Слике страница
PDF
ePub

had a more pleasing disposition; when a man in many cases did not dare to say that he was affiliated with a labor organization. In many instances it would place a force of men in a position where they would be compelled to compete with each other for the good will of King Foreman. The next step then would be the open shop, and then competition would be in full swing, for with the large body of unemployed changes would be rapid, and the "sub" setting a few more ems of type than the regular would be able to displace him.

With very few, if any, exceptions, those opposed to the section argue that there will be more situations to be given out with its abolition. The writer believes they are wholly in error in this, and is of the belief that there is but one thing to be done to make conditions better in the trade, and that is to abolish apprentices in union offices. No doubt many will say that would be too radical a move; that it would give the union much trouble, etc. But it is a condition that will have to be faced sooner or later, for we are taking in any where from fifteen to thirty new members every meeting, while we do not have enough work to keep those within our ranks busy. Many walk out of newspaper offices with one, two and three days a week on the hook, while there are some that show up seven nights without making connection. The old man is thrown out into the cold world, as with the large army of young men to pick from he is no longer to be considered a contender in the race. In the book and job branch conditions were never in a worse state. We are far better able to meet the issue today than we will be when our organization gradually becomes weakened as the load of overproduction becomes heavier. With the abolition of apprentices for five or ten years the International Typographical Union would gradually get back to good working conditions; when there would be a demand for good printers (and there is no demand for them today); when there would be no occasion to take in the incompetent printer to settle strikes (and I believe my opponents on the priority subject will agree with me that that is where the worst of them come from). The antipriority advocates would lead one to believe that a large percentage of our members were incompetent; and, while I disagree with them to that extent, I will admit that our organization needs cleansing and that we need a more searching investigation before a new member is admitted to our ranks.

The printers' branch is not the only one that contains a supply far in excess of the demand. The machinist branch has a waiting list that is simply ridiculously large. And what seems more ridiculous still is the fact that their scale of prices allows one apprentice to every journeyman. Just think what this means, and with the ordinary machinists of other branches to draw from also!

One sentence of Mr. Wells' letter reads: "Is it not perfectly clear that its real beneficiaries are only a handful of selfish and timid situation holders, who, content with their places, wish to hold on to them for life regardless both of their merits as workmen and their conduct as men?"

I can't believe Mr. Wells was truly in earnest when he scratched this sentence. Every member knows, if he knows anything about our laws, that the abolition of section 109 would have no effect whatever on the situation holder; and even if it would affect him it would be his privilege as a union man to retain a situation for life if he did not give the foreman just reason to discharge him. It is the writer's belief that a far greater percentage of the "selfish and timid" can be found among the advocates of the abolition of section 109; the selfish-just naturally so, it having been born in them-while the timid are to be found supporting anything and everything that the unscrupulous foreman is in favor of; and every one knows, with a very few exceptions, the foremen are opposed to section 109.

Now let the members be fair with one another, and instead of advocating laws that will allow them to take advantage of one another, endeavor to place laws on the statute book that will be advantageous to all.

The membership of the International Typographical Union should not lose sight of the fact that there are two sides to this question in the ranks of No. 6. If the vote had been confined to the branch of the trade which is affected in May last a large majority would have been cast to retain section 109. Notwithstanding what others may say, the newspaper branch is the only one affected and the only one liable to be affected for some time to

come.

If those so interested in defeating the priority law would only put as much energy in boosting the label, attend union meetings and help advance the condition of the membership in many ways, our organization would show an almost immediate improvement. WILLIAM MOUNCE.

New York, N. Y.

IS THE PRIORITY LAW FALLACIOUS? The question regarding the priority law will not down. The discussion of it has been resumed, and plausible arguments for and against have been advanced with a cogency that might well give an im partial jury a knotty problem to solve. I am impelled frankly to admit that when the subject first engaged my attention I became an earnest opponent of the law. Further consideration, however, after trying to weigh without prejudice as to its effect upon my personal fortunes the various arguments which have been brought to bear, has carried me to the point of at least doubting the strength of what at first appeared to be ample proof of "priority's fallacy," as Mr. Wells puts it. He has stated the case of the opposition with admirable lucidity and, if we concede his assumption of facts as justified, with a strength of logic that must appeal to the sense of fairness of all concerned. So much admitted, the question arises: Is Mr. Wells' assumption of facts entirely war ranted? It is this question that I shall give as brief consideration as its importance will permit. Asserting that the present law "stands out as a farce and a fraud and the most fallacious enact

