Evening star., 1949-11-25
Clio Plans 10 Contest
Bell Systems S Move
To Increase Pension
Union to File an 'Unfuir
Labor Charge; Declares
Ii Was Not Consulted
By David Laurence

II an employer wants volun-
tarily to bestow benefit on his
employes-increase their pensions,
for example-he apparently can
not do so, in the opinion Of the
CIO Communication Union, with
out negotiating it first with the
union.
This union is planning, there
fore, to file an unfair labor prac-
tice' charge with the National
Labor Relations Board against the
Bell Telephone System because
the company has just announced
an increase from $50 a month to
500 a month as the minimum
pension for its full-time employees
over IS years of age. ~
Why should any union object
to benefits that will be conferred
voluntarily on its members? Is
an employer to be stopped from
improving working conditions or
giving bonuses or doing any one
of the many things that can i'm
prove labor-management relations
Just because the union officers
want to claim credit for it after
an artificial appearance OF nego-
tiation and a victory settle
ment?
No Cut in Benefits Pledged.
The story in the present in
stance is that the CIO union
claims it wasn't consulted by the
company. The pension plan it.
self contains clause whereby the
company pledges itself not to re-
duce the benefits and certainly,
If anything like that were done,
it would be a proper subject for
discussion with the union. But
must the company submit any,
thing it may wish to do in the
way of increase or Improvement
to the union for consideration be-
fore 1t can act?
The National Labor Relations
Board, and perhaps the Federal
courts, may have to rule on this
question. There are decisions al
ready which say it's an unfair
labor practice for an employer
In the midst of a collective-bar-
gaining negotiation to increase
wages or to discriminate between
groups or to go over the heads
of the union to the rank and file.
But these were early interpreta-
tions Of the Wagner law, and it
may be doubted whether in the
long run even such a strained
construction of the law would be
maintained. For it doesn't make
sense to say an employer cannot
publicize his offer Of increases in
wages during q negotiation.
In this instance, however. there
are no negotiations or collective
bargaining contracts up for con-
alteration between the union and
the employees. There is no exact
precedent, moreover, among the
cases on record which would seem
to cover the question now raised
by the CIO Communications
Union.
The Bell System established its
benefit and pension plan 81 years
ago and has led in the field OF
liberal pensions. The pension plan
itself Of the Bell System has never
been a part of any labor-union
contract. It has been revised Pc
riodically and constantly i'm
proved. The action just taken
conforms to previous procedures.
Nor is there any question OF
discrimination involved, since the
Bell plan applies uniformly to|
every employe at all levels. among
the 20 companies of the entire
operating system from coast to
coast. It includes those who are
not represented by unions as well
as those who are members OF
unions, and all are treated alike.
No employe loses any rights when
transferring from one company IN
the system to another.
Under these circumstances, II
the labor board should rule that
a company cannot improve its
pension plan without consulting
the union-especially where the
pension agreement is not itself a
contract between the union and
the emp1oyer-the end result
would be q complete stagnation
In the evolution of pension plans.
Would Delay Changes.
For one thing, such changes as
are deemed necessary would be
delayed months if not years till
q union could trade the issues for
other questions at the bargaining
table. Meanwhile, union as well
as non-union members would suf-
fer.
If the labor board should agree
with the CIO communications
union and issue an order to desist
from an unfair labor practice" +"
what would such an order mean?
The company would be required,
literally speaking, to withdraw
the benefits given and enter into
q negotiation. This could delay
for year or more the installa-
ton of the new pensions.
Conceivably, it could mean that
hereafter no company could i'm
prove working rule and give the
workers a benefit without waiting
for the annual negotiations with
the unions This brings to the point
of absurdity the issue of labor
management relations. It reveals
union officers as much more in
terested In internal politics and
in getting credit for something
which they really have not initi-
ated than In advancing the In
terests Of the employees.
Much has been said and writ
ten about the alleged desires OF
employers to break up unions, bat
when union officers go counter to
the best interests Of the workers
and seek to prevent employers
from voluntarily conferring bene-
fits on employees, some one else will
be charged some day with having
%f~.~ g. l. l. r.