argument better than any "outsider." The workers swallow this taffy when they accept the company union. It is a major manoeuvre of the employer to lead the workers up to the point where they will believe that they can get along "independently," without any "interference" from trade unionists and affiliations or connections with the labor movement. Once they have accepted this "fundamental principle" of the company they make easy meat for its skilled negotiators, who lean heavily upon the legal, statistical, and personnel experts hired at considerable expense by the employer. While using all this outside talent to present his side of a case the employer forbids the worker the right to be represented by a competent trade union expert. This is the typical "equality" of forces found in practically every company union. What does an equal number of men on a "fact finding committee" mean to the workers when their men must depend entirely upon their own knowledge? At the same time the management's representatives have the treasury of the company behind them to purchase statistics and information with which to argue a case and to overpower the workers' representatives with the sheer weight and length and bulk of their evidence. Lacking "outsiders" to help him, the company-duped worker is helpless before the employer no matter how equal the representation on "joint commitees."
"No Discrimination."
Most of the company unions have clauses in their constitution providing that no worker shall be discriminated against because of "affiliation or non-affiliation with any labor union." However, in most cases the final authority to hire and fire rests with the management. It is not likely that it would be so clumsy as to tell a discharged worker the true
55