ment ever put upon the statute books of the International Union," Mr. Wells calls attention to the fact that "there are just four ways in which a man without a situation can obtain one-by an enlargement of the force, by the discharge of a situation holder, by the resignation of a situation holder, or by the death of a situation holder." These have always been the ways of obtaining a situation, and to one of them every man now holding a job owes his place. It is right, however, that we should consider how far, if at all, each of these ways has been affected by the priority law. Mr. Wells evidently thinks that all save one have practically vanished from the reckoning. Vacancies by discharge have virtually been abolished, he says. If this is dependent in any way upon the priority law, which does not seem apparent, I am afraid that it will not seem a potent argument against it to those holding down good jobs and desiring to keep them; and how a rule that protects a man against discharge robs him of his independence is not sufficiently clear to me. Lest I be accused here of an unfair inference, it should be said, perhaps, that Mr. Wells attributes the loss of independence to other causes. Nevertheless, it must be conceded that the sense of security from discharge except for cause approved by the union. vastly increases the feeling of independence of our membership, and this feeling is one of our strongest bulwarks. So that is likely to be regarded as an argument favoring, rather than discrediting, the priority law, so far as it may have any bearing upon it.

I purposely refrain from discussing the enlargement of force aspect of the question, as Mr. Wells rightly regards it as practically negligible. In a somewhat lugubrious vein he deplores the fact that vacancies through resignation, "once so plentiful, have become like snowstorms in May and sunstrokes in November"; a picturesque simile that makes them scarce enough, certainly. I think that Mr. Wells, in his effort to strengthen his case, has taken a gentle pull at the long bow. Reviewing a rather long service in the trade, I do not recall a time when resignations were "once so plentiful" as to make vacancies from that cause a matter of frequent occurrence. So few were they in the last five years preceding the priority law that I believe the average annual resignations on the morning papers of New York could be counted on one's fingers without exhausting the digits. However this may be, I do not think that the priority law has been much of a factor in preventing resig nations. A man in a state of mind to throw up his job will hardly pause for a little thing like that. The law may have deterred some, but not many; because, irrespective of the priority law, resignations are as they always have been-few and far between.

Coming to vacancies through death, Mr. Wells quite appropriately becomes doleful, and draws an almost ghastly picture. "What," he asks, “shall be thought of a law so framed as to tempt the man without a situation to hold that every veteran lags superfluous in his chapel and to look upon the holders of jobs with aversion for the healthy,

with mistrust for the sickly, and with respect only for the dead?" If Mr. Wells finds himself in such a condition of mind it is no wonder that he wishes to get rid of a law that he holds responsible for it. I don't believe many feel that way; in fact, few ever give the death question much thought. The right to live as long as possible belongs to every law-abiding man, and even the most embittered of the "down-and-outs" generally admit that much. As Mr. Wells very truly says, however, death is beyond the jurisdiction of our union. The priority law has not changed human nature. There has always been a good supply of candidates eager for dead men's shoes, and so long as those willing to work far exceed in number the opportunities for work this must remain true. Economic reasons not pertinent to the present discussion might be cited to explain this if space permitted. This feature of waiting for others to die is not peculiar to our trade, it is quite unnecessary to say; it is worldwide, and extends through all gradations, from king down to peasant. Let us be as cheerful as we can in the circumstances. Let those who have jobs take care of their health and live long to enjoy them, smiling encouragingly to those on the outside; and let the latter cultivate the grace of patience and hope buoyantly for an early decrease of the population in their favor, with strict impartiality as to individuals. And, above all, let us keep malice and envy out of our hearts, remembering that every dog has and is entitled to his day, and that time at last makes all things even; that it's a long lane that has no turning, and a whole lot of other appropriate old saws.

In grouping other objections, Mr. Wells has somewhat overdrawn. I do not think the gap between the substitute and the regular has widened appreciably, certainly not anywhere near twentyfold. The man who lost his situation in years past often had to wait a long time for another, a fact to which many now having jobs can testify from personal experience. The "demoralization attendant on a long-continued course of 'subbing'" will not be lessened for him who, having waited long, finds just when the end seems in sight that he must wait still longer because some preferred brother who has lost his job elsewhere is unwilling to wait his turn for another, as the priority law says he shall. To speak of a rule that aims to put all members on an equal footing so far as obtaining work is concerned as an "instrument of oppression" seems to me a quite unwarranted assertion.

Mr. Wells says that "a foreman can bar a man from a situation in only one office; it has remained for his fellow unionists to bar him in all." This seems to mean that a man who has lost his job or become dissatisfied in one office can not walk into another and take a position that, under the pri ority law, belongs to a man already suffering from "the demoralization attendant on a long-continued course of 'subbing.'" From that point of view, Mr. Wells seems to be arguing not against but for the law.

Mr. Wells' "statistics" are worthless, inasmuch as no comparison is made with previous years. No

table would be any criterion that did not cover a considerable period, at least a half decade. And whatever the figures might show as to the number of vacancies and their cause, the principle back of the priority law would not be affected at all.

"Will any one assert," Mr. Wells asks, "that the law helps the book printer who wishes to change to the newspaper branch?" No; certainly not. The law was not intended as legislation for any class. The book printer enters a newspaper office on the same footing as any other member of the union, and I see no reason why he should do otherwise. Can Mr. Wells suggest any? "Will any one claim that it helps the man in a small city who wishes to get work in a large one?" he inquires further. It was not intended to help him any more than others. If he comes to the overcrowded city and takes his chances, and finds that no one asks where he came from or what right he had to come, and that he is received into full fellowship in the union, with all the advantages thereunto appertaining, has he any cause for complaint? Does Mr. Wells think that there should be some way provided by which such a man might speedily get a situation, jumping over the heads of many victims of "the demoralization attendant on a long-continued course of 'subbing'?"

Now, being a substitute is not such a terribly calamitous condition as Mr. Wells, with his probable lack of experience, would imply. Alert men who make themselves competent to do good work (and any man of sense who deserves to succeed can do that), generally make a fair living, often a very good one. There may be at first a struggle against many odds, but that is only a part of the game. Firm ground is sure to be reached at last by him who bides his time without faltering. Others earn their fate. Under the priority law the substitute's status is as clearly defined as that of the regular. He hasn't the full-fledged, recognized "sit" that he is patiently waiting for; still he has a situation of a sort. He is in direct line for a vacancy when his turn arrives. It may look a long way off, but he nevertheless has an assured income meantime, and he may even get married and raise a family with confidence or put a little money in the bank. Is the priority law detri mental to such a man? Under it his position, such as it is, is firmly fixed. In time he is recognized as much a part of the working force as any one, and often earns more money than a "regular." Can we improve his condition or make him better satisfied by repealing a law that, maintaining his rights, gives him a feeling of security and hopefulness? A reasonably long probation or interval between situations in the capacity of a substitute is not a misfortune. It affords a school in which the lessons of fortitude and patience are most thoroughly learned. Often, to be sure, there are the pangs of want, sometimes, it may be, even the lack of shelter; and he who bravely meets these trials, until at last he lands a job and comes into well-earned prosperity, appreciates it all the more, and knows that he is more of a man for the ordeal, with a larger capacity for sympathy for his fellows than he could have had if he had never been

without a "sit." And in nine cases out of ten he is glad to have had the experience.

It may be true that, without the priority law, some who have recently lost their situations, and who regard themselves as a class apart from the general run, might be able to push aside others. who have waited long and hopefully, and that some "crackerjacks" on the linotypes might be able to exact more above the scale than now, but a more important question is, What is to the best interest of the craft as a whole?

Now, I am not disposed to dogmatize on this question, nor to assume that my comments indisputably show that the priority law should be retained. That it does not work to the satisfaction of all is quite clear; and it is equally clear that much of the opposition comes from those who are anxious to return to the system of "pull" and favoritism, whereby they might supersede men who, under the priority law, they can not displace. There is, too, much honest and fair-minded opposition, based on the feeling that the law, good and proper as its object may be, does not, on the whole, work to the general advantage. This heretofore has been my own position; but now, after considering the question as I have done here, my leaning is in favor of the law. I purpose, however, to give the subject such further thought as may be suggested by the opinions, pro and con, of others, hoping eventually, if called upon to act in the matter, to do so in a way that will lead toward the greatest good to the greatest number. New York, N. Y.

GEORGE H. ACKERMAN.

"PRIORITY AS SHE'S WRIT."

(A Two-Act Tragedy in Two Scenes.) Now being played in all cities in the country. If it comes your way, don't miss it. It's a thriller, and the characters are all headliners and strictly union made. Everybody pleased-except the deadheads, non-believers-the latter won't acknowledge conviction, until they become a character in the play.

Time of the play-Any old year.
Scenes of the play-Any old printshop.
Cast of characters-

Foreman (with jobs in his pocket, and a
lover of apples).

Bill Smith

Stranger (who always has a job in advance; a non-believer)..

Hank Jones

Substitute (who sometimes has a job-according to law).....

Tom Brown Enter stran.

