Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1926-02-13
A Half. Billion.Dolla Failure.

Analysis OF the AGREEMENT SoS'SA
day entered into between the anthra'
cite operators and the miners union
to end the coal strike affords little
ground for the claim that the strike
was successful In fact. 1t would
plainly appear that 1t was lamen'
table and costly failure. from the point
OF view Of the miners.
Under the agreement the men are
to resume work at once at the old
scale Of wages and are TO work until
September l. 1880, at that scale. un.
less it should meanwhile be revised by
a board of adjustment. 1t cannot be
changed until January I, 1927. a little
less than year hence. in any case.
There is no assured gain there.
The new contract provides for a set.
Element Of wage questions arising dur.
ing the period until September 1.
1880, by a board of two men, who
may, In their discretion, add to their
number to permit a majority vote in
decision. These two men are to be
chosen from six. three named by each
side, none of whom Is to be connected
with the union or the business OF
mining coal. They are obligated to
render decision within ninety days
after appointment. One Of the con-
tentions OF the union was that there
should be no Arbitration" Just
where the difference lies between
arbitration and the method which is
now agreed upon is not apparent to
the public
The union contended for the adop-
ton Of the Check off" system, where.
by the employers collect the union
dues from the workers. The agree
the operators and the mine workers
on the question of cooperation and
efficiency" are referred to the board
OF cOnciliation-an organization pro-
Vided for by previous agreement
which shall work out reciprocal pro-
gram. 1t is stated that the union
leaders expect that this will result in
the adoption of some form Of check.
OF. Perhaps this constitutes the sue.
cess which Is claimed by them as the
result Of the strike. 1t IS, however, a
remote contingency.
> This strike. 1t has been estimated,
has cost the miners $40, 900, 900 in
wages during the five and a half
months OF idleness. They will get no
increase Of pay for at least ten and a
after that. II they got 10 per cent
advance then. operative for the re-
nainder of the contract period. forty.
three months. they could not possibly
recoup the losses already suffered.
The plain truth Of the case is that
these men, $4,000 Of them, have been
forced into costly idleness for the
sake Of a questionable privilege, that
OF being taxed 10y their employers in
the collection Of their union dues,
which may or may not be accorded by
the board Of Cancellation in the new
code Of efficiency and cooperation"
yet to be adopted.
D.. All this might have been secured
directly If II had been the will of the
leaders to negotiate on such a basis.
But the leaders sought an assured In
crease of wages, avoidance Of the
word arbitration" and an assured
adoption Of the chack.of as an estab.
Hshed feature Of the future relations
between the operators and the work.
ers. They get q possible increase at
the hands of board" Of two, per.
haps three, disinterested persons,
after nearly q year has elapsed from
date. They avoid the hated word
"arbitration,' and they may get some
form of cneck-off IN the readjustment
Of the efficiency and cooperation"
Sehtions. And all this has cost the
pden $4,000, 900 In wages, the union
some 100000 in strike funds. the
business community of the anthracite
region countless millions in lost trade,
ana the coal-consuming public enor-
mously in excessive prices for anthra-
cite and substitutes.
It Is estimated that the total cost of
the sttike-to miners. to operators, to
business and to consumers-has been
at least $500. 900 900. Can such a strike
by any possibility be called success
full? Can it by any possibility be re.
sarded as justified?
The unsafe bridge Ia easily detected