|
In addition the Act excludes people work-
ing for charitable institutions, particu-
larly hospitals, and it does not include
any, or practically any, employees in the
service trades such as waiters, waitresses,
and parking lot attendants. This group
adds up to nearly 500,000 people in this
State and it is not a coincidence, I submit,
that this identical group is the one which
according to federal statistics is earning
less than the minimum wage.
Now, the statement of a right to or-
ganize and bargain collectively which we
ask be included in the new constitution
would, of course, have symbolic universal
application to all people in the State, but
it is to, first of all, a group of private
employees who are not covered by the
National Labor Relations Act and who
have not protection by any other law in the
State, and secondly, to the public employ-
ees of the State to whom we feel this right
must be addressed.
The existence of a large group of citi-
zens who must live in a labor market in
which only the employer has a say is detri-
mental to the entire economy of the State,
to say nothing of the human dignity of the
individual involved.
The blight which is caused by the quasi-
involuntary servitude in which many
people working in the fringe industries
are placed without any means of collective
action is one which this constitution must
address itself to. I will talk momentarily
about the public employees. It is certainly
our intention to include all employees,
whether they be in the hire of the State
or of private persons and industries within
the purview of the recommendation.
The Personal Rights Committee at a
later point in part 2 of its report has sug-
gested to the Convention that the principle
of sovereign immunity ought to be abro-
gated by the constitution, that the State
should no longer be able to escape responsi-
bility for its omissions and commissions;
as, for instance, when an automobile owned
by the State injures someone, it should be
in the same position as when a private
person is involved in an accident.
This same principle, but with much more
force, I suggest, applies also to the State
in the role of an employer. The 135,000
employees of the State in its political sub-
divisions have no right to organize or to
bargain collectively.
It is true that in many areas of public
employment and to an increasing extent,
there have been organizations recognized
|
by the State as political subdivisions and
bargaining occurs. We say that this ought
to be a right. It ought to be a must that
the government as an employer afford its
citizens or its employees all of the avenues
of redress that those in private industry
enjoy.
The proposal for the recommendation of
the minority is Amendment No. 21.
THE CHAIRMAN: The pages will
please distribute amendment L.
DELEGATE BOTHE: The language
suggests the absolute bare bones minimum
statement of a right. It is language similar
to that contained in the constitutions of
Hawaii, Missouri, New Jersey, and New
York, and in the case of New York, both
the current and the proposed constitution.
It would assure the fundamentals of em-
ployee rights. It is no labor bill of rights.
It is simply a bare bones statement of the
very fundamental relationship that should
be guaranteed by the constitution to the
working people of the State that they be
entitled to organize and to bargain col-
lectively.
It does not require that any agreement
be reached. It merely keeps the channels of
communication open between employer and
employees and assures a degree of demo-
cratic give and take in the industry of this
State, something which is sadly lacking.
I am sure that there may be some ques-
tion brought here about the right to strike
and I would like to emphasize that this
proposal does not deal with that question,
but, on the contrary, sets out an assurance
that there will be fewer disruptions of
labor.
I have been making an informal survey
of such strikes as have occurred in the
public employment in recent years and it
seems that the only ones that have taken
place have been in an effort to seek recog-
nition, not to seek any particular terms of
employment, but merely to obtain the ave-
nue through which a contract can be
reached. By the adoption of this language
we, the minority, suggest that there will
be a modicum of peace on the industrial
scene of the State and that it has a practi-
cal operative effect that will be beneficial,
not only to those personally affected, but
to the whole body politic of the State of
Maryland.
In closing my formal remarks, I am not
going to quote Jefferson or Hamilton, but
one of our fellow delegates who was kind
enough to lend me some matters from his
|
