Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

employees, give its approval thereof by certificate to be attached to such plan.2

After obtaining official approval the employer was permitted to enter into a contract with his employee by which the compensation scheme was to be accepted in lieu of all legal liability for accidental injuries. The contract could not be made a condition of employment nor was it to be binding for more than one year from its date. The law is purely of historical interest, as it was a dead letter from the start.

The Federal Act of 1908.-The Federal act of 1908, though notoriously inadequate, was the first real compensation law to be enacted in the United States 3 and continued in force until it was superseded by the act of 1916.

Later Acts. On March 4, 1909, Montana adopted a compulsory compensation law to take effect on October 1, 1910, and applying only to the coal mining industry. A coöperative insurance fund was established to be supported by contributions from employers and workmen. The law was declared unconstitutional since the workman could still sue under the common law, a double liability being thereby imposed on the employer. A somewhat similar statute was adopted in Maryland, in 1910, applying to miners in two counties, but this was repealed in 1914. The only

3

'Laws of Mass., 1908, Chap. 489, § I.

The first compensation law to take effect within the jurisdiction of the United States was that enacted by the U. S. Philippine Commission in 1906 which provided for the continuation of wages or salary for not more than 90 days of disability resulting from an injury incurred while on duty.

other laws not now in effect are the compulsory New York law of 1910, the elective Kentucky law of 1914, both declared unconstitutional, and the impractical Maryland act of 1912 which was superseded by the act of 1914.

Beginning with the year 1909, interest in compensation has grown rapidly. Many investigating commissions have been appointed and the greater number of our present laws are a result of their labors combined with the recommendations of various private organizations. Barring the elective New York statute of 1910, which has been a dead letter, the state compensation law which has been longest in force, is that of New Jersey, which went into effect on July 4, 1911. Two other laws, those of Kansas and Washington, were passed at an earlier date (March 14, 1911) than the New Jersey statute, but they did not become effective until the following January first and October first, respectively. Other laws passed in 1911 were those of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Ohio and Wisconsin.

Since 1911 the compensation idea has spread rapidly until, at the present writing, the United States, thirtytwo states, and two territories have adopted this principle and several others are considering it. In every state prominent industrially there is a compensation law in force. The following table indicates the growth of such legislation in the United States and territories.

In the remainder of this volume the elective New York law will not be considered, as it has no effect. Any reference to the New York act will apply to the compulsory statute enacted in 1913.

YEARS OF ENACTMENT AND TAKING EFFECT OF WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION LAWS NOW IN FORCE IN THE UNITED STATES AND TERRITORIES

[blocks in formation]

Along with this development in legislation has gone a corresponding development in public opinion. A few years ago the proponents of compensation were limited to a few economists and government officials, the great majority of the people knowing nothing of the movement, and most manufacturers and labor organizations actively opposing it. Now it is difficult to find a person with any knowledge of the subject who will offer objection to the general principle. Criticisms are directed at details and methods, but all classes are convinced that compensation is inevitable and desirable.

The foregoing presents in brief the development of the institution of workmen's compensation which has now become a definitely accepted part of our social structure and which has paved the way for the discussion and development of social insurance along other lines. In the three following chapters the statutes now in force are analyzed with a view to explaining the essential features and variations of compensation laws

5

An asterisk indicates that the law took effect in the following year.

as adopted in this country, and to suggesting certain improvements.

REFERENCES

RUBINOW, I. M. "Social Insurance," Holt, New York (1913). Chaps. X and XI.

Workmen's Insurance and Benefit Funds in the United States. 23d Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor, Washington (1909). Pp. 271-662, 749-793. Workmen's Compensation Laws of the United States and Foreign Countries, 1916. Bulletin of the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 203, Washington (1916).

Since this chapter went to the printer the enactment of compensation laws by five states has been reported, as follows: Idaho, Delaware, New Mexico, South Dakota, and Utah.

CHAPTER IX

WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION LEGISLATION IN THE UNITED STATES AND TERRITORIES

Among the thirty-three workmen's compensation acts in force in the United States there is wide diversity of expression of the compensation idea. These laws differ in extent of application, in amount of compensation, in method of administration, in insurance requirements, and in various other elements involved in the application of the principle of compensation. They are all based, however, on the unifying purpose of compensating the workman for economic loss from industrial accidents without requiring proof of fault on the part of the employer or of freedom from fault on the part of the employee. Their diversity is due to differences in opinion on the proper methods of securing justice to the workman, to varying degrees of skill and diligence in drafting laws, and to considerations of expediency in presenting to legislatures bills which do not arouse effective opposition nor encounter constitutional objections. The demand for compensation legislation has often been answered by the passage of acts which have been drawn up without adequate investigation of the subject and by incompetent or partisan officials. So many considerations foreign to justice and scientific accuracy enter into the passage of legislative measures that we can not be said to

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »