HE 
 
 UC-NRtF 
 
 C El 5b7 
 
 ^ 
 

 'H/.-it^Hi 
 
 
 
Association of Railway Executives 
 
 CONFERENCE COMMITTEE OF MANAGERS 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS STATEMENTS, ETC. 
 
 IN CONNECTION 
 WITH HEARINGS BEFORE THE 
 
 United States Railroad Labor Board 
 
 CONCERNING THE VARIOUS 
 
 NATIONAL AGREEMENTS 
 
 AND THE 
 
 RULES AND W^ORKING CONDITIONS REQUESTED 
 BY VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS 
 
 INDEX Pages 
 
 Opening Statement of the Conference Committee of Managers 2 to 5 
 
 Abolition of Piece-Work 6 to 13 
 
 Decisions of Various Boards of Adjustment having reference to re-instatement of employees 14 
 
 Methods of Pay used in Analogous Industries 15 and 16 
 
 Construction placed on Shop Rules Nos. 153 and 154 17 to 20 
 
 Statement of Mr. B. M. Jewell, January 10, 1921 21 to 24 
 
 Statement of Mr. E. T. Whiter, January 10, 1921 25 
 
 Statement of Gen. W. W. Atterbury, January 31, 1921 26 and 27 
 
 Statement of Mr. J. G. Luhrsen, January 31, 1921 28 
 
 Statement of Mr. E. T. Whiter, February 3, 192 1 29 
 
 Correspondence relating to requests of the Transportation Organizations and the Switchmen's Union 31 to 39 
 
 Closing Statement of the Conference Committee of Managers 40 and 41 
 
 Resolution of the United States Railroad Labor Board dated February 9, 1921, read into record February 10, 1921. 42 and 43 
 Statement of Mr. Frank P. Walsh on behalf of the employees February 10, 1921 ; 44 to 50 
 
H^ 
 
 .■Vfi 
 
 ^« 
 
4' 
 
 OPENmG STATEMENT 
 
 Before going into the detailed reasons for our objections to the continuation, perpetuation or adoption of "National 
 Agreements", we want to make it clear to the Board that the railroads do not object to schedules properly negotiated and 
 entered into with their own employees, as is evidenced by the fact that nearly all, if not all, of the roads represented by 
 this Committee, have had schedules with the various train service organizations for many years; all these schedules were 
 made by direct negotiations except as affected by concerted movements and arbitrations as described in our presentation 
 of May 18, 1920 (pages 2152 to 2155 of the proceedings), and the railroads will continue to work under them unless changed 
 as provided for therein. Prior to Federal control, some roads had schedules with other classes of their employees; many 
 had no schedules with any crafts other than the train service organizations, but there were no so-called "National Agree- 
 ments" which made all rules uniformly the same throughout the Country. All roads that did have schedules directly 
 negotiated them to fit their own conditions with their own men, who in some cases were assisted by Grand Lodge officers, 
 excepting the schedule covering the Shop Crafts on twelve Southeastern Roads, yet in every case the railroads had the 
 undisputed right to negotiate their own schedules, which was denied during Federal control. 
 
 Under Governmental control the railroads were unified and considered as one, and the Director General entered into 
 so-called "National Agreements" with the Shopmen, Maintenance of Way employees. Clerks, Firemen and Oilers, and 
 Signalmen. The first of these so-called "National Agreements" was made with the Shop Crafts less than six months, 
 and the last, that with the Signalmen, only a few days before the return of the roads to their owners. The railroads 
 had no voice in their making, and cannot be considered as bound by agreements made by the Federal Administration for 
 the period of Federal control. These agreements which were of universal application for the period of Federal control, 
 were specifically recognized by the parties signatory thereto as effective during this period only, and contain nothing that 
 would impose such obligation upon all roads alike after individual responsibility had to be assumed by the separate rail- 
 roads for their successful operation as separate properties. 
 
 Therefore, we contend that under private control, consideration must necessarily be given to the conditions and 
 peculiarities of operation on the individual properties in the preparation of any regulations governing the working con- 
 ditions of employees of those properties. The only parties who are fully qualified to consider such regulations are the 
 individual managements and their employees. 
 
 Many of the rules in the so-called "National Agreements" are so ultra-restrictive that they positively prevent reason- 
 ably economical operations, and result in serious interference with efficiency and production. There should be no such 
 interference with the responsibility of the Managements as might unreasonably impair the efficient and economical oper- 
 ation of the properties, of which responsibility the Managements cannot divest themselves, and which responsibility is 
 specifically placed upon them by the provisions of Section 422, Sub-titles Nos. 2 and 3 of the Transportation Act, 1920, 
 in the following language: ' 
 
 "(2) In the exercise of its power to prescribe just and reasonable rates the Commission shall initiate, modify, 
 establish or adjust such rates so that carriers as a whole (or as a whole in each of such rate groups or territories as 
 the Commission may from time to time desigt^te) will, UNDER HONEST, EFFICIENT AND ECONOMICAL 
 MANAGEMENT and reasonable expenditures for maintenance of way, structures and equipment, earn an 
 aggregate annual net railway operating income equal, as nearly as may be, to a fair return upon the aggregate value 
 of the railway property of such carriers held for and used in the service of transportation; PROVIDED, That the 
 Commission shall have reasonable latitude to modify or adjust any particular rate which it may find to be unjust 
 or unreasonable, and to prescribe different rates for different sections of the country. 
 
 "(3) The Commission shall from time to time determine and make public what percentage of such aggregate 
 property value constitutes a fair return thereon, and such percentage shall be uniform for all rate groups or terri- 
 tories which may be designated by the Commission. In making such determination it shall give due consideration 
 among other things, to the transportation needs of the country and the necessity (UNDER HONEST, EFFI- 
 CIENT AND ECONOMICAL MANAGEMENT OF THE EXISTING TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES) 
 of enlarging such facilities in order to provide the people of the United States with adequate transportation; PRO- 
 VIDED, That during the two years beginning March 1, 1920, the Commission shall take as such fair return a sum 
 equal to 5K per centum of such aggregate value, but may, in its discretion, add thereto a sum not exceeding 
 one-half of one per centum of such aggregate value to make provision in whole or in part for improvements, better- 
 ments or equipment, which, according to the accounting system prescribed by the Commission, are chargeable 
 to capital account." 
 
 Considering the responsibility upon the individual properties, and the variable conditions which are encountered 
 in the different sections of a country so large as the United States, we feel confident that the Board will recognize the justi- 
 fication for considering such variable conditions which we hold makes impracticable the universal application of the 
 provisions of the so-called "National Agreements". 
 
 507506 
 
 I 
 
By reference to the coMp^Idftorl '"Official Interpretations of the Rules of the National Agreement" (covering the 
 Shop Crafts), it will be noted that questions arose as to the intent of the larger proportion of the rules. In numerous 
 cases the answers were to the effect that the rules are clear as written and there is no necessity for interpretations. To 
 this attitude we take pronounced exceptions. • 
 
 We hold that many of the rules are so worded that they are capable of various constructions and have resulted in so- 
 called Interpretations which are in fact new rules; others are impractical of application without incurring excessive penalties. 
 Notwithstanding the parties who prepared the rules may have considered them clear as written, experience in trying to 
 work under them has demonstrated that they have resulted in extraordinarily numerous questions from both the employees 
 and the Managements. This in itself, makes the rules particularly objectionable. 
 
 • We respectfully ask, therefore, that this Honorable Board leave the individual roads free to negotiate their own 
 schedules, so as best to meet justly the widely varying conditions on the different roads. We hold that this principle is 
 recognized in Section 301 of the Transportation Act itself, which provides that the railroads and their employees shall 
 negotiate directly with each other to the fullest extent before referring questions at issue to other tribunals. 
 
 The so-called "National Agreement" covering the Shop Crafts provides that the rules contained therein apply to all 
 employees of any particular craft regardless of the department in which employed. For example: Steam Fitters, Plumb- 
 ers, Water Service Repairmen and other Pipe Fitters, Tinsmiths, Electricians, Metal Bridgemen, Blacksmiths, Machinists, 
 Bench Carpenters, Cabinet Makers, etc., employed in the Maintenance of Way Department, and having no interest in 
 or connection with the Maintenance of Equipment Department, are nevertheless, subject to the rules of the Maintenance 
 of Equipment Department and are represented by the Committee of that Department. Under these conditions portions 
 of gangs are necessarily governed by one set of rules and other portions of the same gangs by another, which is obviously 
 wholly wrong in principle and practice. 
 
 The seniority rules for certain mechanical crafts limit them to the place where employed, while rules of the Main- 
 tenance Department where these employees are engaged, usually provide territorial seniority, thus producing an undesir- 
 able and in fact impracticable situation. Employees of each department should be separate and distinct from the em- 
 ployees of any other department, and should be governed entirely by the rules or schedules of the department in which 
 they are employed. The rules governing employees engaged in Maintenance of Way and Structures should be especially 
 prepared for and adapted to that department. There should be no division of jurisdiction. It is true that certain mechan- 
 ical work is required in the Maintenance of Way Department. Nearly all of it is road work, performed under entirely 
 different conditions than prevail in shops and shop rules are not applicable. The employees who perform this work must 
 be trained, supervised and promoted by the officials of the department in which they are employed, in order to secure 
 that efficiency, economy and dispatch which is essential to good management and the proper discharge, by the railroads, 
 of their duties as common carriers. 
 
 Rules agreed upon by the individual railroads with their employees can be so constructed as to give employees who 
 are members of the same craft, but employed in different departments, all of the protection to which they are justly entitled . 
 
 Those roads, represented by this Committee, which have been -working on the eight-hour day basis, will continue 
 to do so unless changed by mutual agreement with their employees as outlined in your Decision No. 2, and will apply the 
 rates awarded in that decision, but they must have the right to re-establish more efficient and economical practices, when 
 it is found desirable and practicable to do so.- We refer, among other things, to piece-work methods which were abolished. 
 This action has cost many millions of dollars to the roads which had for years succfessfuUy produced much of their output 
 by piece work methods. This excess cost, which is really a loss to th* railroads, is piling up day after day and will con- 
 tinue to do so as long as the railroads are prevented from re-establishing the piece work basis and until the railroads are 
 free to re-establish such former practices they will not be able to comply wholly with the requirements of Section 422, Sub- 
 Titles 2 and 3 of the Transportation Act, 1920, heretofore quoted. By this method the output of the shop is increased, and 
 the workmen on account of their ability and skill are afforded opportunity for receiving increased compensation over and 
 above what they would receive working on the day basis. The piece work method is well recognized as being the most 
 efficient method of operation and proof of this is the large number of manufacturing plants throughout the United States 
 which are working on a piece work basis and further proof that many men desire piece work, is that, when this method 
 of pay was abolished, a great many employees left the railroad shops and entered the service of car building and other 
 manufacturing plants where the piece work system of pay was in effect. Among the elements set forth in the Transporta- 
 tion Act for determining rates of pay is Item 4, Section 307 — "The training and skill required." We hold that the piece- 
 work system of pay affords a specific basis for compensating employees under this requirement, which at the same time is 
 just and reasonable. 
 
 The railroads must have relief from rules controlling the employment- of men, which are so restrictive as to prevent 
 them from obtaining a sufficient number of employees in certain departments, thus further restricting output and causing 
 delay to the movement of traffic. 
 
 The objections to the various unduly restrictive rules and rules which provide pay for work not performed, will be 
 pointed out for the information of the Board as we progress in our submission. 
 
 The organizations, in addition to asking for the continuation of the so-called "National Agreements", also ask that 
 ' the various interpretations thereto, and supplements and addenda issued by the Federal Administration including Decisions 
 
of the various Boards of Adjustment, be also continued in effect. We shall endeavor to show at the proper times the 
 further punitive and restrictive conditions imposed upon the carriers by some of these interpretations, supplements, etc. 
 
 There are rules that are not objectionable, which the individual roads would consent to adopt, but, even with regard 
 to such rules, we contend for the principle which will recognize the right of the railroad officers to negotiate their schedules 
 with their own employees. 
 
 Each of the so-called "National Agreements" provides: 
 
 "It is understood that this agreement does not annul agreements already in effect with othei* organizations 
 unless 'and until a majority of the employees concerned express a desire for a change." 
 
 Prior to Federal control, on certain railroads the Organizations parties to the so-called "National Agreements" did 
 not represent the employees ; in fact, on some of such roads no organizations represented them; on others, while no schedules 
 were in effect, the employees were members of other organizations. Notwithstanding the employees do not desire the organ- 
 izations listed to represent them, because the organizations of which they are members held no schedule, the organizations 
 listed claim the contract applies on such properties. When the railroads were unified under Federal control, the principle 
 that the majority should govern may have justified the claim to a certain extent, but as each railroad is now a unit, the 
 situation on each railroad should govern. 
 
 The fact that 100 per cent of the employees on one railroad may be members of the designated organizations, can 
 have no effect whatever on another railroad where less than 50 per cent, of the employees are members. The Manage- 
 ment of each railroad has to meet the conditions thereon, and the situation on another property can be of no advantage 
 or detriment to it. 
 
 On at least one railroad, the majority of one craft at each location are members of another organization; at their prin- 
 cipal shop, for the other crafts the situation is mixed — the majority of certain crafts are members of the organizations 
 listed, while the majority of other crafts are members of a rival organization. The majority of all the employees at this 
 shop are members of the rival organization. To decide by crafts for the system who shall represent the employees would 
 make the majority at certain locations subject to the will of the minority, to which they are strongly protesting; in fact, 
 there are cases where the employees positively refuse to be subject to the provisions of the so-called "National Agreement". 
 
 We believe that the Board should not approach this subject from the angle of a schedule with any organization; or 
 that the Board can properly say what organizations shall or shall not represent the employees. The subject should be 
 dealt with from the standpoint of what are proper regulations for the character of service under consideration, and that 
 the question of whether they shall be applied on the individual properties, in the form of a schedule with certain organiza- 
 tions, depends upon the policy of the individual property and the desire of the majority of the respective classes of em- 
 ployees on that property. 
 
 In line with the preceding paragraph, we desire to call the attention of the Board to the so-called "National Agree- 
 ment" of the Stationary Firemen and Oilers, which was executed January 16, 1920, only one month and a half before the 
 return of the roads to private control. So far as we have been able to learn, this Organization had no contract on a single 
 road prior to the so-called "National Agreement", and has, so far as we can learn, only a very limited membership on but 
 very few of the roads represented by this Committee. It would be manifestly unfair not only to the Management but 
 to the employees on roads where this Organization is not represented, or where their membership is in the minority, to 
 place them under the rules and control of that Organization. 
 
 As will be brought out under the rules of other so-called "National Agreements" apparently many of them are taken 
 from the so-called "National Agreement" covering the shop employees. The preponderating work of the shop employees 
 is at fixed points, while the preponderating work of the Maintenance of Way and Signal Department employees covers 
 considerable distances and ranges of territory. The rules of the shop agreement covering the use of the employees away 
 from the fixed points apply only in emergency, while similar rules for Signal Department and Maintenance of Way Em- 
 ployees, if applied to them, would be effective in the preponderating or characteristic conditions of the service. To extend 
 to the preponderating or typical conditions in any department, rules of another department which are applied only under 
 emergency or exceptional conditions, is wholly unreasonable and unjust, and we hold that the Management of no railroad, 
 if free to negotiate its own schedule, could justify the granting of such rules and that the imposition upon the Managements 
 of rules which disregard the conditions attaching to the service would make it impossible for the Managements to meet 
 and discharge their responsibility for the honest, efficient and economical operation of their properties. Rules should be 
 practicable of application without incurring penalties; any rules which are impracticable of application, and which con- 
 sequently result in penalty payments under ordinary conditions, are unsound, unreasonable and uneconomical and should 
 be emphatically declined. 
 
 The proposed so-called New "National Agreement" served upon the Roads by the Maintenance of Way organization 
 is more drastic and restrictive than the one given that Organization by the United States Railroad Administration. 
 
 * . 
 
 This Committee contended at various times during the wage hearings that the consideration of the request made by 
 
 the organization representatives for the continuation or perpetuation of the so-called "National Agreements" was not 
 properly before the Board in connection with the wage issue because from our point of view the spirit and intent of Section 
 301 of the Transportation Act had not been complied with, except on some of the Southeastern roads and perhaps one or 
 two others where the Managements agreed with the organization representatives to refer the matter to this Board for decision. 
 
The organizations have submitted to 'the Board a large hst of railroads on all of which they claim that the require- 
 ments of Section 301 of the Act have been fulfilled. We cannot agree with such claims. We cannot believe that serving 
 notice upon the various railroads by the organization committeemen (who stated that they had instructions that they 
 might discuss, but must not change or modify in any manner, provisions of proposed schedules providing for the continua- 
 tion of the so-called "National Agreements") constitutes the character of negotiations contemplated by Section 301 of the 
 Transportation Act, yet this was the method of procedure followed by the Organizations which held "National Agreements", 
 and which their representatives claim was compliarce with the Act, and so certified to this Board. 
 
 In Decision No. 2 your Honorable Board has stated that further hearings on the question of rules, working conditions, 
 and schedules will be held and a decision rendered thereon as soon thereafter as practicable. We firmly believe that the 
 Board after considering our foregoing statements supplemented and illustrated by the following detailed analysis of 
 certain of the rules, will be convinced that the widely varying conditions on the different railroads can be properly con- 
 sidered and disposed of only by direct negotiations on the individual properties, and will accordingly deny the request of 
 the employees for the continuation or perpetuation of the so-called "National Agreements", together with the interpretations 
 and rulings thereon. 
 
ABOLITION OF PIECE WORK 
 
 Mention was made several times yesterday that if the employees were permitted to use their own 
 discretion, or if influence was not used to prevent them from using their own discretion and making their 
 own selection, that there would not be much opposition by the men to the piecework method of pay. We 
 will read into the records here the following which appears in Official Circular No. 86 issued by the Railway 
 Employees' Department of the American Federation of Labor, under date of December 30, 1918: 
 
 LETTER ON ABOLITION OF PIECEWORK 
 
 "Mr. W. S. Carter, Director, "December 27, 1918. 
 
 "Division of Labor, 
 
 "I. C. C. Building, City. 
 "Dear Sir: 
 
 "Under date of November 4 we addressed a communication to the Director General on the 
 subject of abolishing piecework on all railroads, urging that this action be taken in the form ' 
 of a General Order in compliance with the expressed desire of the members of our organizations 
 who have been compelled to work under the piecework system. In the same letter we also em- 
 bodied a request that all piece workers be granted at least 13 cents per hour above their piece- 
 work earnings as shown by pay roll records of December, 1917, this increase to be effective from 
 January 1, 1918, up to and including the date when piece^irork would be abolished. 
 
 "The question of abolishing piecework and the insistent demands that these men be granted 
 the same ratio of increase as given to all hourly workers, rendering the same class of service in 
 the same trade and shop, together with the proper application of the awards to the employees 
 who were previously receiving a bonus and was cancelled without due notice, have been burning 
 questions for several months back, and in fact since the issuance of Supplement No. 4 on July 25. 
 We have taken this matter up with the several divisions of the Railroad Administration repeatedly, 
 but up to the present time no definite results have been secured. 
 
 "In order to retain control of the membership who are now more determined than even that 
 piecework shall be abolished from all systems, the delay in adjustment of these matters materially 
 , contributing to this state of feeling, we have found it necessary to issue a circular letter to all 
 system federations advising that a meeting be called for the purpose of deciding on date of notice 
 to be served on the railroad officials when piecework will be discontinued. These instructions 
 are being carried out on all roads where the piecework practice is in effect, and the members are 
 warned against any suspension of work, or reduction of output, the change to be brought about 
 without in any way affecting the efficiency of the service. 
 
 "We would rather have preferred a settlement of this question in a more orderly manner, 
 feeling, however, that the only course offering relief has been followed. 
 
 "May we again urge upon you the necessity of hastening all possible the interpretations of 
 the orders as they apply to pieceworkers and bonus payments in order to enable us to make some 
 report to the membership on these questions which have been so seriously delayed, and have 
 already exhausted all patience. We understand that the decisions have been in the hands of 
 the Director General for some time, and should in our opinion have satisfactorily settled these 
 matters without entailing the dissatisfaction that now exists. 
 
 "Trusting you will fully appreciate our desire to secure an early decision of these matters and 
 hoping to be advised of action taken, I am, 
 
 , . "Yours very truly, 
 
 "B. M. JEWELL, 
 "Acting President Railway Employees' Department." 
 
 HONOR ROLL— ABOLITION OF PIECEWORK 
 
 "In order to secure accurate information as to the number of roads abolishing piece work and 
 to lend encouragement to our members in their efforts to rid themselves of the accursed practice, 
 we feel that it is not only appropriate to list under this heading, but believe by this means the 
 information gathered will be of much value to all concerned". 
 
 "We have received many letters from time to time advising of contemplated action on this 
 matter, but unfortunately we have not compiled this information as a ready reference. The 
 few roads hereunder listed represent a good beginning, but by no means complete the list that 
 properly come under this heading, we therefore hope that no offense will be taken if some have 
 been overlooked, and kindly request that we hear from you on this matter at your earliest con- 
 venience, filing copy of all correspondence exchanged on the subject and advising of present status. 
 
' In view of tMe importance of this question the same should be handled as a system federation 
 and not as a local matter. It should also be understood that the movement is supported by all 
 of the federated trades, even if but one or more organizations are at present affected. 
 
 "We are not unmindful of the fact that more or less opposition can be expected from the officials 
 on some roads where piecework has become a "hobby", although having no further reason to 
 recommend it, other than forcing upon the employees a condition that was not in any way accept- 
 able. We have confidence, however, in the judgment of the officers and members to handle 
 this matter with tact and diplomacy and avoid any action that will precipitate either suspension 
 of work or interfere with the efficient operation of the road. 
 
 "GET YOUR RAILROAD ON THE HONOR LIST 
 
 "Baltimore & Ohio. 
 
