Evening journal., 1922-07-20
PR. R. ANSWERS
PAY INJUNCTION
Points Out no New Wage
Rate Is Less Than Board
Scale
PLEA
OF RAIL CLERKS

| vi NAIL SLLlNlNO
THE Railroad Labor Board ex-
ceeded its authority when 1t in
structed the Pennsylvania Railroad
as to the method of selecting rep
resentatives of employees in reach
| ing wage agreements" is a declara-
tion in an affidavit filed in the Unit
ed States Court in Philadelphia yes
terday. by Elisha Lee. vicepresi-
dent in charge of the Eastern Re-
gion of the Pennsylvania Railroad.
That statement was coupled with
an admission that the Pennsylvania
systems method of electing repre-
, sentatives was not that prescribed
by the Railroad Labor Board.
Mr.. Lees affidavit was in reply
TO allegations of the Brotherhood of
Railroad and Steamship Clerks.
Freight Handlers. Express and Sta
tion Employees. The brotherhood is
seeking to restrain the railroad from
enforcing a revised wage rate. es-
tablished July IS. About 10000
Pennsylvania clerks. freight handl-
aggregate reduction in wages OF not
less than s175,000 a month under
what the railroad says is an agree
ment mutually arrived at.
The brotherhood's contention is
that the wage revision was illegally
accomplished, as the railroad ignor-
ed the brotherhood and would not
permit il to represent the employees,
throwing out ballots naming the
brotherhood as the employees rep
resentative.
j. Washington Logue, counsel for
the brotherhood. told Federal Judge
Dickinson OF the anxiety of the en-
ployes over the wage revision and
of the possibility of strike unless
the railroad were restrained from
enforcing the new wage pending the
handing down of a decision in a
similar case at Chicago.
Judge Dickinson reserved decision.
Among the statements of Mr..
Lee. answering for the Pennsylva-
mia Railroad, were:
That the Railroad Labor Board
recently authorized reductions in
wages affecting clerks, freight
handlers, station employees and 9TH
er classes OF employees on other rail-
roads. and that in no case were the
wages to be paid (by the PennsyI-
vania system) less than those pres
cribed by the order OF the Labor
Board. but in some cases the wages
were In excess of those prescribed
by such order.
40
suited in the adoption of new
scale of wages, effective July 16.
1922. were with committees of en-
ployes elected by secret ballot bv
substantially more than majority
OF the entire number Of employees
IN the classes concerned in the pro-
ceedings before the Court.
That the method by which the
representatives OF the employees were
elected was believed by the companv
TO be best adapted to meet the re-
quirements OF the Transportation
Act, and that the Labor Board dia
not have the power to determine the
method by which employe repre-
| sentatives should be elected.
That in reference to elections In
the shop crafts similar TO the cleo
tlons held for the clerical and sta
ton employees, the United States
District Court in Chicago had fuIiv
sustained the position OF the Penn.
sylvania Railroad Company.
That the Court in this case sho,Id
not grant temporary iniunction
for the following reasons.
First, That if the Court granted
temporary injunction and suhse-
quently decided to the contrary u
would, in effect, cost the Penns,I-
vania Railroad Company about
Sl75,O0O month as long as tho re
straining order was in effect and tho
company would be unable to reco,,o,
this from the employees concerned.
Second. That, on the other hand
If the Court, declined TO grant the
temporary injunction and subss-
queDtly decided to the contrary the
employees concerned could recover
any back pay to which they were
entitled.
In other words. while no ire
parable injury would result 70 anv
employees, irrecoverable damage
would be suffered by the company
under a temporary order suspendinR
the wage scale already mutually
agreed upon"
In this connection counsel for the
Pennsylvania Railroad Company.
stated to the Court that in view of
these circumstances. IL the Court
granted temporary injunction the
company would insist upon security
being furnished by the organization
obtaining the restraining order. in
view OF the recent decision of the
United states Supreme Court in the
Coronado case.