Montana labor news., 1939-11-30

Miners CHALLENGE TO COMPANY.
ON ALLEGED 3 HOUR VIOLATION, OF
NOTABLE IMPORTANCE TO WORKERS

The Miners Union eight-hour-day
case was before Judge Lynch in the
District Court last Tuesday. Well
ington d. Rankin, Philip O'Donnell,
and Charles L. Zimmerman APP
peared for the miners; and ". H.
Hoover, James T. Finlen, Jr, and
Frank Jestrab appeared for the
A. c. M. Co.
The case is probably the most i'm
portant one that has come before
the courts of Montana in thirty
years. It is being watched with
keenest interest by the miners and
their families and friends. This
great public interest will help the
progress of the case through the
court, and ensure that no unneces-
sary delay will prevent its early de
cision.
On November 20 an order was
issued requiring the defendant to
appear and show cause why an in
junction should not be issued against
it to prohibit violation of the eight
hour law. The defendant moved to
quash this order.
For the company, Messrs, Finlen
and Hoover contended that the court
could not restrain the defendant
from violating the law. They argued
that such a violation was a crime;
and claimed that the court could
not issue an injunction to stop the
commission of crime. They further
contended that, so long as a man
was not working before the face of
the rock for more than eight hours,
the law was not violated, though
the miner was compelled to be on
the job for nine and one-half hours.
For the miners, Messrs. Rankin
and O'Donnell reviewed the manner
in which the miners are compelled
to work up to 94a hours per day.
Mr.. Rankin discussed the law as
to the time of commencement of
work; the lunch period; and the
time when the men were released
from their mine duties.
Plaintiffs contended that the shift
started at the time when the men
were required to report for work
and to obtain lights, drill-bits and
other equipment for their work and
continued on until they were free
to change their clothes at the end
of the shift.
Many cases from federal and state
courts were cited by the plaintiffs.
These were to the effect that the
period of eight hours commenced
when the men reported ready for
duty and ran on continuously and
uninterruptedly for eight hours.
These cases disclosed that a lunch
hour could not be deducted unless
the men were free to leave the
premises of the employer for a
period long enough to permit rest
and relaxation. The complaint al
leges that the miners are not per-
mitted to come to the surface during
the lunch period.
Mr.. O'Donnell pointed out that
there we're over 5000 miners in
Butte; and that they and their fam
lilies form the greatest portion of
Butte's population. They are the
workers in our greatest and wealth.
est industry. Practically every per-
son and business in Butte is depend
ent upon their labor. 1t was con-
tended that miners are compelled
to devote more of their time to
working and getting to the mines
than any other body of workers in
the city. Mr.. O'Donnell answered
the defendants contention as to the
power of the court to issue an in
junction to prevent the repetition Of
crime. He commended that the rule
was that one without interest-one
not affected by the crime-could not
obtain an injunction to prevent an
act which did not affect him; but
that the miners, vitality interested
in the hours of labor, had an abso-
Lutte right to an injunction to pre-
vent repetition of a crime which in
jured them directly.
The motion to quash was taken
under advisement. Briefs are to be
submitted to the court.