CHARLOTTE
LABOR JOURNAL
VOL. XVII; NO. 26
CHARLOTTE,N. C„ THURSDAY, JANUARY 22, 1948
Subscription $2.00 Per Year
AFL Urges
Retention Of
Rent Control
Washington. D. C.—The Ameri
can Federation of Labor called
for the extension of rent con
trol until June 30, 1949, and the
strengthening of the? existing law
to make rent control more ef
fective and fully enforceable.
In testimony before the Senate
Banking Committee, Boris Shish
kin, AFL economist, emphasized
the importance of the rent item in
the family budget, especially
among the low-income * groups,
and warned that the expiration
of control on February 29 would
mean a sharp increase in living
costs.
In addition to calling for the
extension of controls, Shishkin
recommended that no more in
creases of the “voluntary” type
be permitted; that protection
against eviction be strengthened {
that a direct enforcement system
be set up giving the Housing
Expediter power to secure com
pliance with the law; that con
trols be continued on dwellings
due for decontrol under the terms
of the existing law; and that lo
cal rent boards be reconstituted
to perform advisory functions
only, with final power left in the
hands of the Housing Expediter.
Reviewing the experience un
der the Housing and Rent Act
of 1947. Mr. Shiskin declared r
“Figures of the Bureau of La
bor Statistics show that from
1939 to June, 1947, rents rose
less than 4.7 per cent. This in
dicates that since the establish
ment of rent ceilings in rent con
trol areas in 1943 until the sum
mer of 1947 and until the modi
fication of the original rent con
trol law took effect, rents re
mained fairly stable. The index
shows, however, that from June,
1947 to November, 1947, in the
short space of five months, rents
rose on the average of 6 Vi per
cent, or more than they had in
the previous 8 years.
“This last sharp increase was
caused by \ the weaknesses em
bodied in the rent control law
amendments of 1947. Not only did
this law greatly weaken the en
forcement of rent control ceil
ings and provided for decontrol
of certain types of units, but it
also permitted so-called ‘volun-1
tary’ increases in rents up to 15
per cent whenever a lease was
signed by the landlord and the
tenant to run until December,
1948.
“Actually, the average rents
throughout the country have gone
up more than is shown by the
BLS index; This is due to three
reasons: 41) No newly construct
ed rental units have been includ
ed in the index since June. 1947.
Yet the new units, de-controlled
by the 1947 law, were made avail
able at rents almost 70 per cent
above the rents on comparable
existing dwellings.
“(2) The index does not take
full account of the rent increases
resulting from the turnover of
(Continued on Page 2)
Taft-Haitley Law Exposed!
By J. ALBERT WOLU and HERBERT S. THATCHER
(Members of the law firm of Padway, Woll, Thatcher, Glenn and
Wilson, serving as general counsel for the American
Federation of Labor)
This is the seventh of a series of articles to be published by the
AFL Weekly News Service in refutation of an article appearing
in the Saturday Evening Post which praised the Taft-Hartley
law to the skies. Author of the Post article was J. Mack Swi*
gert, law partner of Senator Robert A. Taft—enough said:
NO. 7—THE “SO-CALLED 14 PRIVILEGES” OF THE
TAFT-HARTLEY LAW—(Continued)
11. “A Look at the Books”
The article rejoices in the fact that “For the first time
in history, unions are, required by federal law to supply
. . . their own members with detailed information about |
union finances.” The article neglects to state that for
many, many years the constitutions and by-laws of over
95 per cent of existing labor organizations have required
periodic financial statements to be. submitted to the mem-1
bership, and that almost all International Unions and the
American Federation of Labor itself submits such informa
tion in the form of printed statements set forth in official
publications.
Here, again we see a privilege
which has already been realized by
union members throughout the
country. If there are any organi
zations which do not make such
disclosures, certainly the American
Federation of Labor has no ob
jections to a law requiring the
filing of financial statements, but
the danger inherent in any such
requirement as a condition of op*
eration is that the requirement
j, i
might easily be converted into a
licensing requirement. This would
that labor organizations could ex- j
ist only at the pleasure of the
state or other governmental body
issuing the license.
The trade union movement in
its day-to-day operation involves
the exercise of the civil liberties
of assembly and fl|>eech. liberties
which the Supreme Court has
constantly reiterated can be free
ly enjoyed wihout a license from
government.
12. “Exemption Prom Personal
Liability”
,The “Post” article plays up the
fact that under the provision
making: unions liable for breaches
of contract, individual members
are exempt from personal liabif- j
ity for damages arising because
of such breach. Damages can
be levied agains the union treas
ury only. While this is a benefit
which possibly may not have ex
isted before (although even this
is doubtful, since the new Rules
of Federal Procedure made effec
tive long prior1 to the Taft-Hart
ley Act permitted suits against
labor organizations as entities),
the article neglects to state the
implicaions of the section of the
act which makes it extremely
easy to sue unions in the federal
courts for breaches of contract.
