Workmen’s Compensation
Insurance
This Puts Premium on Hiring
Aliens Who Are Single Men
“By unanimous vote of the
Chamber of Commerce (of Ju
neau) today adopted a resolu
tion opposing the repeal of the
Alaska Workmen’s Compensa
tion Act, or the enactment of a
Territorial Industrial Insurance
Act. It based its action on the
ground that State monopolist
ic industrial insurance would
put too heavy a burden on in
dustry and business for it to be
a benefit to either labor or cap
ital.”—Juneau Empire.
• This is Juneau’s answer to the
Hyder Chamber of Commerce,
who by resolution have stated
that the present act placing
such a handicap on mining de
velopment that stagnation is the
lesult, or who are discriminat
ing against American citizens
and also against married men.
Who Wrote Our Present Act
Our present act was written
by the attorneys of the Alaska
Juneau Mine originally, and
since amended only in detail
but not in principle.
Why Was It Written
It was written not to insure
the laborers, but to limit the
amount of damages which the
mining men could get from the
Alaska Juneau Company. Min
ing operators preferred to pass
The act, rather than provide
safety devices.
Why the Amendments
The amendments were made
to further decrease the liability
of the Kennecott and the Juneau
mines. For this purpose Joe
Murray, the faithful servant of
the Kennecott people, introduc
ed the present act.
How It Was Done
This decrease is accomplished
by two provisions, first: that
where single men are killed, the
company may settle its liability
by burying the fellow; second,
where single men are killed, and
leave alien dependents, the com
pany shall pay to the alien
mother 60 per cent (Senator
Harry Pratt of Fairbanks tried
to make it only 50 per cent) of
what an American mother would
get, but other dependents can
get only 50 per cent.
This puts a premium on hiring
aliens who are single men. It
discriminates against American
citizens who have dependents.
The Proof
While the fight was going on
in the 1927 legislature, Senator
Harry Pratt conceded every
thing but that of discrimination
and said “That is really the
thing that we want”—since he
had the majority in his machine,
he had his way.
Attorney Robertson Says the
Alaska Act Is One of the Most
Liberal In the United States
Attorney Robertson, of the
legislative committee of the Ju
neau Chamber of Commerce,
says Alaska permits “Schedules
of compensation higher than
those provided by either similar
laws or industrial insurance
acts of most of the States” and
proves (?) it by calling atten
tion to the fact that the MAXI
MUM compensation payable to
an employee or his family under
the act is $9,000 as against $4,
000 for the State of Washing
ton.
The Joker
This $9,000 is only payable to
the beneficiaries of a citizen who
leaves a wife and five children.
Such men are not employed by
the large mines unless from ne
cessity. The large mines make
a practice of employing NON-Ci
TIZENS. They are cheaper to
kill.
The Hyder Complaint
That is the point of the com
plaint coming from Hyder. The
$9,000 maximum benefit is so
high that the insurance com
panies will not insure at any
rate. The small development
companies at Hyder cannot car
ry their own insurance. Neither
can they maintain employment
agencies to obtain single non
citizens. They are forced to take
the labor that is at hand—towit,
American citizens with families,
/.nd so while the Hyder compan
ies are face to face with the pos
sibility of paying $9,000—to
which Attorney Robertson points
with pride, the Juneau compan
ies avoid this risk.
Medical Aid
Under the Alaska law the
companies may charge each
man $2.50 per month for “med
ical aid.” Where a man is earn
ing $100 per month, this
amounts to two and one-half
per cent for medical aid only
but the Company selects the
doctor.
Several Jokers
The present act limits the
damages a laboring man can get,
but the law does not safeguard
the laboring man and guarantee
that he will get his money. So
when a man gets hurt or killed,
his beneficiary is forced to com
promise. The companies have
looked after this too by permit
ting the beneficiary to give a
“binding release,” but the law
does not compel the company
to pay within a certain time.