Evening star., 1941-12-24
No-Strike Agreement

difficult fully to appralSe the eHecC
of the no-strike agreement which
has been reached by the Presidents
Industry-Labor Conference.
The agreement is in three parts.
The first provides that there shall
be no strikes or lockouts' for the
duration of the war. This Stipula-
ton, certainly. is one which will
receive the unstinted approval of the
American people. But the remaining
provisions-that all disputes shall
be settled by peaceful means and
that "the President shall set up
proper War Labor Board to handle
these disputes in the cate
CORY of experiments which are open
to skepticism until their feasibility
has been demonstrated.
On it's face, the provision that all
disputes shall be settled by peaceful
means seems to be beyond the reach
of valid criticism. Yet when this
statement is read against the known
background of the conference and
the text of the Presidents letter to
the delegates, there can be no doubt
that it will be interpreted to mean
that closed shop demands are to be
submitted as a last resort to binding
arbitration. In other words, the
fundamental difference of opinion as
to whether the national emergency
should serve as time for promotion
of the closed shop has been resolved
in favor of labor in the sense that
the agreement by implication con-
cedes that labor may demand the
closed shop in any plant If it sees fit
to do so.
How serious a matter this will
prove to be in actual practice re-
mains to be seen, In many quarters
it had been hoped that the Govern
ment would adopt a clear-cut policy
designed to freeze the existing open
and closed shop status, as was done
during the first World War. But it
is evident from the Presidents letter
that this is not to be the case, for
he wrote that particular disputes
must be left to the consideration of
those who can study the particular
differences and who are thereby pre-
pared by knowledge to pass judgment
in the particular case" This is
tantamount to saying that the pre-
vailing policy of deciding each case
on its merits without laying down
any general standards-a policy
which has been productive of serious
difficulties in the past-is to remain
In effect.
In these circumstances it seems
obvious that much will depend on
the attitude of labor leaders them
selves. If they refrain from excessive
closed shop demands no serious
problems are apt to arise. On the
other hand, if they begin a concerted
drive to unionize all defense workers
through the closed-shop procedure
the proposed War Labor Board will
be faced with both a difficult task
and a heavy responsibility.
/ Outside the ranks of union labor,
there is little sentiment at this time
! for the closed shop. Judging from
samplings of public opinion, most
Americans agree with the view re-
Gently expressed by the country S
three important farm organizations
that the principle of the closed shop
is monopolistic and that the issue
should be outlawed for the duration
of the war.
Since that is not to be the case,
however, it becomes a matter of first
Importance that the War Labor
Board should be composed of men
whose understanding of the labor
problem and whose impartiality are
not open to question. Last month the
President said fatty that the Gov
ernment would never order a closed
shop. Full effect can be given to that
declaration by placing the balance
of power on the War Labor Board in
the hands of public representatives
who actually will represent the pub
lie, and who will not be Influenced
by any predictions for or against
the closed shop.