 "Delaware, Lackawanna & Western. 
 
 "Atlantic Coast Line, ultimatum has been served. • ' 
 
 "Chicago, Burlington & Quincy, system federation has served notice that piecework will be 
 discontinued after January 2, 
 
 "New York Central (Elkhart, Ind., shops), notice served by employees that they decline to 
 accept piecework cards after January 1." 
 
 Further in this same connection the follbwing appears in Official Circular No. 87 issued by the Railway 
 Employees' Department of the American Federation of Labor, under date of January 8, 1919: 
 
 "Dear Sirs and Brothers: As a New Year greeting we are pleased to quote hereunder a copy 
 of telegram from Mr. W. G. McAdoo to all Regional Directors, which we feel assured will sound 
 the death knell of the piecework practice on all railroads if our members are truly sincere in 
 their desire to abolish it for all time. We feel fully convinced that prompt and conclusive evidence 
 will not be found wanting in clearly demonstrating this fact." 
 
 (Telegram) 
 
 "Washington, D. C, December 31, 1918. 
 
 "A. H. Smith, Regional Director, Eastern Region, New York, New York. 
 "C. H. Markham, Regional Director, Allegheny Region, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 "N. D. Maher, Regional Director, Pocohontas Region, Roanoke, Va. 
 "B. I. Winchell, Regional Director, Southern Region, Atlanta, Ga. 
 "Hale Holden, Regional Director, Central Western Region, Chicago, 111. 
 "R. H. Aishton, Regional Director, Northwestern Region, Chicago, 111. 
 "B. F. Bush, Regional Director, Southwestern Region, St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 "Evidence has been presented to me that the shop men throughout the country 
 by a very large majority have expressed a preference to be paid on the hourly basis 
 as provided in Supplement No. 4 t.o General Order No. 27, rather than the piece work basis 
 which is in effect on many railroads. It is entirely agreeable to the Railroad Administra- 
 tion for the hourly basis, which it has established as reasonable, to be adopted when 
 a substantial majority of the employees so desire. You are therefore directed to discon- 
 tinue piece work system on any road in your region and substitute therefore the basis 
 of payment provided in Supplement No. 4 to General Order No. 27, whenever a sub- 
 stantial majority of the employees desire such a change. It is important that this 
 matter be handled without delay or hesitation and with a sympathetic purpose to carry 
 out fully the spirit of these instructions. Please see that all officials concerned are 
 properly and promptly advised so that they may act without delay as the occasions 
 arise. 
 
 "(Signed) W. G. McADOO" 
 
 "With this information at hand there need be no further hesitation on the part of the members 
 to get together in this important matter and make their position clear to the management. 
 
 "We have mailed a copy of this letter to each system federation secretary in advance of having 
 incorporated in this circular, and would therefore request the secretaries to convey the informa- 
 tion to the membership of all crafts at all points on the system to the end that prompt measures 
 be taken to carry out the following instructions. 
 
"It is our desire to canvass the situation thoroughly and determine without question of 
 doubt where we stand on this question. We therefore request that arrangements be made to 
 secure a complete vote of all shop crafts, whether employed on piece work or hourly basis, this 
 vote to be compiled separately for each craft, and also giving the vote separately for men now 
 working piece work from those working on the hourly basis. 
 
 "Name of craft. 
 
 "Number of employees. 
 
 "Number of piece workers voting to abolish. 
 
 "Number of hourly workers voting to abolish. 
 
 "The result of this vote is to be sent to the chairman of craft or general chairman of the Sys- 
 tem Federation, who will compile same and address communication to the Federal Manager 
 of the Railroad, advising him of the expressed desires of the membership and requesting a con- 
 ference for the federated committee, two copies of all correspondence exchanged on this subject 
 to be furnished this department in order that we may handle direct with the administration. 
 
 "Inasmuch as it will necessarily take some time to adjust the forces to this change, you are 
 requested to give the management at least 15 days' notice after the vote has been canvassed, 
 the maximum time limit not to exceed thirty days. 
 
 "In conclusion we believe it will not be amiss to remind the officers and members that your 
 prompt and decisive action on this question is of vital concern to the future of your organization- 
 We have waited many years for this opportunity, let us not be found wanting. Do not be content 
 with a majority vote, see that it is UNANIMOUS and that nothing is left undone on your part 
 to make it so. 
 
 "This matter is now in your hands to be disposed of, it therefore, behooves every man to 
 be up and doing, if we would successfully cope with the situation and effectively eradicate the 
 last vestige of the accursed piece work practice from every railroad in this country. 
 
 "Wishing you every success and eagerly awaiting the results -of your efforts in this matter. 
 
 "Fraternally yours, 
 
 "B. M. JEWELL, 
 "Acting President. 
 
 "JOHN SCOTT 
 
 "Secretary-Treasurer." 
 
 "Since the issuance of telegram from Mr. McAdoo with regard to abolishing piece work, we 
 have received advice from the System Federation officersfon the Pennsylvania Railroad to the 
 effect that the railroad officials were about to poll the system to determine whether the employes 
 working piece work desired to have it retained or abolished. This matter has been taken up 
 with the administration and instructions issued to the Regional Director advising that it is not 
 the intent or purpose for the railroad officials to take a poll on this question. The telegram plainly 
 states that when the request is made by a substantial majority of the employees to abolish the 
 piecework practice it shall be abolished. We therefore request that this matter be handled in 
 accordance with instructions contained in the above circular letter and that you permit of no 
 intimidation on the part of any railroad official in deciding this question." 
 
 We believe that it is propaganda of this kind which influences men — sometimes against their own 
 better judgment. 
 
 For the further information of the Board we will also read into the record at this time a copy of the 
 report of the officers of the Railway Employees' Department of the American Federation of Labor to the 
 officers and delegates to the Fifth Biennial Convention held at Kansas City, Mo., beginning Monday, 
 April 12, 1920, in which appears under the heading "Abolition of Piece-Work", the following: 
 
 ABOLITION OF PIECE WORK 
 
 "On July 25th, 1918, Supplement No. 4 to General Order No. 27 was issued, granting to all 
 employees, on an hourly basis, 13 cents additional to what had been granted under General Order 
 No. 27. 
 
 "Section 8 of Article 4, Supplement 4, provided, 'Employees on piece work basis shall not 
 receive less than the minimum rate per hour awarded to hourly workers, including time and one- 
 half for overtime.* 
 
 8 
 
"This section was construed by Board of Adjustment No. 2 to mean that the 13 cents granted 
 to employees by Supplement No. 4 applied only to hourly rates and not to piece work earnings, 
 and several rulings were made to the effect that piece workers could receive under Supplement No. 4 
 only a guarantee that their piece work earnings would not fall below the hourly rate established 
 for employees under Supplement No. 4. 
 
 "This section was strenuously objected to by men on a piece work basis as being discrimina- 
 tion against this class of employees, and after several unsuccessful attempts had been made to 
 change the attitude of the U. S. Railroad Administration on the matter, the question as to whether 
 piece work ought to be continued or abolished under the circumstances was discussed in several 
 system Federation meetings. 
 
 "As time wore on, resentment over the discrimination became more pronounced and Acting 
 President Jewell suggested the advisability of securing a referendum vote of the piece workers 
 as to whether they wished to have the piece work system abolished. 
 
 "The first move in this direction was at Altoona, Pa., when the employees of that system 
 formed their System Federation in July, 1918, at the convention. 
 
 "It was decided to poll the system on the matter of continuing piece work. 
 
 "On other roads where piece work was in effect, the employees were showing strong evidence 
 of dissatisfaction and being advised of the action taken by the Pennsylvania employees, soon 
 followed in like manner to poll their respective systems, during the months of August and Sep- 
 tember, 1918. Early in October the vote was completed and showed a large majority in favor 
 of the discontinuance of piece work. 
 
 "Notwithstanding this, every effort was still being made by the Railway Employees' Depart- 
 ment to bring about a satisfactory adjustment of this matter that would give to the piece worker 
 the same measure of awards as given to the hourly worker. 
 
 "A considerable exchange of correspondence was conducted with the Railway Administra- 
 tion with this end in view. We quote the following letters and telegrams of evidence of the senti- 
 ment that obtained and were used as further determined effort in this direction: 
 
 "Washington, D. C, Oct. 2, 1918. 
 "Director General of Railroads, 
 "I. C. C. Bldg., 
 
 "Washington, D. C. 
 "Dear Mr. McAdoo: 
 
 "Supplementing my letter to you under date of the 25th ult, calling attention to 
 the general unrest that exists with the members of all shop trades, particularly with 
 the men who have been working piece work, due to the fact that the railway officials seem 
 to be in possession of information other than what has been given out in the form of 
 official circulars from your office, and are denying these men the award granted by 
 Supplement No. 4 on the ground^that the piece work award is fulty covered by General 
 Order No. 27. 
 
 "We quote hereunder a telegram just received from Jacksonville, Fla., which expresses 
 the sentiment of the members *on a large number of roads where the piece work system 
 is in effect, and the railroads official seem to be either handling the same through a mutual 
 understanding with each other, or by instructions from your office of which we have 
 not been advised. 
 
 Telegram 
 " 'B. M. Jewell, " 'Jacksonville, Fla., Oct. 1, 1918. 
 
 " '505 A. F. of L. Bldg., 
 
 " 'Washington, D. C. 
 " 'Sentiment among four hundred piece workers on Seaboard that 
 interpretations we have asked for are being held up until after the Liberty 
 Loan drive ends, then unfavorable decision given, this will greatly curtail 
 sales. Wire me some information suggestion at once. Men's patience 
 about exhausted. 
 
 " '(Signed) J. S. Wilds.' 
 
 "We sincerely trust that you will appreciate the importance of promptly giving out 
 the information and interpretations on all matters which have been passed upon by the 
 Board, in order that the employees will have a general understanding on all questions 
 under contention. 
 
 "Thanking you in anticipation of giving this matter your early and favorable con- 
 sideration, 
 
 "Yours very truly, 
 
 "(Signed) B. M. JEWELL, Acting President, 
 "Railway Employees' Dept." 
 
"Washington, D. C, Oct. 18, 1918 
 "Mr. W. G. McAdoo, 
 
 "Director General of Railroads, 
 
 "Interstate Commerce Bldg., Washington, D. C. 
 "Sir: 
 
 "We, the undersigned committee, representing the piece workers on the railroads of 
 the Southeast, respectfully petition your reconsideration of that portion of Interpretation 
 No. 3, to General Order No. 27, under Supplement No. 4, wherein it applies to the increase 
 for piece workers. 
 
 "We believe that we realize your position in this matter and feel that it was your 
 intention to deal fair with all railroad employees; we further feel that after hearing the 
 case of the men we represent you will agree with us that the piece workers in our case have 
 not received a fair consideration. 
 
 "We notice in almost all your awards, that you have given at least 13 cents per hour 
 increase above the rates in effect, as of Dec. 31, 1917. This has been done in every class of 
 skilled labor and their helpers; it has also been done for the colored help, but for the piece 
 workers, many of them will not receive over 2]/^ cents per hour increase on their back pay. 
 "We realize that some of the piece workers in the past have earned more than the 
 hourly rate men, but we feel that you must know that these men have done a certain 
 amount of work to earn that amount and that their earnings are an absolute guarantee 
 that they did that amount of work. 
 
 "The day workers have always received a neat sum of money in the way of back 
 pay checks and the piece workers have been led to believe that they would receive the 
 same increases per hour in the form of back pay that the hourly workers received, in 
 accordance with your promise in General Order No. 27, page 15, which states as follows: 
 " '(1) The piece worker shall receive for each hour worked the same in- 
 crease per hour as is awarded to the hourly worker engaged in similar employ- 
 ment in the same shop.* 
 
 "Many piece workers have bought liberty bonds freely on the strength of the above 
 promise, with the result that they now have debts on their hands that will be hard for 
 them to meet, if they do not receive the same consideration in the matter of back pay 
 as the hourly rated men. 
 
 "We hope you will understand our position clearly and bear in mind that we fully 
 realize the complications arising when the many different rates and systems of piece work 
 are considered, but for your information, we wish to point out that under the Interpre- 
 tation No. 3, to General Order No. 27, and Supplement No. 4, many of the piece workers 
 on roads with a low hourly rate have had piece work rates established that enabled them 
 to earn as much on piece work as the piece workers on other roads having a higher hourly 
 rate and will receive in back pay as much, and in many cases more, as we are asking for 
 the men we represent, and we do not think it fair that some piece workers should receive 
 a large increase in addition to their earnings in back pay, while other piece workers 
 earning the same amount on piece work, should receive practically no increases just 
 because of the method of application. 
 
 "We claim that inasmuch as you have made it possible for all classes of employees 
 in the shop crafts to receive back pay since January 1st, at the rate of 13 cents per hour, 
 it is no more than fair to ask that piece workers should also have at least 12 cents per 
 hour back pay or an increase of 13 cents per hour above their earnings as of December 31, 
 1917. And as stated before on most piece work roads the hourly rate for such employees 
 was very low, while their hourly rates being increased by General Order No. 27, to the 
 minimum rates established therein gives such employees the increase we are asking for, 
 but on the roads we represent, while the piece workers did not earn any more than the 
 piece workers on the roads having a low hourly rate, the fact that our hourly rates were 
 much higher, will deny our piece workers the same increase that the piece workers on 
 other roads, having a low hourly rate, will receive. 
 
 "We believe that it was your intention that all mechanics of the shop crafts should 
 receive at least 13 cents per hour above their rate of December 31, 1917, in back pay, 
 and we hereby request that you again consider this matter and give to the piece workers 
 as favorable consideration as was given to other employees. 
 
 'We consider that the same increase per hour awarded the hourly workers, above the 
 45 cent minimum established for Carmen — the 55 cent minimum established for other 
 mechanics and the 33 cent minimum established for helpers, which was 12 cents per 
 hour, should be added to the earnings of piece workers in addition to their earnings of 
 December 31, 1917. This would eliminate many differential rates that will still exist 
 
 10 
 
under Interpretation.-No. 3, to General Order No. 27, under Supplement No. 4, and 
 would establish a standard increase whereby the back pay for all piece workers may be 
 figured. 
 
 "The piece workers in the southeast are a highly skilled class of specialists, and while 
 their piece work earnings may compare invariably with the rate of the hourly workers 
 and perhaps seem fair in the eyes of those not familiar with the details of their work, 
 we wish to say it is only the years' of experience and expert training that enables these 
 men, most of whom are on specialized operations, to earn their present compensation, 
 while the average mechanic, not specialized on such work, could not begin to turn out 
 the same amount of work in the same time. 
 
 "These men have had many invitations to change to higher paying positions in other 
 industries, but have remained on the railroads with the expectation of receiving the 
 same consideration in back pay that was conceded to the hourly workers. But if these 
 men cannot get a reconsideration of this interpretation and they are forced to accept 
 other offers of employment, we know that the railroads are going to suffer a material 
 loss this winter, which we feel can be avoided. 
 
 "Again requesting your earnest personal consideration of this matter and a speedy 
 reply, we are, 
 
 "Respectfully yours, 
 
 "(Signed) H. M. Fallon, 105 Brady St., Savannah, Ga. 
 
 "P. D. Laudemann, 426 MacBain Building, Roanoke, Va. 
 "B. H. Congleton, 116 Dinwiddle St., Portsmouth, Va. 
 "R. E. Falligant, 71 Sweat St., Waycross, Ga." 
 
 "Address reply to P. D. Laudemann, 426 MacBain Building, Roanoke, Va." 
 
 "On November 4th, Acting President Jewell followed up this letter to Director 
 General McAdoo, with a letter pointing out that the piece workers had been unfairly 
 dealt with and pointing out that due to this, many piece workers would refuse to continue 
 the system after a given date and formally asked that the piece work system be abolished." 
 
 "507 A. P. of L. Bldg., Washington, D. C., Nov. 4, 1918 
 
 "Hon. Wm. G. McAdoo, 
 
 "Director General of Railroads, 
 "I. C. C. Building, City. 
 
 "Dear Mr. McAdoo: 
 
 "Por the past several weeks, especially since the issuance of Interpretation No. 3 
 to General Order No. 27, which was the first positive statement made setting forth the 
 amount of increase granted to the men employed on piece work, we have received and 
 are still receiving many protests from these men, all being united in their contentions 
 that they have not been fairly dealt with in the measure of increase granted in Supplement 
 No. 4; we wish to state that these protests have not been inspired by any action on our 
 part, but represent the unanimous sentiment of piece workers on all systems. 
 
 "Their contentions are based upon the interpretation of Sec. D of General Order No. 
 27, 'Rates of Wages of Railroad Employees paid upon a piece work basis', which is 
 construed to mean that they were promised the same increase per hour above their actual 
 earnings as granted to the hourly workers engaged upon similar work in the same shop. 
 
 "While many of the protests have been framed in the most positive language, demand- 
 ing that their representatives take this question up at once and secure for them the 
 fulfillment of that promise, we have hesitated in this matter to permit of an expression 
 from all sections, the delay in this case is attributable to the fact that these men were 
 loth to believe that they had been discriminated against to this extent, and still have 
 full confidence that such an injustice will be rectified. 
 
 "Some time prior to the issuance of Supplement No. 4, and because of the insistent 
 demands of the employees that steps be taken to eliminate the piece work system, we 
 started a canvass of the employees on all systems for the purpose of securing an expression 
 from all men so employed, with a view of presenting these facts before you. This poll 
 is now nearing completion and we are in possession of sufficient data to state that fully 
 98 per cent of the men employed upon the piece work basis are favorable to ^'.-^'ng the 
 same entirely abolished. 
 
 11 
 
"The feeling against a continuance of the piece work system is best illustrated by 
 the actions on the employees of several roads who have taken a positive stand that they 
 will discontinue the practice on and after a stated time, notwithstanding the fact that 
 they are aware that we are doing all possible to hasten the presentation of our appeal to 
 you to have it abolished. Such a sentiment may develop into a rather serious situation 
 and which we are doing our utmost to avoid, giving in each instance positive instructions 
 to the members that no action must be taken which contemplates a stoppage of work or 
 reduction of output. 
 
 "The piece work and bonus systems in effect on a number of roads have in all cases 
 been inaugurated against the protests of the employees, and but for the fact that they 
 were unable to get rid of it without involving a general strike, action on the matter would 
 not have been long deferred; on the other hand, the railroad officials have, for reasons 
 best known to themselves, not only refused to discontinue the piece work and bonus, 
 but have sought to extend the practice wherever possible, although we have been con- 
 vinced that the practice was not only costly to the railroads but demoralizing to the 
 employees, and we feel assured that you are in possession of sufficient evidence in support 
 of this contention. 
 
 "In view of the fact that most of these piece workers received much less than 13 
 cents increase over and above their hourly earnings in December, 1917, many of them 
 receiving no increase whatever, and the further fact that the result of the poll taken by 
 these employees settles without any question of doubt that they earnestly desire to have 
 the piece work and bonus systems abolished, we are directed as the officers of the Railway 
 Employees' Department of the A. F, of L. to appeal to you on behalf of the employees 
 affected as per Supplement No. 4 to General Order No. 27 addendum and amendments 
 thereto, to the end that these men who have been employed on the piece work basis, or 
 are now so employed, be granted not less than 13 cents increase above their hourly earn- 
 ings as shown by the pay roll records of December, 1917, this increase to apply on each 
 hour worked and to be retroactive to January 1, 1918, and to continue in force until 
 order has been issued by you abolishing the piece work and bonus systems. 
 
 "We are convinced that a compliance with this request will meet a long felt want, 
 and contribute immeasurably towards the efficiency of the service and in securing the 
 hearty support and co-operation of the employees. 
 
 "Hoping that this matter will receive your early and favorable consideration, 
 
 ' "Yours very truly, 
 
 "B. M. JEWELL, 
 
 "Acting President Railway Employees' Department, 
 "American Federation of Labor. 
 
 "Due to the excitement caused by the termination of the war on November 11th, the 
 matter dragged until December 28th, when Acting President Jewell again wrote a strong 
 letter to Director General McAdoo, calling his attention to his letter of November 4th. 
 A few days thereafter the following order was issued by the Director General: 
 
 TELEGRAM 
 
 "Washington, D. C., Dec. 31, 1918 
 
 "A. H. Smith, Regional Director, Eastern Region, New York, N. Y. 
 "C. H. Markham, Regional Director, Allegheny Region, Philadelphia, Pa. 
 "N. D. Maher, Regional Director, Pocahontas Region, Roanoke, Va. 
 "B. L. Winchell, Regional Director, Southern Region, Atlanta, Ga. 
 "Hale Holden, Regional Director, Central Western Region, Chicago, 111. 
 "R. H. Aishton, Regional Director, Northwestern Region, Chicago, 111. 
 "B. F. Bush, Regional Director, Southwestern Region, St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 "Evidence has been presented to me that the shopmen throughout the country by 
 a very large majority have expressed a preference to be paid on an hourly basis as provided 
 in Supplement No. 4 to General Order No. 27, rather than the piece work basis which 
 is in effect on many railroads. It is entirely agreeable to the railroad administration 
 for the hourly basis, which it has established as reasonable, to be adopted when a sub- 
 stantial majority of the employees so desire. 
 
 12 
 
"You are therefore directed to discontinue piece work system on any road in your 
 region and substitute therefor the basis of payment provided in Supplement No. 4 to 
 General Order No. 27, whenever a substantial majority of the employees desire such a 
 change. It is important that this matter be handled without delay or hesitation and 
 with a sympathetic purpose to carry out fully the spirit of these instructions. Please 
 see that all officials concerned are properly and promptly advised so that they may act 
 without delay as the occasions arise. 
 
 "W. G. McAdoo." 
 
 "Quite a few railroads had completed their canvass, but others were dragging behind 
 and the telegram and letter of instructions were sent out from this Department on January 
 8, 1919, in Bulletin No. 87, notifying all delinquents to complete their canvass and submit 
 their votes through the Department to the United States Railroad Administration. This 
 was done in due time and every piece work road complied with the request, returning 
 not only a substantial majority but a 98 per cent vote to discontinue piece work; in 
 this manner piece work on railroads passed into history, at the earnest solicitation and 
 vote of men who had been engaged on the piece work basis on their several roads for a 
 number of years. 
 
 "One feature should not be overlooked in connection with this matter, and that is 
 that only those directly involved on the piece work basis had a voice in the matter of its 
 discontinuance, effectually discounting the theory that men employed on a piece work 
 basis preferred it to a satisfactory hourly rating." 
 
 Our purpose in reading this correspondence into the record is to show that there was not very much the 
 matter with piece-work up until the time the piece-workers were denied any recognition in the, various 
 wage orders which were issued by the Railroad Administration. We believe it shows conclusively that if 
 they had been given recognition they would have been entirely satisfied to go along as piece-workers; 
 that the influence that was exerted by the heads of the organizations to turn these men against piece- 
 work has had a very strong and wide influence. We believe also that with proper consideration for the 
 reward of effort at this time that the men would be more than satisfied in the majority of cases to return 
 to the piece-work system. 
 
 13 
 
DECISIONS COVERING RE-INSTATEMENT 
 
 The Chairman asked if we could furnish any information or a list of decisions of Railway Board or 
 Adjustment No. 2, with reference to the reinstatement of employees. 
 
 We have prepared and submit herewith a list showing docket numbers which contain decisions 
 rendered by Railway Board of Adjustment No. 2, the Divisions of Operation and Labor, and by the Director 
 General, covering cases of reinstatement of employees. 
 
 Owing to the fact that there are 69 different dockets involved, we will not attempt to read them into 
 the record, but the list which follows gives reference to the dockets in question. 
 
 LIST OF DECISIONS OF RAILWAY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NO. 2, 
 
 DIVISIONS OF OPERATION AND LABOR, AND THE DIRECTOR 
 
 GENERAL, HAVING REFERENCE TO REINSTATEMENT 
 
 OF EMPLOYEES, AFFECTING DISCIPLINE 
 
 Divisions of Operation and Labor 
 
 New York Central R. R., Decision No. 26. 
 
 X)ecision No. 44. 
 
 Director General's 
 
 Decision No. 172. 
 
 SE-10 
 
 SE-810 
 
 MR-381 
 
 SE-808 
 
 AL-424 
 
 SE-827 
 
 MY-510 
 
 912 
 
 AY-624 
 
 963 
 
 JY-644 
 
 1017 
 
 JY-654 
 
 1029 
 
 JY-665 
 
 1061 
 
 JY-685 
 
 1062 
 
 AG-699 
 
 1063 
 
 AG-728 
 
 1072 
 
 AG-743 
 
 1085 
 
 SE-752 
 
 1103 
 
 SE-782 
 
 
 Railway Board of Adjustment No. 2 
 
 1107 1378 
 
 1119 1398 
 
 1120 1459 
 1136 1470 
 1153 1550 
 1189 1552 
 1223 1560 
 1235 1575 
 1266 1611 
 1268 1675 
 1338 1680 
 1350 1684 
 1356 1722 
 
 1781 
 1808 
 1809 
 1811 
 1812 
 1813 
 1924 
 1929 
 1934 
 1946 
 1959 
 2027 
 2039 
 
 The foregoing list includes cases without regard to whether the claims of the employees were sustained 
 or denied. Due to the course pursued during the Railroad Administration control, however, unless cases 
 were completely disposed of by the railroads and the employees affected, they had to be submitted as con- 
 troversies without regard to their merits. This produced a state of indifference on the part of the rep- 
 resentatives of the employees as to whether the cases were settled or not and necessitated repeated con- 
 ferences with the local committees aild general committees on cases which ordinarily would never have 
 been handled beyond the local officers resulting in a continuous state of unrest and agitation which could 
 have no other effect than to lessen the respect of the employees for the officials and weaken the competency 
 of the official in his ability to enforce discipline. 
 
 The effect upon the morale of the organization from this indifference to the authority of the local 
 official needs no elaboration. 
 
 In connection with this matter which has been touched upon several times — as to why better discipline 
 wds not maintained, we would call attention to the fact that the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Rail- 
 road at Milwaukee introduced a special pneumatic riveter and one of their foremen, who was desirous of 
 securing a greater output by the use of this tool, was attacked on December 9, 1920, by one of the boiler- 
 makers and severely handled by practically the entire force. The men also threatened the supervising 
 officers as well as the General Superintendent of Motive Power. This, together with some of the decisions 
 which you will read by referring to the above list, will explain perhaps why it was not possible to maintain 
 better discipline on the railroads during Federal control. 
 
 14 
 
METHOD OF PAY— OUTSmE INDUSTRIES 
 
 In order that the Board may have some idea as to the prevalence with which piece work is followed in 
 outside analogous industries we telegraphed to a number of firms to develop information along this line. 
 We endeavored to select in all cases only those firms which made repairs to cars or locomotives and not 
 to the building of them. From the replies which were received, the following statement has been made: 
 
 STATEMENT SHOWING FIRMS WHO ADVISE THAT THE PIECE-WORK BASIS OF PAY 
 IS IN EFFECT AT THEIR PLANTS WHERE CARS AND OR LOCOMOTIVES ARE 
 
 REPAIRED 
 
 NAME OF FIRM 
 
 American Steel Foundries 
 
 American Car & Foundry Co 
 
 Buffalo Steel Car Co 
 
 Haskell & Barker Car Co 
 
 Illinois Car Company 
 
 Interstate Car Co 
 
 Illinois Car & Mfg. Co 
 
 Laconia Car Co 
 
 Liberty Car & Equipment Co 
 
 Lima Locomotive Works 
 
 Merchants Dispatch Transit Co 
 
 Pressed Steel Car Co 
 
 Ryan Car Co 
 
 Steel Car Co 
 
 Streator Car Co 
 
 American Locomotive Co 
 
 Baldwin Locomotive Works 
 
 Bettendorf Co 
 
 Cambria Steel Co 
 
 Chicago Steel Car Co 
 
 Koppel Industrial Car Equipment Co, 
 
 Middleton Car Co 
 
 Midvale Steel Co 
 
 Pullman Co 
 
 Standard Steel Car Co 
 
 Westinghouse Air Brake Co 
 
 Lenoir Car Works 
 
 Ralston Steel Car Co 
 
 LOCATION 
 
 Chicago, 111 
 
 New York City 
 
 Buffalo, N. Y 
 
 Chicago, 111 
 
 Urbana, Ohio 
 
 Indianapolis, Ind. . 
 
 Hammond, Ind 
 
 Laconia, N. H 
 
 Chicago, 111 
 
 Lima, Ohio 
 
 E. Rochester, N. Y 
 
 New York City 
 
 Chicago, 111 
 
 Euclid, Ohio. . . . . . 
 
 Chicago, 111 
 
 New York City 
 
 Philadelphia, Pa 
 
 Bettendorf, Iowa. . 
 
 Johnstown, Pa 
 
 Harvey, 111 
 
 Pittsburgh, Pa 
 
 Middleton, Pa 
 
 Philadelphia, Pa. . . 
 Pullman, 111 
 
 Pittsburgh, Pa 
 
 New York City 
 
 Lenoir, Tenn 
 
 Columbus, Ohio . . . 
 
 REMARKS 
 
 None. 
 
 None. 
 
 None. 
 
 None. 
 
 None. 
 
 None. 
 
 None. 
 
 None. 
 
 None. 
 
 None. 
 
 None. 
 
 None. 
 
 None. 
 
 None. 
 
 None, 
 (a) 85% to 90%. 
 (a) Practically all. 
 (a) Almost entirely, 
 (a) About 80%. 
 (a) As far as possible, 
 (a) Almost exclusively. , 
 
 (a) Virtually all. 
 
 (a) About 80%. 
 
 (b) 90% of repair work at Pullman 
 
 Works is on piece-work basis, 
 (a) Practically all. 
 (a) Predominates. 
 
 With minimum hourly wage 
 
 guaranteed. 
 With guaranteed minimum 50 
 cents per hour, maximum 75 
 cents per hour. 
 Average earnings about 20% 
 
 (a) Reply does not indicate how the balance of the men engaged in this class of work are paid. 
 
 (b) At the operating department repair shops, of which there are five, employees are paid upon 
 
 hourly or daily basis. Reply does not indicate how the remaining 10% of the employees 
 at the Pullman works are paid. 
 
 THE FOLLOWING FIRMS ADVISE THAT BOTH PIECE-WORK AND HOURLY BASIS 
 OF PAY IS IN EFFECT AT THEIR PLANTS WHERE CARS AND OR LOCOMO- 
 TIVES ARE REPAIRED 
 
 NAME OF FIRM 
 
 LOCATION 
 
 REMARKS 
 
 Davenport Locomotive Works 
 
 Keith Railway Equipment Co 
 
 Manitowoc Shipbuilding Corp. 
 
 Rome Locomotive & Machine Works. 
 
 Davenport, Iowa. . . . 
 Chicago, 111 
 
 None. 
 
 None. 
 
 Manitowoc, Wis 
 
 Rome, N. Y 
 
 Intend eventually to put all opera- 
 tions on piece-work basis. 
 Employees are transferred to piece- 
 
 
 
 work basis as fast as rates can be 
 established. 
 
 15 
 
THE FOLLOWING FIRMS ADVISE THAT THE HOURLY BASIS OF PAY IS IN EFFECT 
 AT THEIR PLANTS WHERE CARS AND OR LOCOMOTIVES ARE REPAIRED 
 
 NAME OF FIRM 
 Pittsburgh Boiler & Machine Co 
 
 Pullman Company 
 
 Sctdlin Steel Co 
 
 Southland Steamship Co , 
 
 Woodward Iron Co 
 
 LOCATION 
 Pittsburgh, Kan 
 
 (5 Operating Division 
 repair shops) 
 
 St. Louis, Mo 
 
 Savannah, Ga 
 
 Woodward, Ala 
 
 REMARKS 
 
 Expect to go on piece-work basis as 
 soon as volume of business justi- 
 fies. 
 
 Employees at these five shops are 
 
 gaid either on the hourly or daily 
 asis. At Pullman, Works, Pull- 
 man, 111., however, 90% of em- 
 ployees are paid on piece-work 
 basis. 
 
 In all departments except car and 
 locomotive departments, piece- 
 work basis is used. Car and loco- 
 motive departments too small to 
 establish piece-work rates. 
 
 Negotiating for piece-work basis, 
 which will, undoubtedly be 
 placed into effect. 
 
 Our shop too small to. establish 
 piece-work basis. 
 
 THE FOLLOWING FIRMS ADVISE THAT THEY DO NOT REPAIR CARS OR LOCOMO- 
 TIVES AND GIVE THE INFORMATION AS SHOWN 
 
 NAME OF FIJIM 
 
 LOCATION 
 
 REMARKS 
 
 American Brake Shoe & Foundry Co. 
 
 Chicago, 111 
 
 Pay to a large extent on piece-work 
 basis. Manufacture shoes and 
 castings only. 
 
 
 Griffin Wheel Company 
 
 Chicago, 111 
 
 Pay on piece-work basis. Work on 
 new wheels only. 
 
 
 Rail Joint Company 
 
 New York, N. Y 
 
 Pay both on hourly and piece-work 
 basis. Manufacture joints for 
 rails. 
 
 
 Railway Steel Spring Co 
 
 New York, N. Y 
 
 Pay on piece-work basis. 
 
 Pay both on hourly and piece-work 
 basis. Furnish apparatus for 
 lighting cars. 
 
 Safety Car Heating & Lighting Co . . . 
 
 NewYork, N. Y 
 
 Standard Steel Works 
 
 Philadelphia, Pa 
 
 Pay on piece-work basis. 
 
 Westinghouse Air Brake Co 
 
 NewYork, N. Y 
 
 Piece-work predominates. 
 
 
 16 
 
CONSTRUCTION PLACED ON RULES NOS. 153 AND 154 
 
 At the afternoon session of Thursday, the 13th — as the members of the Board will recall — a controversy- 
 arose over the construction of Rules 153 and 154 in the agreement covering the shop crafts (pp. 848). 
 
 We had stated to the Board that the carmen had insisted upon a construction of these rules which denied 
 to the railroads the right to employ, for example, experienced and skilled carpenters or painters, unless 
 such carpenters or painters had previously had experience as CAR carpenters or CAR painters; and we had 
 also stated that it was the understanding of the managements that this position of the carmen had been 
 sustained in a letter issued by Mr. Frank McManamy — which letter was read into the record and contained 
 the following: 
 
 "* * * applicants for employment should be required to show that they had served an 
 apprenticeship or had four years' practical experience in any or all of the work enumerated in 
 Rule 154." 
 
 The correctness of our statement both as to the position taken by the carmen's organization in this 
 matter, and as to the meaning of Mr. McManamy's letter was challenged by Mr. Jewell, who held that — 
 
 1st: the carmen's organization had never stood for a construction of rules 153 and 154 that 
 would prevent the employment of experienced painters — for example — even if they had had 
 no experience at CAR painting; and 
 
 2nd: that Mr. McManamy's letter could not be construed as interpreting the rule to prohibit 
 the employment of such men. 
 
 In stating to the Board the constructions or the interpretations placed upon the various rules in the 
 National Agreement, we have only given interpretations susceptible of conclusive proof; and jn conformity 
 with this policy we now desire to read into the record, copies of certain correspondence to show — 
 
 1st: that recognized official spokesmen for the Carmen's organization and for the Railway 
 Employees Department of the American Federation of Labor have insisted on a construc- 
 tion of Rules 153 and 154 which would prohibit the employment as Carmen of skilled 
 journeymen painters unless these men had served an apprenticeship or had four years' 
 actual experience in CAR work; and 
 
 2nd: that in support of this construction of Rules 153 and 154 the General Vice-President of the 
 Carmen's organization cited the very letter from Mr. Frank McManamy which we read 
 into the record of January 13 and which letter the representatives of the employees con- 
 tended did not prohibit the employment of men as carmen who had not had actual experience 
 at CAR work. 
 
 The correspondence, a copy of which we are about to read into the record, arose out of the following 
 circumstances: 
 
 The Charlestown & Western Carolina Railway, needing car painters, had employed a journeyman 
 painter who had served his painters' apprenticeship and had had four years' experience as a painter outside 
 of railroad work. His employment was protested as a violation of Rule 153 of the National Agreement 
 with the Federated Shop Crafts. The question was taken up with the General Chairman of Federation 
 No. 60, at Augusta, Georgia, in May, 1920, and he expressed the view that the employment of the men 
 in question was permissible under Rule No. 153. But in this position, the General Chairman was later 
 overruled by higher authority in the organizations, and in reporting this fact to the management, he furnished 
 it a copy of his letter and the replies thereto. 
 
 His letter setting out the issue involved and giving his own view is as follows: 
 
 "Dear Sir & Brother: 
 
 (Matter in question Rule 153.) 
 "Is it the intent of Rule 153 that the following mechanics must have four years' practial 
 experience in railroad work or is it permisiable to hire a mechanic with four years' experience 
 other than railroad experience the following mechanics I refer to. Coach Carpenters, Painters, 
 Upholsters. 
 
 "A painter made application for job who had four years' experience but had no railroad 
 experience, his experience was outside experience and has served a apprentice Ship as a painter. 
 Is this man eligable to employment in acordance with Rule 153. 
 
 "In the event that there was a vacancye in either of the above departments of the Car depart- 
 ment, and a man makes application who has served an ^.pprentice or who has had four years or more 
 experience at his trade on other than railroad work is it permisable, accordance with this rule 
 153 to allow this man to go to work, or does the rule require that he must have all railroad experience 
 at his trade. 
 
 17 
 
"As General Chairman I was asked to give a ruling on this matter and expressed my opinion 
 as followes, That the same rule should apply to a painter as applyes to a Blacksmith, Machinest, 
 Boilermaker, all we require is that he must serve an apprentice Ship or have four years experience 
 at his trade, and this painter should be aloud to go to work as painter in as much as he has the 
 required amount of experience. 
 
 "Would apprecate if you would advise me on this matter at a early date as possible as we 
 have this painter held up waiting your reply. 
 
 "Thanking you in advance 
 
 "Fraternaly Yours, 
 "(Signed) R. G. Smith General Chairman, Fed. No. 60". 
 
 Under date of June 3, 1920, the General Chairman received a reply from the General Vice-President 
 of the Brotherhood of Railway Carmen, reading as follows: 
 
 Office of General President 
 
 BROTHERHOOD RAILWAY CARMEN 
 
 of America 
 
 "Kansas City, Mo., June 3d, 1920. 
 "Mr. R. G. Smith, 
 
 "Gen'l Chairman, Federation No. 60, 
 "345 Walker St., 
 "Augusta, Ga. 
 "Dear Sir and Brother: — 
 
 "Your letter of May 28th received and contents noted. 
 
 "In reply to the subject matter thereof relative to hiring coach carpenters, painters and 
 upholsterers who have had four years' experience at their trade but not four years' experience 
 in the Car Department, will say that we have numerous decisions rendered by Mr. Frank 
 McManamy, Assistant Director, upon Rule 153 of the National Agreement which specifically 
 states that men must have served an apprenticeship or had four years' practical experience in 
 any or all of the work enumerated in Rule 154; therefore, your ruling as expressed in your opinion 
 is contrary to the ruling made by Mr. Frank McManamy, Assistant Director. 
 
 "I am enclosing copy of ruling made by Mr. McManamy addressed to Mr. C. H. Ewing, 
 Federal Manager, Central Railroad of New Jersey, for your information, and I trust that arrange- 
 ments will be made to comply with the interpretations made on Rule 153 of the National Agree- 
 ment: 
 
 "With best wishes, I remain, 
 
 "Yours fraternally 
 
 "(Signed) Frank Paquin, 
 
 "General Vice-President." 
 «EP:MB 
 "Enc." 
 
 The letter from Mr. McManamy enclosed in Vice-President Paquin's letter to General Chairman 
 Smith is as follows : 
 
 February 19, 1920. 
 C of NJ-NA-153-3. 
 
 "Mr. C. H. Ewing, Federal Manager, 
 "Central Railroad of New Jersey, 
 "Philadelphia, Pa. 
 "Dear Sir: — 
 
 "Referring to your letter to Mr. W. S. Carter, Director, Division of Labor, in which you 
 submitted among others a difference of opinion as to the application of Rule 153 of the National 
 Agreement will advise that the rule, insofar as it relates to the question raised in your submission 
 is clear as written, therefore, it is not deemed necessary to interpret the rule. 
 
 "Concerning the question raised in your submission as to whether or not it is permissible 
 to hire a carpenter as a carman, will advise that applicants for employment should be required 
 to show they had served an apprenticeship or had 4 years' practical experience in any or all of 
 the work enumerated in Rule 154. 
 
 ''Yours very truly, 
 
 "(Signed) Frank McManamy, 
 
 "Assistant Director." 
 
 18 
 
A further letter of advice to General Chairman Smith in reply to his inquiry is as follows: 
 
 RAILWAY EMPLOYES DEPARTMENT 
 
 "Washington, D. C, June 3, 1920. 
 
 ' 'Chas. & West Carolina R. R. ' 
 National Agreement Rule 153 
 Employing house carpenters 
 and painters as carmen". 
 
 "Mr, R. G. Smith, 
 "Augusta, Ga. 
 
 "Dear Sir and Brother: 
 
 "Replying to yours of May 28, in re. above subject. 
 
 "Rule 153, does not permit the employment of Carpenters and Painters, as Carmen, who 
 have not served an apprenticeship, or have had four years' experience on any or all work outlined 
 in Rule 154. 
 
 "You will note it is not permissible to employ painters you refer to. 
 
 "With best wishes, I am, 
 
 "Fraternally yours, 
 
 "(Signed) B. M. Jewell 
 
 "President Ry. E. Dept. 
 "A. F. of L." 
 "No. 2. 
 
 We respectfully submit that the foregoing correspondence conclusively sustains our statement that the 
 Carmen had insistently held that Rules 153 and 154 prohibited the employment of experienced and skilled 
 carpenters and painters for car repair work, unless such men had actually had experience at CAR work; 
 and that they had with equal insistence held that this construction of Rules 153 and 154 was fully sustained 
 by Mr. McManamy's letter. 
 
 During the controversy over this matter, on January 13th, Mr. Jewell made the following statement: 
 
 "Mr. Chairman, for the record only, I want to make just this statement in connection with 
 the case that Dr. Neill cites as to his painter. Individual committeemen may attempt to announce 
 the policy of an organization, and individual officers may, but there are in all organizations certain 
 authorities who announce and define the policies of the organizations. And the case as to the 
 policy of the Brotherhood of Railway Carmen as to their understanding of Rules 163 and 154 — 
 in September, the 28th, in the City of Chicago, the proper body was convened, and they announced . 
 their understanding of this rule, which we will submit for the record later. It is to the effect that 
 a carpenter can be employed in compliance with this rule; it is to the effect that a painter such 
 as would not have had previous experience in painting car equipment could be employed as a 
 carman under this rule." 
 
 From this statement of Mr. Jewell, we understood that the Carmen's organization had now, officially 
 taken the position that Rules 153 and 154 permitted the employment of experienced carpenters, and painters, 
 as Carmen even though they had had no previous experience at CAR work. From the language in the con- 
 cluding part of the statement that such a man as we have been discussing "could be employed as a carman 
 under this rule", it would naturally be inferred that such a man employed "under this rule", held all the 
 rights under the agreement that any man would hold who had been employed in conformity with the pro- 
 visions of the agreement. There is no suggestion that such men could be employed only by the consent 
 of the General Chairman on eaich individual property; an,d that when employed under such permission they 
 were to be regarded as merely temporary employees to fill a gap ; that they were to be given only a condi- 
 tional seniority; and that they were to be promptly thrown out of their employment whenever carmen 
 seeking employment came along and made application for their places. But from a reading of the official 
 report of the action taken by the General Chairman of the Carmen's Organization at their meeting in 
 Chicago, beginning September 28th, 1920, the above fairly describes the only status which the resolution 
 of General Chairmen permits to experienced men, whose experience has NOT been on CAR work. 
 
