 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
| 43. COMMUNISM IN LABOR Soriet groups deferred to the C.I.O. Such news would be more encouraging If the listener had not known that John Act had previously been in secret consult- ation with the Soviet element. The best info mat ion available at this writing, and this from sources recently attending the Paris meeting* is that the W%F*T.U» is firmly controlled by the Soviet and its satellite countries, and that world labor is thus being used for political purposes of CoflBmnism* Controlled Unions in the C.1 »0. It has long been an axiom among the friends of the C,.I.O., including the present writer, that the total member- ship and power of the Communist-controiled onions of the C.I.O. was negli- gible f As a result, the conclusions reached from the tabulation in -appen- dix 17 were quit$ surprising. $y ftxynrlTi*ng each union in terms of its record and that of its officers, it was found that there are five large and one small right-wing unions, with a voting strength in the executive board and the con* vent ion of 64 votes, At the other extreme, there were seventeen unions where left-wing control is generally conceded, with 99 votes, Between these extreme es there are three groups of unions where some uncertainty prevails: four of these unions, with 16 votes, lean to the right; five, with 28 votes, lean to the left; and four, with 17 votes, are disputed territory in the matter of political leanings* The final category might be called the problem unions. These are the large unions with basic right-wing membership, but where some special considerations have often led their officers to side with the left. This group currently boasts 55 votes. This exhausts the voting groups of the executive board of the National C.I.O., which governs that body between con- ventions. In conventions, there are two additional voting unit at the indusv- trial union councils* with 168 votes; and the local industrial unions, with 131 votes* The former would incline to the left, and the latter to the right. If the picture Just painted seems confusing* it is almost purposely so. The writer feels that it is dangerous to make glib generalizations about the political leanings of 0,1,0. unions. There are right-wing unions whose of- ficers for reasons of expe* diency are siding with the left (Hillman and Thomas). There are unions where Communists have considerable strength on the local level, yet whose officers are apparently right-wing (Shipyard workers; Wood- workers)% Many unions will shift according to issuest Thus, if the Commun- ist Party Line leads to a proposition which is contrary to good unionism (e.g., the labor draft daring the War), only fee extreme left is likely to favor it. On the oUier hand, if the issues are not labor issues, and Pressman makes them look sufficiently attractive {e.g..* opposing peacetime conscription), then it is possible that all but the two extreme right groups will favor it. Here is the real danger of left-wing power in the executive board and in the convention; that fringe and political issues will be brougit up, and that labor's power will be used to support the Communist position on these matters. In the right-wing group, the leadership is both opposed to Communism and rather strongly entrenched. The sizable unions in this group are the American Newspaper Guild, the Textile Workers, the United Retail, Wholesale, and Pep art- ment Store Workers, the United Rubber Workers, and the United Steelworkers« Scattered locals of these groups are Communist. Some of them are important, such as the New York and Los Angeles Newspaper Guilds and Locals 1 and 65 of the Retail Workers, But there are no immediate indications that Communist strength in any of these unions has cumulated to a stage where they can threaten the tenure of officers,or dictate policy. By contrast, those labeled as probably right are generally small, new unions where no permanent trend has developed* Taking the two together, one gets a sure right-wing vote of 80. |