THE BRITISH RAILWAY DISPUTE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19069, 15 January 1924, Page 6

THE BRITISH RAILWAY DISPUTE.

Ten days ago it was reported by cable that there was trouble brewing on the railways at Home in consequence of the ballot taken by the locomotive engineers and firemen being against acceptance of the recent award of the National Wages Board. This augured no very promising beginning for the new year, and unfortunately there has been no clearance of the air in the meantime. Evidently behind the scenes there have been certain further developments. The secretary of the Engine Drivers and Firemen’s Union, doubtless fortified thereby, has nsw made, 'for the general enlightenment, a statement to the effect that a railway strike is inevitable, and that the men have been instructed respecting the date and hour upon which they shall cease work. Mr Bromley, the official in question, seasons frankness with a pinch of studied reticence in saying, “We shall choose our own time. We will not warn the public. We could strike within twenty-four hours if we wished.” This is interpreted as signifying that he is delaying the strike in the hope that Ins threat will induce the companies to make concessions. It does not seem that the companies have any disposition towards compromise. The strike threat is made on behalf of a union comprising some 49,000 members, which claims to be able to paralyse all goods and passenger traffic to and from London, but the answer of the companies reveals a certain imperturbability, which no doubt implies a measure of readiness to cope with a serious emergency. The question of whether the National Union of Railwaymen,, with its 400,000 members, would support the Engine Drivers and Firemen’s Union in the event of the latter declaring a strike is manifestly a consideration of great moment in relation to 'any further developments. Apparently Mr Bromley has no assurance of such support.; The grievance of the locomotive engineers and firemen consists in wage reductions consequent upon the recognition, in the award of reasonableness in the felaims of the companies for certain modifications in connection with Sunday and night duty, overtime, mileage allowances, and kindred matters. In the presentment of the case for the companies it was urged that the railwaymeu occupied a most advantageous position, as compared with workmen in other industries, in that their wages ranged from 100 to 144 per cent, above pre-war rates. Apart, however, from the merits of the dispute, there is a certain piquancy in the development of such a situation on the very eve of the Labour Party’s anticipated assumption of political office. The view is expressed in railway circles that the strike will be timed £0 coincide with the assembly of Parliament. It is suggested that the crisis may jeopardise Labour’s chances of coming into powei At all events the position may well bo embarrassing to Mr Ramsay MacDonald, and, if it does not actually interfere with his expected assumption this week of the Prime Minister’s mantle, it is likely to throw something in the nature of a mill-stone round his neck. If a strike occurs it will be the duty of the Prime Minister to deal with the national question of the dislocation of transport, a state of affairs brought about by a section of his own party. Perhaps the reasoning of the disaffected railwaymen leads them to the conclusion tnat the hour and the political circumstances must woi'k in their favour. A Labour loader so fully seized of the need for moving circumspectly as Mr Ramsay MacDonald must he can hardly find this strike proposal other than decidedly inopportune at the moment. As for Mr J. H. Thomas, mentioned as one of the prospective members of Mr Ramsay MacDonald’s prospective Cabinet, a shrewd surmise may be made concerning the advice which ho is likely ..to offer the National Union of Railwaymen, in the councils of which lie has carried so much weight. There is room for hope that a strike is, after all, not quite so inevitable as lias been represented in the most interested quarter.