Juniata sentinel and Republican. [volume] (Mifflintown, Juniata County, Pa.) 1873-1955, 1888-06-20
Arbitration in English Mines

Mr. Thomas Burt, NJ. p, writes the
Philadelphia Press, an interesting
account Of the mines of the Newcastle
coal region IN which he thus de-
scribes the effects of arbitration there:
For two or three years-commenc-
ing in Decentralization was tried. In
that short period no fewer than five
disputes relating to the general rate of
wages or the mode of working in
Northumberland were referred to arbi-
trarIon. The market was depressed
and still falling. the demands for
change came, therefore, in every case
from the employers. The decisions, as
might be expected, were nearly always
! against the workmen; yet, without ex-
ception, they loyalty accepted and car
rIed the award of the umpire. After
wards when a further reduction of
wages was demanded the coalowners
| refused to arbitrate- A strike or lock-
out of several weeks duration ensued,
with the disastrous results which
usually follow such conflicts. This was
| towards the end of 1877. Two years
| later-in 1S19-a sliding scale, adjust
| ing wages ou the basis of prices, was
established. That system. once or
twice modified in the interval, con-
| tinued in operation from 1879 to
the end of 1856. Notice was then
given by the coal-owners to terminate,
or as they said, to modify the scale
with view to a reduction OF wages.
! Fifteen per cent. reduction was de-
manded; this was altered to 12t per
cent. y general strike followed. After
great, and probably lasting, injury to
a trade already bad enough, after
untold suffering and destitution, the
/ IL lnA 81
weeks were compelled to accept the
/ scale was established. In November of
last year, the miners, in their turn,
gave notice to terminate it, and it
ended with the year 1887.
| In the foregoing statement have
purposely confined myself to a bare
record of facts l have tired to avoid
attacking one side or the other. The
facts are significant and instructive.
Employer and workmen alike believe
sincerely wished to settle their differ
ences amicably. There was at all
times a readiness on the part of
the coal owners to meet the repre-.
sentatives of the miners. There was
frank interchange of opinion be-
tween them, and yet the result was
what 1 have stated; arbitration dis
cardeC, sliding scales abolished; en-
ployers and wOrkmen, instead of CO.
operating as friends, standing face to
face In battle array. After many years
of labor and thought the only survival
l-aigreat and valuable survival certainly
of our sOnciliatory efforts is the joint
committee.
The facts i have detailed are dis
couraging enough, but 1t would be an
error to use them as an argument
against arbitration. Arbitration was
not itself a failure; In some respects,
notably in the readiness OF thousands
of workmen to accept an adverse de-
cision-it was a great success. The
chief drawback was in not having a
permanent board of conciIiation and
arbitration. This caused needless fric-
tion and delay, and had much TO do
with the abandonment-the foolish
and mischievous abandonment-of ar
bitration by the employers.
This is likewise true, in some cases,
in tins country; but where a permanent
State Court OF Reconciliation and Ar
bitration is established, as in Massa-
chusetts, the result is very satisfactory.