Minneapolis spokesman. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1934-2000, 1949-02-04
THE WEEK
Under Capitol
DOVE
BY Clifford Rucker

Last Saturday in Duluth one OF
the persons in the audience stated
that he noted the introduction OF
two Fair Employment Practices
bills In the state legislature and
that he would welcome informA-
ton as TO the differences In the
bills.
With the thought that some of
the readers Of this column might
find such information OF value, an
attempt IL made here TO show the
points Of variance between the
two bills.
The Fair Employment Practices
bill introduced in the Senate by
Senators Mullin, Roscnmeier and
Vukehch and in the House by
Representatives Flom. Langley,
Peterson p. X. Podgorski and
Sheran Is the identical bill pre-
scented to the l947 Legislature and
Is endorsed by the Governors In
terrAcial Commission. We will re-
fer to this AZ the "oId Bill" The
bill introduced In the senate by
Senator Homer Carr OF Proctor
and by Representatives Pat Good
in Of Minneapolis. Richard SiIvola
Of Virginia, Loren Rutter Of Kin
ney. Thomas Letnes of NielsVtlle
and Vladimir shipkA Of Grand
Rapids In the House will be refer
red to m the New Bill"
The title and general purposes
Of the two bills are the same cx-
cept that the old bill does not COW
er employers having less than 20
persons employed whereas the
new bill does not include any en-
pIoyer with less than six persons
employed.
Both bills provide for . com.
mission Of flfteca persons. I'm
the Old Bill q quorum would be
seven; I'm the new, three persons
would constitute u quorum and
the members would be- allowed
necessary and actual travelling
expenses.
A major difference between the
bills occurs In the section cover
ing the Powers and Duties Of the
Commission and Director. The
New Bin would set up local and
statewide Cancellation councils
composed Of representative cit-
Iens serving without pay but en-
titled 10 actual expenses.
The New Bill also would give
the Commission the night 10 sub
poenA witnesses. compel their at
tendance, administer oaths, take
testimony and require the produc-
ton for examination OF any books
or papers relating 10 matters un-
der Investigation or In question.
II also lists certain conditions
with reference 70 testimony and
Standardization Hereunder.
Another major difference oc-
ours In the definition Of Unfair
Employment Practices. The Old
Bill declares II unfair employment
practice for an employer because
Of race. religion. color or national
origin to refuse TO hire or employ.
b bar or discharge or discrtmi-
nate against such individuals In
compensation, terms, conditions
or privileges Of employment.
TIE New nan adds the words
unless based 0a o bona fIde &C.
cupationaI q,lAIlfieatIOn."
The New Bin also proposed 70
make Il an unlawful practice for
any employment agency to print.
circulate OF cause 20 be printed or
circulated any statement, adver-
tisemsnt. or publication. or 70 use
any form Of application for en-
ployment or To make any inquiry
In connection with prospective
employment. which expresses, d.
rectly or Indirectly. any linita-
ton. specification or discrfmina-
ton. unless based upon o bona
fIde Occupational Qualification.
The Old Ban provides that u
any clause. sentsnce, paragraph
or part Of this act or the sppliea-
ton thereof 20 any person or cir
cunstsnces. shah. for cay reason.
Be- adjUdged BY Q court Of onmpe-
tent Jurisdiction 10 Be Invalid.
such Judgment shan not effect.
impair or tnvahdats the remain
der Of this act. Ths New Bal does
not contain this provision
These are the major differences
between the two Pair Employ
meat Practices bills. II 10 wen 70
rssrnphassEe that with the BsIn-
bers of the legislature rests tn
decass0n a. 70 the content Of ths
final hin