The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1922-07-08
THE STATUS OF THE STRIKE

In the existing railway strike 1t
must be apparent to the public and
to the strikers as well that the ad-
vantage is all on the side Of the rail-
roads. The reason for this IS that the
roads are acting wholly within the
federal law while the unions are act
ing wholly outside of it. The contest
therefore is so unequal that the ulti-
mate result scarcely admits of a
doubt.
The situation created, 1t is pointed
out by the Railway Age" is quite
different from that brought about by
the switchmen's strikes in 1920. Those
strikes occurred before the railroad
labor board really had begun to func-
ton, and were not ordered or author
lied by recognized and well estab-
lished labor unions. The present strike
has been ordered by the heads of
recognized and well established labor
unions after full hearing and decision
by the labor board regarding the mat
tiers in controversy.
The defeat of the unions would be
victory for the method of settling
established by the government. II
would result not only in the strikN.
losing their wages while they were
out. but also probably in many OF
them losing seniority and pension
rights and other rights and privileges
which have been of value to them.
The effect of such an outcome would
be to vindicate the provisions of the
transportation act and the decisions
of the railroad labor board, to
strengthen the labor boards position
and increase it's prestige, and to make
unlikely important strikes in defiance
of the law and of the labor board
decisions in future.
1t is equally plain what would be
the effects of even a partial victory
by the labor unions If by their strike
they should gain any working condi-
tons or wages which from their
standpoint were more favorable than
those awarded by the labor board,
this would convince them and other
railway labor unions not involved in
the strike that they had more to gain
by striking than by submitting their
claims to the labor board and accept
ing its decisions, This would speedily
result in the destruction of the method
and machinery for peacefully settling
railway labor controversies which
have been established by the trans
portation act.
The formal complaint of the strik-
ers is based upon the allegation that
earnings possible under the rates of
pay now ordered render it impossible
for the men to maintain an Amer
lean standard of living" Whatever
definition be assigned to this term, says
the New York journal of Commerce
it is not easy to see how such an
issue can be raised in the present
controversy. Continuing this paper
says:
Did the peak wages of 1920 afford
the men such a living? If so, then
the obvious answer is that the rates
now ordered will buy more bread
meat, clothes and shelter than would
those of the earlier date, If the an
swer is in the negative, then is not
that fact in itself sufficient to show
the ineffectiveness of merely increas-
ing money wages?
But what is it that the men de-
mand? They seriously put forth the
claim in their hearing" before the
labor board that the workman with
the average family cannot maintain
an American standard of living" on
less than $4,000 year. Actual family
budgets and other statistics were pre-
scented ad infinitum to substantiatE
| that claim. To that sort of comfort
the men. so It is said, have an inalien-
able right" Such a battle cry may
appeal to the unthinking. but 1t would
be difficult indeed to attach any def
| mite meaning to the statement.
Now the railway workmen car
| hardly make good on a claim thai
they should receive special favors-
real wages which the country cannot
with the best of will, pay wage earn
ers generally. A moments considera-
| ton shows clearly enough that the
: American standard of living" as de-
| fined by the rail unions. is an impos-
| sibility for us all. 1t ought to be OBJ
\ vious that more cannot be paid II
wages than is actually produced.