Pine Bluff daily graphic., 1904-02-29

| the mine employees, upon nOnunlOn
| mine workers as well as upon it's own
members, but they look to the union
rather than to themselves to see that
any operator who might attempt to
violate the contract Is forced to live
up to it's terms. In many cases the
operators have gone 50 far as to rec
Ognize all their employees, with but
few exceptions, as members OF the
United Mine Workers. The joint move
ment has established well defined
rights on both sides.
The Iowa and Michigan operators
and mine workers have endcavored
time and again to secure admittancc
to the interstate conference, but their
efforts have been opposed by the OPP
orators Of Ohio Indiana and western
Pennsylvania, while the operators Of
Illinois and the mine workers of all
four states in the joint movement
have favored admitting the representa-
tiveS from these two states. For years
the United Mine Workers have put
forth efforts to bring the operators of
West Virginia into the joint confer
ence, the work of the union in this
direction being encouraged by the OPP
orators of all four states in the joint
movement. but the union has so far
only partially succeeded in this seem
ingly hcrculean task.
AS long as the ma ijority Of the West
Virginia operators and miners are out
side the joint conference the very foun
eaton of the movement is threatened.
This is the more evident when it is re-
membercd that West Virginia coal
completes in the lake mark cts with the
coal from Ohio. Indiana, Illinois and
western Pennsylvania. Under the joint
agreements as to wages and conditions
of employment with the United Mine
Workers the operators of the four
states have to meet Il greater cost OF
production than the operators of West
Virginia, the latter having advantages
in the cheaper labor larger number
of hours Of work per day by the min
ers, larger mining cars, more pounds
to the ton and in the general conditions
of mining, such as weighing, dead work,
dockage, etc. These and other advan-
tages enable the West Virginia opera
tors to send their coal Il greater dis
tance to the same market and sell 1t
for less price per ton than the Ohio, In
DIANA Illinois and western Pennsylva-
mia operators can afford to sell. The
operators Of West Virginia. with a few
exceptions, have persstently refused
to enter the interstate movement for
various reasons, prominent among
which is their ability under present
conditions to secure larger returns up
on their Investments.
Although the interstate joint confer
ence plan is confined to Ohio, Indiana,
Illinois and western Pennsylvania, it's
underlying principles for averting con-
flicts between capital and labor in the
soft coal industry have secured foot
hold in all parts of West Virginia,
Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, cen
trail Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa,
Kansas and Missouri. In these last
mentioned states the agreements made
follow along the general lines of the
interstate contract In brief, it is esti-
mated that about $4,000 mine workers
producing some 125,OOO.OOO tons of bi-
luminous coal work under agreements
with their employers entered into by
the United Mine Workers of America.
The 147,OOo anthracite mine employ
ees. producing annually 6O,OOO,OOO tons
of hard coal, have no such agreements,
but their wages and conditions of em-
poyment are for the present under the
direction of the Cancellation board,
composed of three representatives of
the operators and three of the mine
workers.
Since the joint movement was re-
stored i'll the central competitive ter
ritory in 1898 no strike or lockout of
any serious proportions has visited
any of the states or districts which
are parties to the joint agreement. In
the preceding four or five years, dur
ing which the agreements had lapsed
for various causes. strikes and lock
outs and general industrial unrest
We're the rule rather than the eXcep
ton. 1t does not follow, however, that
the joint agreement prevents abso-
lutely all possibility of industrial dis
turbancaS. This power is not claimed
fer the movement by even its most
ardent advocates. The principle does
tend however, to establish hand preserve
industrial harmony between the two
conflicting interests and to secure more
stable market conditions. The value
of the joint movement is also reelected
in the imitation of its principles by
other branches of industry.
Despite the fact that Il present day
survey of the joint conference plan
for avcrtinS industrial disturbances in
the coal industry shows a gratifying
record of work We'll accomplished, it
cannot be said that the scheme is a
thorough success. Since 1898 it has
not been put to the real test of its