New-York tribune., 1906-04-18
REJECT MINERS PLAN.
OPERATORS REFUSE ALL.
Sag, Ia Letter to Mitchell. Output
Would Be Limited.

The refusal OF the anthracite operators COM
mittse of 10 consider the proposition of the
mine workers presented by Mitchell last Thurs
day was confirmed by the operators IN a formal
reply drawn up yesterday and sent TO Mitchell
in the form of letter last evening. The letter
was signed at a meeting of the operators COM
mittee of seven late yesterday afternoon in the
Jersey Central Building. No 143 Liberty street.
II is signed by George F. Baer. f. 3. Thomas.
David Wilcox. ". II. Truesdale, Morris Will
iams j. B. Kerr and ]. L. Cake. the operators
committee Of seven.
Mr. Baer presided at the meeting. which last
ed little over hour In their refusal of the
miners propositions the operators do not say
whether their last proposition TO the miners is
still open. 1t was learned unofficially. however.
that until negotiations formally broken
off the offer was open unless circumstances oc-
CURED which would make it's withdrawal in
evitable- The alternative offer of the operators.
to continue the agreement which expired
March 81. 1t was said. was also open.
AT the time. it is believed the operators
do not feel themselves bound IN any way which
will prevent them from beginning to mine coal
If they feel so disposed. They have already
| started the washeries. They point IN their
answer to Mitchell that work suspended by
| the officers of the union while negotiations
| in progress
| The operators emphasize the fact that all tha
propositions Of the mine workers have been
| jected They point out that in 1902 the mine
workers agreed that "alI questions at issue be-
| tween the respective companies and their own
| employees whether they belonged TO union
not should be decided by the Anthracite COM
mission For this reason the continuation OF the
three years agreement expiring at the end OF
March was offered by the operators and rejected
by the miners. In discussing the last PROPOSE
| tion Of the mine workers the letter says:
Your present proposition is that all relations
/ between every employer and his employees shall
| De hxed and controlled by a single instrument.
/ Originally you suggested that this should be a
form of contract with the United Mine Workers
OF America; now you suggest that IL shall be
with your committee representa- atives of the
anthracite mine workers" Inasmuch as thu
authority and standing OF your COMMITTEES as
/ representing any one depend wholly upon It's
designation by convention OF the United Nina
| workers as the representatives of that body II
| is clear tnat the change proposed IS not sub
/ stantial, but merely formal and raises no new
| question This is evident also from the fact thai
\ your proposition contains numerous provisiors
for action by "the organizatfon'' ana ..tb AS
4 America
| slrlctIy limiting hours of labor and providing
| tEat no miner can work in more than one cham,
| Der. or have more than two Iaborers; II seeks
| 20 equsllze wages with reference merely TO the
name Of the employees position and not AZ All
70 ms capacity or the work which he actually
does: 1T provides that no new veins or coIIIaTJss
| can be opened without arbitration as 10
wages. and that no contract of employment can
/ oe terminated without an arbitration: u makes
/ the employers the agents of the union to aid N
! In levying upon the wages Of the enpIoyas the
dues hxed by the union: il provides for increase
| IN wages and rates OF payment witch would
| approximate 21-6 per cent and would increase
the cost of the domestic sizes Of coal about 81 20
| a ton. and it suggests diluting the present con
| ctliation board into three boards having CO.
| ordinate powers 1t provides stiu further that
Il fhc
| merely for one year
| e PROVISIONS VITAL To BUSINESS"
| These provisions. the letter says. outside Of
| those regarding wages and the adjustment OF
! complaints. concern radical and fundamental
principles which are vital to the success of the
business and its management The miners COM
mittee is reminded that the operators offered TO
submit to the members of the Anthracite Strike
Commission the question whether any oondi-
tions had arisen TO modify its award .n such
matters. and. If so. how it should be changed.
The only subjects IN reference to which the
miners had made the least suggestion that con-
ditions had changed since the award Of the COM
| mission, the latter said. not supported by
/ auy new facts. The letter goes
| You have rejected this proposition Of arbl-
tration You now propose that IL shall be submit
ted to the strike commission TO decide whether
the ,erms contained in your amended prOposf-
tion. which are stated above. snall De adopted
In other words, you seek To have every subject
considered which has been already settled hy tns
strike commission three years ago. pursuant 70
the Presidents Injunction TO enOeaNOr 10 estAo.
ush the relations between the employers ana
the wage earners in the anthracite region on a
fust and permanent basis. and as faE as pOsSioia
10 do away with any causes for the recurrence
OF such difficulties as these which you nave oeen
called upon to settle.
You say that lit is not suncient answsr 20
saIy +hat because a question arbitrated three
wears ago the question would not oe
proper subject for investigation at this time.
If any new facts have arisen In the mean una
these might properly be investigated
The operators then assert that nothing nsw
has been suggested by the communications OF
the miners II it were seriously asserted that
o,as+ions ruIIy considered should be re-examined
because one party thought rehearing might
bring about a different decision and the conten-
t,on were true. the operators said. the contro-
versy would never end
DToo SHORT TERM SUGGESTED"
In the present case. in fact. the letter says.
+ba miners propose that TO make arrange
rnent for only one year the Strike Commission
shall re-examine questions which II took six
months to decide. The fundamental principles
regarding the conduct OF the business. II then
reneats have all been established by the Strike
Commission. and no reason is suggested why
thew should be retired. Regarding the only mat
ters which the miners suggested, that condI-
tious had changed. the operators said they had
suggested that the Strike Commission consider
the effect OF the new conditions. They said they
had suggested. too that political considerations
should be wiped out by having the award In
force for three years. The letter ends with:
You are responsible for the suspension OF
work. There was good reason for ordering
the 10 stop work pending our negotiations.
which had been delayed by you. especially in