 10 
 
From the reading of this official report of the resolutions adopted by the General Chairmen, we can 
 only understand that' they reasserted the very same contention that General Vice President Paquin and 
 Mr. Jewell had set out in their letters already quoted, and that they were still insistent that Rules 153 and 
 154 prohibited the employment as carmen of experienced carpenters and painters — for example — unless 
 they had gained their experience at actual CAR work. And in support of this construction of these rules, 
 the General Chairmen, in their resolution, cite a letter from Mr. McManamy, the text of which is identical 
 with the text of the McManamy letter which was read into the record on January 13th. 
 
 The only understanding of the resolution of the General Chairmen that we can gather from reading 
 it is that, after reasserting the position taken by Mr. Paquin and Mr. Jewell, on Rules 153 and 154, it pro- 
 vides that in the event that experienced carmen are not available, and that all apprentices and helpers 
 promotable under the rules have been used up, the General Chairman on any individual property MAY 
 agree with his management to the employment as carmen of experienced men who have gained their ex- 
 perience outside of Railroad service; but that the employment of such men is temporary, that they hold 
 no seniority over four year carmen and must be displaced when four year carmen can be furnished. 
 
 The resolution, therefore, does not in any degree change the construction which the carmen had pre- 
 viously put upon Rules 153 and 154. It merely permits a General Chairman — if he chooses to do so — 
 to make with his management, a special, temporary, agreement which for the time being waives or sus- 
 pends what the carmen contend is the proper application of the rules in question. 
 
 We believe, therefore, that this resolution of the General Chairmen merely supports our earlier state- 
 ment that the Carmen have insisted that under Rules 153 and 154 the railroads were prohibited from 
 employing as Carmen, experienced craftsmen, unless such men had had four years experience at CAR work. 
 
 If such men are permitted to be hired in accordance with the resolution of the General Chairman, 
 they are hired only conditionally and temporarily; and not as of right under the contract, but only by 
 temporary waive of contract by a General Chairman. 
 
 20 
 
STATEMENT MADE BY PRESIDENT B. M. JEWELL OF THE RAILWAY EMPLOYEES' DEPARTMENT 
 OF THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR ON BEHALF OF ITS AFFILIATED ORGAN- 
 IZATIONS AT THE HEARING BEFORE THE UNITED STATES RAILROAD 
 LABOR BOARD, JANUARY 10, 1921 
 
 Judging from the press campaign, the railroads are about to ask this Board: 
 
 1. To abrogate the National Agreements entirely, or in large part, or at any rate in respect to rules deemed 
 exceedingly important by the employees. 
 
 2. To attempt thereafter to secure either local, system or regional boards of adjustment instead of a single 
 national board of adjustment, such as was in effect during the period of Government control, and as is desired 
 by the employees represented by the Railway Employees' Department and its affiliated organizations. 
 
 The railroads have heralded widely their accomplishments since Government control was removed and their need for 
 economy and their desire to serve their stockholders and the public. They have requested chambers of commerce and 
 other business organizations to appeal to this Board for the establishment of local Boards of Adjustment. They have 
 attempted to prejudice the whole case in the minds of the public, and the American Railway Executives have openly stated 
 in Number 2, Volume I of their weekly paper called AMERICAN RAILROADS, that they have access to, and will use 
 for the purposes of giving "information" to the Public, nearly ten thousand papers, including nearly two thousand daily 
 newspapers, over seven thousand country weeklies, one hundred and forty-nine foreign language newspapers, thirty-five 
 farm journals, one hundred and seventy-six labor papers, forty-two business journals, and eleven national weeklies. Prom- 
 inent representatives of the railroad executives have said that they wanted to get close to the employees in the old fashioned 
 way and improve the morale of their employees. They have accused the railway employees' organizations of an attempt 
 to establish the closed union shop and the "one big union", and with threatening the public welfare. 
 
 There are two old maxims and principles recognized for hundreds of years by courts of equity, that "He who seeks 
 equity must come into court with clean hands", and that "He who seeks equity should first do equity". 
 
 On behalf of the Railway Employees' Department and its constituent organizations, we charge that the railroads and 
 those who control them have not done equity either in respect to the public interest, or in respect to the Government under 
 whose authority this Board was created and is now acting, or in respect to the spirit of the Transportation Act, 1920 and 
 the public purposes this Board was intended to serve, or in respect to the railroad employees. 
 
 We charge, and later on will substantiate our charges, 
 
 1. That the railroads are controlled by a group of twelve New York banks, trust companies and insurance 
 companies, dominated by J. P. Morgan & Co., and that a group of only twenty-five men are the instruments of 
 this and an even wider control. 
 
 2. That this sarne group of twelve financial institutions at the same time has interlocking directors with 
 twenty of the leading railroad equipment companies. 
 
 3. That, during the past year, the railroads have sent out to such outside railroad equipment companies for 
 repair on contract, over 617 locomotives and over 29,000 freight cars, and have made contracts for much more 
 repair work of like order. 
 
 4. That the charges for such repairs in outside shops have been grossly excessive, averaging $10,000 in excess 
 of legitimate costs for the repair of each locomotive, and approximately $500 in excess of legitimate costs for the 
 repair of each freight car, and that these unwarranted profits have amounted to over $25,000,000 during the past 
 year, and if allowed to go on at the present rate, may amount to well over half a billion dollars a year. 
 
 5. That the money so taken from the railroads is still subject to the control of the financial interests above . 
 mentioned by virtue of their control of both the railroads and the equipment companies. 
 
 6. That these over-charges constitute a drain upon the treasury of the United States Government by reason 
 of the Government guaranty established under the Transportation Act, 1920. 
 
 7. That the close control of both railroads and equipment companies by these financial interests gives 
 ground for grave suspicion of a conspiracy to defraud the Government in violation of Section 37 of the Act of March 
 4th, 1909, which reads: "If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States 
 or to defraud the United States in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such parties do any act to 
 effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be fined not more than $10,000, or 
 imprisonment not more than 2 years, or both", and in violation of Section 35 of said Act, as amended by the 
 Act of October 23, 1918, which, in substance makes it a crime to present any false, fictitious or fraudulent claim 
 against the United States Government for payment by it, and makes it a crime to knowingly and wilfully falsify 
 or conceal or cover up any material fact in order to obtain the payment of such a claim ; and if such a conspiracy 
 has existed it renders many parties guilty by reason of Section 332 of said Act of March 4, 1909, which states 
 that: "Whoever directly commits any act constituting an offense defined in any law of the United States, or 
 aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces, or procures its commission, is a principal." 
 
 21 
 
8. That these same railroads and financial interests within the last two weeks attempted to secure in Con- 
 gress an amendment to the Clayton Anti-Trust Act, which would have made a large portion of this outside contract 
 repair situation lawful, whereas, Vnder the existing statutes, it is unlawful, after January 1, 1921, for any railroad 
 to have dealings in supplies or have any .contracts for construction or maintenance of any kind for more than 
 $50,000 in any one year with a corporation, firm or association in which said common carrier is interested, except 
 upon competitive bidding in the open market; but this attempt to amend the Clayton Act was thwarted by the 
 President's veto of the Amendment. ' 
 
 9. Furthermore, that those same interests are now, by Senate Bill 4576 introduced by Senator Frelinghuysen 
 about December 8th, 1920, attempting again in effect to make lawful that which is or was intended to be made 
 unlawful by Section 10 of the Clayton Act. 
 
 10. That since May, 1920, over 50,000 shop employees of the railroads, and many operating employees, have 
 been laid off by the railroads at the same time that those railroads were sending cars and locomotives out for 
 repair in outside contract shops, on the pretext that the men in the railroad shops were too inefficient or disloyal 
 to get the work done as fast as needed, or that the system of time work, established by the National Agreement, 
 was too expensive, and that the cars and locomotives were therefore being sent out for reasons of economy. 
 
 11. That these lay-offs of employees have created grave conditions of discontent and suffering at a time when 
 there was much strain in the public mind and the public welfare required the best possible spirit and harmony 
 and confidence in the mutual relations of Capital and Labor. ^ 
 
 12. That this unemployment constitutes a menace to the public health, as admitted in a recent bulletin 
 issued by the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company — itself a very large owner of railroad stocks and on whose 
 Board of Directors sit many leading bankers, many of them associated with these same twelve New York financial 
 institutions. 
 
 13. That this action of the railroads in farming out large portions of their car and locomotive repair work 
 deprives the men who would have been doing such work in the railroad shops both of their right to the wages 
 established by this Board and whatever working conditions and rules may be established by this Board or by any 
 railroad adjustment board, and their right to an opportunity to have their grievances heard and settled in ac- 
 cordance with the terms of the Transportation Act. 
 
 14. That the managers of the railroad equipment companies are endeavoring to prevent trade union organi- 
 zations of their employees and to destroy such organization as now exists. 
 
 15. That this is only one part, though a very important part, of the so-called "open shop" campaign now being 
 waged by employers all over the country ; and that the railroad managers and their controlling financial institutions 
 have conspired to bring about this situation in order to destroy the employees' organizations, and at the same 
 time the railroads and financial interests are in effect asking the United States Government and the general public 
 to finance this campaign against the Unions to the amount of hundreds of millions of dollars a year in the same 
 manner as has recently been disclosed by the investigations of the Lockwood Committee in the New York building 
 situation although in that case it was the Morgan-Steel group, whereas in this case it is the Morgan-Railroad 
 group; and this Morgan-Railroad group are exerting every power they possess to prejudice the American people 
 against us and keep them ignorant of the true issues and of our side of the case. 
 
 16. That the interests controlled by the Morgan Combine are utterly unfit to administer the railroads in 
 the people's interest by reason of the fact that the Combine is interested primarily in profits rather than public 
 service, and furthermore will use the railroads largely as an instrument of war against organized labor, in order 
 to establish the "closed shop" — closed against Union workers — , and th|e resulting inhuman conditions of industrial 
 autocracy. 
 
 17. That the Transportation Act has created an agency — the United States Railroad Labor Board — to which 
 the employees must look for relief from their grievances. That this Transportation Act is admittedly a piece 
 of experimental legislation and the employees represented by the Railway Employees' Department and its affiliated 
 organizations did not favor its passage, but nevertheless they are law-abiding citizens and desire to observe both 
 the letter and spirit of the law as requested by this Board in its announcement of December 17th, and they are 
 willing to give the Act a fair and thorough trial. That no matter what legislation exists, the employees ask 
 justice and the maintenance of healthy, adequate American standards of living and work. That the employees 
 represented by the Railway Employees' Department and its affiliated organizations still have undiminished 
 faith that the Government, this Board and the American public will deal justly with them when fully informed. 
 But if this Board cannot afford prompt and adequate relief for this situation, there is grave danger that the 
 employees will be persuaded out of their bitter experience, that the Government has not afforded them fair and 
 adequate protection, and that the public does not especially care. If the faith of the employees in the United 
 States Government or in the attentive interest and willingness of the American people to inquire into the true 
 facts of this situation and to render them fair treatment — if this faith be lessened by ever so little, the service 
 rendered the public will inevitably suffer. 
 
 22 
 
18. By reason of the foregoing facts we charge the railroads and their controlling financial institutions with an 
 insidious attack upon the public terasury and upon the welfare of the American people. 
 
 19. We charge that the railroads and their controlling financial institutions have violated the Transporta- 
 tion Act inasmuch as they have not, as above set forth, administered their trust "honestly, efficiently and econom- 
 ically", and furthermore their expenditures for maintenance of equipment have been unreasonable and contrary 
 to the provisions of Section 422, sub-sections 2 and 3 of the Transportation Act. 
 
 20. We charge the railroads and their controlling financial institutions with a conspiracy to destroy, and there- 
 fore to violate, the National Agreements by means other than a public hearing and decision by this Board as 
 prescribed in its Decision No. 2, and that they have further violated the National Agreements, inasmuch as the 
 above-mentioned lay-offs were not in reality made in order to reduce expenses, but in order to break the Unions 
 and the spirit of the men. 
 
 21. Since this Board, in Decision No. 2, expressly stated that the National Agreements were to continue 
 in force until the determination of the question of their continuance should be settled by this Board, we charge 
 the railroads with a violation of that part of Decision No. 2. Also certain individual carriers have flouted this 
 Board and publicly announced their intention to reduce wages, in violation of Decision No. 2. We charge the 
 railroads, in coming before the Board, now, with an attempt to secure the acquiescence and ratification of this 
 Board to such breaches of the National Agreements and of Decision No. 2. 
 
 The Transportation Act states that it is the duty of this Board to investigate and study the relations between the 
 carriers and their employees and "the respective privileges, rights and duties of carriers and employees" in order that 
 "the public may be properly informed." 
 
 The Act further provides that this Board, in case it has reason to believe that any of its decisions have been violated 
 may hold hearings and determine whether such violation has occurred and make public its decision. 
 
 We assert that, in view of the foregoing, the railroads had car and locomotive repair work which, in the public interest 
 needed to be done; that in view of this fact, it was the right of the employees of these roads, to have the opportunity to 
 render this public service and at the same time earn their living; and that the railroads owed them this opportunity to work 
 and owed to the public the results of such work, done as economically as possible. 
 
 In view of the foregoing, we reiterate our charges that the railroads have not come before this Board with clean hands 
 and have not done equity to the general public, to the Government or to the railroad employees. 
 
 We desire to point out that if the railroads are to be permitted thus to farm out their locomotive and car repair work, 
 and thus arbitrarily deprive the employees represented by the Railway Employees' Department and its affiliated organi- 
 zations, of their opportunity to work, and such protection as is afforded by the Transportation Act and by decisions of 
 this Board thereunder, then the railroads may likewise farm out to outside private contracting companies the maintenance 
 of their tracks and buildings and bridges, and possibly even other departments of their activities, and thereby mulct the 
 American people still further and deprive the Maintenance-of-Way and other employees of similar rights. We seriously 
 question whether, under the principles of public service law, the carriers, having assumed the maintenance of their equip- 
 ment with their own shop facilities, may lawfully abandon such obligation without clear proof determined by public hearing 
 before lawfully constituted bodies that such actions are in the interests of the public welfare both financially and in relation 
 to the labor problems thereby created. 
 
 The Railway Employees' Department and its affiliated organizations, by virtue of the provisions of the Transporta- 
 tion Act and the foregoing matters, request this Board that before holding hearings on the National Agreements, it investi- 
 gate the above recited situation of unemployment, its causes and all circumstances, both those set forth above and any 
 others that may later be brought out, and give full publicity to its findings so that "the public may be properly informed". 
 And that it investigate and determine whether the railroads and their controlling interests have done equity to the employees 
 and the public interest in this situation and whether the railroads and their controlling interests have come before this Board 
 with clean hands, so as to afford them a standing before this Board in respect to their presumed requests to have the Na- 
 tional Agreements abrogated; and if the Board finds that the Railroads have not done equity and do not come before it 
 with clean hands that it require them to correct this situation before hearings are begun on the National Agreements, 
 and that meantime it order the complete and careful observance of all the rules of the National Agreements. We also 
 request that the Board take prompt and effective action to relieve the existing unemployment so created, and afford pro- 
 tection to the employees in respect to their security of livelihood, consequent standard of living and freedom to join, remain 
 in and act effectively through the several labor organizations which they have created. And if the Board should believe 
 that certain of the points involved in this matter lie more fully within the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Com- 
 mission than within the jurisdiction of this Board, we then petition this Board to request the Interstate Commerce Com- 
 mission to hold public hearings on such points, and that then this Board consider the findings of the Interstate Commerce 
 Commission on such matters as to their bearing on its own decision on the situation. 
 
 Because of the dangers created by the above facts we also request the Board to take jurisdiction over the companies 
 building or repairing railroad equipment. 
 
 23 
 
And if the Board should decide that it has no power to take effective action in this matter for the relief of the em- 
 ployees, or that it has no jurisdiction over such companies building or repairing railroad equipment, we desire to point out 
 the great injustice of this situation and we petition the Board to request the Interstate Commerce Commission to forbid 
 the farming out of railroad equipment repair work to such outside companies even more rigidly than it is now forbidden 
 by Section 10 of the Clayton Act, for the protection of both the railroad employees and of the American public. 
 
 Our substantiation of the foregoing charges and our discussion of the National Agreement and of the necessity for 
 its continuance we will take up after the railroads have made their presentation. 
 
 No conferences have been held between the duly authorized committee of the Railway Employees' Department of 
 the American Federation of Labor and the committee representing Railroad Managements of which Mr. E. T. Whiter is 
 Chairman, at which we were advised as to the desire of the Management to amend specific rules, and we do not know 
 what will be the presentation of Mr. Whiter and his committee. Therefore, until such time as Mr. Whiter and his 
 committee have presented to the Board their views and we have an opportunity to review same and prepare replies, 
 the Railway Employees Department, in behalf of the employees whom it represents, may be understood as resting 
 their case with the Board with the understanding that after management has presented its case, y/e will then have an 
 opportunity to present further arguments. 
 
 Presented on behalf of 
 
 (Signed) J. F. ANDERSON, Vice-President, (Signed) JAS. P. NOONAN, International President, 
 
 International Association of Machinists. International Brotherhood of Electrical 
 
 Workers. 
 
 (Signed) J. A. FRANKLIN, International President, (Signed) MARTIN F. RYAN, General President, 
 
 International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Brotherhood Railway Carmen of America, 
 
 Iron Ship Builders and Helpers of America. 
 
 (Signed) EDW. TEGTMEYER, Vice-President, (Signed) E, H. FITZGERALD, Grand President, 
 
 International Brotherhood of Blacksniiths, Brotherhood of Railway & Steamship Clerks, 
 
 Drop Forgers & Helpers of America. Freight Handlers, Express & Station Em- 
 
 ployes. 
 
 (Signed) JAS. M. BURNS, Representing (Signed) S. E. HEBERLING, International President, 
 
 Amalgamated Sheet Metal Workers' Inter- Switchmen's Union of North America, 
 
 national Alliance. 
 
 Presented by 
 
 (Signed) B. M. JEWELL, President, 
 
 Railway Employees' Department, American • 
 Federation of Labor, 
 
 24 
 
STATEMENT MADE BY MR. E. T. WHITER, CHAIRMAN, ASSOCIATION OF RAILWAY EXECUTIVES, CON- 
 FERENCE COMMITTEE OF MANAGERS, BEFORE THE UNITED STATES RAILROAD LABOR BOARD 
 ON MONDAY, JANUARY 10, 1921, IN REPLY TO STATEMENT MADE BEFORE THAT BOARD 
 ON THE SAME DATE BY MR. B. M. JEWELL, PRESIDENT, RAILWAY EMPLOYEES' 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR 
 
 Before starting on our regular opening statement, we desire to make a preliminary statement. 
 
 The statement made on behalf of the Labor Organizations this morning consists of a series of general charges which 
 their spokesman says they will not attempt to substantiate at this time, and which have no relevancy whatever to the 
 continuance of National Agreements or any other questions now pending before the Board. 
 
 The apparent purpose of the labor leaders in introducing such a statement is to divert public attention from the con- 
 sideration of the matters actually in controversy and under consideration by the Railroad Labor Board. The very fact 
 that they are trying in this manner to divert public attention from the matters actually in controversy leads to the con- 
 clusion that they have no confidence in the real merits of their case. 
 
 To us it is a matter of profound regret that, in a hearing so important, there should be interjected a series of charges 
 admittedly unsubstantiated, and that coupled with the insidious intimation that unless this Board follow a course satis- 
 factory to the employees "the service rendered the puolic will inevitably suffer." 
 
 But the statement read into thececord this morning will not divert us from the presentation, in an orderly manner, 
 of the real questions long pending before the Board; and such presentation we will now proceed to make. 
 
 25 
 
STATEMENT MADE BY GENERAL W. W. ATTERBURY. CHAIRMAN OF THE LABOR COMMITTEE 
 OF THE ASSOCIATION OF RAILWAY EXECUTIVES TO THE UNITED STATES RAILROAD 
 LABOR BOARD AT HEARING HELD BEFORE THAT BOARD ON JANUARY 31, 1921 
 
 I have come under a strong sense of duty to lay before you an acute situation. Unless this Board takes prompt action 
 many of the railways of the United States may be forced into insolvency. 
 
 Many railroads are not now earning, and with present operating costs and traffic have no prospect of earning, even 
 their bare operating expenses, leaving them without any net return and unable to meet their fixed charges. 
 
 The emergency presented can be met either by an advance in freight and passenger rates, or by a reduction in operat- 
 ing expenses. 
 
 With declining prices and wages in industry and agriculture the country demands that the solvency of the railroads 
 must be assured by a reduction in operating expenses, and not by a further advance of rates. 
 
 The National Agreements, rules and working conditions forced on the railroads as war measures cause gross waste 
 and inefficiency. 
 
 I estimate that the elimination of this waste would reduce railway operating expenses at least $300,000,000.00 per 
 annum. It would be far better to save this sum by restoring conditions of efficient and economical operation than 
 to reduce wages. 
 
 We believe that as the wages of railroad employees were the last to go up, they should also be the last to come down, 
 but we do insist that for an ample wage, an honest day's work shall be given. 
 
 The public has the right to insist that this must be obtained. 
 
 The public has also the right to expect that the railway executives, with the co-operation of the regulatory bodies 
 and the employees, will as rapidly as possible reduce the cost of railway operation so as to eventually insure a reduction 
 in rates. Ultimately a readjustment of basic wages will be required. Meantime it is to the interests of all concerned, 
 including labor, that the rules and working conditions shall be made conducive to the highest efficiency in output per man. 
 
