Page 2
Sunday, October 10, 1965
Tal'l-IIarllcv Section 14(b)
Opinions of the Daily Tar Heel are expressed in its
editorials. Letters and columns, covering a wide range
of views, reflect the personal opinions of their authors.
ERNIE McCRARY, EDITOR
JACK HARRINGTON, BUSINESS MANAGFfl
rV.-.-..-.
Burn Which Building?
News reports have indicated for some time that
the situation in Indonesia is unsettled, what with all
those attempted coups and counter-coups, but we didn't
know things were quite so confused.
It seems that two days ago thousands of Indonesian
youths attacked the Jakarta headquarters of the com
munist party and burned it to the ground while shout
ing "Long live America" and "Kill Aidit." D. N. Aidit
is head of the 3.5 million-member Indonesian commu
nist party.
When the United States' new ambassador to In
donesia moved into the embassy there a number of
weeks ago, his reception was anything but kind. The
"welcome wagon" was an angry anti-U. S. mob.
Now truck loads of demonstrators have passed that
same embassy shouting "Long live America." Obvious
ly this is a new tactic designed to get rid of our rep
resentatives by shocking them into heart failure.
It'll Never Work
A woman student at Sheffield University in Eng
land has come up with a plan to help weak-willed girls
with insistent boy friends.
She calls it the Anti-Free Love Society, and it's pat
terned after Alcoholics Anonymous. This is the way
it's supposed to work: When a girl finds she is hav
ing trouble resisting sexual advances she calls a spe
cial telephone number. Another member of the society
answers and gives her "moral support."
If the men of Sheffield have any gumption at all,
we predict they will form their own organization
the Society for the Abolition of Telephons.
Setting A Bad Pace
North Carolinians like to think of their state as
something of a pacesetter, and the speaker ban law
fills the bill because we are the first and only state to
have one. To too many Tar Heel's it is just "unfortu
nate" that most outsiders recognize the law for what
it is and give it the "credit" it deserves.
Between the Ku Klux Klan and the gag law, North
Carolina has been getting some pretty bad press
around the country recently.
At the 4th annual meeting of the American Coun
cil on Education in Washington last week, UNC Pres
ident William C. Friday has been called on by offi
cials from several states to provide weapons they can
use back home to head off attempts to pass speaker
bans there. Friday, who is chairman of the Council,
reported that educators and officials from Alabama,
Georgia, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire had con
sulted with him when attempts were made to pass
bans in those states. Gag laws have also been con
sidered in Virginia and South Carolina and rejected.
Reports at the Washington meeting, attended by more
than 1,500 of the nation's top educators, indicate that
other attempts to pass such laws in other states will
be made.
When the only good that can come out of our
speaker ban law is the prevention of similar laws in
other states, we can only say that North Carolina hasn't
exactly covered itself with glory by being a pacesetter
this time.
cElje Satltt (Ear
72 Years of Editorial Freedom
The Daily Tar Heel is the official news publication of
the University of North Carolina and is published by
students daily except Mondays, examination periods and
vacations.
Ernie McCrary, editor; John Jennrich, associate editor;
Kerry Sipe. managing editor; Pat Stith. sports editor;
Jack Harrington, business manager; Woody Sobol, adver
tising manager.
Second class postage paid at the post office in Chapel
Hill, N. C, 27514. Subscription rates: $4.50 per semester;
S8 per year. Send change of address to The Daily Tar
Heel, Box 1080, Chapel Hill, N. C, 27514. Printed by the
Chapel Hill Publishing Co., Inc. The Associated Press is
entitled exclusively to the use for republication of all
local news printed in this newspaper as well as all ap
news dispatches.
Repeal Restores Risfat To Vote
Bv MARSHALL LICHTENSTEIN
The cattle over repeal of Section 14(b
of the Taft-Harley Act-the controversial
law which allows individual states to for
bid the union shop-is currently raging in
the halls of Congress. The public is again
being treated to an extraordinarily huge
dose of bull by the anti-repeal forces.
Thoe groups that are most prominently
against repeal ought to end their masque
rade, and state honestly that they are
against the whole idea of labor unions.
Right or wrong, at least this would end
the hokum that they are losing valuable
sleep over the loss of personal freedom.
This is not just an idle claim. There is
ample documentation to prove this point.
One of the biggest and most expensive lob
bying campaigns that this nation has ever
seen was launched by the National Right to
Work Committee. This group is composed
of company presidents, board chairmen,
professors, "politicians and farmers, who are
"concerned" about the loss of individual
liberty that workers stand to lose. Curiously,
there are no workers represented on this
committee even though they are the ones
who are directly affected. The viewpoints
of those opposed to repeal were amply ex
pressed in hearings held by the House Spe
cial Subcommittee on Labor. They were
simply for "freedom of choice," said such
men as A. D. Davis who threatened to
close one of his Winn-Dixie grocery stores
if his employees chose to elect a union;
or from Xello J. Teer, whose supervisors
had threatened to "tie concrete around an
employee's neck and throw him in the
canal" unless he refrained from union ac
tivity. The classic statement was given by
Dr. Fowler of the National Right to Work
Committee when he testified that the in
dividual worker had a "moral right" not
only to escape union dues obligations but
also to work any hours he wanted, to work
in an unsafe area, to work for less pay
than the minimum wage, and "to be lousy
if he wants to." When the wolf adocates
Red Riding Hood's right to travel, beware.
When groups such as the Right to Work
Committee and the National Association of
Manufacturers are concerned with the right
of the workingman not to join a union,
beware.
Though the groups which have led the
fight against repeal have been generally
discredited, they have succeeded in deceiv
ing a great number of honest people
through the use of distorted propaganda.
The air should be cleared of these dis
tortions by explaining just what repal of
14(b) would and would not do.
That Nurse Looked Kinda Cute To Me"
,,,, 4rf
H Ml
tM-m mi
it JPW hps'
TH6 iw 'cSr rpfCyMei
Chapel Hill Artist
The repeal of 14(b) will restore the right
to vote to workers throughout the country.
They will regain the freedom to determine
whether or not their interests would be best
served by a union security clause in their
contracts. The reason for wanting a union
security clause is simple. The unions proper
ly feef that the worker should pay for the
services rendered by the union in collec
tive bargaining since he, though not a mem
ber of the union, will get the same bene
fits from the contract as a union member.
It should be pointed out that in a union
shop a worker does not become a member
of the union. His sole obligation is limited
to the giving of dues and fees in payment
for services rendered. At present the right
to vote on this issue is restricted by so
called right-to-work laws in 19 states, in
cluding all southeastern states except Lou
isiana. It is quite ironic to see conservatives
advocating state government interference in
the economic process of collective bargain
ing. A true conservative, the late Senator
Robert Taft, co-author of the Taft-Hartley
Act, came to see the essential inconsis
tency and injustice of right-to-work laws:
"I think it would be a mistale to
go the extreme of outlawing a con
tract which provides for a union
shop requiring all employees to
join the union, if that arrangement
meets with the approval of the em
ployer and meets with the approval
of the majority of the employees
and is embodied in a written con
tract." This is all that the unions request
simply that workers and employers be al
lowed to bargain for such contracts. Only
if a majority of workers in a plant vote
for a union shop can this be a bargaining
issue. Even then it would still need to be
agreed to by the employer. Currently 19
states have interposed themselves in the
collective bargaining process and thus de
nied the right to vote to workers. Gov.
George Romney (Rep., Michigan) stated
the issue clearly:
"These laws, whether National or
State, are not the answer, because
- they deny to workers the same or
ganization rights exercised by stock
holders. Management and its pol
ices are the result of majority votes
by stockholders, and minority stock
holders must accept the will of the
majority or sell out. In the American
economy and political system, work
ers must have the same rights of
organization."
Despite the simplicity of the issue there
are a number of deceptive arguments on
behalf of 14(b) and the right-to-work laws.
