On the Other Hand

Yesterday's CRIMSON editorial attacked Charles E. Wilson, mobilization director, on his attitude toward labor unions. The attack centered around Mr. Wilson being "brusque to the point of hostility" to union leaders, and his "apparent lack of confidence in the willingness of labor leaders to... serve the public rather than any special interest." The editorial's conclusion was that labor should be treated fairly and given representation on high level boards.

The editorial based the conflict which has existed between Mr. Wilson and labor on the idea that Mr. Wilson is an old meany and hates unions. This ignores a basic difference which has existed between union leaders and Mr. Wilson over since mobilization began. That difference is inflation.

Mr. Wilson is trying to halt the ruinous inflation which can result from huge defense expenditures. This inflation must be stopped at all points. Any wage increase, even if in response to a rise in the general price level, is almost always inflationary. Wage increases put inevitable pressure on the price level, which eventually yields. To grant wage increases because of a rise in farm prices is simply giving into inflation, for more prices rises must soon follow. It is just this wage-price spiral that Mr. Wilson is trying to prevent.

Union leaders have stated that they will refuse to stabilize wages in the face of inflation. Mr. Wilson is committed to stopping all inflationary pressures. Until these two stands are reconciled and some agreement is reached under which union leaders will cooperate to prevent inflation, it is impossible to see how unions can play an effective part in mobilization plans. Appointing a union leader to a high mobilization post without settling the above dispute, a plan which yesterday's editorial praised, means nothing more than adding to the "window-dressing" which the editorial condemned.

Labor recently gained a victory for its point of view on escalator clauses by withdrawing from the mobilization machinery. This is no solution. The dangers of inflation are very great and at the moment very near. What is needed is an intelligent, non-inflationary wage policy not the meaningless, indefinite cooperation and general changes of Mr. Wilson's attitude proposed by the editorial.