 Mr. Whiter and his Committee have far from exhausted their evidence on this subject and if required to, will of course 
 proceed. But it will be dangerous to continue the consideration of these agreements rule by rule. If the Board follows its 
 present procedure, months will elapse before it can render its decision. 
 
 The urgent financial necessities of the railroads will not permit them to wait any such length of time for relief. Long 
 before the present detailed hearings are concluded the Board will be flooded by appeals from individual railroads from 
 all parts of the country for reductions in basic wages. It will be impossible for the Board to hear and dispose of these 
 separate cases upon their merits in time to avoid numerous receiverships and the possibility of a National panic. 
 
 When wages have been too low, the harm done has been offset by retroactive increases. Losses of railway net operating 
 income are irreparable. You cannot make retroactive tomorrow the savings that should have been made today. 
 
 Your Board cannot possibly write the rules and working conditions of every railroad in this country and adjust them 
 equitably to varying geographical, operating and social conditions. 
 
 It rests entirely with your Board to determine within the next few 6,a,ys whether this whole situation shall drift into 
 chaos, and orderly procedure become impossible except at the price of railroad bankruptcy, financial shock and still wider 
 unemployment. 
 
 The Labor Board can prevent this catastrophe by declaring that the National Agreements, rules and working con- 
 ditions coming over from the war period are terminated at once; that the question of reasonable and economical rules 
 and working conditions shall be remanded to negotiation between each carrier and its own employees; and that as the 
 basis for such negotiations, the agreements, rules and working conditions in effect on each railroad as of December 31, 1917, 
 shall be re-established. 
 
 If the Board will do this, the Labor Committee of the Association of Railway Executives will urge upon every railroad 
 company a party to Decision No. 2, that no proposal for the reduction of basic wages shall be made within the next succeed- 
 ing 90 days. This will afford an opportunity to gauge the economies which can be accomplished through more efficient rules 
 and working conditions. 
 
 It also will afford additional time in which to realize the benefits of a further decline in the cost of living. 
 
 The course which we are recommending is not only imperative but equitable. 
 
 When President Wilson issued his proclamation on December 26, 1917, assuming government control of the railroads. 
 
 he said: 
 
 "Investors in railway securities may rest assured that their rights and interests will be as scrupulously looked 
 after as they would be by the directors of the several railway systems." 
 
 26 
 
In his address to Congress on January 4, 1918, President Wilson said: 
 
 "The common administration will be carried on with as little disturbance of the present operating organiza- 
 tions and personnel of the railways as possible," 
 
 The War Labor Board declared that the war period was an interrognum to be used by neither the employer or the 
 employee for the purpose of bettering or impairing the position of either. 
 
 To perpetuate as the normal rules and working conditions on the railroads, the extraordinary provisions of the war 
 period is a distinct violation of all the foregoing promises. The war has now been over more than two years. The time 
 has come when, if the railways are to be efficiently and economically operated, in accordance with the provisions of the 
 Transportation Act, normal conditions of employment and of working conditions must be restored and increased efficiency 
 of labor be secured. 
 
 If your Board adopts the foregoing suggestion, there is but one aspect of the wage question on which we ask immediate 
 action. The basic rates now established by your Board for unskilled labor are from 39 to 483^ cents per hour. Since 
 your decision was made on July 20, 1920, these rates have fallen materially throughout the United States. For your 
 Board to require the railroads to continue to pay wages to unskilled labor far in excess of those paid by other industries 
 is unfair to those industries, and bears with grave injustice upon the great body of our farmers. Within the next month 
 or six weeks practically all of the railways of the country must recruit their unskilled labor forces. It is desirable that 
 a large part of the work for which these men are necessary be concentrated in periods when the same labor is not needed 
 in harvesting the crops. We therefore ask the immediate permission of your Board to pay for unskilled labor not less 
 than the prevailing rate of wages in the various territories served by any carrier, in accordance with vSection 307 of the 
 Transportation Act. 
 
 I regret the urgency of the foregoing presentation. Its informality does not indicate any intention on the part of 
 the railway companies to violate the principle of orderly procedure in such matters. But to sit by and see this situation 
 develop without bringing it promptly and strongly to the attention of this Board would be to sacrifice both the spirit and 
 thejletter of the Transportation Act, 
 
 In our judgment, unless the proposed measures be taken promptly by your Board, a situation will shortly develop 
 in|which orderly procedure will become entirely impossible. Your Board will be faced with the gravest responsibilities, 
 which it could not possibly successfully perform, in a condition of National confusion, if not of chaos. 
 
 27 
 
STATEMENT MADE BY MR. J. G. LUHRSEN, PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN TRAIN DIS- 
 PATCHERS' ASSOCIATION, BEFORE THE UNITED STATES RAILROAD LABOR BOARD 
 AT HEARING HELD BEFORE THAT BOARD ON JANUARY 31, 1921 
 
 Mr, Chairman and Gentlemen of the Board: 
 
 As the representative of the American Train Dispatchers Association, I want to enter formal protest against the 
 Labor Board granting the request made by General W. W. Atterbury, representing the Labor Executive Committee of 
 the carriers. 
 
 (1st). Because of the fact that the Transportation Act will be violated by permitting the carriers to bring before this 
 Board mere theories, without having followed the requirements of the law governing the manner of bringing matters before 
 the Board, and bj'- giving these theories priority consideration as against the dispute now properly before the Board and 
 in process of hearing, and which has taken months to bring before the Board in the orderly manner prescribed by the law 
 as set forth in the Transportation Act, 
 
 (2nd). Because the carriers have already presented argument which without proper rebuttal by the employees can 
 not help but leave an impression upon this Board detrimental to the case of the employees, 
 
 (3rd). Because the statement made by the carriers that unless immediate action is taken by this Board in line with 
 their request the railroads will be forced into national bankruptcy is deceptive and fictitious. 
 
 (4th). Because many of the arguments already presented by the carriers to the effect that national agreements 
 are forcing the carriers to compensate employees without obtaining from them effective performance cover conditions 
 forced upon the employees through deceptive and inefficient operation which the employees cAnnot combat nor control, 
 as will be disclosed by the continuation of the present hearings. 
 
 ^5th). Because close analysis of the operating records of the carriers, and particularly train sheets, will disclose 
 operating inefficiency which, if rectified, will produce a saving greatly exceeding the waste of $300,000,000.00 alleged by 
 General Atterbury as the result of national agreements. 
 
 (6th). Because, prior to December 31, 1917, train dispatchers had no agreements, rules or working conditions except 
 those arbitrarily imposed by their superior officers, and granting of the request of the carriers will mean, in respect to 
 train dispatchers, that they will have no agreements, rules and working conditions to use as a basis for conducting negotia- 
 tions. 
 
 (7th). Because the representations of the carriers that they desire to reopen negotiations concerning agreements, 
 rules and working conditions and to reach agreements with their own employees concerning such matters are false, mis- 
 leading and wholly without merit, in support of which we charge that the Pennsylvania Railroad, which General Atterbury 
 directly represents, not only refused during Federal control to comply with Railroad Administration instructions with 
 reference to treatment of dispatchers, but has since completely ignored all requests of the dispatchers for conferences 
 through which might be obtained mutually satisfactory understandings. We further charge that General Atterbury 's 
 statement "that mutual agreements can be obtained on individual railroads" is absolutely false insofar as the train dis- 
 patchers are concerned upon his own system. 
 
 We charge that if this Board is flooded with requests by individual roads for immediate reduction in wages, as pre- 
 dicted or threatened by General Atterbury, such action will be concerted propaganda tending to interfere with the orderly 
 procedure of this Board in consideration of the matter now properly before it, and the individual railroads will be acting 
 under instructions to bring into existence a chaotic condition. " . 
 
 28 
 
STATEMENT MADE TO THE UNITED STATES RAILROAD LABOR BOARD BY MR. E. T. WHITER , 
 CHAIRMAN, ASSOCIATION OF RAILWAY EXECUTIVES, CONFERENCE COMMITTEE OF 
 MANAGERS AT HEARING BEFORE THAT BOARD ON FEBRUARY 3, 1921 
 
 General W. W. Atterbury, Vice-President, Pennsylvania Railroad Company, and Chairman of the Labor Committee 
 of the Association of Railway Executives, authorizes the following statement: 
 
 "When I went before the United States Railroad Labor Board on Monday morning, January 31st, there was an emer- 
 gency requiring prompt and energetic action by the Board. I said: 
 
 'Many railroads are not now earning, and with present operating costs and traffic, have no prospect of earning 
 even their bare operating expenses, leaving them without any net return and unable to meet their fixed charges.' 
 
 "Since I made the above statement I have been advised by Mr. Thomas DeWitt Cuyler, Chairman of the Associa- 
 tion of Railway Executives, of the result of a canvass of the operating results of most of the railways of the country for 
 the month of January. It is understood, of course, that it is impossible to close the actual accounts so soon after the end 
 of the month, and that the results of the latter part, therefore, have to be estimated. 
 
 "This canvass shows that thirty-six railroads estimate that they failed to earn even their operating expenses for the 
 month of January. Among these roads are: The Atlanta, Birmingham & Atlantic Railway; Buffalo & Susquehanna 
 Railroad; Central of Georgia Railway; Detroit, Toledo & Ironton Railroad; Erie Railroad; Great Northern Railway; 
 Gulf & Ship Island Railroad; Hocking Valley Railway; Long Island Railroad; MinneapoUs, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie 
 Railway; Maine Central Railroad; New York, New Haven & Hartofrd Railroad; Northern Pacific Railway; Philadelphia 
 & Reading Railway. 
 
 "While earning their operating expenses, twenty-eight additional roads estimate that they did not earn their taxes 
 and fixed charges during the month of January. Among these are: The Arizona Eastern Railroad; Atlantic Coast Line; 
 Baltimore & Ohio Railroad; Boston & Maine Railroad; Chicago, Indianapolis & Louisville Railway; Chicago, Mil- 
 waukee & St. Paul Railway; Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway; Lehigh Valley Railroad; Minneapolis & St. Louis 
 Railroad; Missouri Pacific Railroad; Norfolk Southern Railroad; Pennsylvania Railroad; Pere Marquette Railway; 
 Western Maryland Railway, and the Wheeling & Lake Erie Railway. 
 
 "Under present traffic and operating conditions these were the results despite the fact that the sixty-four companies 
 referred to — of which only a partial list is given above — have, in the aggregate, decreased their labor cost of operation 
 by laying off approximately 200,000 employees since September 1, 1920. 
 
 "These companies have a total main line mileage of more than 100,000 miles and constitute approximately 40 per- 
 cent of the railroad mileage of the country. 
 
 "In addition, there are other companies of well established earning power under normal conditions which expect their 
 earnings for January to exceed their fixed charges by only a narrow margin. 
 
 "The railroads cannot believe that the United States Railroad Labor Board, which by its wage decision of July 20, 
 1920, has kept these National agreements, rules and working conditions in existence sirtce September 1st, can or will deny 
 to the railroads and to the public the relief requested. 
 
 "Included in the above figures of lay-offs and mileage are a number of companies which I have not specifically men- 
 tioned, which in previous years have also had difficulty in approximating a fair earning power. In a developing country 
 like the United States there always has been a number of such railways. Their economic and traffic conditions have not 
 justified the payment of trunk line wages nor the observance of trunk line conditions of work, even when these have been 
 far more reasonable and less costly than at present. Nevertheless, the augmentation of their difficulty only goes to illustrate 
 that it is economically unsound, and can only be fraught with disaster, to attempt to compel all of the railroads of the 
 country, regardless of their differing conditions, to me§t precisely the same wages and the same working arrangements. 
 
 "Our application to terminate immediately the wartime working arrangements which do apply alike, regardless of 
 these differeing conditions, is simply the attempt to secure Government sanction for the necessary process whereby these 
 railroads can again fit their expenses and operating rules to the conditions of the territories whose public servants they are. 
 
 "All the suggestions for laying this matter before Congress or some other public body, with the implication that if 
 not so dpne the condition is not really serious, will, I am sure, mislead no one. 
 
 "Congress has passed the Transportation Act. The Interstate Commerce Commission, pursuant to that Act, has 
 fixed rates. Nevertheless, the railroads cannot achieve their earning power under continuing abnormal and inflated operat- 
 ing expenses, of which the labor cost is the principal item. Hence, in accordance with the letter and spirit of the Trans- 
 portation Act, the railroads are before the on6 body which ought to grant them relief — namely, the United States Rail- 
 road Labor Board. 
 
 "For, as I said on Monday, at a time when wages and prices are falling in the field of agriculture and in the other 
 industries of the country, the public has a right to demand that the solvency of the railroads shall be assured by economy 
 in operation, and not by any further general increase in rates. 
 
 "The fight which the railroads are now making is not only their own fight, but the fight of the farmer, the consumer, 
 and of the working man and employer in every industry of the country." 
 
 o 
 
 29 
 
BROTHERHOOD OF RAILROAD TRAINMEN, 
 ORDER OF RAILWAY CONDUCTORS, 
 BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS, 
 BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE FIREMEN AND ENGINEMEN, 
 SWITCHMEN'S UNION OF NORTH AMERICA. 
 
 The following correspondence in connection with the requests of the above listed organizations for changes in rules 
 and working conditions is shown as information and is self-explanatory. 
 
 (COPY) 
 
 UNITED STATES RAILROAD LABOR BOARD 
 
 Chicago, Illinois, December 18, 1920. 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 This Board has set Monday, January 10, 1921, as the date of the hearing on that portion of the dispute between 
 certain carriers and your organization submitted to this Board on April 15, 1920, which was not decided in Decision No. 
 2. The said portion of that dispute relates to rules and working conditions. 
 
 The Board understands that your organization submitted its presentation as to rules and working conditions as a 
 part of its submission on said dispute. Inasmuch, however, as several months have elapsed since such submission, it may 
 be that your organization desires to supplement, amend, or modify the submission then made. If so, your organization 
 is at liberty to do so at the time of the hearing, January 10, 1921. 
 
 In order that an arrangement may be arrived at with regard to the order as between the several organizations and the 
 representatives of the carriers of their presentation to the Board of this matter, it is suggested that you confer with the 
 chief executives of the other organizations parties to the dispute and with Mr. E. T. Whiter, the representative of the carriers 
 parties to the dispute. It is requested that when an arrangement as to procedure is agreed to that you advise this Board 
 of the arrangement. 
 
 A copy of the Board's letter of this date to Mr. E. T. Whiter, representative of the carriers, is attached. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 (Signed) C. P. CARRITHERS, 
 Secretary. 
 
 The foregoing letter was sent to all of the following organizations under date of December 18, 1920. 
 
 Mr. B. M. Jewell, President, Mr. J. J. Hynes, President, 
 
 Railway Employees' Dept., A. F. of L., Sheet Metal Workers Int. Alliance, 
 
 4750 Broadway, Chicago, 111. 122 So. Ashland Bldg., Chicago, 111. 
 
 Mr. S. E. Heberling, President, Mr. Timothy Healy, President, 
 
 Switchmen's Union of North America, Bro. Stationary Firemen & Oilers, 
 
 39 North Street, Buffalo, N. Y. .211 East 45th Street, New York, N. Y. 
 
 Mr. M. F. Ryan, President, i\/r t /-> t t, r. -j ^ 
 
 •Dn-ilJr-D-i/^ r ^ • ^^- J- ^- Luhrscn, President, 
 
 Brotherhood of Railway Carmen of Amenca, . • n^ • t\- j. -l. a 
 
 cno XT 11 r) -u- xr /^v tv/t American Tram Dispatchers Assn., 
 
 503 Hall Building, Kansas City, Mo. 300 ^^jj^^^ g^^^^ Chicago, 111. 
 
 Mr. W. S Carter, President, ^^ ^ j ^^^.^^^ President, 
 
 Brotherhood of L. F. & E., /-v j r t> -i j 'r i i_ 
 
 nni /- A- TJi^ /i 1 ^ nt,- Order of Railroad Telegraphers, 
 
 901 Guardian Bldg., Cleveland, Ohio. ,4^. • cx x t t -ou o^ t ■ -mt 
 
 ' ' Missouri State Life Bldg., St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 Mr. J. A. Franklin, President, 
 
 Int. Bro. of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders & ^^- "^- ^- Johnston, President, 
 
 Helpers of America, International Association of Machinists, 
 
 315 Wyandotte Bldg., Kansas City, Mo. Machinists Bldg., Washington, D. C. 
 
 Mr. John H. Pruett, Mr. Jas. P. Noonan, President, 
 
 Masters, Mates & Pilots of America, » Int. Bro. of Electrical Workers, 
 
 423-49th St., Brooklyn, New York. Machinists Bldg., Washington, D. C. 
 
 Mr. W. G. Lee, President, Mr. L. E. Sheppard, President, 
 
 Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, Order of Railway Conductors, 
 
 American Trust Bldg., Cleveland, Ohio. Masonic Temple, Cedar Rapids, Iowa. 
 
 30 
 
Mr. J. W. Kline, President, 
 
 Int. Bro. of Blacksmiths, Drop Forgers & Helpers, 
 608 So. Dearborn St., Chicago, 111. 
 
 Mr. E. H. Fitzgerald, President, 
 
 Bro. of Railway & S. S. Clerks, Frt. Handlers, 
 Express and Station Employees, 
 
 Second Nat. Bank, Cincinnati, Ohio. 
 
 Mr. W. S. Stone, President, 
 
 Bro. of Locomotive Engineers, 
 
 B. of L. E. Bldg., Cleveland. Ohio. 
 
 Mr. D. W. Halt, President, 
 
 Bro. Railway Signalmen of America, 
 
 Machinists Bldg., Washington, D. C. 
 
 Mr. E. P. Grable, President, 
 
 United Bro. Maintenance of Way Employees, 
 27 Putnam Avenue, Detroit, Mich. 
 
 Mr. W. V. O'Neil, President, 
 
 Int. Assoc, of R. R. Supervisors of Mechanics, 
 100 Arcade Bldg., St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 (COPY) 
 UNITED STATES RAILROAD LABOR BOARD 
 
 Mr. E. T. Whiter, Chicago, Illinois, December 18, 1920. 
 
 Asst. to Vice-President, Pennsylvania R. R., 
 Broad Street Station, 
 Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Dear Sir; 
 
 This Board has set Monday, January 10, 1921, as the date of the hearing of that portion of the dispute between the 
 carriers represented by you and the organizations of railroad employees, submitted to this Board on April 15, 1920, which 
 was not decided in Decision No. 2. The said portion of that dispute relates to rules and working conditions. 
 
 That an arrangement may be arrived at in regard to order as between the several organizations, of their presentation 
 to the Board of this matter, and with regard to the order of presentation by the representatives of the carriers, it is sug- 
 gested that you confer with the chief executives of the said organizations of employees parties to the dispute. ^^Itjis re- 
 quested that when arrangement as to procedure is agreed to that you advise the Board of the arrangement. 
 
 Copy of this letter has been transmitted to the chief executives of the said organizations. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 (Signed) C. P. CARRITHERS, 
 13-031. Secretary. 
 
 (COPY) 
 
 Room 1864 Transportation Bldg. 
 Chicago, Illinois, December 28, 1920. 
 
 Mr. C. P. Carrithers, Secretary, 
 
 United States Railroad Labor Board, 
 Kesner Building, 
 Chicago, Illinois. 
 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of December 18th, which advises that the hearing of that portion of the 
 dispute between the carriers represented by the Committee of which I am Chairman and the organizations of railway 
 employees, which was not decided in Decision No. 2, has been set for hearing on Monday, January 10th. 
 
 In your letter it is suggested that I confer with the Chief Executives of the several organizations of employees, parties 
 to the dispute, in regard to order as between the several organizations, of their presentation to the Board, and with regard 
 to the order of presentation by the representatives of the carriers. Concerning this suggestion, I submit that in regard 
 to order, as between the several organizations, of their presentation to the Board, this should be left to the organizations 
 for their determination, and that the Committee of which I am Chairman should use its judgment and discretion as to 
 the order in which we make our presentation concerning the proposals of the several organizations. Accordingly, I am 
 sending copy hereof to the several Chief Executives of said organizations. 
 
 Our Committee reconvenes in Chicago on January 4th, 1921, at which time I will take up with the Committee the 
 order in which we will present our views and will advise you of the conclusion of the Committee. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 (Signed) E. T. WHITER, 
 Chairman. 
 Association of Railway Executives, 
 Conference Committee of Managers. 
 (Copy of this letter sent to persons as shown on list next attached.) 
 
 31 
 
Mr. B. M. Jewell, President, 
 
 Railway Employees' Dept., A. F. of L., 
 4750 Broadway, Chicago, 111. 
 
 Mr. S. E. Heberlijig, President,, 
 
 Switchmen's Union of North America, 
 39 North Street, Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 Mr. M. F. Ryan, President, 
 
 Brotherhood of Railway Carmen of America, 
 503 Hall Building, Kansas City, Mo. 
 
 Mr. W. S. Carter, President, 
 Brotherhood of L. F. & E., 
 
 901 Guardian Bldg., Cleveland, Ohio. 
 
 Mr. J. A. Franklin, President, 
 
 Int. Bro. of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders & 
 Helpers of America, 
 
 315 Wyandotte Bldg., Kansas City, Mo. 
 
 Mr. John H. Pruett, 
 
 Masters, Mates & Pilots of America, 
 423-49th St., Brooklyn, New York. 
 
 Mr. W. G. Lee, President, 
 
 Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, 
 
 American Trust Bldg., Cleveland, Ohio. 
 
 Mr. J. J. Hynes, President, 
 
 Sheet Metal Workers Int. Alliance, 
 
 122 So. Ashland Bldg., Chicago, 111. 
 
 Mr. Timothy Healy, President, 
 
 Bro. Stationary Firemen & Oilers, 
 
 211 East 45th Street, New York, N. Y. 
 
 Mr. J. G. Luhrsen, President, 
 
 American Train Dispatchers Assn., 
 300 Mailers Bldg., Chicago, 111. 
 
