394

CHAPTER XVII.
Implications of Recognition.

In our view recognition should mean that the employer re-
cognises the right of the union to negotiate with him in respect of matters
affecting either the common or the individual interests of its members.
The employer, while he should consider proposals advanced by a union
which are applicable to his employees as a whole, need not recognise the
claim of the union to speak for any who are not members of it, and must
be prepared to consider the interests of the unorganised workers. It
is not, of course, intended to suggest that the recognition of a union pre-
cludes individual members of it from direct contact with their employ-
ers. At the same time we are not pleading for a formality. Recogni-
tion in the letter must be followed by recognition in the spirit, by a readi-
ness to discuss sympathetically points put forward by the union, by
accessibility to its officers and by willingness to let them have credit
where credit is due. The Government manager or agent who, in
remedying grievances to which a union has drawn attention, is at
pains to make it evident that the union has had nothing to do with
the result, orwho keeps theunion officials at arm’s length by insist-
ing on written communications in every case, is stultifying the
action of (Government in according recognition. The employer who
discriminates in the matter of promotion against union men, or in any
other way tries to weaken the influence of the union he has recognised,
is in no way better than the employer who denies recognition outright,
and is as little likely to advance the cause of peace. These consider-
ations, apart from any others, make it impossible for us to endorse the
proposal, advanced by several labour sympathisers, that recognition
should be obligatory in certain cases. It was suggested, for example,
that an employer should be compelled to recognise a registered union
of hismen. Recognition may mean much, but it may mean nothing.
No law can secure that genuine and full recognition which we desire
to see.

Recognition of Weak Unions.

We have referred to the prevalent idea that recognition should
depend on the strength of the union. There is a sense in which it may,
for a really strong union is in a position to enforce recognition. The
vigorous union with a genuine grievance can insist on being heard, and
even recognition rules carefully framed by official secretariats may prove
futile when a big railway strike is threatened. But we are anxious to
see recognition based on reason and not on force, and the fact that a
union consists of only a minority of employees is no adequate reason
for withholding recognition. Similarly the existence of two or more
rival unions is not in itself a sufficient ground for refusing to recognise
any or allof them. The combination of all employees with common
interests in a single union is eminently desirable in their own interests,
but this is a matter for them and not for the employer.

Outsiders and Recognition.

The endeavour to dictate to unions on the subject of their

officers or leaders is equally short-sighted and unwise. - We have referred