Evening star., 1946-05-24
The Presidents DUTY

railroad strike seems to belong in 9
different category from the other
strikes which have plagued this
country since the wars end. Blu,
actually, except in the measurement
of its consequences, there is no real
difference.
In the railroad strike, the coal
strike, the steel strike, the petroleum
strike and in many of the other
strikes involving powerful unions
and great industries vitally affect
ing the life of the Nation there is
clear and undeniable evidence that
collective bargaining has failed. And
the railroad strike, climaxing a sue
cesslon of threatened railroad
strikes which were prevented only
by actions taken outside the law
demonstrates that the Railway
Labor Act, possibly the best legisla-
ton OF its kind in our experience
is a failure.
Equally clear are the principal
reasons for the collapse of the ma
cnlnery set up for the voluntary set
tlement of industrial disputes. These
voluntary processes have failed be-
cause of an increasing disinclination
to make them work. In some cases
the employers have been at fault,
oelleVlng that they could obtain a
better settlement with their workers
after a strike had forced Govern
ment intervention. In more cases
the unions have been at fault. Slant
ed laws have given the men who be-
long to unions and the men who lead
them enormous power, and expert
ence has taught them that, fire.
quently, they can use this power to
coerce the public and to coerce
the Government, thereby obtaining
greater concessions than could be
obtained through peaceful bargain
ing.
The railroad strike illustrates the
point. Two out of twenty unions,
representing 25O,OOO workers, forced
the President, by threat of a strike,
to offer them a higher wage than
had been recommended by the
emergency board set up under the
law. But the President did not bid
high enough and the leaders of
these two dissenting unions-men
possessed of power far out of pro-
portion to their sense of RESPONSE
bility--have resorted to a strike
which has crippled the country, be-
lieving that they can get what they
want, whether reasonable or unrea-
sonable, if the public can be made to
suffer enough.
The question of placing blame,
however, is of secondary Importance.
The significant fact. whether unions
or employers or both are at fault,
is that the public is the victim of
their eXcesses, and that there is not
now any legal means whereby the
overriding public interest can be
protected
In this situation the duty of the
President is clear. He has tried as
best he could with the means at
hand to keep our economy on an
even keel. But there cannot be the
slightest doubt that he has failed,
nor that the prestige and dignity
of his office have suffered in the
process. Furthermore, as failure
piles upon failure, the prestige of
the President will continue to
diminish until point is reached at
which he will have little or no
influence and we will witness the
spectacle of the President of the
United States being defied by every
small-minded and arrogant spokes-
man for minority interest with
some selfish and often petty end in
view Clearly, there is no hope in
this direction, and unless the coun-
try is to resign itself to continuing
and endless succession of utterly
destructive industrial upheavals, the
duty of the President is equally clear.
For the first time in more than
a decade labor legislation is before
the Senate. Some action is going
to be taken, yet the various propos-
ais now under consideration, desir-
able as they may be in themselves,
are far from adequate. The imper-
ative need is for broad and compre-
hensive legislative action-action
which will be basically concerned
with the protection of the public
interest in situation which has
become intolerable But the recon-
mendation for that action should
and must come from the President.
1t would be futility, however, to
come forward with a timorous, half
hearted, politically motivated pro-
posal. In The Stars opinion, the
time has come for the President to
put before the Congress a fortnight
recommendation for legislation set
ting up system of compulsory arbi-
tration, applicable to all industrial
disputes vitality affecting the public
interest and backed by sanctions
sufficiently drastic to insure ac-
ceptance by the parties to the dis
putes.
This probably would be opposed
by both labor and management.