OCR Text |
Show Elgtil-Hoor Day For Empfoyes ol ttic Railway Irak Service Local Railway Organizations Send the Standard Their. Side or the Contention Now On and Ask For Publicity in Order to Get Their Grievances Before the People. (From Transportation Brotherhoods Publicity Bureau.) The demand is fair; all of the leading lead-ing industries and trades, railroads excepted, havo recognized, tho economic eco-nomic justice of the eight hour day. We believe it can be accepted with no greater inconvenience by the railroads rail-roads than accompanied Its introduction introduc-tion In other employments. The eight hour day movement is 'based wholly upon the justice of a work day of reasonable hours that will permit the men further to separate sep-arate the dead line between work and wages. The railroads say in effect that men who have put in a few years of railroad service have worked thom-selves thom-selves out and will not be reinstated i If they lose thoir positions. If men ' are worked out in a few years under present service conditions, as the lailroads in effect declare, the de-maud de-maud to extend thjiir wage earning years is fully justified. Overtime In road service is due almost wholly to the practice of railroads rail-roads overloading trains so that they cannot make their mileage within the time limits. The railroads are doing this for piofit; they do not deny it, and if they propose to denaaud extra service at the sacrifice of the health and future earning ability of the men they should pay extra for it. The payment of overtimo applies with particular par-ticular forco to yaids where the companies com-panies can regulate their work so thPt no overtime need be made. If they exact extra service, it is to their own interest and the men have a perfect right to demand time and one-half time for that service. The railroads contend that the men are not sincere in their demand for the shorter work day; they declare they want a wage increase rather than a timo decrease, and refer to a small number of the men who prefer the extra hour jobs to prove it. If the companies desire to test the sincerity of the men, let them prove their belief be-lief In what they say and establish the eight hour day so that the men do not have to make a minute of overtimo. The shorter work day Is the only proposition on which the men voted. The statement has been made that the payment of overtime Is an incentive incen-tive to delay work during the regular regu-lar working time. It does not apply to railroad service. Both the employers employ-ers and the men know that if delays are made without reason, the men are called to account for it, if at fault they are disciplined, and the companies compan-ies have it within their power to determine de-termine whether or not delays are unnecessary. The railways have introduced statements state-ments that serve no purpose other than to divert attention from tho main question; for Instance, the money mon-ey paid a "green'' brakeman is quoted quot-ed at ?S00 a year. A "ripe" brake-man brake-man does not get any more for the ear than the green brakeman except that tho ripe brakeman has a regular regu-lar job and stands a chauce to make regular timo while the green brake-man brake-man is on the extra board and must lake his chances for employment when the regular man lays off. Instead In-stead of getting fSQ0 a year, there nro times -when he will ibe fortunate if he has a chance to make a trip once a month. If he works on certain cer-tain roads, that one day will be applied ap-plied to his payments due the voluntary volun-tary relief association and he will not even receive that In money. The pay of train service employes, other than passenger, is based on 100 miles or less, ten hours or less. In the Eastern territory, for instance, the brakeman will receive the lnun-lflclent lnun-lflclent sum of $2.67 for regular freight service out of which he must maintain his family at home and take icare of himself at the other end of tho road. The 100 mile trip is what represents one day's work and means that at Its expiration tho man must lay away from home until he is deadheaded dead-headed back or returned with a train. The conductors in all classes of road service receive approximately one-third one-third more pay than tho brakeman. The difference between the wages of tho two is easily estimated. To bo specific, tho wage3 paid, in freight service in the "Rnstm frT-i. tory arc as follows: Through freight: Enginoers, $4.75 . firemen, $2.46 to $3.40 according to' class of engine. Way freight: Engineers, En-gineers, 25c additional, and. firemen 15c additional per day. Switching service: Engineers, $4.10; firemen, $2.50 and $2.60. One hundred miles or less, ten hours or less constitute a day. A few roads pay engineers $4.85 and $5.15 per 100 miles or loss for certain classes of