The Washington times., 1922-07-01

neralQeQ 10 sthss
WILLIAM HARD. country by such
triurnphs as those Of Brooknart in
Iowa and Frazier in North Dakota.
The labor people in question call
attention to the fact that the man.
ayers Of American industries are
now very fond Of pointing to the pres
ent working record Of the industries
OF Germany. German industries are
said to be working continuously
while American industries are inter
rupted by strikes. 1t Is admitted In
labor circles here that strikes In
Germany have been greatly reduced.
Attention is called, however, to the
fact that today in Germany by Ger.
man law the normal condition OF
every industry is that besides Its
board of directors representing capt.
tai II has extremely powerful works
councils representing labor.
Nations Have Different Angles.
Germany has been trying to de-
velop a settlement of the labor prob
lem through taking labor upward
toward a recognized responsibility In
Industrial operations. The United
States-through such institutions as
the Kansas industrial court and the
Federal Railroad Labor Board has
been trying to quiet labor by max.
Ing II subject to the dictates Of gov
ernmental boards. Germany in this
matter has been tending toward
provate responsibility and initiative
by capital and labor jointly in the
sharing of industrial management
and in the forwarding Of industrial
peace. The United States In it's ef.
fort to forward industrial peace has
been tending toward bureaucracy.
The American labor movement Is
convinced that the worlds whole
recent industrial history proves that
the bureaucratic method is destined
to complete failure.
II IL pointed out that Mr.. T. r.
Mitten, Of the Philadelphia traction
system, is able to reduce wages
without strikes. 1t Is pointed out
that those reductions are not the
results Of bureaucratic orders but
the results of private conferences.
II Ia pointed out that in those con-
ferences the affairs Of Mr.. Mitten's
traction system become as genuinely
known to its employees as to its direct
tors.
Mr.. Mitten's method has been
much criticized and much praised
both from the standpoint of the peo-
pie on the pay roll and from the
standpoint of the people on the list
OF stockholders. Three things in II,
however, seem plain. 1t Ia a step
toward participation by employees In
q knowledge of the daily manage
ment OF industry. It does not call
in the bureaucratic coercive power
OF government. And 1t has produced
o peaceful acceptance of disagree
able readjustments by the EN-.
ployes.
Labor people deny that an institu-
tion like the Railroad Labor Board
can be regarded as in principle a
fair representation of the interests
either of labor or Of capital. They
ask the public to consider what the
situation would be IL the President
Of the United States, instead Of COM
ing to his office from a long expert
erice as an employer, had come to 1t
from a long experience as a trade
unionist. Suppose that the President
OF the United States was labor
manor q Brookhart farm bloc man,
with personal associations which
filled the White House with labor
and farm bloc radicals.
Suppose, then. that he proceeded
to appoint the three members Of the
Railroad Labor Board who represent
the public along with the three who
represent labor and the three who
represent capital. Suppose that for
the three representatives of the pub
lie he appointed Mr.. Justice Bran
deis, Col. Smith w. Brookhart and
Frank p. Walsh. They are all Of
them distinguished persons, ana thcy
are none of them members Of trade
unions. But what would the owners
OF the railroads think of the Rail-
road Labor Board then?