Toledo union journal. [volume] (Toledo, Ohio) 1942-current, 1948-04-16
Borqoininq Subject

Ii was somewhat OF a coincidence Jnat
the pension agreement of the United Mine
Workers with the mine operators should
be announced almost at the same time
that the National Labor Relations Board
was handing down a fOur-tO-One decision
that employers must bargain with their
employees on pension plans if the employees
requested such bargaining.
Until the passage of the Taft-Hartley
Labor Relations Act, there never was any
question raised by employers about the
propriety of employees seeking to establish
pensiOn or retirement funds. Even though
such plans have made but little progress,
the employers had nothing upon which to
hang their hats until the National AssOcia-
ton of Manufacturers fortified Taft and
Hartley with the plan to stop such dis
cussiOns.
Since the passage of the Taft-Hartley
Act, many employers who previously had
at least discussed pension plans with their
employees bargaining agents, took the posi-
ton that until the NLRB gave ruling
that they doubted if such negotiations
could properly come within the scope of
collective bargaining.
While it appears obvious that union
proposals to increase the security of the
workers, whether ii be through hOspitaIi-
zatiOn insurance for employees, their wives
and families and retirement fund pro-
gram, or any other type of insurance TO
safeguard the economic position of the
workers, the Taft-Hartley Act was grasped
upon by many employers who, for reasons
of their own fought delaying action to
obstruct any and all possible gains for
their workers.
Ever since the Taft-Hartley Act be-
came effective last year, large number
of employers have grasped upon its pro-
visions (as interpreted by corporation
attorneys TO claim that the law specific
ally prohibits any and all benefits from
employees outside of wages paid for actual
work done during the regulation work
day.
Holiday pay and even Vacation pay
have been targets of some of the more
reactiOnary arrangements attentions, ably
assisted by their legal talent, who, in
many instances, have been library lawyers
able to utilize both the time and effort
necessary to search out the lines, para
graphs and clauses i'm the Labor Relations
Act Taft-Hartley) to prove that the only
thing the employer owed the employee
was the actual wages earned by the en-
ployes doing actual work.
In its decision handed down this week,
the NLRB does not attempt TO say that
employers must grant employees pensions,
but it does say, and very clearly, that
employers are bound to discuss pension
plans, and holds that pensions come within
the scope of wages"
That the boards decision will have far
reaching effects cannot be doubted, for
the question of wages is indeed most
important one, particularly in the face
of precedents which have already been
established and accepted by American
industry.
III pensions are considered within the
scope of wages, then there is good reason
for believing that disqualification and
other social security plans come within
the same category.
All benefits" paid to employees, such
as vacations, disqualification, life insurance
or other security plans, must of necessity
~''A'N A'N''A '''N pA"AihH Va OiilpiONtES.
Obviously, these profits come mainly as n
result of the exertiOnS and work of en-
plOyes and therefore cannot be considered
as gratuity from the employer, but as
accrued wages paid TO the employees under
certain conditions.
The ruling of the NLRB has particu-
larly significant bearing on the case of the
United Auto Workers who succeeded in
obtaining an injunction preventing the
General Motors Corporation from putting
its own insurance plan into effect without
negotiating with the union. The corpora
tion, after agreeing that it would continue
insurance talks with the UAW last year,
broke its pledge several months ago and
attempted TO put its own insurance plan
into effect without consulting the union.
Granting of court injunction followed
which, IN the light of the NLRB's decision
Of this week, clarifies and insures favor.
able decision that will force GM TO talk
over its plan with the union until some
agreement is reached
This latest decision of the NLRB is
leartening to labor, which, in the final
analysis cannot and will not be beaten into
by the Taft-HartIey Act con-
eived in the minds of NAM ATTORNEYS and
hu ananIoxar LotnoI