The labor world., 1922-12-30

made by the national or2anlzatlo
printing trades unions, which w
ploying printers.
r Urges Industrial Court.
The state commission regrets that
it has not the power or authority to
enforce its awards and suggests that
''stipulations and agreements result
, ing from collective hargainings
SHOULD be construed and enforced
by some impartial agency, when
ever a dispute arises relating there
to-
James Fullerton, business agent of
Local No. 20 of the Pressmen's union
Of Minneapolis, declared that the
commission had purposely held up
the report until after the election in
the interest of the Republican ad-
ministration. He said that the re-
lease of the report on the eve of the
meeting of the legislature, with a
recommendation for an impartial
! agency" to enforce decisions was for
the purpose of creating "propagan-
da" for the enactment of a law in
Minnesota similar to the Kansas in
dustrial court law.
The report Of the commission con-
ssumes 10 typewriter pages, in which
the events leading up to the strike
are reviewed. Considerable space is
devoted to answering criticism di-
rected at the commission for its fail
ure to make formal findings Of the
facts disclosed at the hearings with
it's conclusions and recommended
'tions.
In view of the fact hat there is
no power vested in the commission
to enforce any judgment or conclu-
sion with reference to the relative
rights Of the parties In a controversy
of this character" the report de-
rclares, ut will seldom. if ever, serve
any useful purpose for the commits
sion to aggravate the local condi-
tions resulting from a national move
ment involving employers and; en-
ployes in any particular Industry
Informal. Conferrnee Held a .s@ j y y
The first move for a hearing. ac-
cording to the report, was made by
the commission on July II, 1921,
when Representatives of all parties
in the controversy were invited to
an informal: conference. The meeting
was continued until July 1S because
some of those present did not feel
that they were authorized, to act for
the various interests involved. AT
the second meeting persons repre-
senting the employers stated they
were satisfied with the situation and
did not desire to enter into any ne
: gotiations., with tho organizations
representing the employees on any
basis whatever.
Upon petition of the Minneapolis
Typographical union No. AZ, Min
neapolis Pressmen's union No. zoe
Minneapolis Press. Assistants union
No. 6, Twin City Book Binders
union No. IL, and similar organiza-
tions in st. Paul. the commission
adopted a resolution and served 1t
upon all ;of the employing printers
of theh Twin Cities calling for a pub
lie hearing to be held in ST. Paul
starting Aug. 1, 1921.
The St. Paul Typothetae appeared
at this hearing and filed a petition
restating the position Of the employ
ers that there was at that time moth
ing to arbitrate and objecting to a
public hearing on the grounds that
the striking printers had not COM
piled with the law by seeking media
ton of the industrial commission
before the calling of the strike on
June l., 1921. The Minneapolis Ty-
spothetae representative appeared but
afterwards withdrew from partici-
patton in the hearing.
Origin of Wage Dispute.
.Ss. 5"The outstanding facts disclosed
tSby the investigation the report de-
clares, "are that for more than Is
years prior to 1920 there had been
system Of collective bargaining be-
tween the employing printers of the
Twin Cities and the various print
ing crafts, and during that time har-
monious relations existed, but on
account of the rapidly advancing
cost of living. as well as the general
increase in wage scales in all activi-
ties existing in the beginning OF
lgZO, the wage Sc2le tnaL naO Deeh
agreed upon in the contracts entered
= into in 1919 became inadequate, and
certain actions were taken durin.
the winter CT 1919 and 1920 on the
part OF the employees to bring about
n modification of the wage sched-
tlles embodied in the agreements
commencing June 1. 1919, for two
year period.
.While these ). negotiations were
pending large portion Of the mer
who. sesemed to be dissatisfied or
account OF what they regarded as
undue delay on the part. Of the, em
ployer, left their employment as IN
diyfduals on April 20, 1920. 1t does
not appear that this was the result
of, any, formal act Of the union .o'
2ttbe direction Of the officers, but the
effect was the same as formally
authorized strike. On account of the
economic conditions existing at that
+ time, the employers were Obliged
to. grant4an increase in the extsti,le
!. wage schedule. ~, s.'.~.
f. The employees contend that >thi:
Continued on page ~
III ta.er.at tSg 70 - r-esf 4: