| Transcript |
i freedom e'
tion.
ed to he-long
isevelt sail
ould nev«
ion. "That
uchliketb
>or.'
can, ovd
lomic cris'
,{ vital mi"
stall trai*
en, works'
x-rship in,
-dominafl
ible to <>"'
re not W
ion lead
loyal An|
lent has!
til those
ompubrl
can wen*'
to such,
,-it his P
tveboanj
ir of re/%
an Willi
- I-:, s. i"
1 Rigbi
in an
■d on did*
mes anom
type ofj|
.il princiPl
Ol lOllll'",
under Wjl
,-<■ sacrtfi
■go"'
id our ctf
ll.'f
7U
(Continued from Page 5)
that
sin.t
The advantages of a union are manifold. For example, the union hall is,
*n certain industries, to union workers
^hat the employment office is to others.
. . . Aside from every Other consideration, the union i.s essentially the only vehicle through which the employer can
gfcfuit the labor force he needs for a specific contract. It is virtually impossible for
'he employer to get workers of the require skill from the labor market at large . . .
•Skilled craftsmen cannot be secured expeditiously in any usable quantity unless
fhe union directs workers to a particular
|°h. This direction may involve the labor
'0rce in a particular craft for a whole
PS^On, as when several thousand iron
Workers are needed on a large-scale proj-
pfc It is impossible for the contractor to
110 this on his own or even with the assis-
J^ce of the United States Employment
pVice unless the union recruiting ma
tin* ..
e and 4
■ations
rfU ol 4
one-Mf
ni/ed. I
oee-iof.
i gain ^
irther:
ee.iH'11;
.1 l11
■s ana
others. L
history
■ mean» 1
iquitot^l
the »'">•
whole"!
list i1'"1/
moraliCi
incipWJ
■d on H
lord 2J1
Sol ■
Winery is utilized.13
As for the worker in a union shop
*"o doesn't join the union, yet who
'■'ps all the benefits which the union
<C|nes for its members, he is known
Jj a lice rider and a ehiseler. He is
.''"Ping where he has not sown.18 This
Comparable with a man living in a
0rnnium'ty and refusing to pay taxes,
s his neighbors have to do.
r 'la- non-union employee might be
^"ilcd as parasitic. He spins not,
,'!' neither does he weave, yet he
S'°ys all the union-bought benefits.
k "'s<'. setting a bad example, other
0rKers might follow in his path. Few
j?" want to pay for industrial citi/en-
'P privileges if they see that they
5,gPt them for nothing.
c r'ide unions not only need dues to
i^ ry on their work, but they need
lM participation to discuss issues
jt| Pass on them in elections. Only
f "n's way can a democratic union
nation. •
Hr ny ""ion members maintain that
,, 's<' who do not see the "light," have
\s'.l;llive stupii
"lo workers in non-union shop:
S"
Vk
lew. as losing his pants, literally, his
' .Gonial might well be phrased
illative stupidity of 100"per cent.
0 than one has got the "word"
he awoke to the fact that all
and no pay was making him a
e-*Oy. Indeed, when he discovered
\l(t\l-
twt r"'('r- Clarence Darrow once re-
<^ed tha
lat there can be no right to
C"t
£■«, ■"':> i-io\,-v u-i
I et <.e,,..
;n r-' """imi,.,
»ess, 1st
Revisions" Hearings, U. S.
Labor and Public Welfare,
Session, Pari I. pp. 504-5
U Toner, The Closed si,oik p. 169
work without a place to work. It is
the right of management to go out into
the labor marketplace and bid for
workers on any terms they choose. A
man's right to work is at all times
contingent on his being able to find
someone who will hire him. And even
then he may well be refused this
"inalienable" right on the slightest
pretext.
Unions do not claim that there are
not abuses of the union shop and
closed union. However, most unions
are against discrimination because of
race or color or creed, and they try to
prohibit this discrimination by others.14
Actually, some unions are not in
favor of a closed union. Walter Reuther made the following statement:
... In the UAW-CIO we have never
asked for a closed shop.
. . . We endorse the- principle of the
closed shop because in certain industries
we- think it is essential. In the maritime industry, for example, we think that the
close-el-shop and the hiring-hall arrangement is essential because of the nature of
that industry. However, we think that the
approach ought to h<- to meet the abuses
rather than to outlaw the principle; I personally think that it is wrong for a union
to have- a closed membership in which
they attempt to build a labor monopoly, in
order to exploit the advantages of a non-
opoly.
... I think if yon had legislation which
said, "We will give labor a certain period
to clean its own house and to make- these
corrections itself," and it failed to do it you
might then have to have corrective- legislation; that i.s a better approach rather than
Outlawing the principle of the closed shop
even in those industries where there are
no abuses.11
There are those who would have
the worker believe that he is "smothered" by bis union, that he has no
"77ee' Cri.se' AgOStUt "fligfct-to-WOT*" LOWS, peile-
lishe-el lev CIO 1 dated.
''"'Iiift-llorlli-ii Art Revisions," Hearings before
ilic Committee on I.,il>e,r and Public V\V!l;ere>, u. s.
Senate. S.'inl Congress, Isl Session, l't. 1, pp. 410-
12 i 1953).
protection against union abuses. This
has no basis in fact. Not only does the
worker have a voice in his representative union, but he has available to him
remedies in the courts and the National Labor Relations Board."1 Additionally, not only can the union member take part in tbe policy making of
his union, but he has the opportunity
to elect the men who negotiate with
management. Moreover, under the
Labor-Management Relations Act, employees can vote in a new bargaining
agency if it does not reflect their
interests.
A paradox of the Union Security and
Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley
Law i.s that the states' rights tire
operative when a state wants to apply
more- harsh restrictions. But these
states' rights are not operative when
a state wants to apply more libera]
standards of union security.17
When the Taft-Hartley Law was
being debated in Congress, Senator
Wayne Morris made the following
statement:
Thus, we lay down in the hill a very
full and complete national policy as to
closed- and union-shop agreements. At the
same time, the hill provides in Section
14(h) however, that the national policy
may he- entirely disregarded and superseded by tlie States if they desire to Impose a more restrictive policy on the same
subject matter. A more pointed instance
of anti-labor bias could hardly he envisaged than this alleged minor change in
the hill.1-
To show further advantages of
union membership, unions sometimes
act in capacities other than collective
bargaining. President of Auto Workers Walter Reuther asked Congress to
plug a gap in the Social Security Act
as follows: (Continued on Page 8)
Terminer tJ1(. failure to cover workers
suffering from long-term disabilities "the
uThe Case Against "llitlht-to-Viink" LalOl
,-tt . p. 89.
,7'/7ee' Case Against "Rtght^o-Work" Laws,
lished l.i CIO. not elated, p. 96.
"93 Congressional Record 6456 (1947).
pub-
■j.,''c'li in time saved mine.
Ui(||"' right-to-work laws are often
^>ev °' as right-to-wreck laws.
% rr"^'lf he construed as meaning 8
Three-way handshake of George
Meany, Walter
Reuther and Adlai
E, Stevenson in
New York City, Dec.
Is this three-
way 'shake prophetic?
Aim: wtuu D PHOTO
V
ing
e
A".s
I'm
in \i News, May, 1956
Page 7
/
|
