Evening star., 1943-01-18
Labor Report

The proposal by Secretary of Labor
Perkins that the War Labor Board
under some other name-should be
preserved after the war will be re-
ceived with considerable interest.
Miss Perkins believes that the
board has proved itself a useful in
Strument in time Of war, and that by
training and developing this ma
chinery I'VE shall build up gradually
an all but universal reliance on the
process of adjustment rather than
on the strike or lockout as a method
of settlement of differences" The
theory of this is excellent. Certainly
1t would be an act Of deplorable
retrogression If, after the war, the
country should be plunged back into
the era of strikes and industrial
violence which characterized the rise
of uniOniSm during the first ten years
Of the New Deal. But it may be
doubted whether there is much of
realism in the approach to the post
war procedure which has been sug-
gested by the Secretary of Labor.
Miss Perkins says that the tech
nique developed by the Labor Board,
while not perfect, has worked SO per
cent of the time and has made for
the reasonable achievement of the
aspirations of the workers within the
pattern Of what the industry could
afford. This is comforting asSump-
ton, but certainly it is open to ques-
ton. If Miss Perkins, in speaking
Of the aspirations of the workers,
refers to the wage increases which
they have demanded and received
through the board, it is not accurate
to say that they have fallen within
the pattern of what the industry
could afford. On the contrary, they
have been absorbed by the industry
through higher costs which have
been passed on by industry to the
Government and through the Gov
eminent to the public. 1t is not to
be supposed that the public, after the
war, will be willing to continue to
foot the bill for a wartime wage
scale, made possible by Government
contracts.
Furthermore, Miss Perkins would
have the board retain its function
on simplified basis, but without any
of the wartime powers which it is
presently exercising. With these
wartime powers, which Miss Perkins
says the board undoubtedly has, that
agency has been able to deal with
recalcitrant employers by the simple
expedient of taking their establish
ments away from them. But, even
with these asserted powers, 1t has not
yet demonstrated that it is capable
Of dealing in similar fashion with
recalcitrant workers. With rare ex-
ceptions, the board, when challenged
by strong union, has met the chal-
lenge by giving concessions, generally
in the form of wage increases, and
as the current coal strike demon
strates this gives no assurance
against labor disturbances, even
when they are seriously prejudicial
to the war effort.
Against the background Of the
record as it is, as distinguished from
what one might wish it to be, the
belief that the board could function
successfully after the war without the
powers that it now exercises seems
visionary to say the least. If the
boards machinery is to be retained
after the war, the probabilities are
that the peacetime agency will need
more rather than less power, and
that there will have to be a willing
ness to apply its peacetime authority
against unions with the same firm
ness which has been displayed in the
use OF war powers against industry.