Toledo union journal. [volume] (Toledo, Ohio) 1942-current, 1946-05-17
Washington
LaborReport
By Bradford v. Carter


by erupting with a rash of
legislation aimed at curbing
strikes and curbing unions.
Washington is currently in
the throes of such an epidemic.
It may be AIDED parenthetical-
ly, that the deliberate with
holding of goods from the mar
ket by profit hungry business
men evokes no similar re-
Sponse although it an be
proved statistically that such
legal blackmail has been a
much more effective brake on
production than are strikes.
The ingredients of these
anti-labor proposals are pretty
much stereotyped largely be-
cause their hackers really are
ignorant about labor relations
and therefore have to resort
constantly to the we'll worn
anti-labor grab bag for their
ideas.
The first ingredient of the
anti-labor formula is to
weaken or cripple the effect of
the unions strike weapon.
This purpose is usually i'm
plemented by requiring cool
ing off period or the filing of
a so or 80 day notice. Some
proposals go so far as to ban
strikes completely in specific
industries.
ARBITRATION
A second common ingredi-
ent is compulsory arbitration
by which both labor and man.
agement would be bound by
the decision of a government
established tribunal in the set
tlement of their disputes.
Many Congressman a N d
others who should know bet
ter are under the erroneous
impression that compulsory
arbitration exists on the rail-
roads and even that railroad
workers are forbidden by law
to strike. The fact is that
there is no legal force which
can prevent the railroad un-
ions from striking after the
report of the presidential fact
finding board is issued. More
over there is nothing in the
law which binds either the un-
ions or the management to the
terms recommended by the
fact-finding board.
Another prominent element
in the proposals to strait-jacket
the unions is to bar the in
clusion of particular provisions
in collective agreements. In
the Case bill the idea was to
put a legislative ban on any
thing which interfered with
something known as manage
ment prerogatives." Of more
recent vintage in the formula
is the proposal to deprive
foremen of the right to bar
gain collectivel, with their
employers through unions OF
their own choosing.
Finally there is always the
proposal to restore the unlim-
tied right of the Federal courts
to grant injunctions in labor
disputes which was sharply re-
stricted in the Norris-La-
Guardia Act. What sponsors
of this kind of Legislation
want is the injection of the
police power of the Federal
Government to break strikes.
THROW BACK
If the history of labor rela-
tions is any guide to what is
likely to happen if these pro-
posals were ever made into
law, we may say with COM
plete assurance that conflicts
between workers and employ
ers would become again the
violent outbreaks that they
had been for century or more.
It's a curious thing about
labor relations before the New
Deal-despite the restrictions
and suppression which were
practiced against labor organ
ization by employers and the
government, no nation has
seen more bitter violence in
labor disputes. And if the IS
or so volumes which consti-
tute the record of the La
Toilette committees hearing
make any sense. They tell us
that most of the violence in
labor disputes has been delib-
crate, systematic, and employ
er inspired.
Much progress has been
made in peaceful labor rela-
tions in the last ten years or
so. Basically this program can
be attributed to the fact that
there was a National Labor
Relations Act on the books;
that the act made it possible
for unions to function more
or less freely.
If xynII douhf that ~ has haaY1