Evening star., 1941-03-07

fessiou lust made by the Labor
Board itself of the various dilatory
steps which its procedure permits
before elections for collective bar
gaining are actually ordered.
The board, of course, contends
that 1t is the Wagner Act itself
which permits such delays, but in
truth the regulations of the board
and its discretionary power could
cover the contingencies mentioned
without legislation.
Thus for example, the board
claims that it permits employers to
petition for an election and this i'm
preston has been broadcast, but
the truth is the board allows the
employer to petition for an election
only when there is a dispute be-
tween two rival unions. He is not
allowed to petition if he has
reason to doubt that union has a
ma iority of his employees signed up
and If he thinks his employees want
no union at all to represent them.
Example Is Cited.
In the last "a hours an inter
esting example of the breakdown of
the Wagner Acts provision for col
lective bargaining as an alleged
meanc of preventing strikes has been
given to the public John R. Steel
man, director of the U. S. ConCili-
alton Service, who is trying to bring
the C. I. o. and the International
Harvester Co. together so as to
terminate a serious strike on de-
fense contract. said that the COM
panv urged that the strikers go
back to work and petition for a
National Labor Relations Board
election to determine whether a
majority were members of a G. I. o.
union that called the strike. The
head of the c. I. o. fatty refused
the proposal and insisted that the
grievances be settled at once.
1t might be asked of what avail
Is a collective bargaining machinery
when 1t does not promptly establish
in the public interest whether a
union does or does not possess the
majority power? The fact is that
the Labor Board in many instances
does not interjeCt itself into the
situation and compel elections, but
avails itself of all sorts of devices
which prevent the election from
being held, so that in many cases
the unions themselves see no ad-
vantage in Immediately using the
machinery set up for them by the
law
The exact words of the boards
policy are given in a circular letter
sent out by the boards director of
information few day ago to the
press in which this confession is
made:
IF there is reasonable doubt as to
the unions claim of majority, or if
the majority is contested by another
organization, then the board holds
an election. There are still other
cases in which union may be sure
of its own majority but the employer
may say that he has no knowledge
Of the majority. In such cases, the
union may insist on recognition by
the employer and refuse to petition
for an election. The law gives the
union this right and it takes the
chance of proving its majority and
a violation of the act at a hearing,
when the employer is charged with
refusing to bargain collectively. But
in every case where a union asserts
a claim of majority to the board,
the board conducts an investigation
and if the claim is supported by a
sufficient showing of membership or
designation of the union by en-
ployeS, or other designation by the
employees of the union to represent
them, and charges of unfair labor
practice are disposed of, the board
orders an election"
Explanation of Strikes.
In the foregoing explanation by
the board itself can be seen why de-
fense strikes are on the increase.
The board takes the view that a
union can refuse to petition for an
election but can file unfair labor
practice charges on the ground that
an employer refuses to bargain. The
employer may be in doubt as to
whether majority of his employees
have designated the union as a bar
gaining agent, but he cannot find