Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1919-01-04

the union, and 90 per cent of
all the employees set in rendering
contract to the president of the
company to induce him to change
the shop from an open shop to- a
closed shop. He declined to accept
this contract and was within his
right under the rules OF the board
in doing so. He is not by the rules
OF the board required to deal by
contract with the union as union,
and in that sense he is not required
to recognize the union, but the
word recognition OF the union has
had an artificial and an improper
meaning given to it by employers.
They have been too technical in
their treatment of committees of
their employees, who have come to
them to represent their union EN-
ployeS, when they have said to such
a committee, DO you represent the
union, and if you do, we decline to
deal with you, The question is not
whether they represent the union.
The question is whether they, being
employees, represent other employees,
and if that is the fact, their mere
refusal to say that they do not rep
resent the union or their association
did not involve a contract dealing
with the union or any organization
in the sense in which the War La
Dor board understands the terms.
Too Much Pride Apparent.
1--WE think that due to the pride
OF the men in their union and or
ganization and the technical sensi-
tiveness of the employer, many
troubles have arisen that may have
been completely avoided by clear
understanding of the view of the
National War Labor board in this
regard,
I'm the matter of the application
tor the modification of the award to
increase wages and to make a funda-
mental change in the schedule we
override the present application for
the reason that under the award a
full board hearing is given for OPEN
ing the award and the revision
thereof on the LIST of February, next,
and the testimony taken at this time
may be considered; that such sup
Elemental evidence as the parties
may desire may be filed with the
examiners before whom an applica-
ton for such revision would prom
erly be taken"
Refuses to Meet Union.
J. F. Mcmillan, member of the
executive committee of the union,
testified that the company officials
efused to meet the men on any
question they desired to submit for
arbitration or settlement when it
was known that they came for such
a purpose as Representatives of the
union.
Ben Short, president of the union,
stated that one specific instance in
which the company refused to meet
a grievance committee was in the
case of Conductor Hastings, who
had been discharged from a run
on the Twenty-fourth and Vinton
streets line for having trouble with
soldier. The committee tried to
get him reinstated, but failed.
Mr.. Hudson, superintendent of
transportation, stated to them, he
said: Nov understand, we are not
having thing to do with the union
If you come from the union I have
not word to say"
did they know you were en-
ployes" asked Mr.. Taft
yes" was Shorts reply.
Short also testified that the COM
mittee had several communication
from the company stating the COM
pany would not treat with the
union.
The question was asked: "How/
many members OF the union are
employees of the street car COM
pany?'
Short replied, about IS per cent.