I will mention two of the more common
ones and their obvious flaws.
One argument is that repeal of 14(b)
would infringe on the rights of individuals
by forcing them to join unions in order to
work. The right to work is defined by op
ponents of repeal as being equal to the
freedom of speech, freedom of religion and
other basic civil rights. But such laws do
not create any right to work, or even
guarantee a chance to work. The only right
which opponents of repeal want to protect
is tne rini m .
his job without being compelled to join a
labor union." Former Secretary of Labor
James Mitchell (Republican in Eisenhow
er administration) recognized these facts
when he stated:
"They call these right-to-work
laws, but that is not what they really
are. In the first place, they do not
create any jobs at all. In the sec
ond place, they result in undesirable
and unnecessary limitations upon
the freedom of working men and
women and their employers to bar
gain collectively and agree 'upon
conditions of work. I oppose such
laws categorically."
It is obvious that in states which do not
prohibit union shops the right to work exists.
In the most strongly unionized state. II.
linois, almost 2-3 of the employees in non
agricultural establishments do not belong to
unions. Their right to work without join
ing a union exists without restricting the
right to vote of those who want a union
shop.
A related thesis of those who support
right-to-work laws is that they are neces
sary to protect a worker's freedom of
choice. In actuality, the worker in right
work states has less freedom of choice than
do other workers. In those states which do
not have a right-to-work law an employee
may work in a union shop, either as a
member or as an employee who tenders
dues and fees for services rendered but is
not an active member. He may also work
in an open state an employee, even if he
wants it, cannot have the protection of a
union shop. He must be in a compulsory
open shop. Which one has the greater free
dom of choice?
The second major fear aroused by the
right-to-work forces is that repeal of 14(b)
protects the position of powerful unions
while suppressing the strength of weak
unions. It is not the 31 states where, the
union shop is allowed, and where labor is
big, that are primarily affected by 14(b),
which leaves it up to the states tc keep
or forbid the union shop. Because labor is
big there, the union shop cannot be scrap
ped through local option. Eugene Patter
son, editor of the Atlanta Constitution,
reiterates this point:
"The local option business in 14(b)
has simply accomplished the pre
dictable. Ineffective in rolling back
big labor in states where it is abus
ing its power, it has simply rolled
back weak labor further in the 19
states. . . where it had little power
to begin with, and incidentally
where per capita income is the
lowest in the nation. It is hard to
make an argument for a law that
exempts the big abusers and crubs
only the weak."
There are many good reasons for the
repeal of 14(b), but the basic reason is
that it is right. It is right to restore to the
employees in 19 states the right to vote
to determine whether or not they believe
a union shop is to their best interest. Who,
other than those most affected, should have
this freedom of choice?
.Ileichert Recreates 'Personal Vision
By MARY RICHARD VESTER
DTH STAFF WRITER
"Just a minute," Mrs. Irene Reichert
said as she cracked her front door. "I'll
have to hold the dog." The door opened
again and revealed a black poodle straining
at the collar Mrs. Reichert held. The frisky
animal pulled his master's small frame
about on the slick waxed floor in his ef
fort to be friendly. She attached a leash to
the collar and slipped it under a leg of the
dining room table to harness his vivacious
ness. "It's the last house on the right on Lake
shore Drive," she had said on the telephone.
"The lake is behind the house, only they're
doing something to it now, and it's just a
large hole." The "large hole" was visible
through a picture window and glass doors
and across a wooden deck extending the
length of the house's upper level.
The interior of the house reflected an
artist's touch. A sculpture on a pedestal
graced the foyer. Mrs. Reichert, whose ex
hibit is currently on display in the North
Gallery of Morehead Planetarium, led the
way down a short staircase to a small room
off the recreation room that she uses as a
studio.
"This is one of those things that might
never work out," she said about the green
and blue tissue paper collage on her easel
But collages are nice when there's not
enough time to get down to oils. Then oc
casionally I go over collages with paint I
like the tissue papers because they give
such nice subtle gradations. Yes, I sort of
had the sea in mind when I started but
nothing m particular. That's why it's so
messy."
