Statement of Chairman Nathan P. Feinsinger of the Wage Stabilization Board on the Board Recommendations in the Steel Dispute
Images (9)
दस्तावेज़
| id |
id
122660010
|
|---|---|
| contentType |
contentType
document
|
| source |
source
import
|
Source image fields (6)
Extracted text
OCR Page 1 of 9Statement of
Chairman Nathan P. Feinsinger
of the Wage Stabilization Board
on the Board's Recom rendations in the
Steel Dispute (Case D-18-C)
Steel is a key product in the national economy. Even in peacetime,
a labor dispute which threatens an interruption of steel production is of
serious national concern. In a mobilization period, the Government has no
choice but to intervene.
The contract between the steel producers and the United Steelworkers
of America was about to expire at midnight, December 31, 1951 with no
agreement for renewal in sight. Collective bargaining and mediation and
conciliation had failed. A strike seemed inevitable.
The President had several courses of action open. One was to seek an
injunction under the "national emergency" provisions of Title II of the
Labor-Manageren Relations (Taft-Hartley) Act of 1947. This procedure
insures continued production for 80 days at the most. In the interim,
it provides for a Board of Inquiry with authority to investigate but not
to make recommendations for settlement.
A second alternative was to appoint a special board to make recommenda-
tions in the particular case, as in the 1949 dispute. The wage recommenda-
tion of such a board, if accepted, would have to be submitted eventually
to the Wage Stabilization Board for approval. This would mean delay, un-
certainty and unrest.
A third alternative, and the course chosen by the President, was to
refer the dispute to the Wage Stabilization Board in accordance with Executivs
Order 10233. This Order vests the Board with the authority and duty to act
where the President has found, as here, "that the dispute is of a character
which substantially threatens the progress of national defense and refers
such dispute to the Board. " It would not have been feasible, to say the
least, for the President to have asked the Board to act on the wage issues
only and to appoint some other board to act on the other issues in dispute.
A labor dispute has been graphically described as "one package" or "one
ball of wax. #: The point was made more fully in a brief submitted by the
Companies in the present case:
"
Ultimately it is the total compensation that counts and
not the form that the compensation takes. During contract
negotiations that fact is well recognized by the parties,
and in some instances the bargain reached may take one form
and in other instances a different form. Both unions and
the employees they represent are aware that any contract
1
Co. Exh. 9, page 23
Relations
belongs_to
belongs_to