WOMEN'S WAGES

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 264, 4 August 1919, Page 2

WOMEN'S WAGES

THE CABINET COMMITTEE'S REPORT

AN IMPORTANT INQUIRY

(By a Labour Correspondent of the LonJ

It is not uncharitable to. suggest that the appointment ot' a Cabinet Committee on Women's Wages last August was an attempt to ovoid a decision on a very difficult administrative problem. The Government had been fixing women's wages, and, indirectly, controlling moil's wages for over three years; it must ill that period have given some thought to ( 'tho rotation which should be maintain* ed between the wages of women and men," with a viow to "the necessity of output during tlio war, and the progress and well-being of industry ju the fiu turo"; yet they found 'themselves faced with tlie alternative of refusing to women, doing exactly the same work a3 men, the men's pay, and adding to tliS' wages bill that tho'Government ultimate-, ly had to meet a sum variously estimate ed at thirty to sixty millions a year. The committee lias served its immediate purpose of postponing a decision; its report comes out at n time when the situation is materially ea;ed by the withdrawal of thousands of women from "men's work" in the munitions industry; And the time the committee has takeu has enabled it to make a full and effective survey of ita' problem. The committee estimate that women's wages on the have trebled dur* liig the war as against a twofold increaso' m prices. The disparity between women's wages and men's has l>B3ii reduced, the relation having changed from under a half to something like two-thirds. Tlio rise in women's wages has been assisted by State control; the lessening of the disparity is also due to State control, which has prevented a proportionate rise in men's wages. State support both of tho general level of women's wages l and of the present relation of women's wages to men's seems lo,the committee to be needed, if they aro not to fall ba„'k. The committee recommend therefore a legal minimum wage, based on the Jieeds of a single woman without dependants, which shall be independent of and supplementary to the provision made for particular trades by trade 1)001x15; and such support as is afforded by tho fair wages clause in-public contracts and by .the example of Government employment to fj|io principle of "equal pay lor equal work." Consideration should bo given by the Government immediately to the needs of women with dependants; and the granting of allowances to married men in the service of central and local authorities, where a salary equal to that of women doing similar work fails to attract men of the required quality, should be considered in connection with the institution of "equal pay for equal work."

"Equal Pay for Equal Work." The crux of tho Committee's problem, was the meaning to bo given to the principle "Equal pay for equal work." fha majority of the Committee givo to it-the meaning equal pay for equal output or equal efficiency, which would givo. for men and women on the same work identical piece rates, . l.ut differential time rates in most cases. They consider, that the relative efficiency of men and women should bo settled by trade boards and industrial councils, and that the onus should lie oh the employer- of proving that a woman is less efficient' than a man. and entitled rnjy to a proportionately lower time rate. Mrs. Webb's minority report, on tho other hand, 1 endorses the trade unionist interpretation of the principle of equal pay, according to which women' should receive the same time rates 'as ' well as the same pic-io rates as men on similar work. Mrs. Webb argues that" the trade unions have consistently claimed the same timo as well as piece rates for women, throughout the war, and that tho Treasury Agreement contained a pledge from the Government conceding that claim. The ground on which the'"''norify Deport rejects the trado union dlr.i& for identical rates, time or piece, is that it would, tend to it' ; .exclusion of women 'from man'y'of tne better-paid occupations. Having lo pay the samo hourly or weekly rates in any case, employers would prefer men to women in most cases. Mrs. Webb points out very justly that this would not necessarily be a bad thing. A segregation of the sexes and a division of '.he field of labour between them is rather to be sought than avoided, since tho special capacities of the sexes are presumably different, and the adaptation/of work to capacity requires some such division. From some trades women would be excluded; from others men would be excluded. There is this, however, to be said against the trade union proposal: the existing distribution of work between the sexes is based on custom nid prejudice rather than on native capacity, and the maintenance of the simrle time rate will obstruct any redistribution. On the other hand, the technical diiliculhes at arriving at iv precise measurement of the relativo efficiency of men and women on similar work are much greater than the Majority Report seems to contemplate.

Disparity Between Women's Wages and Men's. There is a further question. What is the ell'ect on the subsequent movement of waxes o£ the introduction of women into a trade? Wiieu women are substituted for men altogether, /the usual ■result js a drop'in rales; is it unnatural that men should fear a similar drop, or a clieck to a possible rise, when women are introduced alongside men? The Afajority Report doss not mention among tiio causes, to which the lower general rate of women's wages is to be attributed, the fact that women workers usually have not, niiile men usually have, dependant's. Yet is not this a most important factor? Mrs. Webb inveighs against tho employers who argue on this ground that women ought not to be paid as much as men; but it is.not a question of "ought" it is a question of fact". In the last resort, even without trade union .backing, men can be relied on to stand out for a family wage, whilo women cannot. If all wages were reguluted by the State, as Mrs. Webb seems lo imply that they should be, then it would be necessary io decide whether allowance ought to be mado for tho fact that a smaller proportion of women workers than of men have, dependants. But wages aro not so regulated. As Mrs. Webb herself says: "There is, indeed, no way (except that of its price in the market) by which tho relative value to the community of tho service, respectively, of men and women teachers—to take one example—can bo computed." Wages depend on supply and; demand, because society is not agreed on any scale of social values to substitute for the results of supply and demand. Now tho supply of labour can be controlled. That is what trado unions aro for. Even if there is no union, tho supply of any particular kind of labour is controlled by tho instructive resistance of tho ordinary worker to any suggestion (hat he should accept less than his standard rate. Women's standards, just because women, as a rule, have no dependants, aro different from men's, and it will always bo difficult for that reason to maintain wages at men's level once women cuter a. trade in any numbers. Tho conservatism of tho ordinary workman is neither irrational nor altogether solfish, when he resists the entry of women to his trade. It is difficult enough for him in any caso to maintain a tiecent standard; it is just possible that ho may still do it, if identical rates aro paid to men and women; the task becomes altogether too complicated if ho is required to negotiate and defend differential rates for mou and women. It is true that identical rates will tend to the exclusion of women from ninny trades; but such a demarcation of men's and women's trades is desirable; and the disabilities of women workers should bo met by legal minimum rates, technical training to extend their industrial scope, and special social provision for the minority of women workers who have, dependants.