OCR Text |
Show MlrurUarl'H Washlnqton tUqoxt Co-Opcration of Business Sought By Wage-Hour Law Administrator Andrews Pictures Industry of Country as Mainly Decent; Will Depend on Citizens, Not Inspectors, to Make Law Work; Warns Against Chiselers. Ey WILLIAM BRUCKART YVNU Service, National Tress Bldg., Washington, D. C. WASIIINGTON. Mr. Elmer F. Andrews hasn't been in Washington long enough yet to become either widely praised or cordially hated, but he has started on his job as administrator ad-ministrator of the new wage and hour law, and so it will not be long until the country knows him. He has a tough job; one of the toughest, Indeed, since Gen. Hugh Johnson tried to run NRA. Thus, it seems proper to review and examine some of Mr. Andrews pronouncements since he came into the administration. adminis-tration. Ifis main theory of proceeding with a new and wholly untried policy of law is to gain co-operation of business, busi-ness, the business which the law is to effect. He pictures the industry of the country as mainly decent, as willing to do the right thing, and to that extent certainly he is entitled to commendation. l or, all too often in the last live years, all business has been grouped by first one New Dealer Deal-er and then another, as being crooked. Mr. Andrews feels apparently appar-ently that business is honest until Its records show it to be dishonest, and then to apply the lush to the individuals, in-dividuals, and not the whole industry, indus-try, as wrongdoers. "We are going to depend upon the citizens of the United States, not an army of inspectors from Washington, Washing-ton, to make this law work," Mr. Andrews said in a recent speech. The administrator further espoused es-poused the policy of giving the states the job of enforcement within their jurisdictions as far as that can be clone. To this, he added that the law enables a worker to sue for double dou-ble the amount due if any employer fails to pay the minimum wage, explaining ex-plaining that this provision takes one enforcement phase out of the hands of the federal government and creates watchmen of every worker. Since the law, with its minimum of 25 cents an hour becomes effective October 24, (where interstate shipments ship-ments of products are concerned) Mr. Andrews obviously believes-that individual workers will get pretty well acquainted with their rights before be-fore the effective date. Asks for Co-Operation To Minimize Crookedness Mr. Andrews warned against chis-elers. chis-elers. He took the position in an interview that chiseling was to be expected and added that "chiselers will get rich and fair employers will go broke in the short run" of things, but he seems to believe that there can and will be sufficient co-operation to insure the minimum of crookedness, crook-edness, undercutting and cheapness. At least, it is hoped the condition will work out that way. Although I never have believed that a federal wage and hour law would prove satisfactory, sat-isfactory, it is entitled to a fair chance to show whether it can or can not be worthwhile as national policy. And Mr. Andrews is surely entitled to the co-operation for which he has asked unless he develops like so many other New Dealers to whom extraordinary power suddenly has been entrusted. From a quarter of a century of observation, I am inclined to the belief be-lief that the great majority of business busi-ness concerns will "come clean" in their relations with the new federal ollice. Obviously, some will not, but the bulk will try to abide by the law as they understand it. So, I think it is not from the bulk of business interests that Mr. Andrews will get his load of trouble. There will be cheap skates who try to take advantage ad-vantage of any and every situation to gain an advantage on their competitors. com-petitors. That will be one kind of trouble that can be traced home rather quickly. Then, there will be another kind of trouble that will not be so easily untangled. It will come from "reports" of alleged violations some from the "watchmen," some from the chiselers who will seek to cause trouble for or suspicion suspi-cion of violation by, competitors. There will be some labor racketeers who will try to force union organization organiza-tion by threats of "reports" of violations viola-tions which reports obviously would be damaging even though they may not be true. All of these things are due to come, and it is under this test that we can best judge Mr. Andrews An-drews as a public official. Doubts Value of 'Watchmen' In Enforcement of Law As to the sources of information upon which the staff of th administrator admin-istrator may subsequently act, there is some reason for doubt. I mentioned men-tioned some of them above. My doubt as to the value of a "watchman" "watch-man" in enforcement is based upon what we all saw during the early days of prohibition. "Stool pigeons," pig-eons," they were called then. And stool pigeons operated everywhere; some were just plain busybodies, and others were