C I}J> Nonunion . TUESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 1920. A PROMISING EXPERIMENT

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 8, 5 October 1920, Page 6

C I}J> Nonunion . TUESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 1920. A PROMISING EXPERIMENT

« On account of the clear promi- { nenco it gives to factors of industrial efficiency as they bear on national prosperity, the British coal industry dispute provides an object lesson of interest to the whole world. At the stage to which it has been carried, the dispute presents only one promising feature. This is that the miners, though they aro still haggling over details, have shown some disposition to consider a settlement under which wage increases will become dependent upon an increased output of coal—a settlement, that is to say, based in some measure upon tho principle of payment by results. If this principle were fully applied, the wages of each miner would be based on his individual output. The proposals that are being discussed in the United Kingdom contemplate flat rate wage increases based on the figures of total output. They offer, however, a possible remecfy for the low output and high cost of coal which are disastrously impeding the recovery of trade and industry in Great Britain and adding enormously to the cost of living. The outcome of the present negotiations will demonstrata clearly whether tho miners really entertain any regard for the interests of other sections of tho community.. According to one of yesterday's cablegrams they are offered an increase of Is-, per day for an output of 240 million tons per annum, with further increases for additional output above that amount—an increase of 3s. per day being offered for an output of 256 million tons per annum. What this offer means will be realised by looking at current and pre-war figures of output and cost of production. In' 1913, the total output of coal from British mines was 287,411,8G9 tons. _ During the first six months of this year the output was at tho rate of 240,500,000 tons per annum. Part of this decline is accounted for by the reduction of the working day to seven hours. The Coal Industry Commission estimated the immediate loss by the reduction of the working day. at ten per cent., but an output at the rate recorded for the six months to the end of last June-re-presents a reduction of more than sixteen per cent, below tho output of 1913. It materially affects this comparison that the number of persons engaged in the industry at tho end of last June was 1,200,300, as compared with 1,127,890 in 1913. It was with the labour force in the mines increased by 72,410, or well over six per cent., that the output rate of 1913 was lowered this year by more than sixteen per cent. It touches the.root of the matter that the present average output per person is at the rate of 193.6 tons per annum, as compared with 255 tons in 1913 and 265 tons-in 1915. The present and pre-war wages cost of raising a ton of coal Is also illuminating. In 1913 the average out-, lay in wagps alone on raising a ton of coal from British mines was 6s. 4d. In May this year the corresponding figure was 225. Bd. : While the shortage and high price of coal. are handicapping practically every_ British industry and adding heavily, to the cost of living, they arc nowhere operating with more disastrous effect than upon oversea trade and tho shipping industry, which takes such a vital place in the national economy of the TJnited_ Kingdom. So far as export trade is concerned, this is clearly brought out in the table which follows. "Coal," in this tabic, includes coke and fuels manufactured from coal :— United Kingdom Exports foe Six Months Ending June. 1920. 1919. 1913. Tons. Tons. Tons, tixuorts other than coal 5,372,000 3,451,000 7,576,000 Coal 16,493.000 19,995,000 37,045000 Re-exports 399,000 CGO.OOO 956,000 Totals ..22,764,000 24,106,000 45,560,000 Exports other than coal, though still far below the pre-war level (of quantity) increased by nearly 56 per cent, in the first six months of this year, but coal exports', instead of increasing in the same ratio (to more than 31 million tons) heavily declined. What this and the high cost of bunker coal mean to tho people of the United Kingdom in the loss of profitable trade and increased cost of living is suggested in the following statement made recently on behalf of the British Board of Trade by one of its officials: — The export of coal from the United iungdoui to Argentina - has practically ceased, and Argentina now obtains its supplies from the United States and South Africa. Prior to tho war. our exports of coal to Argentina practically paid for our imports of wheat from that country; b"ut in, consequence of tho cessation of exports of British coal to Argentina, tramp steamers . . , have now to proceed to that country in ballast, willi the result that homeward freights must bo higher than if they carried outward cargoes of cool, nnd wo hayo to remit gold to Argentina in payment for foodstuffs. Owing to shortage of coal at British coaling dopots, steamers have to wait for bunkers, and to pay enhanced prices; all these Aolaya and increased

prices add to the expense of voyages. _ • .If the output of coal could bo .increased to the pre-war quantity, on immediate reduction in the price of fo6d nnd other commodities would bo obtained. ;; The citation of established facta ip- might easily, be extended, but it rig ty abundantly clear that for years past T® the British miners have been pursuing a policy which tends directly !to ia . strangle trade and industry and ny more and more heavily penalises ill other sections of the community. Precisely on this account the application to their industry of the principle of. payment by results commends itself as wise and well-ad-vised. Should an experiment on - these lines succeed in the British coal industry, a good case will be made out for applying the same principle,widely throughout industry not only in Britain but in other countries, including our own.