網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

The result, as shown

by the

headlines of

the New

York Times, November 4, 1921.

(November 4, 1921.)

STRIKERS RIOTING ALL OVER THE CITY
DUMP THOUSANDS OF GALLONS OF MILK
HYLAN THREATENS TO SEIZE PLANTS

The neces

sity of legal responsibility in industrial relations.

A proposed

law on this subject.

BRICKS RAIN ON TRUCKS.

Drivers and dealers are beaten. Policemen attacked, wagons stolen.

[blocks in formation]

In industrial relations, as in other phases of life, experience has shown that the combination of great power and lack of responsibility is likely to lead to an abuse of power. Among both employees and employers organization is increasingly close and strong, and though this is in many ways desirable, this development increases the necessity of protecting the community against the aggressions of either labor or capital. Authorities differ as to the desirability or even possibility of so applying ordinary corporation law as to render trade unions and employers' associations legally responsible for their acts. It is believed by some, however, that it is possible to establish legal responsibility by a special form of incorporation. In the following passage Mr. Forrest R. Black outlines a proposed law which would establish such responsibility:

I. Such a law ought to recognize the peculiar nature of the trade union as distinct from the social club, on the one hand, and from an ordinary business corporation on the other.

1 From Forrest R. Black, Should Trade Unions and Employers' Associations Be Made Legally Responsible? National Industrial Conference Board, Boston, June, 1920; pp. 33-35.

Necessity of recog

nizing the

trade union

and its

II. The law should expressly recognize the "identity of interest" between the trade union as such and its members. This would give efficiency to their contracts with employers. It should be so framed "identity of interest" that a breach of a joint contract of employment would give the union between a a right of action for the damages sustained by its members through resulting loss of wages or unemployment. This would virtually introduce arbitration by the courts in labor disputes, by creating greater mutual confidence in the stability of each other; and thus, to a certain extent, superseding the strike, which is at present practically the only remedy against a violation of the labor contract by the employer.

members.

versus

charitable functions of

the union.

III. The statute should specifically recognize the distinction Combative between the combative and the charitable functions of a trade union, and the funds connected with the latter should be declared immune from attachment in a damage suit. Protected by such a limitation, if the unions are acting in good faith, we see no reason why they should not be willing to furnish as good security as they now demand of the employer.

commission

IV. A Federal labor commission should be created to supervise A Federal labor organizations and employers' associations, and among other labor things, to see to it that the unions do not use the benefit function proposed. as a cloak to protect the funds to be used for combative purposes.

VI. The statute must distinguish between the merchant function and the employer function of those organizations that are loosely called "employers' associations."

tion should

be volun

VII. Incorporation should be voluntary. The experience of New IncorporaZealand and Australia shows that such a system, although voluntary, would soon be adopted by the great majority of trade unions and tary. employers' associations. The objections to incorporation, as such, on the part of trade unions, would be overcome by the attending privileges offered, and due to the fact that employers are even now financially responsible, employers' associations would accept it [i.e. incorporation] because of the greater leverage it would give them over organized labor, and because of the stimulus that it would give to the principle of arbitration.

VIII. The foregoing system should be put into effect by national and state legislation. Lack of uniformity in state statutes would

Equal treatment of

trade unions

and employers'

associations.

Conclusion.

Backwardness of compulsory arbitration in the United

States.

no doubt be a serious handicap to the success of the plan, but this is one of the defects which is inherent in our system of government. At least, the proposed plan, where adopted, would be preferable to the present system.

IX. Finally trade unions must be subject to the same rules of legal ability as employers' associations, in the strict use of that term. . . . The public welfare demands that both trade unions and employers' associations stand upon a plane of equality before the and this the state can establish.

law,

It seems that the solution lies in an extension of the Roosevelt Trust Policy of "concentration and control." We must distinguish between good and bad unions, between good and bad employers' associations. The motive of those who urge that trade unions and employers' associations be held strictly responsible for their contracts and the acts of their agents, is not to attack the institutions themselves, but their abuses; the purpose is not to cripple the contending factions, but to protect the great consuming public of which they are only a part.

[ocr errors]

106. The Kansas Court of Industrial Relations 1

The limitations of conciliation, mediation and voluntary arbitration as methods of settling industrial disputes have given rise to the demand for compulsory arbitration. Those favoring compulsory arbitration are particularly insistent that this device be applied to industrial disputes which threaten to deprive the public of such vital necessities as coal, milk, etc. Compulsory arbitration is well known in Australasia, but has not been regarded with wide favor in the United States. Nevertheless, an important step toward safeguarding the right of the public was taken when in January, 1920, the Legislature of Kansas established a Court of Industrial Relations. The chief aim of the court is not to arbitrate between labor and capital, as such, but to represent the public interest in industry. The following description of the court is from the Monthly Labor Review: The action of the Legislature of Kansas of this year [1920] in

1 From the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Monthly Labor Review. Washington, March, 1920; pp. 214-215.

Industrial

establishing a special tribunal of industrial relations has attracted The Kansas widespread attention. The court consists of three judges appointed Court of by the governor, with the advice and consent of the senate, for three- Relations, year terms, and was immediately (Feb. 2) organized. . . . Its 1920. principal powers, from the standpoint of immediate interest, relate Chief to the regulation of designated classes of employments, industries, powers. etc., "declared to be affected with a public interest and therefore subject to supervision by the state." Included are the manufacturing of food products and clothing, and processes connected therewith; the mining or production of fuel; transportation, and all public utilities and common carriers as defined by existing statutes of the state.

The court has power to make investigations, serve process, take Further testimony, and adopt rules and regulations to govern its own pro- powers. ceedings. Appeal lies to the supreme court from its findings. The public welfare is declared to require continuity and efficiency in the operation of the industries, etc., named; the willful hindering, delay, limiting or suspension of such operations are therefore declared to be contrary to the purpose of the act.

The court may act on its own initiative, or upon the complaint of either party to a controversy, or of ten citizen taxpayers of the affected community, or of the attorney-general of the state. Investigation may extend to the conditions surrounding the workers, their wages, returns to capital, the rights and welfare of the public, "and all other matters affecting the conduct of said industries, employments, public utilities, or common carriers."

-

How the

court is set

in motion.

Authority

with respect to working and living

conditions.

The court is authorized to order any changes necessary in the matter of working and living conditions, hours of labor, rules and practices, and a reasonable minimum wage or standard of wages. Appeal may be taken within 10 days to the supreme court. If after 60 days' compliance the order is found to be unjust, unreasonable, or impracticable, the aggrieved party may apply for a modification, and a hearing shall thereupon be had, and the court of industry may modify its orders for cause shown. Enforcement is by process issuing from the supreme court on Enforcement proceedings by the industrial court. Persons wilfully violating the provisions of the act, or any valid order of the court, are liable to

of the
orders of the
court.

Violence and other forms of lawlessness.

Recognition of collective bargaining.

Conclusion.

Increasing

number of plans for industrial peace.

fine not exceeding $100 or imprisonment not exceeding one year, or both. Officers of corporations or of labor unions who use their official positions wilfully to influence or compel violations are guilty of a felony and may be punished, upon conviction thereof, by a fine not exceeding $5,000, or imprisonment at hard labor for not exceeding two years, or both. In case production or operation is suspended, the court may take proceedings for the taking over and operation of the industries or work affected. In any case a fair wage is to be paid the workers and a fair return allowed the owners.

It is an offense to do or perform any forbidden act, or fail or refuse to perform any act enjoined or directed by the court, acting either singly or in confederation with others; or to induce or intimidate any employer or worker to violate the orders of the court whether negatively or positively. Picketing, threats, abuse, or other forms of intimidation are unlawful in connection with the employments, industries, etc., governed by the act.

Unions of workers are recognized, as is the right of collective bargaining. Individual workers are guaranteed freedom of action in making or terminating contracts, but it is unlawful for individuals to conspire with other persons to quit employment for the purpose of hindering, delaying, or interfering with the operation of industries covered by the act. Employees testifying as witnesses or otherwise active in securing the attention or action of the court may not be discharged or discriminated against because of such action.

This is the most comprehensive attempt yet made to protect the public in cases of industrial disputes likely to affect its interests.

[ocr errors]

107. Proposed principles of industrial relations 1

The growing desire to decrease the antagonisms between labor and capital has led to numerous programs of industrial procedure. Some of these programs or proposals have frankly favored the interests of the laborers, while others have tended to favor the employers. Often the interests of the public at large have been inadequately represented in these so-called plans for industrial peace. 1 From the Chamber of Commerce of the United States, "A Labor Program by Business." Printed in The Nation's Business, April, 1919; p. 13.

« 上一頁繼續 »