Evening star., 1921-12-10
lands SETS DEC.21.
FOR RAIL HEARING.
Pennsy's Suit for Injunction
Against Rail Labor Board
Is Welcomed.
By the A,socisted Pres.

by tue Ao00Cl4te0 Pke00.
CHICAGO. December 10. - Judge
Kenesaw NJ. Lands today set Dccem-
ber 81 tor arguments on the Pennsyl-
vania railroads petition for . per-
manent injunction to restrain the
United States Railroad Labor Board
from issuing an order declaring the
railroad to be in violation OF the
Transportation act established de-
cisidn.
Buffeted about by the criticism Of
both railroads and railway workers
for more than . year and q half. the
United States Railroad Labor Board
finally was hailed into federal court
yesterday.
: Members OF the board said they
welcomed the suit" as a means OF
settling many perplexing questions
which have been the subject Of many
three-cornersd tilts between the
.ran:porsat.oa . ns ,po sas o. lines the employees
CHARGED BY the transportation, act
with settling railroad difficulties. the
board has no legal power OF enforc-
ing its orders. and several roads have
boards jurisdiction. =
Based on Two Allegations. {
Hearing on a permanent order
day. The railroads petition 10 based
on two allegations: That the board
has Jurisdiction oily over cases over
which q disagreement has arisen ana
that the board has exceeded its pow
ers in prescribing rules for the seies. g.
negotiations with the carriers.
YestsrdAys Injunction has the ef-
feet Of holding up q decision on the
PsnnsyivRnfa citation before the
labor board October 20. when the
road was summoned to show cause
lation Of the boards orders. c. B.
Heiserman, general counsel. and E.
II. Senne6, general solicitor, made
no defense Of the roads action. con-
hnine their argument to contentious
that the board had acted beyond its
were made by the roads attorneys in
the petition today.
Roaa DfsreearaeA Order.
The controversy arose over the
roads disregard OF an order from
the board to hold An election TO name
ennloye representatives for negotta.
tion OF shop rules with the carrier. A
previous election was declared void
and the new election was to give op-
Eederatian No. 80, the union organi-
sation affiliated with the American
Federation ~ unit to represent the
employees. The road had refused to
recognize the federation as repre-
sentative OF the employees although
not obiocttng TO members el .ne
union serving as negotiators. II elect
ed as Individuals.
The carriers bill asked an injunc-
tion restraining the labor board and
Its Individual members from prescrio-
ing any regulation relating to rules,
working conditions Or wages wrtn1ue s1,ateon
thereof ~ provided in the transporta-
tion act, from assuming to dictate
| the procedure by which employe rep
resentAtives to negotiations snail De
selected; from requiring carriers to
from holding that plaintiff must con.
duct elections to determine who shall
represent its employees: from pre-
promulsating principles to control the
carriers employees ana subordinate Of
icials in selecting Representatives for
mine who are eligible to represent the
employees in conference; from dicta-
ting procedure to govern selection
| OF Representatives Of the carriers or
the employees.
wo1ld Bar Aetsss.
The PennsylyAnfa also asked that
the board be prohibited from acting in
. case where conferences. as provided
in the transportation act, have moi
| been held, as In the present Instance,
and that It be restrained from en-
forcing all previous decisions on the
! case. II granted this would open the
way to nnllincatton Of any or all
board orders by federal court, it wa
said.
Board members. however expressed
| confidence in their stand today and
declared they expected to see thefI
4 synhA1A hyr thn xNhorf