The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1954-06-25


At Montana Labors League for Political Education con
venton last Saturday unsuccessful attempt made
per capita league members
local unions, whose unions certain specifications
total Membership.
It was proposed that all local unions having members
pay only the flat S12 affaton MLPE and that
mated For local unions having SO members the $12 a
ton fee plus four cents member month would remain
effect that would have contribute
S2 month capita to the league regardless of how large
a membership the local might have.
The argument that the present S12 per year
fee plus four cents per capita per month too steep for the
smaller locals And also argued that the extremely large
locals would be paying disportonate share they had
four cents each and member of their locals
With the first find quarrel small locals
such mine QTU No 95 Helena do considerably higher
annual per member than would large
transportation workers local with 500 1000 members
Each member of ITU No 95 for example, paying out 78
cents wear in order to assist the ME do the educational
work badly needed Montana large local with say 500
memberand there number of them that larger
in the state-fnds that it's per capita annual contributions
each year only 5O4 There's ascent differ
yet haven't heard single member of local grumble
over either the difference or the entire B cents per wear which
amounts to less than one-third of an hours pay.
1t with the proposed monthly ceiling per capita
that find fault Not only would represent distinct injustice
all locals having than so but less than 300 members
IN that they would be the only ones stuck to pay the existing
utilization fee plus four month capita, but for
the unions of 800 up would amount to their at
tempting to needed state level political action at cut
rate other words reerder the rest of the labor
movement.
Since the to revamp the financing of MLLPE was
killed. why then time the matter? There several
reasons.
Leaders of Of the larger local unions the state have
shown little willingness to cooperate with the rest of labor
less they dictate the terms of cooperation In spite of Them the
state federation has and forged ahead the last two and
oneha Likewise and in the face of 1853 convention
action of these leaders literally sitting their hands
pushing the signature campaign for the two convenonen
dosed initiative Their that the member cost
of affaon with the American Federation of Labors political
too high, has all the appearances of shamof
rather than sound for not encouraging their locals
affiliate One sometimes conectures whether there not be
Interior motives behind the consistent lack cooperation with
the of the labor exemped by the actions
of of these powerful local union leaders.
Some Of them doubt will be most unhappy the
above only throw stone into pack Of hounds and
the that's hit will howl"
Now let's take further look at the Importance that of
AFL labor have strong political in Montana has often
been said recently that 1884 the year decision Certain
the financial masters of state and country view SUCH
Money will flow like oil both the national and state levels
the 1854 elections for reaction for continued uniner
rupted pundeng of natural tougher Taft
Hartley Act; for fright scab" law right here Montana
Labor cannot hope match these reaconary forces dol
for dollar But if Organized Labor to stay organized
afford to be penurous in the campaign months ahead
To working conditions to natural
children something less than
oletey plundered hertage-yeato futime