Evening star., 1947-02-11
Virginia's Anti-Strike Law
Aimed at Public Utility Tieups, 1t Avoids Forced
Arbitration, but Holds Penalties for Each Side
Rv Rnvmond Rrnndf
By Raym ond p. Brandt


Chief washington correspon,
As result of two threatened strikes
in essential public utilities within six
months, the Commonwealth of Virginia
has on its statute books today law
forbidding work stoppages in water,
light, gas, electric power, transporta-
tion and communication industries
within the State.
Under the new law. which became
effective January %. the Governor is
empowered to seize and operate any
utility In which labor dispute threat
ems Substantially to impair the safety
or health of the citizens of Virginia"
Before such seizure, the Governor
may try to bring about agreement be-
tween the utility management and its
workers. If either side notifies the
Governor that further negotiations
would be fruitless, it is the Governors
duty to request both parties to sub
NIT their differences to arbitration. II
this request Is formally rejected, the
party deciding to engage in lockout
or strike must fix date for the work
stoppage, which shall be not less than
five weeks from the date of the notice.
II any agreement Is not reached dur
ing those five weeks, the State takes
over the operation of the utility, while
the disputants continue their negotia-
tions Compulsory arbitration Is avoided.
Both sides would be penalized by the
governmental operation. Fifteen per
cent of the utility's net revenues dur
ing seizure would be used by the State
to reimburse itself for the operation
and the training and hiring of replace
ments for workers who refuse to work
for the State; employees would receive
the same pay during State operation as
they received prior to the seizure, thus
eliminating retroactive increases that
might be attained by normal collective
bargaining.
Involuntary Servitude" Charged.
The law was overwhelmingly approved
by the General Assembly last month.
The House vote was SO to 6, the Senate,
81 to l. Organized labor bitterly op-
posed It, arguing that 1t was uncon-
stitutienal because it interfered with
the right Of contract and permitted in
voluntary servitude for at least five
weeks.
The history of the law goes back
to March when the. International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
(AFI), threatened a strike against the
Virginia Electric & Power Co. Gov.
William M. Tuck made national news
when he invoked an ancient colonial
militia law to draft" the workers. The
strike was averted at the last minute,
but Tuck started to find more modern
authority for future action. In October
VEPCO management refused to abide
by National Labor Relations Board
order certifying the IBEW as the bar
gaining representative for the foremen.
The union successfully threatened
strike to force the company to accept
the boards certifcation.
Two threats in one year were enough
for Gov. Tuck, who thereupon requested
the Virginia Advisory Legislative Coun-
Gil, composed of nine legislators, to re-
port on two bills, one banning closed
shop contracts, the other designed to
prevent public utility strikes until the
State could seize and operate the utility.
Both bills became law.
Of the nine councillors, eight favored
public utility antistrike legislation,
although they did not agree on details.
One thought the Virginia Assembly
should wait to see what Congress would
do about labor relations.
Protection From a Minority.
The majority report said that the
dominant thought of the proposed legis-
lation was that "the public at large has
the right to be protected from the acts
Of the minority insofar as the minority
is not enslaved or their rights and nber-
ties otherwise encroached upon. The
rights and duties Of the minority are
coextensive with those of the majority"
The report continued:
'The theory of this bill is that the
parties are encouraged to get together
on their differences and the State will
only step in when they fail to do so.
The Council considered compulsory ar
bitration and enforcement of awards
but these run into several difficulties,
some Constitutional and others practi-
cal. OF course, purely voluntary arbitra-
ton Is desirable and should be en-
couraged.
"It is believed that the period of
State operation will be relatively short
since the utility will have lost control
Of its property and the employees cannot
obtain their demands until the manage
ment of the utility is again placed in
charge Of operation" One councillor
agreed with six others on the need for
law, but thought the State Corpora
ton Commission should be empowered
to decide what is legitimate wage
and what are proper methods Of work
and reasonable work-loads for the In
dividual employe."
This, In sense, would be compulsory
arbitration and its advocate said: