|
tions Act has machinery in which the fed-
eral government will conduct elections in
the event that there is some question as
to whether a particular labor organization
represents the majority of employees. There
is nothing to preclude the fact, and very
frequently it happens, that without any
formal designation of the majority, the
employer sits down with a group of em-
ployees whom he is satisfied are repre-
sentative of the employees in his estab-
lishment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Neilson.
DELEGATE NEILSON: Delegate Bothe,
before, in answer to the question, you re-
ferred to the model constitution, and I am
unable to find the reference. Would you
help me on this, please?
I think you read it.
DELEGATE BOTHE: I am reading
from page 28, the discussion from which
I read starts on the preceding page under
what is called the style of the Bill of
Rights.
DELEGATE NEILSON: Will you tell
me what edition you were reading from?
DELEGATE BOTHE: The current edi-
tion which was distributed to all of us. It
seemed to have been published in 1963.
That seems to be what you have.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any fur-
ther questions?
Delegate Hutchinson.
DELEGATE HUTCHINSON: Delegate
Bothe, is it not true that many of these
employees that you mentioned in your re-
port do not come under the National Labor
Relations Act, but in reality come under
the so-called Fair Labor Standards Act?
DELEGATE BOTHE: Yes. You mean
minimum wage, state minimum wage. In
some instances they come under that and
some they do not. They have various cov-
erage, of course. I am not meaning to imply
that the State has completely forgotten
them in enacting beneficial legislation but
this is something given them from on high.
This is not anything which they are able
to effectuate through the give and take of
collective bargaining and it is also a bare
minimum, the eight-hour day in the mini-
mum wage is applicable to many of them,
but that is not much.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Hutch-
inson?
DELEGATE HUTCHINSON: Do the
employees that do not come under this Act
|
have the right today to bargain collectively
if they so desire?
DELEGATE BOTHE: You mean do
they not have the right? If they want to
get fired, they do.
DELEGATE HUTCHINSON: But they
can bargain collectively.
DELEGATE BOTHE: Delegate Hutch-
inson, I do not know what you mean by
that. No, they cannot bargain collectively.
I think it is that simple. If they make any
effort toward it and it is rebuffed, that is
the end of it.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any other
questions?
Delegate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: Delegate Bothe, I
am very ignorant on labor legislation. As
I understand it, those employees who are
engaged in interstate commerce are cov-
ered under the Wagner Act, which is a
federal act. Am I correct in that state-
ment?
DELEGATE BOTHE: For the most
part, there are a lot of sophisticated areas
where you have to determine if they are in
interstate commerce but, on the whole, you
are correct.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: The Wagner Act
was an act of Congress, a statute, correct?
DELEGATE BOTHE: That is correct.
DELEGATE CHILD: It did not require
any constitutional provision to enact that
federal statute, did it?
DELEGATE BOTHE: If your point,
Delegate Child, is that we could do this
without a constitutional provision, I will
concede that any moment just as I previ-
ously stated, we could probably have all
the guarantees and all the protections of
this constitution without any provision be-
ing made for them.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: In other words,
as I understand it, you can get the same
rights from the Maryland legislature that
you now ask us to include in the Bill of
Rights?
DELEGATE BOTHE: The Maryland
legislature would not so much confer the
rights as implement them. For those of us
to declare those rights which we are to
live by in this State —
|
