Evening star., 1948-10-22
Mass Pieketing Ruling
Held Step for Better
Labor Relations
Decision Of Examiner, If
Upheld by Bourd, Clears
Question of Coercion
Bv David Laurence


Question Of Coercion
By David Laurence
When the new labor-management
relations law was being debated by
Congress in l947, proposals were
made specifically to forbid mass
picketing but the answer was given
then that any coercion imposed on
employees would be prohibited any
way. 30 no special provision on the
subject was inserted.
Now q National Labor Relations
Board examiner has interpreted for
the first time since what Is meant
by mass picketing. If the ruling is
upheld by the board itself, no legisla-
ton will be necessary to cover this
point and the original intent Of
Congress will have been borne out.
The boards examiner pointed out
that what is or is not mass picket
ing Is a question of fact and implied
that mere picketing Of q peaceful
nature by q large number Of pickets
was not necessarily unlawful.
Ruling In Chicago Case.
In the case in question, however,
which happened in Chicago, the
pickets monopolized an 8-foot side
walk for the length Of the building
entrance. The labor boards exami-
ner, Irving Rogosin, writes:
"Such picketing would necessarily
result In obstruction Of the side
walk, and interference with ingress
and egress at the plant entrance.
Employees, willing to cross picket
line, are not required to await a
fortuitous breach in the line, and
to so time their entrance or exit as
to avoid encounter with the picketS.
Nor are they required to enlist the
aid of police in order to gain ingress
or egress from plant"
This Is the first time that the
right to work has been spelled~out
so comprehensively since the era Of
special privilege and physical vio-
lence under the guise Of govern
mental protection began In 1885 with
the passage Of the Wagner Labor
Relations Act. There never really
was any sanction in the Wagner
law itself for mass picketing, but
labor union leaders took the po-
sition that the right Of the workers
to organize carried with 1t the right
to prevent other workers from dis
regarding the wishes of union lead
ers when a strike was in progress.
II any employer had undertaken
to bar by physical force the entrance
of union members to labor union
meeting, the Wagner Act would
nave been promptly invoked as an
interference with the rights Of self
organization.
Now when the Labor Management
Relations Act confers equal rights
on union and nonunion members
and protects the rights Of every
worker to work or to refrain from
union activity, If he desires, there
is o natural protest from the
labor unions which have had their
own way at the factory entrances.
The instances of mass picketing
have multiplied in recent years.
Newspaper files contain innumer-
: able photographs of actual violence
in preventing workers from exer-
cising their right to work. Local
State and city authorities, frequently
with an eye to the political in
f1uence of labor unions, have been
derelict In their duty to enforce
law and order. Civil rights are
espoused by many of the same union
bosses in relation to the South, but
none advocates any Federal law to
protect civil rights as against the
failure of sheriffs and local officers
to enforce constitutional rights in
the North.
Form Of Coercion.
The theory under which the Fed
eral courts for decades have pro-
tected peaceful picketing" is that
it shall really be peaceful. To call a
worker names for crossing the picket
line is a form of coercion or intim-
idation, and the new labor man.
agement relations law forbids any
one from coercing worker, wheth-
er it be an employer or fellow work.
ers. ?
The CIO union In question offered
as o defense that picketing was
protected under the constitutional
right of free speech and assembly.
1t was argued that the pickets were
engaging in a parade" But it de-
veloped that no permit for the pa
rade or procession had been OBJ
tanned from the city authorities,
and the examiner commented that
unlike conventional parades, the
procession did not march in the
streets Of the city, but paraded on
the sidewalks, from strike head
quarters to the company plant,
where 1t paraded back and forth in
front of the plant. in a manner in
which picketing Is usually con-
Quoted, until intercepted by the po-
lice"
What the ruling means Is that,
even If the police do furnish protec-
ton and break up the picketing, the
officers Of a union who authorize
and its members who engage in
mass picketing can be subjected
to the process Of discipline known as
an unfair labor practice" This is
indeed progress toward better bal
ance In labor-management relations
than has heretofore been known
and naturally the minority of strong
arm men in the labor-union move
ment don't like 1t.
tRsproductien Rights ksssrved)