Evening star., 1947-05-26
I Senators Backing
Labor Bill Voted for
Wagner Act in 1895
By JOY g. Hayden


The revolution in the attitude OF
Congress toward organized labor is
illustrated by the fact that 7 Of Is
Senators who voted for the Wagner
Labor Relations Act In 1885, and
still are in the Senate, turned to
support the drastic revision OF that
statute now pending.
The seven are George of Georgia,
Connally of Texas, McKellar of Ten
nessee, Overton of Louisiana and
Hatch of New Mexico, Democrats;
White of Maine and Capper of Kan
sas, Republicans.
Those who voted both times on
the labor side are Senators
Wagner of New York, Barkley of
Kentucky, Murray of Montana.
O'Mahoney Of Wyoming. Thomas
of Oklahoma, and McCarran Of
Nevada.
The 18th member Of this group
Is Senator Bilbo of Mississippi.
Vote Was So to 127.
The vote by which the Wagner
Act passed the Senate was So to IL.
OF the small group that opposed 1t,
the only survivors are Senators VAN
denburg, Republican of Michigan,
and Tydings of Maryland and Byrd
of Virginia, Democrats.
An amendment offered by Senator
Tydings and voted down, so to 81, is
especially significant in the light of
the Taft-Ives controversy over the
present bill. With what was then
called the Wagner-Connery BILL for
bidding employers to interfere with
or coerce employees" in collective
bargaining, Senator Tydings pro-
posed to prohibit equally coercion
of workers by labor unions"
\. Another amendment passed by the
House, 127 to 81, on motion of Rep
resentative Ramspeck, Democrat, of
Georgia, but eliminated in confer
ence, would have forbidden the
Labor Board to fix as "a collective
bargaining unit" any group en-
bracing employees OF more than one
employer.
Attacked BY AFL.
Despite this strong expression of
congressional distaste for industry
wide or Nation wide bargaining, the
Labor Board first appointed by Presi-
dent Roosevelt favored so invariably
the largest possible bargaining units
that it was bitterly attacked by the
crafts ts-minded American Federation
of Labor. Representative Connery,
Democrat, of Massachusetts,, sponsor
of the bill in the House. himself
offered an amendment which, If
adopted, might have saved the Labor
Board from some of the disrepute 1t
accumulated.
This amendment, declaring that
nothing in this act shall abridge
the freedom of speech, as guaran-
teed in the first amendment of the
Constitution" was rejected on the
ground that it was unnecessary.
The board, however, as one of its
earliest acts, laid down the dictum
that if an employer so much as
spoke disparingly of labor unionism
in the presence of an employee, this
action constituted coercion.
An amendment by Representative
Bierman, Democrat, Of Iowa, which
would have forbidden strikes in de-
flance Of union contract. was
voted down in the House, 140 to lot.
Influenced by Schechter Case.
The 1885 debate discloses that the
two chief factors prompting Con-
gress to pass the Wagner Connery
law were Cd The Supreme Courts
Schechter decision outlawing the
National Recovery Administration,
and f2) desire to do away with
company unions"
Section IA Of the NRA Act for
the first time established collective
bargaining by workers through rep
resentatives of their own choosing
as a basic legal right. The court
decision knocked this out. The Sem
ate previously had passed the Wag-
ner-Connery bill and Immediately
after the Schechter decision the
House rushed it to the statute books
without even a record vote.
If anybody in Congress SO much
as dreamed that by this enactment
there was being created the undevi-
ating alliance of government with
organized labor that came out of
it, no speech so discloses. What
really brought about the combina-
ton, as it now appears, was the ex-
treme constructions placed upon the
law by the Labor Board, backed ul-
timately by Rooseveltized Su-
preme Court.