THE NOME NUGGET
Published Monday, Wednesday and Friday by The
NOME PUBLISHING CO.
Nome, Alaska
0 __
Telephone: Main 125 P. O. B' x 618
Sl.SO PER MONTH $16.03 A YEAR
W. A. and EMILY BOUCHER.Editors
Entered as second class matter October 14, 1943, at the postoffice
at Nome, Alaska, under the Act of March 3, 1879.
Wednesday, November 13, 1946
^Where Do We Get Off At?
(Anchorage Daily Times)
Week after week passes without any constructive de
velopment in the maritime strike which has held Alaska
trade and commerce in checkmate for about two
months.
Instead of a solution of the strike problems, Alaskans
have had to look for some kind of an agreement which
would permit relief ships to bring at least some of the
essentials of life. But even here their hopes have been
spurred and then dashed by the anctics of the striking
unions and the ship operators.
From the point of view of the Alaskans it looks as
though we are the goats. The ship operators don’t care
whether they do business or not. The unions have their
necks bowed in their battle with the operators that they
are willing to stand pat indefinitely rather than give in.
(Where does that leave Alaska? Where do we get off
at? We are merely the patient—helpless on the operat
ing table while the doctors fight among themselves.
The working man in Alaska is required by union rules
to refrain from union critcism in public. He finds it dif
ficult to follow this rule when his employment is cur
tailed because of the deadlock in Seattle, his income is
shrinking, his living costs are advancing because of the
new item of “air freight,” the safety of his family and
his friends is jeopardized by lack of many essentials to
civilized livelihood.
The 9mall business man finds his overhead costs go
ing on as usual while his business tapers for lack of
stock, his indebtedness soars because of the accumula
tion of merchandise at Seattle which he cannot bring
north to sell.
It is no wonder that Alaskans come to the conclusion
that they are merely the “pawns” of Seattle and they
don’t like it. They are helpless to solvq^ the problems
that affect the Territory. They have been unable thus
far to find a way to avoid the entanglement of looking
to other channels for supplies.
Last October 17 the press reports quoted Burt Nelson,
chairman of the Northwest Committee on Maritime
Unity as saying, “We are not on strike against the peo
ple of Alaska, but we are on strike against the shipown
ers and stevedoring companies.”
That was encouraging, to say the least. But how can
Mr. Nelson justify his union’s refusal to clear a ship
ment of chlorine to the city of Anchorage for use in pur
ifying the municipal water supply?
If the unions are not striking against the people of
Alaska why should they seek to deprive them of the
chemical to purify their water? Does the union want
residents of Anchorage to be compelled to drink con
taminated water? Would that help their strike cause?
Shippers in Ketchikan and Juneau made arrange
ments to move freight to Southeastern ports by bargr
from Prince Rupert. This move brought the statement
from the Sailors’ Union that they regarded it as an “at
tempt to by-pass American labor with non-union labor.’
Thus resistance to this proposal to replenish the sup
plies in Southeastern Alaska came from union head
quarters.
On October 24 the unions greed to clear one large ves
sel as a relief ship for Alaska, to carry food, winter
clothing, medical supplies and feed for livestock. Two
days later they refused to give the vessel clearance be
cause the “operators refuse to negotiate.”
Where do we get off?
The approval of the relief ship was the result of neces
HAS ANYONE COT AN IRRESISTIBLE FORCE T
I
sity. It had nothing to do with negotiations or the settle
ment of the strike. Why do the unions cancel it because
the operators refuse to negotiate? The unions would be
just as consistent if they cancelled it because it was
raining in Florida. That has no more bearing on relief
requirements in Alaska than do the negotiations in the
maritime strike.
While the unions have shown their thinking to be
fickle and as hard to grasp as a handful of quicksilver,
the operators have distinguished themselves no less.
The Only mention of them in the press reports from
day to day is in connection with their refusal to negoti
ate for a settlement. Their line of reasoning is not ex
plained, but it may have some connection with the na
tional election Nov. 5 and the government, involved
through the War Shipping Administration, considers
the strike too hot for action before the voting.
But it is also well known that the owners of the idle
steamships are making just as much money during the
strike as they would during operations. G. W. Skinner,
president of the Alaska Steamship Company, told the
directors of the Chamber of Commerce here that the
returns to the owners under their agreement with the
War Shipping Administration, continue without inter
ruption during maritime strikes.
That certainly puts the owners in a position to ignore
the problems of operating the ships as long as they want.
iBut where do we get off at?
R. A. Kester of Seldovia, who was quoted in the Seat
tle Post-Intelligencer last Friday morning, stated it
well:
!“Every maritime strike that has been pulled in Seat
tle in the 10 years I’ve been in Alaska has been paid for
—any every penny of it—by the people of Alaska in in
creased passenger and freight rates.
“We’re going to try to make Chicago our buying town
and ship to Prince Rupert. Seattle has been cutting
Alaska’s throat as long as we can stand it.”
THAT’S THAT By bruce gustin
John L. Lewis is threatening
another nationwide coal strike un
less the government, which now
is operating the coal mines, agrees
.to reopen the United Mine Work
j ers’ contract and grant a boost in
I pay. The CIO automobile workers
are demanding a wage increase
i from the Chrysler corporation.
[ President Murray of the CIO steel
I workers has served notice they
| will seek a wage boost as soon as
! possible. This looks like a concert
ed plan on the part of powerful
union to “put the squeeze on the
American public again.
The consumers always pay. An
| other round of wage increases will
mean another round of price in
creases. Living costs will be off
again on another inflationary spi
>
iai .And in the long run, nobody
will be any better off. Many peo
ple who do not share in the wage
boosts will be worse off.
Eventually, these strike threats
may have a beneficial effect. An
other wave of walkouts should
give Congress enough political
courage to enact a sound, long
range national labor policy to put
an end to industrial anarchy and
establish a peaceful and orderly
method for adjudicating all labor
disputes. One reason public senti
ment is so strong now for a change
in national administration is the
failure of the Truman regime to
do anything to stop the orgy of
strikes which has been paralyzing
American production.
If manhour production figure
had been going up, instead c
down, big industrial unions woul
be in a much more favorable posi
| tion than they are in seeking fixt
Ither wage boosts. But in som
cases, there is a feeling that th
more they get the less they dc
With 10 million more people em
ployed than ever before “we hav
lower individual productivity thai
we have had during the past tei
of fifteen years,” writes J. H. Van
Deventer, editor of Iron Age. ‘To
day it takes about 50 per 4en
more manhours to turn out an m
tomobile than it did before tft
war, and unit productivity, mea
sured in hourly or daily outpu'
per man, has slipped in almosi
every line of productive endea
vor.”
The decision in Washington, D
C. to go slow on plans for creation
of a United Nations food board
with wide controls over produc
tion, prices and distribution is
wise. Some government officials
and farm leaders are fearful th^
establishment of such a body wit?
the powers which have been pro
posed for it might result in inter
national dictation of farm produc
tion policies in the United States
and other countries. That un
doubtedly is what some of the pro
moters of this plan have in mind
It is all very well for theorists t<
talk about stabilizing farm pto
duction so there will be neithei
.surpluses or shortages. But agri
culutral output is not something
which can be turned on or off lik<
a water faucet at the will of bu
reaucrats either national or inter
national.
Nobody should be surprised a!
the Communist victory in the Bul
garian elections. If the Reds could
not win there after all the tiny
and opportunities the Russians
have had to organize that country
politically, they couldn’t win any
where. With Bulgaria under the
Soviet thumb, and Communist dic
tatorship in the saddle, the elec
tion was anything but a free elec
tion.
A constitutional test of the Dal
las, Tex., city ordinance prohibit
ing labor unions from organizing
municipal employees is assured.
The CIO is preparing to appeal \o
the state supreme court from low
er court decisions upholding the
measure. Ultimately, the United
States Supreme Court will have to
decide the issues. This controversy
is of vital interest to every city in
the country. As Mayor Rogers of
Dallas says, “when the time comes
that a c:ty cannot legislate the em
ployment conditions of its ow*
workers, then we have lost out
form of government.”
Soviet Foreign Minister Molo
tov, proposing universal arma
ment reduction, wants the United
Nations to outlaw the atomic
bomb. Naturally. Russia doesn’1
have the atomic bomb. Only the
United States has the secret of
this new and most destructive ol
all weapons. f
After World War I, the United
States promoted a disarmament
program. We junked battleships
while other nations merely tore up
plans for building battleships Un
itl we have satisfactory assurances
that no other nation ever will
manufacture atomic bombs, we
would be saps to destroy the
atomic bombs we now have. Tf the
Russians really want to outlaw
atomic warfare, they can do tha1
by accepting the Baruch propo^J
for international control.
Venice, Italy, is 150 miles far
ther north than Vladivostok, Si
beria.