Social legislation and social activity : $b being addresses delivered at the sixth annual meeting of the American academy of political and social science of PhiladelphiaAmerican Academy of Political and Social Science
History
Social legislation and social activity : $b being addresses delivered at the sixth annual meeting of the American academy of political and social science of Philadelphia
American Academy of Political and Social Science
Arbitration, Industrial; Child labor; Child labor -- United States; Factory laws and legislation -- United States; Housing -- United States; Juvenile courts; Labor -- United States
The compulsory law of New Zealand has found no favor in this country.
The hearings before the recent Industrial Commission show that the
representatives of both employers and workingmen gave testimony against
compulsory arbitration. The employers object because, they claim, it
would be one-sided owing to the lack of responsibility on the part of
the workingmen, while the workingmen object because, they claim, it
would be manipulated to suit the employers, and, if enforcement carried
imprisonment, it would provide for a species of slavery intolerable in a
free country. Many state boards, however, while not advocating as a
whole compulsory arbitration, urge further legislation which shall
prevent public inconvenience and loss resulting from strikes and
lock-outs involving public service corporations and means of transit.
This condensed summary of the general features of the question brings us
logically to a consideration of the method or methods best suited to our
time and country. Since the great majority interested on both sides,
employer and employed, reject any system of arbitration which includes
compulsion in its composition, experiments must be along the line of
mutual concession and tactful persuasion. Such results may be hoped for,
and, perhaps, confidently expected in the system of mediation and
conciliation promulgated by the Industrial Department of the National
Civic Federation.
That brings me up to date. I do not propose to treat this question from
an academic standpoint, but to give an expression of my own experience,
having been a large employer of labor for more than thirty years, and
having studied that question from the standpoint of mutual interest. My
attention was strongly directed to this subject as far back as 1874, at
the end of one of the most severe and destructive strikes that ever
occurred in Northern Ohio, in the coal mines, long and protracted,
bitter and destructive. When it was over both sides had suffered, and it
occurred to me that there ought to be some other way to settle these
differences, and as a result of that we organized in Northern Ohio an
organization of employers, the mine owners, and the men organized what
was known then as the National Bituminous Coal Miners’ Association, the
first of that character ever organized in the United States. Their
constitution and by-laws provided that no strikes should occur until
every other effort in the right should fail, and the employers
covenanted that they would give hearings and consideration to any
committees sent to them by the union.
As a result, during the life of the organization on the part of the men,
there never was a serious strike. All differences, which with small
beginnings very often lead to disastrous strikes, were settled by the
employer and employee coming together with a proper spirit, with a
determination to do right. Upon that hypothesis I have been working ever
since, and from that day to this I have never had a serious strike.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account