|
were known as "yellow dog" contracts. The
State of Maryland adopted a law which
outlawed this kind of relationship with the
employer on an individual basis.
What we may possibly be doing is creat-
ing a situation which may be extremely
chaotic if employees through a voluntary
agreement set up a wage scale which would
affect various classes; an individual, be-
cause of this constitutional guarantee, could
say "I will work for a different wage scale,
I will work for less or somehow throw
out collective bargaining agreements" be-
cause they violate his individual rights.
I am frightened by this amendment. It
has all the implications of rights not to
bargain. I think it would be extremely dan-
gerous, and I hope we will vote against it.
THE PRESIDENT Is there any other
discussion? Does any other delegate wish
to speak in favor of the amendment?
Delegate Macdonald.
DELEGATE MACDONALD: Mr. Presi-
dent and fellow delegates, I rise in favor
of the amendment. I think employees should
have the right to bargain collectively. On
the other hand, I think the mavericks of
this world have the right to bargain indi-
vidually if they so choose.
Now, what we are really talking about
here is the closed shop, and the union shop.
The unions want, if they can get it, the
law to do their organizing for them. I say
let them organize on their program. Let
them sell their program to their employ-
ees, to their members. If they cannot do it,
I do not think they are entitled to the pro-
tection of the law to force people to join
a union in order to get a job.
I say when an individual does not want
to join, the unions say "well, yes, he is
getting a free ride." That is the American
way. You have a right to join, or not to
join, and I support this amendment.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Beatrice
Miller.
DELEGATE B. MILLER: I have a ques-
tion for the maker of the amendment.
THE PRESIDENT: Let me see if some-
one desires to debate first. Does any other
delegate desire to speak in opposition ?
Delegate Hanson.
DELEGATE HANSON: Mr. President,
not only would this amendment possibly
bring back the "yellow-dog" contract in
Maryland, but it would also have some very
|
interesting and, if one pursues it very far,
almost incredible implications. It not only
might be possible to forbid an employer who
wishes to do so from reaching a collective
bargaining contract with his employees,
but beyond that, 1 think if one would begin
to look at what might happen if all of the
employees of the telephone company in the
State of Maryland decided to exercise the
right individually or if all of the workers
at Sparrow's Point decided to exercise this
right to bargain individually with manage-
ment for an annual contract, I think that
management might wish very devotedly
that such a provision were not in the con-
stitution.
I think the way in which this is worded
contributes, or could easily contribute, to
its abuse, and to making it either a mean-
ingless or virtually an incredible proposi-
tion in labor relations in the latter third of
the twentieth century.
I urge you to reject it.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Churchill
Murray, do you desire to speak in favor?
DELEGATE E. C. MURRAY: I do not
know, sir. I suppose if I can put this in the
form of an inquiry, then we would get the
most out of it.
THE PRESIDENT: Let me find out first.
Does anyone desire to speak in favor of the
amendment?
If not, then the Chair would have to rec-
ognize Delegate Miller first to ask a ques-
tion, if that is your purpose.
Delegate Miller, of whom did you wish
to ask a question ?
DELEGATE B. MILLER: Delegate
Adkins.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Adkins,
would you take the floor. The Chair will
point out to you that this will be the sec-
ond time you speak.
DELEGATE ADKINS: This will be
enough.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Miller.
DELEGATE B. MILLER: Did you mean
to upset the present contractural relation-
ship that exists now between half a million
union members and their employers?
Is this your intention?
DELEGATE ADKINS: Neither my in-
tention nor, indeed, do I consider that to be
the effect of the amendment.
|
