Evening star., 1947-03-17
Cut in NLRB's Power
Seen as Warranted
Enforcement of Labor Law
Should be Free of Bias
By Dapid Laurence

Dv DUIsO LutOTCU
A misguided campaign has been be-
gun by labor leaders and some Of the
New Dealers in the Administration to
browbeat and intimidate Congress SO
that it will not pass legislation restrict
ing the monopolies Of labor unions.
Witness after witness from the labor
side, as well as from the Administra-
tion, predicts chaos and industrial strife
If Congress dares to enact legislation
banning the closed shop or prohibiting
industry-wide bargaining or ehminat-
ing other devices whereby the economic
system is dominated by labor groups.
The theory seems to be that in some
way labor unions will strike against
or disobey the laws of the United States.
Such ridiculous assumption could be
brushed aside as meaningless were it not
for the fact that it comes seriously
from persons in high positions who
ought to know better.
1t is, in sense, the residue Of nearly
q decade of special privilege which has
led labor unions to feel about their mo-
about their vested rights when they
were interfered with by legislation that
was designed to end exploitation Of
the worker.
Workers Seek Liberation.
Evidence is piling up that the rank
and file Of labor wants to be liberated
from the yoke Of the monopolists who
carry on the lobbying campaigns sup
posedly in their behalf. incidentally.
the Truman Administration, through its
witnesses, is exhibiting decided bias
in favor OF maintaining the special
privileges and monopolies Of labor
unions.
The customary technique Is to argue
that the new laws will complicate mat
ters or will produce chaos or will be
difficult to enforce. All the imaginary
barriers are offered that usually are
interposed whenever Congress tries to
legislate reforms.
One OF the most disappointing docu-
ments is that offered by the National
Labor Relations Board, which has
~ment suggested by Congress and has
acknowledged that 1t considers 1t It's
duty to show bias" in favor Of
collective bargaining
This is not what Congress intended.
The National Legislature does not ere
ate commissions or boards to repre-
sent any special group or technique.
The words collective bargaining" are
in themselves innocent enough, but
the decisions Of the National Labor
Relations Board show that 1t Is biased
in favor Of the CIO concept most Of
the time or at least in favor of national
unions and that independent unions are
considered to be unlawful unless they
are somehow tied with national organi-
zations.
Powers Should Be Shifted
Congress wrote collective bargain
ing" into the law, but it never in
tended to create q crusading agency
to enforce the law The case, therefore,
grows stronger each day to take en-
forcement powers away from the labor
board and to put them into the hands
Of the Department Of Justice. az
The theory that Congress gives an
agency the right to be biased in its
enforcement is new one and could
.conceivably take away fundamental
Constitutional rights. Indeed, this has
already been the result. The NLRB's
testimony cynically opposes any amend
ment to the Wagner law to protect
free speech and insists the Constitution
already protects that right. But the
cases decided by the labor board show
that it still feels it can take away
free speech whenever in its own judg-
ment there has been what the board
arbitrarily may construe as "intimida-
Stion."
The traditional American concept Is
not the New Deal concept of law. The
New Deal concept is that agencies Of
the Government are created to protect
special privileges and that the citizen
does not appear before the Government
as entitled to equal protection before the
law but is already condemned.
Thus, for example, II In the labor
boards judgment of what constitutes
collective bargaining citizen has
uttered words that can be considered
intimidation" then he loses his right
Of free speech. The effect of the deci-
sions which the labor board attempts
now to minimize has been coercive and
has done more to promote bad feeling
between employees and their employers
than any other single factor In labor
management relations today.
Such vaguely written statutes need
amendment and definition. The Ameri-
can people will ultimately sanction far
more drastic laws to amend the Wagner
Act than are now being proposed If the
threats being made by the New Deal
group and the labor union lobby are not
soon eliminated and, instead, . con-
structive course adopted.
(Reproduction Rights RsssrvsdD