Republican farmer., 1918-07-12
DISCRIMINATION
 IS CHARGED BY
 THE LABOR MEN
Testimony to Show Manu- facturer Have Not Kept
 Agreement.
Saturday, July 6

After a brief session this morning before Judge H. s. Hannah of Wash ington, D. C., who is the examiner sent here to represent the Taft-Walsh Board, adjournment was taken until Monday morning, July IS, at 10:30 o'clock. This is the time originally asked for by the manufacturers who
 claimed there was a considerable amount of data which would take some time to compile and that 1t was most essential to their case. When the question of adjournment came up at first there was strong objection on the part of the labor men but evil dently this has been overcome.
 According to the agreement be- tween the manufacturers and the machinists all discrimination toward employees was to cease from the time the Taft-Walsh Board began it's sit tings until the award should be an- nounced. Should there have been cases before this date they are to have no bearing on the question. This morning there were two men who tes- tified before Examiner Hannah to the effect that there had been discrinina- ton practiced, after the sessions of the board began at the Remington | Arms.
 These men, M. Daily and Richard Mcguire, are polishers and Mcguire,
 who has been working at the Whiting
 Manufacturing Co.,, left that place be- , cause, as he stated he felt he could get better wages at the Remington
 and this was desirable on account of the cost of living. He applied for employment at the Remington in re- sponse to an advertisement for pol | ishers but was refused a job. MT.
 Daly intimated in speaking to the ex- ] aminer that very possibly the fact he | was prominent in the conduct of the strike at the Remington last year was the reason he had not been able to l again secure employment at the shop. | All data concerning these cases of al- l legged discrimination is to be com piled and given to the examiner. Attorney George S. Hawley went into the matter of the visit of Major Rogers to this city and as to what concerns were affected by the award which was made on Major Rogers
 recommendation. He cited personal conversations he had held in Wash ington and mentioned the conference held in May at The Stratfield with l Rogers and the heads of 22 of the contract shops who were engaged in war work on sub-contracts. Attorney Hawley stated that there were a few of the manufacturers present but not as members of the Manufacturers Associationn and that at this meet 1 ing these contract men agreed not to practice discrimination against the men who had gone on strike and also to accept the terms of the award that should be made by Rogers.
 He said further that these contract shops were not members of the Man
 ufactutrers' Association and that therefore the agreement to accept the award was not binding on the other concerns who were members of the association and that the award would not be applicable to the other shops. There are 160 other shops, including the greater part of the large concerns that were not parties to the agree ment and for the most part had no
 knowledge of it.
 Samuel Lavit, business agent of the
 Machinists, placed before the Exam iner a letter from Major Rogers which had gone in as evidence at one of the hearings of the board. This letter stated that the manufacturers at the conference on May Ii were represent
 ative of the manufacturers of Bridgeport and that the award ap- piled to all shops. Lavit declared that the idea that the award ould be en- forced in all shops was the only req son the men went back to work in response to Major Rogers appeal.