Great Falls tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1921-current, 1922-08-05
THE r d PROPOSAL.
CONSIDERABLE asst,

CONSIDERABLE establishment
has been created and is ex-
pressed by the leading newspapers
of the United States over the pres
ident's proposed compromise with
the striking railroad shopmen.
Their criticism goes u%nerringly to
the question of restored seniority
rights. The railroad executives by
a unanimous vote declined to ac-
cept the presidents recommends
ton to them on this point. That
recommendation was that they
should double cross the employees
who had remained faithful and
loyal to them and to the govern
ment labor board and repudiate
their promises to these men in or
der to give back to the strikers
their former jobs with all their
seniority rights intact. This could
be only done at the expense of the
employees who had remained loyal
to them. 1t is certainly a strange
view of ethics that the president
holds and commends to the railroad
executives. We are not surprised
that they refused to consider it,
though willing to accept all the
other proposals Of the president. A
man who cares to keep his WI self
respect and the respect of his en-
ployes cannot make a liar of him
self in that way when it comes to
carrying out pledges he has made
to faithful employes-pledges made
at the direction and with the ap-
prevail of the government labor
board also. Most of them would
rather resign than be put in that
light before their friends and the
public. The Minneapolis Tribune
is a republican newspaper and has
been a warm supporter OF Presi-
dent Harding and the present ad-
ministration but this is what it has
to say about the presidents pro-
posal:
1.-The Tribune is constrained to
confess its amazement at the presi-
dents plan to bring about a settle
ment of the shipments strike. Like
a great many others, we are at a
loss to understand the thought
processes by which the president
arrived at the seniority proposal he
made the railroad executives. As
we see it, the only result of this
proposal is the practical destruction
of the labor board and the shift
ing to the railroad executives of
the responsibility for the continual
ton of the strike. W. are not now
considering the right or wrong of
the issues involved in the strike
but are combining ourselves strict
ly to the logic Of the relations OF
the three parties to the contro-
versy, the labor board, the employees
and the railroad executives. In
this consideration it is essential to
remember that this strike is a
strike against a decision of the
labor board and not against the rail-
roads. The railroads in this in
STAGE have implicitly obeyed the
instructions of the labor board.
Of course, it was to their interest
to do SO and it is equally true that
they have not always been SO obed-
lent when their interests lay the
other way. But the fact remains
that in this particular instance
every act of the executives has
been ~scrupulously in accordance
with the instructions of the labor
board. In his letter to the execu-
tives the president set forth his be-
lief that prompt and unquestioning
obedience on the part of both ex-
ecutives and employees was neces-
sary. Yet the presidents proposal
for a settlement frankly amounts to
a compromise with the strikers dis
obedience. A request that the rail-
roads disregard the instructions of
the labor board and a reputation
of their promises to the employees
who put their faith in the labor
board. On the word of the labor
board the railroad executives prom
Used permanent positions to all
men who stayed at work or who
came to work. The good faith of
the railroad executives as well as
of the labor board was pledged
rightly or wrongly. Yet in the
face of this patent fact. the presi-
dent asks for the reputation on
the part of the executives which
>1,d;,%;or would also he a dis