The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. TUESDAY, APRIL 7, 1908. EFFICIENCY IN LABOR.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2159, 7 April 1908, Page 2

The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. TUESDAY, APRIL 7, 1908. EFFICIENCY IN LABOR.

An underlying principle that is frequently lost sight of when modern labor problems are being discussed is aptly touched upon by an American writer who puts tho caso thus:

There used to bo an old Irishman who was a ditcluliggcr. But ho rnado a profession of it: ho made nil art of it. AVhen ho dug a ditch it was dug, and it couldn't bo dug better, •and of how many ditch-diggers can you say that to-day? That man’s pride in his work was positively stimulating—tho only thing old John knew was to dig a ditch, but ho was ail artist at it. He dug a ditch not for the day’s wage, but because ho loved it. He never did •anything else: to tho end of his thno ho dug ditches well. -Yet liow many would call old John a. successful man? But ho surely was. None more successful —in his line. He was a success in his work: as a ditch-digger; and, what is better, lie was a success as a man: the very highest- type of man. For the part that God gave him to do in the world he did honestly, lovingly and well: tho very best lie could do. He was competent! To bo competent : one man au President, tho other as ditch-digger: each in his own sphere—but competent! That- spells success!

In this paragraph the writer lias undoubtedly laid his finger on that aspect of the industrial position which most needs attention. If New Zealand is to attain a place of any distinction ill the manufacturing world, it will not be through cheap labor being available, but because of the high standard of efficiency obtaining amongst tho workmen. In this connection the question whether, or not our present legislation tends to increase or to decrease individual efficiency becomes a very serious matter. The. chief objection many employers have had to our system of compulsory arbitration has been that the minimum wage which is a basic feature of tho system, tends to lower the standard of efficiency of the best workers to that of the less capable or less willing, and the Premier himself appears to recogniso that there is forco in the contention, for, in his last utterance oil the subject, he announced his intention to bring iii legislation dealing with what lio described as “tho dead level.” Tho position is obviously a most difficult one, and it is difficult to imagino how Sir Joseph intends to improve it. The court now fixes what is described as the minimum wago and the employer promptly makes this tho maximum amount that ho will pay. He knows that ho will be fined if he pays less and naturally lie declines to ply more than the court awards. Hero and there cases occur where there is a specially keen demand for labor and really competent hands aro then able to command more than tho minimum wage, but generally speaking, it fixes the amount that a man can earn. The natural consequence is that a particularly energetic workman, realising that all liis energy and all his skill will not ennblo him to earn more than does his less strenuous fellow-laborer, inevitably falls back into a regulation groovo. .Speaking on this question tho other day to a “Lyttelton Times” reporter, ’Mr George T. Booth, of the engineering firm of Messrs Booth, Macdonald and Co., Christchurch, who is recognised as one of the keenest commercial men in the South, expressed liis views as follows:

The trades unions . objected strongly to any system of piece work; in fact, anything that tended to allow a •man to work harder or more scientically than his fellows. was frowned upon. His idea had always been that piece work was the ideal system. The most capable man then' had an opportunity to earn wages in proportion to his capacity as a producer, and for both tho employer and the worker the piece system was the best. To fix a rate of wages on the basis-of tho most exnert workman’ output was manifestly unfair to the less competent man. Vet there was nothing at present to give the expert workman a real'iy fur chance. One had only to take tho case of men filling drays. Three men might be filling a drav, and two would make perfect slavery of it. Tho third man, by using‘bis brain and working scientifically, could dp as much as tlio other two, but lie got no credit for that. In his firm’s works. Hr Booth continued, the premium or'bonus system was in operation. By that system a iob was 'rated at so much tiiuo allowance. Tho work was fixed at a fair rate for an average man’s work, ami any excess produced was paid for. for instance, u man made eight articles in an eight-hour day and was paid Is an hour, each, article thus costing Is. His employer said, •‘Anv vou make over the fixed number during the day will be paid for ar 6d each.” Tims tho worker was given an incentive to increase his output, thus benefiting bis employer'and himself. Wages were fixed at a fair rate and stayed there. The principle of the minimum wags had the effect of grading, down efficiency. There was no doubt in Mr Booth's mind that that principle was making a deep impression on the dominion. The tendency was to mediocrity, and he had heard several employers say that they could not get as much work from two men nowadays as had been got from one man some years ago.

The trades unions had become imbued with an idea that if one man did moro work there would be less for another to do. That was entirely a fallacy, mid in consequence of it, men in many branches of trade “sit tight instead of using their energies to tho best of their ability. There were opponents of the premium system who said that it was immoral. Perf.onnllv, he had never been able losco that land thought it was far more immoral for a man to bo paid lor eight hours’ work when he did only six. Then there was the prevalent id in that tho employer wished to grind a man down. If workers would only reason, they would see that that was not to the employer’s interests. In some concluding remarks Air Booth added another illuminating thought to tho subject when ho expressed tho opinion that industrial peace would bo helped to finality if tho workers thought more lor themselves ami listened less to tho agitators who aro so fond of using arguments to stir up unnecessary strifo. On tho samo subject another large employer of labor in Christchurch, Mr J. A. Frostiok, said ho had been associated with unions lor over thirty-five years, and with ono or ' two exceptions it had been his invariable experience that good workmen never held office for long. Tho j men who always had the limelight ' on them wanted to nialco trouble. In his opinion one of tho greatest dangers to industrial peace and the worst menace to the happiness ol the worker was tho union agitator. Tho system of compulsory arbitration, it must bo remembered, was mndo noccssary to protect workers from that -small section of employers who would, if not otherwise restricted, use their powers to oppress and sweat those needing employment, but for the larger percentage of employers thero is really no need for such a compelling forco. Tho average employer is quite prepared to meet his men in ,a reasonable spirit and treat them well, but with the labor agitator working amongst the hands, poisoning their minds,telling them that every employer is one of tho hated capitalist class and therefore an hereditary enemy to the worker, there is little opportunity for conciliatory methods. Once the worker recognises the true position and, having come to a reasonable arrangement with his employer, determines that he will serve his master faithfully and well, performing his daily task, like old John dug his ditch, to the utmost of lii.s ability, then will tho industries of the Dominion make a forward step that will prove of benefit to all who aro engaged in them.