Milford chronicle., 1903-09-11
WRIGHT DECIDES
Mine DISPUTES
Findings in Five Grievances Filed
With Cancellation Board.
OPERATORS WIN IN SEVERAL

was referred the nVe disputes DC
tween the operators and miners rep
resentatives on the board of concili-
alton. appointed under the provisions
of the anthracite mine strike commits
sion. has filed his findings with T. D.
Nichols. secretary of the board. The
: k..Hng with the question Of employ
- right to discharge men for any
cause other than that of connection
with a labor union, Umpire Wright
agrees wholly with the contentious
of the operators representatives. and
declares that tie right of an employer
to discharge without giving the cause
of the discharge is sustained by the
award Of the commission. AS to the
rockmen's dispute. the umpire says
they do not come under the award.
The complaint of Thomas Tanner is
not sustained in regard to the allie
cations of discrimination on the part
of the Lehigh Coal and Navigation
Comnany and Coke Bros. & Co. He
e~vs that these companies should take
ss old men, instead Of putting on
Rmen, in all cases where the old
men are competent and have not been
convicted of or not awaiting trial fol
crime committed during the strike.
The umpire's findings cover 25 pages
of typewriting. The resume prepared
by the Cancellation board for the press
reads as follows:
Grievance No. II - Complaint Of
Thomas Tanner that he was receiving
less wages for 10 hours per day than
he had received for a 12-hour day pre-
vious to the strike.
He received previous to the strike
S1.S8 per day for u hours. On April
1st his hours were reduced from y
to 10. and his wages to @t.77 per day.
The s1.77 per day includes an advance
of II 1-9 of per cont. of his former
hourly rate of wages.
The miners representatives, CT tho
board claimed that he w9s entitled to
the same days wages Of 10 hours as
he had formerly received fer y.
The umpire decided that no iajus-
tice had been done Mr.. Tanner. His
employers have in his case carried out
the provisions OF the award of the
anthracite coal commission"
The petition of Taom2s Tanner,
. therefore. is not sustained.
rGrieyance No. S-Claim of discrimi-
rfksSS aagainst Coke Bros. g Co. By
loves who were not reinstated
w work was resumed. as per agree
ment signed by the superintendent of
the company.
Mentioning one complainant named,
Harry Brosius, the umpire says: Il
find that in the case of Harry Brosius
Coke Bros ought to give him employ
rlnAn+ 4"
Grievance No. 10-COmplaint OF ais
elimination and blacklist of employees
of the Lehigh Coal and Navigation
Company, who were not reinstated at
the ending of the strike.
The umpire decides that it has not
been shown that the men were dis
criminated against on account of mem
bership of the union. but he is Of
the opinion that discrimination existed
against a small number Of men, and
makes the statement:
w u&L Lue H4OttNt VI INC ui1Nt l4llA-
nation has been it is impossible to
decide but I an clearly Of the opin-
ion, as in the case of Coke Bros. &
Co., that the Lehigh Coal and Navi-
cation Company ought to give prefer
ence to all their old men-those en-
ployed prior to the strike-who have
not been convicted of crime commit
Oh
under arrest awaiting trial, or are not
incompetent, or have not been guilty
of misdemeanor to render their en-
ployment undesirable. The terms Of
tk8> submission and the language Of
tx gard under it make this conclu-
sion iseyitable."
t4rievance No. 45-Complaint of un-
just discharge of William Mowry.
against the Philadelphia and Read
ing Coal and Iron Company.
Leading up to the final award, the
umpire says:
taking the rulings of the court,
the assertion of the anthracite coal
strike commission, the clauses in the
agreement made by and with the
United Mine Workers of America,
whether on the one side or the other,
there can be no doubt that a man
has a right to quit the service of his
employer whenever he sees fit, with
or without giving any cause. provided
he gives proper notice, and that the
employer has a perfect right to en-
ploy and discharge men in accordance
with the conditions of his industry;
that he IS not Obliged to give any
case for discharge, but that he
should. as in the reverse case, give
proper notice.
This right 70 discharge must, there
fore. be sustained. Any other view
OF the. case would result in compelling
men to work for an employer when
they did not wish to. and thus enslave
them. when. on the other hand, it
would compel employers to employ
men whether the men were incompe-
tant or not and would thus stagnate