The term featherbedding describes UNION efforts to require employers to hire more workers than needed for the task. Featherbedding agreements require companies to pay union members wages whether their work is needed or not. As LABOR MARKETS change, often certain skills and tasks are no longer needed. However, if the union/MANAGEMENT agreement calls for workers to be employed, then the company is required by the CONTRACT to pay the workers. A classic example was firemen on trains. In the days of wood and coal engines, having a fireman on board a train was a reasonable requirement. But as diesel and electric engines came into use, railroad companies were often required by the union contract to continue to employ firemen. The TAFT-HARTLEY ACT (1947) attempted to outlaw featherbedding by making it an unfair labor practice to demand payment of wages for services that are not performed or will not be performed. Nevertheless, featherbedding exists. In one case the Supreme Court ruled that only payments for workers not to work are prohibited. A union may require that the employer pay workers for useless or totally unnecessary work, as long as the work is actually performed. For example, a newspaper accepted ads from customers that had been prepared by the customer. However, the union agreement required the employer to recopy the prepared work using union workers. In another case, companies have been forced to pay union workers who do nothing as long as they remain willing to work. For example, a theater that brought in out-of-town orchestras still had to pay union musicians, even though no work was performed. Featherbedding is a basis for major criticism of labor unions in the United States. In recent years many unions have become more flexible in union/management negotiations about minimum crew sizes and “make-work” agreements.