The labor journal. [volume] (Everett, Wash.) 1909-1976, 1918-12-20

hospital treatment.
Before the machinery for the ad-
ministration of this Act was proper
ly organized complaints began to
pour in from different sources
against the Washington Hospital AS
sociation calling attention to un-
scrupulous methods resorted to by
their solicitors in order to secure
medical contracts. In the majority
of cases these complaints came from
workmen, and every single charge
that | made against the Washington
Hospital Association in my article
of October 9Th was taken from the
verbatim records of Investigations
that were held by the State Medi-
cal Board, and were made under
oath by workmen of organized la
Dor. The Washington Hospital As
sociation was we'll aware of this
fact and for that reason diplomat
ically ignored and failed to answer
the indictments contained in that
article.
The Washington Hospital Associ-
alton is charged with securing
medical contracts by methods not
only questionable but sadly out of
keeping with professional ethics.
They are charged with sub-contract-
ing medical contracts to physicians
at rate lower than is paid by the
State. They are also charged with
the failure to furnish to the en-
ployees of the Pacific Coast Steel
plant and other places the medical
treatment and care contemplated un-
der the First Aid Law. For the
complete substantiation of my as
sertions | herewith submit excerpts
from testimony submitted at several
hearings before the State Medical
Board. The following is from a
hearing regarding the securing of
contract at the Pacific Coast Steel
plant, West Seattle:
Witness: "The solicitor for the
Washington Hospital Association was
notified through me to stop taking
signatures. Between that time and
the 18th, the day on which the con-
tract was signed, however, the sig
natures were obtained which we
deem were obtained fraudently, and
on the night of the 14th after be-
ing stopped the evidence shows that
the solicitor came to the plant at
10:45 P. M. to obtain signatures
and those who refused he threatened
with loss of employment if they did
not sign the contract"
Chairman: 81 would like to ask
you a question. Why did the men
oppose the Washington Hospital
Association ?"
Answer: "On account of the
record of their past services. They
have had that plant now for three
or four years and because they are
not competent and do not look after
business" | have talked with
great many of the men about the
Washington Hospital Association and
have not found one who would be
willing to have them take charge
of him."
Chairman: "How long have you
worked for this particular concern?"
Answer: Thirteen years."
Question:: "You are pretty we'll
acquainted with the doctor that has
attended the workmen at this par
ticular plant?"
Answer: eyes, | think the idea of
the feeling of the men is more or
less against the Washington Hos
pital Association because l have not
seen one that was satisfied with the
treatment they have received. Not
only that but the way they have to
take care of the men after they
are nufC.
Question: "They told you they had
300 doctors in that Association"
Answer: "This man (pointing to
the solicitor) told me there were
800 DOCTORS"
Question: "And you found out it
was not the case?"
Answer: GAS near as l can find
out it is not the case"
We now turn to another hearing
brought by an employer against the
Washington Hospital Association.
Witness sworn and testifies: That
the contract at his plant was secured
under misrepresentation, That the
solicitor claimed the company would
have two doctors to look after their