UNEMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR EXCHANGES.

Auckland Star, Volume XLI, Issue 70, 23 March 1910, Page 8

UNEMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR EXCHANGES.

(By JAiLES THORX.)

Superstitions, social and otherwise, die hard. Sometimes they linger, and then are destroyed, quite unwittingly, by those who previously kept them alive. Among these, in the United Kingdom, in any case, may be placed that one that unemployment was the result and punishment of wilfully defective character. Lp to within quite recent years, the conventional view concerning an unemployed man was that he was a "wastrel," a "won't work," a "shirker," who simply had himself to blame. Though uneraplovment fills the streets with lamentation, Society merely shrugged its shoulders, laid the balm to its soul that "there was plenty of work for the unemployed if they would only look for it," and went on its unthinking way, indolently content to let the problem settle itself. Now different sentiments prevail. There may be some of lethargic brain who are still obsessed by economic obsoletism. but the great bulk of authoritative opinion is ready to admit that unemployment is an evil naturally arising from the existing form of industrial organisation. Of the social forces which contributed towards the development of this new conception, the Labour partyi with its '"Right to Work" Bill, occupied a foremost position; but, incongruous as it may seem, the most potent ultimate factor responsible was the Tariff Reform agitation. The explanation is simple. The Tories wanted power. The achievement of power was impossible without working-class support. Unemployment terribly scourged this particular class. Theretore, a policy had to be adopted which admitted the general inculpability of the unemployed, and whicn seemed to contain a capacity to mitigate the evil if not to wholly eliminate it. So the Tories first admitted and then asserted, what before they had always denied, that for hundreds of thousands of honest and willing workers honourable employment did not exist. To supply work was the object of their Tariff Reform policy, so they alleged. Unquestionably, what progress Tariff Reform has made is largely attribut/ble to the belief that it would lessen unemployment. Whatever our feelings may be, however, with regard to the grck-th of Tariff Reform, one significant faci of great encouragement to social reformers clearly emerges from the clamour of Tariff Reform propaganda, and that is the Tory assertion that unemployment is the fruit of faulty hocial arrangements. This represents a tremendous social advance, and makes possible the application of national resources to the end that unemployment might first be reduced as a preliminary to its complete eradication. Xow that these sensible conclusions have been arrived at, one marvels that the process lias been so slow. The average Briton must hug his delusions with dogged, almost immovable, conservatism. On every hand, at any time, this social disorder of unenxploj'ment manifests itself. Xot only that, but the fierce willingness to work of the wage-earner is also evident. Savage struggles at nock and lactory gates to secure ill-requited, almost inhuman, toil are of daily occurrence, while the Thames Embankment and the thoroughfares teem with human beings, unnecessary to modern industr-r, drifting down to physical and more] degeneracy. The Embankment presents the social tragedy. At noon, near Cleopatra's Needle, long lines of men, physically dejected, loathsome, greasily clad, wait like wan-grey spectres for a bowl of soup. Through the streets of the suburbs others, not yet fallen to the bottom of the pit, march in long procession, singing songs of unemployment to arouse the sympathy of the charitable. Even young girls are compelled to parade their unemployment. Yesterday I saw two | smartly-dressed girls pulling an organ in the streets. Attached to the organ • was a placard with the announcement, "Shops Assistants. Out of Work." Two potential tragedies if they have no luck. As in London, so everywnere. Jtofc a town exists in all Great Britain where this open sore, draining away the vitalrtv of the community, does not confront one and outrage every human sentiment. Ana yet, though this social waste was, and is, obviously enormous and offensive, no organisation outside of a repelhnt Poor law system and incoherent haphazaro. private charity existed prior to this year to minimise or prevent it. Officialdom shrank from the assumption o{ responsibility. Organised national interest in such a problem was distasteful. A studied indifference marked the attitude of those who governed. No attempt, not even to deal with the fringe of the question, was made. Nothing was done, except by trades onions to collect information by which the real extent of the evil could be measured. Statesmen -were so engrossed in schemes of Imperial expansion as to be undisturbed by the chaotic -welter to which industry had been reduced. The people's condition as a reason..for legislative acti-rity was carelessly shelved.

This is how matters stood four years ago. Then came the "Feeding of the School-children" and the "Old Age Pensions" Acts to strengthen the poor in their independence of the Poor Law. And now, on February Ist of this year, another instalment of order in place of chaos, the ""Labour Exchanges Act," came into force. Before the end of the month SO exchanges will be at work in the large ' centres of population, and as a further development of the scheme, another 150 | will be opened next financial year, and provisions made for the use of the post I offices where no exchange is available. No labour has been spared to facilitate | the work of the exchanges, and no precaution overlooked to secure the confidence of both employer and employee. The exchanges are linked up in intertelephonic communication. Employers have been personally canvassed to notify the exchanges if they are in need of labour, and the regulations have been specially drafted to permit of no suspicion of partiality, either in favour of an employer as against a worker or in favour of one worker as against another, whether he be married or single. In time of strike every employer seeking to engage labour and every worker seeking employment will be informed of the stabs of affairs. A strict neutrality will be observed. The sole purpose of the exchanges is to effect contracts without suggesting their terms, and to methodise the engagement of labour by bringing unemployed work-people into touch with employers. This purpose realised is the limit of the most sanguine official exI pectations. The opening of the exchanges gave more than argumentative proof of the unemployed man's eagerness to escape from the inaction and mental strain involved in unemployment. At many bureaux huge crowds obstructed the traffic in their anxiety to register, and necessitated the intervention of the police In Manchester, yesterday, where a week ago I witnessed a turbulent throng o; two to three thousand men struggling to get sandwich board work at two shillings for a ten-hour day, over 4000 put in their applications. Every imaginable trade and occupation is represented in these crowds, from silversmiths down to road sweepers and pick and shovel men, and what is as important, and probably more disquieting, is the large number of young men competing side by side with the grey-haired and the infirm. The compulsory idleness of virile manhood in such degree indicates, in addition to the chronic nature of unemployment, the alarming dimensions which it ha» assumed. No doubt a short experience of the operation of these exchanges will produce many disappointments. Optimism is ignorant sometimes, and expectations outreach results. It is foolish to imagine that' Labour Exchanges in themselves ■will greatly reduce the volume of miemployment. Obviously, they cannot create more employment than there is, and on that account are probably open to just, if impatient, criticism. The tendency, however, to deprecate their value is far from being a condemnation. As Mr. Churchill says: "They are a piece of social mechanism absolutely essential to any well-ordered community," and though, as he states further, "they are primarily agents for dealing with" employment rather than with unemployment," their existence is indispensable to any general policy for thejremoval of unemployment. Quite apart, too, from their power to accomplish immediate benefits, however small, their- —tility is revealed in so far as they can be made to serve more drastic and final purposes. In the first place, they establish a precedent in national obligation. This will accelerate progress because it will obviate an imaginary difficulty, much enlarged upon by politicians to excuse their hesitation and timidity, that of inertia being preferable to experiment, when the past offers no guidance. The nation, being committed, must proceed further when precedential legislation proves inadequate. That Labour Exchanges are insufficient to meet the whole question oi worklessness will be shown by their own operations. In effect they will provide for a census of unemployment. In the past the absence of reliable general statistics obscured the urgency of the problem. Though trades unions in connection with their benefit work compiled unemployed statistics, belief in them was not strong, in consequence of ignorant anti-trades union prejudices; and in any case their figures, reliable enough as regarding trades union membership, understated the general truth, and so did not stimulate social thought as much as the situation demanded. Not unnaturally, therefore, the public displayed but languid interest in the needs of the workless man, and was in no mood foi remedial legislation. What indifference was justified in the possession of incomplete information must now give way tc attention. The statistical revelations made by the Labour Exchanges, being more serviceable because of the certainty of impartiality in. collection, must, anc will, inspire a determination for ever more radical treatment. Labour Ex changes enclose the germ of social recon struction. In the second place, they wil economise the workers' time and physi cal energy, and save them as far as possible in the circumstances from un necessary expense incurred in following rumours of work in different localities For instance, owing to causes rooted ii , modern conditions, the fickleness of taste the disparagement of the "old-fashioned/ the deliberate creation of "new wants,' . and so forth, certain industries an ; doomed to decay. Workers are squeezet out, and, being ignorant of the actua , position, wait expecting to again -be em ployed at their trade until their physica I and moral stamina is so sapped as t< , unfit them for any employment when i . does appear. And, again, sometimes ru mours of labour-shortage are deliheratel; , set afoot as a ruse to overstock th , market in certain districts and depres . conditions. Labourers thereupon migrate , many times are financially unable t< , leave a district after being refused wort , I and there slip down to destitution. 1 cases oi this kind the ohjeet of the ex changes will be to provide accurate know ledge of the conditions of the labou i market, and to direct workers to trade , and occupations in which the supply c '. labour is insufficient. Thus needles , mental anxiety and avoidable physica j exhaustion, will be precluded. By thes I means it is hoped to so conserve huma } energies and .protect human life, tha r duties may be the more easily and efl j ciently performed. '; r It is quite possible that the option; , nature of the scheme may dhninis . its usefulness,- -but compulsion in an i form just now would have excited dii 1 trust, and destroyed all hope of succes 9 Initial success was or the utmost in * porianee, because upon it depended a s future movement on national lines. No - that this is assured, the problem of vi , employment in the. United Kingdom _ I ters upon, a new stage, and is appreciabl i- nearer solution. ? . s> To sum up: the Labour Exchanges ai : to be welcomed,: not so much that' the a confer* direct: advantages, but that the l- demonstrate principles of national x sponaibinty, and disclose the trend <

pablic thought. They are the 8& I rings of the dry bones of a § long content to leave untouched 1 cause and symptom of its own London, February 9, 1910. " >