Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1921-01-11

Agreements between the railroads
and various classes of their employ
ees. standardizing the latter's rules
and working conditions throughout
the nation, which were instituted
within six months before the end OF
federal control, should not. in the in
terests Of honest, efficient and econ
omical management" be continued
longer under private operation, ac-
cording to contention made by repre-
sentatives of the railroads before the
Railroad Labor Beard here today
during hearings on the demand OF
railway employees for the pepetua-
ton of these agreements.
1.-THE only parties who are fully
qualified to consider such Regulations
are the individual arrangements and
their employees" E. 7. Whittier. chair
man of the managers committee
which is presenting the carriers. slde
of the controversy, testified.
The reasons for the carriers oppo-
sition to National Agreements were
outlined during the course of today's
hearings in the opening to Mr.. Whit
er's testimony is based on the
grounds that:
"a They are ultra restrictive and
therefore prevent the honest, efh-
cient and economical management
demanded by the Transportation Act;
(2) The variable conditions in diff
ferent sections of the country make
the universal application of their
provisions impracticable;
go The existing rules, the contin-
uation of which is proposed by the
men. are capable of various construc-
joins;
(D The existing agreements pro-
vide that the rules contained therein
shall apply to all employees of any
particular craft regardless of the de-
partment of the railroad in which the
man is employed, thus leading to a
division of jurisdiction and n conflict
in the working rules applicable to
employees engaged in the same work;
60 The existing agreements have
destroyed acknowledged efficient and
economical practices such as the
piece work system for regulating
rates of pay:
go The railroads must have relief
from the rules controlling the en-
ployment of men. which are so re-
strictive as to prevent them from
obtaining sufficient number of en-
ployees to certain departments, thus
interfering with output and causing
delay to the movement of traffic;
60 The agreements contain many
rules which provide for payment for
work not performed. and thereby
- l1ll 49,
necessary expense annually.
The railroads do not object to
schedules ttte technical term for rail-
way agreements) properly negotiated
and entered into with their own en-
ployes," Mr.. Whittier said, ''as is evil
denced by the fact that nearly all, If
not all, of the roads represented by
this committee have had schedules
with the various train service organ
! izations for many years.
Prior to federal control. some roads
had schedules with other classes of
their employees; many had no schedules
with any crafts other than the train
service organizations. but there were
no so-c&lled national agreements
which made all rules uniformly the
! roads that did have schedules direct
ly negotiated them to fit their own
conditions with their own men, and in
| every case the railroads had the I'M
disputed right to negotiate their own
schedules, which was denied during
the. fe,iel al control.
"UaGer governmental control the
railroads were unified. and the direc-
tor general entered into so-called ma
tional agreements with the shopmen.
mainte nance of way employees clerks.
firemen ar d oilers. and siGnalmen. The
first of these so-called national agree
ments' was made with the shop Crafts
less than six months, ard the last. that
with the Signalmen. only few days,
before the return of the l. ass to their
owners. These agreements which
were of universal application for the
period of federal control. were spe-
officially recognized by the parties sig
natorv thereto as effective during this
reriod only. and contain nothing that
would il pose such obligation uDc1 all
roads alike after individual RESPONSE
blity had to be ass umed by the sepa-
Grafton as separate properties.
"Thercfore we contend that under
private control consideration must
necessarily be given to the conditions
and ncculiarities of operation on the
individual properties in the preparation
of any regulations governing the
working conditions of employees of
those Properties. The anly parties
who are fully qualified to consider
such regulations are the individual
managen1ents and their employees.
Many of the rules in the so-called
national agreements are he contin-
ued, $50 ultra-restrictive that they
positively prevent reasonably econom-
zeal operations. and result in serious
interference with efficiency and pro-
duction. There should be no such in
reference with the responsibility Of
the arrangements as might unreason-