The Daily Worker Newspaper, December 29, 1934, Page 5

DAILY WORKER, NEW YORK, SATURDAY, DECEMBER 29, 1934 Page 5 nsurance Congress Sabotaged by Muste And Socialist Leaders am and File in Their Organizations, However, Are Going Over Heads of Leadership to Endorse Workers’ Bill By I. Amter In order to prevent the united ont in the struggle for relief and w unity of the unemployed or- wnizations, and particularly in or- or to prevent united action behind 1e Workers Unemployment and ad Social Insurance Bill at the Tashington Congress on Jan. 5-7, 1e Socialist and Muste leaders of 1e opponent unemployed organiza- ons are raising “new” issues, hese people know that the masses € the United States want unem- loyment and social insurance. hey also know that the Workers ill is not only the only genuine nemployment and social insurance ll, but is the only bill that will rovide insurance for the 16,000,000 nemployed. Not a single other 1, whether drawn up by Fed- 1 or State commissions, or by vate institutions, such as the .aerican Association for Social ecurity (A. Epstein), or the Amer~ van Association for Labor Legisla- ion (John Andrews), will afford ne single penny of protection for he unemployed. All the other bills re unemployment “reserves” bills, legedly intended to provide insur- nee for a short time for workers 1ow employed who in the future nay lose their jobs. But all these rills are so constructed that even hese workers may be deprived of nsurance. In addition, they all act \s strikebreaking bills. The Ntationa|l] Unemployment Souncil has proposed the united ‘ront to the Socialist and Muste ontrolled unemployed organizations not once but many times. On oc- sasion and in certain localities— ?ittsburgh, Youngstown, New York, Philadelphia, TIllinois, etc. — the inited front on certain issues has ’epn achieved. This has been ef- ted not through the good will the leadership and recdgnition their part that the united front and unity are essential for most effective struggle on the part of all the unemployed. It has been achieved through the mass pres- sure of the rank and file. .When directly approached, the leadership of these organizations refused the united front; when the rank and file spoke and acted, these leaders had to change their position, as, for instance, in New York, Chi- cago, Pittsburgh. Reject Cooperation In preparation for the Noy. 24 demonstrations, the Socialist and Muste national leadership of the Opponent unemployed organizations united—but they rejected the co- operation of the National Unem- ployment Council. In spite of this rejection, the locals of the National Unemployment Council participated in variozs localities. where a real united front was achieved, the demonstratios was a most effective one. In other locali- ties the demonstrations were piti- “ly small. This shows not only weakness of the Socialist and ste controlled unemployed or- aghizations, but also the irresponsi- bility of their leaders towards the unemployed masses. Is not the aim of demonstrations to increase the _ fighting power of the masses and = aid them in getting their demands? Surely that can be the only pur- pose of demonstrations, and the . only reason that the masses partici- pate. What were the demands of the Noy. 24 demonstrations? One of the central demands was for the Workers Bill—thebili formulated by the National Unemployment Coun- eil and for which the N. U. C. has secured the support of four to five million people in the United States. Should not, therefore, the N. U. C. wave been an integral part of the demonstrations, and would not its “participation in all localities have _€ @ Committee. made Noy. 24 a ringing day of struggle and protest? Weak Demonstrations But what was the result of the refusal of the Muste and Socialist leaders? The best demonstration was in Chicago—25,000, of whom 20,000 were brought into the streets hg the N. U. C., 5,000 by the Work- In New York, 6,000 7,000, of whom no more than ay were brought out by the Workers Unemployed Union and were kept away by strict lines from the remainder brought into the streets by the N. U. C. In Pitts- burgh, about 500; Columbus, 100 to 150; Gulfport, Miss., 1,000; Milwau- kee, 1,200; Charleston, W. Va., 100, ete. In Newark, Ohio, despite the bluff of a demonstration of 20,000 (out of a total population of 30,000), there were only 70 in the demon- Stration. Other demonstrations ‘showed militancy, but a very weak Participation. Why is this brought forward sharply? Because the Socialist and Muste leaders continue their irre- sponsibility toward the unemployed in the united front, in keep- ing the workers divided, not on is- sues that the unemployed raise, but that they themselves bring forward in order that they, the leaders, may continue in control of their rank and file, This division only helps the government and the bosses and Taperaaten the division that the employed want ended. Muste—Socialist Split “wan spite of these facts both the Socialist and Muste organs speak about the “gigantic” demonstra- sons on Nov. 24th, the “greatest -stpouring of unemployed since the Uepression began” (Lasser, Dec. 14th), This is the sheerest humbug, and only harms the unemployed “movement. = In response to the letter which the National Unemployed Council