THE CO-OPERATIVE SYSTEM.

Otago Witness, Issue 2744, 17 October 1906, Page 87

THE CO-OPERATIVE SYSTEM.

Bx A Cooper itive Wohkeb.

" Judging by result?, the co-operativa system has bepn a failure." Thus a writer I Jiavo already quoted, who, venturing *• shrewd suggestion aa to the cause of this failure, goes on to say : — " The failure lies not so much in the class of men employed as in the management. ' In this tho writer, viewing tho question from a business point? of view, is undoubtedly correct. There is not a business firm in the whole ooJony tLafe does not run its business concerns on better and moro methodical lines. There is not * single firm of contractors anywhere in Australasia which would not stand aghast if called upon to supervise its contracts with a 6taff up to the numerical strength of thoeo petty Government contracts. Anyother firm of contractors would select tbe very best men, with practical experience as well as theoretical knowledge, for overseers, inspectors, and general supervisors. Nothing else would have any weight in its choice. No question of kinship, place of origin, religion, or political creed wo-iltl be considered, but only this: practical and theoretical knowledge. A nailtnaker, xor instance, would not have an inspectorship over bridge constructors ; a second-hand cook in a restaurant would not; be- promoted to an overseer-ship where a. practical quarryman or railway navvy was wanted ; a. warder from an asylum would not be- given an overseership over men bush-falling ard navv\ing; but my recollections are teeming with these apjsoihtmente. "What affinity has nailmaking with carpentry and bridgebuilding? How does it come about that an analogy exists between the occupation of second cook and that of practical quarryman? How does it come about trat a. warder from a lunatic asylu.u is tho best n^an to suporviso bush-falling and roi.c(« making? The libel laws prevent me froai furnishing the details of these appointments, but should any of our Parliaments eet up a commission to inquire into the mis^ management of tho co-operative system, these details will bo a revelation. In another case we come to an important lino employing a large number of men, and wo have a shearer for overseer. Now, no business firm with a single shred of respocfe for its reputation as commercial men — no business firm which wanted to get the highest results from its employees— would make such ridiculous appointments. Ifc would employ as overseers the best value it could get for the wage offering — men of practical knowledge ana experience, who would not bo inferior to oon»e «f *h« t«a<l men chosen by the co-operative gangs, who could show you what to do as well as repeat orders parrot-like, and who could supervise any and every part of railway and road construction, from barrow work to " back lift." Neither would a business firm despise technical and theoretical knowledge in the overseer. On , the other hand. it would gladly welcome it. If a practical man has a theoretical knowledge of tho why and wherefore for certain processes of construction— e.g., laying out a "cutting," including " batters" and "curves," measuring cubic contents, levelling with clinometer, "plate-laying," with all its little mysterious processes of a nature tending to bewilder the unintelligent observer who is totally unacquainted with the reason, of each process, which, insignificant as ife may appear to the uninitiated, is a factor in the interests of the safety of the subsequent traction to be employed, and is therefore absolutely necessary from an engineering point of view. — auch a man will ba the better man. Practical knowledge in an overseer is absolutely necestary, and cannot be too strongly insisted on, but when technical knowledge is added to this it gives the overseer a strength of conviction in supervising 1 the work that could not ocsbibly be possessed by the merely practical man, who has got to rely for the mosfc part on some mere rule of thumb, "which, afc best, is a sorry substitute for the certainty of the carefully-calculated engineering 1 equation. The one is mere guesswork, the other a oeitaintj. Is it not a fact thafs your good tradesman becomes a more intelligent tradesman and worker after a course) in technical instruction? Tho head of a good business firm says, " Ge^t the besfe man you can for the iob." To do this you must advertise or make your requirements known. The applicants must 6how that they are possessed of the neoessarv qualifications for the position. If they possess tho corresponding technical knowledee, so much the better in tho estimation of the business firm. No suchlike business methods ran be anolied, by the widest stretch of the nna s ination. to the appointments which arc cenerally made to the management of these unfortunate and chaotic Government co-oDer<itive contracts. In tho first place, ifc not only liai>i>oiis frequently that the overseers aio inferior to some of the head men of tho ganos. but in a few glaring instances , they have been toi-allv deficient in the practical knowledge that should be exported from men occunvinc such a position as that; of overseer. Moreover, sonic of the acpointments are unnecf&sarv, boinc simply male to tfive a billet U> some political supporier or home friend of some political supporter. This is so annarent that .in tliMntfrested workman who is not blinded by political zeaJ faile to notico and comrncni upon it. Now. every appointment

