OCR Text |
Show PASSAGE by the Indiana legislature legis-lature a few weeks ago of a "right to work" law has brought the big national Labor Unions up with a Jolt True, 17 states already had passed such laws, but Indiana was the first big industrial state to do so. Most of the other states were in the South and West where unions were not strong anyway. This rising tide of sentiment against the unions, has been brought to a head by disclosures in the Senate Investigation of improper im-proper activitier of both Unions and Management, and the alleged misuse of Union funds by some of the Union leaders as brought out in the case of Dave Beck, President Presi-dent of the International Union of Teamsters. The Taft-Hartley Liw outlawed the so-called "closed shop." The closed shop deal required all employees em-ployees covered by the Act be members of unions. However the Taft-Hartley Act preserved the Union Shop, and although not requiring re-quiring employees to be members of unions when hired, does require them to join unions soon after starting to work. The so-called "state-right-to-work" laws profess to protect the individual employee in his right to work whether he belongs to a Union Uni-on or not. But under this guise of protection, it wrecks the entire union movement, by banning the union shop and the entire collective bargaining system now in effect. Some management is backing this move to wreck the labor union movement, because of the prevalence preval-ence of Union security agreements in collective bargaining contracts. Union leaders declare union members mem-bers want these security agreements. agree-ments. Rlght-to-work advocates claim that tha workers are forced to accept them. There can be no question, but that under the collective bargain-ing bargain-ing system, the Unions have Increased In-creased the standard of living of. the working people of the country, both for union and non-union employees. em-ployees. For wages of non-union workers follow closely behind those of union members. The rlght-to-work movement, according ac-cording to its advocates is based on the traditional right of every individual to Independence, freedom free-dom . . . therefore he should have the right to work whether or not he join a union. However if tlu union shop is banned, and collet, tive bargaining weakened, then every worker is on his own to bargain for his wages and hire . . and takes him back 25 or 30 years. In these days of multiple corporate corpor-ate interests, what effect or power would one or a dozen men have In bargaining for hours and wages and conditions of work have on management, as compared to the bargaining power of 3.000 to 10,000 men in a union as represented by his elected officials. These states have right to work laws today: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia. Iowa. Mississip. pi, Nebraska. Nevada. North Caro-Una. Caro-Una. North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota. Tennessee. Tt-xas, Utah and Virginia In Idaho a law failed to pass by four votes. In Wyoming and Colorado, the legislatures legis-latures rejected right-to-work riders rid-ers on civil rights legislation. |