Congress has thereby directly
encouraged resort to the courts
rather than resort to the bar
gaining table as a means for set
tling differences arising over the
interpretation or the application
or the enforcement of existing
agreements. This encouragement
fails to recognize that collective
bargaining agreements differ
v
greatly from the ordinary com
mercial agreement not only be
cause ofj the human relationships
involved in the former but be
cause of the fact that both par
ties to the collective agreement
must continue to live together re
gardless of who may win out in
any lawsuit. It is for this reason
that breaches or claimed breaches
of union agreements are far bet
ter disposed of at the bargaining
table than in a court of law.
It is not difficult to imagine
the repercussions upon our econ
omy if uninog choose to Invoke
this provision in the settlement
of their claimed grievances, be
cause each and every grievance
involves a breach of contract un
der which the union would be en
titled to sue.
Farther, the article does not
mention how union treasuries may
be depleted under another sec
tion of the act which enlarges
the definition • of “agency" to
make the union liable for the
acts of alleged agents even though
such acts were neither authorized
nor ratified by the union.
Any democratic union neces
sarily has many so-called “agents,"
such as committee chairmen,
stewards, trustees and others of
lesser statute than elected officers.
Yet, if any of these agents par
ticipate in a wild-cat strike or
breach of contract, the entire as
sets of the union might be taken
in payment of damages 4or such
action. These provisions are all
the more reprehensible in view of
the fact that, while unions may
be subjected to law suits for
wild-cat strikes, they are pre
vented from /disciplining mem
bers engaging in wild-cat strikes
through invocation of the union
shop claifke against them.
This enlargement of the defi
nition of “agency” is directly
contrary to the policy of Con
gress under the Norris-La-Guard
ia Act whereunder specific proof
was required that alleged acts
were actually authorized or rati
ified before the union could be
held liable
COUNCIL URGES FULL BI PARTISAN
SUPPORT FOR EUROPEAN AID PLAN
THINKS THE MARSHALL PLAN IS THE MOST VITAL
MATTER BEFORE CONGRESS
Miami.—Warning that American foreign policy must not
waver or weaken in the face of Soviet Russia’s hostile
actions, the AFL Executive Council called upon Congress
to vote full, bi-partisan support of the Marshall Plan.
The Executive Council declared that America must give
the world assurance that it will remain firm, united and
unshakeable in defense of world peace and human freedom,
regardless of the outcome of the 1948 elections.
EMPLOYER WARNS
AGAINST RELIANCE
ON TAFT-H- LAW
Washington, 1). C. — Clarence
Francis, chairman of the board
of the General Foods Corpora
tion, warned his fellow indus
trialists not to rely upon the Taft
Hartley law as the way to in
dustrial peace.
Francis thus joined other, prom
inent business leaders who have
a sufficiently enlightened outlook
to realize that harmonious labor
management relations cannot be
legislated. In a recent address
inserted in the Congressional
Record he declared:
“You an legislate conditions
under which management and la
bor can quarrel. You can legis
late conditions under which they
can maintain an armed truce. But
you cannot legislate harmony into
the hearts of men.
“To attain positive industrial
peace, we need something more
than by-laws and compulsory
rules. We need productive team
work.”
Office Workers
Union Contract
New York City—The AFL’s
Office Employes International Un
ion won another union shop elec
tion in the Wall Street financial
district here.
In an election conducted by the
National Labor Relations Board,
employes of the New York Cotton
Exchange voted 74 to 6 in favor
of the union shop.
This represents the second re
sounding triumph for Local 205
of the Office Employes Union,
formerly known as the United
Financial Employes prior to its
affiliation with the AFL interna
tional union. Recently, the union
wop a similar union shop election •
held among employes of the Mew ,
York Stock Exchange.
After yon hare read The Journal 1
pass it on to your neighbor.
1
ApL. President William Green
told newspapermen at a press
conference that the Executive
Council had given lirst consider
ation to the Marshall Plan at the
current mid-winer session because
it considered the European recov
ery program the most important *
matter now pending before Con
gress.
Mr. Green said the council in
the next few days will proceed
to give consideration to many oth
er major problems, such as in
flation, housing, social justice
legislation^ national ^ ,
the formulation of a political pro
gram to bring about the repeal
of the Taft-Hartley Act.
The council statement empha
sized the need to stimulate the
development of ^the European
tracfe union movements and to
gair their whole-hearted partici
pation in the Marshalf Plan. To
this end the council proposed that
an advisory council composed of
labor and government representa
tives bt> eppoined to consult with
he iedcral agency which will ad
minister the plan. The declara
tion said:
“The American Federation of
laLot has maintained close fra
ternal relationships with the free
trade union movements of Eu
rope. *We know from personal
contact that these free tra V un
ion movements can be mobilised
into a powerful force for con
structive collaboration with the
recovery program. That kind of
co-operation is vital and invalu
able in such an undertaking. It
cannot be obatined by official
represenativcs of the State De
partment operating at hirh dip
lomatic levels. We trust that we
will be given this opportun'tyi to
be of service.”
The council declared that the
United States had led the way
in establishing the United Na
tions and in promoting a general
understanding for international
peace, but that Russia had
‘checkmated” our efforts at every
turn.
Calling for widspread and
mited support for the foreign aid
program, the AFL leaders warned
;hat Russia will '•''■"tinue its op
position to the Marshall Plan
tinee its aims will be better suited
>y an economically poor and
>rostrate Europe.