Relations with C. I. O.
During much of 1941 the A. F. of L. and many of its constituent unions were deeply involved in disputes with the C. I. O. and its affiliates. These disputes were the culmination of several years of rivalry and were brought to a head by the opportunities for organization which the defense program afforded. The Federation, because of the great growth in employment and evidences of the disfavor in which the C. I. O. was held by employers, was moved to hope that it could win a foothold in the large mass-production industries of steel and automobiles, mining and textiles, from which it had been all but eliminated by the C. I. O. The C. I. O. on its part having given up hope for any peace with the Federation was determined to carry on guerrilla warfare and extend the area of its jurisdiction at the expense of the A. F. of L. The tactics dictated by these views often resulted in head-on collisions and strikes or threats of strikes in defense, as well as in ordinary, industry. One of the most bitter fights between the two organizations was over their attempts to unionize the International Harvester Company. When the C. I. O. called a strike in the Chicago plant of this company, the Federation, under police protection, marched its members into the factories.
The most serious jurisdictional conflict between the C. I. O. and the A. F. of L. originated in the activities of the C. I. O. construction workers' union, an organization headed by the brother of John L. Lewis and aiming to weaken the building unions of the A. F. of L., against which Lewis harbored a particular grudge. The C. I. O. building union had made some progress against the established A. F. of L. unions in this industry by offering substantial concessions in wages and working conditions, particularly in agreeing to permit building contractors to use pre-fabricated materials. Some time in the second half of 1941, the C. I. O. union made a labor agreement with one Currier, head of a prominent Detroit firm handling building materials and engaged in construction. This firm, it appeared, was the low bidder on a government housing project in the Detroit area, but was denied the contract through the intervention of the labor division of the OPM. Currier, supported by the C. I. O., strongly protested this decision and the case became a cause célèbre of the defense administration. It was taken up by the newspapers, investigated by a Congressional Committee, and was under examination by the Department of Justice. Inquiry disclosed that the Government through Mr. Hillman, labor director of the OPM, had given the A. F. of L. unions a virtual monopoly over building labor in return for their undertaking to prevent strikes and stabilize wages. This revelation of the part played by Government in creating a labor monopoly and raising the costs of public construction aroused a storm of protest. But nothing happened; Currier lost his contract, and the Federation building unions retained their monopoly.
An equally important dispute grew out of the efforts of the same C. I. O. union to invade the territory of the A. F. of L. teamsters' union. The overt act which precipitated this struggle for supremacy was the granting of a charter by the C. I. O. construction union to a local of the A. F. of L. teamsters' union in Minneapolis. This organization was led by the famous Dunn brothers, who among other things were noted for their prominence in a communist labor political organization, which followed the Trotzky line. Since Daniel Tobin, one of the labor leaders who strongly supported Mr. Roosevelt in his three presidential campaigns, was president of the teamsters' union, this act of aggression by the C. I. O. particularly annoyed the Administration. The President issued a sharp letter condemning inter-union raids. The Department of Justice began proceedings against the Dunns and several of their associates for their leadership in a subversive political organization, which sought to overthrow the American Government.
Internal Dissensions.
In the relations among its constituent organizations, the A. F. of L. also faced considerable trouble. Again, as in the preceding year, the members of the typographical union voted to stay out of the Federation in the face of an agreement which had been negotiated by the officers of the A. F. of L. and the officers of the printers' union. On the Pacific coast, locals of the machinists' union called a strike in the shipyards employed on vital Government contracts, in violation of an agreement not to strike made between the Government and the metal trades unions of the Federation. In the same area the welders crippled ship production on several occasions by strikes called in protest against their parent organizations and in furtherance of the demand that they be allowed to form a separate and independent union of their own. The Brotherhood of Electrical Workers ordered a general strike against the Consolidated Edison Company in an attempt to obtain jurisdiction over electrical work done under the jurisdiction of an independent union of that company's employees. After a brief stoppage the Electrical Workers' union was prevailed upon to call off the strike and submit the issue to a special investigating commission appointed by the Defense Mediation Board. The report of this commission failed to sustain the position of the Brotherhood.
