SHORTER WORKING HOURS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22352, 25 February 1936, Page 13

SHORTER WORKING HOURS

Sir,—Mr. J. Johnstone still neglects to answer the question I put. I want to know how those people who oppose shorter working hours will arrange that all who are able to work 44 hours per week shall be enabled and entitled to do so, and how if they do so work, and use modern equipment and methods, those who favour that system will arrange for the profitable disposal of the resultant product. Mr. Johnstone thinks he has answered the question by pointing to the obvious fact that with present working hours many of us have wants unsatisfied. And he asks, how then can there be any need to do less work? Now I have said nothing about doing less work. I have said we might so arrange things that less time would be required to do the work, or that the time that is required could l>e more fairly spread among those able to do the work. I do not believe that the object of life is work; I believe the object of work should be life. Mr. Johnstone says that "men are unemployed because employment costs are too high, and it can easily be proved that shortening hours, by increasing those costs, would aggravate the evil." Well, if that can be easily proved I ask Mr. Johnstone to produce the proof. So far I have not seen it. I think it is generally admitted that there is no "only" cause of unemployment, but one of the principal causes of the world depression which intensified unemployment was the fact that the supply of primary products—farm produce—had been so increased, and prices for it consequently so reduced relatively to the price of manufactured goods, that the farmer could not buy the produce of tho factories. Hence unemployment for the factory worker, and still lower prices for the farmer's goods. That is how increased productivity increased unemployment. It is not that our wants were less. It is not because enough clothing and potatoes, to use the commodities Mr. Johnstone mentions, were not produced; it is because we do not directly exchange clothing lor potatoes or potatoes for clothing. But before an exchange takes place in the great majority of cases the person who would be a purchaser—who would satisfy his wants—must be possessed of money, and he usually becomes possessed of that through being employed. If, on tho other hand, a person is employed, but for long hours, he is still not the best consumer of goods, because so many things to-day require leisure for their consumption, hence it is desirable that people should have more leisure so that they may become better consumers. Mr. Johnstone asks why I did not cite New Zealand figures for production, which, he says, show our volume of output per head to be 5.4 per cent less than 35 years ago. I would ask, does that mean per head of population, or per head of actual producers? The 1936 Year Book, page 689, says: "The volume of production for tho year 1933-4 was however tho highest yet recorded," and that in spite of the fact that there were in that year about 70,000 registered unemployed. What I am anxious to know is how that 70,000 and all the machinery and equipment which was also unemployed is to be re-employed, at the old hours, and the resultant product profitably disposed of. Tom Bi.ood worth.