\ /!^>^?^// Labor—Management Cooperation by Very Rev. Msgr. George G. Higgins Director Social Action Department National Catholic Welfare Conference Social Action Sunday— January 25, 1959 Archdiocese of Hartford What do you mean by labor-management cooperation? Isn’t that the same thing as collective bargaining? Not quite. Collective bargaining can be, should be, and frequently is a good preparation for labor- management cooperation. Normally, as a matter of fact, you have to have the one before you can have the other. Collective bargaining, then, is a step in the right direction. Nevertheless there are some important differences between collective bar- gaining and labor-management cooperation as the two terms are generally understood. Can you be more specific? What are some of these differences? (a) In the first place, collective bargaining frequently — though not always, of course — in- volves a test of strength between labor and manage- ment. It might be described as an economic tug- of-war, with each side trying to win, if not to force, concessions from the other. Labor-management cooperation, on the other hand, puts a premium on team work between the two parties. Starting, as it were, where collective bargaining ends, it brings labor and management together — around instead of across the table from one another — for the purpose of jointly and co- operatively discussing and, if possible, solving common problems. (b) Collective bargaining is rather limited in scope. It is usually confined to fairly controversial items— e.g., wages, hours, working conditions, and a variety of so-called fringe benefits — which all too often tend to divide rather than unite labor and management. Labor-management cooperation, to the con- trary, lends itself to the free and friendly discussion of all sorts of problems which go beyond the usual scope of collective bargaining — problems which are of mutual interest and concern to both parties and which both are equally anxious to solve. (c) Collective bargaining, as often as not. is carried on in an atmospliere of tenseness and con- troversy, with each side using everv available means to line U[) public support for its own position. Labor-management cooperation, on the other hand, presupposes an atmosphere of harmony aiul mutual respect. Are you suggesting^ then, that adlet'tive bar- gaining should be discarded and replaced by new forms of labor-management cooperation? Not at all. (Collective bargaining between unions and em[)loyers is not onlv desirable but necessary. W e need more of it rather than less. That, of course, is why the Church insists so em- phatically on the right of labor to organize and on the obligation of employers and government to respect and facilitate the exercise of this right. But collective bargaining is not enough. While it is an important step in the right direction, it should be supplemented, wherever possible, by new forms of labor-management cooperation fitted to the particu- lar needs of individual companies and industries. Are you proposing something brand new, or do we already have some successful programs of labor-management cooperation in the United States? Happily there are many successful programs of labor-management cooperation in the United States, some of which were started many years ago and have greatly benefited not only the parties con- cerned but the economy as. a whole. But there is still a great deal of room for improvement. For one thing, we need to set up organized programs of labor-management cooperation in many more indi- vidual companies. Secondly we ought to be think- ing more about industry-wide cooperation between labor and management. We badly need coopera- tion between labor and management at the national level to promote the welfare of the economy as a whole and to solve economic problems of a national scope (inflation, for example) which are largely beyond the control of individual companies and in- dustries. At the present time, unfortunately, the top leaders of labor and management seldom if ever meet, even informally, to exchange information and ideas on the condition of the national economy, much less to plan for its future stability and i prosperity. What do you recommend with regard to the last idea? ^ I recommend that representative national lead- ji ers of labor and management come together as soon ! as possible in a series of exploratory meetings. These meetings should frankly discuss the hotly i debated question as to whether or not wages are 1 currently exceeding productivity and are thus, as is sometimes stated, contributing to inflation. They should also discuss prices and profit levels and I industry’s ability to pay. 1 Is there any guarantee that meetings of this [ type would he successful? Not necessarily. Economics is not yet an exact science. Nevertheless there is little reason to believe that experts on both sides would disagree on these and similar matters of fact if they approached them with an open mind, and while disagreements on the interpretation of facts and on matters of policy would not he automatically resolved by joint discussion, they might be gradually reduced to manageable proportions. Is there any public support