The Connecticut labor news., 1924-09-06
COST-PLUS REPAIRS SCORED BY 1. (. L.
 IN NEW DECISIONS
Charges of William H. Johnston Sus- tained in All Cases Investi-
 gated and Tried.

l Cummins-Esch law filed by President William H. Johnston of the Interna- tional Association of Machinists against railroad managments who Harmed out' 1 locomotive repair work on the cost-plus basis has been confirmed by investiga- ton and decisions of the Interstate Commerce Commission.
 In addition to those already publish ed, the commission last week handed down another series of decisions affect Ing number of railway companies which in 1920 contracted for repair of locomotives in outside shops, finding in each instance that the cost greatly ex- ceeded what the same class of repairs could have been done for in the car riers' own shops. The decisions are based on investigations made by federal inspectors and hearings conducted be- l fore an l. C. C. examiner, evidence be- ing submitted by the railroad compa- mes III an effort to controvert the charges made by Mr.. Johnston.
 Under the loose provisions of the Cummins-Esch law it will be impossible tor the government to recover on any of these excess expenditures because the carriers were guaranteed by the government and given a free hand dur ing the period covered by the cost-plus contracts. The commission, however, condemns the homogeneous for lack of efficiency and proper economy" Commissioner Hall, chairman, Lewis, Aitchisonn, Potter and Cox dissented from the decision.
 The majority decision says that the Chicago, Burlington & Qunicy railroad sent Is locomotives to the Davenport Locomotive Works, at Davenport, Iowa, on a cost-plus basis, and seven to the Edwin Locomotive Works The total cost of this contract work is com puted to have been $254O4323 'in ex- cess of the cost of similar work in the respondents shops"
 Notwithstanding that the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul maintained shops capable of doing its own locomotive re- pair work, 1t contracted with the Bald win plant on cost-plus basis and paid $731, ,1oo84 in excess of what the same repairs would have cost if done by reg ular employees in the companys shops. The Edwin plant repaired Is 1ocomo- tives for the Philadelphia X Reading at an excess of $22O,473.21 Compar- able costs in the companys shops of from $20,o55 to 2,300 for repairs cost $84, ,1S1 when done under the cost-plus plan in the Edwin works
 The St. Louis-San Francisco railway did cost-plus business with outside shops at Wichita and Pittsburg, Kan. The excess cost paid these two con- cerns aggregated $208, ,335.24, finds the commission. It had two wrecked loco motives repaired at the Baldwin plant, paying $51 600 for one and $52,800 for the other Similar locomotives could have been purchased new at a cost of S53OOO each.
 For repairs to 4o locomotives in out side shops the Missouri Pacific paid va l complete data on some of which the in vestigators could not obtain The Grant shops at Houston Texas, received $98- 561 0S in excess of similar repairs in the conlpanys own shops The Murphy Iron Works, Alexandria, La, received an excess profit of $22,073,21. The Manufacturers Railway Co. St Louis, had an excess of S9,9O5S2
 The Grant Locomotive & Car Works repaired six locomotives for the St. Louis South western railway at an ex- cess cost of $o,721.45, per locomotive, or total of $58,32S7O
 i Five locomotives Harmed out' for repairs by the Texas & Pacific railroad cost an excess of $1o,88223, or an aver age of S3,37o45 each more than the same repairs would have cost in the Company's own shops.
 The investigators made and decisions rendered cover only a comparatively small part of the cost-plus contracts let by railroad arrangements during the guarantee period, when the excess costs came from the United States treasury and went to swell the profits of inside stockholders who largely own and con trol the railroads and the outside loco motive shops.
 In conclusion, the majority decision says: "We deem the circumstances to justify us in assuming that in future respondents will leave nothing undone to avoid further recourse to the costing | contract work"