It is impossible to imagine a greater blow to the
principle of collective bargaining than such a general strike, for it in effect tells all employers that contracts are useless. These may be broken at any moment by order of the Trades Union Congress. A man who joins in a general strike without notice is, of course, subject to the ordinary law of the country and can be sued in Court for damages. A member of a trade union may say " Yes, but I came out in response to an order, and if I disobeyed my trade union I should forfeit all my benefits." Sir John Simon did well to point out that the argument is based on a misapprehension. " No Court of this country would ever construe such a rule as meaning that a man would forfeit his benefit if he were asked to do what is wrong and illegal." Sir John appealed strongly for the maintenance of the right to strike in the proper sense, but he reminded the House that when Parliament gave immunity to trade unions, under the Trades Disputes Act, it was contemplating lawful strikes. He did not know how the true rights of Labour could possibly be protected in future if the present mad course of the Trades Union Congress were pursued. The trade unions were indeed put by their leaders into a cruel position. They were ordered to break both their contracts and the law ; they were threatened with being deprived of the money due to them if they did not obey ; they were called " blacklegs " and " scabs " if they did not support those who struck, yet all these orders and threats were all the..,time bringing deep dishonour on the whole system of trade unionism. The general strike is rooted in dishonour : it makes the word of Englishmen a meaningless thing and brings dis- ruption into what is otherwise an efficient: ,and honoured organization.
* • * * *
Previous page