for such a national program of labor-management cooperation? There is a great deal of support for such a pro- gram. Within recent weeks at least two prominent representatives of the American labor movement, a number of Catholic and secular newspapers and magazines, and a scattering of influential govern- ment officials have more or less simultaneously and independently of one another discussed the advis- ability of holding a national labor-management conference. Some industrialists are also sympa- thetic to the idea. This is very encouraging. Let us hope that within the near future practical steps will be taken to call such a conference. There is no time to lose, for, in spite of the progress we have made in collective bargaining and, to a lesser extent, in labor-management cooperation during the past few decades, there are some discouraging in- dications at the present time that labor-management attitudes may be getting worse rather than better. Finally, has the Church said anything official- ly about the need for new forms of labor- management cooperation? The Church has spoken on this subject fre- quently and emphatically. As a matter of fact, labor-management cooperation is one of the princi- pal themes of Catholic social teaching in general and of the social encyclicals of recent Popes in particular. The American bishops, applying the teaching of the social encyclicals to conditions in the United States, have also stressed the need for new forms of labor-management cooperation. We shall conclude this brief discussion with a pertinent quotation from their annual statement of 1948 entitled “The Christian in Action”: Christian social principles, rooted in the moral law, call insistently for co-operation, not con- flict, for freedom not repression in the develop- ment of economic activity. Co-operation must be organized — organized for the common good; freedom must be ordered — ordered for the common good. Today we have labor partly organized, but chiefly for its own in- terests. We have capital or management organized, possibly on a larger scale, but again chiefly for its own interests. What we urgently need, in the Christian view of social order, is the free organization of capital and labor in permanent agencies of co-operation for the common good. *^ 0^ ViSjP of Christ’s moral teachings into the labor move- ment, into management, into business, into social work, into the professions and into all other fields of human endeavor. On Social Action Sunday we again emphasize the urgent duty which rests on all Catholics to actively participate in those efforts being made to resolve the problems of our society. It is my earnest hope that our Catholic people will not only study the social doctrine of the Church, but that they will join with all men of good will who give practical application to this doctrine in building a more Christian social order. Most Rev. Henry J. O’Brien, D.D. Archbishop of Hartford Social Action Sunday January 25, 1959 Published with the approval of HIS EXCELLENCY HENRY J. O’BRIEN, D.D. Archbishop of Hartford by the DIOCESAN LABOR INSTITUTE Rt. Rev. Msgr. Joseph F. Donnelly, LL.D. Director P. 0. Box 2967 New Haven 15, Conn. EPISCOPAL RESIDENCE 140 Farmington Avenue Hartford, Connecticut For almost a hundred years the Popes of the Church have been urgently encouraging Catholics to take an active part in resolving the social, politi- cal and economic problems of our society. In the papal encyclicals of modern times the Holy Fathers have made it abundantly clear that our interest in resolving these problems is not a voluntary thing with which we may, or may not, concern ourselves. To the contrary, they have emphasized that the social apostolate is today’s offensive for Christ. It is an offensive that can move the world closer to the standards of Christ’s teachings, an offensive which can win the battle for souls. The principal objective of the observance of Social Action Sunday is to give emphasis to this social apostolate which is so urgently needed in our day. The role of the Christian in today’s world is not to stand by and utter eloquent condemnations of social evils which exist in the world which must go on in any event. Rather it is the duty of the Chris- tian to plunge into the task of changing evil into good, wrong into right, and disorder into the order decreed by the moral law. Perhaps never has the Church had a greater need for an informed and zealous laity, a laity who will be concerned not only with the responsibility of their own personal sanctification, but who will be equally anxious to accept their responsibilities in resolving the social problems which harass man- kind. In the theology of the Church the first re- sponsibility cannot be separated from the second. To be fervent in personal prayer, but to be unwill- ing to lift a finger to relieve the miseries of mankind is a travesty of religion. Yet the offensive lags. Relatively few have carried it on. To reach the vigor needed to conquer for Christ it must have new blood, new resources, new strength. From the ranks of the professions, the workers, the employers and the students must come the generous apostles who will bring the guidance V. V',