sent on Nov. 30, to a so-called “Na- tional Action Commitize,” supposed- ly representing the Socialist and Muste controlled unemployed or- Senizations, ve learn that the Muste-Socialist united front no longer exists, but is split up into two groups, as before, The political In Chicago, | convention of the Musteites to- gether with the counter-revolution- ary Trotzkyites, decided that unity with the Socialists is “impossible of achievement at the present time, mainly because of the attitude of reformist elements (especially of the S. P.).” The Musteites also speak of “bureaucratic control by the Socialists. Those who attended the convention of the Muste con- trolled National Unemployed League in Columbut, in July, 1934, learned samething about bureau- cratic control. Not even William Green or John L. Lewis would at- tempt to put over what Ramuglia, Johnson and Truax (Must@ leaders), tried—only to be rebuffed by their own membership. Let us, however, look at it from the standpoint of the interests of the unemployed. Both the Muste and Socialist controlled organiza- tions have endorsed the Workers’ Bill. This did not come about through recognition by the leaders that the Workers’ Bill is the only real bill, but through endorsements that were passed over the heads of the national leadership by the locals and branches. Try to Prevent Action What do we find today? Truax, Ramugiia, Johnson, go about from local to local of the Unemployed Leagues, trying to prevent united action and the election of delegates to the National Congress, and promising separate action on Jan- uary 24th! But January 24th would only mean. a division of forces—just what should be prevented. This shows the sincerity of the Muste leaders in the struggle for the Workers’ Bill. The Socialists “talk” united ac- tion. Early in the organization of the Sponsoring Committee for the National Congress, not only were the Socialist and Muste leaders of the unemployed organizations in- vited to participate, but also Nor- man Thomas. The Socialists at- tended the first meeting, partici- pated in “the discussion, promised a memorandum—then disappeared. The Musteites did not participate at all. Only a short time ago the Socialists again sent “observers” into the Sponsoring Committee— none other than Mr. David Lasser himself. But cooperation? No, the Socialist leaders of the unempoyed organizations, who also “endorse” the Workers’ Bill, owing to the pressure of their rank and file, promise action on March 4th! Again splitting forces. This too shows the “sincerity” of these people. In spite of these actions, locals and county bodies ‘of the Muste and Socialist unemployed organizations are electing delegates to the Na- tional Congress. Mr. Lasser now takes a different tack—following the line of the N. E. C. of the Socialist Party. He de- clares that unity with the National Unemployment Council is impos- sible because: 1—It is not “non- partisan”; 2—It is eee pom nat a ‘le political party ee eteale amentitied with that party. The Unemployment Coun- cils in turn always endorsed and supported that party politically”; and 3—The N. U. C., as a result of the policies of the Communist Party, “is committed at present to dual unionism.” Let us examine these points. Lasser speakes about “non-partisan- ship.” The N. U. C, declares that there is no unemployed organization in the country except the N. U. C., which gladly and freely admits into its ranks workers irrespective of political, national or religious affi- ation or belief. The N. U. C, makes no distinction as to color — which neither the Socialist nor Muste con- trolled organization can even pre- tend, since they both in various localities openly jim crow the Ne- groes, and in others will not admit Negroes. The N. U. C. carries on a sharp fight against any manifesta- tion of race prejudice or superiority. The N. U. C. has within its ranks thousands of Socialist workers, workers of all political opinions. We need but point to the support to the N. U. C. in the mining sections of Pennsylvania, where the over- whelming majority of the workers voted Democrat. On the other hand, the Socialist Party, when it is unable to build a local of the unemployed organi- zation, simply baptizes its S. P. branch an “unemployed union,” and thinks it is doing “work among the unemployed.” We wish to state further that practically all of the top and District leaders of the Socialist and Muste organizations belong to their respec- tive political parties. Furthermore, that it is difficult for any worker to rise in their organizations unless he joins the political party that con- trols the particular unemployed or- ganization. The N. U. C. on the other hand, has in its leadership workers of all political affiliations. It is particularly the task of the N. U. ©. to bring into leadership any and all workers who sincerely and militantly fight for the line of the N. U. ©. Leadership is lacking in all working class organizations, and only the most rapid training of leadership will enable us to carry on the fight. As a result, there are Republicans, Democrats and Social- ists, as well as Communists in the leadership of the N. U. C. : If, however, by “non-partisanship” Lasser means what Sam Gompers and William Green maintain—a so- called “neutral” attitude towards Politics, then the N. U. C. is not “non-partisan.” This so-called “non- partisanship” is only a cloak for covering up all the political trick- ery and actions of the capitalist politicians to keen the workers down. The N. U. C. advocates and will continue to advocate militant WORKING CLASS POLITICS. The unemployed above all have to face the question of politics. They con- | |Jocal, of which he is the head and | The Central Committee of the Communist Party of the United States of America publishes the following letter to the “Commu- nist” Opposition (Lovestone group) as educational material for our new members, showing the inevitable ending of all oppor- tuuist oppositions to the Leninist line of the Communist Interna- tional: one To the National Committee and all | members of the “Communist” Opposition, 51 West 14th Street, New York City. | We have received a letter from | the secretary of your group speak- ing in the name of your “National” Committee, in which is proposed that we meet with representatives of your group to discuss the build- ing of a “new” organization to fight against war and fascism, and also to “join in a common effort to bring about a better political understand- ing between our organizations so as to pave the way to complete unity.” Surely there is no need to carry on any discussions on the first point. Especially do we see no ground for discussion on the basis of the approach to the American League Against War and Fascism contained in your letter. Can the members of the Lovestone group talk about united action seriously and at the same time approve the vicious and provocative approach to the League of Struggle Against War and Fascism contained in your let- ter to us?. In what way is the language here different from that of the open enemies of the Commu- nist movement? The League Against War and Fascism and its various sub- divisions, especially its Youth Sec- tion, represent already millions of workers, farmers, students, intellec- tuals, ete., among them important sections of the American Federation of Labor trade unions, and some important socialist organizations. Its program represents the broadest possible approach toward mobilizing the American masses in the struggle against wsr and Fascism. The League has achieved these results despite the attacks made upon it by the reactionary officialdom of the A. F. of L., the leaders of the Socialist Party and the sabotage and sniping of the leaders of the “Communist” Opposition. As an! example of this sabotage is it not enough to cite the role of Zimmer- man in the League? What has he done to build the League in his own | which he represents on the League's National Committee? To be sure, the League is only on the road to develop into the instru- | ment needed by the masses, As is| well known, it is the Party policy to win to its support the broad masses of the A. F. of L. unions, thr unorganized workers, all the So- cislist organizations, all toilers and those who sincerely wish to fight egainst war and Fascism. We have | made serious efforts to enlist the support of the N. E. C. of the So- cialist Party in support of the League. We have made headway in winning S. P. local organizations to the League despite the opposi- tion of the N. E.C. And what has been the role of the “Communist” Opposition? One of jaying to pre- vent the drawing in ‘of the Social- ist Party and other organizations. Surely the League will not be broadened by such discussions as | Loyestone is carrying on. Even if| you were to stop your attacks on the League and join in building it— which surely no one prevents you from doing—would that change ma- terially the situation? Hardly. After all, why not look facts in the tinually deal with the government and governmental agencies. Only a correct, militant line can guide them. It is just because the N. U. C. is uncompromising in the fight for the interests of the unemployed and carries on its fight through mass action, that the Socialist and Muste leaders, who dicker with po- lice and relief officials, despite their “radical” phrases, try to change the N. U. C. with “partisanship.” Parti- sanship for the interests of the workers is the basis of the work of the National Unemployment Coun- cils. The second point “charges” that the National Unemployment Coun- cil is dominated by and supports a certain party—meaning the Com- munist Party. Is it not a fact that the Communist Party is the ONLY party that really supports the un- employed in their struggles—not only by giving policy and advice, but also by throwing its forces into the struggle for relief, against evic- tions, against discrimination of Ne- gro and foreign-born, for the Work- ers Bill? Does the C. P. not also mobilize all its sympathetic organi- zations in this struggle? It does. Does it follow then that the N. U. C. forces endorsement of the Com- munist Party on N. U. C. affilia- tions? In the last elections, the N. U. C. recommended to its affili- ated bodies endorsement of the C. P. on the above grounds, but also proposed that the locals of the N. U. C. arrange symposiums and in- vite speakers of all parties to pre- sent their platforms. If as a result of these symposiums, the workers in the N. U. C. more heartily en- dorsed the C. P., it