New-York tribune., 1921-10-25
After the Strike-What?

After the Strike-What?
Now that prospects of averting
the railroad strike are promising,
the time seems an appropriate one
for the public to consider the general
railroad problem with some degree
of seriousness.
A second-thought conclusion Of
the railway brotherhoods not to
quit their work will, of course, lift
a great and pressing anxiety. but
it will in itself settle nothing. In
six months or year another crisis
is likely to arise and it will become
again necessary to call in the po-
Itical and economic doctors to use
their pulmotors tn keep life in the
country's transportation system.
Strange reports have recently
come out of Chicago and Washing
ton, and there seems danger that
even though the strike is called off
1t will be at the cost of sowing
seeds of greater future trouble. 1t
is said, for example, that the Labor
Board does not consider it any of it's
business whence comes the money
for the wages it prescribes. 1t is
said that it looks at the railroad
wage question wholly from the
viewpoint Of what will preserve or
advance the existing standard Of
living; that is to say, there is new
vested interest which must be recog-
nized.
Again, those who say they are in
the confidence of the Interstate Com
merce Commission declare that it's
policy is to establish rates called
"fair" to shippers without regard
to whether or not the total of
the income realized under them
meets the social justice wages fixed
by the Labor Board and leaves any
return on the property used in
carrying on railway service.
Finally, Congress is said to be
about to consider repeal of the
section of the Cummins- -Esch law
under which the railroad owners
are to realize 51a per cent on the
ascertained value of their holdings.
It is thus limited that the railroads
are to have no protection against
confiscation and the season to hunt
railroads is to be again declared
open.
If these things are done where
will the public get off after the rail
road owners are stripped? Social
justice wages and social justice rates
are noble in ideal and as far as
possible should be realized. But un-
fortunately money to pay wages
must come out of income, and in the
case of the railroads that income
comes out of rates. There is a
limit to confscation, and even to
philanthropy. Social justice also
demands that the railroads be kept
running. Can they be, except with
ar appalling subsidy from the ma
tional Treasury, unless they pay
their way?
A change from private to public
ownership would not bulge this ir-
removable fact. It's only probable
effect would be to increase the size
OF the subsidy. A public manager
cannot any more make five by adding
two and two than can private one.
The totalisy Of railway income
must be higher. Last year the net
return on the estimated value of
railway property was less than one
third of / per cent. This is not
enough. Wage increases that flow
from larger individual contribu
tion Of railway product per unit of
time or labor are of some use.
Rate decreases that bring a larger
return for each unit of property
employed are also of some use.
But inconsiderate markings up and
down because of the delusion that
burdens can be indefinitely passed
ON are worse than useless.
II the strike is averted the Ad-
ministration, it would seem, may we'll
take nete Of the spirit and policies
Of the Labor Board and the Inter
state Commerce Commission, and
prepare for the consideration of
Congress a plan of railway organ
lzation based on reality that will
not be makeshift.