Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1943-07-23
Mine Owners Oppose
Illinois Contract as
Model for Industry
Demand Enforcement
Of WLB Rule Barring
PortoI-t Portal Pay
Ey the Associated Press.

Indicating lack of enthusiasm
for model agreement between
the United Mine Workers and
the Illinois Coal Operators AS
ISOLATION, spokesman for opera
tors in the Nations largest
producing areas demanded today
that the War Labor Board en-
force its ruling that miners sign
a contract without pay for I'M
foreground travel time.
Pending WLB action on the Illi-
nois contract, which contains provi-
sion for portal-to-portal pay and
which the UNIV Policy Committee
has approved as model for tn.
entire coal industry. Northern and
Southern Appalachian operators
said they knew of none of their
colleagues who have made overtures
to the union for similar agreements.
Union spokesman said yesterday
operators in other areas already had
put in motion machinery to effect
agreements like that approved by
the Illinois group and providing for
s1.25 daily portal to-portal pay, an
eight-hour day and 4S-hour week.
with time-and- one-half pay for all
time worked in excess of IS hours.
Subject to WLB Approval.
The Illinois contract is subject to
approval of the WLB, which last
month rejected portalto-portal
(nonproductive travel time) pay as
hidden" wage increase, and di-
rected the UNIV and operators to
enter into an agreement without
that provision.
R. L. Ireland, jr.. representing the
Operators Negotiating Committee
for the Appalachian Joint Confer
ence, and Edward r. Burke of the
Southern Appalachian Committee
demanded that the board enforce its
June 18 directive to the parties to
sign contract. They speak for the
bulk Of the Nations soft coal mines.
Pointing out that the operators
had agreed to abide by the June 10
directive, but that the UNIV had
rejected it, Mr.. Ireland and Mr.
Burke sent a joint letter to WLB
Chairman William H. Davis request
ing some action on your part
What merit is there in your TAX
ing jurisdiction of wage dispute
and making finding, if you do not
obtain compliance with your order?"
they asked Mr.. Davis.
What justification have you for
existence if those parties to disputes
who carry out your orders to the
letter have their properties seized
while the culprit dictates the terms
of seizure? What industry or union
can respect your board If it con-
tinues to pursue its present course
Of conduct"
They asked Mr.. Davis what action
his board had taken since its letter
to the President June % urging
that all the powers of the Govern
ment be used, If necessary, to en-
ASl Nc CAlC 0Ool " D hCIllNC.
Board spokesman said privately
the WLB has expressed concern
over failure of some groups to COM
ply with its orders, and has drafted
a compliance report to submit to
the President. There are an esti-
mated dozen cases of -compli-
ance with board orders on file now.
So Increase Denied.
In the meantime w. Buchanan,
president of the Old Ben Coal Corp,
Chicago, who helped negotiate the
Illinois contract, assailed interpre-
tations of the agreement stating it
provided for 50 daily increase in
the average miners pay.
Mr.. Buchanan declared the actual
increase would be only $1.95 daily.
He arrived at that figure by adding
the SIPS daily portal-to-portal pay
to 20 cents previously approved by
the WLB for additional vacation
and other concessions, and so cents
premium pay for an extra hour
worked each day. While the agree
ment provides for time and one
half for the eighth hour worked on
each OF the first five days of week,
Mr.. Buchanan insisted that the en-
tire $1.50 received for that hour
could not be considered an increase,
since 81 of it represented straight
time pay at present rates of 81 an
hour, the remaining so cents being
for overtime.