Evening star., 1924-05-05
LABOR BACKS BILL
TO KILL RAIL BOARD
Members Are Claimed to Be Sol
idly Behind Howell -Barkley
Proposal.
COOLIDGE ACTION UNCERTAIN
Board of Mediation and Concilia-
ton Would Be Substitute.
COOLIDGE ACTION UNCERTAIN
BY DAVID LAWRENCE.


BY DAVID LAWRENCE.
Organized labor has lined up solidly
behind the Howell -Barkley bill which
proposes to abolish the United States
Railroad Labor Board and substitute
for it board of mediation and con-
cilation.
Friends of President Coolidge have
been saying in the last few days
that he would veto the bill, but there
is a general misunderstanding about
it's provisions and if it should pass
both houses of Congress a veto may
be said to be doubtful.
Misstatement Made.
The writer enormously stated a few
days ago that the Howell-Barkley
plan would eliminate the representa-
tives of the public and leave railway
disputes to be decided by the inter-
ested parties. The truth is the rep
resentatives of the employers and en-
ployeS will alone constitute the mem
bership of the four national adjust
ment boards which are to settle
grievances and conflicts of interpre-
tations on rules. But the principal
body. to be known as the Board of
Mediation and Cancellation, will con-
sist of five members, all of whom will
represent the public.
This is directly in line with the
recommendation of the late President
Harding. For, al present, the Railroad
Labor Board consists of three repre-
sentatives of the railways. three of
labor and three of the public This
means that three men, representing the
public, usually have the deciding vote.
as almost invariably the parties at
interest influence the votes of their
representatives.. To cure this weak
ness, the representatives of the en-
ployers and employees will appear
before the board of mediation as advo-
Gates and pleaders for their respective
causes, and the judgment will be
rendered by five impartial judges.
The four national adjustment boards
are not to assume jurisdiction over
disputes unless the employers or en-
plyes make applicatin. This means
that If the So-called company unions
and the railway employers can adjust
working conditions and wages between
themselves, the adjustment boards will
not come into the picture at all.
There are certain company unions
which are objecting to the Howell
Barkley bill on the ground that it is
unnecessary, but advocates of the
measure say that a long list of labor
organizations do want such tribunals
and the bill proposes to give them the
seek.
What Bill Comprises.
The Howell-Barkley bill combines
many of the features of the Newlands
act, the Erdman act and the present
transportation act. 1t has, however.
introduced one important change
which has been the basis of opposi-
tion by railway employers. 1t pro-
hibits the employer from interfering
in the selection of representatives or
from controlling the organizations of
employees SO as to dictate the selec-
ton OF employe representatives
This has been inserted to over
come the embarassments encounter
ed by the present United States Rail-
road Labor Board in determining
exactly who actually represents the
employees on certain railroad sys-
TENS. 1t is the outcropping of the old
fight as between national labor or
SaniZatioSs like the American Fed
Grafton of Labor and such unions as
have been fostered by the Pennsyl-
vania railroad for its own employees.
On the Pennsylvania nobody can rep
resent the workmen in a dispute eX-
cept persons actually on the Pennsyl-
vania'S pay roll.
The principal weakness of the
present transportation act has been
the failure of the parties at interest
to form the local adjustment boards
provided by law. These organizations
were left to voluntary action by the
employers and employees.
Undert he HoweH-Barkley bill the
adjustment boards would be govern
ment institutions, and, therefore, the
minor grievances and disputes Wnlcn
piled high the cases before the United
States Railroad Labor Board you'd
be diminished because they would, so
to speak, be settled by the lower
tribunals.
Chief Objection to Bill.
One of the objections to the bill
said to emanate from the Wnlte
House is the appropriation of S500,0O0
for the expenses of the new machin-
ery. The proponents of the bill point
out that 100000 is now being spent
under the transportation act, and that
the additional 100000 is good lnsur-
ance against another railway strike,
particularly since the last l|:e is esti-
mated to have cost the government
about s2,000,O00, while the railroads
are known to have spent many times
that sum themselves in fighting It,
The proposed bill provides about
500, 900 for the maintenance of the
board Of mediation and Cancellation,
thus saving between $25O,O0O and
$500. 900 over the cost of the present
Labor Board, which saving would
be expended in the expenses of the
four national adjustment poarus.
Fully s5.000,000 is appropriated an
nually by Congress for the Interstate
Commerce Commission, so, relatively
speaking, the amount needed to keep
peace between always and their en-
ployes is not as large as the sum
needed to regulate disputes between
the railways and shippers.
Several of the railroads are luke
warm in their opposition to the bill,
but certain roads which have always
fought the present Labor Board and
it's decisions are working tooth and
nail to beat the bill or force a presi-
Dental veto. 1t looks as if some
action will be taken on it before ad-
journment or a filibuster against ad-
journment may be started, for the
Democrats. and inSurgent Aepublicans
are in the main in sympathy with
the proposal.
Copyright, 1924.)