The Holt County sentinel. (Oregon, Mo.) 1883-1980, 1916-06-23

49, N..HH - H..f 80 60. afs
CH"IHrn'r" committee IN NJ York
wired I.'s q. ~ meeting yost,rday a.
.'Yw-: Settlement ~ National
Railway wage controversy. either By
ar'i' alton 10 lsr pro ~ ,aw ~ pre.
'rfab.y by admission 20 Interstate
Con mo"cs Commission fpr thorough
and speedy investigation. was plopos.
"d b. railroads today a, conclusion Of
conference IN New York with train
,"rvico bro,herhood.. Rejected by
Broth.rhoods, who announced the,
would take strike vote. Railways
noln'"d out tina, Interstate Commerce
Commission, with is control Of rae
regulations Of revenue Of railways and
IL thorough knowledge Of whole rail.
way situation, l. in position 20 avert
national strike and settle controversy
with justice 20 employees. employers
and public. The committee in making
this proposal TO Brotherhoods snys,
National conference committee rail.
way has carefully considered your
proposals. and your explanations IL
lh"ir meaning and intended applica.
oon' and in our Judgment no reason.
n'N"l"r"d during oar conferences To-
JUSTIFY extraordinary charges in opor-
ating method and practice and large
"Sr"ndltpros for additional facilities
winch your proposals. involve, nor has
anything presented 20 Justify your re-.
ppos'od radical revision Of established
basis Of comp"na alton for men in on.
Rinc, train and yard service. Present
Iut"s and rI'os are largely re.ul, Of
recent arbitration award and in our
iIIfItFFu.auf q
""mn"nsatipn and favorable working
conditions Moreover, best ob,anahlo
'H'lmh'r- indicate tina, 20 accent your
proposals would increase cost Of opcr.
alton Of railroads approximately one
hundred million dollars n year. nil ur
which must eventually be borne by
IN" public. We are confident that YOU
anu IN" men you represent apprcciatc
~" r"spon 'ibilitics Of this committee
W three substantial interests, viz: (a)
10 "mploy"s her" involved whose Ell.
Gent service Il acknowledged and with
whom railways have no difference.
which can not be fairly and decided
Justly by some impartial body. )bD To
All "thcr employees Of railways whose
material welfare should not suffer be-
cauS" Of prcfcrmcn, of any particular
group of fellow workers. On To
owners Of railways who have n RICH,
10 participate IN earnings Of their
bnsino'h ON fair and equitable basi 3.
!') !" the pub who are vitality in
'r'Stch IN maintenance of an unn-
corrupted and efficient transportation
service anu whose ultimate control of
tho situation we all recognize as fun.
haDental' We reltcratc statemcn,
given by railways To their men and
mat railways have no desire 10 charge
eithtf existing rates Of pay or work
iny rules nor 10 reduce the earnings
possibilities Of the employees under
their existing schedules, but your
proposals IN connection with the inter-
pfetations given during our confer
ences are so inherently and funda.
opposed to the views of this
that we feel constrained 10
decline and do hereby decline them.
Dur conferences have demonstrated
that we can not harmoniZe our differ
ences OF opinion and that eventually
matters IN controversy must be pass-
ed upon by other and disintercstcd
agencies. Therefore, we propose that
your proposals consisting of articles |
one ana four inclusivc) referred 10
turing our conferences as form rs,
and the proposition of the railways,
VIZ: That In connection with and as a |
part of consideration and disposition |
hose provisions in schedules or prac- |
ices there under governing compcn-
'ation In classes of service affected
,y your proposals or those in conflict
WITH following principals as they ap-
ply to such classes: (a) No double
compensation for the same time or
'ervice. ID Same classification for
purposes Of compensation to be an
'lied to all members of train and
'ngine crew. (c) Two or more diff
erently paid classes of service per-
'roportionate rate according to class
ervice with not less than minimum
~ fof the combined service, be dis
,osod by one or other of the following