The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-03-04
THE BURLINGTON STRIKE.

rnade to extend the Burlington strike SO as to
embrace, practically, the entire Western sys-
tenn of transportation, and, in the end there
is fear that it will become general through
out country. Should it assume such
proportions it is likely to be,
in its direct and indirect results on business
the most disastrous railroad strike on record.
Whether it will lead to great destruction of
property and loss of life as the great strike of
1877 remains to be seen. It has not reached
the violent stage yet, but that is the inevita-
BILE tendency of all strikes and may come later
on. There is no logic in strike that does
not contemplate violence. Men do not quit
work and throw up good positions without ex-
pecting to regain them, and when they see
the work and wages they have rejected about
to go to others there comes the temptation to
violence. A strike may easily occur without
violence, but one is rarely enforced without
il. 1t is essentially violent remedy.
Like most extensive strikes the present one
IS drifting far away from its starting point
and involving large bodies of worknen who
had no connection with the original contro-
versy. This was between the Chicago Bur-
lington & Quincy railroad and its engineers
and fremen. There is where the strike be-
gan, but it is impossible to tell where it will
end. The controversy grows out of a
question of policy and one of wages
though each, to some extent, involves the
other. The officers of the railroad claim the
= II
regulate the employment, classification and
wages of their engineers as they see fit, while
the latter insist on a different policy and
practice. The management of the road has
been based on a sort of civilservice idea, in
volving different grades of engineers at differ
snt rates of pay, promotions being made from
one class to another according to experience,
fitness and length of service. Thus it has
given one class of runs and the lowest rate of
pay to engineers just promoted from fremen,
more important runs and better wages the
next year, and the most responsible runs and
the highest rate of pay the third year and
after. This system seems to be based on good
business principles. It recognizes merit, eff
cheney, experience and training as forming
the basis of continued employment and pro-
motion. The officers of the road say it has
worked well in furnishing an incentive to
young engineers to seek promotion into
the higher classes, and has tended to
develop a healthy rivalry and ambition
among them. A very slight knowledge of
human nature and of the working of the
system OF competitive promotions in other
fields would justify belief that it would have
the effect claimed for 1t. The Brotherhood of
Engineers demanded that this system be
discarded altogether, and that all engineers
be paid by the mile, certain distance to con-
stitute a days work. They insisted that
svery engineer should have full pay the first
year, without reference to the character or
responsibility of his run. AS Chief Arthur
put it, mo was fit to run passenger
engine at all unless he was fit to run it over
the most difficult routes" According to this
claim, it made no difference whether a mans
engine drew three cars a dozen, whether
his run lay across the prairies or in broken
country, by day or by night if he were fit to
much pay as he who had not only served time
as fireman, but had had years of experience as
an engineer. 1t needs argument to show the
unreasonableness Of this position. It amounts
to a claim that apprentice is en-
titled to the same pay as a master
workman, an inexperienced and perhaps in
ferior engineer to one who has earned success
give promotions by years of patient labor.
While discarding all recognition of skill or ex-
perience, this would put all engineers on the
Bame wages and largely increase the pay of
the first and second-year men. Thus the de-
mand of the engineers was for a change of
policy in the management of the road, as well
Rs an increase of pay. The officers rejected
she demand. To quote from their reply:
''To mass all engineers into one common
body and to pay all alike. taking no account
of superior ability or intelligence seems to us
unjust and unfair, and in direct opposition to
the spirit OF the times we live in, which tends
to assure each man whatever rewards are due
to his own abilities and skill. and not to pro-
duce castles. all members of which are on the
same level"
In this contention think every reason
able man viii say the company is right. We
refer to the method, irrespective of the ques-
lion whether the wages paid is sufficient;
Of that we do not pretend to judge. The
system Of classifying employees according to