COAL - Clpdigital.org

36
THE COAL TRADE BULLETIN.
TEXT OF UMPIRE NEILL'S DECISION ON THE
GRIEVANCES OF PLYMOUTH COLLIERY
MINERS OVER PAY FOR LIFTING BOT­
TOM BONE.
The decision of Umpire Charles P. Neill of the
anthracite conciliation board in the miners' grievance
at Plymouth colliery of the Delaware & Hudson
Coal Co., over pay for lifting bottom bone, was
outlined in the last issue of THE COM. TRADE BUL­
LETIN. \ve believe tnat the text of this grievance
and the umpire's decision are of sufficient importance
to be given in lull. The Plymouth grievance
was as follows:
We, the miners employed in the split vein in
No. 5 colliery, in the town of Plymouth, owned
and operated hy the Delaware & Hudson Coal Co.,
submit for your consideration the following grievance,
namely, all employes were paid 50 cents
per yard for lifting bottom bone regardless of
thickness before and after the award of the anthracite
coal strike commission and until the
month of September, 1904, at which time we were
notified that the conipany would not in the future
pay for lifting none unless bone would exceed in
thickness eight inches. Our claim is that by this
system we have received a reduction contrary to
the award of the commission. After taking this
matter up with the officials of said company and
failing to have same adjusted we submit this our
grievance to your honorable board in order that
we may have our grievance adjusted.
The original grievance of the miners, presented
under date of March 3, is based upon these contentions:
First—That under the contract with the company
at the time of the award of the commission
they were to receive 50 cents per yard for lifting
bottom bone, irrespective of thickness.
Second—That while the bottom bone was thick
and the rate of 50 cents (or 55 cents) per yard
was to the disadvantage of the miner, the contract
price was adhered to.
Third—That when the bottom bone became
thin, and the price of 55 cents was to the advantage
of the miner, the company arbitrarily ordered
that nothing be paid for lifting bottom bone whenever
such bone was less than 8-10 of a foot in
thickness.
The umpire says:
During the hearings, the representatives of the
company admitted that a rule had been promulgated
fixing 8-10 of a foot as a minimum limit of
thickness below which no payment would be made
to the miner for lifting bottom bone, but the
action of the mine foreman promulgating this rule
was disavowed by the representatives of the company,
who stated that the fixing of 8 10 as a limit
was due to a misunderstanding on the part of
the foreman, and that the rule was no longer in
effect.
This would have disposed of the grievance had
it not been that in setting aside the rule fixing
a limit of thickness at 8-10 of a foot, the representatives
of the company stated their position to
be that when it was necessary to have bottom bone
lifted in order to gain height for the mine ear
or to provide for the proper grading of the roadbed,
the company would order the bone taken up
and would pay the rate of 55 cents per yard irrespective
of thickness; but that the company would
not pay for any bone lifted by the miner unless
it was ordered to be taken up by the mine foreman.
This position was not satisfactory to the miners.
Their representatives on the board contended that
it was frequently impossible for the miner to
avoid taking up the bottom bone; and that when
compelled by physical conditions to take up the
bone he was entitled to tne contract rate of 55
cents per yard, since the labor was just as onerous
when the work had not been specifically ordered
as it was when done in conformity with the orders
of the foreman.
The two parties to the controversy then joined
issue over this new contention and the grievance
reniained before the board of conciliation in this
new form.
The board of conciliation seems to have been
agreed as to the duty of the company under its
agreement with the miners to maintain the rate
of 55 cents per yard irrespective of thickness, but
the board could not agree over the question of the
payment of this rate regardless of whether or not
the bone was lifted by the order of the mine foreman.
The position of the representatives of the operators
on the board was that if the mine foreman
declined to order tne bone taken up, the miner
should not receive his 55 cents per yard, even
tnough he were unable to blast the coal without
lifting the bone along with it, or in other words,
that the miner was entitled to 55 cents per yard
for lifting bone only when the work was done by
order of the foreman; and it was emphasized that
any departure from this position would be demoralizing
to the discipline of the mines and
would practically amount to taking the control of
the business of the company out of its hands and
turning it over to the miners.
The position taKen by the representatives of the
miners was that so long as the miner actually
had to take up and handle the bone, the work entailed
on him by the lifting of the bone was just
the same whether the foreman of the company
did or did not order it taken up. They further
agree that where it was possible for the miner
to leave the bone down and escape the extra work,
he was entitled to no extra compensation if he
deliberately took it up.
In the judgment of the umpire, the position
taken by the miners' representatives is a fair one