The Seattle Star Newspaper, August 10, 1921, Page 9

; _EDNESMAY, AUGUST 10, sz? THE SEATTLE STAR ” * ‘4 TO THE PUBLIC: The time has arrived for a clear statement of the basic points at issue in the controversy between the commercial coal operators and their men. That controversy in its inception was over a downward revision of the wage scale, but by reason of the attitude of the officials of the United Mine Workers of America, it has now resolved itself into the much larger question of whether the coal mines are to be operated in the interests of their owners, of their employes and of the public under a policy based on local conditions, or under a policy dictated by the United Mine Workers of America, which completely disregards these interests. That organization has evidently disregarded the principle of collective bargaining for the principle of dictation. It has refused to bargain with the employers for a new wage scale. It has refused to consider any reductions whatsoever in wages. It has refused to take cognizance of the condition and needs of the industry as shown by the report of the joint commission appointed by the Director of Labor and Industries of this State. It has refused to permit the men employed by the idle mines a chance to vote on the question of returning to work at a wage scale proposed by the neutral member of that commission. It has closed the door to all efforts of the operators to reach an amicable settlement with their former employes. The reason advanced by the officers of the United Mine Workers of America for this attitude is that the interests of their organization in the large producing districts of the East make it impossible to consider any wage adjustments in this district. It has become increasingly evident, not only in connection with the present controversy, but by reason of accumulative experience over a number of years, that the policy of the United Mine Workers of America is not one of consideration for the interests of the industry and of its own members in this district, but one under which those interests are sacrificed to the interests of that organization in other remote districts. The following communication addressed to the former employes of the mines reopening gives an outline of the developments which led up to the present situation, and contains an announcement of future policy: TO OUR FORMER EMPLOYES: About the first of the year it became apparent that, owing to the high cost of production, the commercial mines of this state were rapidly losing their markets, and that a reduction in wages was necessary if the mines were to be kept'‘in operation. During January and February the situation was presented in detail to the na- tional and district officers of the United Mine Workers of America. After 60 days of effort to prevail upon these officers to enter into negotiations for a new wage scale, the operators were given a definite refusal. This action left the operators no option other than to close their mines, unless a lower wage scale was accept- _ ed by the men. Therefore in our circular notice to you dated February 28, 1921, we proposed that the wage scale of Octéber, 1919, be made effective. We urged you to accept that proposal, at the same time stating that if you + not accept we would of necessity be compelled to close the mines in order to cut our losses to a minimum. You did not accept, and in consequence the mines have been closed since March 15th. In April at the request of Mr. Edward Clifford, Director of Labor and Industries of the State of Washing- ton, the operators consented to the formation of a commission composed of two representatives of the opera- tors, two representatives of the miners, and a representative of the Department of bor and Industries. The commission was directed by Mr. Clifford to investigate and report the facts conce: g the conditions sur- rounding the coal industry in this state, and he made it incumbent upon the commission “to determine the bisie on which operations can be resumed.” This commission after a very full and complete investigation itted a unanimous report of facts, which fully justified the previous contentions of the operators that the situation of the industry was a critical one, the miner members, in their communication of June 30th to Mr. Clifford, stating “our investigation has revealed a condition of affairs that we are frank to state is more dis- couraging than we had anticipated would be the case.” Based upon the above unanimous report of facts ~ member of the Commission representing the Department of Labor and Industries recommended a wage under which it would be possible for the mines to operate. The operators accepted the scale. After more fr five weeks’ delay, the United Mine Workers organization has refused to accept it. The employes of the idle properties have been refused an opportunity of voting on the scale, and men from operating mines whose wages were not and are not in controversy, were brought into the situation. The pom hap. which adjourned Saturday, by its action in refusing to recommend the acceptance of the prop8sed scale, and also by refusing to consider any reduction in wages whatsoever, finally — the door to any possible settlement with the United Mine Workers’ organization. someee The national officers of the United Mine Workers’ orgeniéation have stated that they would not sanction a reduction of wages in this district because of the effect in other districts more —— to them. It is evi- “dent, ape that the commercial mines of this state, and the men working in them, are being sacrificed by, the United Mine Workers’ organization because of interests elsewhere which that organization considers of more importance. Whether you men consent to being sacrificed in the interests of other districts far re- moved, is something which only you yourselves can decide, but this company does not propose to be sacrificed in such manner. The indifference of the officers of the United Mine Workers’ organization towards the in- terests of the coal operators and the men in this district leaves us no other course than to announce the com- plete severance of relations with the United Mine Workers of America, and to announce also that we will reopen our mines independently of that organization. Many of you hage expressed yourselves individually as believing that the wage scale proposed is fair, and should be adopted. Many of you have been with us for years and our relations with you individually have been of the most pleasant character. It is therefore not only our desire, but our duty to give you the oppor- tunity to return to your old jobs. The wage scale will be that recommended by the neutral member of the Commission, and at an appropriate time and as soon as possible after resumption of operations, our employes will be invited to select representatives to meet us and work out a plan of organization which wil embody the principle of collective bargaining and assure them a voice in the discussions of our mutual problems. It is ou: most earnest wish and hope that you will accept this invitation to return to work. Employment will be given prenrtly to all who return, and any remaining positions will of necessity have to be filled with men secured elsewhere, The following is the scale of wages heiessiail by the neutral member of the commission which we will pay on the-reopening of the mines; All per eight-hour day. Contract miners—Piece work which will range from $7.00 to $14.00 per day’ Day scale men (underground)......... $6.00 per day : Common labor (underground)... ...... ser Co's ¢ACAMGAICAK 910 Rie.aceie'e aia 4 $5.25 per day Day scale men (aboveground) . ...-«-.-<4:c.+.000% ce -«.. $6.00 per day Common labor (aboveground). . ... ..2esicaeceece ee ween ees $4,590 per day Comparison is invited between the above wage scale and the wages now received by labor in other lines of industry. The public is vitally interested in the coal industry of this state from two angles: First—The coal industry as it affects the general prosperity of the State of Washington, as the pay rolls and purchasing power of the industry in the state exceed $20,000,000 per year; and, Second—as it affects the cost of your coal, as the operators positively intend to make every possible reduction in selling price which the decreased oo. of production will permit. N.D. MOORE.” R. J. WULZEN, JOSEPH LEE, : 4