Perkins: Dewey and labor unions
By Fred W. Perkins, Press Washington correspondent
Washington –
Some weeks ago, this writer reported conversations with Midwest labor leaders as meaning that Wendell Willkie had the best chance among Republican presidential possibilities of cracking the labor vote that has gone predominantly to President Roosevelt in three elections.
But now that Mr. Willkie is apparently extinguished as a possibility, opinions may be found among Washington leaders of the American Federation of Labor that Thomas E. Dewey is capable of winning considerable support from this part of the electorate. The same opinion has not been found among leaders of the CIO – that organization being apparently as determined as ever to go down the line for a fourth term.
A nationally known power in the AFL who declined to be quoted directly because of his organization’s policy of not becoming active in party politics, says:
I’ll not try to kid you – most of our people are likely to support Roosevelt again. But Dewey will have strong support among our membership.
This leader said Governor Dewey had won many labor friends through public opposition to certain “anti-labor” bills that were introduced in the last session of the New York Legislature – similar to laws which were enacted in nearly a dozen states. he declared it was largely due to the Governor’s influence that these bills were allowed to die in New York legislative committees.
Friendly to labor
The AFL leader said it will not be possible to hang an anti-labor tag on Mr. Dewey merely because of his prosecution of labor racketeers in New York City. The same thought apparently was in the mind of Thomas A. Murray, president of the New York State Federal of Labor, when he introduced the Governor at the convention of that organization last August.
Mr. Murray said of him:
As a federal prosecutor and as the District Attorney of New York County, he made a reputation for brilliant and fearless crusading in the cause of justice, which won for him the highest honor our state can bestow. As Governor of the State of New York, he has demonstrated a friendly and sympathetic attitude to the cause of organized labor and to the program of social and economic legislation to which we have dedicated ourselves.
Governor Dewey also addressed last year’s convention of the New York State CIO, and the two speeches now are being scanned for indication of the labor attitude of the unannounced candidate. Together they seem to furnish a more definite idea of the Dewey ideas on the labor subject than on some other important questions.
To the CIO, he said:
It is true that we still have labor organizations that are run along undemocratic lines. We still have instances of the misuse of union funds, of careless and slipshod accounting, or no accounting at all to the members of their hard-earned dues.
We still encounter instances of unjustified strikes, violent and unfair picketing and destructive raiding by one union of the membership of a rival union. But on the other hand, only a fool in management would wish to destroy the sense of security and usefulness which comes to workingmen when they are ably represented by honest labor leadership which believes in the American enterprise system.
Regimentation
The Governor’s AFL speech, which has been highly commended by AFL leaders, contained a statement which will please people outside the labor movement who contend that no strike, for whatever reason, can be justified when the country is in a great war. It was:
We know that winning the war is greater than the issue involved in any strike, yet it is too easy to let little issues become big issues which roll up and multiply into strikes.
To the AFL, Mr. Dewey also said:
Under the pressure of war, we have all willingly submitted to restraints by the national government which are foreign to our most vital principles… A multiplicity of federal regulations have been promulgated governing hours, wages and conditions of employment. In large measure these regulations supersede the functions of collective bargaining and take its place. They have superseded private management, too, and in some cases they have even take the plants away from the owners when they were admittedly without fault.
In time of war such an abridgement of the rights of everyone is probably inescapable, but it is a condition which can only be justified by the sacrifices of war. We are fighting to make sure that such totalitarian conditions cannot exist in time of peace.
Is this a kind of fighting with windmills? Some people in high places have already advocated that wartime controls be made a permanent part of government.
The Governor continued:
So that we shall truly regain and keep the vital freedoms for which we fight today. I invite you to join with all your vigor in the struggle to restore them at the end of the war. We can be neither free nor strong in a peacetime regimented economy. We can be both free and strong if we recover for labor and enterprise the dignity and unfettered strength which only free men can enjoy.