AGREEMENTS-PAINTERS, DECORATORS, AND PAPER HANGERS 209

Painters, Decorators, and Paper Hangers-New York

AN agreement signed March 11, 1926, between New York District Council No. 9, of the Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators, and Paper Hangers and the Association of Master Painters and Decorators, the Interior Decorators' Society, and the Cabinet Makers Employers' Association contains several provisions designed to remove possible causes of dissension and to safeguard the health of the employees. The agreement calls for a week of 40 hours and 5 days, with no holiday, Sunday, or overtime work except by written consent of the signatories. In order to meet the emergencies of the renting season, however, this provision may be waived by consent of the parties concerned during the months of September, October, and November. In such cases all overtime work is to be reported within 48 hours to the secretaries of the respective associations. Painters are to be paid $12 for an 8-hour day. Paper hangers are to receive 20 per cent above the price list approved in 1920. Wages for paper hanging are to be paid directly to the journeymen performing the work and to no other person." When overtime or holiday work is permitted, it is to be paid at double rates. One rather unusual clause relates to work done outside of the immediate district.

On all work done by an employer outside of Manhattan, Bronx, and Richmond Counties in Greater New York and Long Island within a radius of 25 miles he shall employ members of District Council No. 9 to the extent of at least 50 per cent, providing that the enforcement of this clause causes no antagonism against the employer on the part of the local men.

It is stipulated that the joint trade board shall provide for the health and safety of the men at their work and as far as possible protect them from the hazards of their trade. To this end the following rules are adopted:

RULE 1. (a) To minimize injurious effects of paint fumes on the health of men, windows shall be kept open while painting ceilings or walls to assure a sufficient supply of fresh air.

(b) Where fresh air is not available, a five-minute rest period in each hour shall be allowed.

RULE 2. (a) Paint containing benzol shall not be used; nor shall benzol as such be added to any paint material on the job. Where penetrating stains or removers containing benzol are used, as many men as practicable shall be employed to minimize the period of exposure to the injurious effects of benzol. (b) Shellac cut in wood alcohol shall not be used, nor shall wood alcohol as such be used on any job.

RULE 3. Paint materials which are suspected of being injurious to health are to be investigated by the trade board for the purpose of their regulation or elimination.

RULE 4. The joint trade board is on record as favoring and advocating legislation requiring the labeling of paint materials in original containers to show ingredients as manufactured or offered for sale.

RULE 5. (a) To reduce the hazards of lead poisoning, surfaces painted with lead paint shall not be sandpapered or scraped by a dry process.

(b) By carrying lead into mouth, smoking is a source of lead poisoning and should therefore be avoided during working hours.

RULE 6. Where running hot or cold water is not available in or about the clothes locker, a sufficient supply of pails of water and soap powder shall be furnished to the men twice a day to provide adequate facilities for clean washing. No common pail or bucket shall be used for washing by more than 5 men.

RULE 7. Fresh drinking water and sanitary cups shall be provided twice a day during working hours.

RULE 8. Men shall not eat their lunch in paint or clothes locker on new operations.

RULE 9. (a) Drop cloths shall be maintained in a sanitary condition by the employer.

(b) Overalls shall be kept clean by the journeymen.

RULE 10. Men, no matter how slightly injured, shall be immediately taken care of by a physician.

Teamsters, Chauffeurs, etc.-Delawanna, N. J.

THE Kelly Plasterboard Co. made an agreement with its truck drivers, Local No. 478, for two years, beginning March 10, 1926, of which the more important sections are as follows:

SECTION 1. All chauffeurs to receive $37.50 per week.

SEC. 2. Ten hours out of ten and one-half hours to constitute a day's work. Overtime to be paid for at the rate of time and one-half. Straight time for the first hour.

SEC. 4. All men starting a day's work shall be paid for a full day unless they are discharged for cause, or quit, or ask for time off.

SEC. 5. Sundays and holidays to be paid for at the rate of time and one-half. SEC. 6. All 7-hour trips started Saturday morning are to be considered half days. It is understood that all New York, Brooklyn, and surrounding territory, or trips of an equal distance are to be included as half days. Otherwise, all work to stop at 1.30 p. m. on Saturdays.

SEC. 8. All grievances outside of violation of the agreement between the party of the first part and members of the union which can not be settled by the representatives of the union and of the employers shall be adjusted by board of arbitration, said board of arbitration to be composed of two selected by the employers and two to be selected by the union, these four shall select a fifth member, who shall be a disinterested party, the findings of said board shall be final and binding on all parties to the controversy.