* The, previous articles appealed on Tuft 2S and August L

means a salary, and certain perquisites and allowances in addition which scern to be

recognised by precedent. And all this means money, which in some ca«es. where the construction works ara Avoful'y ard

recklessly

o\ er-officered.

must be consider

able. Rain, hail, or blow, their pay goe^i on. Not so the poor nuv\y, who. besides

getting small reward for hard toil.

perforce to lose all wet days. Now. where * does this Iwjavy drain coare from, this money to pay adequately over-officialdom? Naturally, one would infer it come 1 ? out of the vote allocated to the works under construction, on which these hangers-on are nominally employed. Is it any wonder, then, that the labourer is tquflfzed ac tight as possible? Is it any wonder that he

can 'hardly make a decent wage, let alone

reap any benefit from the co-optrame contract profits — i.e.,' the profits o-.er and above those which at one time went to the contractor after the latter lied paid a decent wage? In shcrt, is it any wonder thas people are beginning to a.«k. How is it the average mileage cost of railway construction is going up in spile of the fact that the wages earned by the men are much below what i 6 nece a sary to support a wife and the average colonial family? Not only have the large majority of these men no practical or theoretical knowledge, but they are deficient in the ordinary rudiments of education — a fact which sometimes makes things very unsatisfactory to the poor men under their control. As an illustration of this, one ease w ill Suffice: — Not far from our survey camt; there was a party of four men tnarajed putting in rough service culverts. Three of the m«n had full time in. and owed the Government nothing for their pascage*.

The fourth man had a certain number of days in, and owed the Labour Department £4 9s 6d. On this work it wa- customary to keep back the half-pay, so that only the balance was sent on to the worke. Out of this balance the o\erseer paid the btore account, and the Labour Dc'.>artment was paid the passage inonev. so that the half-paj— the passage money, ore— :ie\er left the bank, the balance only being sent to the works. • There was no time-book kept, although the regulations lequire it. Tn that case each man's share is paid directly by tho oiers^er, and it i« \erv amuMiie sometimes to see the intricate labyrinth he gets into— such a muddle, indeed, a? a boy in iho Third Standard would bhr-h at-* I" tin-, ea-,e, the balance due to the four men was equal'y divided •by the overseer. Consequence, consternatioH, dissatisfaction, grumbling, and bad language. In other words, the three apiece to draw, had to contribute tneir share • of the fourth man? indebtedness, and the fourth man, instead of being a dehfor to the Labour Department for the difference between £4 9s 6d and the balance due to him after paving the store account, was made to appear as a shareholder, on the same footing'as the three men who owed nothing to the Government. Wrier appealed to. tne overseer simply swore, and told the men to setfle it the best way they could, or else to get someone "who was able to do so for them. It was four months before this was patched up. the men being the losers to the extent of about 5s each. One other instance from my notes on co-operative worke speaks for itself: "Persons crossint; this bridge does so at there own risk."' The above interesting legend and -warning is signed by a well-known inspector of bridges in the Public Works Department. and. ; as a literary effort in '" fonetic spelling"' and English construction, is typical of the literary calibre of the majority of «ur overseers. ~ l

