Southwest Washington labor press. [volume] (Hoquiam, Wash.) 19??-19??, 1925-01-09

on July %, 1924, in Docket zO6E, over
ruling the protest Of the representa-
tives of the employees to the jurisdic-
ton OF the beard, Il Is said the boards
opinion that . substantial interruption
Of traffic was likely to result from the
controversy was based upon the am
plest grounds And then seven So
called reasons are assigned by the
board for its action.
~Some Of the reasons are not rea-
sons at all, but merely statements Of
fact; for example, reason No. as
serts that the questions in dispute af-
feet AN overwhelming percent Of the
mileage in the western territory; rea-
son No. states that the carriers af-
fected serve an agricultural region
which would suffer disastrous results
from q railroad strike
'aThe board makes such capital Of
the statement that strike votes had
been taken by the same two organiza-
tons on certain eastern roads, and
states that the board Is therefore JUS
titled in the conclusion that it is the
policy Of these two organizations to
promptly resort to a strike upon the
failure to reach an agreement
without commenting on the ex-
traordinary type Of reasoning emb0d-
led in this non-sequitor, it Is lament
able that the board should have so far
allowed itself to become an advocate
of the carriers, that it failed to state
that in these two cases in which strike
ballots were taken, no strike ever took
place, and that, on the contrary, the
Representatives Of the employees, ex-
erting every reasonable effort and
available means to reach just settle
ment without an interruption of traf-
fc, offered to arbitrate the matters in
dispute with9fhe carriers involved, un-
der the terms Of the Newlands Act,
before an impartial tribunal whose de-
cision would be binding.
"The court, in reading this opinion
of the board, which forms a part of
! the record herein, should note that the
board does not state, nor could it state
consistently with the facts, that at the
date Of the last conferences held in
accordance with the provisions of the
Transportation Act-which was about
March %, 1924-there was anything
resembling a threatened interruption
to commerce. And the court should
note this Illuminating fact: that al
though on May IA the board stated
that in its opinion a substantial inter-
ruption to commerce was threatened
there is not a line in the record be-
fore this court to indicate flour and
a half months later) that on the Bird
day of October, 1924, when the petit
ton herein was filed, there had been
strike vote even contemplated by
the representatives Of the employees.
MediatOrs Successful Action
at is common knowledge among
those familiar with the adjustment OF
railroad labor disputes during the past
rs years that government mediators
of such high standing and trustworthi-
ness as Commissioner Neil and Judge
Knapp never regarded a dispute be-
tween a carrier and its employees as
being the subject for the Intervention
of government mediators until the
employees had taken and counted a
strike ballot. For example, on JAN
uary 10, 1928, these government med
iators informed the representatives
of 81 carriers and of the firemen in
| IN.
during the course of which the par
ties themselves requested the inter-
vention of the mediators, that their
request was premature and stated
that We have therefore decided to
withdraw from the controversy, leav-
ing before the parties thereto the
same propositions that were under
consideration by them respectively at
the time mediation was invoked
THAT this rule of procedure, en-
ployed for many years by these two
trusted and experienced mediators, is
a reasonable and effective rule, is at
tested by the fact that during their
incumbency there never was a strike
in interstate commercel How, then,
can it be commended, on such a state of
facts, that the opinion of the board on
May ID, 1924, was a reasonable one ?
Summary of Arguments
Summing up the argument made
on the jurisdiction of the board, coun-
sci have pressed the following points
upon the court:
-.