heavy power while other roadB In. tho same territory, terri-tory, with heavier engineers which handle approximately 3o per cent more tonnage, pay the same late of $4.75 to the engineer, although the fireman gets tho benefit of a graduated scale running from $2.45 to $3.40. Through and irregular freight work, construction, snow-plow, cincus or wreck train service: Conductors, $0.04; flagmen, $0.0267; brakemen, $0.02G7 per mile; runs of 100 miles or less to be paid for as 100 miles, on a speed basis of ten miles per hour. Jxical freight service, way freight, pick-Up or drop, mine and roustabout service ara paid as follows: Conductors, Conduc-tors, $0,045; flagmen, 0.03; brake-men brake-men $0.03 per mile; 100 miles or less, ten hours or less constitute a day. Eight hundred .dollars means that the brakeman who receive that amount must work 100 miles or less for every calendar day In the year. Tho railroad men are piece-workers; they do not get paid by the year but by the days worked. Whatever wages (brakemen receive above $200 are earned because they havo worked overtime. It is no trouble to estimate esti-mate these wages for they arc based on 100 miles or less, ten hours or less for the day's work. Wages are a trifle higher in tho Southern and Western territories. The statement has been made that this present demand for the shorter work day is based on "peak" earnings of the raihyays, due to the present boom in business. That is not so. The shorter work day movement was Started before the nrosenl. fl.irnintrs of the the railways were thought of. The demand is based whollv on the absolute belief of the men "that the eight hour day is the proper work day and that when they have woiked that number of hours they have fully complied with every reasonable requirement re-quirement that pertains to a fair day's work. The statement has been made that roads in the hands of receivers have not cut wages. Tho fact that wages have not been reduced on such roads is not to be placed to the credit of the companies themselves, but rather to the courts that have denied the right of such roads lo reduce wages of employes on lines in the hands of receivers. "Forty-five per cent of the earnings of the railway companies are paid in wages," affords the opportunltv to show the sum total of wages "paid What interests the railroad emplove is not the bulk sum paid to all of the railway employes, but tho individual amount that goes to each man and it is only on this basis that the figures fig-ures of the railway companies interest inter-est him. That there is not so much justification justifi-cation for the contention of the railroads rail-roads that, the eight hour day is impossible, im-possible, is proven by the fact that at the present time there are seven roads in the Southeastern, and one in the Western territory, pay overtime on a twelve mile per hour basis. Eight in the Southeastern, and two In the Western territory, pay overtime over-time on a twelve and one-half mi'es per hour speed basis. There is only one road in the United States of which we have knowledge that works luuiw wiuu me ten nour work day, namely, the Monougahela. The question lias been raised, "Whether there should be a national regulation of wages on the railroads to be administered by a spoclal national na-tional board'" This is a question that at this time should not enter into in-to a discussion of the main proposition. propo-sition. It contemplates, however, so great a departure from the present method of fixing wages that certain Inquiries as to its effect are pertinent. pertin-ent. The most important are these-Does these-Does the proposition by implication mean that wages so fixed would have to bo accepted by the employes without with-out question? Is It tho idea that wages and conditions once decided bv a board of the diameter sugge'sted, would mean that the employes would have to accept them and remain in service? If neither of the suggestions applies to the proposition, and railroad rail-road employes are to be left perfectly perfect-ly tree to ajecept or reject wnc-PR nnri conditions fixed by such a board, and if they would not consent to work-under work-under them, it would leave the situa-tlon situa-tlon exactly as it Is. There does not appear to be much gained by the creation cre-ation of such a board unless involuntary involun-tary servitude Is expected to be a part of its application. Understanding Understand-ing the question as it has in this way been answered, the railroad organizations organi-zations are opposed to it. The following question has been asked: "Whether there should be government ownership of railroads reducing re-ducing the employes to classification ui uno vivn aervicoif" The question ques-tion of government ownership has nothing whatever to do with the present pres-ent shorter work day movement and therefore Is not a matter for discussion discus-sion relating to it. .nx?1?!. qUGstIon Qs been asked: Whether the railroads in responding to the present demand of the four brotherhoods should reduce the wages of other classes?" Certainly not. The effect of wage increases to the four uromernoodB in the past has been to encourage Increase In wages to all other employes whether or not they were organized, it is true that in the past two years tho railroad companies have attempted to show that the increased in-creased pay secured by the employes who wero organized prevented them lrom Increasing the pay of employes who were not organized. Tho purpose pur-pose of this contention has been merely mere-ly to betcloud the main Isbuc. The fact stands In evidence that no wage Increases wore given to the organized organ-ized employes until they exerted every ev-ery pressure at their command. (rrJlotJlor question has been asked: Whether they should reduce interest and dividend payments?" So fnr as railway employes are concerned, that is a matter with which they have noth-ing noth-ing to do. , Tho next question asked Is: "Whether "Wheth-er they should cut down expenditures for so-called non-productive improvements"? improve-ments"? That is a matter ontiroly within the judgment of tho railroad companies themselves, governed largely, large-ly, however, by the demand of communities com-munities for buildings and terminals that will meet the requirements established es-tablished by civic pride and business demand. If a railway company in complying with .public demand expends ex-pends twenty millions for a passenger station that will not increase its revenues, reve-nues, it can hardly be expected that the employes alone should assume the cost of th6 unproductive Investment. It bears the same relation to their wagrs as so much watered stock. We are asked, "Whether they, the railroads, should seek another increase In rates?" This Is asked on the assumption as-sumption that' wages are to be increased. in-creased. The men arc not asking for more money. They are asking for a shorter work day If the railways insist in-sist on a longer day, then It will mean increased pay. If the railways need revenues to meet their increased costs of operation, yes. There is no other business in the United States that is not at perfect liberty to adjust its revenues to meet Its coats of operation. opera-tion. The fact that the railway companies com-panies must first secure authority from the Interstate Commerce Commission Com-mission to raise rates places them in a different position entirely from tho remainder of the business in the country. This, however, is not the fault of the employes, and it is wholly whol-ly unfair to expect that approximately eight millions of railway employes, and their dependents, must sacrifice their Interests to the general betterment better-ment of the remainder of the population. popula-tion. Why should not the railroad companies be permitted to Increase rates to meet legitimate costs, the like of which had to be met in the same way by every . other industry? We are asked, "Whether they, the railroads, should refuse the present demand de-mand and risk a strike, should arbitration arbi-tration be relused by the employes?" This Is a question that at this time is not a part of the discussion. Whether Wheth-er arbitration will even be suggested or whether it will be agreeable to either side is a subject the answer to which at this time cannot even be guessed. The position of the railroad organizations organ-izations in regard to arbitration Is about the same and might bo expressed express-ed in general terms as follows: They are not opposed to arbitration, neither neith-er are they pledged to accept It. They are practically pledged to peace, but that does not mean peace at any price. It means peace with honor and not peace at the sacrifice of justice. The organizations Mo not desire to take issue with tho public; they havo no disposition to take undue advantage of it in any sense; they accept every public responsibility. They challenge even the inference that they have not always been fair to the public and they ask only from tho public that which the public holds fast as its absolute ab-solute right, namely, the liberty to make its own terms of service so far as It has the power. Nov, to say what will bo done would be based wholly upon personal opinion and without organization or-ganization authorization. It Is true that In 'past arbitrations the men were disappointed and to some extent lost iaun in mat method of adjustment of diiferences, but there Is neither warrant war-rant nor authority for saying that arbitration ar-bitration will or will not bo accepted. Circumstances will determine the position po-sition of the men when the need arises and th'ey will then decide what shall be done. |