merely proves that they recognize that the C. P. represents ther interests. The third point is drawn in arti- ficially. The purpose of this point is to bring down into the mnem- ployed organizations the differences that exist even in the ranks of the Socialist Party. The N. U. C. not only gives support to all A. F. of L. workers on strike—note the truck- drivers in Minneay the long- shoremen and general strike in San Francisco—but to workers in inde- pendent unions that go into strug- gle. In turn locals of the A. F. of L. give open support to the N. U. C. in all parts of the country, as they support the Workers Bill, The reason this point is raised | New York and vicinity are after all |crats with whom they are allied face? You represent only a hand- | ful of individuals with very little| connection among the masses. Those | of your followers occupying leading positions in some trade unions in only in these “commanding” posi- tions by grace of A. F. of L. bureau- (Zimmerman), or have lost all sup- port of the masses as a result of their reactionary and class col- laborationist policies (Keller), What is true of the united front on the field of struggle against war | and Fascism is unquestionably true in all other fields where the broad united front can be and is being | built (unemployment, in the trade | unions, Scottsboro, etc.). Can we talk of united front for example in connection with the unemployment insurance campaign when you speak of the broadest movement ever built in the history of the Communist movement in this country as “just another name for the bankrupt Unemployed Councils,” the “latest puppet organization of the Commu- nist Party”? Is this not going) William Green one better? Or can we have united front in the trade unions—where you are. completely isolated in the important industries, or in the few locals where your members are openly allied with the | reactionary bureaucracy, fighting against the Communists and mili- tant workers? | No discussion is possible with you on the united front, so long as you carry on such anti-Communist slanders and actions. A united front with your handful of follow- ers is at any rate of little conse- quence in the labor movement. If you change your ways and really wish to honestly support the posi- tion of the Party in the struggle it is leading you can show it in the practical daily work. Now as to the second point in the letter regarding “a better po- litical understanding ... so as to pave the way for complete unity.” We are sure that you are fully ac- quainted with the position of the Party on all important questions of fundamental policy and tactics, We also are well acquainted with the view of your group. There is no need to organize any discussion merely for the purpose of restating our respective positions which are well established. The only way in which any understanding can be reached between us is by your group abandoning its anti-Communist po- sition and fully accepting the poli- cies and tactics of the C. P. U_S. A. It is not necessary for us to go into the motives behind the sending of the letter to us. But every mem- ber of the Lovestone group who sin- cerely wishes to fight capitalism and be part of the Communist move- ment ought to ask himself the question: why did the leaders of the group send this letter to the: Com- munist Party when only a few months ago, after the Comintern | informed through the columns of the “Communist International” that all the followers of the Brandler group who wish to come into con- tact with the Comintern should ad- dress themselves to the respective Communist Parties. The Lovestone group instead of taking this honest course, opened up a new “offensive” against the C. P. U. S. A. in the form of “an open letter” to the membership of the C. P. U.S. A. Unmistakably the following are chief reasons why Lovestone is now compelled to make this latest ma- neuyer: 1, Because the CP. U. S, A. is now completely united on the basis of the line of the Comintern and is making rapid progress in all fields of work, especially in the trade unions, and in the building of the Communist Party Tells Lovestoneites to Admit and Correct Errors as Way to Enter Party united front. 2. Because the Lovestone policies are becoming more and more ex- posed in the trade unions. Not even the closest collaboration with the reactionary A. F. of L, bureaucracy is saving this group from isolation. Keller, for example, has lost all support among the silk workers in Paterson, while the opposition to Zimmerman, who is the Dubinsky | agent in Local 22 of the I. L. G. W. U., is mounting from day to day. 3, Because of the split of the Git- low-Zam group, who went over openly to the 8. P. This develop- ment unquestionably raises in the minds of any honest follower of the Lovestone group as to where they are going, and increases the pres- sure within the Lovestone rank and file proletarian followers for aban- doning the present position of the group and a return into the fold of the Communist Party. 4. Because of the action of the N. E. C. of the 8. P. in terminating the brief united front flirtation with the Lovestone group, despite the readiness of the Lovestone group leadership to increase their attacks on the C, P. U.'S. A. as the price for a united front, 5. Because the group has lost all perspective and any pretense of be- ing part of the international Com- munist movement, with their loss of influence, the breakup of the Brand- ler groups everywhere throughout the world. 