Q. How did their wages compare with the wages of your men?
A. If they had steady employment—if they had been employed each and every day—the wages they had would have been sufficient, and would have compared very favorably with the employment in other lines of business—in other departments. As I looked upon it, the prime cause of the trouble was that there were more men than there was work for, and they undertook to make a little work divide around amongst a great many men, and that, of course, made a small amount of pay for each one. In many other businesses, an employer so situated would have—I know I should have discharged my men down until I had full employment for those that were retained.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. From that I would infer that it was not the pay, but it was the time they were making?
A. They did not make enough time.
Q. Had they made full time they would have made ample pay?
A. Perhaps satisfactory.
By Mr. Englebert:
Q. Has not that been the case in all business for the last year?
A. I think that some employers have made the same mistake as the railroad men. It was out of the goodness of their hearts that they kept men about that they had not employment for. I would either give them work or not give them work.