 Mr. E. J. Manion, President, 
 
 Order of Railroad Telegraphers, 
 
 Missouri State Life Bldg., St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 Mr. W. R. Johnston, President, 
 
 International Association of Machinists, 
 Machinists Bldg., Washington, D. C. 
 
 Mr. Jas. P. Noonan, President, 
 
 Int. Bro. of Electrical Workers, 
 
 Machinists Bldg., Washington, D. C. 
 
 Mr. L. E. Sheppard, President, 
 Order of Railway Conductors, 
 
 Masonic Temple, Cedar Rapids, Iowa. 
 
 Mr. J. W. Kline, President, 
 
 Int. Bro. of Blacksmiths, Drop Forgers & Helpers, 
 608 So. Dearborn St., Chicago, 111. 
 
 Mr. E. H. Fitzgerald, President, 
 
 Bro. of Railway & S. S. Clerks, Frt. Handlers, 
 E.xpress and Station Employees, 
 
 Second Nat. Bank, Cincinnati, Ohio. 
 
 Mr. W. S. Stone, President, 
 
 Bro. of Locomotive Engineers, 
 B. of L. E. Bldg., 
 Cleveland, Ohio. 
 
 Mr. D. W. Helt, President, 
 
 Bro. Railway Signalmen of America, 
 
 Machinists Bldg., Washington, D. C. 
 
 Mr. E. P. Grable, President, 
 
 United, Bro. Maintenance of Way Employees, 
 27 Putnam Avenue, Detroit, Mich. 
 
 ■Mr. W. V. O'Neil, President, 
 
 Int. Assoc, of R. R. Supervisors of Mechanics, 
 100 Arcade Bldg., St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 (COPY) 
 
 Cleveland, Ohio, December 30, 1920. 
 
 Mr. E, T. Whiter, Chairman, 
 
 Association of Railway Executives, 
 Conference Committee of Managers, 
 Room 1864 Transportation Building, 
 Chicago, Illinois. 
 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 This will acknowledge receipt of copy of your letter of December 28th, addressed to Mr, C. P. Carrithers, and dealing 
 with the hearings that are to begin on Monday, January 10th. 
 
 We are enclosing you copy of our letter, of even date, to Mr. Carrithers, on the same subject, for your information, 
 and that you may know the position we take. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 (Signed) W. S. STONE, 
 
 Grand Chief Engineer, B. of L. E. 
 
 (Signed) L. E. SHEPPARD, 
 President, O. R. C. 
 
 (Signed) W. G. LEE, 
 
 President, B. of R. T. 
 Enc. 
 C/c B. M. Jewell, President, 
 
 Railway Employees Dept., A. F. of L. 
 4750 Broadway, Chicago, Illinois. 
 
 (Signed) W. S. CARTER, 
 
 President, B. of L. F. & E. 
 
 32 
 
(COPY) 
 
 Cleveland, Ohio, December 30, 1920. 
 Mr. C. P. Carrithers, Secretary, 
 
 United States Railroad Labor Board, 
 Kesner Building, 
 Chicago, Illinois. 
 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 Referring to your letter of December 18th, wherein you notify us that the United States Railroad Labor Board has 
 set Monday, January 10th, 1921, as the date of the hearings on that portion of the dispute between certain carriers and the 
 transportation organizations submitted to the Board under date of April 15, 1920, which was not decided in Decision No. 2; 
 the said portion of that dispute relating to rules and working conditions. 
 
 This is to advise that the Executives, at a conference, discussed your letter and also the copy of the letter written 
 by you to Mr. E. T. Whiter, Chairman, Association of Railway Executives, Conference Committee of Managers, dated 
 December 18, 1920. 
 
 We desire to call your attention to the fact that these rules under discussion, for the transportation organizations, 
 were submitted to the Director General in August, 1919. Later on this unsettled question was delegated to the bi-partisan 
 Board and transferred to the United States Railroad Labor Board. 
 
 At the presentation in April, the rules and working conditions were presented, along with the request for increase 
 in wages and, insofar as the transportation organizations are concerned, their presentation of the case is closed, unless the 
 representatives of the railway executives present additional argument that will call for rebuttal. 
 
 It is our further understanding that the Shop Crafts presented no rules. We think, in all fairness, that the Board 
 should pass upon the rules submitted by the transportation organizations before taking up the question of rules for the 
 Shop Crafts. 
 
 We are reliably informed that the railroads intend to consume some six weeks in presenting their side of the case on the 
 national agreement for the Shop Crafts. This being true, it would seem only fair, as stated above, for the Board to pass 
 upon the rules that have already been submitted by the transportation organizations before taking up this question of 
 rules for the Shop Crafts. 
 
 We are very anxious to get the agreements for the different railroads signed up and in the hands of our men. It is 
 impossible to do this until the Board gives its decision on the rules and working conditions, as many of the railroads refuse 
 to sign up until these decisions are handed down. 
 
 The transportation organizations presented their argument first, before the Shop Crafts were heard, and in our opinion 
 the Board should not require them to wait while the railroads are presenting arguments against a national agreement for the 
 Shop Crafts which, as stated, will consume several weeks and, perhaps, months. 
 
 We do not agree with the position taken by Mr. Whiter, that the Committee of which he is Chairman "should use its 
 judgment and discretion as to the ord er in which we make our presentation concerning the proposals of the several organiza- 
 tions", and we ask that your Board order the presentations to be made in the order in which they were made by the execu- 
 tives of the Labor Organizations. 
 
 A copy of this letter is being furnished Mr. Whiter, in order that he may know our position in the matter. 
 
 Yours very truly. 
 
 (Signed) L. E. SHEPPARD, 
 President, O. R. C. 
 
 (Signed) W. G. LEE, ' 
 President, B. of R. T. 
 
 C/c E. T. Whiter, Chairman, 
 
 Association of Railway Executives, • 
 Conference Committee of Managers. 
 
 C/c B. M. Jewell, President, 
 
 Railway Employees Dept., A. F. of L., 
 4750 Broadway, Chicago, Illinois. 
 
 (Signed) W. S. STONE, 
 
 Grand Chief Engineer, B. of L. E. 
 
 (Signed) W. S. CARTER, 
 
 President, B. of L. F. & E. 
 
 S3 
 
(COPY) 
 
 Room 1864 Transportation Bldg., 
 Chicago, Illinois, January 5, 1921. 
 
 Mr. W. S. Stone, President, 
 
 Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, 
 B. of L. E. Bldg., Cleveland, Ohio. 
 
 Mr. W. S. Carter, President, 
 
 Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen & Enginemen, 
 901 Guardian Bldg., Cleveland, Ohio. 
 
 Mr. L. E. Sheppard, President, 
 Order of Railway Conductors, 
 
 Masonic Temple, Cedar Rapids, Iowa. 
 
 Mr. W. G. Lee, President, 
 
 Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, 
 
 American Trust Bldg., Cleveland, Ohio. 
 
 Gentlemen: 
 
 I have your letter of December 30, 1920, with reference to the hearings before the United States Railroad Labor Board, 
 set for hearing on Monday, January 10. 
 
 For your information and to advise you of the position of our Committee, I am enclosing you copies of two letters of 
 even date to the Secretary of the Labor Board. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 (Signed) E. T. WHITER, 
 End. Chairman. 
 
 (COPY) 
 
 Room 1864 Transportation Bldg., 
 Chicago, Illinois, January 5, 1921, 
 
 Mr. C. P. Carrithers, Secretary, 
 
 U. S. Railroad Labor Board, • 
 
 Kesner Building, 
 Chicago, Illinois. 
 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 Referring to letter to you under date of December 30, 1920, from Chief Executives Stone, Carter, Sheppard and Lee 
 (of which letter copy was sent me by the four Chief Executives) and particularly to the fourth paragraph of the letter, 
 which reads: 
 
 "At the presentation in April, the rules and working conditions were presented, along with the request for 
 increase in wages and, insofar as the transportation organizations are concerned, their presentation of the case 
 is closed, unless the representatives of the railway executives present additional argument that will call for 
 rebuttal." 
 
 Upon examination of the record of our presentation heretofore made in response to the requests of the four Trans- 
 portation Organizations, we find that our position has been clearly stated and the arguments supporting our position have 
 been fully presented. Therefore, insofar as the specific requests made by the four Transportation Organizations are con- 
 cerned, the presentation of the case by our Committee is closed. 
 
 tf 
 
 Attached hereto, for convenient reference, are indexes to the pages of the proceedings \n^erein our presentation is 
 et forth. 
 
 In connection with this formal closing of their respective presentations by the four Transportation Organizations and 
 by this Committee, we direct attention to the fact that Decision No. 2, by providing monthly increases equal to thirty 
 times the increase granted per day, has disposed of the request of the Conductors and Trainmen in passenger service to 
 change the long established calendar month basis to a twenty-six working day basis. 
 
 Yoturs very truly, 
 
 (Signed) E. T. WHITER, 
 Chairman. 
 Association of Railway Executives, 
 Conference Committee of Managers. 
 
 34 
 
(COPY) 
 
 Index to presentation made by the Association of Railway Executives Conference Committee of Managers before the 
 United States Railroad Labor Board in response to the requests of the four Transportaion Organizations. 
 
 BROTHERHOOD OF RAILROAD ' TRAINMEN 
 
 Article 
 Number 
 
 COVERING 
 
 Pages of 
 Proceedings 
 
 1 
 
 26-Day Guarantee — Passenger Service 
 
 / 2151 and 
 \ 2228 to 
 
 [2152 
 
 
 
 2239 
 
 2 
 
 Basic Day — Passenger Service 
 
 2239 
 
 to 
 
 2241 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 Overtime — Passenger Service 
 
 2241 
 
 to 
 
 2253 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 Guarantees — Passenger Service 
 
 2253 
 
 to 
 
 2260 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 Mountain Differentials — Freight Service 
 
 / 2260 and 
 \ 2285 to 
 
 2261 
 
 
 
 2312 
 
 • 7 
 
 Guarantees — Freight Service ■ 
 
 2316 
 
 to 
 
 2357 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 Held Away from Home Terminal 
 
 2357 
 
 to 
 
 2360 
 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 Monthly, Daily or Trip Basis 
 
 2360 
 
 to 
 
 2367 
 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 Arbitraries and Special Allowances 
 
 2369 
 
 to 
 
 2372 
 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 Beginning and Ending of Day 
 
 2372 
 
 to 
 
 2374 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 Deadheading 
 
 2374 
 
 to 
 
 2382-A 
 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 Right to Legislate for Yardmasters 
 
 2398 
 
 to 
 
 2401 
 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 Overtime — Yard Service 
 
 2402 
 
 to 
 
 2403 
 
 
 
 
 16 
 
 Guarantees — Yard Service 
 
 2403 
 
 to 
 
 2411 
 
 
 
 
 17 
 
 Assignments — Yard Service 
 
 2411 
 
 to 
 
 2424 
 
 
 
 
 19 
 
 Point for Beginning and Ending of Day — Yard Service 
 
 2424 
 
 to 
 
 2428 
 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 Lunch — Yard Service 
 
 2428 
 
 to 
 
 2439 
 
 
 
 
 21 
 
 Overtime — Sundays and Holidays — Yard Service 
 
 2439 
 
 to 
 
 2450 
 
 
 
 
 22 
 
 Application of Proposed Rules to Existing Agreements, etc 
 
 2450 
 
 to 
 
 2456 
 
 
 
 
 
 Sur-rebuttal 
 
 3278 
 
 to 
 
 3305 
 
 
 
 
 35 
 
ORDER OF RAILWAY CONDUCTORS 
 
 The Order of Railway Conductors presented the following request for working rules: 
 
 "Working Rules: The rules for all men on the train should be uniform, and they should have the same 
 working conditions. Specific requests filed by other organizations in this regard are satisfactory to the 
 conductors." 
 
 Our comments in connection with the rules contained in the Trainmen's request apply equally to the Conductors. 
 (Sur-rebuttal covering this organization appears on pages 3306 to 3308.) 
 
 BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE FIREMEN AND ENGINEMEN 
 
 « 
 
 Article 
 Number 
 
 COVERING 
 
 Pages of 
 Proceedings 
 
 2 
 
 Basic Day and Overtime — Passenger Service 
 
 2678 to 2690 
 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 Assignments — Hostlers and Hostler Helpers 
 
 2710 to 2714 
 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 Starting Time — Hostlers and Hostler Helpers 
 
 2710 to 2714 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 Meal Period — Hostlers and Hostler Helpers 
 
 2710 to 2714 
 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 Monthly, Daily or Trip Basis ■ 
 
 2714 to 2719 
 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 Final Terminal Detention 
 
 2719 to 2742 
 
 
 
 
 n 
 
 Deadheading 
 
 2742 and 2743 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 Specified Holidays — Overtime .' 
 
 2743 and 2744 
 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 Held Away from Home Terminal 
 
 2744 and 2745 
 
 
 
 
 14 
 
 Expenses Away from Home 
 
 2747 
 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 Monthly Guarantees 
 
 2747 to 2749 
 
 
 
 
 16 
 
 Mechanical Stokers — Two Firemen 
 
 2749 to 2754 
 
 
 
 
 17 
 
 Mechanical Coal Passers 
 
 2749 to 2754 
 
 
 
 
 18 
 
 Grate Shakers — Fire Door Openers 
 
 2749 to 2754 
 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 Removal of Tools and Supplies 
 
 2755 to 2757 
 
 
 
 
 21 
 
 Flagging and Throwing of Switches 
 
 "2757 to 2759 
 
 
 
 
 22 
 
 Taking Fuel and Cleaning Fires 
 
 2759 and 2760 
 
 
 
 
 23 
 
 Investigations 
 
 2761 to 2765 
 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 Interpretation of Agreements 
 
 2765 to 2766 
 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 Conflicting Rules to be Changed ....". 
 
 2766 and 2767 
 
 
 
 
 26 
 
 Saving Clause 
 
 2766 and 2767 
 
 
 
 
 
 Sur-rebuttal 
 
 3309 
 
 
 
 
 36 
 
BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS 
 
 The above organization confined their request to changes in basis daily rates and did not present any request for 
 changes in rules or working conditions. 
 
 (Sur-rebuttal covering this organization appears on pages 3308 and 3309.) 
 
 (COPY) 
 
 Room 1864 Transportation Building, 
 Chicago, 111., January 5, 1921. 
 
 Mr. C. P. Carrithers, 
 
 Secretary, U. S. Railroad Labor Board, 
 Kesner Building, Chicago, 111. 
 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 Referring to your letter to me of December 18th and my reply of December 28th, pertaining to the hearing set for» 
 Monday, January 10th, and particularly to the last paragraph of my letter which reads: 
 
 "Our Committee reconvenes in Chicago on January 4th, 1921, at which time I will take up with the Committee 
 the order in which we will present our views and will advise you of the conclusion of the Committee." 
 
 The letter to you of December 30th from Chief Executives Stone, Carter, Sheppard and Lee, and my letter to you 
 of even date with reference to the letter from the four Chief Executives, formally closes the respective presentations by 
 both parties as to all the specific requests of the four Transportation Organizations which were not decided in Decision 
 No. 2. 
 
 As to the requests of the other Organizations, this will advise that our Committee expects to make its presentation 
 in the following order: 
 
 1. Shop Crafts. 
 
 2. United Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees and Railway Shop Laborers. 
 
 3. Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employees. 
 
 4. Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen of America. 
 
 5. International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers. 
 
 6. Switchmen's Union of North America. 
 
 7. Order of Railroad Telegraphers. 
 
 8. American Train Dispatchers Association. 
 
 9. Masters, Mates and Pilots of America. 
 
 10. International Association of Railroad Supervisors of Mechanics. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 (Signed) E. T. WHITER, 
 Chairman. 
 Association of Railway Executives. 
 Conference Committee of Managers. 
 
 (Copy of this letter sent to persons as shown on list next attached.) 
 
 Mr. B. M. Jewell, President, 
 
 Railway Employees' Dept., A. F. of L., 
 4750 Broadway, Chicago, 111. 
 
 Mr. S. E. Heberling, President, 
 
 Switchmen's Union of North America, 
 39 North Street, Buffalo, N. Y. 
 
 Mr. M. F. Ryan, President, 
 
 Brotherhood of Railway Carmen of America, 
 503 Hall Building, Kansas City, Mo. 
 
 Mr. W. S. Carter, President, 
 Brotherhood of L. F. & E., 
 
 901 Guardian Bldg., Cleveland, Ohio. 
 
 Mr. J. A. Franklin, President, 
 
 Int. Bro. of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders & 
 Helpers of America, 
 
 315 Wyandotte Bldg., Kansas City, Mo. 
 
 Mr. John H. Pruett, 
 
 Masters, Mates & Pilots of America, 
 423-49th St., Brooklyn, New York. 
 
 Mr. W. G. Lee, President, 
 
 Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, 
 
 American Trust Bldg., Cleveland, Ohio. 
 
 Mr. J. J. Hynes, President, 
 
 Sheet Metal Workers Int. Alliance, 
 
 122 So. Ashland Bldg., Chicago, 111. 
 
 Mr. Timothy Healy, President, 
 
 Bro. Stationary Firemen & Oilers, 
 
 211 East 45th Street, New York, N. Y. 
 
 Mr. J. G. Luhrsen, President, 
 
 American Train Dispatchers Assn., 
 300 Mailers Bldg., Chicago, 111. 
 
 37 
 
Mr. E, J. Manion, President, 
 
 Order of Railroad Telegraphers, 
 
 Missouri State Life Bldg., St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 Mr. W. R. Johnston, President, 
 
 International Association of Machinists, 
 Machinists Bldg., Washington, D. C. 
 
 Mr. Jas. P. Noonan, President, 
 
 Int. Bro. of Electrical Workers, 
 
 Machinists Bldg., Washington, D. C. 
 
 Mr. L. E. Sheppard, President, 
 Order of Railway Conductors, 
 
 Masonic Temple, Cedar Rapids, Iowa. 
 
 Mr. J. W. Kline, President, 
 
 Int. Bro. of Blacksmiths, Drop Forgers & Helpers, 
 608 So. Dearborn St., Chicago, 111. 
 
 Mr. E. H. Fitzgerald, President, 
 
 Bro. of Railway & S. S. Clerks, Frt. Handlers, 
 Express and Station Employees, 
 
 Second Nat. Bank, Cincinnati, Ohio. 
 
 Mr. W. S. Stone, President, 
 
 Bro. of Locomotive Engineers, 
 
 B. of L. E. Bldg., Cleveland, Ohio. 
 
 Mr. D. W. Helt, President, 
 
 Bro. Railway Signalmen of America, 
 
 Machinists Bldg., Washington, D. C, 
 
 Mr. E. P. Grable, President, 
 
 United Bro. Maintenance of Way Employees, 
 27 Putnam Avenue, Detroit, Mich. 
 
 Mr. W. V. O'Neil, President, 
 
 Int. Assoc, of R. R. Supervisors of Mechanics, 
 100 Arcade Bldg., St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 (COPY) 
 
 RAILWAY EMPLOYEES' DEPARTMENT 
 A. F. of L. 
 
 Headquarters, Riviera Building, 
 4750 Broadway, Chicago, 111. 
 
 January 6, 1921. 
 Mr. C, P. Carrithers, Secretary, 
 
 United States Railroad Labor Board, • ^ 
 
 Kesner Building, Chicago, 111. 
 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 This in reply to your letter of December 18th, regarding further hearings on rules now pending before the United 
 States Railroad Labor Board and Mr. Whiter's letter of January 5, 1921. 
 
 If the Committee representing the railroads does not make further arguments before the Board on rules pertaining 
 to the Switchmen, it is my desire not to present any further arguments in addition to what has been presented to your 
 Board in hearings April, 1920. Should the railroad officials make further arguments, then we will reserve the right to 
 offer a rebuttal. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 (Signed) B. M. JEWELL, 
 President, 
 Railway Employees Department, A. F. L. 
 
 (Signed) S. E. HEBERLING. 
 President, 
 Switchmen's Union of North America. 
 C.C. Mr. E. T. Whiter. 
 
 38 
 
(COPY) 
 
 Room 1864 Transportation Bldg. 
 Chicago, 111., Jan. 8, 1921. 
 
 Mr, C. P. Carrithers, 
 
 Secretary, U. S. Railroad Labor Board, 
 Kesner Building, Chicago, 111. 
 
 Dear Sir: 
 
 Referring to letter to you under date of January 6, 1921, from Mr. B. M. Jewell, President, Railway Employees 
 Department, American Federation of Labor, and Mr. S. E, Heberling, President, Switchmen's Union of North America 
 (copy of which letter was sent to me by Messrs. Jewell and Heberling) and particularly to the last paragraph of the letter, 
 which states: 
 
 "If the Committee representing the railroads does not make further arguments before the Board on rules 
 pertaining to the Switchmen, it is my desire not to present any further arguments in addition to what has been 
 presented to your Board in hearings April, 1920. Should the railroad officials make further arguments, then we 
 will reserve the right to offer a rebuttal." " 
 
 This will advise that otir Committee does not desire to make further arguments than have been heretofore made 
 in our presentation in response to the requests of the Switchmen, which appear at pages 2457 to 2459 of the transcript 
 of the proceedings. Therefore, the presentation of our case with reference to the Switchmen's demands is formally 
 closed. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 (Signed) E. T. WHITER, 
 Chairman. 
 Association of Railway Executives. 
 Conference Committee of Managers. 
 Copy to 
 
 Mr. B. M. Jewell, 
 Mr. S. E. Heberling. 
 
 30 
 
CLOSING STATEMENT MADE BEFORE THE UNITED STATES RAILROAD LABOR BOARD ON FEBRUARY 
 3, 1921, WITH REGARD TO THE OBJECTIONS OF THE RAILROADS TO THE CONTINUATION 
 OF THE SO-CALLED NATIONAL AGREEMENTS, WAGE ORDERS, ADDENDA, SUPPLE- 
 MENTS, AND INTERPRETATIONS, AND TO RULES AND WORKING CONDITIONS 
 REQUESTED BY VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS. 
 
