Evening star., 1941-08-12

ment now has David Lawrence.
before 1t the issue of open or closed
shop and that the National Defense
Mediation Board panel of three
members created this embarrassing
situation, having encouraged strike
on the closed shop issue when this
never might have been permitted
to become a part of the Mediation
Boards findings at all.
The demand of the c. I. o. at
the Kearny, N. j., plant of the Fed
eral Shipbuilding & Drydock Co..
has been euphemistically referred
to in the dispatches as merely an
insistence on the union shop" The
inference to be drawn from this is
that the employer refuses to recog-
nize the majority as the collective
bargaining agent for the union. The
truth is such recognition has been
extended and no dispute exists about
It. What the G. I. o. union is de-
manding is that the employer make
himself responsible for the con-
tinued membership of workers in
a given union. The employer de-
clines and says this is the unions
affair and the strike has been called
to compel the employer to agree to
discharge any union man who re-
fuses to pay his dues or remain a
member in good standing
All Yards on Same Basis.
If the Navy Department takes
over the Kearny plant and agrees
to the closed shop it means that all
navy yards and shipbuilding in
terests in the United States will be
on the same basis. Some idea of
the straitjacket in which workers
now find themselves by reason of
the closed shop agreements may be
derived from a reading of decision
announced on July % last by the
Court of Appeals of the State Of
New York-the highest court in the
most populous State in America.
That court decision makes it clear
that once a man belongs to a union
under a closed shop agreement he
cannot quit the union together with
his fellow workers and start another
union. He must submit to the
tyranny of the existing union till
the end of the contract, however
long that may be.
The case in question came before
the State Labor Relations Board
which is operating under statute
analogous to that OF the Federal
Wagner law. The State board held
that when a majority of the workers
wanted a new contract they could
have it and that the collective bar
gaining machinery could then func-
ton. But the Court of Appeals held
that in a choice between upholdlng
the sanctity of contracts and the
collective bargaining process, there
was nothing in either the Federal
or the State laws governing collec-
tive bargaining which could upset
the validity of contract.
Meany's Views Cited.
It is to be noted that the court
decision quotes a high executive OF
labor as favoring the maintenance
of the contract rather than the en-
try of a new bargaining process.
The court says, in overruling the
board:
The practical implication of the
decision of the board upon the
closed shop unions was clearly
pointed out by the testimony of
George Meany, president of the New
York Federation of Labor and now
the general secretary of the Amer
lean Federation of Labor. Mr..
Meany testified that the State
boards decision that it will hold an
election upon request when 1t finds
that the workers desire a change Of
bargaining agent, will upset the en-
tire democratic process whereby
closed shop unions are controlled,
since that decision will allow work.
ers to set up their own rival unions
instead of seeking control by the
normal process of joining the union
In power and electing representa-
tives favorable to their views. In
this way the board, instead of
furthering industrial peace, makes
itself an instrument TO destroy a
collective bargaining organization
and to weaken the effectiveness of
collective bargaining"
The foregoing decision marks an
important precedent. 1t means that