Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1959-08-02
Steel Strike Recalls
F oct-finding' Post

cept the Wage Sterilization Board
recommendations on wages and
the union shop. The President
would not invoke a Taft Hartley
injunction even after the Supreme
Court vacated seizure and the
United Steelworkers struck for
eight weeks. He asserted that to
do so would be useless and unfair
to the union.
Mr.. Truman's preference for
fact-finding boards that can make
recommendations was revealed in
l945 when, after the National
Labor Management Conference
failed. he asked Congress for fact
finding legislation to cope with
the growing number of postwar
disputes in major industries.
The top union leaders of that
day helped kill the bill, although
it contained pretty much what
unions would accept today. Mr..
Truman wanted authority to APP
point fact-finding boards which
would make recommendation and
function during a 30-day cooling
off period while workers remained
on the job.
The common complaint against
the Taft-Hartley provision is that
it does not permit the board of
inquiry to make recommendations
for settlement. Those who fear.
recommendations feel they are es--
sential to facilitating a settlement.
Those who oppose them, as do
the U. S. Chamber of Commerce
and other business organizations,
feel it interferes with a voluntary
settlement and leads to compul-
sorry arbitration.
Sentiment Persists
Nevertheless, there has been
general sentiment at the White
House and on Capitol Hill in favor,
of allowing the boards to make.
recommendations. In 1854, Mr..
Eisenhower proposed that the law
be amended so that he could re-
convene the board of inquiry and
ask for recommendations if a ma
tional emergency dispute was not
settled on the basis of the boards
earlier finding of facts. The Re-
publican-co controlled Senate Labor
Committee went along on this,
but no legislation resulted. -
A furry of proposals advocating
seizure authority were introduced
and considered in Congress after
the Supreme Court voided the
sto-l mill seizures in 1859. -
Senator A. S. Mike Monroney,
Oklahoma Democrat. proposed
that the President could seize for
80 days after two days notice to
Congress. Congress would have
Is days to disapprove the seizure,
Representative Howard W.,
Smith, Virginia Democrat. pro-
posed that if strike persisted af-
ter an 80-day injunction expired.
the struck property be seized and
both the employer and the union
be put in receivership. Both par
ties would share in the cost OF
receivership. The seizure would
last until the dispute was settled
or the national emergency was
over. Wages and working condi-
tons could not be changed during
the seizure period.
The first attempt to amend the
Taft-Hartley law, after the Demo-
Gratis regained control of Congress
in 1919, included a provision for
recommendations by boards of in
quiry and government seizure
supported by Senator Robert A.
Taft, Republican of Ohio. co-au-
thor of the labor law.
The provision, giving the Presi-
dent the choice of an injunction
or seizure where a threatened
strike endangered national health
or safety, was among group of
abor-approved am en- d mentS
which Senator Taft helped get
through the Senate in a strategic
move to avert virtual repeal of
Taft-Hartley.