66

'Every person suspended shall receive a written notice, directing him to appear at the office of the company for a decision-every suspension notice properly presented to the discipline officer of the company must be disposed of within six working hours from the time of its presentation and a definite decision announced to the suspended person.'

"Under the provision of the agreement for discipline the practice at present is as follows:

"All exercise of discipline or discharge has been withdrawn from the shop managers or superintendents and foremen, and is vested in the director of labor who investigates and passes first on all charges against a workman before an order for discharge is given. His function in this respect is a judicial one. According to the discipline officer of the company,-'in cases of discharge the burden of proof is upon the employer to show that such discharge is necessary for the welfare of the organization. He must also show that any alternative action involving less hardship on the individual is inadequate.'

"When, however, the discharge is advised by the discipline officer the discharge is immediately taken up by the deputy of the workers and, if no adjustment with the company can be made, the discharge becomes an emergency case and is heard immediately by the Trade Board.

"There are two exceptions to this method of procedure.

"Cutters who fall off in their production may not be disciplined, i. e., reduced in wages, suspended or discharged, before there has been a hearing before the Trade Board. Cutters are week workers.

"In the case of deputies of the Union and Trade Board members, no discipline can be imposed until charges are filed and heard before the Trade Board.

"By practice also Shop Chairmen are not disciplined until charges are filed and reviewed before the Trade Board.

"The system at Hart, Schaffner and Marx has worked well largely because of the following factors:

"When the agreement was first made the company held the power of discipline and the agreement was designed to define and limit the exercise of the power; further, the disciplinary function is centered in one official-the director of labor -who determines the policy of the company as to discipline and discharge and so maintains consistent aims and practices in the exercise of his functions; and further, the promptitude with which the discharge cases are heard and disposed of.

"The provision in the Sonneborn Labor Agreement dealing with discharge is as follows:

"It is understood that the power of discipline and discharge shall remain with the corporation and its agents. It is agreed, however, that at the request of the Shop Chairman the employee shall remain at work until the Trade Board reviews the case.'

"The practice under the Sonneborn agreement was originally like that of the Hart, Schaffner and Marx Agreement. The clause in the earlier agreement reads as follows:

"It is understood that the full power of discipline and discharge remains with

the corporation and its agents, but it is agreed that this power shall be exercised with justice and with due regard for the reasonable rights of the employee. If the employee feels as if he has been unjustly discharged, he may appeal to the Trade Board, which shall have the power to review and decide such cases. every case the Shop Chairman shall be notified before actual discharge. By request of the Shop Chairman, the discharge should be delayed until the Trade Board hears the case.'

In

"Because this request of the shop chairman on account of the use of the word 'should' was not held to be mandatory, the company insisted that the discharged man should leave the shop forthwith. This action, however, always awakened the resentment of the people in the shop and caused a falling off in production, and even when the man was reinstated with back pay the summary action of dismissal still rankled.

"On account of this evil effect the original practice was abandoned and no discharge involving immediate withdrawal from the shop took place except by agreement of the Shop Chairman. This practice being recognized as conserving the interests of both parties, the agreement was changed to read as at present, giving the Shop Chairman authority to prevent the withdrawal from the shop until the case has been heard by the Trade Board.

"It is clear that the administration of the two systems is not so widely different, and it is purely a question as to which is best adapted to meet the needs of the New York situation.

"As pointed out above, the outcome of the struggle between the employers and the workers finds the employers bereft of the power of discipline. For years the workers apparently had been able to veto any disciplinary action of the employer, and a guerrilla warfare has been waged.

"Any system of orderly procedure will take power from the workers or at least confine the exercise of it within prescribed limits. Under these circumstances we believe it is altogether advisable to inaugurate the procedure under the Sonneborn Labor Agreement

"1. Because it is adequate, and

"2. Because it will secure the co-operation of the workers in the endeavor to secure orderly procedure.

"(a) The system of review before final discharge has proved effective and satisfactory for the Sonneborn Co. in the operation of their shops employing over 3000 and for Strouse & Bros. employing about 1200 workers. It has been in practice for some three years and a new agreement confirming this practice has just been concluded. Prompt action from an authoritative source, the Impartial Chairman, before any action is taken disturbing the relations in the shop, will train both parties to habits of responsibility in cases of discharge. Shop Chairmen will acquire a new status and a new accountability, and this will result in moderation and independence in dealing with cases of discharge in the shop.

