The Press., 1892-07-14


 Below is statement from the workmen:
 The differences existing between the Carnegie company and their employees at Homestead have drawn from H. c. Prick a statement of the points in dispute which makes necessary reply, in order that wrong impressions of the conditions may not be received by the public. It is asserted that the employees combined with others of their trade forming the amalga- mated association, with absolute control over the Homestead works. The charge can only be supported to the satisfaction of those who deny the right of the -em- ploye to enter objection to any conditions offered by the employer. The working men at Homestead, or any other of the hundreds of mills organized into the anal gamated association, have no desire to dictate the wages they shall receive; but they see no good reason why they should not exercise the privilege of engaging with their employer in the controversy through which the rate of compensation for their labor is fixed. The workmen are now, as they always have been, pre- pared to meet the representatives of the company and discuss the provisions con- tained in the scale submitted by them. If the conference already having been held failed to bring about settlement, it can- not be said that this was the fault of the workingmen The scale under which the men at Homestead were working was arranged in July of 1889. The rate Of wages was fixed according to the selling price of hy 4 Bessemer steel billets, the wages advancing and declining with the selling price of that article; it was pro- vided that the minimum should be 1925. | Complaint is made that no minimum
 should have been insisted upon. It is the
 experience of the iron and steel workers that some prevention is necessary to pro- tect themselves from being reduced to an
 extremely low rate of pay by the accept ance by manufacturers of sales below cur rent rates; as the workingmen do not sell the product. there must be point where reduction in wages by reason of the low-figured sales shall cease.
 It is alleged that labor organizations are injurious alike to the toilers and those 1 by whom they are employed; in substan- l tiation of which it is represented by the | firm that there is no organization amongst their employees at Braddock or Duquesne steel works; that the men there are satis- fled, that they get good wages, and that no strike has occurred at those works since the institution of that management. It may be said that the satisfaction of which MT. Prick speaks as existing at the above works, is forced rather than volun- tary, as may be proved by the many ef- forts of the men in these mills to organize themselves in secrecy. Knowledge of such intentions coming to the ears of the company would and was followed by dis charge. The wages enjoyed by the men at Braddock and Duquesne all the direct result of the rate of compensation sustain ed by the organized iron and steel-work- CTS. While they are not organized in these mills, the rate of pay for the class of work done by them, fixed by their or ganized fellow-trademen, determines the pay that can command their services. It is the custom of the employers of non- union men in the iron and steel trade to pay the rates provided by the amalga- mated scale in order to secure the ser vices of men of that trade; it is found, however, to be invariably the case with these employers, that, while they pay the rates provided by the amalgamated asso- citation, the men are required to accept conditions which are tantamount to a re- duced rate, although not appearing on the face.
 We have reason to believe that the non- union plants of Braddock and Duquesne can be proved to be no exception to this rule. The introduction of improved ma- chinery, to which reference is made by the company, has displaced men that were necessary before the introduction of such machinery, and in this manner re- pays the costs of the investment. The output of mill is always considered when arranging scales, and if increase of output without increase of labor to the workmen is brought about by improve ments there is every opportunity offered by the workmen to arrive through con- ference at an equitable rate; but when the employer refuses to engage in discus sion with the employe on the matter all hope of a just settlement is lost.
 An attempt is made to lead the public into the belief that the number of men af- fected by the reduction are few. Here again it becomes necessary to impress on the public mind the fact that there are three distinct propositions contained in the dispute, namely: A reduction in the minimum, another reduction on the pro- portionate rate of pay (thus making terminate December 31, 1893, instead of June 30, 1894. It must be understood that while all of these propositions do not affect the whole of the Homestead work men, few of the $500 employees of that place escape without being affected by one or more of its provisions. What does not affect the one does affect the other, and it might be said that instead of the company's proposal altering the condition of employment of 325, the change is gen. eral, and the whole are involved It is stated by the company with much force. that it is not their desire to reduce their workmen below others. The cost of pro- duction to the Carnegie company at Homestead is decidedly in favor of the company as compared with mills of that character. It can now be shown that they cannot establish a complaint in that direction.
 There can be no legitimate reason why the Carnegie company should deny to their Homestead workmen a conference, where the things of which they complain could be analysed, and, if found unjust, made right. The men make no fairer proposition than this, for the simple req son that none fairer is possible. If argu- ment and honest reasoning were substi- tuted for the reserve and coldness of man. ner, as seen in the company's present at titude, there can be reason to expect an end of this deplorable state of affairs. Does it not seem strange that the Carnegie 110l IL