SEC. 3. That pending the report, of the commission herein provided for and for a period of thirty days thereafter the compensation of railway employees subject to this Act for a standard eight-hour workday shall not be reduced below the present standard day's wage, and for all necessary time in excess of eight hours such employees shall be paid at a rate not less than the pro rata rate for such standard eight-hour workday.

SEC. 4. That any person violating any provision of this Act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be fined not less than $100 and not more than $1,000, or imprisoned not to exceed one year, or both.

Approved, September 3, 1916.

Approved, September 5, 1916.

VII. GREAT BRITAIN.

ADJUSTMENT OF RAILWAY DISPUTES IN GREAT BRITAIN.

The settlement of disputes as to wages and hours of labor of all classes of railway employees in Great Britain has been provided for since the year 1907, by a series of private agreements negotiated by the Board of Trade. After a threatened railway strike in 1907 an agreement was entered into by the railroads and their employees which arranged for the conciliation or arbitration of all controversies. This arrangement was found to be unsatisfactory in several ways, and after the great railway strike in the United Kingdom in 1911, a royal commission was appointed to investigate and suggest remedies to meet the defects which had been found by experience to exist in the agreement of 1907. As a consequence of the work of this commission, as well as of conferences between the railroads and their employes, a supplementary arrangement was entered into under the auspices of the Board of Trade by which wage disputes are now adjusted. A thorough study was made of these agreements by the United States Bureau of Labor, the results of which were published in 1912.1 From this study the following extracts, giving a history of the agreements and an analysis of their operation have been taken.

In Great Britain, since November 6, 1907, the settlement by conciliation and arbitration of questions in dispute between railway companies and their employees relating to the rates of wages or hours of labor of any class engaged in the manipulation of traffic has been under an agreement secured through the Board of Trade and signed by representatives of the railway companies and of the leading railway men's trade-unions. This agreement was the outcome of a series of protracted conferences following a threatened general railway strike in 1907. The agreement was signed initially on behalf of 11 of the principal railway companies, but its terms were afterwards accepted by 35 others. The 46 companies which entered into this agreement, together with one other company which had a scheme of conciliation of its own, employed over 97 per cent of the railway workers in the United Kingdom.

Under the plan agreed upon conciliation boards were formed for each railway company, to deal with questions referred to them either by the company or its employees which could not be settled through the usual channels. The various grades or occupations of men coming under the scheme.were grouped in a suitable number of sections or groups of grades, for each of which a sectional conciliation board was formed. Each sectional board consisted on the men's side of one or more representatives elected by and from among the employees of the particular section in each district, and on the company's side included an appropriate number of officers representing the company, with one or more directors, if practicable. In addition to the sectional boards there was for each railway a central conciliation board, consisting of one or more representatives chosen from each sectional board.

The plan provided that any application for a change in rates of wages or hours of labor was first to be made in the usual course through the officials of the departments concerned. A reply was to be given within two months, and if no reply were received within that time, or if the decision were not accepted, the men could require the matter to be referred to the sectional conciliation board, which was to be at once convened to consider it. If the sectional board failed to reach a settlement, the question might be referred, on the motion of either side, to the central board, and upon the failure to reach an agreement by the central board the question should go to arbitration. In case of arbitration a single arbitrator was to be appointed for the particular case by agreement between the two sides of the conciliation board, or, in default of agreement, by

1 Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor, No. 98, January, 1912. Article entitled "Conciliation and arbitration of railway labor disputes in Great Britain," pp. 82-122.

the speaker of the House of Commons and the master of the rolls, or, in the unavoidable absence or inability of one them to act, then by the remaining one. The decision of a conciliation board was, subject to certain provisions, to be binding on the parties and not to be reopened within 12 months. The decision of an arbitrator was to be binding on all parties for a period fixed by him for the duration of his award.

The agreement might be terminated only after 12 months' notice had been given by one side or the other, but no such notice was to be given within 6 years from the date of the agreement.

The agreement of 1907 was drawn up in November, and many of the roads did not accept it until the following year. The process of setting up the machinery it provided took considerable time, and but little was done in the way of settling disputes in 1908. By 1909, however, on most of the roads the scheme was in full working order, and in that year 265 cases were handled by 30 boards. Of these 171 were settled, 67 of them by arbitrators. In 1910 comparatively few disputes arose, most of the leading roads having in the preceding year effected settlements lasting three years or more. However, 14 boards handled 97 cases, of which 72 were settled during the year.

