Page:William F. Dunne - The Threat to the Labor Movement (1927).pdf/3



SERIES of recent events indicate in an unmistakable manner that a new systematic and well-organized offensive against the left wing in the trade unions has been launched. The left wing, fighting against the official program of "efficiency unionism." in this struggle is actually fighting FOR TRADE UNIONISM which, as a weapon of the working class is being discarded by a leadership "soaked to the gills"—drunk, in other words—in the boss-begotten theory of the "identity of interests of worker and employer."

The tone of the capitalist press, the socialist press and the official trade union press leaves no doubt as to the intentions of the forces for which they speak. All are united in asserting that "the Communist menace" in the trade unions must be destroyed. In the tone of these articles there is nothing new but ill their volume and intensity there is evidence of a method, mutual understanding and determination that shows this campaign to be of sufficient intensity to mark it as a new phase of the struggle in the American labor movement between the "worker-employer co-operation" policy and the policy of class struggle.

This is not to say that all the elements which support one side or the other are fully conscious of the policy to which they give allegiance. The contrary is true and in general it may be stated that only conscious reactionaries of the type of Lewis (United Mine Workers). Woll (vice-president of the American Federation of Labor), Sigman (president of the International Ladies' Garment Workers), understand the full implications of the right wing position, and only the Communists and the workers closest to them realize that the struggle is actually one for the maintenance of the trade unions as weapons of the working class.

The drive against militant unionism took on new force with the settlement made by the New York Joint Board of the 1. L. G. W. U. with the Industrial Council of Manufacturers.

The twenty-five weeks' strike resulted in the union making some gains, (the 42 and 40-hour week, all increase in the minimum rates of pay, guarantee of 32 weeks' work, a wage increase, etc.), but the union also sustained some losses (right of the bosses to reorganize shops with 35 or more workers).

From the beginning, the struggle of the union was for the elimination of the jobbers, but it was unsuccessful in its efforts. The jobbers demanded the same settlement terms as the manufacturers; the union refused this and the jobbers locked out the workers.

HE strike was nominally a joint effort of both the right and left wings of the union, but was actually conducted by the left wing leadership of the New York Joint Board in the face of sabotage from the right wing elements in New York and from the international officials of the union