The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1903-09-09
UMPIRE DECIDED
AGAINST MINERS
-Four Of the Five Questions An
sweTsd FaVorabIy TO Operators.
SEVERE BLOW FOR WORKERS
Men May &c Discharged for Any Cause Save
: Belonging to the Urlon, Says
Carroll D. Wright.
SEVERE BLOW FOR WORKERS

Scranton. Pa, Sept 9--President T. ID
Mine Workers OF America yesterday af-
ternoon gave out the text OF the decision
Of Umpire Carroll d. Wright on FIVE ques-
tons submitted TO him for consideration
by the Cancellation board.
I The decision consists OF lengthy
views the issues raised in detail The
awards show that the miners have been
beaten badly. the umpire sustaining four
Of the contentious OF the operators.
! District President Nichols admitted
tonight that the decision OF Mr.. Wright
that the opera tors have the right TO
discharge men at any time for any
cause other than belonging TO labor
union was a severe blow To the United
Mine Workers. There is much bitter
ness here as result.
Mr.. Wright in his decision first dts
poses OF the grievance OF Thomas Tan
ner, that he was receiving less wages
for 10 hours day than he had received
previously for ~ hours a day. and de-
cided IL by saying that no injustice had
been done Tanner. II is true that his
wages are less, but he receives IL l9 per
cent. more an hour than he did before.
The next grievance was that Coke
Brothers e. Co OF Hazleton discrimi-
mated against employees who were not
reinstated when work was resumed after
The strike last year. This Is decided In
favor OF the miners. and, taking the case
OF Harry Brocius az an example. Mr..
Wright decides that ne should have en-
pIoyment. There should be no discrim-
nation against any former employe not
found guilty OF a crime or not under ar
resi-. Mr.. Wright decides.
MUST HAVE REASONABLE BASIS.
In the case Of alleged discrimination on
the part OF the Lehigh Coal and Navi-
cation company Mr. Wright says that
he has not been shown that the men
were, disc eliminated against because they
were members Of labor union.
II was clear that there was discrimi-
nation aginst a small number OF men,
and regarding this Mr.. Wright says that
the company should have given prefer
ence 20 the old men when they were put
ting miners TO work after the strike.
Then came the case Of William Mowry
OF the Philadelphia and Reading com
pany, whose discharge raised the point
as to whether the mine operators have
the right to discharge at VIII. Concern
ing this Mr.. Wright says that there is
no doubt that man has right To
Quit his employment upon giving proper
notice. Therefore the right Of the en-
| ployer TO discharge for any cause other
than the belonging 10 a labor union must
be sustained. In the case Of Mowry Mr..
Wright says: "It would have been bet
ter had the foreman kept better. control
OF his temper and thus allowed Mowry
10 have behaved more reasonably Mr..
Wright adds that all discharges should
be made on a reasonable basis
The last question decided was that Of
the rock men. who went out on strike
because the contractors for whom they
worked refused them the 10 per cent. al
lowed 10 the miners by the decision OF
the anthracite commission.
The umpire decides that neither the
rock men nor their employers were par
ties TO the submission before the strike
commission and therefore that these en-
ployes have no standing before the con-
ciliatlon board and are not among the
workmen affected by the award OF the
commission.