I

T IS not my purpose to deal with the vast array of details which enter into even a cursory discussion of social insurance,

but rather to give expression to the basic principles of the American Federation of Labor with particular reference to the subject under consideration. The development of the A. F. of L. has proceeded along necessary and practical lines, but with unceasing vigilance that the organizations of labor should be maintained unimpaired and the individual workers should retain undisputed possession of the rights and liberties guaranteed by the organic law of our country and the spirit of our people.

The history of the movements of wageearners in all ages reveals the machinations of their opponents to disintegrate and destroy their associations. It has not infrequently been accomplished by employing the law-making power, and even in our own time the legislative, judicial and executive branches of our federal government, as well as that of the states, have been made the instruments of oppression under the guise of benefiting the workers.

With these facts before us we organized wage-earners cautiously scrutinize every movement launched by outside agencies whose claimants profess devotion to the common weal. Before the A. F. of L. gives its approval to any plan contemplating the establishment by law of any form of social insurance it must first be assured that the economic freedom of the workers is guaranteed, and that the participation in benefits to be derived from any system of this character is not based upon continuous employment in a certain industry or predicated upon time of service or other devices intended to tie the workers to their jobs.

The primary step necessary to real, permanent betterment of the workers is to free them from thraldom which has been fastened upon them by those who took advantage of the necessity of the poor. The great majority of wage-earners each day earn daily bread-the opportunity to work stands between them and want on tomorrow. Employers have held men in subjection through the threat of loss of the job. Only through organization has any degree of freedom or stability of employment come to wage-earners. Our first concern, therefore, in

considering any proposition is, Will it interfere with organization for freedom?

While the question of social insurance in all its phases is a proper subject for the serious consideration of all groups interested in the general welfare of the people, yet the underlying or basic causes which bring the demand for insurance of a social character ought first to be 'thoroughly comprehended and a combined effort put forth to apply remedies. The application of legislative remedies to industrial diseases without at the same time directing our energies to the eradication of the agencies which bring the disease into existence is abortive.

Organization among the men and women of labor has been the exclusive cause of their achievements. Group concert of action has been the means of compelling society to listen to the wrongs committed against Labor by the controllers of industry. Organization, advancing with the passage of each decade, has been the instrument through which at least a partial recognition of the justice of the claims of wageearners has been secured.

Like every movement bassed upon immutable fundamental principles, the organized labor movement has attracted the attention of other groups of society which assume that in them and their schemes lie the only solution for the problems concerning the lives of the working people. These groups as a general rule are but little interested in the struggles or perpetuity of the economic organizations of the working people, and only on rare occasions, if at all, appear as their sponsors or extend assistance in the maintenance or advancement of their organizations.

Apparently the fundamental foundation of the American govenrment is given no thought by social insurance enthusisasts who attempt to apply ssytems evolved in other countries whose form of government, history and traditions are wholly at variance with ours and founded upon radically different concepts.

Imbedded in the minds of the founders of the organized labor movement was the spirit of liberty. Throughout the history of the A. F. of L. this spirit has been maintained unimpaired, intensive and far-reaching. Regulation by sta

tutory law is the panacea proposed for every social ill by welfare groups not associated with the organized labor movement, with apparently no consideration of the ever-present clash of the legislative and judicial branches of the government, whereby the rights and liberties of the working people might be jeopardized.

It is a fact too well known to be seriously disputed that the economic efforts of the wageearners receive but half-hearted support, if any at all, from the so-called welfare groups of society. During periods of industrial conflicts brought about for the purpose of lessening the burden borne by the wage-earners and raising their standards of life the brunt of the fight rests chiefly upon the shoulders of the members of the organized labor movement, while the social reform element permits itself to be largely classed with that mythical portion of society euphoniously denominated the "public." And yet these industrial conflicts are the real battlefields for justice and betterment for the masses of the people.

