The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1912-05-08
(By Allan T. Burns, Secretary Pitts
 burg Civic Commission.)

rOaoS seemed matter oL hOurs. A 1 this juncture Martin A. Knapp, pre- l siding judge of the United States | Commerce Court, and Charles P. Neil United States Commissioner of La bor. rendered their friendly offices tc l the contending parties. The offel | was accepted. The federal media l tors acted under the Erdmann law o1
 1898, but snapped red tape by prof
 fering their services without any re- | ing review of the operation of this act, especially in the last five years 1 during which it has prevented or set tied nearly half hundred strikes
 was prepared just before the situation the more timely.)
 Industrial peace? impossible!" in- sisted a powerful leader of Congress
 in discussing the bill to establish a
 Federal Commission on Industrial Re-
 lations. His resourceful mind could
 imagine no way in which to bring or 1 der out of the chaos of hostile factions
 in the industrial world. In his opin- ion ''to prevent or settle quickly large
 strikes is visionary. The contending
 forces are too mighty, they are bound l to differ, their interests are so diverse
 and when they fight they must fight
 until one or both are ready to quit from sheer exhaustion"
 | A, single argument has convinced l these men to the contrary. That fact i is the practical cessation of war on | interstate railroads, the industry most essential to the conduct of modern l life. The success of a method in one l field forecasts. that some way can be 1 found to deal with all classes of ia bor disputes
 The Erdmann act is Federal
 Law of 1898 providing for mediation and arbitration in controversies affect l ing railways and such employees as are actually engaged in train opera ton. It has dealt in a single con- troversy with 10000 employees and with 50 roads involving 10000 miles
 of line. Its total operation has en1- l braced 4S disputes affecting 160.000 men and 500,000 miles of road-all this in the last five years. No ser ious dispute on an interstate railway has arisen in this period where the act has not been invoked. All but
 one of these disputes where mediation was accepted were amicably settled. This exception occurred where the strike had been ordered before the | s4f> iva nd fho n would not revoke the order. So the mediators dropped the case. Only three times was mediation rejected.
 Every case of arbitration has ended in the acceptance by both sides of the award. What wonder that sud- denly this federal law has become a starting point of a nationwide dis ' cussion of a means to establish peace
 more and more widely in industrial relations.
 The Erdmann act provides for both
 mediation and arbitration to settle disputes. At the time of the bills passage arbitration was prejudged to be the more effective, but an obscure
 feature of the law proved to be the important one. For arbitration has
 been resorted to as the first step in only four cases and as last resource in only eight others. In these eight
 most of the differences have been set tied by mediation and only some details by arbitration.
 There is nothing compulsory in the act for it comes in play only at the request of one or both parties to the dispute. The mediators cannot of l f1cially take the initiative. The law requires that the dispute must have l interrupted or threatened railway op- eration before action can be begun. Usually this has been interpreted to mean that vote to strike has been carried. The procedure is as follows: If an application is received from | one side only the mediators fnme- diately tell the other party that the | first side has appealed to them and ! ask whether the second will enter in ] to uoSOtldC1OuS 1Hc S0COHu party | must agree before the proceedings go l further. In only four instances did the second side refuse. When both sides have agreed to mediation, the mediators at once meet the two par ties in an agreed city but separate
 ly. The negotiations are always car ried on bv conference first with one side and then the other. Neither
 side knows how the other side states it's case. Then a confidential state
 ment or agreement to possible con ! cession is obtained from each side l without the knowledge of the other. One side does not hesitate to agree
 to concession since, because of it's se- | crecy, such an offer cannot be inter preted as a sign of weakening. Fur 1 thermore. should the parties later go to arbitration neither would have pre- judiced its chances. The contest ants are never brought together un- til the mediators have found a settle
 ment to which each has agreed with out pressure from the other side. Each can thus look at the settlement as one made on its own terms. Then the two sides meet and sign up.
 Tn the roror Q orhitrat tiop rrcceS9 the