The Alaska daily empire., 1921-01-13
ALASkAhS IN SLOW /. TO COMMENT ON
 INSURANCE ACf
New York Bureau Only Source of Analysis on Pro-
 posed Compensation Act.

proposed WOrkmenS Compensation Act for Alaska have been mailed out to all parts of the Territory with. requests for comment, up to the pre- ent time, not a word either of con- demnation or approval has been re-. ceived from any Alaskan source, ac- cording to a statement made today by Gov Thomas Riggs Copies of the proposed law were sent out under instructions contained in a resolu- tion adopted ot the last session of the Territorial Legislature for the pur- pose of obtaining the sentiment of Alaskan .workmen and employees by submitting such comments as should be made to the coming legislature.
 Several requests have been re ceived at the Governors office for copies of the proposed bill from per sons and corporations outside of Alaska. An analysis and criticism of the plan embodied in it have been made by the Workmeh's Compensa- ton Publicity. of New York City. which suggests that system model ed after the Virginia compensation act would be more satisfactory both to employees and employers.
 The bureau also states, 'dthe the compensation law should be fair to both the employee and the, employ err The measure under consideration it is claimed, has been adopted by North Dakota only, although 43 states have enacted compensation laws. Nine Objections Raised
 Nine specific objections are brought against the bill by the bureau, in it's analysis which fills five pages of closely typewriter matter. The first listed is said to be in .,;
 listed in what is said to be a mon opolistic state insurance" which it is alleged is created under the pro visions of the proposed act. The second point raised against the meas ure is an allegation of unfairness toward the employers. it being claim ed employers have no right to be heard as to awards for compensation
 they must simply pay up whatever the Botrd, Commission or Bureau chooses to assess them to cover the costs; whereas, from a denial of his claim, a wOrkingmatl has the night of appeal to the courts.| Third, that this act provides that in arriving at its awards the Bureau or Board shall not be bound by common law or statutory rules of evidence.
 Encourages MaIineerine
 In the fourth objection found by the Bureau it is alleged Tt is pro vded in this act that no coInpensa- tion shall be paid for the first seven days of disability unless liability exceeds seven days, in which case compensation shall be paid from the date of injury. That means, prac- tically, that if a workman is disabled for two @ days. he will not return to work on the third day but will take a vacation over the seventh day since that will make his com pensation for the seven days equal to what he would have earned as wages had he returned to work on the third day. Adverse experience has thoroughly discredited provisions like this
 Fifth, it is claimed that the act contains no provisions for notice of accident, it being sufficient that the injured, employee make his claim within sixty days after injury, thus depriving. it is stated, the employer to investigate the circumstance of the accident and to apply prompt first aid and timely medical care toI reduce the consequences of the in jury.
 The sixth objection states that this act covers "all injuries arising in the course of employment" The far better and more common rule, it Is said, lis to cover only injuries by accident arising out of and in the course of employment" Further, it is declared: "It was never the thought in enacting the sound com pensation law precedents to make the employer the absolute insurer of the lives and health of employees during the hours they are engaged to work, regardless of caues, but only to insure them against accidents caused by their work"
 Miqht Cause Discrimination Seventh it is stated. This act pro- yides in effect that if workman who is crippled or infirm, suffers an in jury at work. the employers subject 10 the act must pay collectively, com pensation for both the injury and the precious infirmity. This provis- ion will inevitably cause employers collectively to discriminate against hiring aged. infirm or maimed work men" Eighth. without a substan- tial waiting period-and this act has worse than none the 662s per cent rate of compensation is deemed too high by those who study results" :" This rate, it is claimed, was origin ally taken from the German law which has a 13 weeks waiting period. Sixty per cent. it is said, is about the limit even within an unqualified one