6. The group more and more sees no basis for an independent exist- ence. Honest proletarian elements of the group can see that they are now at the parting of the ways. The question before them is either going over from a slightly covered to a completely open position of reform- ism or return to the fold of the | Communist Party. The followers of Lovestone can now see where Lovestone, Gitlow and Co. have led them when they challenged the policies and the dis- cipline of the Communist Interna- tional and the Communist Party. They have led them into the swamp of opportunism and isolation from the masses. Their whole policy al- ready more than once proved bank- rupt by the developing events. The group is not a Communist group, although without question some of the followers believe that they are a Communist group. The policies of the group on the development of the crisis, the theory of exception- alism, no danger of fascism in the U. 8. A., collaboration with the bu- reaucrats and against the Commu- nists in the trade unions, the open struggle against the Party and the Comintern, etc, are full proof of the anti-Communist policies and practices of the group. On the other hand the C. P. U. S. A. is steadily marching for- ward. It has increased its mem- bership to about 30,000 good-stand- ing members, it is a growing influ- ence in the trade unions, it has es- tablished a broad unemployed movement, made great progress in the work among the Negro toilers, farmers, intellectuals, ete. The po- litical level of the membership is today higher than ever, new prole- tarian forces have been trained and developed to leadership. The Party stands today stronger than ever, building solidly among the masses, especially in the basic industries, growing in influence and authority, on the road to become really a mass Bolshevik Party, These achievements of the Party are due to the fact that the Party has freed itself from the influences of the Lovestoneites and the Trot- zkyites and has carried on loyally the fight for the line of the Com- munist International. Throughout | these years that the Party has| struggled for the masses, the Love- stone group tried to do everything possible to hamper the growth and examine the role of the group in the trade unions, the slanders and prov- ocations of Lovestone Zimmerman and Co. and you will see how every | step in the progress of the Pa was made not only by struggle against the bourgeoisie and the open reformists, but also through a/| struggle against the anti-proleta- | rian policies of the Lovestoneites. | In fact at this very moment, when | your lettor was sent, the leaders of | the group are carrying on the most | vicious slanders against the Party | as revealed in Lovestone’s state- ment before the N. E. C. of the S. P., | in the recent editorials in your pa- | per and the activities of your fo)- lowers against the National Con- gress for Unemployment Insurance and in the trade unions. In the | trade unions it is the Zimmermans | in Local 22 who carry on the Green- | Woll expulsion and suspension tac- tics, place every obstacle in the | path of the unification of the dress- | makers, while in the Paterson Silk Workers Union it is Keller who openly violates every decision of the membership in his openly pro- claimed policy of “rather wreck the union. than allow the Communists to win the election.” In view of this situation, the ques- tion before your group and before | every member of the group is clear: | the way of Gitlow, the way from a| covered support of reformism to openly going over to the camp of re- formism, or the way back to the | Communist Party and the Commu- nist International. The way back to the Communist International demands: full recog- nition of the mistakes of the group, recognition of all the decisions of the Party and the Comintern, recognition of Party discipline, To show a serious turn in this di- | rection would demand: 1. An immediate end to all at- tacks against the Party and the Comintern. 2. Full and active support of the | policies of the Party and its ac- | tivities in all fields, especially in the trade unions, If such a principled position is taken by your group, then the Party stands ready to meet with a com- mittee elected by your National Committee meeting, to discuss all | the practical questions, the best manner in which unity of action | can be achieved in the various mass organizations and the steps leading to the return of the members of the group to the fold of the Communist Party. ‘We appeal especially to all hon- est proletarian followers of the group to think over seriously the Position in which they have been misled, the prospect before them now, and the proposals of the Party. | Those who want to make good their mistakes and recognize them, who show in practice they are willing to follow the line of the C. P. U.S. A will find the hand of the Party ex- | tended to them. so that they can| come back to the Party and take their place in its ranks for full and active participation in the glorious work in