PENNSYLVANIA SYSTEM, ETC. v. Pennsylvania R. Co.

• Citation: 1 F.2d 171
• Decision Date: 14 July 1924
• Docket Number: No. 3118,3140.,3118
• Parties: PENNSYLVANIA SYSTEM BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY AND STEAMSHIP CLERKS, FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND STATION EMPLOYEES v. PENNSYLVANIA R. CO. et al. PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD SYSTEM AND ALLIED LINES FEDERATION NO. 90 et al. v. SAME.
• Court: United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)

1 F.2d 171 (1924)

PENNSYLVANIA SYSTEM BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY AND STEAMSHIP CLERKS, FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND STATION EMPLOYEES v. PENNSYLVANIA R. CO. et al.

PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD SYSTEM AND ALLIED LINES FEDERATION NO. 90 et al. v. SAME.

Nos. 3118, 3140.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

July 14, 1924.

Hunt & Swiger, of New York City, and David Wallerstein, of Philadelphia, Pa. (Henry T. Hunt and Morris Hillquit, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellants.

John Hampton Barnes, of Philadelphia, Pa., for appellees.

Before WOOLLEY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and BODINE, District Judge.

WOOLLEY, Circuit Judge.

These cases concern controversies between a railroad employer and its employees and call for an interpretation of Title III of the Transportation Act of 1920. 41 Stat. 456, 469 (Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, §§ 10071¼ee to 10071 ¼ jjj). Beyond this it is impossible to state the questions involved without first stating the facts from which they arose.

The two cases are against the same carrier, the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, and its officials. The first was instituted by bill in equity filed by the Pennsylvania System Board of Adjustment of the Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employees, setting forth grievances peculiar to the crafts indicated by the title of the complainant labor union; the second was instituted by a similar bill filed by the Pennsylvania Railroad System and Allied Lines Federation No. 90, and certain persons as individuals and officials, stating grievances peculiar to the crafts indicated by the title of this complainant labor union; both asserting rights conferred by the Transportation Act (Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, § 10071¼ et seq.), averring violations thereof by the Railroad Company and its officials, and praying that the Railroad Company and its officials be enjoined from further acting to their injury.

The law on which the two bills are based is the same and the facts on which they are rested differ only in those details which arise from differences in the crafts and their labor organizations. As the action brought by the Pennsylvania Railroad System and Allied Lines Federation No. 90 (to which for convenience we shall hereafter refer as System Federation No. 90) embraces all questions raised in the action brought by the Pennsylvania System Board of Adjustment of the Brotherhood of Railroad and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employees (hereinafter referred to as Brotherhood of Clerks) and embraces one or two more, we shall, in an effort to keep this opinion within reasonable bounds, recite only the facts of the former case and then only those facts averred in more than one hundred printed pages of the bill which we think are pertinent. They are as follows:

Prior to December 28, 1917, the Pennsylvania Railroad Company (hereinafter referred to as the "Company") operated railroads in twelve states under what was commonly known as the "Pennsylvania System." The Company employed a large number of men in shop or mechanical work in and about the repair and maintenance of locomotives, cars, and other equipment and also a large number as clerks, freight handlers, express and station employees. Many men of all crafts were members of labor unions and many were not. Thorough unionization of these crafts was resisted by the Company which, being antagonistic to labor organizations generally, refused to recognize and deal with their unions, although it recognized and, under collective agreements, dealt with four other labor organizations, namely, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, the Order of Railway Conductors and the Brotherhood of Railway Trainmen, known collectively as the "Big Four."

