Evening star., 1941-11-16
The Closed Shop

derlng, SO-called closed shop
raises question which is open to a
great deal of misunderstanding.
If Mr.. RooSevelt'S language was
carefully chosen, his declaration has
little meaning. The closed shop, in
the accepted precise meaning of that
term. has not figured in any defense
labor dispute, not even in the captive
coal mine controversy. What the
labor leaders have been striving to
get in these disputes has been the
so-called union shop, or some other
modification of the closed shop.
According to an analysis by the
Twentieth Century Fund, the closed
shop, which is relatively rare, is an
arrangement under which the en-
ployer must hire men supplied by the
union and the employees must remain
in good union standing to keep their
Jobs. Under the So-called union
shop, an employer may hire any one
he pleases, but the non-union men,
to retain their employment, must be-
come union members after certain
period of time. Then there are at
least five other types of restricted
shops, all less desirable from the
union point of view.
A fair appraisal of the Presidents
language would indicate that he had
the union shop in mind when he
spoke of the "so-called closed shop"
for he stated explicitly that the Gov
ernment would never compel the S
per cent minority of nonunion
miners to join the union. And since
the compulsory unionization of these
men is the essence of the union shop
which John L. Lewis is demanding,
it seems reasonable to conclude that
the President, even though his COM
ment was confined to this one
dispute, meant to say that the Gov
ernment would never order ac-
ceptance of the union shop in
any case.
If that Interpretation be correct,
the Presidents statement points
either to a most significant revision
of the Governments labor policies
or to an era of even greater con-
fusion in the industrial picture.
In the past, the National Defense
Mediation Board has recommended
that employers grant the union shop.
or some other modification OF the
closed shop, and the boards recon-
mendations, at least so far as
employers are concerned, have had
the force of commands which must
be obeyed. In the recent Kearny
shipyard case, for example, the board
recommended a maintenance OF
membership" shop. That meant
that all employees then in the union
had to remain in good standing, but
that non-union workers, or those
subsequently employed, did not have
to join. When the employer refused
to grant it, the plant was taken over
and the Government granted that
form of restricted shop. Further
more, the board has plainly indicated
that it may recommend the granting
of union shop demands in the future.
This was the case even in the captive
coal mine ruling, when the board
rejected the demand, for on that oc-
casion the majority opinion expressly
denied that the ruling against the
miners meant that the board was not
prepared to recommend the union
shop under any circumstances what
ever. The opinion added that the
board in the future may recon-
mend, as it has recommended In the
past, various kinds of union security
appropriate to the particular case"
Thus, much depends upon whether
the Presidents statement, coming
several days after the boards pro-
nouncement, signified fundamental
change in Government policy. The
Mediation Boards refusal on Friday
to recommend a union maintenance
shop for the Pascagoula, Mississippi,
yards of the ingalls, Shipbuilding
Corporation, although the circum-
stances were quite similar to those
at the Kearny yards, where the
union maintenance shop was recon-
mended, may be an indication that
the change is at hand.
One thing, however, seems certain.
Whatever the Presidents statement
means, the days when strikes in de-
fense plants for the union shop or
any other form of closed shop will be
tolerated are numbered. If the ad-
ministration does not deal firmly and
squarely with this issue, 1t will be
disposed of by an outraged public
opinion making itself felt through
the House and Senate.