The Waterbury Democrat., 1945-03-26

employees, 1t made them too willing to be exploited in other ways.
 But some of the unions them selves went in for a degree of this old-fashioned paternalism. Typo graphical and Pressmen's unions, among others, had well-established homes to which their lesS-fortunate members could retire when too old to work at their trades.
 PENSION NEED PASSES
 With the passage of the original Railroad Retirement Act and the Social Security Act in 1885, the need for private pension plans largely disappeared and the government took over the responsibility for old age benefit payments. Similarly, with the passage of the Unemploy- ment Insurance laws of the various states and the federal government, the need for unions to pay strike or sick benefits was reduced.
 The trend all through the war years has been to extend govern ment old-age retirement and unem- ployment insurance benefits to the millions of workers previously not covered by these laws and to expand the benefits to cover unemployment caused by sickness or accident Cradle to grave" social security ideas caught on and government disqualification and health insur- ance benefits of some kind are cer- tain to be provided, eventually.
 But now comes John l. Lewis proposing that his United Mine Workers Union be given 8 royalty Of 10 cents ton on every ton of coal mined, so that the union can set up its own unemployment in- surance system, Its own medical and surgical service, hospitalization, in- surance. rehabilitation and econ- omic protection.
 The trite question posed by this issue is, Where do we go from here? Onward to greater government pro- lection, or backward to the private welfare plans of employers and unions interested in the economic security of their employees and members?
 STEEL EXECUTIVES
 POSE QUESTION
 This same issue came up 8 year ago when the c. I. O. Steelworkers Union presented its demands for such additional benefits as dismissal pay, sick leave, insurance, and guar anteed annual wage, all to be paid Tor by the employer. Steel company executives asked then If these mat ters were rightful responsibilities of the employer, or whether the gov- ernment was not tending to assume more and more responsibility for all such reforms.
 It is noteworthy that neither the Steelworkers nor the Miners have asked that their social benefits be granted 1n place of government benefits. Instead, private benefits are asked for as a supplement to whatever the government sees fit to bestoW.
 From this it might be argued that the proper solution of the issue raised by John L. Lewis is not a Bailey bill to outlaw the collection Of royalties for benefits to union members but the passage of ex- banded social security legislation by government, which would make the Lewis demands unnecessary.
 On the other hand, it can be argued that the Miners demand and the Steelworkers' demands of- Ter an alternative to extend gov- ernment social security, socialized medicine and all that. This alterna- tive boils down to a return to rug ged invidualism and paternalism = the steel industry to look after the welfare of its employees in the one instance, the Miners union to look after the wellbeing of its members on the other.