Toledo union journal. [volume] (Toledo, Ohio) 1942-current, 1946-02-08
Washington
LaborReport
BY Bradford V. Carter


publicsns has pulled another
fast one. This time, by par
liamentary maneuvering of
the most outrageous sort.
The coalition which really
controls the present House of
Representatives succeeded in
bringing to the floor the
Case Bill, which everybody
here knows is a clear-cu at
tempt by the Republican Ma
tional Committee to put over
an anti-labor bill in order to
make the most of the pres
ent industrial unrest.
the curious thing about the
Case bill (Which is not this
obscure Republicans creation
at all, but that of the heavy
duty thinkers of Southern re-
action Smith of Virginia and
Cox of Georgia, aided by Hal
leck of Indiana, Is that If it
were in force currently it
would convert the peaceful
strike situation into a Seeth-
ing caldron of violence and
bitterness.
Un derpious sentiments
about "the duty of both en-
ployers and employees to bar
gain in good faitn," the bill is
a more illiterate version of
the Ball-Burton-Hatch bill.
In fact, it Is interesting to
observe how the B2H bill has
served as treasury of anti
labor proposals. Not one bill
comes up to destroy the un-
ions that doesn't borrow from
Donald Richberg'S concoction.
CASE BILL
The Case Bill sets up a tri-
partite board which would
first attempt to mediate dis
putes. If it couldn't mediate,
it would attempt to persuade
the parties to accept arbitra-
ton.
There is no Limitation on
the authority of the So-called
public members to intervene
in a dispute except that it
must be one which "substan-
tally affects the public in
terest," and that workers en-
ployed in a plant of less than
so workers are not covered by
the provisions. The dispute
does not need to affect inter-
state commerce, which Is the
common provision in federal
legislation. In short, the al
legedly public members under
this bill can, for all practical
purposes, intervene in any
dispute they chose.
II they accept jurisdiction,
then a cooling off" period of
thirty days must enSue. Some
how the supporters of this leg
lation must be blind to the OBJ
Vious facts. In the current
strike wave, there have been
no quickie strikes of any con-
sequence. Instead the unions
have waited not 80 days, but
closer to 90 days before un-
dertaking strike action.
The advocates of the cool
ing-off provision must also
have missed the whole point
of the Smith-Connally expert
ence; unions, in order to pro-
tect themselves, filed strike
notices whether or not strike
action was actually contem-
plated. Like Smith -Connally,
this legislation would mean
more not fewer strike notices.
AN ATTACK
The underlying intent of the
Case Bill as an attack on the
basic rights of labor is clearly
revealed In the barring of SUI
pervisory employees from the
protection of the Natl. Labor
Relations Act. AS this provi-
sion is drafted, not only would
it bar foremen, but practically
every worker who may guide
or direct the activities Of other
employees.
A new wrinkle is added in
the bill by barring workers
engaged 'in the computation
OF the pay OF other employees
from the protection of the
NLRB. This would affect, for
example, bookkeeepers, pay
roll clerks and time clock at
tendantS. In other words,
workers of the kinds indicated
above could be fired at will by
employers If they joined a un-
ion or were active in it.
The most vicious provision,
however, is the one which in
effect revokes the Norris-La-
Guardia anti-labor injunction
act. This would mean a re-
turn to strike breaking in
functions and the bitter vio-
lence which had always en-
sued in the enforcement of
these injunctions.