She applied new paper cuts to the com
pleted background with a brush dipped in
polymer, a plastic liquid that both glues
and forms a protective coating.
Does she hang much of her work in
the house? "Some," she said, "but I get
tired of it. I might really like something
just after I finish it and grow to despise it
in a few months. Then I get another one
from the attic and change them. I don't
really paint for the house, though, or to
sell, but simply because I enjoy it."
Her husband, Herbert W. Reichert, a
UNC German professor, popped in to see
what was going on and was introduced.
Man and wife were dressed similarly
slacks and pullover sweaters and shirts
underneath. And the mister popped back
out.
Mrs. Reichert taught some German
classes herself in the summer and at night
when she was a graduate student here
around 1950. It was in a conversational
class of German that she met her hus
band. He was the instructor.
As a housewife she went back to art,
her undergraduate major at the University
of Alabama.
"I set myself a problem with each thing
I do," she said. "I try to compose ele
ments from a point of departure the cor
ner of the canvas or a dab of color any
where on the canvas and achieve a spa
tial and color relationship.
"My pieces aren't abstract expression
ism, but they are abstract. Abstract ex
pressionism," she continued, "is working
in a way I don't work; you wort of move
and swish and dribble. But I don't mean
that in a derogatory sense."
She said her work often makes refer
ence to living and growing things like
rain and flowers in a semi - abstract
way. "But rather than trying to recreate
the physical world," she adds, "I try to
put on canvas my own personal vision of
beauty and to interpret with paint those
things to which I am sensitive in the world
of inner experience. It's difficult to trans
late a nonverbal experience into words, or
to explain the process of creating a paint
ing." Her exhibit at the Planetarium repre
sents five or six years of work and is var
ied. She aims for richness of color, feel
ing for design and interrelationships be
tween objects and backgrounds. Some of
the paintings reflect touches of surrealism
! ( wjk r rr
or an oriental influence. Many feature over
lapping and sometimes transparent planes.
"The overlaps got tedious" and compli
cated," she said. "I wanted to get back to
something neat, simple and formal." This
accounts for her "Rock Garden" series, a
realm of fantasy with rock and plant forms.
Various media she employed in the paint
ings on exhibit include: oils, pen and ink,
pencil, pastels, collage, casein, gouache (an
opaque water color), transparent water
colors and polymers.
pint was squeezed from a tube in
Rock Garden: Personages" to create a
brilliant, linear, wiry structure on a flat
black background. "I'm afraid the figures
look too much like men from outer space,"
she said. "I didn't intend them for that,
iney may be worshippers."
Mrs. Reichert's paintings are priced
from $25 to $350. All Planetarium exhibits
are open to the public free of charge daily
from 2 to 5p.m. and 7:30 to 10 p.m.; 10
a.m. to 10 p.m. on Saturdays and 1 to 10
p m on Sundays. The North Gallery is to
the left off the rotunda just inside the build
ing s west entrance.
The current exhibit will be showing
through the end of October. A water col
VartTn Va7JLy CXhibit Mrs. Xadaine
verS Ufham sched for No-
in MnLo,11'5 Work has exhibited
Tort n afd PIanetariura vCTal times be
s?on L thr ,Il0winS PIaces: the Win
S5e -ASaIrem,GalIery of fine Arts, Green
one C7ter' A1Ued Arts in Durham (a
ham w,SKh0W)' Downtow" Gallery of Dur-
o Mftih U i? Gullery and the UNC School
oLiln 1 (Hn0rabIe Mention 1963
Mrs Rp k li' W Fl0rida Alabama.
Membe'r of th , a 3 Charter Exhibiting
Member of the Associated Artists of NT C
She graduated Phi r. 15 01 -
University J? Vja KaPPa 'rom
University rvn ama a"ended Stetson
-ties of TnLbS e Univer-
eled abroad. Vienna and trav-