In spite of the opposition to our movement by manufacturers and other associations of employers the organized labor movement has made phenomenal progress, bringing to the wage-earners, both organized and un-organized relief that could not be secured except through organization. The responsibilities and sacrifices which it has been necessary to assume and meet have almost universally been borne by those directly interested. The achievements, influence and power now held by the organized wage-earners is the result of their own efforts. Appreciating to the fullest extent the potentiality of associated effort, realizing that the continuity of organization means the preservation not only of future opportunity, but guarantees that rights, liberties and achievements can be maintained, it is little wonder that the organized labor movement is reluctant to accept the proffered schemes of those who profess interest in their welfare, but who have failed to participate in the struggles that have eventuated in giving potency to the wage-earners' movement.

Organization is a foundation, it is fundamental, and under all circumstances it must be preserved it must not be hampered, it must not be deflected to carry out experimental or vitiating schemes of those who are anxious to undertake responsibility for the lives of others, and those who assume they are clothed with a

prophetic wisdom enabling them to direct the power and influence of the organized wageearners, even though the have not contributed in any way to the creation of this power and influence.

Within the organized movement the widest latitude possible is accorded to its affiliates. Compulsion of every character is frowned upon -freedom is the watchword. Voluntary in character, democracy in its most generous form is maintained. While codes of regulations are recognized as necessary, yet self-imposed compliance thereto constitutes the great strength reposing in the unions of labor. No other human institution in society treats with equal sacredness the rights of the individual as do the organizations of labor. It is equally true that many of our mistakes can be directly attributed to this broad policy, but the penalty which these mistakes impose compared with results flowing from a compulsory system, is but significant. The policy of liberality of action within the trade union has a still further significance. The trade union teaches the fundamental principles of citizenship, a democratic citizenship. If the democracy of our governmental institutions is to be maintained and perpetuated, the trade union school must be maintained and perpetuated, and its policy of maintaining individual rights, liberties and opportunity recognized and adhered to.

These organizations, with their wide-spread influence, were brought into existence by the slow process of education, the polyglot character of the American wage-earners making the task a most difficult one. But we have succeeded in molding a great mass of workers into a cohesive and effective combination, and even in the process of development benefits have unceasingly flowed. Realizing the tremendous task that has been accomplished, fully cognizant of the fundamental principles which underlie and give force and effect to our efforts, we do not propose to yield willingly to the importunities of those who would now employ the implements of our success in carrying out social experiments without regard to the dangers that. lurk in their plans.

In the light of experience it cannot be asserted that our movement lags or is unmindful of the interests of every wage-earner, organized or unorganized. The organized labor movement is the only institution that has the unquestioned right to speak and act for the

Organization, then, must be the beacon shedIding its light upon all our efforts. It must be our first consideration.

Let me now draw your attention to the fact that there are many industrial combinations in our country that have and are inaugurating social welfare schemes. Many of them contemplate social insurance of infinite variety. Among them are sickness, accident, superannuation and pensions. All these schemes, however, are primarily based upon length of service and economic loyalty to the concern formulating the schemes. The power to extend or withdraw benefits resides wholly in the hands of the controllers of the industry. Freedom of action by the workers is thereby made a negligible factor. In plain English, the workers under this scheme are chained to their jobs.

It is likewise true that in all the combinations referred to the right of economic organization has been and is denied. In other words, a benevolent feudalism is the translation of the ordinary welfare scheme. In nearly all the plans promulgated for social insurance compulsion appears as the one chief characteristic. Compulsion to do an infinite variety of things on the part of the workers is indicative of control over their lives. Without the safeguard of economic organization, untrammeled and in full influence, the governmental agencies created to establish a system of social insurance would soon destroy the trade unions and transmute the wage-earners into industrial pawns on the governmental chess board,

Workmen's compensation laws now in operation in many states are presenting many intricate problems. While it is not denied that they are conferring upon the wage-earners relief to which they are justly entitled, yet there are questions now arising under their administration that require our utmost vigilance in protecting wage-earners. Simultaneously with the advent of compensation laws came the introduction of systems of physical examinations. Industrial controllers, in their desire to reduce

liability, are insisting upon ever increasing rigidity in physical examinations and excluding from employment those who show even non-essential defects. It is well known that able bodied, skilled workmen have been dismissed from employment at the recommendation of the company physicians who found in them the disease of unionism and diagnosed the cases under convenient professional terms.

