Work Of National Production Committee, U. S. Fuel Administration -Discussion

ROBERT PEELE, * New York, N. Y.-I should like to ask Mr. Neale how the members of the production committees at the individual mines, who came from the mine workers themselves, were chosen or appointed; also from what classes of employees they usually came? J. B. NEALE.-In the union fields, they were chosen by a local. In the non-union fields, they were chosen either by the men in mass meeting or by the company officials. The last way was very unsatisfactory because it gave the men an opportunity to say that they were going to be passed upon as to whether they were slackers or not, by men chosen by the company. When they were chosen by the locals or at mass meetings of the workers, the appointments have been very much more satisfactory. R. D. HALL, ? New York, N. Y.-The matter of inefficiency on the part of the operator is one that I think we may well take into account, because there is a very large inefficiency on the part of the coal operator; it has arisen from reasons almost beyond his control and will continue for these same reasons. It is no use arguing a moral responsibility on the part of the operator, when you make efficiency very largely a loss to the operator who puts it in force. If you ask a man working on a clay wage to work with more efficiency. he says, "Well, I may do it or I may not," it all depends how he feels, but he does not lose anything financially by not working hard. If you ask the man who is working by the ton to put out more tons, he makes a profit by putting out more tons. How is it with the operator? If he gives a man all the cars he needs and all the power he needs, if he runs after his working men and waits on them, he does not get his coal out any cheaper than before.. He gives the man a better chance and there is more efficiency, but at the same time he has increased his expenses all along the line. At the end of the year he finds that his profits have been less than if he had had less efficiency. The efficiency is really against him in many ways. Because he gets a larger tonnage, he reduces the overhead to a certain extent; but hiss tonnage may not be any greater because he may work fewer days. As Mr. Taylor remarked some tine ago, supposing he puts in a machine that is very much more effective than any he had before, he has the same scale; the miner gets out more coal, but he himself does not get any benefit out of it because he has a scale fixed, so much per ton.