docket is made up, and the case is now, for the first time, open to public inspection. Only the commission may bring a complaint. Subsequent steps must be based thereon, and unless it sets forth facts to show a violation of law a valid order cannot be based upon it, regardless of the evidence.26"* * * * The thing which may be prohibited' is the method of competition specified in the complaint." 26 A complaint is issued in the name of the commission in the public interest. It names a respondent and charges a violation of law, with a statement of the charges. It contains notice of a hearing. Thirty days are allowed the respondent within which to make answer. The party first complaining to the commission is not a party to the complaint when issued by the commission. Nor does the complaint seek to adjust matters between parties. It is to prevent unfair methods of competition for the protection of the public. Upon the issuance of a complaint, the case is referred to the chief counsel, who is charged with the trial and the submission of the matter to the commission thereafter. 12. Same; Answer, Examination, and Finding After answer is filed and upon due notice to all parties respondent the case is set down for the taking of testimony before a trial examiner.27 After the taking of testimony and the submission of evidence on behalf of the commission in support of its complaint, and on behalf of the respondent, the trial examiner prepares a report of the facts for the information of the commission, counsel for the commission, and counsel for the respondent. Exceptions to the trial examiner's report may be made by either counsel for the commission or counsel for the respondent. The next step is the filing of briefs, and thereafter the case comes on for final argument before the full commission upon the complaint, the answer, the testimony and exhibits, the examiner's reports, exceptions thereto, and briefs by opposing counsel. The case is heard and taken under advisement, and thereafter the commission reaches a decision either sustaining the charges in the complaint or dismissing the complaint.25 The foregoing procedure is the one followed in contested cases. In other cases an admission of the matters alleged in the complaint may be made by respondent and a stipulation in lieu of testimony entered into between the commission and the respondent, upon which the commission makes its findings of facts, which are the basis of an order to cease and desist. The stipulation, of course, obviates the necessity for the taking of testimony and the briefing and argument of the case, unless the respondent desires to be heard upon the law alone. 25 Annual Report, Federal Trade Commission, 1924, p. 20 et seq. 26 Federal Trade Commission v. Gratz, 253 U. S. 421, 40 S. Ct. 572, 64 L. Ed. 993. 27 The answer is the only defensive pleading or motion permitted. See The Federal Trade Commission, G. C. Henderson, p. 57 et seq., citing Chamber of Commerce of Minneapolis v. Federal Trade Commission (C. C. A.) 280 F. 45, 763 13. Same; Injunction Against Commission Where the respondent asked a District Court for an injunction to arrest proceeding under the complaint, and to prevent the commission from compelling the respondent to produce records and documents, the injunction was denied.28 14. Same; Bill of Particulars The Commission will not entertain a motion to make the complaint more specific or for a bill of particulars.29 15. Same; Orders The final expression of the commission, if the complaint is sustained, is an order 22 upon the respondent to cease and desist a particular practice or practices charged in the complaint; or, if the complaint is not sustained, an order of dismissal is issued. The commission, during 1924, issued 92 separate orders to cease and desist. All of the 92 orders covered violations of section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act relating to unfair methods of competition. In two of these violations of section 2 of the Clayton Act-price discriminations-were enjoined, and in one order violation of section 3 of the Clayton Act-tying contracts was enjoined. As in past years, the respondents upon whom the orders were issued have in a great majority of cases accepted the orders and filed reports with the commission signifying their compliance with the terms of the orders. 28 T. C. Hurst & Son v. Federal Trade Commission (D. C.) 268 F. 874. 29 Federal Trade Commission v. Joseph Simmonds, 2 F. T. C. D. 11. 764 1. Mission CHAPTER 80 UNITED STATES RAILROAD LABOR BOARD The United States Railroad Labor Board, created in 1920,1 is an independent federal establishment, of a quasi judicial nature, with central offices at 608 South Dearborn street, Chicago, though it may meet at any other place. Its general mission is the amicable adjustment of disputes arising between carriers subject to the Interstate Commerce Act and their employees and subordinate officers in matters relating to wages, grievances, rules, or working conditions. 2. History The amicable adjustment of labor disputes was first made a subject of a national law in 1888, though some of the states and European countries had experimented in such legislation. The panic of 1873 in the United States, the crop failure of 1881, and the maladjustment of 1882, resulting in increase of living costs and consequent discontent, induced the Senate investigation, through its Committee on Education and Labor, in 1882-1883.5 The contentions of that period and results of the hearings were illuminating, though they produced no immediate solution. Strikes increased." The President sent a special message to Congress in 1886,8 and the first act above referred to 2 was passed, the net result of which was compulsory attendance of witnesses, production of evidence, and publication of the Commissioner of Labor's decisions. Strikes were numerous and violent.10 The Erdman Act,11 like the act of 1888, provided for arbitration 1 Act Feb. 28, 1920 (41 Stat. 456, 469); section 304, P. L. No. 152, 66th Cong. (the Transportation Act). 2 Act Oct. 1, 1888 (25 Stat. 501). 