The journal. (Caldwell, Ohio) 1934-1961, 1950-02-16

Morton Clausen public aware
ness the question as to whether
labor unions should be subjected
to the antitrust laws of the
land. 1t is a question of far
reaching implications to every
citizen. to the labor unions, to
our national economy, and not
in the least, to the legal frame
work upon which this nation to
an ever increasing degree must
erect its social, economic and
moral structure.
Under present interpretations
labor unions as such are not
subject to the antitrust laws.
Consequently, any labor. czar
can tie up not only one but sew
eral Industries while the public
is being made the hapless and
helpless victim, without recourse
to law.
The only reason that can be
logically advanced for such a
situation is that labor holds re-
straining powers over our ma
tional administrative and judi
ciary machinery to such an ex-
tent that the laws of the land
are rendered imperative.
1t seems only logical and rea-
sonable that if a labor union
willfully perpetrates the ident-
ical offenses that brought the
law into existence, it should
make little difference from a
legal and ethical standpoint
whether the intent of the anti
trust law was that it should or
should not apply to labor unions.
A law is enacted as a safeguard
against a PRACTICE. and not
only against specific group
The antitrust laws specifically
forbid such activities as price
fixing and quota-enforcements.
But last summer John L. Lewis
attempted. together with man
agement, to establish control
over the coal fields of the ma
ton, thereby seeking to deter
mine not only wages, but also to
establish certain definite over
all production levels.
Fortunately, the plan failed to
materialize. But since then
Lewis has imposed an enforced
three-day week upon the miners,
thereby seeking to achieve the
same end. 1t would be much too
naive to assume that he is using
this method of production con-
troll merely as bargaining wea-
pom. We have here the unique
example of a labor union ceasing
to be primarily an instrument
for bargaining, substituting it.
self for management, and yet
escaping the very restraints i'm
posed by law upon management.
Furthermore. we have here a
case where the instrument of
law is available. but the ma
chinery for application and en-
forcement of that law restrained
from using the instrument.
It is entirely conceivable that
John L. Lewis may, through the
arrogant Haunting of his ego
tistical powers, force such legal
action upon the United Mine
Workers Union as may deal all
labor unioniSm, if not a fatal,
certainly a setback blow from
which it would take years to
recover. This would be unfor-
tunate, because good labor un-
ionisn has carved valuable
niche for the laborer in Amer
lean progress. The deplorable
thing about the whole aspect of
present-day unionism is that in
too many instances, the individ-
ual member has ceded certain
inalienable rights as an individ-
ual and citizen to an unscrup-
ulous leadership. The time has
arrived when a union member
must regard his citizenship
rights and duties above those of
his union membership.
It is a blot upon nations
integrity when its government
fails to afford protection to its
citizens under law, making the
laws of the land subservient to
the dictates of minority group
Tor the. purpose of political greed
and corruption.