Evening star., 1946-05-30
Importiolity Doubted
In Strike Settlement
Mine Leaders Are Applauded,
Rail Strikers Denounced
Rp Dapfd Laurence

By David Laurence
As reward for their strike against
the Government, the mine workers
union has been given a written con-
tract by the Government itself. This
contract is not binding on the mine OPP
orators but if they don't accept its
terms, the Government will not turn
the mines back to the owners.
Thus, while the Truman administra-
ton denounces the railroad union chiefs
who struck against the Government, it
applauds the coal miners leaders by
giving them more than had been agreed
to in collective bargaining proceedings.
The administration broke the spirit
as we'll as the letter of the Smith-Con-
nally law by refusing to prosecute any
of the miners or their leaders who were
responsible for the concerted action of
nearly 100000 miners in remaining off
the job during the last few days of
Government seizure. I
The law specifically forbids any two
or more persons from acting in concert
in bringing about work interruption
while properties are under Government
seizure. Just why the President of the
United States failed to enforce the law
against labor unions-though he doubt
less would never hesitate to enforce it
against management-will ever be a
puzzle to those who believe in even
handed justice from a Chief Executive
at all times.
Expediency and Opportunism.
The only explanation is that the law
was not enforced because the Nation
needed coal and the miners by their
strike were, in effect, coercing the Gov
eminent to make contract with them.
Hence the surrender by the President
was IN the interest of expediency and
opportunism. 1t means, of course, an
abandonment of principle.
There is an orderly procedure during
the period when properties are in the
Governments possession. The Smith
Connally law prescribes that the same
terms and working conditions as existed
before a seizure occurs must be main
talned, with one exception. That ex-
ception permits the employees or the
Government agency which holds the
properties to 60 before the National
War Labor Board and apply for n
change in wages or other terms or con-
ditions of employment in such plant.
| mine or facility" Then the law reads:
Upon receipt of any such application,
and after such hearings and investiea-
tions as it deems necessary, such board
may order any changes in such wages,
or other terms and conditions which it
deems to be fair and reasonable and
not in conflict with any act of Congress
or any other executive order issued
hereunder"
The statute, it will be noticed. spe-
cihcally stipulates the National War
Labor Board. This tribunal consisted
of three sections-the public, labor, and
management. That board has been dis
continued by executive order and its
functions turned over to the National
! Wage Sterilization Board.
BMnder Compounded.
But Congress has not recognized by
law the new board, which is merely the
creature of an executive order. Also
there have been no hearings and no
opportunity for management to present
It's side. To contend that no hearings
were necessary is to refute a principle
laid down in many Supreme Court de-
cjSiNnc iol. =
private property could not be confscated
by any governmental order in any in
stance where hearings were provided for
the aggrieved parties unless and until
such hearings have been duly held.
1t would appear, therefore, that the
President and his advisers have COM
pounded their blunder, first, by refusing
to prosecute law offenders and, second,
by making contract in behalf of a
Government agency with labor union
which is on its face contrary to the
procedures prescribed by law.
The tendency toward arbitrary action
by the executive branch of the Govern
ment has increased in the last decade
but it was thought that under President
| Truman there would be more respect
shown the statutes. 1t may well be asked
why Congress takes the trouble to de-
| bate or pass laws if the President can
nullify them at will. This is not what
the American system of government
with its checks and balances has pro-
vided as means of safeguarding the
rights of the people. The so-called set
tlement of the coal strike is not an
occasion for rejoicing-even though the
| terms of it are doubtless fair to the
miners-but it is an occasion for mourn
ing. The slogan Equal justice for all"
is rapidly being made obsolete.
Reproduction Rights Reserved)