OCR Text |
Show POSTALCLERKS CLEVELAND. 0., Dec. IU Demanding Demand-ing a salary increases of 25 per cent, double pay for overtime and the recognition rec-ognition of seven hours' night work as the equivalent of eight hours' day work, 1500 postal employes formed a permanent organization at a mass meeting here yesterday . WASHINGTON, Dec. 10 Organized labor last night threw down the gauntlet to Postmaster General Burleson. Bur-leson. In a statement issued from the headquarters of the American Federation Fed-eration of Labor in this ciiy, Samuel Gompers. president of the federation, served notice that any attempt to force through congress his proposal to deny postal employes nght to organize, or-ganize, will be bitterly fought. Mr. Gompers said: "The American Federation of Labor La-bor will resist any effort made by Postmaster General Burleson o put into effect his recommendation to congress that the postal employes be denied the right of direct apueal to congress and the right to organize and affiliate with labor. "More than ten years ago, in 100G, the American Federation of Labor presented its historic bill of griev ances to President Roosevek, and mentined as one of the particulars ihe restoration of the right of direct pe-tltlonto pe-tltlonto congress' by government employes em-ployes a right that was denied them by executive orders issued by Presi dents Roosevelt and Taft. We kept this issue prominently before the pub. lie, ancl on August 24, 1912, the Sixty-second Sixty-second congress enacted what was then commonly called , tho anti-gag law, a law granting postal anil other government workers the right to main, tain their own organizations in the interest of the men and freo from the domination of the department heads, and also restoring to them tho constitutional right of direct petition to congress. It is this which Mr. Burleson Bur-leson is seeking to have repualeil. We fought for its enactment, wo believe it a wise, Just, necessary .law, and Ave are prepared to fight against Its repeal. re-peal. No Strike Threats. "Mr. Burleson cannot point to a single instance where an affiliated organization or-ganization of postal employes has threatened to strike. He cannot name a single officer of these organizations organ-izations who has remotely suggested such a course. Personally I have addressed ad-dressed postal employes many times In all parts of the country. I have explained ex-plained to them that legislation and not the strike was their weapon ot last resort. "I can see no danger of a strik& of postal employes, if they have free access to congress and public opin. ion to secure the correction of their grievance. But I can conceive of serious se-rious trouble arising if the Burleson Idea of repressing men and not giw ing them the opportunity to organize and to come In contact with their fellow fel-low workers in a sinoere desire to make better the lot of all groups ot workers Is put into operation. Affiliation Affili-ation with the labor movement Is a safety valve for the postal workers which Mr. Burleson, in a mistaken view of the yearnings of his em ployes, would close. "At a time when governmental activities ac-tivities are being extended into ev. ery industry connected with the sue cessful prosecution of the war and thousands of workers are either already al-ready in the government service or potentially po-tentially government employes, it is Imperative that their right to organize organ-ize and petition congress be not interfered in-terfered with. I can conceive of nothing noth-ing more harmful to the necessary ex. tension of government control and regulation at this time than the adoption adop-tion of the Burleson idea by our government gov-ernment in its capacitj' of an em.-ployer. em.-ployer. The American Federation of Labor j stands prepared today to back up its position of 1906. when it fought for the rights of the government employes. em-ployes. We differ from Mr. Burleson ;in his view that the anti-gag law has operated to build up organizations ot employes that are a menace. We fear that the menace lies, not in the employes' em-ployes' organization, but in the de- n.laJL citizens f fundamental rights." |