the fight for Communism. Every single follower of the group can prove himself at once in his shop, trade unions, etc., by support- ing the work of the Pariy. The Party will inform its members in these organizations to extend a comradely hand to all such com- rades who wish to take the road back to the Communist Interna- tional. EARL BROWDER, General Secretary, C.P., U.S.A. Party and the Communist Party. The Socialist Party supports the bu- reaucrats in the A.F.of L. The Com- munists support, organize and lead the rank and file in opposition to the class-collaboration policies of the bureaucrats. It is this which raises the fear of the Socialists and Musteites, so that they do every- thing in their power to eliminate Communists from their unemployed organizations. These reformist lead- ers, bureaucratically trying to con- trol their organizations, fear the leadership of the rank and file against their pussyfooting policies. Sabotage Interests of Jobless The rank and file of the Socialist and Muste controlled unemployed organizations must take note of the sabotaging activities of their lead- ers. The sabotage of the National Congress is the clearest expression of their struggle not for but against the interests of all unemployed. Their refusal to form the united front, their seeking fake issues to prevent unity, clearly expose them as working against the interests of the unemployed. ‘To the rank and file we appeal: It is in your interest that. there should be unity. Elect more delegates to the National Congress and the Con- vention of the N. U. C. Buiid unity groups in every branch and local of these unemployed organizations. Pass resolutions in your locals. In- struct your delegates to the city and county bodies to fight for united your locality. But don’t wait: FORM THE UNITED FRONT IN ACTION with the N. U. C. on the immediate is- snes in your vicinity. Draw up joint demands, mobilize jointly, elect joint leadership and go to the relief bu- reaus in one body. Join together in arranging the demonstrations on Jan. 7 to back up the demands to be LS oery by the National Con- gress U. 8. Congress. Send resolutions congressmen. jointly for the struggle after the National Con- gress to force the U. S. Congress and the State legislatures to pass the Workers Bill. The issue daily becomes clearer: | Your leaders do not want unity. They are doing everything in their front action with the N. U. ©. in| te! Store Strikers In Milwaukee By BELLE TAUB (A copy of the following article was sent for publication in the Working Woman): sae MILWAUKEE, Dec. 28.—How women are becoming a vital force in the struggle for better conditions can be seen clearly in the strike of some 800 department store workers of the Boston Store, Milwaukee, more than half of whom are women. “My husband is baking bread and washing curtains today.” “My boy Tommy says: ‘How can I wash the dishes without a work- ing card?’” “And mine says: ‘Mommy, when the strike is over we'll get ac- quainted again.’” “The store called me back to work, but my family won't let me go.” That’s what the pickets say when they trudge back to union head- quarters to warm their freezing toes and hands. The conditions which brought about the strike cannot be forgot- mn. Ruthless wage-slashing brought the average wage for women down to $14, while the men get $16 for the same work. Many have their hours cut to 36 and only get $12.60. Speeu-up, layoff without a mo- ment’s notice, discrimination against union members, were the order of the day in the Boston Store. Any foreman whom the boss thought was “too liberal” simply disappeared from the ranks. After 36 years of this ruthless exploitation of its salespeople, the Boston Store piled up huge profits and a reputation for | the most greedy and vicious treat- ment of its workers. Women have special problems in the store. They must “keep up ap- 1 pearances” in good, dark dresses; flawless hose and shoes; they must. power to prevent unity. YOU want is the difference in policy in the same unions, between the Socialist unity—WE want unity. Unity must | be achieved, despite all sabotage, be manicured and marcelied. all on the starvation wage of $12.60 to $14, “We go into the store with our Customers Aid .| their plans. The hair curled and nails manicured, but often don’t have the price of a ten cent sandwich,” they say. When hunger gnaws, they can be consoled by thinking about their boss's wages. “Two hundred and ten dollars a day for him,” they cry on the picket lines! Here's the rec- ord, published in income tax re- ports, for Mr. Stanley Stone: $70,299 in 1932, and $53,872 in 1933, $72,209 in 1982, and $53,872 in 1933, while four other officers of the firm | receive similar amounts. On November 29 nearly 800 of the workers came out on strike, sur- rounding the store with pickets at every entrance. A ‘group of women came together to help the strikers. They ap-| proached the American Federation | of Labor leaders, telling them of leaders called them “reds” and refused to au-| thorize the women to participate in | the strike. A few members of the | Socialist Party who were in the group dropped out under pressure from the leadership, while a few bravely defied the leaders. Of the determined handful of women in the gfoup real solidarity