Evening star., 1941-05-10

More than David Lawrence.
s14000000 worth of orders for Diesel
engines for the use of the United
States Navy are involved. The
BuSCh-Sulver Bros. Diesel Engine
Co. of St. Louis is the innocent VIC
tim of the controversy. Two unions
are quarreling as to which shall do
certain work. The employer is help
less and evidently the Governments
new Mediation Board feels helpless
In the executive order creating the
new Mediation Board. Mr.. Roose-
welt specifically limited it to inter-
vention in disputes between en-
ployerS and employees. Quarrels be-
tween two union groups of like
affiliation, even though leading to
serious strikes, are apparently no.
bodys business, except the two
unions involved
In this instance there is an old
rivalry between carpenters and ma
Chinists over which union has the
right to diSmantle machinery. This
was the issue which brought on the
antitrust suit in which the New
Deal majority in the Supreme Court
ruled that unions we're not engaged
In restraint of trade when they pre-
vented innocent employers - not
parties to a dispute-from operating
their businesses.
Involves Plant for Navy.
In this instance, new plant is
being built which is to be owned
by the United States Navy. The
BuSCh-Sulzer Co. merely acts as
manager for a fee. About 55 ma
chimes are to be installed and mem
bers of the carpenters union have
been employed to do some of the
work. Anticipating the possibility
that millWrights would not be per-
mitted to install the machinery
itself, threat of a strike has been
made. The maChinistS in turn have
threatened a strike unless the work
Is given them, for they argue they
understand the machines which are
to be installed.
The maChlnlstS have gone so far
as to refuse to make their per capita
payments to the A. F. of L.-pos-
sibly facing suspension-unless the
jurisdiction of the machinists over
the work in question is affirmed by
the executives Of the A. F. of L. it
self.
It would appear that a dispute
Of this kind would lend itself to me-
diation and that some ingenious
minds in the Government would be
able to work out a temporary ar
rangement which would not set up
a precedent or prejudice the rights
Of either union. But jurisdiCtional
disputes are evidently hot potatoes
which nobody in the Government
likes to grasp. The National Labor
Relations Board, for instance. has
had a 5-year-old custom of avoid
ing Intervention in jurisdictional
union conflicts.
May Bring Change.
It may be. of course. that the Ma
tional Defense Mediation Boards
refusal to tackle the dispute at st,
Louis because of lack of authority
under the executive order of the
President will lead him to iSst1e an
amendment enlarging the authority
of the board. But there is no sign
of it as yet.
The Mediation Board has had its
hands full with employer-employe
disputes recently but it is being
given increased personnel so that
it can develop more panels to hear
the cases before it. Undoubtedly one
of the most difficult tasks before the
mediatOrs Is the General Motors
controversy with the C. I. o. unions.
Not only is wage increase involved
but there is a demand for the closed
shop--something which it is believed
the company will never consent to
adopt In many labor negotiations
the closed shop is used as a leverage
to get other demands but when the
final showdown comes. the closed
shop demand is withdrawn.
May Prove Boomerang.
The C. I. o. is not likely at this
time to press the closed shop issue,
for there is a decided sentiment IN
Congress that no American should
be required to join union and pay
tribute thereto in order to work
for the defense of the Nation.
Should strike develop out of the
demand for a closed shop at General
Motors. it would not be surprising If
the House of Representatives acted
quickly on pending proposals to
outlaw closed shops for the period
of the war emergency. The Senate
in the last year or two has not
been much inclined to follow the
course of the House on labor legis-
lation, but if the closed shop issue
ties up close to billion dollars
worth of defense contracts at Cen
eral Motors after the National De-
fense Mediation Board has failed, it
would not be at all surprising to
gee the Senate taking action, too, to
ban closed shops.
The principal objection to the
closed shop is that when it is
granted, the unions insist usually
on the "check-off" whereby union
dues are collected by the employer
from the employees. Thus the en-
ployer indirectly assists in the
maintenance of a unions finances
something which, paradoXically
enough, means an accusation of
unfair labor practice if he does
1t for union before 1t is recognized
or before it is embodied in an agree
ment between employer and en-
ployes. Once the monopoly is grant,
ed to particular union through
closed shop, the employer becomes
bound not to hire anybody except
members of the union and he agrees
to discharge any who do not main
tain their membership in good
standing.
E,oh+s ppsnrye5