HOW TO SPLIT THE APPLE

Evening Post, Volume XCVII, Issue 127, 31 May 1919, Page 4

HOW TO SPLIT THE APPLE

-It seems that the Chairmanship of the Harbour Board has passed from one candid friend of Capital and Labour to another candid friend.. Mr. Daniell's rebuke to.greed and to sloth we dealt v;ith soma weeks ago, and to-day we must equally congratulate Mr. Harkness.on the impartial'• tone of his annual address to the Wellington Chamber of Commerce. It is true that Mr. Harkness spoke as President of the Chamber and not as Chairman of the Board, but since a public man should have only one set of convictions, either for precept or for practice, the voice of the President in this case is no doubt the voice of the Chairman also. (We are aware, of course, that the duty of a public man to be loyal to his convictions is somewhat of a rare occurrence in party politics, but that is a different' s;tory, and need not be here referred to; especially as corrective measures are probably not far distant.) It is a fact of no mean importance to hear from the lips of, the President-Chairman, on a "State" occasion, the principle that "service to the community, must necessarily rank superior to a large income." Here is another important sentence : —

It may be a bitter lesson, but the fundamental principle has to be grasped that more injury is dona to the community by having discontented, depressed, and underpaid employees, than any benefits the community will gain by accumulated wealth.

This is a maxim sound and just. Nothing damages the machine like friction, the friction of discontent; and nothing speeds it like mutual satisfaction. Satisfaction is the long-sought oil of the industrial machine;

But still the question arises—how to obtain it? From the standpoint of industrial peace, the militant section of Labour is at least as blameable as the greedy, section of Capital. One would succeed through anarchy, the other through slavery; and Both are alike without merit. Mr. Harkness pleads for a broadening of the worker's outlook :—

Tho worker must realise that tb'e interests of !>.o particular. section of the community can become paramount to the interests and prejudicial to the common good of the community. He must learn that his best efforts should be given and tha hardest work performed, not for a section of the people, but for the general good of the community. A "go-slow" policy which-limits output will inevitably deny tp Capital a legitimate return, and it will seek other forms of investment. Wages will fall, the industry will become unprofitable, and unemployment will follow. Such a policy is dishonest.

Capital, according lo Mr. Harkness, should receive "a fair return," and Labour should receive "improved conditions! of working, better wages, arid a higher standard of living, combining comfort and contentment." This means a more equitable division of the results and the profits of industry. As they stand at present, Capital and. Labour cannot agree upon the division, but there is at least a chance that agreement may be reached along the lines ci TO-partnwshiii, t/nkh would begin with a sharing of bansftta, mi would

develop into v sharing of responsibility (including business risks) and therefore of authority. When workers succeed in mastering the real difficulties of manr»;;cnit<!\t, when they come to realise how mui:h industry can do, ami how much it ciinnot do, then it will bo possible to reduce profits to terms of wages, and wages tr> terms of profits ; and a mutually satisfactory allocution will naturally follow. Meanwhile, there aro reports that Labour views with hostility the labour-saving vehicles that have been introduced to the wharves. To oppose progressive measures, merely because they reduce manual effort, is uneconomic and selfiijh, and Labour should set itself against such obsolescent attitudes. On the other hand, the employers; of wharf Inbour must not shirk (he problem' of casual work on the wharves, and of bettering the industrial conditions obtaining there. Neither Labour nor Capital has a monopoly of error, and the public should be allowed to see both sides of the penny.