SEC. 9. Chauffeurs and teamsters of all hired cars or trucks to be members of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Stablemen and Helpers of America, as far as possible.

SEC. 10. Party of the first part agrees to employ only members of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Stablemen and Helpers of America, in good standing, or those willing to join at the next regular meeting. SEC. 12. Members not to be asked to deliver any material to any job where there is any labor trouble.

AWARDS AND DECISIONS

Men's Clothing Industry-Baltimore

THE chairman of the trade board, Baltimore, in case No. 77, March 12, 1926, expressed his views of the method of obtaining harmony between the firm and its employees, as follows:

The firm complains of having great difficulty in issuing orders because the workers "refuse to take orders unless said orders, no matter how minor, are given through the chairmen." And the complaint adds that chairmen are now absent because of part-time work and thus there is no union representative with whom to take matters up.

At the hearing in this case it appeared that the matter of chairmen being away without substitutes was only one of the matters in dispute. Another was the right of the firm to change work without consulting the union. Still another was the right of the assistant labor manager to call workers into his office. in addition, there were other charges and counter.

And

As the chairman of the trade board explained orally to the representatives of both parties, there is no reason for any misunderstanding at this time of what the agreement requires with respect to the rights and duties of management and union representatives. Both have worked under the agreement long enough and have followed the rules amicably when they wanted to. The present disputes have arisen because both have been pursuing a policy of spite work instead of working out their differences in a common-sense manner under the agreement as they usually do.

If the parties choose to pursue spite-work policies, the trade board can not help them at all. No rules of any kind will work with such policies. The firm complains that the workers, instead of helping to get the quality of their work right, merely say "give the bad work back to us and we will fix it." The workers, on the other hand, complain that the management instead of trying to adjust disputes in a friendly manner issues its own orders and says "you can sue us before the trade board if we are wrong."

The chairman of the trade board has witnessed many instances of this sort of spiteful attitude on both sides, as well as impugning of motives and calling of names. The present bad feeling is the inevitable result of such policies, and it ought to teach both sides the lesson that only by trying to work in a friendly manner under the agreement can either get the results they want.

With respect to the rules, there is no reason why the management should not call a worker to the office if his chairman is present to represent him. The agree ment permits it, but if it is done spitefully when unnecessary, it will of course not work.

On the other hand, the management is not permitted to issue any orders changing or modifying work or specifications without taking the matter up first with the union so that a proper record of the change can be made.

If a shop chairman is absent there must be some other representative present with whom the firm can deal. This is fully understood, but if the firm makes it a custom to deal with an absent chairman over the telephone, calling him at his home in some cases, it can not properly object when he expects other cases to be handled in the same way.

Men's Clothing Industry--Chicago

THE chairman of the trade board, men's clothing industry, Chicago, comments as follows in case No. 991, February 26, 1926, when the union had complained of abusive and improper language used by the foreman in a shop.

The board had thought that most shops and cutting rooms had discontinued the practice of indulging in loose and reprehensible personal comment. Experience has shown that where such conditions prevail both management and workers are guilty in a degree. Loose talk appears to be contagious, but management must accept greater responsibility because something different is expected of those in charge of workers, and because the condition will not prevail unless management tolerates and condones it, if not, in fact, setting the example. It may well be that irritating remarks have been made to this foreman and that the comments were but a manner of speaking or a way of retort. It may be assumed, too, that the significance attached to the remarks was not as great at the time they were made as they appeared when brought out at the hearing. Having said this, it remains to be emphasized that such language has no place in any shop and will not be tolerated. If workers are not respectful, management has the right to impose discipline even to the extent of discharge. If those in charge of workers are not respectful they have no place in the industry. The board expects the situation to be corrected at once. If occasion arises again for complaint against the foreman on this score, the board will order his discharge.

Railroads-Decisions of Railroad Labor Board

Extra Conductor

A CASE differing slightly from decision No. 4006 (see Labor Review, March, 1926, pp. 98, 99) appears in decision No. 4070 of the Railroad Labor Board, March 17, 1926.

A conductor was needed for a train from a point where no conductors were available.

Conductor D being the oldest conductor filling a position as brakeman available, was held off his regular assignment as brakeman and used as a conductor. Mr. D in making this trip as a conductor did not earn as much as he would have earned had he worked as brakeman on his regular assignment.

Accordingly he made claim for the difference between what he would have earned in his position as a regular brakeman and what he received while performing service as an extra conductor, basing his claim on the following articles of the agreement between the carrier and the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen.

Article 6 (d) reads:

"Conductors and trainmen in any class of road service used or held for other than their regular assigned run will be paid the rate for the service performed, but not less than they would have earned on their regular assignment. This does not apply to men regularly assigned for extra passenger service. "Crews assigned to irregular (pool) freight service will be considered as assigned for the purpose of this rule.

Article 21 (d) reads:

"The oldest conductor in a minor position may be used as a conductor in extra or emergency service when no conductors on regular extra board are available, but will be displaced on return to the terminal where regular extra board is maintained if regularly assigned extra conductors are then available. Provided, on runs that do not reach a terminal where extra board is maintained, such conductor used in emergency will be displaced by sending a conductor from the extra board when available."

Carrier's position. The carrier contends that in allowing Conductor D the conductor's rate for service performed as a conductor he has been properly compensated, and that the claim for the difference between what was paid him as a conductor and what he would have earned as a brakeman is not justified under schedule rules and practice.

Decision.-Claim of the employees is sustained.

Seniority

THE application of seniority rules continues to perplex railroad officials, as is shown by decision No. 4052 of the Railroad Labor Board, made March 11, 1926. From the statements in the case the following facts are taken.

June 1, 1920, a trick dispatcher at Mount Carmel, Ill., on the Cairo division of the "Big Four" Railway was transferred to the position of chief train dispatcher of the Evansville, Indianapolis & Terre Haute Railroad, which was being operated by the "Big Four."

On or about July 17, 1924, the train-dispatching office of the Evansville, Indianapolis & Terre Haute Railroad was abolished and the dispatching of trains operating over that line was added to the duties of the train dispatchers employed at Indianapolis, on the Springfield division of the "Big Four." An agreement was made between the carrier and the train dispatchers "providing that the seniority of the displaced dispatchers and of the dispatchers on the Springfield division of the 'Big Four' would be pooled."

The train dispatcher in question "had not accumulated sufficient seniority on the Evansville, Indianapolis & Terre Haute Railroad to entitle him to a trick dispatcher's position on the Springfield division." The carrier, however, permitted him "to retain his seniority on the Cairo division," and to exercise such seniority on that division, thereby displacing a junior employee.

The employees took the position that the carrier had violated the following provisions of its agreement with the American Train Dispatchers Association:

ARTICLE V, SECTION (a). A train dispatcher's seniority will date from his last entrance into the service as such on the seniority district where employed.

SEC. (c). Except in case of sickness and as otherwise provided in these rules, the nonperformance of train dispatching by train dispatchers (other than extra dispatchers) for a period of 90 days shall constitute a forfeiture of seniority.

The employees further contend that by reason of Mr. N having of his own volition elected to absent himself from his seniority district to accept another subordinate official position, i. e., chief dispatcher on another seniority district, he automatically forfeited seniority accrued to him on the Cairo division, but acquired seniority as train dispatcher on the Evansville, Indianapolis & Terre Haute Railroad beginning with the date of his performing service in that position; therefore, Mr. N should not have been allowed to displace anyone on the Cairo division, but should have been assigned to any position his seniority entitled him on the Springfield division, which would have been the chief dispatcher at Indianapolis, Ind.

The carrier takes the position that the schedule with the train dispatchers was not effective until May 1, 1924, and, therefore, can not properly be considered as applying to the change made in 1920, at which time it is claimed that proper arrangement was made between Mr. N and the general manager of the railroad to protect his seniority rights on the Cairo division, which was consistent with previous practice on that line. The carrier takes the further position that if the present rules are applicable to the case in question, Article V (d) justified its action, and that under this article, as well as under customary practice prior to the adoption of the present schedule, Mr. N was entitled to resume his seniority as a dispatcher at Mt. Carmel, Ill.

Article V, Section (d) reads:

A train dispatcher promoted to an official position with the company or while engaged in committee work will retain his seniority.

Decision. Under the facts and circumstances of this particular case, the position of the carrier is sustained.

Signal Maintainers

AN

N INTERPRETATION to decision No. 1538 was given by the Railroad Labor Board, March 22, 1926. Section 12 reads as

follows:

Overtime hours continuous with regular working hours shall be computed on the actual minute basis at the rate of time and one-half. Employees will not be required to work more than 10 hours without being permitted to have a second meal period. Time taken for meals will not terminate the continuous-service period.

Sections 13 and 17 of the same decision reaffirmed similar sections in decision No. 707 (given in the Labor Review, April, 1922, pp. 111, 112).

The question was whether time and one-half should be paid to signal maintainers who are required to travel by train immediately prior or subsequent to their regular assignment.

The statement of the case is as follows:

The evidence shows that the employees involved in this dispute are assigned to regular hours for commencing and quitting work; that they have permanent headquarters; and that they are assigned to the maintenance of a section of