ACT I. Scene-Composing room. ger; proceeds to foreman's desk. Lays apple on desk. Substitute sitting on empty box. Greets stranger with glad hand, receiving stony stare! And then this:

[blocks in formation]

Stranger-Priority? Pen, ink and paper is my stock in trade on the priority question. When I want to change jobs I change. You priority howlers make me bilious.

(Enter foreman, proceeds to desk, bites apple; tries to look wise on seeing stranger, who ambles to desk and presents business card.)

Stranger-Like my apple? Buy them by the barrel. Got your telegram, all right. How about the job?

Foreman-O. K. Start on No. 25 at 7:30. Stranger-Who's the guy on the box? Foreman-Priority howler, square man, allround, etc.-you know 'em. We don't recognize priority here. Everything double price on your job. Time!!!

Sub (approaching foreman)-What kind of a deal are you handing out here? How long have I got to sub here before I get a sit? Been here six months that guy you gave No. 25 to just got in How about my priority?

town.

[blocks in formation]

ACT II. Same as scene 1. Time-One month later. Same characters-only one more. A new foreman-Green.

Foreman (just left makeup to take foremanship) -Say, Brown, you're first out for No. 25. Better go to work. Seven months' priority

Brown (the sub, who nearly faints)-Thanks. Foreman-No thanks. Just a matter of justiceand law.

Stranger (who breaks a record in getting to the foreman's desk)-Say, what the devil you

Foreman-Cut it out. Don't drop any apples around here; I don't like 'em. Go on the list and wait your turn-if competent you'll get what's coming to you.

Stranger-But my job! Ex-Foreman Smith gave me-how can you do that-take my job and give it to Brown the sub?

Foreman-Priority! Shoe pinches, does it? Time's called-get thee hence.

Ex-Foreman Smith (timidly approaching foreman)-How about me? Been here for yearsdon't I get No. 25 by right of priority?

Foreman-Sit down; let's talk it over. Did you consider Brown's priority when you gave No. 25 to Jones? Brown showed up every day for six months; is thoroughly competent; took what he could get, and was satisfied-incidentally a man who believes that all laws should be enforced. Just the kind of man you don't like. Jones is no more entitled to the job than you. You just resignednow you take your chance at the foot, and see how it works. (Smith starts for the door.) What? Going so soon? Well, so long. Think it over, you and Jones.

(Exit S. and J.-to condole.)
(Curtain-quick. No spotlight.)

Once upon a time a TYPOGRAPHICAL JOURNAL was overheard talking to a member who had just started to read it. The words seem worth recording, and here they are:

"Don't handle me with dirty hands. I should be

ashamed to be seen when the next member reads

me.

"Or leave me out in the rain. I can catch cold as well as children.

"Or make marks on me with your pen or pencil. It would spoil my looks.

"Or lean on me with your elbows when you are reading me. It hurts.

"Or open me and lay me face down on the table. You wouldn't like to be treated so.

"Or put in between my leaves a pencil or anything thicker than a single sheet of paper. It would strain my back.

"Whenever you are through reading me, if you are afraid of losing your place, don't turn down the corner of one of my leaves, but have a neat little bookmark to put in where you stop, and then close me and lay me down on my side so that I can have a good, comfortable rest.

"Remember, I want to visit others after you get through with me. Besides, I may meet you again some day, and you would be sorry to see me looking old and torn and soiled. Help me to keep fresh and clean, and I will help you to be happy. Springfield, Ill. F. C. REED.

ANENT PRESENT FACTORS. (Being something about the "very new" printer and the so-called "adwriter.")

"Hello, Johnnie. How've you been? Haven't seen you for a month of Sundays. Where do you keep yourself? Come and have a 'smile' and tell me what you know."

"Well, I am working daytime now and don't get around much. I read in the October JOURNAL a record of our little conversation that morning." "Did you read the November issue?"

"Sure, and I noted where an old friend of mine, Charlie Simms, of Pittsburg, endorsed my sentiments. I hope to see many others come forward with the same expressions."

"Have you laid your scheme before the board of education yet?"

(This is what Johnnie said during our last conversation, which was published in the October JOURNAL: "As a starter I shall request the local board of education to entertain a proposition whereby the daily papers shall be introduced into the higher grades of the public schools. I think the adoption of such a course would have a salutary effect both on the pupils and the publishers. To the former this method would prove very instructive, because, besides acquiring a knowledge of current events, they would learn to read understandingly-that is, provided they noted and corrected whatever they read. The latter would certainly endeavor to present to their readers a much better publication than heretofore, knowing, of course, that the article turned out is to be criticized by children.")

"No. That will come in due time-at least the attempt will be made to get the members of that body to consider it."

