The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1912-03-27
LABOR KNOCKS.
GRAND TRUNK.
Opposed Entyin Boston at Mas
sachusettS Legislative Hearing
ON CHARGE OF UNFAIRNESS
Men Asserted Before Committee That
Railroad Is Not Keeping Agreement
With Employes-Therefore, Better
Terms Should Not Be Given.

Boston, March 81. Railroad employees
| appeared before the railroad committe,
again yesterday, at the State House, t.
| oppose the coming of the Grand Trunl
railroad into Boston They made tn,
| general charge that the Grand Trunk il
not keeping its agreement with the
labor unions, is not complying with tho
rules and regulations in Canada, anC
| therefore should not be permitted t.
come into Boston on better terms thar
those governing the railroads which are
here and which are carrying out Their
agreement.
Alfred w. Lindsey, secretary OF the
Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, said
that organized labor opposes the coming
Of the Grand Trunk because the company
has been unfair to its conductors, engi-
neers Engagement, switchmen and 9TH
er employees, and has broken its agree
ments with them. lie. said that, in APP
pearing in opposition, he did not rep
resent any railroad, but only labor un-
ions.
T. Il. Donovan introduced himself as
a railroad man, saying that he would not
speak for any labor organization, but
would speak about labor measures.
Asked by a member of the committee
as TO his connections, he said he is a
Boston & Maine employee His complaint
was largely about wages on the Grand
Trunk, eontending that the road is yio-
lating wage contracts. He said that the
unions have wage contracts with the
Boston & Maine, the New Haven road
and the Boston & Albany and those
roads have lived up to the contracts but
the signed up contracts of the Grand
Trunk don't amount to nothing" He
declared that the Grand Trunk has paid
under contract for the past two months
the same wages that are paid on the
other eastern roads, but has served no.
tice that il will not pay it after April |.
Several committee members asked him
if he would produce copy of that no.
tce. He replied that he had the infor-
nation from Vice. President James Muir
dock of the Brotherhood OF Railroad
Trainmen and would try to produce a
copy.
Joseph T. McArdie Of Worcester, rep
resenting the Boston s. Maine and New
Haven employees at Worcester, said c. 5.
Mellen has always lived mp to his agree
ments with the unions, but neither
Charles NJ. Hayes nor Earl II. Fitzhugh
have done this and the Grand Trunk
Is q detriment and menace to indus
trial peace" He described how the I'M
ions OF railroads took up the wage ques-
ton with the roads, starting with the
Baltimore & Ohio road in 1910, and
standard wages were gradually adopted
and put in force on all the lines. The
Grand Trunk was the last to be reached
and it did not agree to the same stand.
ard before 1912. Then it signed an
agreement paying the same on the
branch lines as on the main lines but
has since served notice on the men that
it will reduce wages on the branch lines
on April |. The speaker said that il
the New Haven management should serve
such notice on its employees that it would
cut the pay of its branch line men, there
would be trouble at once. The men
would not submit to it.; they would
strike In answer to questions from the
committee. Mr.. McArdle admitted that
he New York Central railroad does not
pay such high wages on its branch lines
rs on its main lines; neither does the !
Baltimore & Ohio road. To questions |
whether he would require the Grand |
Trunk to pay as much on the branch
ines as on the main lines when the 1
New York Central does not, he replied |
hat the Grand Trunk had signed an
agreement to pay the same wages.
Mr. Lindsey offered the correction thar /
n Massachusetts, the New York Central |
,avs the same wages on main and branch /
ines.
The Public Franchise league is neither /
or or against the entrance of the Grand I
Trunk railway into Boston. said Joseph I
B. Eastman. bat he argued that the gsn
raj railroad laws shonld not be revised I
low without most careful study. If the 4
irand Trunk does come, it should not be /
,iven privileges which tie legislature is
lot willing to extend to any OF the other
which are here, when they ask
or il. In the matter of route for the
irand Trunk, he thought the legal proc
IS for determining it might be short
ned. He 5admitted that the process is
cumbersome, OUT ne aiKueu IhdI UilS
rand Trunk should be required TO dis
lose its route to the railroad commits.
ion, and notice should be given to cities
nd towns. Damages could be assessed 4
N the basis of valuation of the land
t the time of filing the route plans
The port directors should be allowed
o make reply to the wage question
rgument, but the committee ruled that
! would hear the opposition first and
ear the rebuttal afterward.
Woodward Hudson, attorney for the
,oston & Albany railroad, addressed the
ommittee in opposition to the Grand
runk He started with reply of ALE
ations that there is a railroad monop-
" in New England. He explained the |
raffic arrangements which President
lelen Of the New York system has
lade with the New York Central rela-
i've to the Joint use of the Boston &
.lbany tracks and showed that they
'ork for the efficiency of service and /
hat the Boston & Albany management
vet Independent of the New Haven
Through these agreements,
e showed, much better freight and pas.
,nger service had been established, max
70 fuller use of the rails and estab-
shing some through lines which did
I.