Slichter Asks U.S. Stand by Old Rail Pact

"Any settlement with the striking railroad workers which gives the men more favorable terms than their leaders accepted on December 21 would be fatal to future industrial peace," Sumner H. Slichter, Lamont University Professor, declared last night.

The economist called upon the government to beat the strike at any cost and then insist that those men who instituted the "sick" dodge be disciplined. He proposed that an outside committee he formed to determine liability of individuals in disputed cases involving discipline.

"Too often in the past, members of the train service unions have been rewarded for striking or threatening to strike by being given concessions over and above the recommendations of presidential fact-finding boards," he said.

Slichter pointed out that on December 21, the leaders of the Brotherhood of Railway Trainmen and three other brotherhoods signed a memorandum agreement which called for a three-year moratorium on strikes based on wage and rule demands, in exchange for wage increases and other concessions.

The unions later attempted to repudiate the pact on technical grounds, although in the current controversy they have supported the government by calling on the workers to return to their jobs. The workers have been staying away, claiming to be "ill."

"It is a minority among the trainmen themselves who are causing this strike. They have no union backing, yet the government's way of dealing with them in the past has encouraged them to try again," Slichter declared.

In line with his proposal that a committee be set up to place responsibility among the strikers, Slichter suggested that possible punishment might include loss of job or seniority. Some form of disciplinary action is definitely called for, he remarked, adding, "It was a mistake that appropriate discipline was not applied in December when the men stayed away from their jobs on the fictitious grounds that they were sick."