The evening herald. [volume] (Albuquerque, New Mexico) 1914-1922, 1920-12-07
WAGE INCREASES
NOT JUSTIFIED
FOR THE FUTURE
-Alschuler
Arbiter in Pa c kin g
House Wage Dispute,
However, Awards Nice
Christmas Gift to l00,-
900 Employees.


CHICAGO, Dec. "A five percent
wage Increase for the period between
Monday. July ., 1896 ana sunday.
December 8, 1920, was granted EN-.
ployes Of the packing and allied In
dustrlea IN a decision handed down
today by Federal Judge Samuel Al
schuler, arbitrator in the packing
house wage disputes.
The employees had asked fiat in
crease Of 81 day.
The decision upholds the contcn-
lion of the packers that the cost of
living Inns fallen to such an extent
thnt increases for the future were not
Justified. hut found the employees
were entitled to an Increase over the
amount paid during the last five
months.
The retroactive award will give an
average OF S271O to approximately
100000 men. packing officials esti-
mated, or total Of S2,750,00O. Judge
Alschuler stipulated that the checks
should be distributed not later than
Dee p.
While the case urbitrated applies
only To packing house employees in
the Chicago district, the decisions OF
Judge AlHchuler have In the past been
APPLIED to more than 100000 packing
house employees throughout packing
ccntcrs OF the middle west. including
Kansas city, st. Paul, Omaha, Sioux
city and 81. Louis
In "a series Of supplemental orders
| lut go Alschuler adjusted differentinla
between several classes OF employees.
slack barrel coppers Will receive an
hourly rate OF not less than Gl cents
and sheet metal workers and cleo
tricians who have been receiving less
/ than this rate were advanced to IL.
/ These increases are effective from
Dee. & but do not apply to beginners
and apprentices.
Workmon employed In moving
| heavy machinery or other articles are
advanced to 57ia cents an hour, as
their work requires greater skill than
! that OF common labor. at SO cents.
Explaining why the general in
crease was limited to a five months
period, and not continued into the
future, Judge Alschulers decision
says:
why Increases Not justified
The question OF continuing the in
/ crease for the future IN Of course im-
portant Considering II only In It's
relation to the cost OF living. my tudg-
ment is against it's continuance. Tho
| prices Of those great basic staples
which enter so largely into food and
clothing values have for quite num-
ber OF weeks been declining most
sharply. II Is true that retail prices
have not yet taken the downward
course to nearly the same degree, and
In some instances not at all, a FREE
| uucnt preteNt IN the claim OF being
stocked up with the goods at the
higher prices, although In most IN
stances the possession OF goods at low
prices was no bar. when wholesale
prices advanced, to raising at once
the goods on hand, with good proni
on the advance itself Increased
wage rates are also urged as reason
for keeping up the prices. but II must
be remembered that at the reduced
" wholesale price OF the finished arti-
Gle all the labor has already entered
into II up to the time It is sent to the
retailer.
Consumer still The Victim
1T is no doubt true that the ulu-
mate consumer ia still the victim Of
many unconscionable cNocttons. Goa
prices to the user seem to be ridicu'
iously ana ineNcusahly hign and IKE
wise in many cases, rent But not
withstanding all this, the authorita'
tive reports as well as common exper'
lence, seem to indicate a quite pro
yressive recession In cost 90 living
This tendency, in connection with ths
undoubted slowing up OF Industry
generally. and the quite general YET
down Of commercial and tinancf' q
tivlties. TO my mind strongly for, dd
ows continuing and substantial price
declines reine 20 convinced, l woule
not be Justified IN now fixing for the
future higher wage rates based upoi
paat or prospective increases In nv
ms costs.