Evening star., 1941-02-04

days under the specifications. A re-
quirement of so days of negotiation
on such a job obviously would tie
labors hands completely.
| Further l believe the need is for
broad legislation covering all indus
tries producing for defense. A num-
ber of separate acts applying to in
dividual industries would cause end
less confusion and increase costs
needlessly.
This need for a fairly simple and
speedy procedure which can be
one factor which led me to depart
considerably from the Railway La Dor
Act model. The Railway Labor Act
sets up a very complicated and
lengthy procedure. 1t provides first
| for direct negotiation between the
employer and employees, then for
submission to an adjustment board.
then for mediation by the National
Mediation Board, then for an at
tempt to get both parties to agree
to arbitration, and finally if all else
fails, for appointment of q special
fact-finding commission by the
President. During all these pro-
cedueS, and they often string out
over many months, there can be
neither strike nor lockout. That
sort of procedure has worked out
very well for the railways where
employment is stable year in and
year out and where there is a long
record of collective bargaining on
both sides of the table. don't be-
lieve it can be applied Immediately
TO all industries, and so | have
slmplifled the machinery as much as
possible. I hope and I believe that
eventually organized labor and or
ganized employers will themselves
get together and work out proce-
dures aimed to settle disputes with
minimum of strikes or lockouts.
They will either incorporate such
procedures into all collective bar
gaining agreements or else ask the
Congress to enact them into law.
Permits Labor to Strike.
The bill which I have introduced
does not take away labor's basic
right to strike. I am absolutely op-
posed to legislative prohibition of
all strikes or a requirement for
compulsory arbitration, which
amounts to the same thing. For
one thing, Congress could not stop
strikes by such legislation; it would
merely make them illegal. Further
more, believe the emphasis in such
legislation should be on Cancellation
and negotiation, rather than having
Government step into the labor
relations picture as policeman
cracking down on either party.
I do not believe that a require
ment of 20 days of negotiations in
all before a strike could take place
impairs labors Fight to strike seri-
ously. AS I see it, it simply means
that when a group of employees and
their employer have reached the
conclusion that they cannot agree
and decide to have test of strength
by either a strike or lockout. the
public steps in and says to both Of
them that you must make one more
attempt to settle this thing peace
fully.
The chances of effecting A settle
ment of labor dispute are much
better and the job is much easier
if the employees are still working
and the plant still operating Once
the plant has been closed down
either by strike or lockout. tempers
rise. Usually there are incidents
which create bitterness and it is
infinitely more difficult to get both
parties to be reasonable and agree
on a settlement.
And even from organized labor's
point of yieW-while the strike is
labors ultimate and most powerful
weapons-it is also true that the
strike is a more effective weapon
when it is still a threat than il is
once it becomes an actuality and the
men have walked out. AS long as
the strike is only threat, the en-
ployer is anxious to make any pos
Sible concession as a rule to avoid
having his plant closed by walk
out. Once the strike has taken
place and his plant is closed. then
he is likely to settle back and say.
The worst has happened and be
much more inclined TO stand pat
and refuse to make any conces-
SionS.
Society Justified in Picture.
realize that union business
agents and employers may not like
having their rights to do as they
please even regulated to the extent
proposed in this bill. I don't think
any organization or corporation or
business ever likes to be regulated
by Government. Labor unions
and employers are no exceptions.
But society from time to time has
found it necessary in the public
interest to regulate many types Of
organiza tions and endeavors: and I
believe that in the present emer-
gency society is fully justified in
stepping into this labor relations
picture to the extent proposed in
this bill.
Every labor dispute is settled
eventually. and consequently the
possibility of settlement is always
there. I believe it should be
Governments sole objective in la
Dor relations legislation of this sort
simply to make sure that every ave-
nue. of peaceful settlement is ex-
plored before there is plant shut
down and stoppage of production.
If Government attempts to "crack
down" on either employers or labor
unions. it defeats this objective, be-
cause it is only when both parties
have confidence in the fairness and
justice of Government conciliators
and procedures that its efforts can
be effective.