|
DELEGATE WAGANDT: Delegate
Bothe, would this permit police departments
to organize?
DELEGATE BOTHE: It would permit
police departments to organize.
It would necessarily. It would not permit
them to go beyond the point of organizing
and bargaining collectively. In the event
that there were no successful negotiations
it would not go to any right to disrupt
the activities of the policemen. I think that
my answer is yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Wagandt.
DELEGATE WAGANDT: In other
words, the General Assembly could pass a
law which would prohibit striking by po-
licemen?
DELEGATE BOTHE: Oh, yes, if other-
wise constitutional. I am not an authority
on the constitutionality of labor injunc-
tions, although I realize and I think we all
know that there are situations in which
the security and welfare of the State would
be imperiled by disruption of work in
which the injunction is a proper remedy
and one which this right would not pre-
clude.
THE CHAIRMAN : Delegate Wagandt.
DELEGATE WAGANDT: Do you know
what the attitude of the Police Commis-
sioner of Baltimore City is on the issue
of organizing policemen?
DELEGATE BOTHE: The present Com-
missioner?
DELEGATE WAGANDT: Yes.
DELEGATE BOTHE: His predecessor,
I was familiar with, but he has gone back
to the militia. I do not know his attitude.
I know what it ought to be.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Hostetter.
DELEGATE HOSTETTER: The amend-
ment I have before me states employees
have the right to organize and bargain
collectively through representatives of their
own choosing.
Now, admittedly this is a bare bones
amendment. Would it be possible for em-
ployees to organize and bargain without
first joining a labor union?
DELEGATE BOTHE: It would be with-
out first joining. Two or three employees
could just get together for lunch and de-
cide they want to organize without any
labor union, as we understand it, being in
the picture.
|
DELEGATE HOSTETTER: Am I to
understand that the labor unions have noth-
ing to do with this proposal?
DELEGATE BOTHE: The labor unions
certainly have a deep interest in it. I might
add, however, Delegate Hostetter, that or-
ganized labor has an unselfish interest in
this matter because its basis is that those
employees who are covered by the National
Labor Relations Act, the ones who would
get some practical effect out of this pro-
posal, are not people with whom big labor
has any interest. They already have the
protection under federal law which would
be extended here to others.
DELEGATE HOSTETTER: On page 2
of the Minority Report you equate collec-
tive rights with freedom of speech and
freedom of assembly.
Now, you have stated, I believe, that
collective rights are fundamental as would
be freedom of speech.
May I ask you this question with re-
spect to the organization? Would not an
individual who had the freedom of speech
also have the counter right not to speak?
DELEGATE BOTHE: I do not under-
stand your question. Does he have the
right to keep his mouth shut? I do not
know if you would call that a right. The
right is to do something affirmative. He
would have to keep his mouth shut unless
he had the right to open it.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Hostetter.
DELEGATE HOSTETTER: The Sixth
amendment of the federal Constitution en-
titles a person to testify in his own behalf
but Article 5 of the present Constitution
permits him to remain silent.
Getting back to the amendment with re-
spect to the joining, would not a counter
right be involved in organizing and bar-
gaining, not to organize and bargain as
a member or as a non-member?
DELEGATE BOTHE: You call it a
right; I do not. I think that situation is
implicit. We are not here trying to deal
with the question of whether somebody
does or does not have to join a labor or-
ganization. We are merely giving him the
vehicle through which he can organize and
through which he can expect a reception
when he can get his fellow employees to
cooperate with him. As to what happens
in the event that the employer recognizes
him and his co-workers and those co-
workers desire everyone to share the bur-
dens of collective bargaining we are not
reaching that point in this proposal at all.
|
