The Dominion. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 30, 1920. UNEMPLOYMENT IN BRITAIN

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 81, 30 December 1920, Page 4

The Dominion. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 30, 1920. UNEMPLOYMENT IN BRITAIN

The' scheme the British Cabinet is now said to be considering of making industries responsible .for the solution of unemployment problems, without Government or outside intervention, is not new. Proposals broadly on these lines were mooted, and received some support from Labour and other members, ill the course of a debate on unemployment in the House of Commons 011 October 21. Whether any

scheme of this nature holds useiui possibilities must, of course, depend upon the spirit in which it is taken up and developed. Only a bare outlino is given meantime of the scheme now under consideration in Britain, and details of the responsibilities it is proposed to cast on employers and trade unions arc withheld. Indeed, it is stated thai opinions differ as to whether an obligation should rest upon indus : try as a whole or each trade shoulc bo responsible lor its own unem ployment. So far as the first greai steps to a solution are concerned however, it seems fairly clear thai action must be • taken from c broader standpoint than that of individual industries. The' rool problem is to prevent unemployment. and not merely to mitigate its hardships, though this lasl must, of course, be undertaken as long as unemployment exists. The elementary fact from which anj practical treatment of the problem must procced is that the prevention of unemployment demands an advance in industrial organisation which is only possible or conceivable in conditions of industrial peace. So long as the parties in industry are committed to_ policies and methods which inevitably work out in friction and strife! and directly occasion unemployment, they will only waste theii time in jointly attempting to devise partial remedies. In Britain 'or anywhere else, the first thing to be considered by employers and workers who take- up the problem of unemployment is whether they arc in _ common prepared to adopt a policy which will make for the smooth and unbroken continuity of industry. Failing this measure of 1 agreement, any effort they make to remedy unemployment is bound to be abortive, except, perhaps, as regards the provision of panaceas and the partial alleviation of hardships. The proposal that cmplo3'ers and trade unions be made responsible for the solution of unemployment prob-

loms has one great claim to attention. Carried in any real sense into effcct, it would enforce consideration of Hie vital relationship between industrial peace and employment. "It is 'very desirable that workers «and employers jn Britain and in other countries should muer. and frankly discuss the whole question of unemployment. No doubt in such a discussion it would appear that there are faults of policy on both sides which, tend to cause unemployment, and that much might easily bo done by sound organisation to reduce this evil 1 to

small proportions. It ccrtainly could not be ignored, however, that the policy pursued by the most powerful sections of organised Labour heavily aeecntuaf.es the unemployment problem and makes its

solution for the time being impossible. The proposals now being considered in Great Britain will servo an invaluable purpose il they concentrate practical attention on the obvious but neglected fact that the root remedy for unemployment is to establish industrial peace on a firm basis. In thc'Unitcd Kingdom, for instance, representatives of tlio workers and employers, dealing with the. -problem from any practical standpoint, could not. ignore the extent to which the number of people at present out of work in that country is increased as a result of the lat? coal strike. During a recent debate on Mncmployment in tho House of Commons, Mn. Lloyd George detailed the measures of relief by which the Government proposed to supplement the operation of. the unomplovment insurance scheme, and added:

These plans were all in progress before tho outbreak of tho [coal] strike, and but for that strike the hoped that, by .these nn<l sitailnr means, the pioblem of unemployment, nn<l especially •■ho unemployment of ex-Service men, would bo adequately met during the coming winter. Wo shall proceed with our plans to the best of our ability, in spite of the,/strike; but T need not tell the Housa'that the elfcot of tho strike must lie. not only to add onormously to tho number of unemployed, but "to lessen our power to give, effect to the schemcs slrrady planned . . .

This is a conspicuous example of its kiucl, and one which derives weight from the terrible conditions of unemployment now developing in the United Kingdom; but it is, of course, apparent on all sides that industrial strife not only occasions and extends unemployment, but paralyses any attempt to raise industrial organisation to such a pitch of cfiicicncy as would make

settled employment normal and assured. At the present moment the Australian inter-State stewards are adding seriously to the volume of unemployment in the Commonwealth by a strike which they seem to have declared only or mainly l>ecausc they wish to spread a working day of eight hours over _ a period of thirteen and a half, instead of fifteen hours. So long as industry is liable to be thrown into confusion on such grounds any talk of eliminating unemployment amounts to mere trifling, and wage-earners, in their own interests, are. bound to give full liced lo the fact.