The Ypsilanti daily press. (Ypsilanti, Mich.) 1928-1962, 1941-09-29

ShAAito l. 'NAANAf u a. N .
Stewart they're unfair
to employers,
who may not be a bit averse 10
their stats unionization but who
can't help It II opposing groups Of
EN- declare civil war between
themselves, forcing suspension Of
their plants activities. Such snarls
also, as he says, throw crimps into
production at a time when we need
all we can get OF il. He doesn't
believe that they're profitable for
the workers, either.
Reader Smith doesn't mention
either William Green's American
Federation of Labor or Philip Muir
rays Congress OF Industrial Or
CARNATIONS by name, but it's obW-
Gus that they're the two clashing
forces he has in mind.
All right he proposes
Suppose a plants management
perfectly willing to accept union
cation but has no choice between
the A. F. Of L. and c. l. o. Let
EN- both organize until every last
employee belongs to one outfit or
the other.
From each worker the boss COL
lscts monthly a rum sufficient TO
pay his share Of dues to whichever
alignment he prefers to affiliate
himself with.
It's up to tie boss to divide the
gross kitty up regularly between
his plants A. F. Of L. crowd and
its c. I. o. crowd, for union main
tenance.
But on what basis Is he te-ai-
vide il?
Ballot Periodically
Why, periodically, a government
tally-supervised secret ballots TO
Be taken. Nobody's to know how
any individual voted, but the votes
are to be counted. and the taly's
net result will be disclosed.
Thereupon the dough will be
split up proportionately.
If 4. F. of L. and c. I. o. score
$3.50, they'll get 80 per cent each
Of the gravy II the voting rec
ords 1925, those figures viii be
the basis Of the financial cut.
And another thing
Suppose one side got a 80 per
cent majority and the other side
only a 10 per cent minority. And
suppose the 80 per centers' direc-
torship mismanaged expenditure Of
that bunch's ALLEGATION, didn't sat-
-iStactorily represent its rank-and-
files interests, or possibly, did a
little grating. In that case.
Reader Smith surmises that the
next election would be apt to go
1890 in the opposite direction. It's
a system that would make for the
highest type Of union leadership,
he argues. He doesn't charge that
II isn't Of high type now. but it's
a scheme, he reasons. that would
be calculated to keep it that way.
Reader Smith doesn't seem to
object TO competitive unions, pro-
vded their respective leaderships
are in competition for the best re-
suits obtainable.
What he does find fault with Is
what he describes as the present
destructive competition" - compe-
tition, he asserts. TO destroy one
another. He doesn't consider it as
to unionizations own advantage.
It isn't radical program, he in
sists - no more radical than
American democratic govern
ment."
Then he goes on, Under the
American system Of government,
the voter has his choice Of political
parties. while under the Nazi sys-
TEN there's no choice whatsoever"
Offers a Choice
It's true that an American work.
ingman has choice between the
a F Of l. and c. l. o., but he
doesn't have much or a choice be.
tween EN- in any one plant.
That's the kind Of choice that
Reader Smith wants to give EN-.
He likewise makes the point that
t would give the unions lone or
he other Of 'em) revenue from
.Yery worker"
That ought to make q hit with
the unions. Maybe II wouldn't be
popular with EN- jointly, but either
group certainly should like the
tdea, considered separately, each
tor its own benefit.
Doesn't the notion merit care.
,ul study" asks Reader Smith.
Yeah. l think it's interesting. ,