The Lincoln times., 1955-04-21
Strike Seen As
Form Of War,
BY w. A. HILDEBRAN

WASHINGTON - In times
gone by it has been remarked how
easy it is to get a war started. In
any event, it is easier to start a
war than to stop one, as witness
Korea.
Much the same thing may be
said of strikes. especially when
conducted and directed on an in
ter-state basis. And such strikes
bear some resemblance to war, if
remote. The governors of the nine
Southern states affected by the
telephone strike have finally been
impelled to supplement the efforts
of the Federal Mediation Service.
The work of stoppage referred to
has been featured by sabotage.
vandalism, cable cutting, squirting
acid, egg and rock throwing, dy-
namiting and forcing four ex-
changes to close by near-mob ac-
ton.
District union leaders assert
they have no knowledge concern
ing these developments. and do not
condone violence in any form. One
may assume this to be generally,
if not wholly true. If any union
members started out at night on
mission of destruction they would
not give advance notice to union
headquarters.
POSSIBLE EFFECTS
But union leaders in setting in
motion a strike of thousands of
people would be we'll advised to
reckon with mass behavior. In
war there are the camp followers.
At other times emergencies arise.
There are destructive storms.
floods and fires. When such things
occur it is necessary to mobilize
all the law officers available to
guard homes temporarily aband-
oned to keep away the looters.
There are times and places when
civilization seems to mean little
more than a thin veneer.
When crowds gather, and what
is called tension runs high. the
lower orders emerge, seemingly
from nowhere, but looking for
trouble. When trouble inevitably
comes. and there is a resort to
violence and lawlessneSs. organiz-
ed labor is apt to be brought into
more or less disrepute. even if a
majority of union members are at
home reading the papers or listen
ing to the radio.
SETTLEMENT DIFFICULT
1t may be found difficult, even
with the aid of the governors, to
compose the differences between
the striking union and the Bell
Telephone Company. In the early
DAYS of the disturbance one dis
cerned one rock or stumbling
block on which peace negotiations
might be shattered. There was the
insistence by the company that an
anti-strike clause be included in
any new contract, presumably on
the theory that if the workers are
left free to call quickie strikes here
and there such a contract would
have little value or validity.
Now there are two rocks in the
road: the action of the company
in firing a number of men pre-
sumably for acts of violence or for
interfering with back to work
movements. In the past. when
weaker companies were involved
there has generally been a de-
mand in any settlement to put dis
charged men back on the payroll.
The Bell Company is not likely to
comply with such demands. Bells
a powerful corporation. In any
conflict it is much like coming to
grips with General Motors, Ford.
or us. Steel. And the company in
the instant case. or with respect
to controversial issues that may
be considered vital from the COM
pany point of view has probably
reached the point of no return.
The telephone strike has been
running along for month. The
end. moreover, may be some days,
if not weeks away.