WHO IS THE GAINER?

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXIII, Issue 8150, 4 September 1888, Page 3

WHO IS THE GAINER?

■ Sir,— As a small dairy farmer, with a large family and somewhat bemuddled brain, I venture to appeal to- you as uni--yersal enlightener for a little assistance in comprehending the drift and tendency of certain domestic details which have lately harassed me. Permit me to ex-, plain that I have sris sons, and .two daughters ; the lads are honorable, straightforward fellows who hold well together, and the girls good, sensible, useful maidens, who can do a good' day's work in the house or the dairy with any one— one, in fact, does the housework, aud the other the butter-making. You may perhaps be aware that dairy farming is not very profitable work, but we mana«e I to make enough to ke«p the family comfortably, and for me to put by a small reserve for improvements, but in order ' that we may do this I have, following the precepts of the excellent Mr Barlow, made it clearly understood that unless a man will work he shall not eafe } the boys and girls have each their own work to do, - and unless it is done they do not come to table, except in cases of illness. This arrangement has worked well hitherto, . but a few weeks since John, one of my sons, tried to get mo to lighten his work. When I refused he replied that he would do nothing till I complied. Knowing that if I granted his request I. should have to do the same for his brothers, and would then infallibly fail to get any profit on my farm, I waited, trusting that he would soon see his request was unreasonable. . He stayed on doing nothing, and the other five each allowed him a fifth of their provisions, which they did not feel - inueh, as I am not illiberal to them, and he fared as well as ever; but I lost his labor. , Soon, however, it occurred to auother that John was having a nice easytime of it, and why should not ha do th'o same. So he tnadc a request for lighter work, and being refused slopped iloin" anything and applied to his brothers to provide For him. They seeing two to be provided for, mulcted themselves of a quarter of their allowance, but the uonworkers did not fare as well, and the workers felt the loss more. Then we fouud two hands short. All the cows could not be milked, anil with our shorter supply we could not make so much butter. So one of the girls, without wishing it, was obliged to he idle, and had to turn to the brothers .for provisions. Then the workers turned on the ntm-workers and said, "We have had enough of this ; you either get to work or be off." 'They chose the former alternative, aud things ara gradually working back to their old etate ; but my losses have been very heavy. I raised the price of my butter, as 1 had le«s to cell, and the neighborhood depended upon mo for its supply, but though I sold 2Mb at Is 4d, for every 25 I had formerly sold at Is Id, and the lads thought I was making money,' I lost on my neglected cattle, on the horses eatin-r their heads oil', and on my rusting iiupleinents, to say nothing of the time I lost when they took up work again, and I found they had contracted such loafing habits that I had to be constantly round to keen them upio the mark. Now, sir, what I want to know is how long this kind of thing can go on, and who gains by it ? It seems to me, comparing small things wilh great, that my recent experience is somewhat similar to that of the mine owners in Australia. Now. the world is so small, our civilisation has resulted in such intimate mutual dependence, that the comparison of the laboring classes to brothers is not very far-fetched. How long will the Unions think (hat because they have done good work in the past, have raised wages, lessened tile hours of labor, and increased the responsibilities of employers, continuing the same course of action the results will be equally beneficial V Has it not been proved again aud again ■ (hat good work may be done by imperfect instruments, but that sooner or later the imperfection will reveal itcclf f And does it not look as if there wore something radically un&ound in a system which keeps up wages bo that men can stand being mulcted of a larger and larger portion of them as more and more of their fellows choose to stand idle ? Is Smith better olf with 483 a week paying 8s to the Union than he would be with 40* and no tax ? Aud what is the effect all round ? Is the employer's losa more ur less heavy '—loss of the usual profit per day, loss through machinery and plant sull'eriug from- disuse, loss through additional superintendence being inquired afterwards ; part of loss recouped liy higher price on stock in hand, and for some time after resumption of work. To < the men on strike pro (c»i shorter commons, which must mean either dimtuution of strength for work if they have no reserve, or diminution of capital if they have reserve. To the rest of the laboring class, as before stated, diminution of wages. To all alike, employers and employed, higher prices and lesa ruouev to pay with. So much for the immediate effect. The ultimate is not very differeut. If the ctuployois give in the hours are shorter or wages higher, prices go up all round, the employer must secure enough profit to keep on his work, and if lie gets less production from his men or Vaya more for it ho must charge more for his goods. So in that case the result is higher wages but less purchasable with the money. Some think that ft strikein a_ eilk factory, we will say — must benelit the laboring classes because getting higher wages, they will not be affected by the i-ise in the price of bilk ; but that is a mistake. A rise of wages in oue industry generally leads' to a rise in others, men being attracted to that industry and having to be tempted back by offers of a rise. If on the other hand the men . give iu what is the result ? Loss to (hem of the amount Uicv could have- made while they stood out, miners' allowance nmde to them by the Union, and return to the status quo ante. So- that it would seem that in any case the employers stand to lose more or let,s by a. strike, the strikers to either lose or in future find their money go a shorter I distance, the uon- strikers to lose more or less of their earnings according to Iho ratio of tbeir number to that of the strikers, and the general public to suffer from higher prices.. So I come back to my_ question, Who is the gainer by a strike? la it when the non-workera are to the workers as 1 to 4 '—that is, when every worker has to mulct himself of. a quarter of fiia wage to keep the nonworker? When will the inherent defects of the system be made clear ? I have trespassed long upon youv space, and yet I have not asked for quite all the enlightenment I need.- I should much like to know what is meant by talk about the liberty of the subject and freedom of action, when a strike in one trade throws out of work all or many of the members of another trade nolens volens ? We used to hear that on matters which concern all all should be consulted ; but perhaps that is an old-fashioned principle not easy of ■• application in the present. But, 'Mr Editor, you will be impatient with me, and I will restrain ray inquisitivencss. — I am, &e.,