Evening star., 1947-09-24
ITU No-Contract Stand
Faces Early Court TEST
After Denham Charqe
By jones Y. Newton

W S0hiSS . tNCWtVu
The printers union no-con-
tract policy seemed headed for |
an early court test today follow
ing action by Robert N. Denham,
National Labor Relations Board
general counsel, in citing the
union for violation of the Taft
Hartley Act.
Mr.. Denham filed a complaint
against the Baltimore local of the
AFI International Typographical
Union, charging it with refusing "to
bargain collectively in good faith,"
which is an unfair" practice under
the new labor relations law. This is
a new provision and it is the first
time such charge has been filed
against union.
The complaint was issued by the
Baltimore regional Office of NLRB,
which is under the general counsel,
after a charge of refusal to bargain
had been filed by % Baltimore print
ing shops organized as the Graphic
Arts League.
Expected to Go to High Court.
The case will be heard by an
NLRB trial examiner October 6. The
examiners findings will oe reported
to the national board here. Appeals
may be taken from the boards oe-
cision. and eventually, the matter is
expected to be decided by the Su-
preme Court.
Last month at it's convention in
Cleveland, the printers union
adopted policy against future
contracts with employers. In the
place of contracts. the union de-
cided to post conditions of en-
ployment" which were to be arrived
at more or less unilaterally by the
workers. The conditions would
cover all working conditions and
wages.
This plan was designed primarily
to get around the Hartley law
ban on the closed shop, a type of
union security which the ITU has
enjoyed for decades.
Convention Policy Followed.
The Baltimore local followed the
policy laid down by the ITU con-
vention, and the charge and Mr..
Denham's complaint resulted.
Jacob L. Edelman, attorney repre-
senting the Baltimore local, said he
would battle the charge every inch
of the way"
Il feel it was the impetuous action
of some one in Washington who au-
thorized the issuance of the COM
plant" Mr.. Edelman said. There
was no threatening action I know
of to- justify the complaint"
Coercion Also Charged.
Besides the charge of refusing to
bargain, the NLRB regional office
also accused the Baltimore printers
of restraining and coercing' the
printing shops in the selection of
plant foremen. The shops employ
about 100 union printers.
Mr., Edelman said the union had
not received copies of the NLRB
complaint, but that he had been
notified of the action.
However, our assumption is that
the union is charged with refusing
to bargain in good faith with the
Graphic Arts League. We deny en-
phatically on behalf of the union
any such charge"
In second challenge Of the ITU
policy, the Union Employers Sec
tion of the Printing Industry of
America yesterday adopted a reso-
luton pledging members to bargain
with the union in full compliance"
with the lew labor act.
Second NLRB Action In Two Days.
The resolution, voted at a meet
Ing in French Lick. Ind, said this
no-contract policy is, in our opinion,
a violation of both the spirit and
the letter" of the act "in that it
represents refusal on the part of
this union to bargain collectively"
Yesterdays .NLRB move was the
second action In two days under the
Taft Hartley law, which went into
full effect month ago.
The NLRB previously asked for
Federal court order against an AFL
carpenters union at Chattanooga
Tenn, to enjoin it from a secondary
boycott. A hearing on the suit was
set for September 30.
The old Wagner Act banned only
unfair practices by employers and
did not cover secondary boycotts,
which involve union action against
an employer with whom the union
has no specific dealings.
The Chattanooga suit named
Local IA of the International Broth
erhood of Carpenters and Joiners.
The Ira A. Watson Co., a speciality
store, filed charges against the union
three weeks ago claiming members
Of the labor group had refused to
work on jobs where Watson had a
contract for laying linoleum.
The store does not employ union
men in laying linoleum and has
refused to sign contract with the
union. asserting none of its en-
ploye5 is a member. The union
II 1l> AZ eSJ 49,,