THE World of Labour

Sun (Christchurch), Volume III, Issue 872, 25 November 1916, Page 12

THE World of Labour

TRADES AND LABOUR COUNCIL HALL. MEETINGS FOR WEEK. SATURDAY- Trades Council and Executive Committee; Freezing Works Employees' Union; Typographical Board Meeting. SUNDAY—Chrlstadclpllians' Mission, 11 a.m.; Public Lecture in Social Hall, 7 p.m. MONDAY—Amalgamated Society of Engineers, No. 1 Branch; Tailoring Trade Union; Painters' Union; Saddlers and Harness Makers' Union. TUESDAY—Coachworkcrs' Union; Gas Works Employees' Union. WEDNESDAY Canterbury Carpenters' | Union; Public Lecture In Social Hall,! 8 p.m. FRlDAY—Engine Drivers and Firemen's ; Union; General Labourers' Finance Committee. INDUSTRIAL PEACE. PROPOSALS TO MAINTAIN IT. Leaders of thought in Great Britain are at present discussing the possibility of arriving at a basis that will preserve the industrial peace of the country for a period of five years after the war. Among those who arc taking part in the discussion are the I Lord-Mayor of London, Mr Arthur I Chamberlain, Bishop Gore, John! Hodge, M.P., Mr L. G. C. Money, Mr j Harry Gosling, and Dean Weldon. "Why should it not be possible to j arrange now the general terms of an industrial • truce for five years'?" asked the Lord Mayor, as reported in "Public Opinion." He was presiding al the Mansion House, at a large and representative gathering of all branches of the engineering industry. Representatives of various Government departments were also present. "Whatever might be said of the future of commerce in general," said the Lord Mayor, "we were surely all agreed that the nation and the Erafnre must jealously guard the secur- [ ty and the progress of engineering. It was mainly on the engineering workshops of this country that the fighting forces of the Alliance depended for the mechanical means of victory. It is the main bulwark of British liberty. Don't Wait. "Such a truce would, with intelligent policy and skilful direction, ensure that British engineering, after defeating the most terrible enemy in our records, took the leading part in the most astonishing era of mechanical progress in the history of ihe world." Mr G. H. Roberts, M.P. (Lord Commissioner of the Treasury, Labour), said our immediate task was to create a friendly interest between the two great industrial classes. "Don't wait," he added, "until peace has been established. Do it now, for the atmosphere is more favourable than you will ever create after the war. The working classes do not find grievances out of mere wantonness. They have them." To Avoid "a Terrible Time." Mr Arthur Chamberlain, the chairman of the great firm of munition makers—Kynoch's, Ltd.—has been interviewed by the "Sunday Herald" on this great problem. His maxims for the new era after the war are thus summarised: — "To Masters: Pool • your brains with your competitors. The day of petty jealousy is past. You and your competitor have both to fight Germany and America. "Pay a good workman the lasl penny he can earn. It will pay you. Win his confidence. It will be good business. "To the British Workman: If Britain is to beat the Hun at his own game it depends mainly on you. Put

A Column for Workers

Conducted by D. G. SULLIVAN

Ihc lasl ounce into your work —andj see that you are paid for it. "The man who would take thej bread out of your mouth is not the man at the next bench —it's the German workman in Germany, or the Hungarian, the Swede, the Pole in America. "To Master and Man: Don't be suspicious of one another. Make a bargain in Britain's name—and keep it. "Now is the time to act." More Work and More Wages. Mr Chamberlain is strongly in favour of more work and more wages, and suggests that securities should be given for both. "It is possible," he says, "for Labour to give a great deal more work without tiring themselves, without overworking, than they are now doing—probably a 20 per cent, increase in work, without approaching fatigue or overstrain. If they gave that Capital could very well afford to give very greatly increased wages." "Proportionally increased?" "Oh, yes, probably more than proportionally, but certainly proportionally. And the country would be better off because of the increase in production. "Wo in this country always have cut down piece-work prices, and how is the worker to be sure that we arc going to stop now? "If he produces more work, how is he to be sure about his 20 per cent, extra output? How is he to be sure that we shall not turn round and sav, 'Wages shall not be increased?" "He should have assurances from Capital on this point. And what assurance would Capital have, on the other hand? Capital and Labour have to solve this problem: How to ensure that Labour will produce more and Capital pay more for it." "Let Labour Share Control." Bishop Gore, of Oxford, writing in "The Times," says:— "The demand of Labour is not only (perhaps not chiefly) a demand for a larger share in profits; it is a demand for more recognition of the rights of the workers as persons. Even though no change be made in the wage system; even though that be still left to bargaining, as it is at the present day; or be regulated by an extension of the system of the Wages Board, there still remains the possibility that the workers should be admitted to a share of the control of industry, so far as it affects their convenience and human rights—that they should be consulted as a matter of right as to the conditions under which the work is to be done, as to overtime, as to everything that concerns the conditions of labour, as I distinguished from the remuneration of labour. "While I feel that there is at prej sent little prospect of a fundamental I alteration in the wage system, I do ] not sec that there is any hindrance i to an even immediate adoption of some system by which Labour i should be admitted to a share of the | control of the conditions of producI tion." High Wages Quite Possible. Sir Leo Chiozza Money, M.P., in ■ the "British Weekly" says: "The fact that the number of our j income-tax payers has doubled, I partly because of the lowering of the i exemption limit from £IOO to £l3O a | year, but chiefly because of the great I rise in earnings through the war—--1 is one of the greatest social importlance. European civilisations are ; suffering in respect of wages (and

