AN ECONOMIC ISSUE

Evening Post, Volume CVII, Issue 26, 31 January 1924, Page 9

AN ECONOMIC ISSUE

"HIGHER WAGES AND GREATER PRODUCTION"

WELFARE LEAGUE AND TRADES COUNCIL.

The following letter has been sent by the Welfare "League to Mr. J. Read, president of the Wellington Trades and Labour Council :— Dear Sir,—We take the liberty of writing you in reference to your statement in the "Evening Post" of the 26th inst.,, wherein you refer to. the Welfare League. - You say therein? that the "league and other similar organisations were,'some time ago, continually dinning, into the ears of the workers that they must produce more, and then, likely enough, if their employers approved, they might get more in the way of wages." In thus representing what the league has written, ■we fear that' you have allowed some prejudice to becloud your otherwise fair comments. We have as n. matter of fact, in urging the need for greater production, avoided dealing .with the issue of. the basis of class. A review of your articles, several of. which we forward you, will show that our call for'increased industrial activity is directed as much to the employers as to workmen. To secure greater output we have emphasised the need for improved organisation, management, skill, and initiative. The idea that labour is the source of production is one that;, in our opinion, is quite unsound. Consider the following from our articles':—"Some employers think the call for 'more production' is a demand that the operatives shall work harder. What about the employers? If you want better work, set the example, is a good line to follow." In another article we wrote: "We do not want to see working men worked as horses, nor do we wish to see them go as slow as snails. Men should work :is men with their brains. In urging the need for more production in several directions we are making a. call for brains and manhood, not for increased hoTse-pcwer." One of our principal articles on this subject is headed, "The Need For Greater Production. -A Question of Management-! Plain Speech to the Employers." • At the time when the go slow" practice wtis much talked of we issued an address by the Right Hon. J R, Clynes, M.P., who' condemned, wholesale, the policy of limiting production. ; / ' You will see, then, that we have dealt with the question in a broad spirit as an economic issue. We concur with you in desiring to see higher- wages and greater production; at the same time it must be recognised that higher wage3 cannot be assured generally unless the volume of output is increased. The result in the case of the Hutt'road work meets with our congratulation for all concerned. Like yourself, >.we believe that New Zealand workmen are as good as any to be found. Left to follow, their own berit the. New Zealand workers certainly make good. It would be foolishness, however, to ignore the- fact that some are at timefl,,mis.led by teaching of the false economic doctrine that to go slow means that there, will be more work to do and greater security in employment. :■'■.'.•■: : _You seem t 0 argue that the payment ot higher wages will always ensure greater, production. We should be pleased if such were the case, as it would simplify the industrial' problem. Our opinion is . that increased wages will no' more .result in greater production in all instances than greater. production will produce, higher , wages. After all, we have human nature to deal with, and there are good and bad, or. approaching such, both amongst employers and workers. .We will'get nearer to practical benefits when both employers and workers think more of the advancement of cur industries, nat merely what they can respectively get out of the same. Closer co-operation between Capital and Labour, is wanted so that advancement in wages, and production shall go together, ■i Ti '* W, 6 understand, is the doctrine :both of the Hon. C. A. M'Curdy, and Henry Ford ' Here is an extract from Mr. Ford s book, which we suggest your council might well consider: ' The cost of living depends largely upon the efficiency of production and transportation; and the efficiency of these is the sum of the efficiencies of the management and the workers Good work, well managed:, ought to result m high wages and low living costs.' If w 6 attempt to regulate wa^es 'on living costs, we get nowhere Thecost of living is a result, and ' we cannot expect to keep a result conwhich produce the result. When .we try to regulate wages according to the cost of hying, we are imitating a dog chasing his tail. . 6 Does-not that reach the kernel of'the matter for us in New Zealand?' Instead of considering wages in relation to pro-duction-our whole industrial system of settlements, Arbitration Court awards and agreements included—appear to largely ignore the relation, which is' real and dwell on a cost-of-Kving stan So:e hme hnt SUPPhe§ *™«° Wo desire, in conclusion, to thank your council and yourself for pubUdy raising this question,, as discussion win do good. As it is a matter of public interest you will not object to u s P sup' a copy°f 4 " '. ARTHTJR P. HARPER, .Secretary, N.Z. Welfare Leug Ue . .