THE THIRD PARTNER

Hokitika Guardian, 24 January 1920, Page 4

THE THIRD PARTNER

SHOULD BRAINS COMBINE.

(Australian Paper). Capital has its unions for self-pro-tection, for attempting to prevent, and often successfully attempting to prevent, undue competition in the disposal of the goods owned by Capital. Labour has its unions, which prevent competition among the workers and so maintain wages, but Brains, which Capital uses to organise industry and direct Labour, have not hitherto combined. Except for brains of the highest quality the remuneration has stood still. Measured in currency, it is the same as it was five years ago, while the remuneration of Capital has increased and the wages of Labour have advanced. As capital receives more and Labour receives more, as less goods are being produced than are wanted, prices have risen. Consequently the reward of Brains has actually diminished, for currency will purchase less food, less clothing, and fewer services than would the same amount of currency five years ago. Why have Brains not combined? Because Brains are severely individualistic. Brains fight each for themselves, believing in standing in their own strength and obtaining what they can by their own exertions without calling upon the aid of anything else. While Capital adopts a defensive co-operation when it is attacked, and Labour affects to believe in an aggressive communism all the time, Brains when at work, whatever opinion that may affect, work on severely individualistic lines. It is this individualist work of Brains which keeps the world in the path of progress. Tho endeavour of each brain is to do better than its rival, to show better results. Brains rejoice in their work and their accomplishments, Brains know that Brains really keep the world moving, and see in a vision the time coming when Brains will really rule the world. Perhaps it is that vision which makes Brains not wholly discontented with their lot.

What would happen were Brains to combine ? But first, what are the Brains in industry. ■ They are the managers and the under managers of factories, the foreman, the general managers, managers, and branch managers of banks and insurance companies, the men who plan new machinery, new enterprises, who are able to imagine where new markjets for goods will be found, and who are able to forestall the wants of the community, the managers of warehouses and of departments in , warehouses. These are the men who do the thinking, who plan what Capital wants to be done, and who direct Labour as to what work it shall do, what methods it should adopt to perform that work. Suppose the warehouse managers founded a union, whose principal object was to increase the honorarium of warehouse..managers, and that it should decree that warehouse managers should be remunerated according to the value of the softgoods, the silks and satins, woollens and cottons, whose buying and selling they directed; also, that in fixing the honorariums account should be taken of the decrease in the purchasing power of the currency. If it costs more to purchase a pound of chops than it did five years ago, why. should it not cost more to purchase the grey matter of Brains ? There would be a panic among shareholders of the big drapery houses and among the women who buy the fashions, and the wo-

men who buy what they can. 'Warehouse managers cannot bo picked out indiscriminately from salesmen. Probably all warehouse managers have commenced in the rank of the salesmen, hut all salesmen are not even potential warehouse managers. And it is the : same with all other managers—managers of banks, of insurance companies, of factories, even of newspapers. It ■ might he said that Capital would get along of itself, that it would direct LaI hour, and do the organising. Occasionally Capital is brains as- well, but only occasionally. When it does occur it would be more correct to say that Brains are Capital as well, for Brains are there first and Capital follows. Successful Capital is generally limited to two outstanding qualifications—the ability to acquire and to Hold, and the ability to,

pick out Brains and us© them effective- j ly. ‘And what would happen were Brains to combine in One Big Union, were managers, superintendents and foremen, all to coriie together and determine on united action to acquire their “rights.” If Capital and Labour refused to pay and the One Big Union of Brains called a stop-work meeting, and resolved to go out on strike until its demands were conceded, there would be chaos in industry. Some sections of Labour have the idea that an establishment once set going will run itself, will go without direction; that foremen and managers are mere excrescences; that without them orders would com© in, and the merchandise would be delivered just as usual, and in good order and condition. A strike of the One Big Union of Brains would quickly remove the misconception of the' part which Brains really play in industry. Such a strike would be far worse than a strike of the One Big Union of Labour, which some sections of Labour advocate. A strike of Labour means reduced production simply. A strike of Bratus would result in no production, since there would be no machinery to keep Labour at work, and Labour would be continually holding mass meetings to determine when, where, and how the next step in production should be taken. In plain fact, there is a danger to Industry, because the gap between the wages of Brains and the wages of Labour is closing up. .In some cases the wages overlap, the men at the bench earning more than the foremen. The result is the same as when the inferior workmen earn more than the workman on skilled work, when the wharf-labour-er earns more than the “boss,” when the trimmer earns more than the engineer. If there is no incentive to use Brains, Brains will not be used. If the man with brains does not get what he considers a fair remuneration, and' finds he can do better by using his muscles, he will desert the work of brain and adopt the work of muscle. That spells the end of progress; and when we cease to progress there will come a time of retrogression. The moral does not need enforcing.