Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1916-03-02
CHAMBER OPPOSES
THE B0RLAND RIDER
Directors Set Forth Objections
After a Committee Has
Reported.
FINDINGS TO BE SENT
TO SENATE AND HOUSE
Efforts Will Be Made Also to Enlist
Support of Representatives in
Fight for Clerks.

The Borland added-hour measure, at
fecting government employees IN the
District of Columbia. is not only IN
consistent with the eight-hour law.
provided by legislation as maximum
number of hours for days work, but
defeats the just propositions involved
in the eight-hour maximum day laws
and upsets every principle of con-
sideration to the laboring man or
woman, upon which those laws are
based.
This is the substance of one of the
reasons of opposition to the bill in
troduced by Representative Borland of
Missouri. extending the working day
of the government employees in Wash
ington to mot less than eight hours.
as cited in a report adopted by the
board of directors of the Washington
Chamber of Commerce last night.
The report was prepared by sub
committee of which John q. Capers.
former United States commissioner or
Internal revenue. is chairman. Mr.;
CaperS said the committee endeaVored
to eliminate from its report self-evI-
dent reasons for opposition to the Boz
land rider and confine itself to those
having a more 1undamental bearing on
the situation. The committee of which
Mr. caperS is chairman is to take n
active part in the campaign being
waged by various organizations against
the Borland rider. Copies of It's re-
port are to he sent to both houses of
Congress. and members of the commit
tee plan to make every effort to enlist
members of both houses i'll the fight
against the measure.
Report of the Committee.
The report is as follows:
The proposed legislation making
provision for the payment of salaries
to government clerks in the District
of Columbia dependent upon the condi-
ton that all such clerks should be re-
Quired to work mot less than eight
hours a day" is repugnant to recent
Legislation in both state and nation
upon the question of the hours of labor
required by employers of labor. whether
the employer be an individual. a COM
pany corporation. municipality.
state or the national government. This
is primarily true because the proposed
eight-hour day. as a minimum time of
service for government clerks, is not
only Inconsistent with the eight-hour
law provided by legislation a maxi
mum number of hours for a days work,
but defeats the just propositions in
VOWED in the eight-hour maximum day
laws and upsets every principle of con-
sidera,ion to the labcring maE wom-
an upon which those laws were based.
No Extra Pay Provided.
Existing law. fixing eight hours as
maximum days work. provides for addI-
tional work in cases of emergency upon
the distinct basis that extra compensation
shall he paid for each hour Of service over
and beyond the maximum eight-hour
period. The Horland rider not only makes
NO such provision. but. by fixing eight
hours as minimum. leaves the govern
nlent free to work the clerks employed in
the District OF Columbia any length of
time beyond the eight hours without any
additional compensation That fact
makes il uncomfortable to Your committee
low the member of Congress who is the
author OF the proposition can defend il
by q statement that its purpose is to
correct accidental privilege Of discrimi-
nation now enjoyed by government en-
pioycs i'll the District Of Columbia" ON
the contrary. the discrimina ton is. for the
first time. proposed by the provision in
reversing the present maximum period
ard making OF il d minimum period APP
Iiiica bic only to government clerks en-
ployed in the District of Columbia.
Your committee feels that it is for
that reason that the labor organZa
tioHS Of the country. without exception,
have aligned themselves earnestly and
ably III opposition TO the proposed
amendment. Always regardful. and
properly so. of the interests. the rights
the health and the opportunities in life
of the members of labor organizations,
these organizations are alert when leg
iSlatIOn is proposed that would dis
crimiuate against them and their mem
bers. and iii their present opposition
to the proposed amendment the labor
organizations show a cornmeudabIc and
nd rIss.al,