shop" are permitted. Ordinarily it
is a violation of law for an en-
ployer to make union or non-union
membership condition of hire,
but if a union and an employer
agree upon it in private contract
the employer can refuse to hire
anybody unless the worker joins a
particular union. Congress, there
fore, could amend the law to say
broadly that employers and en-
ployes may get together on any
form of contract they desire, so long
as no employer coercion or i'm
proper financial aid is given.
But at present the board, pos
sessed of a broad veto power al
ready given by Congress, can in
tervene and prevent the employees
from bargaining on their own terms
with the employer. If, moreover,
this provision of the existing law