Extremely difficult problems arise out of the attempt by the legislative branch of the Federal government to detail how the right to organize shall be protected, and these problems go to the very heart of the whole field of employer-employee relations. These problems have their origin in the Act as written, in its interpretation, in its failure to deal with certain pertinent issues other than the ones dealt with, and in the whole history of the American labor movement. The sincere employer who desires to improve management-labor relations; the employer who prides himself on individualism and resents any agency or organization's hedging his activity no matter the social cost; the dual labor movement, which results in each major organization's demanding that the law operate to its own benefit; the lawyers and employers who refuse to understand the Act and insist that it should incorporate a multitude of other proposals dealing with labor relations--all these sources are reflected in the problems which exist or have arisen in conjunction with the unfair labor practices proscriptions.
Employer groups and employer associations have urged that the Act should be amended so as to prevent coercion not only from the employer but also from any source. What is meant is that employees and unions should not be permitted to exercise coercion in order to drive other workers into the union. Is this attitude a desire by the employer for "fairness," or is it an indirect method of fighting union membership?
It is fair to say that unions definitely do exert coercion against