1941: Labor Unions

Unionization.

The major influence affecting the course of organized labor during 1941 was the national defense program. Large and constantly expanding orders for war materials, superimposed upon a considerable boom in general business, produced economic conditions unusually favorable to union growth. For the first time in 10 years, since the beginning of the depression of 1930, production and employment, as well as national income, exceeded the prosperity peaks of 1929. High profits, the withdrawal of able-bodied men from industry to the army, spirited bidding for labor, and the prospect that the boom would last for a number of years, were the conditions that had traditionally contributed to union expansion and power.

At the same time the political atmosphere continued to be a favorable one for the unions. In his first reorganization of the defense administration the President retained Sidney Hillman, an outstanding union leader, in a high position, when he appointed him associate director of the Office of Production Management, thus dividing the authority of that important post between Mr. Hillman and Mr. Knudsen. From this strategic position Mr. Hillman was able to be of invaluable assistance to organized labor through his influence on policy and the informal pressure he could put on employers and related government agencies. Wherever possible, also, bureaus and departments of the Federal Government, with rare exceptions, did what they could to further the unionization of industry. More important still, the administration used its very considerable influence with Congress to prevent the amendment of existing labor laws and legislation aimed to regulate unions and curb their powers.

Policies of the NLRB.

The agency most concerned with the position of union labor — the National Labor Relations Board — effected no substantial change in its policy. Although the three original members of the Board had now been replaced, their successors pursued, except for relatively minor matters, much the same policies in the interpretation of the Wagner Act. On the whole union contentions were upheld and organized labor was strengthened by decisions of the Board in 1941, as in previous years, which further supported the right to strike, inflexibly held employers responsible for a variety of unfair labor practices, and continued the widespread disestablishment of unions held to be company-dominated. As in recent years, also, the decisions of the Board were upheld by the United States Supreme Court and by most of the lower Federal courts.

Growth in Membership of Unions.

Organized labor, consequently, recorded during the year a further substantial growth in membership. Unreliable as current figures of union membership are, the evidence is strong that unions gained from 500,000 to 1,000,000 members during 1941. The A. F. of L. alone reported a gain of more than 300,000 members. The C. I. O. failed this year to report the membership of its affiliated organizations. But the known increases made by C. I. O. unions in the automobile, steel, mining, textile and electrical manufacturing industries justify the conclusion that the expansion of the C. I. O. did not fall short of that of the A. F. of L. The independent railroad unions also augmented their ranks through successful organizing and increasing employment. In addition the number of independent unions, unaffiliated with any of these groups, has been increasing, as has their membership. Altogether, it may be conservatively estimated that aggregate union membership at the end of 1941 was close to 10,000,000. This is the largest number ever included in American unions and is double the number reached during the inflationary boom of 1920. Among other things, this figure means that from one-fourth to one-third of American wage-earners and lower salaried employees belonged to unions.

This expansion in total membership was accompanied by the wider dispersion of unionism and the capture of outstanding non-union strongholds. The most spectacular victories, comparable in importance to the organization of General Motors and United States Steel in 1937, followed the successful campaigns waged by C. I. O. unions against Ford and the Bethlehem and Republic steel companies. Before the year was over the C. I. O. had won contracts with all of these companies and gained thereby several hundred thousand members. But, though not so striking, equally important progress was made throughout industry by the organization of large numbers of small and middle-sized firms, whose capture greatly strengthened organized labor's bargaining power and control over industry.

Wage Increases.

The conditions which made the expansion of organized labor possible was at the same time the source of difficult problems of union policy. Eager to take advantage of the opportunities for organizing which rising employment and increasing government spending afforded, the unions made vigorous efforts to raise wages. Before the year was far along general wage increases, amounting to 10 cents an hour in defense plants, began to spread from industry to industry and resulted in a country-wide wave of wage advances. Although the same pace was not sustained throughout the year, increases continued at a high level and at the end of twelve months the rates of factory employees had gone up by nearly 15 per cent. Meanwhile employment had risen by an even greater amount. The result was a considerable increase in wage disbursements. The combination of rising purchasing power and the gradual diversion of materials and plant capacity to war uses tended to force up prices and the cost of living and to raise the fear of inflation. Wage demands of organized labor, therefore, became the subject of public criticism and public agencies dealing with labor disputes were pressed to lay down policies that would restrain inflationary wage and price movements.

The Closed Shop Issue.

