Evening star., 1946-01-11

ing board in the General Motors
dispute, as issued by the White
house, tollo1Us:.
The board pointed out that the
unions demand for 80 per cent
wage increase was based entirely
on the factor of loss Of weekly
take-home pay due to shorter hours
and downgrading, coupled with the
company's ability to meet 1t with
out a price increase. The board
said, however:
1--WE do not believe that in dis
putes over wage adjustments consid-
Grafton should be given only to the
question of the maintenance OF
take-home pay. If wages were to
be set on this basis only, it is likely
that historical wage relationships
between companies in the same in
dustry, and even between different
industries, would be disrupted with
accompanying unrest and competi-
tive injustices.
Accordingly, in our consideration
of this case we have taken into
account a number of factors which
have customarily entered into the
settlement of wage controversies, as
well as the question of the main
tenance of take-home pay, which
will first be discussed"
'Not a New Concept"
In dealing with the loss of weekly
take home pay the board said:
"a reduction in weekly earnings
as a ground for increasing hourly
wage rates is not new concept in
wage determinations. On the con-
trary, when, in the past, hours have
been reduced it has been the rule
rather than the exception for the
workers to seek, and the employers
to grant, some upward adjustment
in hourly rates.
"The principle of 'cushioning the
shock has been applied in other
situations as we'll. After this war
when hazard bonuses were Cancelled
in the maritime industry, substan-
tial portion of the bonuses we're con-
yerted into wage-rate increases to
compensate for the loss of take
home pay.
Similarly, in many cases bonuses
paid to interurban bus drivers be-
cause OF mandatory wartime re-
strlctions on the speed of driving
have been translated, in whole or
In part, into wage rates upon the
lifting OF the restrictions. In the
transit industry guarantees of pay
ment for a specified number of
hours have frequently been given
even though the actual number of
hours worked was less.
What makes the present situa-
ton unique is the suddenness and
extent of the reductions in weekly
earnings throughout industry. The
effect of these reductions, not only
on the workers but on the economy
as a whole, has become a matter
of national concern
Difference Over Hours Noted.
The board pointed out that "the
company's position now is that it
Will schedule As to 48 hour shifts
so that the weekly hours will aver
age slightly in excess of As, with
no resulting loss in weekly earnings
from the wartime high. The union
insists upon a return to the stand
ard 40-hour week"
The board reviewed this contro-
Versy and noted that the company
on August 81, 1945, had announced
a return to the 49-hour policy, and
that IN the company's first reply to
the union dated October 3, 1945, the
company had stated that the prewar
contractual arrangement for a basic
40-hour work week was not
changed during the war and is still
in effect"
Later the company came out for
the 45-hour week, after Mr.. Wilson
mad proposed that the union ioin
with General Motors in petitioning
congress to amend the Fair Labor
Standards Act so as to make the
standard work week As hours.
The board concluded, after con-
sldering the congressional policy, the
capacity of the company to employ
more men on a 40-hour basis, and
the fact that the 40-hour week had
first been established by General
Motors in 1886 and had been en-
bodied in every collective agreement
that the settlement between the
parties should be made on the basis
OF a continuation of the basic 40
hour week"
Assuming return to the 40-hour
week. the question was how many
hours would actually be worked on
an average in 1916. The board con-
cluded that 1916 will be a year of
large and rising production q
and that in such a period it is in
evitable that overtime needs will
make themselves felt in added hours
within the framework of a con-
tractual work week of 40 hours"
Above the Usual Average.
Because of these overtime needs,
the board concluded it would be
likely that the actual average hours
worked in 1916 would run above the
usual 1899 average. The board pre-
sented calculations to show what |
increase in cents per hour would be
necessary under varying hours to
restore fully the weekly take-home
pay to the 1914 level, which was
based on an average work week of |
456 hours.
If 38 hours were averaged, a wage
increase of 30.3 cents would be
necessary. At 80 hours, 261 cents
would be necessary; at 391a hours,
"a cents; at 40 hours, 21.7 cents; at
40.7 hours (the average worked in
1941, which was partly a year of
war production), 1877 cents; at Al
hours, IT'S cents; at AZ hours, 1872
cents.
The board concluded that: Gall
things considered, the greatest
range of probability for 1916 seems
to us to fall somewhere between
391a and Al hours.
The board then considered the
unions claim of loss of earnings
through downgrading and demotion,
and after examining the data con-
cluded that: I'm comparison with
the probable loss of income which