Charges of graft against the president of one of the Federation's constituent unions (the union of theatrical stage employees) and his personal representative in Hollywood proved to be one of the most embarrassing episodes in the history of the A. F. of L. Due largely to the efforts of a newspaper columnist. Westbrook Pegler, who for several years had been devoting his column to presenting malpractices in the administration of A. F. of L. unions, George Browne, president of the theatrical stage employees' union and William Bioff, his Hollywood agent, were brought to trial and convicted for demanding and taking bribes from officers of moving picture companies. The case reached its climax during the annual convention of the Federation. On its specific issues the A. F. of L. took no public position. But, since Browne was one of the vice-presidents of the Federation and, as such, a member of the Executive Council, the A. F. of L. was forced to assume some public attitude in the matter. This it did by an indirection. The convention voted to reduce the number of vice-presidents from 15 to 13, thus allowing Browne's membership in the Council to lapse.
As in the year before, the dispute between the Federation and Thurman Arnold, assistant Attorney-General in charge of the Department of Justice's antitrust division, over the application of the antitrust law to union activities continued. A decision of the United States Supreme Court, Feb. 3, 1941, in the famous case of United States v. Hutcheson was a victory for the Federation since the Court held that the use by a union of a strike, peaceful picketing, and boycott of an employer, arising out of a controversy over jobs between rival unions affiliated with the same parent body, was not a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Law.
In its campaign against the administration and policies of the National Labor Relations Board, the A. F. of L. won another victory. It successfully blocked the reappointment of Edwin S. Smith as a member of that Board. As a result of its opposition, the Federation had forced the retirement of the three original members of the Board — Warren Madden, the first chairman, Donald Wakefield Smith, and in 1941 Edwin S. Smith. The Federation had been successful also in effecting important changes in the Board's procedures and policies. Its agitation apparently persuaded the new members of the Board to deal more gently with the demands of the A. F. of L. craft unions. In many of its decisions, the Board rejected earlier policies and sanctioned bargaining units on craft lines. In one of its most important findings, the members of the Board set aside an earlier decision made by their predecessors establishing the ports of the Pacific coast as a single bargaining unit. The effect of this, of course, was to revive the A. F. of L. longshoremen's union in those ports in which its members were in the majority.
On the National Defense Mediation Board, created early in 1941, the A. F. of L. shared labor representation with the C. I. O. The Federation's activities on this Board were uneventful until late in the year when the issue of the closed shop in the captive coal mines was submitted to the Board for adjudication. Since this was a complex political issue, involving the position and prestige of John L. Lewis in the labor movement, the A. F. of L. representatives voted with the employers and the public members of the Board to deny the United Mine Workers the closed shop in these mining properties of the steel companies. This decision disrupted the Board. The C. I. O. members resigned and C. I. O. unions refused to submit disputes to the Board, which was, therefore, virtually forced to discontinue its operations.
Truce with C. I. O.
Apparently this series of events widened the rift between the C. I. O. and the A. F. of L. But American entry into the war in December caused these rival federations to patch up some of their differences and to adopt at least a temporary truce. During the joint conference of employers and unions, convened by the President in Washington in mid-December, representatives of the two organizations presented a united front. They agreed to urge their affiliated unions to avoid strikes; to recommend the creation of a war labor board to replace the Defense Mediation Board; and, more important, to oppose the recommendation of the employers that the status of the closed and open shop be frozen for the duration of the war. This reversal of position by the A. F. of L. clearly paved the way for friendlier relations with the C. I. O.
Membership.
In spite of internal dissension and the rivalry of the C. I. O., the year was a prosperous one for the Federation. It reported an increase of more than 500,000 members, with an aggregate membership on Dec. 31 of 4,827,724. But 180,000 of these were members of the Ladies Garment Workers union which had returned to the Federation in the fall of 1940 after an interim period as an affiliate of the C. I. O. The gains the Federation made were dispersed over a large number of unions. It made, however, signal progress in unionizing the Western Union Telegraph Company, a business whose employees had for more than 20 years been members of a company union. The disestablishment of this organization by the Labor Relations Board opened the doors for the unionizing campaign by the A. F. of L. Successful as the Federation's organizing efforts were they failed to dislodge C. I. O. unions in the steel, automobile and related industries. See also CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION; LABOR ARBITRATION; LABOR LEGISLATION.
No comments:
Post a Comment