"(b) Any system of discipline to be effective must finally commend itself to the workers and secure their sanction and co-operation. The discharge after review gives them all the protection they can properly expect and will give to the employer some guarantee of discipline, such as he does not in the present circumstances possess.

"We do not believe the procedure under the Hart, Schaffner and Marx Labor Agreement would be a workable one in the present situation for two reasons. "1. The large number of employers-each with his own ideas of disciplinemakes any consistent policy of discharge impossible. Under the Sonneborn procedure the standards and policy as to discipline will be determined at the outset by the Impartial Chairman.

"2. The large number of establishments separated by considerable distances makes prompt hearing and action very difficult, certainly without the possibilities of speedy action such as is a part of the Hart, Schaffner and Marx procedure."

The Newer Industrial Relationship Between

Employer and Worker

By DAVID A. BROWN

President, General Necessities Corporation, Detroit, Mich.

S the Industrial World a Smoldering Fire?

This question has been smashed into my consciousness by the repeated hammer blows of the daily press, the weekly and monthly magazines, the screeching of the radical, the pleading of the social-minded, the threats of the workers and the pussyfooting of the employer.

To those who can see with their eyes closed comes the recurring picture of bursting flames carried by the prejudices, the sympathies, the ideals, the hatreds and injustices from town to town, state to state, country to country. Here and there in the midst of this chaos stands a "fireman" in a feeble attempt to put out his individual "fire," succeeding partially, but always endangered from the flying embers of his neighbor's conflagration.

Men of industry talk in whispers and there is a look of fear in their eyes as though they were sitting on the rim of an erupting volcano. From everywhere comes the cry of unrest, shouted from the housetops by the ranter, discussed academically by the learned professor, written of profusely by the theorist.

Capital says the question of unrest should be solved. Labor says the conditions that make for unrest must be solved. And all of this discussion is being piled mountain high, a smoldering fire, now bursting out into flame, now being controlled and at all times a veritable volcano, ready to spit its devastating, destroying lava over the earth. Go where you will, no matter where your destination or what your object, the subject of discussion eventually turns to the present day problem of capital and labor.

All types of men and women are giving serious thought to hundreds of minor differences that make up the major problems. Captains of industry are meeting through trades, by localities, through Boards and Chambers of Commerce and have thrown their best resources in an attempt at a solution. National and international organizations have called together the great men of

this age for the purpose of spot-lighting the subject so that the world might learn of every movement forward.

Socially-minded men, men who are giving their lives unselfishly so that the world will be a better and a finer world for the fit and unfit, men who because they have no selfish interest in the controversy, are recognized as the "Neutral" in this great battle for human rights and social justice, are giving the very best they have in them in an attempt to bring the warring forces of industry to a realization of the obligations and responsibilities of each for the other.

Workers of every group, from common laborer to skilled mechanic, from the man in overalls to the highly paid executive, are thinking and talking in terms of a Fairer Day, a day when their voice will be heard in industry whether the service they render be one purely of brawn or of brain. Public officials of the cities, state and country have lent themselves freely in an attempt to prevent injustice from being done. Committees of every nature have reported and are still reporting, while sufficient legislation has been suggested to solve all the problems in the world.

Every movement forward that the world has taken has been pregnant in the minds and souls of people for years, yes ages, and the labor pains of each birth have been long, excruciatingly painful and exhausting, bringing with them death, sorrow, hatred, love and happiness. And so from all of this great expenditure of thought, energy, time and money must come some definite, concrete, satisfying result, though it be over the bruised maimed bodies of thousands of experiments, the loss of great sums of money, and the tearing down of present day conditions and socalled rights of men.

Have we started? Is there on the horizon of industry any evidence of a rising sun, the "Dawn of a New Day"? In Canada they are asking why capital and labor cannot be partners. In the early months of this year a commission was appointed, two of whom represented the public, two representing the employers and two representing the employes. In their report, they suggest that all changes should be made step by step, each step being based on experience as it is gained, but the general direction should be determined toward health, happiness and the prosperity of the workers.