Word: taft-hartley
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
Riesel, arguing in defense of the Taft-Hartley Act, said that any organization which spends over 50 million dollars a year must stop thinking of itself as oppressed...
...once lectured on economics at Rutgers. That answer would have sufficed, but Beeson rambled on: "I was frankly there to try to explain the American enterprise system from the businessman's viewpoint." Asked the C.I.O.'s James Carey, a later witness: Would not Beeson also administer the Taft-Hartley law from a "businessman's viewpoint?" Despite strong opposition from labor leaders (truculent John L. Lewis called him "Union-Buster Beeson"), the committee approved Beeson's nomination by a 7 (all Republicans) to 6 (all Democrats) vote...
Many unionists privately concede that Taft-Hartley is far from oppressive or anti-union despite its concessions to employers. It bans the closed shop and jurisdictional strikes and secondary boycotts (i.e., strikes against one employer to win concessions from another), and gives employers the right to argue against unionism with their employees. But it also bans company unions, specifically allows the union shop, permits labor (as well as management) to sue for damages if a contract is broken...
...Some Taft-Hartley provisions, designed to modify the Wagner Act, have little effect because they are unenforceable or simply ignored. Hence, some of the proposed changes would simply bring the law in line with reality. The closed-shop ban, for example, has been ignored, notably in the construction, maritime and amusement trades where the unions have the labor market sewed up. The Administration wants to permit a virtual closed shop in these industries. When a firm handles work for a struck company, the union obviously has a grievance-and in such cases Eisenhower would legalize secondary boycotts...
...reason that Taft-Hartley has not stirred up more rank & file protest is that prosperity has been high and unemployment low since the act was passed in 1947. It has remained unamended because it was originally passed by overwhelming bipartisan majorities, and, until recently, liberally interpreted by a Democrat-controlled NLRB. Furthermore, labor leaders wanted outright repeal. Though the labor leaders have since changed their tune, the Taft-Hartley fight remains a battle of the professionals. And like old pros who have been through all this before, they may well let the battle die-and Congress will feel no need...