New-York tribune., 1922-08-07
What the Railroad Executive Saws:
Employee Representation Is the Means by
Which Management and Men Get Together

to vote for them. This the union OFF,
GERS refused to do.
The elections were held, however,
but due to the efforts Of the union
officers many OF the shop employees did
not vote.
Representatives were elected by
those who did vote and those repre-
sentatives were recognized by the man
agement, just as in city, state and
national affairs the candidates elected
by those who actually exercised their
right of franchise are recognized. Ne
gotiations were entered into with them
and the rules and working conditions
and wage schedules now in effect were
agreed upon with them.
In some classes of employees solid
union committees were elected and the
management has negotiated with them.
The results of these negotiations have
been in effect for many months to the
mutual satisfaction Of all concerned.
AS q matter of fact, the Pennsylvania
has been dealing with union employees
in the engine and train service for
many years, also to the mutual salts
faction Of both parties
System Federation No 90 appealed
to the Labor Board when the company
refused to recognize the unions as rep
resentatives Of its employees, and the
Labor Board sustained them to the ex-
tent Of ordering new election in
which the union itself was to be
candidate. 1t was also provided by
the Labor Board that men who had
ceased to be in the company's employ
and who had been let out in the re-
duction OF forces were to be given an
opportunity to vote.
Railroad Carrying Case
to the Highest Court
The company stood by the results
of the elections already held and ap-
pealed to the United States District
Court to restrain the Labor Board from
publishing q decision to the effect that
the company had violated the boards
decision.
The District Court upheld the Penn
sylvania, and the Labor Board appealed
to the United States Circuit Court Of
Appeals. The Circuit Court has now
decided that the lower court should not
have granted an injunction TO the COM
pany, and the company is taking steps
TO carry the case to the United States
Supreme Court.
The gist of the company's contention
is that the Labor Board had no power
under the transportation act to pre-
scribe methods of election, and that the
board, in this case, had exceeded the
powers conferred upon it by the trans
portation act
1t SO happens that since the strike
began the Pennsylvania shop employ
ees themselves, by substantially more
than a majority, have indicated very
clearly that System Federation No. 80
does not represent them.
1t is also significant that no strike
vote was taken among the Pennsylvania
shop craft employees on the issues on
which the general strike was called
Those issues do not apply to the Penn
sylvania, inasmuch as the Pennsylvania
was not party to the Labor Boards
decision on wages, rules and outside
contracting The strike vote on which
en- effort was made to get the Pennsyl-
vania men out was the strike vote taken
about year ago when the Pennsyi
vania refused to hold a new election
of employee representatives in the shop
crafts.
Mr.. Jewell in his reply to President
Harding's proposed terms for settling
the strike, makes this condition: That
all the employees of the Pennsylvania
system be returned to work under
wages and rules fixed by the Labor
Board.
If Pennsylvania employees were to
accept Mr.. JEWELS edict now they
would work for less wages than they
themselves negotiated with the manage
men and under less favorable conditions
than those which they themselves had
a part in Determining