On December 28, 1917, the President of the United States, by authority of the Act of Congress of August 29, 1916, c. 418, 39 Stat. 619, 645, took over the railroads of the country, including those of the Pennsylvania System, and operated them through the Director General of Railroads. On February 21, 1918, the United States Railroad Administration issued an order, known as General Order No. 8, which prohibited discrimination against employees because of membership or non-membership in labor organizations. In consequence of this order local unions and lodges of the national organizations of shop crafts of the Company became active and, in July, 1918, their representatives met at Altoona and formed the Pennsylvania Railroad System and Allied Lines Federation No. 90, one of the complainants. This relatively local labor organization became affiliated with the national organization of the American Federation of Labor. A full statement of the relation of these major and minor organizations is unimportant except to note that the constitution and by-laws of System Federation No. 90 showed an interdependence in action and provided against strikes by employees of any member craft unless authorized by that organization on a referendum vote and sanctioned by the American Federation of Labor. In the spring and summer of 1918, the war being on, the Railroad Administration issued several general orders revising and increasing the wages of shop craft employees, making the rates uniform throughout the country, establishing definite and uniform classification and discontinuing the system of piecework. Thereafter the Railroad Administration entered into an agreement with the national body of railroad employees of the classes here in question, represented by the American Federation of Labor and its affiliated organizations, including System Federation No. 90. This agreement, which because of its scope became known as the "National Agreement," further increased wages and dealt generally with conditions of labor. About February 1, 1920, the war being over, shopcraft employees and employees of other classes presented to the Railroad Administration a request for a still further increase of wages and for further modifications of the National Agreement concerning working conditions. With this request pending and undetermined, the Congress passed the Transportation Act which, being approved by the President, became a law on February 28, 1920. Under its terms federal control of railroads ended on March 1, 1920 and on that day all railroads, including those of the Pennsylvania System, were returned to their owners.

In order properly to understand the remaining facts of these cases it will be necessary to stop at this point and briefly review the pertinent provisions of the Federal Transportation Act — holding in mind the existence of the National Agreement and the pending demand for increase of wages.

The portion of the Act here in question is Title III, which provides for the settlement of disputes between railroad companies engaged in interstate commerce and their employees. Following closely the summary of the Act made in the report of the case of the Pennsylvania Railroad Co. v. United States Railroad Labor Board, 261 U. S. 72, 43 Sup. Ct. 278, 67 L. Ed. 536, Section 301 makes it the duty of carriers and their employees to exert every reasonable effort to avoid interruption to the operation of an interstate commerce carrier because of disputes between them, and further provides that such disputes shall be considered and, if possible, decided "in conference between representatives designated and authorized so to confer by the carriers, or the employees or subordinate officials thereof, directly interested in the dispute." The section concludes: "If any dispute is not decided in such conference, it shall be referred by the parties thereto to the board which under the provisions of this title is authorized to hear and decide such dispute."

Section 302 provides for the establishment of Railroad Boards of Labor Adjustment by agreement between any carrier, group of carriers, or the carriers as a whole, and any employees of the same. No such Boards of Adjustment were established when the controversy with System Federation No. 90 arose.

Section 303 provides for hearing and decision by such Boards of Adjustment of any dispute involving only matters not decided as provided in Section 301.

Sections 304, 305 and 306 provide for the appointment and organization of a "Railroad Labor Board" composed of nine members, three from a group representing labor, three from a group representing the carriers, and three from a group representing the public.

Section 307 (a) provides that when a Labor Adjustment Board under Section 303 has not, within a reasonable time, reached a decision of a dispute submitted to it, or when the appropriate adjustment board has not been organized under Section 302, the Railroad Labor Board "(1) upon the application of the chief executive of any carrier or organization of employees or subordinate officials whose members are directly interested in the dispute, (2) upon a written petition signed by not less than 100 unorganized employees or subordinate officials directly interested in the dispute, or (3) upon the Labor Board's own motion if it is of the opinion that the dispute is likely substantially to interrupt commerce, shall receive for hearing, and as soon as practicable and with due diligence decide, any dispute involving grievances, rules, or working conditions which is not decided as provided in section 301." Paragraph (b) of the same section provides for a hearing and decision of disputes over wages and paragraph (c) requires in a decision by the Labor Board the concurrence of five of the nine members, of whom, in the case of wage disputes, a member of the Public Group must be one. This paragraph further provides that, "All decisions of the Labor Board * * * shall be immediately communicated to the parties to the dispute, the President, each Adjustment Board, and the (Interstate Commerce) Commission, and shall be given further...