377 Cong. Rec. p. 2968; Cummings, Industrial Arbitration in the United States, Quarterly Journal of Economics, IX, pp. 353, 354, 358, 392, 397, 410, 420, 447, 572, 580, 587; Hatch, Government Industrial Arbitration, Bureau of Labor Bulletin 60, pp. 392, 572; Hatch, Arbitration; Bliss, New Encyclopedia for Social Reform, p. 60; Statutes of Apprentices-1562, 5 Eliz. c. 4; 20 George II, c. 19; 39-40 George III, c. 90; 43 George III, c. 151; 44 George III, c. 137; 53 George III, c. 125; Weeks, Labor Differences and Their Settlement, Society for Political Education, Economic Tracts, XX, pp. 9, 50; Sumner, Industrial Courts in France, Germany, and Switzerland, Bureau of Labor Bulletin 98, pp. 273, 289, 290; Wright, Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration, p. 4; Cummings, Action under Labor Arbitration Acts. Quarterly Journal of Economics, I, p. 497. 4 Appleton's Annual Cyclopedia, 1882, p. 453. 557 Cong. Rec. p. 6996. 6 Report of the Committee of the Senate upon Relations between Labor and Capital, vol. I, pp. 377, 1173. 7 Commissioner of Labor, Annual Report, 1901, p. 16; Taussig, The Southwestern Strike of 1886, Quarterly Journal of Economics, I, p. 184. 878 Cong. Rec. p. 3728. 977 Cong. Rec. p. 2964. 10 Carroll D. Wright, Industrial Evolution of the United States. 11 Act June 1, 1898 (30 Stat. 424); Act July 15, 1913 (38 Stat. 108 [Comp. St. § 8676]). and mediation, but was appliable only to cases of employees engaged in railway train service. It was premature legislation,12 but in the end was invoked successfully in more than sixty cases.13 The Newlands Act 14 followed the lines of the Erdman Act. It established the office of Commissioner of Mediation and Conciliation and the United States Board of Mediation and Conciliation. The effect of legislation at this stage was temporization; settling isolated disputes disposed of no question of fundamental principle. The law was threatened with breakdown, with disastrous results in critical national periods, and necessitated the President's intervention. The Adamson Law 15 was passed. The entrance of the United States into the World War and government control of the railroads created a decidedly new situation, from which the creation of the Railroad Wage Commission 16 and the Board of Railroad Wages and Working Conditions 17 resulted. The Railroad Labor Board was created as a new agent to supplement previous provisions, and was organized April 16, 1920. Its powers in regard to wages and working conditions are similar to those of the Interstate Commerce Commission with respect to rates. 3. Quasi Judicial Activities The Railroad Labor Board 18 is primarily a final court of appeals for labor disputes originating in connection with railroad carriers subject to the Interstate Commerce Act, including express companies and sleeping car companies, but not 'street, interurban, or suburban electric railways not operating as a part of a general steam railroad system of transportation.19 In the conduct of its judicial proceedings, members are authorized to require by subpoena the attendance of witnesses, to take depositions, to secure evidence by production of papers, books, and documents, and to administer oaths and examine witnesses,20 and the aid of United States District Courts may be invoked to that end.21 Access to documents and records is authorized.22 The board may adopt its own procedure,23 but must grant a hearing to any party to a dispute.24 Disputes as to grievances, rules, or working conditions may be decided upon certification 12 Bureau of Labor, Bulletin No. 98, p. 26 et seq. See, also, Commissioner of Mediation and Conciliation, Report, 1913-1919, p. 7. 13 Report of Commissioner of Mediation and Conciliation, 1913-1919, pp. 77, 96. 14 Act July 15, 1913 (38 Stat. 103 [Comp. St. §§ 8666-8676]). 15 Act Sept. 3, 1916 (39 Stat. 721 [Comp. St. §§ 8680a-8680d]). 16 Director General of Railroads, Gen. Order No. 5, Jan. 18, 1918. 17 Director General of Railroads, Gen. Order No. 27, art. VII, May 25, 1918. 19 41 Stat. 469, § 300, par. (1) being Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, § 100711⁄4ee. from an adjustment board or otherwise.25 Disputes over wages must pass directly from the conference between representatives of carriers and employees to the Labor Board.26 The quasi judicial activities may be classified as follows: A. Settlements of disputes involving grievances, rules, or working conditions between carriers and their employees or subordinate officers. (1) Disputes received from adjustment boards: (x) Cases where adjustment boards certify that they have failed to reach a decision. (y) Cases where adjustment boards certify that they will fail to reach a decision within a reasonable time. (z) Cases where Labor Board determines that adjustment boards have failed or are not using due diligence. (2) Disputes received upon application or petition: (x) Upon application of chief executive of any interested carrier. (z) Upon written petition signed by not less than 100 interested (3) Disputes received upon Labor Board's own motion, if substantial interruption to commerce is threatened. B. Settlement of disputes as to wages and salaries between carriers and employees or subordinate officers. (1) Disputes received upon application or petition. (x) Upon application of chief executive of any interested carrier. (y) Upon application of chief executive of any organization of em ployees or subordinate officers. (z) Upon written petition signed by not less than 100 interested unorganized employees or subordinate officers. (2) Disputes received upon Labor Board's own motion if substantial interruption to commerce is threatened. (3) Affirmation or modification of suspended decisions. (4) Investigation and decision as to violations of decisions of Labor Board or adjustment boards. 4. Administrative Activities There are certain administrative duties, incidental to the judicial, such as sending copies of its decisions to the President, the Interstate Commerce Commission, the adjustment board, and parties to the dispute,27 and certain publicity activities, and hearings and decisions as to violation of the decisions of the Labor Board or an adjustment board.28 The board must 29 conduct investigations 25 41 Stat. 469, 470, §§ 302, 303, 307, par. (a) being Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, §§ 100714f, 100714ff, 100714 ggg. 26 41 Stat. 470, § 307, par. (b) being Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, § 100714ggg. 27 41 Stat. 470, § 307, par. (c) being Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, § 100714ggg. 28 41 Stat. 473, § 313 (Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, § 100714iii). 29 41 Stat. 470, § 307, par. (d) being Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1923, § 100714ggg. |