Arizona republican., 1921-10-18

duction put into effect July 1. was authorized by the board under the provision of this act. Therefore the strike which has been ordered will be, if it occurs, a strike against decision made by a government body acting in accordance with federal law.
 'The situation presented is, in inn portant respect, more serious than that created by the issuance Of strike order by the same labor or ganizations in 1916, which preclpl- tated the passage of the Adamson act. At that time while the railways had asked for arbitration there had not been any arbitration because the labor unions had refused 1t. There fore the labor unions then were with in the law The present case IS dlI ferent There is now law Whlch requires the railways and their em, ployes to submit to the labor board disputes which may lnterrupt- .4,,
 While the railways compiled with the decision in 1920 for an advance in wages. the labor brotherhoods now propose 10 defy the law and strike rather than accept a much smaller reduction in wages. The course or the labor unions in ordering a strike in violation of the decision or the labor board and in disregard Of the plain provisions of the law, is clearly adopted to nullify these provisions or the law.
 "The railway executives at a meet ing in Chicago Oct. fl decided To ask the railroad board for a further re- duction in wages and to give the pup lie in the form of reductions in rates all benefits of any further reduction in wages that were granted. This, however, afforded the brotherhoods no reason for ordering strike. The strike vote was taken on accepting fhe, wage reduction already author ized by the labor board and not on future reduction. The executives at the Chicago meeting did not make any reduction in wages, but decided simply to seek a further reduction, in accordance with the law, so thaE rates might be reduced.
 No Legal Right to Strike
 'The railway employees have no more legal right to strike against II than the railroads would have had to refuse to grant the advance in wages authorized in 1920 by the labor board"
 Concerning the labor board public eroups proposal to cut rates 1mme- diateIy, the statement also said;
 ''In asking for a further feducllof in wages in order that they may be able to grant the public reductions Tn rates, the railways are acting only Tn accordance with the laws and In obedience to an insistent public de mand that they shall create condi- tions which will enable them to re- duce rates. The suggestion has been made in a statement issued by the public members of the labor board | that the railways. to prevent strike | shall make a reduction in rates equal to the reduction in wages made July 1 1 and shall postpone seeking TUT 1 ther reduction in wages
 "A general reduction in rates Wlth- l out a further reduction in wages would be ruinous to many railways Thus far in 1921 the railways have
 earned a net return of only 2.6 pel
 cent and although the net earnings have increased recently owing largely | to the recent reduction in wages, 2
 general reduction of rates without g
 further reduction in wages would put
 the railways back in precarious po-
 sition financially"
 The statement declared that the
 roads were in sympathy with the
 farmer and desired to help hin | through lower rates just as quickly as
 possible, but that this was impossible
 under present wages.