The adoption of the agreement of 1907 happened to coincide with a period of decreased earnings in the railroad world, with a consequent reduction of expenses, including wages, and a general process of "speeding up," so that the employees might in many cases be getting actually less pay while doing more work than they had a year or two earlier. At the same time pressure was brought to bear on the railway companies to cut down, in the interests of public safety, the long hours which some of the men were working. This cut off the overtime pay at the same time, that regular wages might be cut down. Also in the interests of public safety much stricter physical examinations and especially stricter eyesight tests were instituted, so that many good workers found themselves reduced to more poorly paid positions or in some cases even laid off. Naturally, the men thus affected felt they had cause for complaint.

Apart from this, however, the scheme proved unsatisfactory. Proceedings under its terms, the men complained, were slow and expensive, and a marked tendency appeared to look upon arbitration not as a last resort to be called upon only in the most difficult and intricate cases, but as the inevitable goal of every case brought up by the employees. As the scheme had been based upon the idea of conciliation, with arbitration as a last resource, much time was consumed in reaching the final stages. Much of the delay, the men believed, was wholly unnecessary, and, rightly or wrongly, they credited the companies with using every possibility of delay for the sake of postponing decisions and continuing the conditions of which complaints were made.

The dissatisfaction and unrest among the railway workers finally culminated in a general strike during August, 1911. The board of trade at once intervened, and through its offices the following basis of settlement was agreed to by both parties:

1. The strike to be terminated forthwith and the men's leaders to use their best endeavors to induce the men to return to work at once.

2. All the men involved in the present dispute, either by strike or lockout, including casuals, who present themselves for work within a reasonable time, to be reinstated by the companies at the earliest practicable moment, and no one to be subjected to proceedings for breach of contract or otherwise penalized. 3. The conciliation boards to be convened for the purpose of settling forthwith the questions at present in dispute, so far as they are within the scope of such boards, provided notice of such questions be given not later than 14 days from the date of this agreement. If the sectional boards fail to arrive at a settlement the central board to meet at once.

Any decisions arrived at to be retrospective as from the date of this agreement.

It is agreed that for the purpose of this and the following clause, "rates of wages" includes remuneration whether by time or piece.

4. Steps to be taken forthwith to effect a settlement of the questions now in dispute between the companies and classes of their employees not included within the conciliation scheme of 1907, by means of conferences between representatives of the companies and representatives of their employees who are themselves employed by the same company, and, failing agreement, by arbitration to be arranged mutually or by the Board of Trade.

The above to be a temporary arrangement pending the report of the commission as to the best means of settling disputes.

5. Both parties to give every assistance to the special commission of inquiry, the immediate appointment of which the Government have announced.

6. Any question which may arise as to the interpretation of this agreement to be referred to the Board of Trade.

Assurances were given by both parties that they would accept the findings of the commission of inquiry, the terms of reference to which are as follows:

“To investigate the working of the railway conciliation and arbitration scheme signed on behalf of the principal railway companies and of three tradeunions of railway employees, at the Board of Trade, on November 6, 1907, and to report what changes (if any) are desirable with a view to the prompt and satisfactory settlement of differences."

On behalf of the Government an assurance was given to the railway companies that they would propose to Parliament at the next session legislation providing that an increase in the cost of labor due to the improvement of conditions for the staff would be a valid justification for a reasonable general increase of charges within the legal maxima if challenged under the act of 1894. During the hearings before the royal commissions neither the railroad workers nor the officials of the companies presented arguments against the principle of conciliation and arbitration. The men were dissatisfied primarily with the working of the arrangement. Their complaints centered around two points-first, the absence of any recognition of the unions and the refusal of many of the companies to treat with the men as equal parties in the conciliation proceedings, and, second, the alleged violation by the companies of the spirit and intent of the agreement by delaying its working unreasonably, by claiming the right to be sole interpreters of the awards when given, and by varying conditions of work after awards had been given, so that those who would otherwise have profited by these awards gained no advantage from them. The men stated that they had very serious grievances in the matters of long hours, low wages, and oppressive conditions of work, and that the agreement of 1907 had been so perverted from its true purpose that it was merely an ingenious device for preventing any remedial action.