"I doubt if they will entertain the proposition, fearing to antagonize the newspapers. It is not

likely that the publishers will take very kindly to your ideas."

"I have considered all that, and when the time is ripe I will find a way to circumvent their opposition. In the meantime let the membership discuss my remarks, and at the next International Typographical Union convention there may be some action taken. There certainly should be if we are to preserve the 'art preservative of all arts.' Since the introduction of machines you often wonder if the man working alongside of you isn't a boilermaker who picked up an International Typographical Union card somewhere. Give him good copy and he will follow it all right; but be sure that no flies alight on it or he will mistake the specks for periods, commas or dotted letters. Yes, you can laugh, but this is true, nevertheless."

"Whom do you consider responsible for this condition of the trade?"

"Why, nobody but the printers themselves. I know there are members of the union who are not printers at all. What I can't understand is how these people got their cards. There is something rotten in Denmark. I believe local unions should be empowered to take up these cards, as they must have been obtained fraudulently."

"How about proofreaders and linotype machinists? Some of these are members of the union."

"I said those who gained their admission by fraud. I don't believe in taking in non-printers other than the linotype machinists who are members of the machinists' union. We need them. have failed to see other than one printer-machinist whom I would hire if I had a plant of many machines."

I

"You will hear a howl go up on that score. There are many machinist-operators who will disagree with you.

"Yes, lots of alleged machinists, I suppose. When I need my watch repaired--that is, if I have it with me-I take it to a jeweler, not a blacksmith."

"Well, the idea is to find employment for printers wherever possible."

"Before you proceed any further I want to call your attention to something that I have noticed. It is this: There are four classes of workmenthe good, very poor, fair and poor."

"Why do you name them in that order?" "That is easily explained. I place them in the order of their success. The good workman generally finds employment enough to suit him. The very poor comes next, because he is so bad that he is driven out of the business altogether, gets into something else and comes out O. K. The fair artizan makes both ends meet. The poor workman is the worst off of the bunch, because he merely gains an existence and has not energy enough to seek other fields."

"That just puts me in mind. You remember the fellow we used to call 'Daffy'? Well, he's the advertising man for Elah's, next to the largest advertiser in the city. What do you think of that?"

"It proves my assertion. He was so poor a workman that he had to get out of the trade. There's a field for printers in the advertising line

-good ones especially.

While discussing this subject I want to pay my respects to these adwriters and also to the ad compositors. The former are either printers who could not make a living at the business or bum reporters, who go to the type foundry, get a specimen book and mark 'Twenty squares double column, four-point rule border, body in twelve-point Cheltenham, this line in fortyeight point Roycroft, this in twenty-four point De Vinne, thirty-point figures,' etc. They then take the copy to the advertiser, hand him some 'bull' about the marks for the 'stupid' compositor to follow and tell him it will be a fine ad. He might have been talking Greek for all the advertiser knows. The copy is then sent to the adman, and if that individual has any sense he will about ignore all the adwriter's instructions as to size of type if he wants to get the ad in space. But you do not always find an adman with enough common sense to use his own judgment. He has that 'follow copy' germ in his brain and becomes so infected with it that when he loses his job he is a 'has-been.' The adwriter will use a punctuation mark any old place, capitalize, ditto and spell according to his own dictionary. And all this the intelligent compositor is instructed to follow. Not for me! The other day the gentleman working alongside of me showed me a return proof from an adwriter with the 's' marked off pairs, speaking of 300 pairs of gloves. He was told to make the change. Another instance: The word kimono was ordered spelled with an 'a.' 'Breaks' of this sort are of daily occurrence. What do you think of that?"

"It's awful! I hope conditions will change for the better. I would like to hear some of your experiences in adrooms."

"Do you intend to publish this interview?" "Yes."

"Well, when I am in the humor I will send them to THE JOURNAL for publication. In the meantime boost straight composition-the foundation of the printing business." J. J. NEELY. San Francisco, Cal.

THE LABEL CAMPAIGN.

The label is practically the only weapon which our organization can use to fight its battles against unfair employers, and yet how often do we forget it in our every-day life and in our dealings with the business world?

Hasten the day when all members of our or ganization shall deem it their duty to speak a word or two to the merchants whom they deal with, requesting that their future orders for printed matter be placed with concerns that are fair to our cause and granted the conditions for which we fought. As business men, they will listen to a customer, and who knows but what the least of us might turn the largest concerns over to our side by the most simple argument; at least, a trial costs nothing, and we have all to gain and nothing to lose except a few spoken words.

Many methods have been tried in the late campaign for an eight-hour day to reach the business

« ПретходнаНастави »