At Bluefield, W. Va., on the Norfolk & Western Railroad he was advised that a member had lost his leg 8 inches below the knee when jerked from a caboose by rough handling. The company first offered $3,500, but later settled for $6,000 and promised a job as a switchtender, but he, of course, had no assurance as to how long the job would be available. Another man lost a hand and foot under circumstances denoting liability. The company gave him $7,500 and a part-time job as a relief clerk, but he did not get enough work on this job to support himself and it was necessary for his wife to work to make both ends meet. Another member lost an arm at the shoulder while adjusting a defective coupler. The railroad company paid him $5,000 and promised him a job as a switchtender. However, at this time, which was 2 years later, he was still on the extra list and did not have steady employment. The members here at Bluefield said there were no local lawyers they could talk to that they had any confidence in and it was their general feeling, "Do not get the company mad or they may not settle with you." They said in the few cases where there had been lawsuits the employees had been afraid to testify against the company for fear that they might lose their jobs. At Raleigh, W. Va., on the Chesapeake & Ohio, a member had been injured when setting a defective brake and fell off, resulting in his foot being broken in several places. His case was settled with the aid of a lawyer from Pittsburgh for $3,500, notwithstanding his injury was such that he could not go back railroading. The members advised that the claim agents at that point were very arrogant, that they made small offers of settlement and told the employee that they could take it or leave it. They further advised that the employees never got legal. advice, that there are no lawyers available in whom they have confidence or who are familiar with the Federal employers' liability law. At Hinton, W. Va., a member knocked from top of a car and severely crippled was given $500 and a job tending switches. At Princeton, W. Va., on the Virginian Railroad, Mr. McGrath was advised that a member had been killed under circumstances indicating clear liability. The widow employed a West Virginia lawyer who settled her case for $8,000 and paid her $4,000. At Elkins, W. Va., on the Western Maryland Railroad, it was the same story and on the Campbell's Creek Railroad they reported that a member who had lost both legs in a clear liability case had been paid $500 by the railroad to pay for two artificial limbs. They also gave him a lot valued from $800 to $1,000 and $179.45 worth of lumber to build a shack on the lot. They told him he could raise a garden. He had no legal advice and relied solely on the information given him by the claim agent as to his legal rights. Mr. McGrath reported that our members in West Virginia seem to have no information as to any capable lawyer in West Virginia except those employed by the railroads or other large corporation, and as an illustration as to why they felt that way they told of a member who had been injured and retained two attorneys at Fairmont, W. Va., agreeing to pay them 50 percent of the recovery and all expenses. These attorneys received an offer of settlement from the railroad company in the sum of $600 and tried to persuade this man to accept thtat amount in settlement. He refused and later employed some attorney from Cleveland, Ohio, paying the two Fairmont layers $150 and the Cleveland lawyer settled the case out of court for $6,400. As a result of the investigation made by Mr. McGrath and the many requests received by President A. F. Whitney for the establishment of a legal aid department, he submitted the question of whether or not such a department should be established to all of our lodges in the United States in January or February 1930 and they voted better than 11 to 1 in favor of the establishment of this department. In May 1930 the department was established and the local lodge officers were instructed to make a report to the grand lodge at Cleveland in every instance where a member sustained an injury during the course of his employment or was killed, with a brief outline of the extent of the injury as well as the manner in which the accident happened and then regional counsel were appointed in Cleveland, Chicago, and Minneapolis and later at other points and in making these appointments President Whitney selected attorneys who had specialized for some years in the handling of personal injury claims coming under the Federal employers' liability law, after he had assured himself of their honesty and integrity, as well as their ability, and in most instances after having recommendation of one or more of the judges before whom they had tried cases. Senator MOORE. Are there any questions? Senator DONNELL. No questions. Senator MOORE. Senator McGrath? Senator McGRATH. No. Mr. ATHERTON. Thank you very much on behalf of the trainmen, Mr. Chairman. Senator MOORE. Thank you, Mr. Atherton. Mr. Corbett. STATEMENT OF JOHN T. CORBETT, ASSISTANT GRAND CHIEF ENGINEER AND NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE, BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS, CLEVELAND, OHIO Mr. CORBETT. My name is John T. Corbett. I hold the offices of assistant grand chief engineer and of national legislative representative in the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers. The headquarters of the brotherhood is at Cleveland, Ohio. The local office is at 10 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, D. C. I appear in opposition to the proposed provisions of bill H. R. 1639. Now it was my understanding that H. R. 1639 was before you, because of Senator MOORE. That is right, it is a companion bill to the Senate bill. Mr. CORBETT. The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers was an active participant in the efforts made to secure the approval of the Congress and of the President to the present Employers' Liability Act, and its officers and members must consider action to amend the act, as proposed in this legislation, as a most unfriendly act. May I respectfully direct attention to the fact that for some many years we have witnessed the progressive development of specialists in practically all lines of endeavor. We consider our operation of modern locomotives as one of the outstanding services of the world's most expert specialists in the transportation industry and when one realizes that these transportation specialists operate the longest and heaviest trains ever known in the history of the world, we must recognize the specialized abilities that their many years of specialized craftsmanship have produced for the benefits of the traveling and the shipping public, including our Government. There are specialists in the production and maintenance of all of the countless pieces of materials which enter the construction of the machinery and/or articles used in manufacturing, science, commerce, and the arts. Again, there are recognized specialists in the professions, generally acknowledged by others of those professions. There are certainly acknowledged specialists in the medical profession, to which the small-town, general practitioner in medicine may find it necessary to go for the purpose of securing more information and/or assistance than his limited experience may have provided him, or her, opportunities to secure full information about. We know that certain physicians, whose sons, daughters, brothers, or other close associates may be doctors, will leave their own community and go some many miles to secure the assistance of some specialist practitioner in order to secure relief from some of his own personal ailments, or to secure a diagnosis of the condition of some member of his family. We know of no instance in which the medical profession, or union, has endeavored to secure the protection of some closed shop act, or restriction under the laws of the Nation, which would restrict either the patient, or his family physician, from securing the assistance of some specialist in some other city, county, or State, which might provide hope for the bodily relief sought for and which local practitioners appeared unable to provide. Now, let us give some attention to the activities of the great "legal union" in some instances divided up into local, municipal, county, State, and/or national bar associations, and we may also find that, even in that great group of legal practitioners, all of whom have probably been fairly successful in their efforts to pass the bar examinations, there are so many specialists who have attained their recognized leadership because of their successful services in the prosecution of cases dealing with one or more special branches of legal controversies. It is not necessary to leave the city of Washington, D. C., to learn that there are many legal specialists dealing only in matters involving patents; we hear of certain Members of the Congress who may be considered as specialists on matters dealing with questions involving the constitutionality of some proposed legislation. We hear of, and read of, so many legal specialists on such public questions as employee rights and/or employer rights. Again there are tax specialists and those references to legal specialists might be referred to for almost indefinite lengths. We recognize the fact that their professed specialist studies may provide them so many proper rights to return us their charges for the alleged specialist abilities which their reputations as specialists may prompt them to claim as their proper remuneration for the specialist nature of their legal services. We know of no instance in which some citizen who has been successful in securing the development of a patent shall be compelled to submit the handling of the application for the patent rights which he desires to secure to some small legal practitioner in a particular county or State, regardless of the efforts of the lawyers' union in the citizen's local territory. We consider it equally ridiculous to endeavor to have the Congress demand that some injured railroad employee shall be restricted from endeavoring to secure the specialist services of some legal practitioner whose studies, or efforts, may have developed a reputation for him that he "knows his stuff" in the handling of certain types of legal questions or matters in a far more satisfactory manner and with far more satisfactory results than have been provided by the average legal practitioner whose practice may be more extended along some other and quite different route of legal activities. Because of the interest of the many thousands of locomotive engineers in securing the passage by the Congress of the Employers' Liability Act, and the adverse effects we believe this legislation would create, if passed and approved, we shall respectfully hope and request that this committee and that the Congress shall give the proposed provisions of this bill no favorable consideration. That is all of my statement. Thank you. Senator MOORE. Are there any questions? Senator McGrath? Senator DONNELL. No questions. Senator MOORE. Thank you, Mr. Corbett. Are there any other witnesses here from a distance that would like to be heard today? (No response.) We will hold a short session tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock. I want to afford an opportunity for Mr. John Ryan, who I understand is from Chicago and I believe represents a bar association, to testify, which I am informed he desires to do. At the conclusion of his testimony we will recess these hearings for a short time. Therefore, we will meet at 10 o'clock tomorrow morning for a short session. (Thereupon, at 3:55 p. m., an adjournment was taken to 10 a. m., Wednesday, January 14, 1948.) |