On Bias

As he had done a thousand times before during the National Labor Relations Board hearings on the Ford Motor Co. case in Detroit (TIME, July 26), Louis J. Colombo Sr., the swart, able Ford counsel, shouted one day last week: "I object." Lawyer Colombo objected to the way the Labor Board counsel was riding a Ford foreman who testified that he fired a man, not for union activity as charged, but for "gazing off into space." But Lawyer Colombo's objection was overruled by Trial Examiner John T. Lindsay. Lawyer Colombo started to say: "I am going to object every time . . ." when Examiner Lindsay cut him short: "Go ahead and object. Your objection is overruled."

At that Lawyer Colombo strode toward the dais, waving his hands, declaring: "There must be some rule of fairness in this." Up jumped Examiner Lindsay, crying: "Now wait a minute, wait a minute." Yelled Lawyer Colombo: "Wait a minute yourself!"

For a moment it looked as if the lawyer and the examiner were about to have at one another but finally Mr. Lindsay admonished: "You've been treated to every courtesy here." Roared Mr. Colombo: "Yes, courtesy! I'm treated like a horse thief!"

Next day just before he wound up the turbulent Ford hearings, preparatory to submitting his report to the three-man Labor Board in Washington, Examiner Lindsay gave a little dissertation on the theory of Labor Board hearings, a type of procedure which has baffled many another lawyer beside Mr. Colombo. Said the trial examiner:

"The purpose of this hearing or any other NLRB hearing is quite 'different from a lawsuit. We have to let in hearsay evidence and immaterial things so we may get at the material things. The strict rules of evidence are not followed. Only the material facts are considered in the trial examiner's opinion and in the rulings of the Board. The immaterial is rejected. Rulings on objections are entirely within the discretion of the trial examiner. Nobody is injured or harmed by this procedure. We are charged with the duty of conducting the inquiry on a thorough and fact-finding basis."

This pleasing picture of NLRB impartiality is not shared throughout the land. The three-man Labor Board--Chairman J. (for Joseph) Warren Madden flanked by two men named Smith, Donald Wakefield and Edwin Seymour (no kin)--is generally rated proLabor. And NLRB's many enemies say this pro-Labor bias extends down through its 21 regional directors. NLRB's decisions have been roundly criticized not only for bias but for inconsistency. It has even been damned by A. F. of L. sympathizers as pro-C. I. O.

Following his sudden blast last fortnight when he called NLRB a "kangaroo court" which should be scrapped before it made "economic hash of our national welfare," Senator Gerald P. Nye last week resumed fire on the floor of the Senate, attacking the Board for failure to hold an election in Philadelphia's strike-wrecked Apex Hosiery Co. (TIME, July 5). The North Dakota Senator trumpeted: "If a great Government is going to tolerate administration by a board or a bureau which in turn is going to tolerate practices of that kind, the hour is not far off when Americans are going to be reminded that 'it can happen here.' " Brought down to more relevant ground by Senator Wagner, Senator Nye conceded that he had never heard an employer deny that NLRB elections, at least, were "absolutely fair and impartial."

Across the Capitol in the House, Mississippi's John E. Rankin led the NLRB attack. Fighting the Board's request for a bigger appropriation to handle some 200 cases every month, Congressman Rankin swore he would oppose appropriating another dollar "until representatives of NLRB cease the communistic activities by which they are stirring up strife in every section of the country, and especially in the Southern States. I cannot withhold my protest until the streets of Southern towns and cities are stained with the blood of innocent people."

Slight, bushy-haired Congressman Rankin, has a reputation as a liberal, largely because of his ardent support of TVA, and his spleen seemed to be caused by labor trouble in Tupelo, Miss., the model TVA consumer town. There, declared Mr. Rankin, the way NLRB men had "helped destroy" the cotton mill and "the brutal manner in which they are now trying to destroy the garment factories" was "enough to stir the people of my State to revolt."

Straight from the White House came an answer to the NLRB attackers, President Roosevelt declaring that he was completely satisfied with the Board's impartiality, flatly denied that he had asked for reports on the Board's work. In the President's opinion the fact that the Board had been attacked by both Labor and Capital was conclusive evidence that both sides were being fairly treated. Congressman Rankin's comment: "The President has evidently been misinformed. I know he means well."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.