Any further systems evolved having for their purpose intended benefits to the great mass must contain adequate safeguards to protect the wage-earners from industrial, law or welfare exploitation. The American Federation of Labor stands committed to the welfare of the wage-earning population of our country, but it will refuse now as it has done in the past to endorse or lend its assistance to any scheme, no matter by whom proposed, unless it is first convinced that the same measure of freedom of action as now enjoyed in the trade unions are secured to the workers under any insurance scheme proposed.

The purpose of social health insurance is to provide for emergencies and to prevent suffering of wage-earners and those dependent upon them. Well-to-do citizens do not make special provisions for such eventualities because they have a surplus upon which to draw. But wage-earners have no such surplus. Benevolent society has been moved to compassion for the suffering of the poor and their children -they offer a new form of charity, benevolent supervision and compulsory social insurance. Benevolent society does not go to bed-rock questions-why the meager wages, starved lives and the restricted opportunities of those who toil with their hands. It offers palliatives, not remedies. This new form of charity provides for the division of society into classes based upon wages received. Those who receive less than a specified sum, automatically come under government supervision upon the theory that they are unable to care for themselves and their dependents properly. Therefore, the state and their employers set aside money for their upkeep in times of emergency. The workers themselves make but meager contributions. Thus the fundamental principle of social insurance is to make permanent distinctions between social groups and to emphasize that distinction by governmental regulation. What wage-earners want is not benevolently administered saving of pennies but opportunity

to do the world's work like free men and women and to receive honest returns for their labor in the form of adequate wages. Get off the backs of the workers and there will be no need for "insurance," for then wage-earners like employers will have enough to live on and to provide for emergencies without "aid."

Sympathetic advocates of health insurance justify the plan by indicating the members injured, incapacitated, and exhausted by modern production. Organized labor has also called attention to the number of debilitated and physically deteriorated men and women thrown aside as useless by industrial managements, and has demanded the eradication of the inhuman speeding up devices that have marked many human lives. Driving workers at high tension, overfatigue, unsanitary conditions of work are fundamental in ruining the health of the workers. If the speeding-up sentiment pervading industrial managements is continued the physically fit must soon be transferred to the unfit class, thus we are confronted with a constantly increasing number of industrial defectives. This question alone is serious and must be solved first. Without the removal of the causes for sickness health insurance is not even a safeguard, for the burdens upon society would become steadily heavier until too great to be borne.

For prevention of disease there is no agency more effective than high wages-wages that enable the workers to be comfortably housed, well nourished and free from the harassing dread of pauperism and dependency.

The one agency that attacked the problems of the workers from the fundamental construction side is the labor movement. It seeks to protect the health of the workers at work and at home, and to assure them the necessary means for living properly and providing for the future as any other citizen does. If you really wish to promote the health and welfare of wage-earners devote your efforts to securing for them the opportunity to organize. The workers have fought for that right-some have secured it, but we are in the fight until that unquestioned right is assured to all. Because wages are not yet what they should be; many organized workers enjoy through collective action union benefits which provide for emergencies.

At the present time a large number of organizations affiliated to the A. F. of L. as well

as those not affiliated, are paying benefits in various forms, but mainly for death and sickness. Some of these organizations are also paying unemployment benefits and some pensions to superannuated members.

In all organizations now paying benefits there is at work a well defined sentiment not only to increase the benefits but to add to them to cover the misfortunes to which wage-earners are liable. In addition to what has already been accomplished, the United Mine Workers of America, the largest organization attached to the A. F. of L., is now formulating plans for a pension system which no doubt will be put into operation in the not distant future. In fact, the entire trend of our movement is expansive, with a marked tendency to work out some feasible voluntary plan whereby organized wage-earners may place themselves in a position to guarantee to the less fortunate among their number safety from the ills and misfortunes of life.

