GATION, SEPTEMBER 1, 1909, TO DECEMBER 31, 1911-Continued.

A.-MINES, AGENCIES OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATION, AND OTHER PUBLIC-SERVICE UTILITIES-Continued.

APPLICATIONS FOR BOARDS OF CONCILIATION AND INVESTI A.-MINES, AGENCIES OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATION, AND OTHER PUBLIC-SERVICE UTILITIES-Concluded.

B.-INDUSTRIES OTHER THAN MINES, AGENCIES OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATION, AND OTHER PUBLIC-SERVICE UTILITIES.

GATION, SEPTEMBER 1, 1909, TO DECEMBER 31, 1911-Concluded.

A.-MINES, AGENCIES OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATION, AND OTHER PUBLIC-SERVICE UTILITIES-Concluded.

H. C. Taylor, C; A. W. June 2 ...do.... New schedule of wages and working rules drawn up and Ormsby, E; W. Sy

monds, M.

unanimously agreed to; submitted to both parties and after some changes accepted by them. Dispute harmoniously settled.

B.-INDUSTRIES OTHER THAN MINES, AGENCIES OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATION, AND OTHER PUBLIC-SERVICE UTILITIES.

1911.

G. W. Jolicoeur, C; Apr. 15

Felix Marois, E; J.
A. Langlois, M.

1911. June 24

Settlement affected in each case by unanimous report of board.

CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION OF RAILWAY LABOR DIS

PUTES IN GREAT BRITAIN.

CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION AGREEMENT OF 1907.

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 at time, or if the decision were not accepted, the men could require

rms of this agreement and for sample scheme formed under it, see Appendixes 4 pp. 117-122.

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 the speaker of the House of Commons and the master of the rolls, or, in the unavoidable absence or inability of one of 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.1

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 expen

1 Report on Strikes and Lockouts and on Conciliation and Arbitration Boards in the United Kingdom in 1910, Board of Trade (Labor Department, London. 1911, p. 81.