The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1892-07-08

are based on ceiling rrcs that the workmsn
must DC willing 20 follow that price down u
least TO . reasonable minimum. ana taas
in view OF selliag prices IS 10 now isif
minimum. There certainly 10 force m tae
claim of the manufacturers sasi Il the meu
demand that they be psii On . sildiaS ses1e
that the vsges shall foilow the seiauS Price
down rs wei a. ap; that taey mus; sASe the DAD
with the good. that If the rule appsies 20
high selling prices when the manufacturer eAu
afford - par aigh wages, much more should u
Apply IN times of low selling prices where ne N
less able 10 nay
Is 10 TIE second point. the change OF dates OF
the expiration Of the scsle- There Is sEgauieas
or both SIDES II is well that manufacturer
Should know, especially one gaskiag tie terms
oi ssees made a, Homestead, whas wages ne
must nay during the year 50 tass ne can iaaAe
his contracts Tor the yesr accordingly: sat ca
the other hand If contest mas: come. II - os'-
Ter for the uorkmen thai IL shoaAd De IN saI.i-
ner than in winter
BGs after 81 the important question AZ issue
IS ire third The reduction n toanag> rates
There is decided r.isun .erstaa4iug IN the
Yaolie mind as to what 10 covered ~ ta1s pro-
posed reGgctson. how many are affected sna
via; sAe effect of the proposed reduction WIN
De on earnings
The proposed reiu sioa in Tonnage rates sp-
plies ealy % three departments IL TIE wosSs.
viz:
Thirsy-tvoinea s,sesing naill One hundred
and nire,een-iacn plate mill open hearth
sura<ees
OF the $50, employed at ere works only sor7s
- n,el are effected by tAese tonnage redue-
tons. sad tie total number OF enp>oyss wao
are ssscsed both ar the reduction IN Tonnage
rates and II tes scale minimum. inc-udias rae
-o, is lcss than 81 not II per eeat OF the en-
psoyss There 10. as is stated xeave. No resuc-
fsrz --,sf f-rr
ire output ess net eeen very greatly increased
since the iSSSes >caIe veas into effect, aad fur
Tier st tie proposed reduction. IN toanSse rates
tae earning VII IN almost every case q
grsStsr ih&n the earnings az the TINE TIE i>Ss
scale ue1s iaso eGecs, sad even on the Is 1Esni'
mann Of TIE new scsle tia earnings vii II IaSny
cases be higher than Sc the So - rate il force,
when the 1879 scale took effect
The reasons tia. have led 30 this demand
tos reduction in toaasss rates are:
FlTss-Tass as these gs,es are based o. ceiling
prices. the ed minimum Of SIS Is Too aiSa IN
view OF the reduction in prices
SsSoaa-Taas there hiss been such an increase
IN output Is 20 justify Q reduction and ssill
leave tie earnings OF tie wcsxzen practically
unchanged. or in some cases but ssigas&y re
1uced. even AZ tie reduced minimum, AID
sGrtaer that IN the aes- future these earnings
VIII re greatly increased
II tie claims nsos Is 70 increased output an
true, and that thew are q statement taken .-oE,
the Homestead books ssu2tsa.ly rcoves, II
seems 20 Us sass tie Carnegie s:es& Company
IS .CsslSea n asking tor red Ics.ol The re
cuctsoa n selling price % - Below tie Etn.
mum ssi4s - sAls justification A. 30 vass ;hi'
reduction sho1is Dc. that Is question 81 ea-a-
IRA Il there is any :Gssiee II the sliding scsl'
| principle scales sAoad rot remain 81 TIE sa-,s
rsss Of wages when tie es.lees On which tax
sesies acs based sell At IS IS vasa Lay sci
| 8. 81