New Britain herald., 1922-08-01
SETTLEMENT PLAN.

The plan for settlement of the raj strike, fairly definite now, has nv clauses. The only objection to th'
 first Is that it provides that th' "employes" will abide by the deci sions of the United States Railroad Labor Board in the future. "Em
 ployes and railroads" should be thf wording. The executives of the roads have not been blameless in thi' regard. They should be bound in tho future, as well as the employees. | should be so stated, if only for the moral effect.
 Acceptance by the men of the wage reduction made by the board, pending a re-hearing. is proper. It is merel, abiding by the decision of the court pending appeal and re-hearing.
 piscontinuance of farming out by the roads has been practically agreed to by most of the roads Discussion of the establishment Of adjustment boards certainly is a proper provision. Adjustment boards must come eventually, even if final decision is left in the hands of the Railroad Labor Board, where 1t should be. The adjustment boards would occupy much the same position as the "referee" who hears evidence and renders a decision, in a legal matter, to be made effective only after ratification by the court which appointed the referee.
 The second clause of the plan of five provisions will probably be the basis of the eventual settlement although it will require compromise with conscience on the part of some of the railroads. It gives preferen-. tial treatment to loyal employees who remained on the job during the strike. It gives seniority rights back to strikers returning, those rights to be subject to the preference obtained by the men who stayed at work. And it dates seniority rights of new men who took strikers places from the time they entered employment of the roads In other words it treats these new men just as they would have been treated if they had gone to work when there was no strike. except that they will see a crowd of men put in with advantages superior to theirs, thus being treated quite as if they, these returning men, had come back from a war in which they had done something worthy such as de- lending their country-our country, Possibly those who commend this plan may remember that many of our soldiers, returning from France, were taken back into the employ of the men whom they had served previ- ously But perhaps they forget that many of those returning soldiers found that new men had gone to work while they were away; that these new men had been gradually promoted and were now occupying positions they, the returning fighters, would have had if they had not been away fighting the good fight Their old places were given back to them; but others had advanced to positions they might have had if they had pleaded exemption. In some cases even their old places were filled. The soldiers had to begin again a step lower. In some cases there were no places for them.
 Let those who commend this plan note that. by 1t, returning strikers will be treated as more deserving than many of our returning soldiers were treated.
 The Railroad Labor Board declared 1t would recognize new unions, made up Of a majority Of the men now working on the railroads" If those new unions should come before it with grievances. Suppose the new men, who took places left vacant" by the strikers, should form a great union today Suppose the strikers were taken back by the roads, with Seniority rights returned, being placed over the heads of the new men. Then suppose this new union of new men should go before the Labor Board, citing the railroads promises, the Boards acquiescence. Would the Labor Board decide in favor of the strikers who fouted it, or would it stand by the new men who relied on those promises?