Collective Bargaining and Accelerated Production
| DOI | 10.1177/000271624222400116 |
| Date | 01 November 1942 |
| Published date | 01 November 1942 |
| Author | Clinton S. Golden |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
96
Collective
Bargaining
and
Accelerated
Production
By
CLINTON
S.
GOLDEN
I START
this
discussion
with
what
is
perhaps
the
most
interesting
expe-
rience
during
my
nearly
forty
years
in
the
labor
movement.
It
is
a
story
about
collective
bargaining
and
increased
pro-
duction.
The
first
part
of
this
story
took
place
in
June
1941.
On
behalf
of
the
then
Steel
Workers
Organizing
Committee
(now
the
United
Steelworkers
of
Amer-
ica,
USA-CIO)
I
wrote
the
vice
presi-
dent
of
a
large
airplane
corporation,
pointing
out
several
major
factors
that
were
retarding
production.
We
were
in
the
process
of
renegotiating
our
first
contract
in this
plant
of
his
corporation,
and
throughout
the
conferences
dealing
with
wages
and
other
working
condi-
tions
the
talk
of
the
union
committee-
men
led
to
the
poor
quality
welding
rod,
the
heat-treating
bottleneck,
the
high
percentage
of
scrapped
propeller
blades,
and
other
things
that
were
holding
down
production.
In
my
letter
I
recounted
these,
and
proposed
a
program
of
union-
management
co-operation
designed
(1)
to
eliminate
them
and
(2)
to
continue
such
joint
efforts
for
the
purpose
of
in-
creasing
propeller
blade
output.
I
thought
this
constructive
proposal
might
well
clarify
the
heated
and
con-
fused
conferences
and
give
management
somewhat
more
confidence
in
the
union.
The
vice
president
was
harassed
because
of
the
lagging
production
in
this
plant,
and
he
looked
upon
his
collective
bar-
gaining
relations
with
his
employees
as
one
of
the
things
that
was
keeping
him
from
getting
on
with
the
production
job.
But
instead
of
taking
advantage
of
this
offer
to
help
him
gel
on
with
his
major
job,
as
I
thought
he
would,
the
vice
president
reacted
negatively.
He
said
the
letter
was
&dquo;damnable.&dquo;
It
was
ob-
vious
that
he
took
it
as
a
personal
at-
tack
upon
his
executive
and
managerial
ability.
Apparently
the
idea
of
workers
participating
in
the
solution
of
operat-
ing
problems
so
infuriated
him
that
he
was
blinded
to
the
possibilities
of
union-
management
co-operation.
LETTER
RELEASED
TO
NEWSPAPERS
The
letter
only
raised
the
temperature
of
the
already
overheated
conference.
A
strike
seemed
unavoidable,
and
in
an
effort
to
offset
the
bitter
press
campaign
which
at
the
time
was
maligning
organ-
ized
labor
for
striking
I
released
this
letter
to
the
newspapers
as
an
example
of
constructive
union
proposals
to
in-
crease
armament
output.
Here
is
what
one
of
the
Pittsburgh
papers
of
June
11,
1941,
reported:
&dquo;Mismanagement
is
rampant
and
inex-
cusable,&dquo;
Golden
charged.
He
declared
that
in
the
past
eleven
months
a
total
of
2,195
propellers
have
been
scrapped-an
average
of
200
a
month-because
of
man-
agement
inefficiencies
and
poor
quality
of
materials.
The
Federal
Bureau
of
Investigation
and
Army and
Navy
Intelligence
officials
have
been
deeply
concerned
about
the
heavy
loss
of
propellers
through
scrapping
and
at
one
time
it
was
feared
saboteurs
might
be
at
work
in
the
plant.
SWOC
tenders
its
union-management
plan
as
a
solution
to
this
problem.
The
strike-hysteria
campaign
of
the
press
was
not
abated
by
this
construc-
tive
proposal,
but
was
increased
by
hints
of
&dquo;saboteurs.&dquo;
Not
only
this,
but
local
Government
inspectors
called
the
newspapers
and
threatened
dire
consequences
unless
they
suppressed
this
proposal.
These
inspectors,
like
management,
took
the
at SAGE PUBLICATIONS on December 4, 2012ann.sagepub.comDownloaded from
To continue reading
Request your trial