ENGLAND AND TUE TRADE UNIONS.

Hokitika Guardian, 11 April 1922, Page 3

ENGLAND AND TUE TRADE UNIONS.

(Mercantile Gazette.) In England, hundreds of ships are laid up, some of which are occasionally commissioned for one or two voyages, not for the purpose of profit, the owners being content to make a loss less than that which results from keeping their vessels at anchor. The shipbuilding industry is upon its last legs, which must lie obvious when a ship can be bought at one-fourtli of the price for which it can now he built. One would think that at such a time it would not be difficult to persuade the workmen that half a loaf is better than no bread • but that is’ not the opinion of those who have charge of the shipbuilders’ employees’ unions, as they have ordered the men to resist to the utmost ally attempt: on the part of the builders to get rid of the bonuses paid to the workmen during war time, R o as at least, if an order for some special class of ship oom.es along, they may be able to find employment for them. At present the workmen have refused to consent to any reduction and are walking about tho streets, their leaders preferring that Urn work should go to Belgian or German shipbuilders rather than .wages should he reduced. This gives the agitators a further chance to worry the British Government for doles. The engineering lock-out will add another million and a half to the ranks of the unemployed and assist competitors to gain another slice of English trade, besides inflicting untold sacrifices upon thousands of people who have no direct connection with the depute.

It is difficult to understand the temper of the men or the mental attitude which in time of stress such as England is at present undergoing prefers to injure themselves and their own class rather than concede the necessity of reducing costs. They fail altogether to appreciate tlijit their very existence depends upon the ability of England to import food, which cannot be done unless she is able to export goods or perform services for those countries from whom she purchases. England could find food for only 8,000,000 of her people at the beginning of the eighteenth century—two hundred and twenty years ago—and although modern methods of agriculture might now enable her for a time to feed double that number without importing, if her export trade were to be lost more than half of the population would have to emigrate or die. This result would follow as certainly ns day succeeds night; but the trades union leaders dismiss the possiiblity as unworthy of consideration; they snv there is plenty of money in the country to buy foreign food products and before they starve that at least shall go. But the wealth of a country consists hut to a small extent of gold, and nothing else would he <4 value if raw material or manufactured goods wore not available. If the Labour leaders sueaeded. as l.enin and Trotsky have done in Russia, in bringing about a republic governed by Ihe militant agitators, food would be. as now, the first necessity, and couhl not be obtained except, its value were transmitted in exchange; and assuming that the workmen settled down to regular work and that the industries of the country were carried on as at present—which is suggesting an impossibility—the workmen could get no more than they will obtain under the present system, because if they then determined to increase their wages, the goods they manufactured c ould not in foreign markets lie sold against the products of those conn, tries whose cost of production was less.

It is almost incredible that any body of men whose brains have not .completely failed to function ctould regard with equanimity •, condition of tilings which would leave the workers without subsistence am] at the mercy of tyrants who would destroy them without hesitation if they protested aigainst their methods. The obvious course to follow would be that which would lead them along the paths of safety, and although those will not bring them into avenues where all the good things of life will be found, as they bad been taught by their leaders to expect they would at least be sure of obtaining sufficient for all reasonable wants. If England held a monopoly of the foreign markets, then she could find customers for all of her manufactures at any price in reason sh e chose to ask, but the products of her looms, her factories and workshops now have to meet those which originate in Germany, Belgium, France, and Japan, and the buyers give preference to those sellers who are able to deliver at the lowest cost. It it not that English employers wish to reduce wages or to lengthtvhours but it is impossible for them to find buyers against other countries whose workmen have discarded loafing iind who accept smaller wages and longer hours. It is the customer in the foreign country which fixes the price, and if he will not buy English goods because the cost is higher than those offered by our competitors, then our cost must come down to theirs or the trade is lost, and our workmen must, if they persist in their present attitude, emigrate ®r starve. All the drastic action by tho most extreme of trade unions will not affect the question. even, will not alter it. The fundamental economic law that one nation must in competitive markets bring its priceg down to that of others will ride roughshod over all attempts to ignore its power and if the workmen of England decide that they will not co-ope-rate with the employers to lower cost, but prefer to wade through seas of blood to resist the economic- law, the result would be the same. If they destroyed capital and shot the employers they would still find that to obtain food they must export goods, and thrt those goods could not be sold unless they could bo placed upon the foreign markets at a price as low as the nationals of other countries are asking.