 In closing the statements of the railroads with reference to the requests under consideration in this hearing, viz. : that 
 all the so-called National Agreements entered into by the United States Railroad Administration, the wage orders, addenda, 
 supplements, interpretations, etc., shall be continued in effect, we desire to emphasize the statements contained in our 
 opening remarks. 
 
 First : That there is no obligation upon the individual railroads to accept and adopt these agreements, wage orders, etc. 
 to which they were not a party; that there is no obligation in law or reason that they should be required to adopt these 
 intricate, complicated and extensive regulations, which were applied throughout the United States, with utter disregard of 
 conditions on the individual properties or the extraordinary, in many cases grotesque, results which followed. Further, 
 that the necessity for specific understanding to continue these agreements was plainly recognized by the Organizations 
 who were parties to such Agreements, as shown by their letter of March 24, 1920, quoted in the proceedings of May 6, 
 Volume XVI, commencing at page 1611, as follows: 
 
 "Washington, D. C, Mar. 24, 1920. 
 
 ^^ "Mr. E. T. Whiter, Chairman, 
 
 ^H^ "Railway Executives' Conference Committee, , 
 
 ^H^^» "Room 353, Washington Union Station, 
 
 ^^^^B "Washington, D. C. 
 
 "Dear Sir: 
 
 "During Government Control of Railroads, General Orders, Supplements, Addenda, National Agreements, 
 and Interpretations thereof were issued by the United States Railroad Administration, as result of negotiations 
 conducted with the organizations parties to this conference. 
 
 "These General Orders, Supplements, Addenda, National Agreements and Interpretations thereof are con- 
 tinued in effect until September 1, 1920, except as amended by mutual agreement between the organizations 
 and managements of the railroads and carriers covered by the Transportation Act of 1920. 
 
 "In the interest of successful operation, it is desirable that definite agreements be had prior to September 1, 
 1920, providing for the preservation of the conditions of employment thereafter, and that these agreements 
 be entered into at the earliest possible moment. 
 
 "Therefore, the organizations, parties to this conference, urge that the Association of Railway Executives 
 delegate your committee with authority to enter into an agreement preserving the provisions of such General 
 Orders, Supplements, Addenda, National Agreements and Interpretations thereof, upon all railroads and carriers 
 coming under the provisions of the Transportation Act of 1920. 
 
 "BY ORDER OF THE COMMITTEE. 
 
 "(Signed) B. M. JEWELL, Chairman, 
 
 "Railway Employees' Conference Committee." 
 
 Further that the terms and provisions of the Transportation Act have not been complied with with respect to the 
 requirement that bona fide efforts must be made to reach agreements between the parties directly concerned before the 
 controversies can be submitted to your Board. We hold that this is a separate and distinct phase of the problem before 
 the Board and that this phase should be disposed of by the Board independently of the merits of the respective agreements 
 and the individual rules contained therein. 
 
 Second: Through the wage orders, addenda, supplements, interpretations, etc., which we have brought to the 
 attention of the Board, we feel that the Board will recognize that through the provisions of Decision No. 2 of the Labor 
 Board, that: 
 
 "The Board assumes as the basis of this decision the continuance in full force and effect of the rules, work- 
 ing conditions and agreements in force under the authority of the United States Railroad Administration. Pending 
 the presentation, consideration and determination of the questions pertaining to the continuation or modification 
 of such rules, conditions and agreements, no changes therein shall be made except by agreement between the 
 carrier and employees concerned. As to all the questions with reference to the continuation or modification of 
 such rules, working conditions and agreements, further hearings will be had at the earliest practicable date and 
 decision thereon will be rendered as soon as adequate consideration can be given." 
 
 many bases of classification of service for purposes of pay, application of rules, etc., have been continued, notwithstanding 
 that by reference to the terms of the agreements themselves, they terminated February 29, 1920; also by reference to Circular 
 121 of the Director General it will be found that he states that decisions by the Railroad Administration, Railway Boards 
 of Adjustment, Staff Officers, etc., were not to extend beyond the termination of Federal control of the Railroads, viz.: 
 
 40 
 
12.01 A. M., March 1, 1920. These Boards of Adjustment and Staff Officers have continued to render decisions, and so 
 far as known, may continue to render decisions as long as they exist, affecting the responsibihty of the Railroad Adminis- 
 tration, in cases occurring during the period of Federal Control. Many decisions have been rendered since the date of 
 Decision No. 2. Some of these decisions have been incorporated in our presentation. We feel that your Board certainly 
 did not in Decision No. 2 base your conclusions on decisions of these Boards of Adjustment which had not theretofore been 
 rendered. 
 
 From the provisions of Decision No. 2 quoted herein, there would not appear to be any doubt of the intention of this 
 Board to continue the bases of pay resulting from the decisions of proper authorities of the Railroad Administration, but 
 it is very properly a question whether this Board intended to vitalize decisions which by instructions of the Director General 
 were to only apply up to the end of Federal control and continue them in the same manner as it did acts of the Railroad 
 Administration prior to the date of its decision. 
 
 These decisions have such extensive ramifications and are so utterly out of all reason in the light of practical conditions 
 and the extravagant payments resulting, as repeatedly stated herein, that we feel the only practical way to properly dispose 
 of these complications is by negotiation between the Managements of the individual properties and the proper representa- 
 tives of their employees, and that no railroad or tribunal could justify such expenditures and expect that the patrons of the 
 railroads should pay rates or producing revenues to be expended in such a manner. 
 
 41 
 
RESOLUTION OF THE UNITED STATES RAILROAD LABOR BOARD 
 
 DATED FEBRUARY 9, 1921, AND READ INTO RECORD 
 
 AT HEARING HELD FEBRUARY 10, 1921 
 
 February 9, 1921. 
 
 RESOLVED, that the Chairman be authorized to make the following announcement at 10:00 A. M., Thursday, 
 February 10th: 
 
 The Board has considered the request of the Association of Railway Executives as presented on January 31st, 1921, 
 and has made its decision thereon. 
 
 In order that the reasons for this decision may be understood, a statement of the history of the present dispute which 
 relates to the agreements, rules and working conditions entered into or authorized by the United States Railroad Adminis- 
 tration and their justice and reasonableness is necessary. 
 
 On February 28, 1920, the Transportation Act became law. This act created this Board and imposed upon it the duty 
 of deciding disputes between carriers and their employees. Section 307 (d) of the Act provides that all the decisions of the 
 Labor Board in respect to wages, salaries and working conditions of employees of carriers shall establish rates of wages 
 and salaries and standards of working conditions which in the opinion of the Board are just and reasonable. Prior to the 
 passage of the Transportation Act, the organizations of railroad employees made certain requests for increases in wages 
 and for changes in working conditions. These requests were submitted to a conference between representatives of the 
 carriers and of the organizations concerned which conference took place on March 10th, 1920, and continued to April 1st. 
 The conference resulted in complete failure to agree and. the parties accordingly referred the entire controversy, which 
 included the question of reasonable rules and working conditions as well as wages, to this Board. 
 
 This Board in its decision of July 20th, 1920, Decision No. 2, decided what wages constituted just and reasonable 
 wages for the employees of carriers parties to the dispute. The action of the Board with regard to that part of the dispute 
 which did not relate to wages is set out in Decision No. 2 as follows: 
 
 "There are in the dispute as presented questions involving rules and working conditions, some of which are 
 interwoven with and materially affect earnings and wages. Adequate investigation and consideration of these 
 questions would demand time. Existing conditions required that the Board should make as early decision of the 
 wage question as practicable. For that reason, it has been necessary, — and both parties to the controversy have 
 indicated it to be their judgment and wish, that the Board should separate the questions %ivolving rules and 
 working conditions from the wage questions. Accordingly, the Board has not undertaken herein to consider or 
 change the rules and agreements now existing or in force by the authority of the United States Railroad Adminis- 
 tration or otherwise and this decision will be so understood and applied. 
 
 " The Board assumes as the basis of this decision the continuance in full force and effect of the rules, working 
 conditions and agreements in force under the authority of the United States Railroad Administration. Pending 
 the presentation, consideration and determination of the questions pertaining to the continuation or modification of 
 such rules, conditions and agreements no changes therein shall be made except by agreement between the carrier 
 and employees concerned. As to all questions with reference to the continuation or modification of such rules, 
 working conditions and agreements, further hearings will be had at the earliest practicable date and decision 
 thereon will be rendered as soon as adequate consideration can be given." 
 
 On December 18, 1920, this Board notified the parties to the dispute that a hearing of that portion of the dispute 
 which was submitted to the Board on April 15, 1920, and which was not decided in Decision No. 2, which said undecided 
 portion of the dispute related to rules and working conditions, would be heard beginning Monday, January 10, 1921. 
 
 Accordingly, on that date the representative of the carriers presented evidence, and argument tending to show that 
 the rules and working conditions embodied in the agreements entered into by the Director General and the several or- 
 ganizations of railroad employees were in many respects unjust and unreasonable and continued to present evidence and 
 arguments as stated until February 3, 1921. 
 
 On January 31st, 1921, the Chairman of the Labor Committee of the Association of Railway Executives appeared 
 before the Board and urged that this Board at once take the following action in order to avoid a financial catastrophe to 
 the railroads : 
 
 First, that the national agreements, rules and working conditions entered into or authorized by the United States 
 Railroad Administration be terminated at once; that the question of reasonable rules and working conditions be remanded 
 to negotiations between each carrier and its own employees and that as the basis for such negotiations, the agreements, 
 rules and working conditions, in effect as of December 31, 1917, be re-established, 
 
 42 
 
Second, that the Board set aside its decision expressed in Decision No. 2 as to what constitutes just and reasonable 
 wages for unskilled labor and that it substitute the prevailing rate of wages in the various territories served by any carrier. 
 
 Section 307 of the Transportation Act, 1920, provides: 
 
 "All the decisions of the Labor Board in respect to wages or salaries and ***** j^ respect to 
 working conditions of employees or subordinate officials of carriers shall establish rates of wages and salaries 
 and standards of working conditions which in the opinion of the Board are just and reasonable." 
 
 It is obvious that the Board cannot assume without evidence of the justness and reasonableness of the agreements, rules 
 and working conditions in effect on each railroad as of December 31, 1917, that such agreements, rules and working con- 
 ditions would constitute just and reasonable rules and working conditions today on the railroads parties to the present 
 dispute. To make such a decision without evidence and careful consideration would be an abdication of the functions of 
 this Board and would frustrate the purposes of the Transportation Act. 
 
 It is the judgment of the Board, therefore, that the request of the Association of Railway Executives for the immediate 
 termination of existing Rules must be, and is accordingly denied. 
 
 The duty is imposed upon this Board by the Transportation Act of determining just and reasonable wages and working 
 conditions for employees of carriers. All questions involving the expense of operation or necessities of railroads and the 
 amount of money necessary to secure the successful operation thereof are under the jurisdiction, not of this Board, but of 
 the Interstate Commerce Commission. 
 
 This Board is not insensible, however, of the fact that the national agreements, rules and working conditions which are 
 the subject matter of the dispute now being heard by the Board, do affect the expenditures of the railroads. If any of these 
 rules and working conditions are unjust and unreasonable, they constitute an unwarranted burden upon the railroads and 
 upon the public. It is, therefore, the duty of this Board to use the utmost practicable expedition, consistent with the 
 necessary time for hearing and consideration, in determining whether any of the rules and working conditions now in effect 
 are unreasonable. The Board is endeavoring to perform this obligation and will be better able to succeed in doing so if it is 
 not further interrupted by the introduction of unwarranted demands by either party. 
 
 The Board must also deny the request of the Association of Railway Executives as presented by the Chairman of its 
 Labor Committee that so much of Decision No. 2 as fixed wages for unskilled labor be set aside and the prevaihng rates of 
 wages in the various territories served by any carrier substituted. 
 
 The boundaries of the power of this Board to decide controversies between railroads and their employees are set out 
 in Section 307 of the Transportation Act. Section 307 (b) provides: 
 
 "The Labor Board upon the application of the Chief executive of any carrier * * * shall receive for 
 hearing and as soon as practicable and with due diligence decide all disputes with respect to the wages or salaries 
 of employees not decided as provided in Section 301." 
 
 Section 301 provides that it shall be the duty of all carriers and their officers, employees and agents to consider dis- 
 putes in conference between representatives designated and authorized so to confer by the carriers or the employees or 
 subordinate officials thereof directly interested in the dispute. If the dispute is not decided in conference, it shall be 
 referred by the parties to the Railroad Labor Board. 
 
 It does not appear that there has been any attempt on the part of the Association of Railway Executives to secure 
 conference with representatives of the unskilled laborers directly interested in this controversy. 
 
 The Board is therefore without jurisdiction to take the action requested. 
 
 UNITED STATES RAILROAD LABOR BOARD. 
 
 R. M. BARTON, 
 Attest: ■ Chairman. 
 
 C. P. CARRITHERS, 
 
 Secretary. 
 
 43 
 
STATEMENT OF MR. FRANK P. WALSH ON BEHALF OF THE EMPLOYEES 
 
 MADE BEFORE THE UNITED STATES RAILROAD LABOR BOARD 
 
 ON FEBRUARY 10, 1921 
 
 Mr. Walsh: May it please the Chairman and your Honorable Board: It would not be amiss for me, I am sure, to 
 observe here, that in the opinion of those whom I represent, as well as my personal opinion, the decision which you have 
 rendered here, and the laying out of your future course, is perhaps the most momentous decision that has ever been rendered 
 in the United States as far as our citizenship is concerned, outside of any representation which I have here. 
 
 This Board is the result of a struggle — I might say an intellectual struggle and one abstracted entirely from any of 
 the ordinary things that come up as controversies between employers and employees, because it is the final co-ordinated 
 thought of all of those publicists and representatives of our government that have studied the industrial and economic 
 phenomena of this country and have arrived at this in a basic industry as the spear point which points directly to some 
 other settlement of controversies that aflfect all of our citizenship, than the attributes heretofore known that occurred in 
 industrial struggles. They involve everything, so far as these immediate organizations are concerned — the struggle for 
 organization, the right of collective bargaining, the right of an orderly effort, first, between employer and employee to 
 adjust their differences, and finally an appeal to a forum of such integral strength, as far as this organization is concerned 
 and of such personnel that men will be willing to surrender certain natural rights for the benefit of society as a whole, that 
 lam going to undertake to say — and I am going to keep within the suggestion of the Chairman, because I know the very 
 great value of your time — I am going still to observe that had it been permitted for the orderly conduct of this judicial 
 hearing to be interrupted, it would be parallel to the unthinkable scene of a gentleman interested deeply and financially 
 in a case coming before the Supreme Court of the United States, where the issues had been framed, and where con- 
 sideration of the Justices was about to be had and argument was about to be made, to intervene and have a party ask 
 the Chief Justice to suggest to that Honorable Body that it should at once desist in its orderly deliberations for the reason 
 that he represented the defendants in the case, who were upon trial and that the judgment of that Court would be ren- 
 dered nugatory, because they would not comply with it, first, because they were not financially able to comply with it, 
 and follow it by saying that if the Court did not desist in that hearing they were in a position, through their power and 
 influence, and through those whom they represented, so to burden the Court with litigation of this character that it 
 would be destroyed. 
 
 Again, had this Honorable Body listened to the suggestion that these rules and agreements which affect the whole 
 industry, and which affect the cost of the industry be abandoned without a hearing, and that 300,000 men should have 
 their wages reduced on account of the alleged necessity of their employers, that again would be comparable to Mr. Jewell 
 appearing here for these workers and calling attention to the fact, for instance, that the Delaware & Lackawanna Railroad 
 had applied to the Interstate Commerce Commission for permission to distribute their surplus in a new stock issue to their 
 stockholders, amounting to something like $100,000,000, and for Mr. Jewell to appear here on behalf of the men of that 
 road, and of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy, which is similarly situated, and urge upon the Board the fact that these 
 companies were very rich and had made a great deal of money, and therefore the employees were entitled to a greater 
 division of that money, and having discovered that, they proposed to stop the operations of the Board unless this Board 
 immediately made a finding that their wages, with probably a retroactive clause, should be increased 100 per cent, on 
 account of the fact these railroads were rich and amply able to pay them. 
 
 So, I say the decision of this Honorable Board goes far beyond the representation which I have the honor to make 
 here today, vast as that is, and much as it means to the wives and families of millions of men engaged in the most neces- 
 sary industry of our whole social life. I had prepared here to answer the suggestions of Mr. Atterbury with reference 
 to the advisability or to the power, under the law of your Board, considering the question of the financial ability of a rail- 
 road to pay, and I might suggest it in a word, that your opinion follows not only the best thought of those who have studied 
 this question for generations as applicable to all industry, as well as the railroad industry, but you followed the intent 
 of the law, as expressed over and over again by its framers in the words that society has agreed upon wherever it has spoken, 
 and that is — that the first charge upon any industry is a just and adequate wage to those who carry it upon, and that the 
 basis of that is a living wage to the humblest employee who performs a necessary task in the productivity of that industry 
 r and if that cannot be done, then that industry is a parasitical industry and the State should take it over or it should be 
 abolished as a menace to the fabric of the entire State. 
 
 Now, ruling as you have in this case, the gentlemen whom I represent are now confronted with the consideration of 
 the main question that was under consideration by your Honorable Board. 
 
 The success of a judicial institution, such as this is, and while this is an administrative board and is limited in its 
 powers to the express provisions of the statute, very little reflection will bring you to the thought that this body has powers 
 greater than was dreamed of in the delegation of judicial power to our courts, even in my time. It has the power con- 
 ferred upon it, as a Board to inquire into the condition of the industry involved here and elsewhere. It gives a great power, 
 f although this is a Board that acts as a whole, composed of nine members, to the individual members of the Board, not 
 only to make personal inquiry tmder order of the Board away from the sittings of the Board, but by the power of subpoena 
 land the duces tecum, enforced by the strong arm of the Federal judiciary, can each individual inquire into those things 
 which he thinks are competent and necessary for a proper consideration of the case. 
 
 44 
 
Now, then, we come to this National Agreement. First, the suggestion is made and sent broadcast that this body 
 would have the power to pass upon the question of the rights of three hundred thousand men so far as wages are concerned, 
 without a consideration of the case. Second, it carries the thought, and it has been carried broadcast in this country, 
 that unless this body acts, and acts quickly, that a great public calamity is about to fall, that the railroads of this country 
 are about to go into bankruptcy, and therefore throw the entire country into chaos. That has a very great bearing on 
 the presentation of our case. 
 
 In the first place, it is not true, as expressed in the statement of the Railroad Executives, through Mr. Atterbury, 
 that those rules are wartime regulations imposed upon the railroads in the exigencies of the world war. 
 
 Again, they say that if you fail to do this, you are violating the pledge of the President as to the conservation of the 
 rights of the stockholders. 
 
 And another item, to which I very much desire to address myself, is the taking from its conte5ct of a statement made 
 by the National War Labor Board to the effect that the war was to be looked upon as an industrial interregnum in which 
 one side was not to take advantage of another, and arguing from that that you should immediately permit these railroad 
 companies, organized in the first place as large units in corporate life, added to by organizations again of those units, super- 
 added the organizations of the Executives and the Managers of these Railroads — that these were to be allowed to continue, 
 but that the employees, on account of these expressions of the Government were to be relegated to conditions such as 
 existed in 1917. In other words, that the combined organizations of all the railroads with the direct command of the 
 Transportation Act which created this Board, that those railroads should consolidate for economic purposes, ready to 
 consolidate, ready to adjust rates, organized as a national unit on account of reasons so compelling that all branches of 
 our Government have acceded to it and taken action upon it, that with that highly intensive organization of the railroads 
 of this country, that you are by your ipsi dixit to relegate these men to the conditions of 1917. 
 
 We say that there is nothing in this situation that calls for precipitate action. We say that the National Agreements, 
 so called, were in effect upon fifty per cent of the railroads of this country before there was any war. It was the result 
 of the effort of years to establish just conditions. And I say, and say it without any offense, that the conditions referred 
 to by Mr. Atterbury as the conditions that obtained in 1917, he clearly conceives to be the conditions which obtained upon 
 the Pennsylvania Railroad. 
 
 In a small duty which I had to perform in this industrial field, in a body constituted much as yours, but without the 
 power of decision — the United States Commission of Industrial Relations — we were charged by the Government to investi- 
 gate the conditions of the railroads in the United States. And upon that Board was a Railroad President and the executive 
 of one of the great railway brotherhoods. And when we came to select the typical railroads, those representatives upon 
 that Board were permitted by the balance of the Board to select the two railroads that best typified what one side claimed 
 was the modern thought, of the right of the men to collective bargaining, the adjustment of disputes, first by conference 
 between the heads, and second by an orderly appeal to arbitration, and those roads which denied those principles, that 
 were the most backward — the road that was most backward in accepting the ordinary rights of citizenship and of organiza- 
 tion to its employees. And it is significant to find that the roads picked were the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul, as the 
 fair road, and the Pennsylvania road, as the most backward road in the United States. / 
 
 An investigation of the Pennsylvania Railroad shows clearly the basis that they desire to go back to. I say first 
 as the representative of these men, and second, as a citizen of the United States, God forbid that we should ever go back 
 to that. It involves the absolute destruction of the right of free speech. It destroys the absolute right declared by every 
 body that ever passed upon the subject that men had a right to organize and bargain collectively. It involves in times of 
 peace the keeping of a standing private army, as was proven against the Pennsylvania Railroad, with all of the instruments 
 of warfare under private command, a constant menace to the State, and begrudging recognition of the powerful brother- 
 hoods that move their trains because it had been reluctantly forced upon them, and a never-ceasing, every-day campaign 
 to destroy the right of such men as they ask here to wipe away their earnings, to organize and try to have a collective voice 
 to get better conditions. 
 
