|
The Chair recognizes Delegate Betty
Miller.
DELEGATE B. MILLER: Mr. Chair-
man, fellow delegates, what we are discuss-
ing here is a specific right of the people, a
right to establish democratic procedures in
their working places.
Under President Roosevelt this new right
was recognized for most workers by the
National Labor Relations Act. Under Pres-
ident Eisenhower, its procedures were reg-
ulated and formalized by the Taft-Hartley
Act. President Kennedy extended this right
to federal government employees by Exec-
utive Order 10,988.
Now the trend is to extend this right to
those employees in the State who do not
yet enjoy it. What the proposal does is to
affirm the extension of this right in the
Maryland constitution to benefit that seg-
ment of our economy which does not enjoy
these rights now by reason of this single
omission. This is not a right for the pro-
tection and aid of those who are covered
by federal statute. It does nothing for the
members of the established great unions of
our State. This is a right to aid the poverty
stricken, the underpaid workers, those who
are not now covered by minimum wage
laws, or who just come under the new mini-
mum wage laws, the borderline poverty
workers unprotected and unrepresented,
and the great and growing army of public
employees who are falling behind their pri-
vate industry counterparts.
It is inconceivable that you men and
women of good will, with the best inten-
tions toward the citizenry, would fail to
protect these people who most merit your
concern. We are not here granting any new
rights but extending existing ones to a
whole group of neglected workers many of
whom labor at wages far below the poverty
level. I have often marveled at the wage-
earner who struggled through a 40-hour
week at 80 cents an hour, when a welfare
check would far exceed that.
THE PRESIDENT: Your time has
expired.
DELEGATE B. MILLER: I plead for
those workers. Please support the recon-
sideration.
THE PRESIDENT: Does any delegate
desire to speak in opposition to the motion?
Delegate Harry Taylor.
DELEGATE H. TAYLOR: Mr. Presi-
dent, I get letters from a person who signs
them as an admirer. From the tenor of the
letters sometimes I do not think that he
|
really is, but over the holidays, after we
had incorporated this right to organize
provision in the constitution, he sent me
a little sink, and he said, "It looks like
you fellows have put everything in the
constitution but the kitchen sink. I want
you to take this down, and maybe somehow
or other you can work it in."
It is not really a sink, it is a stove. When
I made the discovery and it got back to
the admirer, he said, "Well, I did not think
you would know the difference."
(Laughter.)
We are not down here to pass constitu-
tional provisions for labor. We are not
down here to pass constitutional provisions
for preachers, and, believe it or not, we are
not down here to pass constitutional pro-
visions for lawyers or for judges. We came
down here for a very simple task — to set
up an executive, a judicial, and a legisla-
tive branch of government, to provide for
a declaration of rights, and to provide for
some general provisions.
This provision on the right to organize
is a volatile provision that is going to pit
labor against management. It is going to
be one of those things that may make this
constitution an Edsel instead of a Mustang.
You probably remember the Edsel motor
car: it looked like an Oldsmobile that had
been sucking on a lemon. When Ford Motor
Company sent that out to the public, they
thought they would buy it.
On May 14, we are going to find out
whether we have got an Edsel or a Mus-
tang. If you want to build a Mustang, vote
against this motion to reconsider.
THE PRESIDENT: Does any other del-
egate desire to speak in favor? Delegate
Mitchell.
DELEGATE MITCHELL: Mr. Presi-
dent and fellow delegates, that may be
funny to Delegate Taylor, but it is not
funny to the overwhelming majority of the
adult citizens of the State. We have heard
some specious and fallacious arguments
today. You have heard a very learned
former judge and a representative of big
business say that this pertains to just a
class of people.
We have written into this constitution
rights for the accused, and that is a small
class of citizens in this State. We have
written in rights — and I would say the
majority of the citizens, judging by the
church attendance, are nonrelig-ious — but
we have protected the rights of those that
|
