Evening star., 1946-05-05
New Union Issue
Faces Government
Question of Bargaining Rights
Raised by Pro-Soviet Group
By John II. Cline.

| o"cSN dbAS VOlhClS VI ftIlGTICd-
has served to reopen the whole ques-
ton of the role of unionism in GOV
eminent.
1t is a question to which there can
be no simple or easy answer Most
people would concede that government
workers-State, Federal or municipal
should have right to organize for the
protection and promotion of their COL
lective interests, and that right, as a
matter of fact, has been freely exer-
cised. The dificulty arises in under
taking to set reasonable limit on this
activity by people who work for gov
ernment unit, and this difficulty is
bound to be increased by the entry into
the field of the new CIO union, with
its demand for collective bargaining
rights and its implicit espousal of the
right Of government workers to strike
in pursuance of their objectives.
The UPWA is product of the recent
merger of the United Federal Workers
of America and the State, County and
Municipal Workers of America. The
new union has about $4,000 members,
many of whom Undoubtedly are Com
munists. Its leaders adhere faithfully
to the Communist party line, and at the
Atlantic City convention last month the
delegates, with only one protest, ap-
proved resolution attacking the "ag-
gressive imperialism" of the United
States and Britain. The delegates re-
fused, however, to voice any criticism
OF Russian foreign policy on the ground
that 1t would be silly" to question Rus
sian intentions. This leaves little room
for doubt as to the Communistic char
acter Of the new union, and it is worth
nathing that C1O President Philip Muir
ray, in addressing the convention,
pledged to 1t the full support of the
CIO in Its efforts to obtain collective
bargaining rights for government en-
ployes.
Obviously, this raises serious ques-
tion for an administration which is on
friendly terms with Mr.. Murray and
which is closely allied politically with
the CIO.
For several years prior to the merger,
the UFWA was demanding the right
to bargain with the Federal Govern
ment, and it was on the basis of
request from that organization that
committee Of the Civil Service Com
missions Council Of Personnel Admins
tration drafted proposals to extend
limited" collective bargaining rights
to Federal workers. The Civil Service
Commission is opposed to this proposal,
and rightly so. The proposal means,
presumably, that government employees
would be given the right to bargain
with respect to all matters except
salaries, which are fixed by Congress.
1t also may be presumed to mean that
these employees, while permitted to
bargain as to hours, working conditions,
etc, would not have the right to strike
to enforce their demands.
AT best, the acceptance of any such
proposal could only lead to the worst
sort Of confusion in government, with
rival unions competing for members on
the basis OF the concessions they could
obtain, or promise to obtain. And As
experience with municipal unions has
shown, 1t would only be a question of
time-once the right of bargaining is
conceded-until there would be strikes
in furtherance of bargaining objectives.
What the final attitude of the Fed
eral Government toward limited" COL
lective bargaining for its employees will
be remains uncertain. AS has been
stated, the Civil Service Commission
is strongly opposed. But there is ground
for some misgivins in a reply which
President Truman made to a question
at his most recent press conference.
The President was asked this uues-
ton: will you allow executive depart
ments to bargain collectively with
unions whose constitutions permit
strikes against the Government" The
PRESIDENTS answer was evasive. He
stated emphatically that he did not be-
heve IN strikes against the Government,
and he said that If such strikes occur
the Government would cease to exist.
But he did not say whether he favored
collective bargaining with unions whose
constitutions do not permit strikes, or
even with unions like the UPWA, which,
while disclaiming strikes as a matter of
policy, nevertheless sets out in its con-
stitution the steps by which a strike
might be called.
This may mean that the President
while opposed to strikes against the
Government, is not opposed to bar
gaining between the Government and
unions. If 50, it raises policy question
OF the greatest Importance, and espe-
cially so In the case of a union like the
UPWA.
Here is an organizat ton which has de-
liberately chosen to identify itself with
the policy line" espoused by Communist
spokesmen and which is openly hostile
to the policy of our own Government.
II the Government recognizes this
union however, and proceeds to bargain
with it, the inevitable effect will be to
increase its strength And if one may
judge from the unions performance at
Atlantic City, its increased strength
would be used to promote the objectives
OF the Communist party at the expense
Of the interests of this country.
There is the additional point that to
encourage the UPWA would be to en-
courage union which, by plain impli-
cation, asserts right to strike against
the Government and the people whom
the Government represents. But this,
so far as the, UPWA is concerned, may
be regarded as secondary considera-