actions with the strikers were developed. They brought sandwiches and cof- fee to the picketers on the lines. | They formed an outer picket line | and appealed to shoppers not to buy there. The women marched through | the store with their banners and | slogans, appealing to scab workers | and scab shoppers alike to leave the | store. Finally, they planned a large | public meeting, under the auspices of the League of Women Shoppers, where the strikers could come and | tell their stories. After days of op- Position by the leaders, the women | covered the city with 10,000 leaflets. | At this meeting, the strikers had their day! Nearly a thousand came | to hear them. An appeal for relief | in the collection brought nearly | $100, part of which was used for Christmas baskets for strikers. The | Boston Store sent its official rep- | | resentatives, who were booed and / jeered when the strikers pointed | them out! | Workers and consumers joined hands and pledged to fight together. “Customers are on strike, too, at ‘the Boston Store.” | feated by the Green bureaucrac: the AFL. League for Unemploy-| For In A.F.of L. League’s Bill surance Carries An Anti-Strike Clause Ohio Union’s Measure, Indicating Upsurge of the development of the Party. Just; Masses, Is Greatly Inferior to Workers Insurance Bill, Which It Resembles in Some Respects By SANDOR VOROS (Daily Worker Ohio Bureav CLEVELAND, Ohio, D employment Insurance Bi employment Insurance Bll made shortly to the incoming St Assembly by the A. F. of L. Leagu ers, of not less than 3 per cent of cording to Stephen Lesco, pr jent of the League. The bill now is dergoing final revisions and come up for approval in the y near future While the measure which is ing proposed indicates the growi revolt in the A. F, of L. for ge: unemployment insurance, introduc- tion of such a measure at this time splits the fight for the Worker: Unemployment Insurance Bill and weakens the united front given to the National Con; Unemployment Insurance. be- ss for At the same time, besides containing an anti-strike turned 2 moveme e proposed A, F L. Bill s less in benefits to tt unemployed. Workers and their organiza supporting the Ohio meas follow the example of the organizations in the Ohio tion for Unemployment I: which rescinded their previo dorsement of the Wagner-Lew Bill, endorsed the Workers’ and elected delegates to the Na- tional Congress for Unemployment | ° Insurance. Benefits to Present Jobless Consisting of nine points, proposed Ohio bill is based the principles that the State can and must protect its people. In opposition to the Harrison Bill which is endorsed by the Stete Federation of Labor it provides for immediate benefits to “all genuine- employable-unemployed.” It flects the steadily growing real tion among the ranks of the Ameri- can Federation of Labor for the need of a genuine unempl and social insurance bill to go into the effect immediately and not in some]! . distant, vague future. Organized three years ago at the time of the A.F.L. Vancouver con- vention where the resolution for unemployment insurance was de- ment Insurance consists at present of 92 local unions of the A.F.L, in Cleveland. Although it includes al- most every craft and industry, till lately it did not develop suff: it activity to secure the needed mass support. Sticking closely to the trade unions it only established contacts in the past week with the Ohio Association for Unempl ment Insurance consisting of about two hundred fraternal organiza- tions that went on record to sup- port the Workers’ Unemployment Insurance Bill (H.R, 7598). only lately that efforts have been made to extend their activities to! the entire State and~a wide pub-| licity campaign is pursued by issu- ing regular releases to 39 Ohio newspapers. State Federation Stabs at Bill It ts due to this activity and the| support gained by it that the Cleve- land Federation of Labor not only Officially endorsed the League but two weeks ago passed a resolution | demanding action on it of the § Federation of Labor. The State Federation of Labor at its fiftieth convention this summer referred the bill to its Committee on Legislation which in turn re- jected it as “unconstitutional and too radical.” they would frame their own bill or ate amend the Harrison Bill, although | the Harrison Bill was vehemently opposed by the League as entirely inadequate, It does not provide for immediate benefits, it would not go into effect until 1936; one would have to work at least 26 weeks to be eligible and even then for only 16 weeks’ benefit, and to cap it all —it would absolve the State of Ohio | from all liability and any contribu- tion whatsoever to the insurance fund. Likened to Workers’ Bill The State bill of the League pro- poses the establishment of a fund by the contribution of all employ- ers of not less than 3% of their pay Stiikers Stiow! Huge Profits Of Boston Firm MILWAUKEE, Wsi., Dec. 28.