Evening star., 1942-02-20
War Labor Policy

1t Is obvious that the settlement
of the controversy between Little
Steel" and the Steel Workers Organ
izing Committee of the C. I. o. is
going to bring what well may be the
decisive test of the effectiveness of
the National War Labor Board.
The union is demanding closed
shop, the check off and a fiat $1-a-
day wage increase. In a statement
yesterday spokesman for Little
Steel" whose conflict with the C..
I. o. has been long and bitter, served
notice that it was opposed to the
closed shop in any shape or form.
The statement did not deal with the
wage issue, but it may be recalled
that some Government officials, in
Guiding Leon Henderson, price con-
troll administrator, are opposed to
blanket wage increases SUCH as this
on the theory that they contribute
to the inf1ationary trend which the
price control law, with other things,
is designed to hold in check. In all
probability, however, the union will
make determined effort to enforce
both Of these demands.
The Little Steel statement was
prompted by press reports that Will
liam H. Davis, chairman of the War
Labor Board, would sponsor the So
called union maintenance clause as
a compromise of the closed shop dis
pute, and these reports, If they are
correct, suggest that the War Labor
Board is falling back on the same
tactics that led to the collapse of the
old Defense Mediation Board.
If past experience demonstrates
anything, it is that such vital issues
as the closed shop question cannot
be resolved successfully by the make
shift and expedient policy of decid-
ing each case on its merits In the
past, rulings based on this policy
have satisfied no one and have set
tied little. Nor is there any reason
to expect better results from SINH
lar course in the future.
The basic and fundamental issue
in this whole matter is whether, dur
ing this war emergency, the closed
shop in any form should be imposed
upon industry by the Government,
for 1t is clear enough that recon-
mendation by the War Labor Board
for closed shop or any modification
of it would be binding so far as in
dustry is concerned.
William M. Leiserson Of the Ma
tional Labor Relations Board recent
ly expressed the belief that disputes
relative to the closed shop and wage
increases cannot be dealt with sue
cessfully on the basis of an individ-
ual decision in each case as it arises.
Mr.. Leiserson said he would prefer
to see these issues disposed of by
voluntary agreement, but indicated
that he had little hope of such
solution, and made it plain that in
this event he believes that the only
alternative would be for Congress to
dispose of the closed shop and wage
issues by enacting legislation which
would lay down a national policy on
these questions.
This is point of view which clear
ly finds abundant support in past
experience. And 1t seems evident
that the formulation of such a ma
tional policy will become absolutely
essential in the future. Of course,
Congress can wait until the proc
esses of the War Labor Board have
broken down, as did those of the
Defense Mediation Board, but this
would be a timid approach to an
obvious problem, and one for which
the Nation might have to pay a
heavy price in terms of lost pro-
duction.