Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 3, March 1955
File 006
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Facts Forum. Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 3, March 1955 - File 006. 1955-03. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. October 29, 2020. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/769/show/705.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum. (1955-03). Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 3, March 1955 - File 006. Facts Forum News, 1955-1956. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/769/show/705

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum, Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 3, March 1955 - File 006, 1955-03, Facts Forum News, 1955-1956, University of Houston Libraries, accessed October 29, 2020, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/769/show/705.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 3, March 1955
Series Title Facts Forum News
Creator
  • Facts Forum
Contributor
  • Evans, Medford
Publisher Facts Forum
Date March 1955
Language eng
Subject
  • Anti-communist movements
  • Conservatism
  • Politics and government
  • Hunt, H. L.
Place
  • Dallas, Texas
Genre
  • journals (periodicals)
Type
  • Text
Identifier AP2.F146 v. 4 1955; OCLC: 1352973
Collection
  • University of Houston Libraries
  • Facts Forum News
Rights No Copyright - United States
Item Description
Title File 006
Transcript Seventeen different stales have outlawed the union shop with whal they call right-to-work laws. These states are: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska. Nevada, North Carolina, South Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and \ irginia. On December 7, 1954, Labor Secretary Jan,,- P. \lili-hell. speaking before the sixteenth annual convention of the CIO in Los Angeles, express,-,I the- hope lhat these seventeen states would wipe those right-to-work laws from the statute books, saying that such laws do more harm than good.1 The cordial lone of Mitchell's talk to the CIO was made even more emphatic by the warm tone of the message he brought to the CIO from President Eisenhower. The Eisenhower message to the CIO said: "Trade unionism has become a vital part of American life. The activities of the American labor movement have brought about social and economic reforms which have enriched ihe lives not only of union members but of millions of other Americans. Union efforts to help strengthen our general welfare, our national prosperity, and our democracy have earned sincere gratitude among our people."1 After listening lo lhe President's words, one CIO leader said: "We used to organize by saving. 'Roosevelt wants vnu to join a union.' Now we can revise lhal In say. 'Ike wants vou to join a union.'"1 The next day. December 8. 1954, al the White House, however. President Eisenhower in a press conference said that Mr. Mitchell, in calling for repeal of state right-to-work laws, was not speaking for tbe administration.2 TOUCHED OFF SHARP ATTACK This comment touched off a sharp at- laik on Mr. Eisenhower lev Walter Reuther, president of lhe ClO. Mr. Reuther declared lhat the President had repudiated his Secretary of Labor.3 The political implications of all this are interesting and important; but Patre 4 RIGHT-TO-WORK LAWS Facts Forum's specific question here is this: "Do you agree with Secretary of Labor Milchell that the state right-to- work laws do more harm than good?" As usual, let's answer this question from two exactly opposile points of view, taking first the arguments of those who say "Yes." All of the arguments on this side of the question are taken from the CIO publication, ECONOMIC OUTLOOK, September, 1954. The article is entitled " 'Right-to-Work' Laws— Slick Anti-Labor Weapon."1 "The Hi I ing si lgiit to Work" is a fair-sound- slogan. Il siilluils like- lhe title of a full employment program. But it is being used by reactionary groups as a cover for stale antilabor legislation. in its name, seventeen states have outlawed all forms of union security: the- e lee-e-d -hop. lhe union shop, and maintenance of membership. These laws aim to undermine union strength and lo ihrow roadblocks in the way of collective bargaining. Eleven of the seventeen "right-to- work" state's passed their laws in 1917. That was the year of whipped-up anti- labor hysteria when tin- Taft-Hartley Act was passed over President Truman's veto. Since 1952. antilabor forces in the stales have been gathering new strength. Five aeleliiieenal slab's passed right-to- work laws between 1952 and 1951. And antilabor groups are hard al work in the- slate Capitols attempting lo convince legislators lhal their slates need such legislation. "Right-to-work" propagandists always refer to liberty, justice, anil free choice. which union-security provisions sup- posedly lake away from workers. But underlying such misleading declarations of high principle is the illusion that "right-to-work" laws are a special attraction lo industry and commerce. PREMISES ARE DECEIVING Both of these premises used by "right-to-work" propagandists an- false ami illu-eerv. They serve merely t,, ,-loak antilabor legislation with a fraudulent cover of social purpose and respectability. The past hundred years have W» nessed a vast change in types of eflf ployroent. 'I he dominant type of business toil"? is thc hug,', impersonal corporation c"1 ploying thousands of workers. '"" quently in establishments that are cated in different parls of the countffi The individual worker on bis own I at a distinct disadvantage in trying* influence lhe company's decision reg'-in1 ing his wages, hours, and working '"<"' ditions. Unions attempt to redress lhe balni1f through collective organizatioi action. The union attempts to give "' individual worker lhe bargaining p""' he lacks on his own. Tlie union which a majority of fJ, ployces of a company unit select is "'' exclusive bargaining agent for all ef" ployees in lhat unit. When a in'''1' bargains with an employer on wtlr\\ hours, and working conditions. "' union bargains for ali of the unit's mr"1 hers. I 4 —Wide World Labor Secretary James Mitchell, at"*r*|r ing ClO's national convention at Los A"^ {, Dec. 7, defended the idea of comPu' / which prohibit contracts. such requirements in FACTS FORUM NEWS, March ■ spring „, basis of Ce . Multipi "' '"nil,. ployer . . u"ions, r '•"''his. a "'"-. all J* »argai "V/am,. The .,, r'Shts lo" **b the I " ^nds to ""dless b, '".", unio, »«h the , e u"ions y obiig, *fraterni Jfaterne , y are „ U'J * fo, '■■.- "'"'■•"" or'°ns if *"'" -ill , , ih" ba; I U"'^T- \;;i-s,,1 tionY' '"'r the ' ;""1 t, t>*en il,,.'". "ni, tt>'evani :;>"■::, C^ed e fun0s.to be
File Name uhlib_1352973_v004_n003_006.jpg