Evening star., 1948-12-30
Labor Acts Repeal
Without Substitute
Measure Doubted
Union Leaders Believed
MiseoIcuIotine; Trumon
Veto Seen If 1t Passes
Bp David Laurence

cussion inside the Administration.
For several weeks now it has been
assumed that only two courses OF
action were open to the President
to recommend outright and COM
plete repeal of the existing law. al
lowing an interval to elapse while a
study was being made of a substi-
tute, or else to recommend that the
repeal be accompanied by simulta-
neous enactment OF fair substi-
tute.
The first course. which labor
union leaders want, presupposes
that the Wagner Act would be re-
stored and that there would be no
limitation on time consumed in con-
sidering a substitute-that, in fact.
the end result might be such con.
troversy as to wind up with no sub
stitute at all.
Some Ask Repeal of Both.
The second course is one that has
been urged upon the President, but
it is doubtful whether he will be
able to throw of the shackles placed
upon him by the labor union lead
ers, who now claim Mr.. Truman
didn't elect himself but that the
labor unions did it for him.
There is, however. third course
looming up as possibility. 1t would
call for repeal of the Taft-Hartley
Act, including the original Wagner
Act, so that no statute governing
labor relations would be in effect.
A small minority OF labor leaders,
notably John L. Lewis, think that it
was a mistake in 1885 for Congress
to put the Federal Government into
the business of regulating labor
management relations and that,
since collective bargaining is already
established in many industries and
the right to strike is unlimited any
way, labor would be better of with
out either the Wagner law or the
Taft-Hartley Act. A small segment
Of management likewise would pre-
fer to see both the Wagner Act and
the Taft Hartley Act swept from
the statute books.
MtScaIculatlOn Seen.
Mr.. Truman, on the other hand,
could be expected to veto any such
repeal bill, even If it did command
q majority in Congress, and 1t seems
certain that no two-thirds majority
could be modified to override the
veto. Such a veto would leave the
Taft-Hartley Act intact.
The more the situation is studied,
the more 1t appears that the labor
union leaders have miscalculated
their opportunity to get repeal Of
the Taft Hartley Act through with
out simultaneous action on sub
stitute. They will not discard the
idea, however, and it may be ex-
pected that President Truman will
90 along with them. at least in his
message.
Mr.. Truman may say that expert
ence with the Wagner Act was quite
satisfactory and that after repeal
of the Hartley Act time is
needed for the study which he once
recommended. He could express the
hope that the survey would not
take long. though everybody knows
that, once the Taft-Hartley Act is
repealed and the Wagner Act Is
restored, labor unions will have the
whip hand and will do everything
in their power to stall of amend
ments-something at which the
labor union lobby was quite success
full from 1885 to 1916.
Business Alarm Unjustified.
Businessmen will be alarmed at a
recommendation by President Tru-
man that the Taft Hartley Act be
replaced Temporarily" by the old
Wagner Act. But they needn't be.
This is what the unions want, and
this is what they will insist upon,
for they feel they own Mr.. Truman
body and soul and that he doesn't
dare to differ with them on his cam
paign pledge, which they interpret
sbout as they please. If they sue
ceed in forcing Mr.. Truman and
majority in Congress to do their
bidding and then labor manage
ment relations deteriorate, much
more drastic law, regulating more
details of the operations of labor
unions than the Taft-Hartley Act,
may be expected as sequel when
the country elects q Congress OF
another political complexion either
two or four years hence.
II the labor -union leaders insist
on extremes, 1t will be sign that
they learned nothing from the cir
cumstances that prompted the pas
sage of the Hartley Act-a
mild and weak statute compared to
what some future Congress may
enact if economic power is arbi-
trarily exercised by union leaders
to the serious injury Of the public
interest.
Action Could Be Delayed.
While the new Congress which
meets next week contains a major
ity which originally voted to enact
the Taft Hartley Law, there have
been signs that II q fair substitute
were proposed this majority would
accept it. But If labor union leaders
muddy the waters with a demand
for a restoration of an unamended
Wagner Law, the controversy will
grow complicated and action will be
delayed indefinitely. The leverage
will then rest with the majority who
want a substitute that is fair to
labor and management alike.
Mr.. Truman could play his cards
politically and recommend outright
repeal and restoration of the orig
inal Wagner Act together with
proposal that joint committee be
appointed to make q study and that
a labor-management conference be
called
This would discharge his obliga-
ton to the labor union leaders and
would not really mean anything,
because Congress will have to legis-
late and Mr.. Truman will not come
into the picture till a majority in
Congress give him a bill to sign or
veto.
Reproduction Rights Reserved)
Q