Evening star., 1943-10-30

dent RooSeuelt'S letter last night
/ to Chairman William H. DdUlS OF
the War Labor Board on the coal .
/ problem
Dear Mr. Davis:
I have your letter of October q
/ informing me of the need for action
to prevent further interruption of
production in the coal mines. I am
watching the situation carefully and
shall not hesitate to take whatever
steps may be necessary to see that
the coal is mined.
We are short of coal to meet our
war needs. Wemust have more coal.
We can no more tolerate the letting
down of coal production than we
can tolerate letting down of the
shipping of supplies to our fight
ing men.
I am not planning to take decisive
action, however, until after the
meeting of the Policy Committee of
the miners next Monday. I am
loathe to believe that the miners,
after careful consideration. will re-
iect the proposal which the board
has indicated it would approve and
which goes very far toward meeting
the demands of the miners.
Certainly, in wartime, the miners
will not take the position that they
will sign no contract other than one
dictated by their leaders. We are
at war. and all of us must make
sacrifices for our common good and
common safety.
The board has indicated that it
will approve the Illinois contract
with notifications which will give
the miners for a 5l-hour. portal-to-
portal siX-day week, s54, which is
$3.50 a week more than they are
now receiving for AZ hours actual
work at their working places in
The mines.
1t is about $3.50 less per week
than they would receive under the
Illinois contract as it was submitted
But we must recall that already
Sl.50 per week has been added to
the rates prevailing under the old
contract by reason of the adjust
mentS previously allowed by the
board.
In making this proposal it seems
to me that the board has resolved
every reasonable doubt with respect
to the requirements of the stabiliza-
ton program in favor of the miners
demands. Some may reasonably
question whether the board has not
gone too far.
There is no basis for the assertion
that the boards proposals involve
IN any way reduction in the basic
rates that the miners are receiving.
On the contrary, the assertion ig-
nOreS the fact that the present basic
rates are for production work at
their working places and make no
allowances whatever for travel time
as such. Under the boards proposal,
the miners for the first time will re-
ceive pay for travel time as such.
AS matter of fact, a 51-hour.
portal-to-portal, siX-day week does
not, conservatively estimated, aver
age more than 46la hours produc-
tive work in the mines. For a 49, =
hour six-day week of productive
work, which is the equivalent of a
51-hour portal-to-portal week, the
miners would get under existing
rates S52.25. Miners under the
boards proncaal would get s54 for
the same work. In addition they
would get s1.50 special allowances
previously granted. This certainly
does not constitpte reduction of
In order tl1at there may be no
misunderstanding among the miners,
the board should consider the wis
dom of an announcement that it has
no objection to the insertion of a
clause in the contract that in no
case shall miner receive for a
DAYS work less than he would have
received for his productive work at
the straight time hourly rate under
the old contract
I am confident that when the
patriotic American miners realize
the substantial increase in benefits
the boards proposal offers them
they will not reject the opportunity
given to them to secure contract.
But if 1 am mistaken and the
miners do not accept the board s
proposals, shall take decisive action
Sincerely yours,
Sincerely yours,
FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT