Ottumwa semi-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1916-1918, 1918-02-19
ARMOUR FENCES
WlTHATTORNEY
PACKER DISCUSSES LABOR CUES.
TIONS, DEFENDING TEN
HOUR DAY.

TIONS, DEFENDING TEN
HOUR DAY.
Chicago, Feb. 1S.-In testifying at
the stockyards wage arbitration hear
ing today, ]. Ogden Armour, presi-
dent of Armour and company declared
himself in favor of the principal OF
equal pay for women performing the
same work as men and said he be-
Ilieved packing house employees should
receive extra compensation for work
ing Sundays, Christmas and other
holidays, as we'll as additional pay for
overtime.
In speaking of the eight hour day
he said it was a debatable question
but he was willing to consider its
adoption. He said he did not think
that the ten hour day in itself under
mines mems health or shortens their
lives, but he recognized the tendency
Of the times as towards a shorter
working day for all Classes
Mr.. Armour said he wanted all his
employees to earn sufficient wages to
properly support their families.
FIGURES NOT AT HAND
Mr.. Armour was questioned by
Frank P. Walsh, attorney for the en-
ployes, who are seeking higher wages.
you are aware that number Of
your employees have joined the labor
unions, are you not, Mr.. Armour"
asked Attorney Walsh.
Il believe they have" replied the
packer. He added in answer to other
questions that he was familiar with
the demands Of the men and the
nature of the arbitration
Are you familiar with production
Walsh.
"In general way, but could not
give you exact figures of hand" Mr.,
Armour answered.
EQUAL PAY, BOTH SEXES
Can you say what your total pay
roll is, and the percentage of labor
cost to total production COST" asked
the labor attorney.
Il would have to consult the COM
pany's books
Have you any objection to equal
pay for men and women doing the
same class and volume of work?'
II understand that is done now. II !
it is not done, see no objection to it |
being done"
TIME FOR LUNCH
Where employees work in three !
shifts of eight hours, have you any
objection to giving twenty minutes for ,
luncheon with pay?"
Il don't suppose I have. If it was
followed by everybody we
would not object
Is it true that if the wages of all !
your workmen were doubled it would |
increase the price of meat only
6t-100th of cent pound?"
II couldn't tell that without some |
figuring"
500, 900 PROFITS IN 1916.
Is it not true that If you doubled |
the wages paid your men, in 1916 you
would still earn 61h per cent on your
capital stock?"
II couldn't answer that now, but it
would be unfair to figure on basis
Of capital stock alone"
The witness was asked to prepare q |
statement on the subject and to sub
NIT it later to Judge Alschuler. He !
Identified the annual report for 1916
as showing total profits of $20,100,.
300. Mr.. Walsh read items from the
annual reports of the company for
1914 and 1915 and ldr. Armour said |
he presumed they were correct"
TEN HOUR BASIS
Armour employees, the testimony de.
7eloped. work on a basis Of ten hour !;
lay and are paid by the hourly rate.
The witness said the subject Of the
eight hour day had been presented
% him by Mr.. O'Hearn, he didn't re-
member just when.
Don't you think your employees
should be allowed their liberty on
,olidays?" asked Mr.. Walsh.
II do if it is possible"
DOES NOT VISIT WORKERS
do you think double pay would be
90 much for work on Sundays and
,olidays?'
II cannot answer that"
DO you work Sundays and Christ
nas?"
mo"
do you ever visit the homes Of
our laborers?"
Il do not We have a welfare de-
'artment which keeps in touch with
ne1r nome HE.
You realize that any system which
Ioes not allow a proper livelihood is J
to your company and to the
y
"Yes: it could not last"
Mr.. Armour said that wages were {
ixed by Mr.. O'Hearn and his assist.
nts. Mr. Walsh asked If witness !
bought it proper for one man to fix ]
he working hours and the amount of I
york for man without consulting
hat man.
1.-The man can object if he wishes
nd will be given hearing" replied
ar. Armour.
$3.50 A YEAR NECESSARY
But is it possible to get that hear
ng?' pursued the lawyer.
81 don't see why it is not" said the
witness.
Are you familiar with the report Of
be department of labor, that it re-
uires $3.50 year to insure proper