The Ronan pioneer. [volume] (Ronan, Mont.) 1910-1970, 1914-10-16
INITIATIVE MEASURE
NO. 7 WILL HELP THEM
Casualty Com panies Doing Bust
ness In Montana OjSCrimi-
nate Againt Married Men.

now carried in Montana is handled
through casualty insurance compa
MES, which share the proceeds chief!
with the lawyers-mighty little gets
to the injured employee.
The casualty insurance system, de
signed to protect the employers an6
enrich the grating insurance compa
MES and the lawyers, now prevails in
all Its glory throughout the great
state of Montana.
And yet, the cry has been raised
that if the state embarks in industrial
insurance the employers will, per
force, discriminate against married
men, on the theory that the married
men prove greater risk than the sin.
gle man. The fellows who have raised
that cry blandly overlook the fact that
the assessment Is based on the to-
tai payroll of each separate employer,
whose scale of wages varies accord
ing to the nature of the employment,
regardless of whether the employee is
married or single, the rate being cal
culated solely upon the hazard of the
industry.
Exploded in New York.
Under the workmen's compensation
law recently enacted in the state of
New York the employer is given the
option of insuring either with the
state department or a private COM
pany. Complaint arose that those
employers who preferred to insure
with the private casualty companies
We're openly discriminating against
the married men!
Whereupon the state workmen's
compensation commission exploded
this theory and set matters Alright by
adopting the following resolution re-
ported in the minutes of the commits
sion and the New York daily papers
of July "a:
1T has been brought to the atten-
ton of the workmen's compensation
commission that some large employ
ers of labor have threatened to dis
charge or have actually discharged
from their employment married men
with families, alleging that the work
mems compensation act places a
heavier burden on industry in connec-
ton with compensation payable to
married men with families than is i'm
posed in connection with compensa-
ton payable to unmarried men, This
commission has been informed that
the discharge or the threatened dis
charge OF married men on this ground
has occurred particularly in those in
dustries which have been granted the
privilege of carrying their own insur-
ance.
1T is evident to this commission
that this action on the part of the en-
ployers in question is predicated upon
a mistaken conception of the law and
OF the basis upon which insurance
rates are computed. The managers
and directors of industrial enterprises
should bear in mind that the rate of
compensation under the workmen's
compensation act is calculated upon
the weekly wages paid to men whether
they be married or single, and that
the premium rate is calculated solely
upon the hazard of the industry. 1t
follows that the premium rate in a
the number of married men employed
be large or small or whether married
men have large or small families;
hence the managers of these indus
tries, the casualty insurance compa-
MES, and the mutual associations are
not warranted in thinking or stating
that the employment of married men
places an undue or an additional bur-
den upon industry. AS a matter of
fact, the cost of insurance under the
workmen's compensation act is exact
ly the same to the employer whether
married or unmarried men are en-
ployed; and employers who have been
granted permission to carry their own
insurance are making a fundamental
mistake when they discriminate
against married men with families.
This commission feels that upon
legal, practical and moral grounds it
Is warranted in insisting that indus.
try shall respect the family life OF
the citizens of this state, and it in
tends to use all the power legally vest
ed in it to protect married men with
or without families, in their right to
work and to enjoy protection and
benefits OF the workmen's compensa-
ton act. To that end be it
,Ioo mi, Ho
Instituted into the charge that en-
ployers of labor carrying their own
insurance and employers insured in
stock or mutual companies have dis
eliminated or are discriminating
against married men with families, in
order that this commission may be in
possession of the facts, and in posi-
ton to reconsider it's action in grant.
ing to employers who have thus abused