Evening star., 1943-06-26
Overriding q Veto

the Presidents veto of the antistrike
bill are indicative of a deep and
significant change in the temper of
the American people and their
elected representatives. This Nation
is fighting for it's life, and as the
President has said on at least two
occasions, the people know it. In
such time of national crisis there
can be no liberation of labor tactics
which defy the authority of Govern
ment, nor of governmental policy
which seems to condone defiance.
And the votes in Congress yesterday
serve clear notice that this is the
mood OF the country.
1t is to be hoped that those men
who are responsible for shaping labor
policy will not blind themselves to
the real meaning of what has taken
place. Over their extreme protests
and the opposition of the President,
the Connally- Smith bill has become
law. 1t is not the best bill that might
have been passed. But it is law, and
it is going to be enforced. There has
been some talk by some labor leaders
to the effect that the law would not
be obeyed unless and until it is finally
sustained in the Supreme Court. To
adopt such an attitude would be
grievous mistake, and would almost
certainly lead to enactment of far
more drastic legislation. If it is
desired to avoid consequences harm
full to the country and disastrous to
organized labor, every effort will be
made to comply with the statute. AS
has been said, it is not the best law
that might have been adopted, but in
its essentials it is aimed only at that
minority which refuses to respect the
no-strike pledge and which obviously
cannot be controlled by the national
labor leaders. # these leaders read
the plain handwriting that is on the
wall, they will welcome the support
to be derived from this bill in what
for them is most critical period.
The action of Congress also has
been interpreted as protest against
the Presidents labor policies, and
there can be no doubt that this had
much to do with the overriding of
his veto. The veto message, for the
most part, was on a constructive
plane. Mr.. Roosevelt acknowledged
that the bill has the entirely praise
worthy purpose to insure full war
production" He also said that he
was in sympathy with the first seven
sections. That includes Section 6,
relative to strikes in Government
owned or operated plants, to which
labor had taken most vigorous ex-
ception. Mr.. Roosevelt's fundamental
objection ran only to Section 8, under
which no strike may be called in a
private plant until there has been a
thirty-day cooling off period and
secret strike ballot. A similar provi-
sion in the Railway Labor Act has
worked well, but if experience dem
onstrates that the President is right
in his belief that the section will en-
courage rather than prevent strikes,
the remedy of amendment is always
open. Certainly, all things consid-
cred, Section does not appear to
represent fatal weakness in the law.
There is one more point raised by
the Presidents message that is
worthy of notice. Expressing his own
opposition to strikes in time of war,
he emphasized that he intends to
"use the powers of Government to
prevent the interruption of war
production by strikes" Perhaps the
President feels he has made full use
of his powers in this respect. But
the Congress and the people do not
share this view. At the very time
the President made this statement,
approximately half of the country's
coal miners were engaged in an
unauthorized strike, and in no real
sense were the powers of Government
being used against them. And this
Aiefo bSSAA VI NC Gal nlOIlS LlIC llllG. LII
one war plant after another, day
after day, strikes have disrupted
production, and in no instance has
the Government made any effective
use of its powers to prevent the
strikes or penalize the strikers.
1t may very well be, as the Presi-
dent so often says, that the effect of
these strikes on war production is
small when balanced against the
total time worked. But their effect
on the state of mind of the people
has been exceedingly bad, and
neither the President nor the labor
leaders seem to have grasped this
fact. Properly interpreted, the vote
to nullify the veto is clear reflection
OF the public resentment of strikes
and the administrations handling of
them. We will get along with the
conduct of the war in better style if
both the President and labor accept
this as true.