Only a small degree of the efforts being put forth by organized labor or its accomplishments reach the distributive channels of our public press. For instance, for two or three years, the organized labor movement of the city of Chicago has provided for all members of unions and their families during the winter months, when unemployment, sickness and other misfortunes have befallen them. In other words, the organized labor movement of Chicago has taken care of their own without any assistance whatever from any outside

source.

This same state of affairs obtains in St. Louis and many other cities of the country. This is eveidence of the growing interest in the organizations of Labor toward instituting a voluntary system of general relief among the wage-earners.

Wanted to Please Customer.

A country hotel proprietor, glancing out of a rear window, saw his new waiter chasing a chicken about the yard.

"What have you in that bowl?" demanded the hotel man, referring to a utensil he was hugging.

"Mushrooms," responded the new waiter. "There's a gentleman that wants chicken smothered with mushrooms, and I'm trying to smother him, sir!"-Sacred Heat Review.

T

HE attitude of the American Federation of labor toward the formation of a labor party has been outlined in many reports and pamphlets, but as the proposition sometimes arises in local organizations, a summary is presented for the information of all workers and all others who may have occasion to study the question.

Suggestion of the formation of a labor party is not a new idea in the United States. During the nineteenth century there were several labor parties formed, some local and some aspiring to national proportions. Perhaps one of the most significant of these movements was in the thirties, but as soon as that labor party acquired some degree of power a combined attack by all other political parties disrupted and destroyed not only the pilitical movement of the workers but temporarily checked the economic movement.

In 1866 the trade unions of the country united in a national organization known as the National Labor Union. This organization did much for the welfare of the workers until it launched into a political campaign, nominated a presidential ticket and entered the field of partisan politics. One effort to participate in national partisan politics resulted in the destruction of the economic movement and the loss of the political influence of the workers.

When the A. F. of L. was formed in 1881, as a result of the experience of the National Labor Union and of the political experiences of the Knights of Labor, it was deemed wise to adopt a policy of independent political action. All questions of a partisan political nature were ruled out of discussion in the economic organizations. The primary purpose of the trade union movement is to secure those things that are fundamental for the welfare of the workers. These are, of course,

of an economic nature, such as higher wages, shorter workday, and better conditions of work. The efforts of the organization were concentrated on the securing of fundamental things first. While independent use of the ballot by workingmen was the policy adopted by the A. F. of L., until 1906 there was no organized plan for the guidance of the workers so that their ballots might be used for the best interests of all.

It will be helpful to digress a moment from this argument to call to mind the experiences of Australia. In Australia there was what was known as a Labor Government, and yet the criticism and dissatisfaction of the workers of Australia directed against the course of the government caused its downfall.

It is the nature of the government to concede as little as possible to the governed in order to retain its power and to concentrate its efforts upon the perpetuation of its control. The labor government of Australia has been no exception to this general rule. It has not directed its efforts wholly toward the furtherance of human welfare, but it has been concerned with entrenching itself in power and with maintenance of governmental power. The labor papers of Australia are filled with criticisms of the labor government which are of like character and phraseology to the criticisms which the workers of England are directing against what is known as a capitalistic administration.

To return to the political policy adopted by the A. F. of L.. in 1906. Hostile employers had organized in powerful organizations such as the National Association of Manufacturers, the National Erectors' Association, Citizens' Alliances, etc. These organizations pursued policies of unremitting hostility to organized labor. Their relentless opposition was not confined to the economic field although contests there were terrific and of unprecedented savagery. The war of opposition to trade unionism was carried over into the judicial field. To further the interests of hostile employers judges arrogated unto courts powers not delegated to them. Proceeding upon an old theory that employers have in the labor power of their employes some kind of proprietary right, judges usurped the power to issue injunctions regulating industrial relations between employers and employes.

By this perversion of the writ of injunction the courts sought to deny workers the right to those legitimate activities that were necessary in order to carry out the purpose of organized labor. In addition to this perversion of the writ of injunction the courts misconstrued anti-trust legislation to apply to associations of workers, organized not for profit but for