— Income tax reports of the Herazfed- Philipson Company, operators of the Boston Store here where a strike has been going on for more than &@ month, show profits ranging from 134 per cent to 351 peh cent on itS capital during the years 1929 to 1933 inclusive, an investigation by the strike committee of the Bos' Store strikers revealed yesterday. The 351 per cent rate was for last year, while the low was in 1931. On the other land wages for most workers, it was shown, range from $14 to $15 a week. The four chief executives of the company received a total asalary of 380,600 for the year of 1933. This was an increase of $2,000 over the amount received the previous yaer, The total salary received by these four during the period 1929-1933 is $550,666.36. In addition, these same officers, who hold a majority of the firm’s stock, received dividends amounting to $2,254.133.36 for that period. The figures were published by the unions of the strikihg workers, after | Boston Store eds appeared % all the papers, including the Milwaukee Leader, Socialist Party daily here, claiming that the workers in the store averaged $19.55 per week. The Bill, | upon | re- It is} It advised the League | t all 3 ollowing the Work- workers are to contrie- ig according to the latest r ana it four. ogy with H. R. 7598 which sets the minle fit at not less than $10 is $3 for each dependent. This ela however, is limited by the provision that maximum bene- fits are not to exceed 75 per cent of the normal wages of the workers. This clause discriminates against those with large families, who are forced to work for starvation wages and thereby tend to beat down the Jevel of general wages. In line with this cl n with five e starvation per week p) benefit of $25 Anti-Labor Clause to Stephen Lesco, presi- e League, the framers of studied practically all ican and European unemploy- surance bills to embody the les of all. In spite of se good intentions a vicivus tted to creeo in tead of being an could be used as the most effective strike- devices by the bosses and the State. This is contained in point six, which reads “Benefits shall be paid all em- ves, for duration of unemploy- 2g complied with authorized Fed- ‘ation Board, such to workers, of Act, Resolution 44, approved J: 20, and, nevertheless, are forced into a strike or lock-out.” This clause, under penalty of lose unemploy ¢ insurance bene- S, would force all strikers to ac- |cept compulsory arbitration and j abide by all ke-breaking deci- sions of the arbitration board Another out ig weakness of the bill cor s of surrendering con- trol of the fund to the political machines and politicians by ployment through a Insurance “non-partisan” ticket with no provsions made for work- ers’ control. “Lundeen Bill Propaganda” When asked about the A. F, of (H. R. 7598) Good L. League's attitude towards the Workers’ Bill and the Washington Congress, Mr. Lesco declared that at present they were concerning j themselves with the passing of the State Bill alone. Fight Roosevelt Scheme “We recognize that the Lundeen Bill is an excellent propaganda for unemployment insurance but it is impossible to put it into effect un- der the present system of society, We sympathize with it, but we are interested in pushing our State bill. | We do not see how the Washington Congress could help our bill aside from its propaganda value. No, Green’s letter against the Washing- ton Ci ss had nothing to do with it. We are opposed to the Wagner Bill and will fight against it. Put- ting through our State bill would help greatly towards a uniform Fed- eral unemployment insurance bill and we are willing to work with any | group that would help us with our State bill.” Mr. Lesco, who gave the impres- sion of being entirely sincere, failed to see that th proposed State bill would have no more chance of passing than the Workers’ Bill, un- jJess the broadest united front mass | Support could be secured for it. The | backing of the Workers’ Bill would only strengthen their fight for ine surance on a State scale, not to mention the fact that their State | bills in its present form falls far short from the protection the Worke ers’ Bill would give. Their bill, with |the forced arbitration clause and |the proposed form of electing the |Insurance Commission could be most effectively turned against the unions, countering the statements of the company, declare that 75 floor men and a number of buyers receive $35 and more per week, which brings up the average, and conceal the fact that most workers get far below $19.55 a week. “Figures gathered among the em- ploy now on strike bear this out conclusively,” says the union's state- ment. “Among these hundreds of employees it was found that the majority working from 5 to 15 years for the store, were receiving only $14 to $15 per week for 40 to 48 hours work, “Some of these so-called extras, who worked as much as 36 hours |Der week, earn as little as $12.60 per week. Textile Striker Freed By Campaign of LL.D, CLAREMONT, N. H., Dec. 28.— John Sucharzuski, textile worker framed up by the police during the |General Textile Strike, was ace |Quitted this week by a jury at Wood- ;stock, Vermont, as a result of the |legal and mass defense conducted by the International Labor Defense, Sucharzuski was arrested while |deing strike duty with a | squad. The mill bosses and the pros |ecution made clear their intention | to railroad him to five years in jail, | Although his arrest occurred on | Sept. 11 and bail was set at $500, the | Officials of the United Textile Worke jers Local made no attempt to get him out on bail or to arrange ade- [quate defense for him.