We often see it stated that so-and-so has made a fair pro'it on certain contracts at present schedule rates. I do not dispute that for a moment. Bet there is a vast difference between a contract as it existed in tho.'-'-- times and a co operative contract as it exists at present. Under the old frysteni the contractor was his own overseer; he was usually an experienced workman, whose experience was practically acquired cither manually or through long contact with labour conditions. The contract was on view, and open to competition. There were conditions as to working, excavation, deposit of material, etc., all clearly defined in writing. The contractor employed whomsoever he thought best, and he ciis charged v.-l,Dmsoc\cr he listed; he defined a method by which he shifted the material, and brooked no interference with the method he had selected as that best fitted to make the contract pay. In khort. the following was his axiom : '"The greatest quantity of stuff, in the shortest possible time, by the easiest possible method." Ho had his own material for haulagre. and no neighbouring contractor could interfere with it. In short, he was totally untrammelled by orders, and counter ordc-s. commands and countermunds, from the tiaie the contract was signed until it was handed t^er to— in this case— the Public Works Department. In the ca^e of a co-oporati\e contract, the pigmy commonwealth composing the company or gang, as banded together by an arbitrary selection on the part of the officer in charge, is very often composed of uneven units. Dissatisfaction is the result. The head man, who is held rcponsible for the thoroughness of the work done, is powerless as far as regards the lazy and inefficient, because clau c e 7 of the special conditions blocks him effectually. The price per yaid is compulsoiy. Moreover, it is fixed by the servant ol the interested party to the contract, and is more frequently than not a sweating prioe, at which wages cannot possibly be made by gangs as at present constituted, working under conditions of management and under rules, regulations, etc., which are contradictory, irksome, vexatious, and unnecessary. The rules are so \ague on account of tho English that is employed in them that they become a blessing- on some works and a stockwhip en others, according to the idiosyncraeic-s of the enginc-ei or other officer in charge. In tho one c.se. then, the contract is free and untrammelled, and is clearly defined : and the choice of workmen and the method of procedure of fulfilment of contract arc left entirely to the good M-ns-e and practical and theoretical experience of the contractor. On the co-operative works, under the present management, compulsion is rampant : you must work with those you do not like, and you must work at a price per yard which rou know will not gne you wage* (by wages, I mean 8s a day). Not only so. but the conditions, management, etc., render it w holly impossible to make even the best of the schedule prices offered. If any workman is dissatisfied he may. perhaps, be roughly told, "Ye can take it or •laic- it: ye can git off the joab and lave the worruk6." The only work where there was anything lik" an intelligent conception of what co-operatne contract was performed 13 years ago, and the method adopted by tlio engineer in eharg? was as follows: — The contract was no-Led up at the pur\ey camps in the neighbourhood of the works. It bet forth the number of yards in the contract, the total price for the total woik, the conditions a-s to solid flooring, batter.etc. A member of any gang einpk vod on tho works could accept tlu» contract and sign for it. Having- notified the nearest, or any, sur\ev camp of his wie.h to pecopt this contract, he w«fi allowed to interne w any

member- of any ether gang, and thus a party- was formed by mutual cenne-nt. Ths contract vr»s signed, work commenosd. and there was no interierenco with the meihcd ; while judicious -a-nd expert advice could be always had for tho faking. Progrosshe payments were made (less 25 per cent.) ; and everything worked sincothly and fatisfactoiily. Things are vastly changed since then, and upon one important work at the present time dissatisfaction is rampant among a large section of the more intelligent and experienced vrorkmen. In this connection I may mention that during nry 14 years* experience on co-operative wm-ks there were four instances in vh'eh the inspectors were old railway men. who had been formerly employed en rail-.', ay construction, and it is very suggestive that in each of these instance's results were satisfactory. Now. this is \ery c?sy of explanation. The practical man. as soon as he comes along, can cast h's practised eye o\er conditions and methods, and he knows at once whether or net a rang is working systematically cr not. If ir is not, ho 6houJd be eomp2lled by the department to advVe them. In other words, if a gang does not make wages at the Fchedi'le rates fixed upon, someone is to blame for it, or else the department is <.v.-eatin°r the men. Therefore, the department should hold the inspectors and ovc-r-<eors responsible for not drawing the attention of the men to the fact that their methods are bad. Should bad wagys still be the result, these overseers should bs removed and mere pract.'cal overseers put in their p^ace.