Great as was the progress which unionism made in 1941, the unions recognized that much of it depended on temporary forces. Hence they promptly sought effective measures that would solidify their position and assure their permanency. The most effective of such measures is the closed shop, a device which requires every employee to join a union and to maintain his membership in it. Accordingly many unions, particularly the young ones, made their plans to win the closed shop, in one or another of its forms. But on the closed shop most American employers were adamant, both because they were averse to forcing employees into unions against their will and because they feared the restrictions on the rights of management which they believed the closed shop would bring. Whatever its merits, the closed shop became the most contentious labor issue of the year. Controversy over it reached its climax in the captive mine strike, when President Roosevelt made five separate pleas to John L. Lewis for reconsideration of his demands for a closed shop. On Dec. 7, however, the three-man arbitration board appointed by the President ruled in favor of a union shop as almost all the miners considered themselves members of the C. I. O. But at the end of the year, as a consistent policy had not been decided upon, it was still unsettled and, obviously, a fertile source of much future trouble.

Strikes.

These uninterrupted demands for higher wages and the closed shop were bound to encounter resistance and to become the cause of strikes. Strikes did in fact begin to multiply soon after the turn of the year. When the year was ended, it was found to be one of the most troubled periods in recent history. Both in number of strikes and in time lost through strikes, the record of 1941 was exceeded only by that of 1937, which was featured by numerous and prolonged labor disturbances. To make matters worse this wave of stoppages touched many plants engaged in producing airplanes, tanks, guns and the machines and tools essential to all war production. Interference with critical plans for arming the country forced the administration to set up a new board for settling labor disputes. But this board failed to stem the tide. By December the National Defense Mediation Board had become defunct and steps were being taken to create in its place more effective machinery.

Demand for Legislation to Curb Labor.

The upshot of these developments in labor relations was a strong popular demand for legislation. Both houses of Congress were soon considering numerous bills. Some were aimed directly at the strike issue, others at various practices of organized labor. The strike bills ran the whole gamut of proposals from the outright prohibition of strikes, through compulsory arbitration, to milder measures, modelled after the Railway Labor Act, which required a breathing spell (cooling-off period) usually of 30 days during which strikes were prohibited. The purpose of another type of bill was to reform union management and to regulate union activities. These proposed measures differed widely in detail, but they all had the same aim of democratizing American labor unions and eliminating some of the grosser abuses associated with the labor movement. They, accordingly, provided for independent audit of union finances, publicly supervised and secret strike votes and elections of officers, stringent curbs on the use of pickets and the like. In addition, legislation already existed empowering the President to seize and operate strike-bound plants, producing materials vital to the safety of the country. During 1941 three plants were taken over under these powers.

All other legislation failed of adoption. Pursuing its customary policy the administration successfully intervened to block restrictive legislation of any character. Although a large majority of the House voted to proceed with regulatory measures and this position was apparently supported by dominant public opinion, the administration deemed it wise to continue to apply conciliation and persuasion and to defer more drastic means until they were proved absolutely necessary.

Impact of War on Labor.

The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Dec. 7, 1941, instantaneously and for the time being, at least, changed the whole complexion of our labor relations. All strikes in war plants were called off and demands held in abeyance. Both federations of labor promised to support the program of war production and to refrain from strikes. The President designated 12 representatives of organized labor and 12 employers to meet in joint conference for the purpose of formulating the principles and procedures to govern the peaceful settlement of labor disputes. After one week's session, the conferees agreed to outlaw strikes and lockouts and to propose the creation of a war labor board. But they were unable to agree on the employers' proposal that the closed shop, unless arrived at by voluntary agreement, was not an arbitrable issue and could not be submitted to the new board. Disregarding this vital difference, the President congratulated the conference on its undertaking to avoid stoppages and to submit disputes to appropriate public bodies and took steps to organize another mediation and arbitration agency.

Behind the year's disturbances and the specific issues that terminated in strikes, the most formidable underlying force was the desire of the labor movement to share more fully in the conduct of the war program and in the management of industry. The A. F. of L., as well as the C. I. O., kept demanding greater labor representation in government administration. Philip Murray continued to push his plan for joint industrial councils, composed of representatives of labor, employers and government. In the automobile industry, the union went further by proposing that it study and plan the most effective and swiftest means for converting the facilities of that industry to war production. In none of these demands was organized labor successful. But the progress it has made in organizing non-union industry and the force of its campaign for the closed shop suggest that it is in this area of the division of the powers and responsibilities of management with labor that the foundation was laid in 1941 for more stubborn difficulties than this country has yet faced. See also articles on AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR; AVIATION; BUSINESS; CHILD WELFARE; CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS; LABOR ARBITRATION; LABOR LEGISLATION and WAGES, HOURS AND WORKING CONDITIONS.