The representatives of the railway companies who testified before the commission denied the charges of delay and bad faith in the working of the scheme of 1907, and on their side complained strongly of the recent strike as a breach of the agreement. They also claimed that they had signed the agreement on the understanding that the question of recognition was not to be raised during its existence, and for the men to bring forward that demand was a violation of their bargain which showed the futility of entering into negotiations with the unions. For the most part the companies were fairly well satisfied with the scheme of 1907, though they suggested various changes which would make it work more satisfactorily.

REPORT OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION.

The royal commission, after reviewing the evidence, suggested certain amendments to the scheme of 1907 designed to secure promptness of settlement, uniformity of procedure, and finality of decision.

It was suggested that the central boards be abolished, and that the sectional boards, with some alterations and additions, should perform the conciliation work not settled by direct negotiations between the parties concerned. All matters of difference dealing with rates of wages, hours of labor, or conditions of service other than matters of management or discipline, if not settled by conference between deputations of the men and the company, should be referred to the conciliation boards.

Either side of a board, by 14 days' notice, might ask for a special meeting, submitting the matter to be discussed. A neutral chairman was provided for, to be selected by the conciliation boards from a panel to be prepared by the Board of Trade, the same chairman to act for all the boards on a system during the entire period of office of those boards. The fees and expenses of the chairman were to be paid by the Board of Trade. Any differences arising as to matters to be placed on the program should be decided by the chairman, as well as any question of interpretation not settled by the board.

The scheme proposed by the commission, as can be readily seen, contemplated the final settlement of disputes by conciliation boards, if possible without a chairman, but if conciliation failed, then by bringing in a chairman. The report of the commission, however, was received adversely by the men, and, as the result of further conferences between the employees and the railroad held under the direction of the Board of Trade, modifications were made, involving important concessions to the men. It was agreed that—

the employers must receive a deputation, if the men wish to send one, within 14 days of the receipt of a petition. Petitions and answers must be made in writing, thus avoiding some possibilities of misunderstanding. Clause 2, providing that if the employees wish to apply for any changes a petition must be presented, signed by 25 per cent of those affected, was altered to provide that special meetings of the conciliation boards might be held at once, at which the necessary percentage should be decided upon; if the two sides were unable to agree, the 25 per cent should stand. Clauses 5 and 6 were amended to provide that, in the case of a company wishing to alter adversely wages, hours, or conditions of service, it must notify the workers concerned, and the matter must be brought up and passed upon at the next meeting of the conciliation board, the change not becoming effective until the board had approved it or the chairman given his decision in its favor. Variations in trip rates, if unsatisfactory to the men, might be referred to the next meeting of the conciliation board, and its decision should be retroactive. Alterations in existing settlements might be made at the meeting of the conciliation boards to be held in May, 1912, but should not take effect till July, 1912. A number of other amendments were made, all in the direction of securing a smoother working of the scheme. In addition, the railway representatives present bound their own roads to pay extra and casual men for the time actually worked at rates not lower than the minimum rates paid regular employees for the same work, and undertook to get other companies to adopt the same arrangement. The plan as amended was signed December 11, 1911.

SCHEME FOR DEALING WITH QUESTIONS AFFECTING WAGES, HOURS, OR CONDITIONS OF SERVICE OF RAILWAY EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN MANIPULATION OF TRAFFIC.

Following is given the text of the proposed new scheme of conciliation and arbitration as suggested in the report of the royal commission of 1911. The scheme as here given is as recommended by the commission:

STEPS PRELIMINARY TO THE BRINGING OF BUSINESS BEFORE CONCILIATION BOARDS.

1. Unless otherwise mutually arranged the procedure laid down in paragraphs 2 to 8 shall be adopted.

2. If the employees forming a grade, or combination of grades having a common interest, wish to bring to the notice of the company a matter affecting their rates of wages, hours of labor, or conditions of service, or (at this stage) any questions affecting the contractual relations between the company and its employees, a petition shall be presented signed by at least 25 per cent of those concerned. The petition shall name a suitable number of employees of the company whom the petitioners desire to form a deputation. The company shall receive the deputation and shall give a reply to the petitioners within 28 days of its reception.