 I simply wish to say this further, that the statement of Mr. Atterbury presents facts that are of the utmost pertinency 
 in the consideration that you are about to give to this question. For instance, as to the costs of the working rules as they 
 are. Mr. Atterbury was again — I am sorry to say — lacking in frankness. 
 
 If the abolition of these rules would make a saving of three hundred millions of dollars a year, that would be but five 
 per cent of their operating earnings. Therefore, his conclusion is lacking in logic. It could not destroy the railroads. 
 
 Again, I am very much afraid that Mr. Atterbury received his conclusions from other hands. And I have found them 
 on a slight investigation to be extremely variable. Mr. Atterbury, before your Honorable Board, stated that the abolition 
 of the National Agreements would result in a saving to the railroads of three hundred millions of dollars. We have a 
 statement given to the press for release on the same day by Mr. T, Dewitt Cuyler, which was recalled on account of the appear- 
 ance of Mr. Atterbury before your Board, in which Mr. Cuyler stated that the National Agreements had increased railroad 
 expenses to the extent of one hundred and fifty million dollars a year — ^just one-half of what Mr. Atterbury stated here. 
 
 Mr. Atterbury, before the Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce, surrounded by gentlemen that perhaps had the same 
 general object in view, stated before starting for here, and a day or two before, that the result of the National Agree- 
 ments, as applied to the railroads, after war time, had been to increase — if maintained, would increase the cost of main- 
 tenance of equipment from five hundred millions before the war to four billions, or an increase of three billions five hundred 
 million dollars. 
 
 45 
 
Another release trom Philadelphia in — no, that was his interview in the Philadelphia Inquirer before he came. In 
 his speech before the Chamber of Commerce he said that the National Agreements were costing the railroad companies 
 five hundred million dollars per year. 
 
 We find on an investigation — and I might say this and say it very briefly, that the statement Mr. Atterbury made 
 here might indicate to the unthinking that the railroads of this cotmtry were on the verge of bankruptcy. There are rail- 
 roads in this country upon the verge of bankruptcy, of course. They were inconsiderately built. They had no public to 
 serve commensurate with the building of the road and the amount of the investment. They are chronically in a state of 
 bankruptcy. They have gone in and they have gone out. The railroads of this country are stronger financially today, 
 and stronger, not on account of the backing they received from the United States Government, but stronger on account 
 of the Absolute increase in their traffic and the reduction in operating expenses measured, compared to the increase in their 
 traffic, than they ever have been in the history of our whole country. 
 
 There are other railroads, as we thoroughly understand, that have been so mismanaged — mismanaged, some of them, 
 as evidence has shown in court proceedings, to the point of criminality, that they were brought to the verge of bankruptcy 
 and are only now coming out of it. But certainly that is not a reason for your Honorable Board to suspend its functions, 
 nor should it be used as a reason to set aside rules that were found just and equitable, and to reduce the wages of men 
 below the cost of living, where they are, as a matter of fact, at the present time. 
 
 Class one has ninety per cent of the mileage of the United States. Oh, I might say with respect to bankrupt roads, 
 that includes, of course, roads that are not in class one, some of them. 
 
 Class one has ninety per cent of the niileage of the United States. The total surplus on hand, the total credit surplus 
 of those railroads is three billion ten million dollars. 
 
 Two hundred in class one, or about 170 of those railroads show that surplus, a credit surplus of three hundred and 
 ten million dollars. 
 
 There are only thirty-two that show a deficit. And that includes these mismanaged roads. 
 
 And the total aggregate deficit amounts to but one hundred and sixteen million dollars, so that they have a net surplus, 
 all of the roads in class one, of two billion and eight hundred million dollars. 
 
 Now, the legislators, the law-making power, when they created this Board, of which you are so important a part, had 
 this very idea in mind, so they provided for the consolidation of these roads in groups, which is already going on. And 
 these roads when consolidated will be so managed, and the earnings so distributed, that those roads that have been dis- 
 criminated against by improper competitive conditions, and other things that it is not necessary for me to go into now, 
 will be placed more closely upon an equality with the other roads, and for the sake of serving the whole United States it 
 is believed, and 1 believe, that all of those roads will be placed upon a solid financial basis. 
 
 Again, the short line railroads, included, of course, in this general situation the tonnage upon them, but from twenty 
 to forty per cent originates and ends upon the small roads. In other words, from sixty to eighty per cent of the tonnage 
 that is initiated upon the small roads, finally finds its way on a part of its journey over the long roads. 
 
 Now, experience has shown the Interstate Commerce Commission and all of those who have investigated this subject, 
 that the more powerful roads have had a very strong influence upon these smaller roads, in that they are in a position to 
 take a greater share of the result of the work of the small roads than they are entitled to for the length of the haul which 
 they make. So this law which created this Board has also provided that the Interstate Commerce Commission has a right 
 to readjust the rates of the small roads, interstate or intrastate, in order that they shall bear a more honest and juster 
 relation to the whole haul and take into consideration the necessities of those small roads; in other words, to pay them ade- 
 quate pay for the service. That has already been begun and is going on, so they will have the vitality, the blood will be 
 given to those smaller roads as well. 
 
 Now, in view of the statements that have been made here, that the result of the National Agreements — and that is 
 a subject, of course, for your very earnest and proper consideration — that it has resulted in great waste — I would not 
 properly represent those whom I represent here, if I did not say that that is not the truth, that it is not typical. 
 
 It was our very proud reflection that ours was the only country during the great war where the industries — all of the 
 industries were carried on without the loss of one day's production in essential war industry on account of labor disputes. 
 In other words, notwithstanding the War Labor Board had to take within its jurisdiction disputes involving almost three 
 million employees, there never was such a cessation in labor as to cause one day's loss to essential labor productivity in 
 this country. And I want to say that that applies to the workers whom I represent as well. I want to say that that state- 
 ment that great wastage had resulted may find its basis before your body — and the further efforts that may be made when 
 you come to consider this whole case — the basis may be found in the fact that those railroads are now presenting claims 
 against our Government arnounting to millions of dollars, much of which is based upon the alleged waste under Govern- 
 ment ownership. But if they could get a finding, even inferentially from*this Board upon this full hearing, and I say — 
 and I think I say it without undue prejudice, that perhaps that was a large part of the animative force behind this state- 
 ment of Mr. Atterbury and those whom he represented, because if they could get even an inferential finding from this 
 Board that there was such waste, it would be of immense value in adjusting'those disputes that are placed in a concentrated 
 way and outside of the courts in a way that has never been known to our country before and is a part of the alleged exi- 
 gencies growing out of the great war. 
 
 46 
 
Now, we have gathered here and we ask to present it in connection with the request that we are going to make of this 
 Board, as to subpoenaing of witnesses for the hearing that is now to proceed — 
 
 The Chairman: Of course, counsel will bear in mind the resolution passed by the Board, and consider how far that 
 should limit the views to be presented. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Yes. I will do that, Mr. Chairman. I am doing that. Naturally, of course, this finding — we came in 
 response to this letter and this finding was somewhat of a surprise to us. But I am trying not to trench upon those 
 instructions that the Board have indicated we should have in mind. Nevertheless, now, we are going on with this hear- 
 ing, and I am leading up to a request that we are about to make for the subpoenaing of wituesses on the whole question 
 of the abolition of National rules. 
 
 The Chairman: It occurs to my mind, of course, the Chair never can anticipate what a gentleman is going to say, 
 and some times we all take a running jump. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Yes, we do. 
 
 The Chairman: Before we think. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: And we jump too far when we are not prepared some times. 
 
 The Chairman: Yes, And some times make a good m&ny remarks in the premises. The Chair can never anticipate, 
 but it occurs to me that you might be going to address us on the question of taking evidence on a subject — 
 
 Mr. Walsh (interrupting) I am. 
 
 The Chairman: (Continuing) — that is — 
 
 Mr. Walsh: (Interrupting) — That is still left to the Board. 
 
 The Chairman: Well, of course, I just want to caution you on that. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Yes. 
 
 The Chairman: And request you to expedite the hearing and not go into water that has passed over the dam. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: I will remember that, Mr. Chairman. And I am coming to my request now, and I wish to say this, to 
 sum it up by saying that the railroads are not in a dangerous condition; that the employees whom I represent have not been 
 derelict in their duty; they have not wasted the substance of the railroad companies; they have not added improperly to 
 the costs of railroad operation ; that Mr. Atterbury 's statement here is a part of an effort to establish in this country what 
 they call the open shop; that he represents not only his railroad company, but he represents the banking control that are 
 engaged at the present time in that effort; that the open shop, as it was developed in the steel investigation, operated by 
 the same gentlemen whose names I am about to give you and ask to be subpoenaed before your Honorable Board, were 
 forced through their representatives to confess that their open shop movement meant an effort to crush every labor union 
 in the United States; that their open shop movement that in this temporary period of depression, which Mr. Atterbury 
 says will be over in a few months — that during that, they want a strict espionage upon the personnel of their employees, 
 and to discharge any man that carries a union card; that it was their intention to absolutely wipe out every advance that 
 has been made along the line of collective bargaining and just and adequate cooperation between employee and employer. 
 
 I am going to give the Board the names of the Directors of those railroads. Twelve of them have financial control, 
 of 90 per cent of Class 1 railroads. Mr. Atterbury presumably only speaks for those who are in control. We will submit 
 to you now the names of the gentlemen whom we say have the knowledge of the condition of the railroads in this country 
 and that are the moving force, the gentlemen that were behind these statements made by Mr. Atterbury, the complete 
 disclosure of the incorrectness of which is prevented at this moment by the ruling of your Honorable Body. 
 
 Mr. Hunt : Mr. Chairman, may I ask Mr. Walsh one or two questions-* 
 
 The Chairman: Yes. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Yes, Mr. Hunt, 
 
 Mr. Hunt: I think the Board would like to know what you expected to prove by these witnesses. It is possible that 
 the Board may then be able to determine whether or not their testimony, if given — 
 
 Mr. Walsh: (Interrupting) Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Hunt: (Continuing) — would be relevant to the main subject. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Hunt: That is, the reasonableness of rules in effect on the railroads now, and what rules would be reasonable. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Yes. 
 
 Mr. Hunt: In case those are not. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Yes. Well, we must have a background for that; as I understand from the ruling of the Board just 
 made this morning, they have a right to take into consideration, and are going to take into consideration the reasonableness 
 
 47 
 
of these rules, a part of the consideration of which will come from the fact whether they were wasteful or not, and whether 
 they did through their application unnecessarily impose burdens upon the railroad companies which ought not to be 
 imposed. 
 
 Now, we propose to — the statement is made by Mr. Atterbury that that is the case- 
 men who know better than anyone else that that is not the case. 
 
 Mr. Hunt: That what is not the case? 
 
 and we propose to show by these 
 
 Mr. Walsh: That there has not been wastage on account of those rules, that the rules — we will endeavor to show 
 by those gentlemen that the rules have imposed no burden upon the railroad companies. 
 
 Mr. Hunt: Well, according to your argument, and as I understand it, it would not make any difference whether the 
 rules imposed a burden on the companies or not, if they were just and reasonable rules, would it? 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Well, an unnecessary or an improper burden upon the companies. 
 
 I am trying to answer now, very quickly, the suggestion made in your statement here. If I gather the statement, 
 you are not going to consider, of course, I think that is very clear, — the financial ability of the railroads to pay. 
 
 But, you are going to consider, as I understand it, the question as to whether the imposition of those rules, or the 
 continuation of those rules results in wastage, improper wastage, thus placing a burden upon the railroads that they 
 ought not to have. 
 
 Mr. Hunt: Mr. Walsh knows too well the rules of evidence for me to make the slightest suggestion that it is necessary 
 for us to confine ourselves, if we are to make progress, to matters that are really relevant to our main problem. 
 
 Mr. Walsh* I think so. 
 
 Mr. Hunt: And with that remark, I will say no more. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: I think so, yes. 
 
 The Chairman: The only other suggestion the Chair cares to make is — rather, I make it as a member of the Board, 
 and not as Chairman, because I only make rulings when the Board authorizes me to — is that it struck me that probably 
 you were drifting off into a subject and an examination that the Interstate Commerce Commission had taken up. 
 
 The President in his reply points out that the Interstate Commerce Commission has jurisdiction — in reply to the com- 
 munications that were made to him on this subject by the respective parties, that, "The Interstate Commerce Commission 
 has full jurisdiction of all questions involving the expense of operation, the necessities of the railroads, and the amount of 
 money necessary to secure the successful operation thereof." 
 
 Of course, the Chair will not prevent you from making any request that you want to. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Certainly. • ^ 
 
 The Chairman: And the Board can then act on it. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Certainly, certainly. That is all I wish to do. I wish to submit it, of course. 
 
 The Chairman: Yes. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: I have the names set out here in a little memorandum, and I will just submit them to the Board, with 
 the request that as we proceed with the consideration of the rules and National Agreements that these gentlemen be sub- 
 poenaed. 
 
 The Chairman: Hand them to the Official Reporter. 
 
 Mr. Hanger: I think, Mr. Chairman, that it might be well to have those names read for the information of the Board. 
 
 The Chairman: That will be done. 
 
 Mr. Hanger: And the representatives of the railroads. 
 
 ( Mr. Walsh: We want — we request that Mr. Atterbury and his sub-committee on labor — I have not the names, 
 but Mr. Jewell or Mr. Lauck will supply them to you, be subpoenaed. 
 
 The Chairman: Well, read those that you have requested. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: 
 
 Julius Kreuttschnitt, 
 Chas. E. IngersoU, 
 E. T. Stotesbury, 
 E. V. R. Thayer, 
 T. deWitt Cuyler, 
 H. Walters, 
 
 1. 
 
 Robert S. Lovett, 
 
 8. 
 
 L. F. Loree, 
 
 14. 
 
 J. E. Reynolds, 
 
 20. 
 
 2. 
 
 Wm. Rockefeller, 
 
 9. 
 
 A. J. County, 
 
 15. 
 
 Chas. Steele, 
 
 21. 
 
 3. 
 
 H. W. deForest, 
 
 10. 
 
 A. W. Krech, 
 
 16. 
 
 Howard Elliot, 
 
 22. 
 
 4. 
 
 A. H. Smith, 
 
 11. 
 
 F. H. Davis, . 
 
 17. 
 
 M. H. Smith, 
 
 23. 
 
 5. 
 
 G. F. Baker, 
 
 12. 
 
 Fairfax Harrison, 
 
 18. 
 
 Chas. Hay den, 
 
 24. 
 
 6. 
 
 H. S. Vanderbilt, 
 
 13. 
 
 W. W. Atterbury. 
 
 19. 
 
 A. H. Harris, 
 
 25. 
 
 7. 
 
 Samuel Rea, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 48 
 
Now, here is what we had in mmd. As I say, we had to consider this very hurriedly, but the point to which we propose 
 zu direct this testimony is this. In your decision of this morning, you use this language: 
 
 "This Board is not insensible, however, of the fact that the National Agreements, rules and working conditions which 
 are the subject matter of the dispute now being heard by the Board do affect the expenditures of the railroads. If any 
 of those rules and working conditions are unjust and unreasonable, they constitute an unwarranted burden for the railroads 
 and for the public." 
 
 Now, accepting that, of course, why, we want these witnesses subpoenaed so that we may interrogate them. We 
 want the gentlemen here. 
 
 I thank you very much, you certainly lightened our labors this morning. 
 
 Mr. Baker: I think Mr. Hunt asked you a question as to what you expected to prove by those witnesses. I do not 
 ■recall that you answered that question. 
 
 Mr, Walsh: Well, perhaps I did not make it clear. 
 
 Mr. Baker: I would be glad to know just what you expect to prove by them. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: What we expect to prove by those witnesses is that they have control of the finances of all of these rail- 
 road companies; that they are familiar with the expenditure of the railroads, and necessarily must be as directors. 
 
 ■ While I would not attempt to go into detail as to their evidence, we expect to show by them that these rules and work- 
 ing conditions have not — do not affect the expenditure of the railroads, and that the rules, so far as the expenditures of 
 the railroads are concerned, are not unjust and unreasonable, and that they do not consititute an unwarranted burden 
 upon the railroads which they direct. * 
 
 , Mr. Baker: That is all. 
 
 Mr. Hunt: Mr. Walsh, does your position take the extreme point of declaring that no rule in the National Agreement 
 is subject to any improvement? 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Not at all. Not at all. I agree and urge that it is the power and the right of this Board to pass 
 upon those — not only at this time, but at all times. 
 
 Mr. Hunt: You might agree, then, that there were certain rules which might operate in some instances improperly? 
 
 Mr. Walsh: I certainly would. 
 
 Mr. Hunt: Which improprieties might be corrected by. proper apt language? 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Yes, sir, by modification. 
 
 Mr. Hunt: By modification? 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Yes. I think that is the thought of those whom I represent. It is my thought as a citizen that it ought 
 to be done. 
 
 The Chairman: You have something further you want to offer this afternoon, have you? 
 
 Mr. Jewell: Yes. 
 
 The Chairman: It is now so near the adjourning hour that we will not commence with anybody else. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: May I just make one further request, Mr. Chairman, before you recess? 
 
 The Chairman: Yes. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Pardon me for the interruption. 
 
 The Chairman: Yes. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Just before you adjourn. 
 
 The Chairman: Yes. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: It has been stated to us that the Chambers of Commerce of the United States have been sending resolu' 
 tions to this Honorable Board. Is that correct? 
 
 The Chairman: There have been resolutions from a great man};- civic bodies that have been sent to the Board, and 
 are on file in the records of the Board. There are some resolutions from the Chamber of Commerce of the United States. 
 I think it was particularly bearing, as my recollection serves me — I am just stating it from recollection — on the question 
 of being heard on the formation and character of adjustment boards. There may be some other resolutions. There have 
 been quite a number of resolutions sent in, and they are on file with the Board. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Well, I would not want to make this request in a formal way, until, of course, we could consult those 
 resolutions. But the statement was made that those resolutions went directly to the heart of the decisions that this Board 
 
 49 
 
might be called upon to make; for instance, asking the abolition of the National Agreements. I recognize that any person, 
 of course, would have a right, or any body, to adopt a resolution asking for a hearing upon anything, but if such resolu- 
 tions have been passed here — -and 1 will try to have recourse to them — why, we will ask for the President of the Chamber 
 of Commerce of the United States to be subpoenaed. 
 
 Mr. Hunt: Mr. Walsh, I think you can assume that the Board will not be affected by any resolution passed by any- 
 body, but only by the evidence before us which is relevant to the reasonableness of the rules'. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Yes. Well, there is this idea. It is difficult to get, I think, the ramifications of evidence, but there 
 is this idea — I believe that if those gentlemen are subpoenaed, that the facts as they view them may differ. I think some 
 of them will give ready assent to the idea that those rules as a whole are wise and just and reasonable. 
 
 Mr. Hunt: That would be their opinion. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Yes. 
 
 Mr. Hunt: Which would be of no particular consequence, to some members at least. 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Unless they were the operators of the railroads, of course, who gave facts upon which the opinion was 
 based. 
 
 Now, to the others, why, of course, we would have to make in an orderly way as firm a defense against this testimony 
 
 as possible. And it might become of great relevancy as to what actuated the motives that were behind them, whether 
 
 they had organized, for instance — and I do not like to call it a conspiracy — but whether they had organized a movement, 
 
 regardless of the facts as to whether those rules were wise and just, and as to whether they imposed a burden or not, for 
 
 \he purpose of having them set aside, their object being to crush the unions as a whole. 
 
 That is the plain statement of it. We have a right — of course, we would have a right under certain circumstances, 
 to show the motives of witnesses, and to show anything that might have occured to this time that would show that their 
 motive was not to prevent evidence of the facts to the Board, but to create such a situation that they could pursue their 
 main object successfully. 
 
 Mr. Hunt: Well, don't you think, in general, though, that there is grave danger that that course would involve a 
 departure on the part of the Board from the main subject, and lead us into all sorts of difficulties and by-paths, which 
 would occasion loss of time and the postponement of a proper decision? 
 
 Mr. Walsh: Well, I feel, of course, that anything that the Board — I have that confidence in the Board that tells me 
 that anything that the Board thought was not relevant, they would exclude, but that this is such an important matter 
 that a mere question of time, of hours of time, or even a few days' time, ought not and would not stand in the way of 
 getting the truth. 
 
 The Chairman: I want to state that in addition to whatever resolutions are on file — and I do not now recall the 
 exact character — from the United States Chamber of Commerce, there are quiet a number from different civic bodies 
 and industrial organizations throughout the United States which are on file, some of which request a hearing by their 
 representatives at this time. 
 
 They have not been passed on by the Board, 
 records, subject to the inspection of anybody. 
 
 Those resolutions are on file in the records of the Board, and are public 
 
 And as to whether or not they will be read into the record in the future, the Board has not acted on that. I take it 
 that any kind of a resolution that will come from a reputable body, industrial body throughout the United States would 
 be given due and respectful consideration as proper. They have not so far been made any part of the record of this Board 
 on this hearing. * 
 
 50 
 
RETURN CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT 1 Q R ? ? 
 
 T0»^ 202 Main Library x>30^^ 
 
 LOAN PERIOD 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 HOME USE 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS 
 
 Renewals and Recharges may be made 4 days prior to the due date. 
 
 Books may be Renewed by calling 642-3405. 
 
 DUE AS STAMPED BELOW 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 uoym mSs 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 mm^M23*\ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 FORM NO. DD6 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY 
 BERKELEY, CA 94720 
 
Photomount 
 
 Pamphlet 
 
 Binder 
 
 Gaylord Bros. 
 
 Makers 
 
 Syracuse, N. Y. 
 
 PAT. JAN 21, 1908 
 
 I 
 
 <^0510S3177 
 
 rf 
 
 5 075 fit: 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY