THE ECONOMICS OF LABOUR

Evening Post, Volume CII, Issue 38, 13 August 1921, Page 11

THE ECONOMICS OF LABOUR

WORKERS' EDUCATION

PROFESSOR MURPHY'S LECTURES.

The advanced economic* class of the Workers' Educational Association continues to attract a satisfactory number of students and visitors to Banks' College each Tuesday evening, and Professor Murphy's treatment of "The Economics of Labour" is being followed with great interest. The discussion that takes place after each lecture invariably reveals the different lines of thought that have exponents in the class. The lecturer is' dealing exhaustively with the question of trade unionism, four or five different lectures being devoted to that phase of the subject.

Referring to tKe nature of trade unionism, Professor, Murphy said that the unions had gradually expanded in function until they had become the material and spiritual expression of organised labour, with a positive as well as a negative aspect, and they had been pushed forward from one point to another,' owing to the ' inter-relation of all modern economic, social, and political phenomena. Beginning as fighting or: i ganisations to secure shorter hours and larger wages, they became benefit and insurance societies, vehicles oi collective bargaining and industrial peace, political societies, putting vp 1 candidates, watching legislation and lobbying, propagan-. dist centres for working-class activities,' and generally the focus of all that made for the 1 advantage, or apparent advantage, of labour. At first they were entirely industrial, in function; thoii they became political,.and the most 'recent move was in the direction of looking to the union as the nucleus of the body by which the workers in each industry should run it. That vagne ideai seemed to, lie behind most contemporary thought, for example in gild socialism, syndicalism, trade union policy, and the Whitley system, and would probably be the subject matter of industrial struggle in the 20th century. Either democracy would 'move on from the political field to the industrial field, .or, if it failed to conquer there, it would recede from the political field; also, for, ultimately political democracy was not compatible with economic autocracy. It was a dim consciousness of that fact that explained "direct action." ■ ' OBJECTS OF UNIONISM. JLaboiir was at a fundamental disadvantage in bargaining when isolated, said Professor Murphy. The worker had no reserve, and he was in the 'constant position of making, a forced sale, which was always a bad bargain. He sold labour retail, in small continuous quantities; the employer bought wholesale. He was not a,good bargainer; the employer was. The worker,; ignorant as 'a 'rule of prices, trade outlook, wages elsewhere, was matched against a man who spent his life buying and . selling. He must sell at once or starve, .while the employer had always some reserve; and while the loss of one hand was but a slight inconvenience to the employer, it was food !or famine for the worker or his family. Therefore, the union had for its object:—(l) To provide a,reservo to enable the worker to hold out for' a good price; (2) to make the employer treat with all hands oh one'basis; and (3) to provide an equally well-trained bargainer to negotiate. The main object and justification of the union was, there.. ■_,-.. "THE PAID AGITATOR." Professor Murphy said that the term "paid Agitator" wag a foolish vulgarism, quite out of place as applied to a trade union .secretary, whose existence was essential to the working of unionism, ,and who acted as a stabiliser of industrial ; conditions, and 'generally as a force making for continuity of policy. Under modern conditions, industry was so complicated that the operative could nqt either know or protect his own interests, and must therefore hire, an agent to give all his time to the problems of the worker, which grew more and not less complicated. Industrial bargaining was just as much a profession as the "paid agitation"!of the barrister in Court, and increased/in importance with the increased complication of methods of work and reward. It was now seen tliat the union with its staff was as much superior to the old haphazard methods of dispute as a trained army and general was to a guerrilla band. War was deplorable, but inevitable, hence it was advisable to elevate it as far as possible on to a rational plane. UNIONISM AND WAGES. As regarded the effect of unionism as a movement on wages as a whole, continued the lecturer, the unions raised wages as I follow:—(1) By so improving the bargaining power of labour as to make competition perfectly fluid and secure the real competitive wage. (2) By the reactions of unionism on the efficiency of .labour, for example, by promoting temperance and a higher moral standard, by encouraging the acquisition of technical skill, by assisting the smooth conduct of industry and facilitating settlement of disputes without stoppage, and generally in so far sis unionism elevated the standard of life of the worker and made him a better man. (3) By strengthening the power of labour to bargain for the indefinite surplus product of industry. As regarded the effect of a ' t given union on the wages of its members, a particular union in a highly-skilled trade could, by closing its ranks and, refusing to train new craftsmen, for -a time secure monopoly, wages, but that was sure ultimately to break down, either through the invention of machinery, the import of competing foreign products, or the attraction exercised; on outsfde labour by, the temporary high rate. No example conld be found of a consistently successful labour monopoly, the bargaining power of labour being in general too weak to sustain the monopoly in view'of the numbers of the potential workers. SOCIAL ADVANTAGES. ' The unions had been praised, and rightly, Professor Murphy stated, as a powerful lever in the education of the masses, and had been of inestimable value in democratic societies in stimulating the intellect, fostering temper-' ance, counteracting the monotony of machine production, affording opportunities for social intercourse, training workers for local and national politics, and fostering independence and self-re-spect. All the great labour men in England had graduated in that school. STABILISATION OF INDUSTRY. The unions were a benefit to the "fair" employer who relied for his competitive power rather on excellence of organisation and marketing , than ■ on the power to beat down the standard of life, Professor Murphy contended, and had always been welcome to a minority of good employers because they (standardised wages,, throughout a trade, and the employer, sure that less scrupulous competitors could not get cheaper labour than the standard rate, was able' to exercise competitive energy of a good one! not a socially injurious kind. It was desirable that evil forms of competition, for example, trenching on the standard of life, should be eliminated, and competition in excellence of organisation

substituted. In that way strong unions standardised one of the conditions of competition, eliminated one element ,of uncertainty from business, and levelled up the tone of industrial competition. Moreover they regularised industrial disputes when they did break out, for warfare, though always bad, was less evil when conducted between regular armies than between irregular guerrilla bands, and unions, being permanent institutions, developed a permanent and comparatively predictable policy. DRAWBACKS OP UNIONISM. Professor Murphy concluded by referring to the ' drawbacks of unionism, which, he said, sprang from failure to realise its ideals, and almost always from attempts at monopoly of labour. supply;' for example, restriction of apprentices, closing the union to outsiders, sympathetic strikes and demarcation disputes, which penalised employers for the actions of other parties,, for whose doings they were not responsible, and over which they could exercise no control. 'Union practices in those respects did not differ in kind from similar restrictive practices on the part of associated employers.