The publicity given the unit problem has left with the public the impression that the problem of craft units v. industrial units is synonymous with the conflict between the AF of L and the CIO. Yet, from the inception of the Board until January 1, 1940, the AF of L requested that the Board find an industrial unit appropriate in 345 cases as compared with its request for a craft unit in 176 cases. The AF of L also asked in 6 cases out of the 345 that skilled groups who wanted to separate be included in the larger unit requested by them.1 Likewise, the CIO on occasion requested the Board to find a smaller unit than the AF of L was requesting in the same case.
In attempting to appraise and weigh the validity of the AF of L and CIO positions, one must consider the realities of the organized labor movement. The belief that the AF of L is now a "craft" movement and that the CIO stands for industrial unionism is largely erroneous. Throughout its history, the jurisdictional disputes of the AF of L have been to determine which union may organize a group of workers, and no test is inevitably applied to ascertain whether the workers are "craft" workers. All types of unionism have always been found in the Federation, and this is especially true since the split in the labor movement. Indeed, the issue to the Federation itself is not one of defining crafts. Mr. Frey, of the Federation, testified:
". . . The term 'craft' is unfortunate in these days. It conveys an entirely erroneous impression. There have never been pure crafts