Evening star., 1939-05-12

Va
itself. David Lawrence.
Thus does the principle made
effective in Nazi Germany and
Fascist Italy come into use in Amer
lea because of the arbitrary use of
economic power by private groups of
employers and unions. In Italy and
in Germany sit-down" strikes and
other labor disturbances resulted
from the fact that economic groups
over-reached themselves and the
National Government in each case
intervened to compel productive
processes to be resumed
This is not to suggest that there
Is anything Fascist in the action
taken by the administration in
threatening to take over the mines
and force operation, but that the
conditions which brought on Fascism
abroad are being repeated in Amer
lea so that the demand for Gov
ernment action here results precisely
as it did abroad from the damage
done to the public interest.
Closed Shop Is Issue.
The issue in the coal strike was
q form of the closed shop or, to put it
another way, the right of a union
to exclude competing union from
securing members. The issue was
by no means settled by the insistence
OF the Federal Government that the
mines be reopened by as many
operators as already have the So
called union" shop in actual prac-
tice. The latter is the type of union
shop which permits existing nom
union employees to continue to work.
but prohibits the employer from
taking on anybody new except union
men.
The underlying desire of the
United Mine Workers is to perpetu-
ate their authority and jurisdiction.
This is not something peculiar to the
miners. The idea of compelling en-
ployerS to force their new employees
to become unionized is upheld te-
naciously by many labor organiza-
tions in other industries, too, as es-
sential to their very existence The
theory is that if an employer cares to
do SO. he can take on non-union men
In such numbers as to overturn the
majority of union men employed
who have the exclusive bargaining
rights.
So. to protect the majority status,
the unions want to compel employers
to agree that as condition of en-
ployment men will become members
of the majority organization. This
is directly contrary to the principle
in the Wagner law which says that
employers must not advise their en-
ployes about union matters or coerce
them into joining or staying out of
unions.
But the Wagner law also has a
provision which says it is not il
legal for labor unions and employers
to make contracts whereby workers
must join unions as condition Of
employment, provided the existing
union wants it that way. In other
words, the Wagner Act says that
employers must not advise employees
about union membership unless they
advise them one way-namely, that
as a result. of contractual agree
ments, minority employees must join
unions. Thus, by saying a closed
shop is not illegal, Congress has en-
couraged disputes on that subject.
Big Issue Remains.
The power of the Wagner Act to
compel recognition of majority units
has had much to do with the pres
ent coal dispute, so that it can
hardly be claimed that the law in
its present form can prevent strikes.
There have been, on the other hand,
similar strikes before the Wagner
law was passed. What is important
to note is that the law has by no
means put an end to the fundamen-
tai issues, namely, the right of or
ganlzed groups to shut down opera
tions unless employers agreed to CO.
operate in forcing men into union
membership.
The merits of compulsory union
ization are by no means a simple
case of right on one side or the
other, but it Is clear that if unions
and groups of employers are to WELD
hereafter the vast powers over pro-
duction exercised in the coal strike,
or lockout" as Secretary Perkins
calls it, they cannot continue to do
so without bringing Oh a certain
measure OF governmental regula-
ton. Thus the Railway Mediation
Act, If applied to industry generally,
would have prevented the coal strike
or lockout" Operations could not
have been suspended while discus
sion was going on. And provision
for submission of the issues in an
orderly way would have prevented
the stoppage of production during
the negotiations. Clearly Congress,
which has before it the matter of
revising the Wagner law. may find
more instructive testimony in the
coal dispute than in the hearings
going on before Senate and House