Evening star., 1940-04-30
ha||eck, in Forum,
Surveys Conclusions
OF Smith Committee
Contends Changes in
Wagner Act Merit
Non-Purtisun Verdict

Representative Halleck, Repub.
hcan, of Indiana discussed proposed
changes in the National Labor Re-
lations Act last night in an address
on the National Radio Forum, ar
ranged by The Star. The talk was
broadcast over a national hookup of
the National Broadcasting Co. and
was heard locally over Station
WMAL.
The complete text Of the address
follows:
Sound and equitable labor legis-
1ation is always a major concern
of Congress This is particularly
the case In the present session be-
cause of complaints from so many
sections and groups in the country
to the effect that certain of our
existing laws have worked hard
ship on some divisions of labor, have
retarded full economic recovery In
various industries and in other lines
have tended to create more unem-
ployment An increasing number
of our people want more jobs rather
than more laws.
In bringing this lively question
before the great Radio Forum. The
Star performs distinctive public
service. and I am honored by the
invitation to discuss pending labor
legislation with the vast Forum au-
dience.
Policies Above Partisanship.
I shall not carry my discussion
into the field of partisan debate
Industrial relations and the smooth,
orderly working of national labor
policies are matters far above mar
row partisanship.
I shall seek, therefore, merely to
outline some of the major pro-
posals now before Congress and to
survey the conclusions of the special
investigating committee of the
House which has been inquiring into
administration of the National La
Dor Relations Act.
AS a member of this special in
vestigating committee I have heard
voluminous evidence and examined
many exhibits bearing on the diff
cult daytorday problems of ad-
ministration. AS member of Con-
greSs I have given much thought
and study to the relationships of
employer and employe, capital and
labor, and the responsibilities of
Government in respect thereto
The extended hearings before our
special committee have demon
strated clearly that prompt action
Is desirable if the country is to
avoid further unnecessary and costly
labor strife flowing directly from
imperfections in the National La
Dor Relations Act and its admins
tration and if the fundamental OBJ
tectives of that act are to be at
tanned
Let me make it clear at the outset
that the demand for amendment Of
. the Labor Act comes with vigor and
1insistence from both organized labor
and the employers. The issue be-
fore us distinctly is not one in which
labor stands on one side Of the dis
cussion and employers on the other.
In fact, I think 1t is fair to say
that there is throughout the country
a clear majority which demands
changes both in the law and in its
administration.
Opposition Critical.
OF course, there are those who
oppose any amendment and who
Immediately characterize any offered
r1i ~
attempt to emasculate the law.
I do not concur in that view.
For myself, I believe implicitly in
the right of workers to organize and
bargain collectively through repre-
sentatives of their own choosing.
Only in that way can labor achieve
a balance of bargaining power with
the employer. That such is the
view of an overwhelming majority
of the House cannot be disputed.
What the opponents of revision
mean is that the current demand
over the country for some changes
will certainly be felt in the House;
which leads me to another state
ment some enemies of revision of
the Labor Act may think little
harsh. If there are irritants in the
act or its administration which are
creating so much sentiment for
change, should not those irritants
be removed before the demand for
change gets completely out of hand?
The action which will be taken
In the House now in respect to
amending the act undoubtedly will
60 farther than it would have gone
a year ago. 1t may well be that
If conditions continue as they
are, amendments which might be
adopted year from now would go
much farther than those which
would be acceptable today. A true
friend of the act. and one who
believes in its fundamental pur-
poses and objectives, should Ger
tainly recognize this very obvious
fact, face the situation with cour-
age, and remove those irritants
which, if allowed to continue, may
ultimately uproot the entire law.
Rights Recognized.
Let me say again that there has
not been evident here in Congress
any intention of limiting or re-
stricting labor's right to organize
and bargain collectively. These
rights were recognized by the ma
jority of our employers and by the
courts long before they were writ
ten into the N. L. r. B. Act In 1885.
They have long been recognized as
fundamental in the American sys-
tenn of life and government.
AS a result of the increasing and
consistent demand for some over
hauling of the act and its admin
istration, regular committees of the
House and Senate during the last
year or two have held extensive
hearings. No legislation was forth
coming as result of those hearings.
Then, on July 20, 1899, the House,
by vote of 254 to 1874, adopted a
resolution providing for appoint
ment of q special committee of five