The Waterbury Democrat., 1946-03-08
ny s. BURTON HEATH
N.EA. Stan Correspondent

N.E.A. Stan Correspondent
washington, MArcn 0-(NE.A.)
-Fur almost ~ years the Railway
Labor Act has been one Of the few
cheerful Gases IN O dreary desert
OF industrial unrest. That Is why
almost everybody who Is trying TO
draft legislation TO handle strikes
Il looking to the Railway Act for
Inspiration.
But experts say that many who
cite and borrow from the Rail-
way Labor Act either overlook or
ignore important reasons why II
has worked 80 well, and also some
reasons why It has not functioned
even better.
The systems success, until re-
Gently, rested largely upon these
factors:
i. II established o purely vol
untary system without compul-
sion at any step, or sanctions, or
thou-shalt-nots except for the
three that prohibit company unions,
closed shops or dues checkotf. II
merely sets up machinery through
which the parties can settle their
differences. Contrary to popular
belief. there Is not even o statutory
prohibition Of strikes during the 30.
day cooling of" period now at
tracing so much attention.
2. Until l94l the system was opsi-
tive, objective, anal. It's relative fail.
aire since then, say experts, Is large.
" because executive interference,
under the stress Of war, gave unions
the idea that they could proflt by
stalking It to the President" This
was exaggerated by too frequent use
OF the emergency board, which lost
its prestige and, therefore, no
longer swung the pressure Of pub
lie opinion behind II.
PROCEDURE OUTLINED
Because the law looked so well
while It was let alone, and because
that success is being cited In sup
port Of proposals that do not de-
rive from the act, 1t Is well to UNI
derstand what the Railway Labor
Act does and does not provide. Here
is the procedure IN tabloid:
step Companies and unions
must make every effort to get to-
gether by collective bargaining with
conferences beginning not more
than 80 days after one party notl-
FEES the other. But there Is no
minimum or maximum time limit
on the required bargaining effort.
Step 2-1f a deadlock occurs
either party may ask the National
Mediation Board to try Its hand,
out Of lo4e mediation cases handl-
I'D through June, l946, COS were
withdrawn and mediation got
agreements In l042.
Step SIT mediation fails, arbi-
Aratlon Is offered. Either party can
refuse, or both. But II arbitration
Is accepted, the award will be bind
Ing. OF 2eS such offers made, a
were accepted; companies refused
ZOE offers, unions 10, and both 4S,
Only once, 30 far as ] can learn,
hes an arbitration award been con-
tested, and that was on the
question, now In the courts, wheth-
or the arbitrator had decided prob
lens not submitted to him. He has
no right under the law to do this,
Step 4--If arbitration Is refused,
the Board may wash its hands Of
the case. Or, II q strike vote Is ia
ken and q strike date is set, and
II the Mediation Board believes
that the strike would affect inter-
state commerce seriously, 1t may
ask the President to appoint an
emergency board.
FINAL STEP
The emergency board, then, is
only one step--the Anal one-in
q process, Out Of $50 cases in which
arbitration was rejected, only SO
went to such boards. And that, ex-
perts feel, was far too many.
When an emergency board Is APP
pointed there can be no change In
wages or working conditions, with
out joint agreement, for 80 days.
This Is the 30-day cooling of
period" Of which so much Is said.
But this Is important:
Nowhere in the law is there so
much as a request that q union
should not strike during this period,
Oldtimers cannot recall an instance
in which q union did strike during
that 80 days-but all there was to
stop them was the fear Of public
condemnation II they were too i'm
patient 10 give Presidential board
one month to work on their prob
lens.
The Boards fact-finding report
is merely advisory. Either party
can reject it. It Is not even a find-
ang Of fact in the true sense. It is
really q Observation-Disclosures,
perhaps usually, q compromise
bulwarked by selected facts that q
board feels are important. Such re-
ports carefully withhold these COM
blicating facts that might weaken
bubble pressure for acceptance.
Recommendations Of such boards
psed to have considerable pres
eige. The process, as 1t should
Rork when report Is rejected,
nFas exemplified by the so-called
Diesel Case in 1913. When the
@nions would not accept the boards
Recommendation, President Roose-
welt insisted upon further media
eion, which took q year but brought
Che two parties into agreement.
Unfortunately this process Is moi
always followed Mr.. Roosevelt him