many other things) the customs and standards inherited from a povertystricken past. New countries like America and Australia, on the other hand, are free from low-wage traditions; their standards of remuncra-. tion were set in countries where natural opportunities were enorm-1 lons, and where there was not sufficient labour to develop them. ! "When this war broke out wages in the United States were from two to four times as great as here. Bricklayers, carpenters, mechanics, printers and other skilled men earned anything from £7 to £lO a week, while unskilled labourers earned j from £1 to £7. When allowance was 'made for a greater cost of living, these earnings were enormously | higher than ours. The war has is!,own that similar earnings arc j quite possible in our society, and we I must not imagine that they are not j possible in peace. I wrote much on this before the war, and everything J that has happened since has encour- j aged me to assert that you cannot oh- j tain a high standard of productivity i without a high standard of wages." | Masters and Men Meet. Mr John Hodge, M.P., in "The People," gives some hopeful facts: "During the past week another committee has been added to the many such bodies set up by the Government for the purpose of dealing with war problems," he says. "The Bight Hon. Arthur Henderson, recently appointed as Labour Adviser to the Government, is the originator of the latest, which is called ' the Consultative Committee.' Its purpose is eminently laudable and practical —'to establish a regular and; definite means of co-operation and i communication between organised] labour and the Government.' "The committee consists of 15 pro- j minent trade union officials and is representative of the chief industries. My Personal Opinion. Many other speakers and writers have expressed themselves along similar lines, but the feature which nearly all of them, both Labour andj non-Labour, emphasise is that of giving the workers a share in the control of industry; one and all concur] in thinking that this would make for industrial peace. Viewing this pro-1 blem as a citizen intimately acquaint-j ed with the Labour side, and yet brought into constant touch with employers, I express it as my opinion that there is not sufficient constructive thought "and effort brought to bear upon the problem.of reconciling the differences between. Capital and Labour. Employers lake ho general interest in the problem, being solely concerned with their own immediate business, and waking up only when they become personally involved in a dispute with their own employees, i Labour, too, particularly in this! country, is very niuch lacking in constructive thought and effort. ! The employers, on their side, have done nothing to eliminate the wasteful; competition that now obtains, and for which the whole community must pay; they have done nothing to bring about the organisation of their scattered, badly-equipped industries into an up-to-date organic whole, and| consequently money that might be used for extra wages and 1 profits is! wasted. Labour and the Public. Labour, on the other hand, has left unexploited the whole field of selfhelp through co-operation, and there is no body of thought or effort perseveringly directed towards the solution of the economic trouble. The public, too, is much to blame; it never interests itself in the problem of Capital and Labour until it finds itself inconvenienced, then it declares against the side responsible for the inconvenience, irrespective of the merits of the dispute. It may be anticipated that if the drivers, for instance, go on strike that the public will declare against them; yet today when public opinion might induce the employers to realise that £2 12/- is insufficient for a man and his family to live on, it gives no sign. It is repeatedly said that the public should be considered in these disputes; but if the public is to be considered, the public should earn that t consideration by trying to help Capi-

tal and Labour in their difficulties. There is scope in this country for an organisation working on these lines; everybody knows that the Arbitration Court is no final solution of the problem of Capital and Labour. If the public want a peaceful solution of Labour disputes let it help find that solution. I am glad that the public men of the Old Country are waking up, as indicated in the opinions I have published.