Courier Democrat. (Langdon, N.D.) 1891-1920, 1903-05-14
DoUBLE-HEADERS.
The Attitude of the Trainmen Re-
viewed.

AS rule. of late. railway employees,
trainmcn especially, have been prett! fea-
sonuble in their demands upon the en-
ploving companies. The railways nave
been enjoying period of unusual pros
perity. and it was not inappropriate 1hat
the employees should ask Il reasonable III
crease in wages as their share Oh lhe
prosperity For the most part. railway
managers recognized the justice OF the
demand, and wage scales nave oeeh
raised quite generally without anything
serious in the way of strike. n strike
is, now threatened on the Great Northern
railway. which was one of the first ROADS
to grant q liberal increase in wages. me
strike is now thrcatcnel not rs a result
of wage disputes. but over Il matter OF
economy i'm the running of trains. AZ the
gravamen of the dispute has been pre-
scntcl in the Minneapolis newspapers, the
Great Northern tr;linmen are wholly
wrong in their contention and should be
able to count on little popular sympathy
if they make the refusal of their demands
the prctext for Il strike.
The dispute is over the use of double
headers a "double-header." in railway
parlance. is a train to which two loco
motives are attached. Th" Great North
crn company desires to use two locomo-
tives to pull over the heavy grades trains
which on more level track need only Il
single locomotive. The trainn3n contend
that when two locomotives are used two
complete train crews must be employed,
or that the single crew shall receive
no
panN. reasonably enough. it would seem.
argues that It has use for but a single
train crew and has no desire to employ
more men than arc really needed. IL
argues. moreover. that as the use of the
extra engine requires no extra work on
the part of the crew employed. the COM
MANY is not disposed to pay double wages
to that crew.
1T is not difficult to see what the train
men have in mind. If they can prevent
the company from using "double-headers"
the company must run two trains instead
of ore to get the same number OF cars
over q heavy grade. Thus two train crews
instead of one will be given employment.
The trainmen insist that if the double
header be used the crew employed shall
he naid double wages, so the railway may
not to be able to find any economy in the
use OF the "donble-header.'
This is clearly q case in which the labot
orga nization is contending against the
logical economy Of things. 1t is the same
old protest against labor-savinG methods
which has so often brought organized
labor into disrepu1c. The trainmen are
Insisting that the railways shall handle
their TRANSFORMATION of freight in a more
expensive way than modern ingenuity has
heen able to devise. In so dong. the
trainmen are arguing against the interest
of the railway and that of the public as
we'll. 1t is the right of the railway to
transact its business OH the most eco
no,nical methods 1t is to the interest OF
the public that the railways shall be al
lowed to do this. 1t is the obligation of
the company to pay all its employees 4
fair wage for the service performed. 1t
is not the right of the employee to ask thai
he shall be paid for more work than he
actually performs, or that the railway
chat, employ more men than are actually
welded in the running of trains. The
Great Northern trainmen are funda-
mentally wrong in demanding what they
do. Even if their demands should be
granted nobody-not even themselves IN
the long run-would be benefited. What
fs best for the many must be best for the
Individual Looking back over the long
record of futile protest against labor
saving methods we find that what at first
locked like a calamity to some eventually
nroved to be q blessing in disguise. Fa-
cilitating production has made work
easier, wages higher and in the long run
has helped to make opportunities for Ia
Dor. The Great Northern trainmen should
ponder a long while before they strike
avainst a principle the soundness OF
which has been proved by the record OF
certukdes.-Sioux City Journal.