"THE TACTICS OF HOODLUMS"

Despite the accusations and recriminations accompanying it, the A. F. of L.'s proposal to have the State Labor Relations Board investigate Harvard's labor troubles is one which should be welcomed by the University. In every encounter between organized labor and University officials, the latter have shown themselves to be disinterested and impartial. This is an attitude worthy of Harvard, and in view of the loose talk prevalent today, it should be brought to the public's attention by some responsible agency with all possible speed. The University has observed the law and has nothing to fear from the law.

Minor officers of the University may have disregarded this policy, to be sure, but similarly members of the union have forgotten their organization's protests of good faith. In the last four months, strong-arm methods of recruiting members have become increasingly popular at Harvard.

This was especially apparent during the waitress controversy. Insults, abuse, additional work, threats of discharge, of criminal action for some forgotten offense, of exhorbitant initation fees later on, even possible injury to her children, confronted the girl who held out against her immediate co-workers. Since there were more unionized waitresses than non-unionized, it is not too much to say that they were the heaviest offenders in this dining hall controversy, whereas the "inside union" may be very likely be open to attack in the current drive to unionize chamber-maids.

If the University is to be blamed for allowing this situation to arise, it may be said by way of defense that never before has it had to cope with friction and strife between rival factions of its employees. Much of the agitation in favor of the "inside union" is coming from employees in responsible positions who erroneously believe that Harvard favors this group and hope to better themselves by backing it. The University should make it absolutely clear to all employees that such agitation cannot be sanctioned, and that where it involves an executive, constitutes an illegality. Once this is made clear the University need have no compunction in discharging employees who persist in this work.

The A. F. of L. is equally to blame, and its local organizers, no less than their undergraduate sympathizers, should heed the words uttered yesterday by William Green: "The best interests of workers will never be served by tactics adopted from hoodlums and gangsters."