The Wilmington morning star., 1947-04-21
Today And Tomorrow
By L LIPPMANN

By WALTEl
The vote in the House on the
Hartley bill is a spectacular dem
onstration of the depth and extent
of the reaction against organized
labor. The intention of the bill is
to outlaw all the big weapons of
the labor union - industry = wide
bargaining, the secondary boy
colt, the check-off, sympathetic
strikes, the closed shop, mass
picketing, the picketing of the
homes of non = strikers, sit : down
strikes, featherbedding, immunity
under the Sherman act, the right
to spend money in politics, secre-
cy of union funds, and many
special privileges under the Wag-
ner act. The bill also intends to
rearm employers with many wea-
pons, for example the Injunction
which have been taken away from
them.
The bill does not attempt to dis
guise it's purpose. which is to re-
duce drastically the power of or
ganized labor to bargain co4lec-
lively. Though the bill does not
prohibit collective BARGAINING, 1t is
meant to deprive the unions OF a
very considerable part of their
power when they bargain collec-
lively.
The bill passed the House by a
vote of nearly 3 to /. The Re-
publicans voted for it nearly 10 to
1; among the Democrats there
was a majority in favor of it. No
doubt not all the supporters Of the
bill have read and understood the
whole sixty-six pages on which
it is printed, and many, We may
be sure, who do understand it
were recording their general feel
ing, leaving it to the Senate and
tn President to work out a bill
that can actually become law and
can be enforced.
Nevertheless. the action of the
House is a fact of great impor-
lance, and there is no ground for
thinking that it does not repre- :
sent correctly the feeling. though
probably not the informed and
considered judgment, of that ma
jority Of the people who are not
closely connected with organic
ed labor.
To understand this great reac-
ton against organized unionism.
we must remember that it was
generated in the period of the war
and Immediately after when the
Idemard for labor far exceeded the
supply. When t h i S Congress was
elected in 1916 there was not only
no unemployment, except of those
changing jobs or not willing to
take jobs, but there was more
than full employment. There was
over-employment. Labor was op =
Grating in what was for it a sellers
market, and that, much more
than the legal privileges Of the
Wagner act and the New Deal i,
gave organized and also morgan
lied labor their unprecedented bar
gaining powers. The legal privil-
eyes helped. But in a period OF
large unemployment, they could
not have been exercised so effec-
lively as they were.
These legal privileges, we must
remember, were enacted-also by
impressive Congressional MAORI
ties-after the depression of 1929
and during the '30s, when the
reservoir of unemployed work
ers was never less than about
eight millions. They were approx
ed by the general sentiment of the
country which disregarded the de-
tails as in reverse it does now,
because then the employers were
operating in a buyers market,
and Congress 1egislated to right
the balance.
As a matter of fact neither the
legislation in favor of the unions
curing the sos nor the legislation
against them now has a more
than secondary effect. The con-
trolling condition Is the volume of
employment - whether the de-
mand for labor Is more than Or
less than the supply. During a
period of unemployment, labor
unions, except perhaps those
| which have a tight monopoly Of
special skill, will be weak, and the
general sentiment Of the country
and its politicians will be pro-la-
Dor and in favor Of reform. i'm
provements, and a new deal. Dur
ing a period like the one Of war
employment and postwar intla-
tionary demands for goods and
services, labor will be strong, I'M
ions will use to the full and abuse
frequently their power, and the
temper of the country will be anti
Labor and conservative and reac-
tionary.
Labor legislation will reflect.
rather than control, the phases OF
the economic cycle. It was not the
Wagner act but the reflationary
measures of the New Deal, and
then above all the gigantic war
expenditures which raised labor
from the abyss of 1929 to the
height of power which it had at
tanned by 1916. It will not be the
labor legislation of the Congress