fanatics. The result re-sult was that gradually a disrespect for law grew up, and this disrespect disre-spect was blamable to a considerable considera-ble extent upon the fact the early provisions of the law encouraged "squealing" and "squealing" more i times than not is used as a means of vengeance, of "getting even" with someone who Is disliked. It has been many years since business, busi-ness, generally, was said to have a policy of "the public be damned." There can be no doubt that business conscience has changed immeasurably immeasura-bly since those days. It is apparent, for example, that two of the really great sins of employers, namely, oppression op-pression of labor and defrauding of labor, have largely passed out of existence. ex-istence. Competitors seem to be watching each other in that regard and union labor officials have lent a hand. An employer no longer is received re-ceived among decent people once it Is learned that he has cheated his workers of their wages. Now, Mr. Andrews says that one of the things he hopes to accomplish is to "clean out dark corners." That is to say, to finish the job of helping industry get rid of that low level of humanity which, by virtue of its momentary power as an employer, oppresses labor or refuses to pay wages earned. Surely, the co-operation of employers and workers alike is required in this effort. Honest employers have much to gain by having the "dark corners" cleaned out and disinfected with a good grade of roach powder. But again, it is being pointed out in many conversations, con-versations, the administrator must be on guard as to the sources of his information. Irreparable harm can come from missteps in filing charges of violation because of the trend in public consciousness towards general gener-al fairness of which the wage and hour labor is an evidence. Job May Make Andrews Either a Hero or Villain Summed up, then, it seems to me that Mr. Andrews has a job in which he can turn out to be either a hero or a villain. A very great deal will depend upon the type of individuals with which he surrounds himself in administrative work. An illustration of what I am trying to say is to be found in the setup of the national labor relations board. I have watched that outfit through many of the cases it has handled and I simply can not believe it intends in-tends to do otherwise than play the game of the C. I. O. and John L. Lewis as against the American Federation Fed-eration of Labor. Time after time, the A. F. of L. has charged discrimination discrimi-nation and, to an outsider, most of the claims and protests seem to have been justified. The board's staff is full of radicals and quacks and individuals whose government salaries are larger than they, ever before drew in their lives. The question of federal supervision supervi-sion of wages and hours takes the federal government quite closely into the lives of millions of workers, just as many other new activities of the government under President Roosevelt has done. One of these instances has just come to fruition and is worthy of reporting because it shows the fallacy of a national government interfering everywhere. This story relates to the effort of the farm security administration, (which was once the resettlement administration that was founded by the former Braintruster Rexford Tugwell) to reform the lives of some of the residents of the Appalachian mountains. These people were moved out to a model town to clear the Shenandoah National park. They were to have nicer homes and enjoy greater opportunities in life. The trek started three years ago. Bought Liquor Instead Of Paying Grocery Bill Only lately, however, it has come to public notice that the governmental governmen-tal agency in charge had evicted one of the families moved them out on the sidewalk, so to speak. "Ida Valley," the community's name, was shocked. They were all "hill billy" families, and they could not understand such treatment Well, the crime the man committed commit-ted was that he had used his WPA check to buy liquor instead of paying pay-ing his grocery bill. He had been warned, of course. But the warnings warn-ings went unheeded, and finally, the government, like a private landlord, moved him and his family outside. Obviously, no person is going to condone the failure of this man to pay his debts. But there is something some-thing more to the incident What I am wondering is why a government, anybody's government, should attempt at-tempt to "make over" a person who does not want to be reformed in his living conditions. This family had lived, its ancestors had lived in the Appalachians for years. It had its habits, its traditions. It got along pretty well and from what I have seen in many trips through those mountains, they do not care much about the "more abundant life." They want to be left alone, and I think that is a pretty sound philosophy philoso-phy of life just to be let alone as far as government is concerned and as long no harm is done. Western Newspaper Union. |