Toledo union journal. [volume] (Toledo, Ohio) 1942-current, 1949-04-22
Time For Plain Talk

BY TOM BURKE

fled to this committee that they were quite
satisfied with their collective bargaining agree
ments.
MOSHER: l certainly do not want to rem
der the impression that | do not know OF
great many cases where we have had collec-
tive bargaining, and very successfully, with
certain unions. And the record Is good, yer.
good, / still rest on my original statement,
which was that under the Wagner Act, collec-
tive bargaining was becoming impossible, and
it became impossible in countless numbers of
cases.
A bit later had an opportunity to ques-
ton L. r. Boulware, vice president in charge
of employee relations of General Electric Co.
The topic was featherbedding.
BURKE: l would like to ask Mr.. Boulware
a question for two reasons. First, something
that appeared in his statement and second,
think that after all these legal terms, you and
l can talk in shop language.
BOULWARE: We will try, anyway.
BURKE: | want to refer on page B-4, to
your featherbedding statement. You say, I'VE
get practically all our advances in production
from incentive-inspred and owner-provided
chronological improvements that lengthen
mans arms"
| quite agree with the latter part of that
statement and probably most of it, In our
process of industrial evolution the hand tool
was the extension of the mans hand and the
machine tool was the eXtention of the hand
lOOl. NOW 40 l understand your SIdteIlleHt
here to mean that simply because increase in
production through chronological improve
ment is first, ncentive-nSpired, and next the
chronological improvement is oWner-provided,
then any challenge that the worker might
make to the production standard that the
owner of the machine tool might desire would
be in the nature of featherbedding?
BOULWARE: Oh, no, indeed We feel that
the fair days work as to the combination of
skill, care, interest and effort is something
that should be going up all the time In the
skill and care and interest and should perhaps
be going down as to physical effort, as we
know how to take the work out of the work.
BURKE: l understand
BOULEWARE: And we do not
BURKE l have only three minutes, sir.
BOULWARE: What we are saying here is
that this is the way we can provide do
not know, but maybe, 4-day week.
BURKE: l understand that the theory of
mass production is that the idea is to take the
load off the mans back as much as possible.
Now, in writing law, you would advocate,
then, that that law provide that the setting
of production standards shall not be subject to
the process of collective bargaining?
BOULWARE: Oh, no. indeed What we are
after here is this: You have full days work,
by reasonable modern standards. That is the
way we describe it, full days work content.
And what we are after here is that you cam
not come in and by force set up the situation
where fellow is going to do a half days work
just because of some power involved, when it
is unfair, palpably unfair. to other people.
There are plenty of Irregularities in days
work You cannot regulate the machines that
we'll
BURKE: But production standards can
properly be subject to the processes of collec-
tive bargaining.
BOULWARE: That is right.
BURKE: That Is all.
And so it went all through the testimony
of management representatives. They made
flat statements, designed to undermine the
cause of Labor and it was up to the members
of the committee to sift their statements and
by questioning bring out the true facts, the
exceptions to what the industrialists maintained
was the rule.
There was much good testimony, of course,
by labor leaders and friends of Labor But
there is no need to review it here. 1t is the
story we all know, have lived through and
know to be true.