A Union Viewpoint

Free collective bargaining has become a symbol of the American way of life at the same time that the nation has been legislating measures restricting the freedom of workers and employers in collective bargaining. Despite this tendency towards increasing government intervention, the collective bargaining process has remained essentially free and has proved its value for both workers and employers. The case for fur ther government intervention in the bargaining process is not persuasive. There is no need, for example, for government measures to reduce "excessive union power," because union membership, financial resources, and bargaining strength are not disproportionate to that of employers. Union organization and control are fundamentally democratic, and unions are no less anxious than Congress to insure ethical practices and sound leadership. Nor is there need to regulate the terms of col lective bargaining agreements; instead, many existing restric tions should be lifted. Improvements can be made in the manner in which government services are available for the settlement of labor-management disputes, particularly for so- called national emergency cases. The years ahead will gen erate new pressures for increased government intervention. However, it is likely those who now welcome or predict such intervention will be surprised by the loyalty that the free bargaining process can command and by its continuing effec tiveness as an instrument for solving industrial relations problems

Bargaining power · Business · Collective bargaining · Democracy · Economic interventionism · Economics · Government (linguistics · Intervention (counseling · Labour economics · Law and economics · Market economy · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Settlement (finance · Trade union · Finance · Labor Movements and Unions · Law · Psychology