TO END INDUSTRIAL UNREST.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 96, 13 October 1911, Page 4

TO END INDUSTRIAL UNREST.

Tick up any newspaper and you will find reference to some industrial disturbance, either in Pritain. the Continent, Australia, and even in this country, which was supposed to have eliminated strikes entirely. Everyone will «<lmit that strikes are unprofitable, even calamitous, to both masters and men. Can they he, prevented? Arbitration has done a lot and may do a lot to prevent strikes, Imt with human nature as it is it can never ■brinjr about complete industrial harmony. An over-increasing number of thoughtful lwn believe that the only practical solution is to be found in the application of profit-sharing. At kst week's meeting of thn Canterbury Philosophical Society, an address on the subject of profit-shar-ing was delivered by Mr. A. W. JJeaven, and among those who attended to h«ar

it were representatives of tlio Canterbury Industrial Association and the Canterbury Trades and Labor Council. Mr. Ben veil, who lias evidently made a long and careful study of tho subject, takes it for granted tliat neither employer nor employee is satisfied with the present wages' system, He reminded his hearers that Socialism, co-operation and pro-fit-sharing had been suggested 1 as remedies for tho defects of the wages system, and ho gave it as hi* personal opinion that 'though compulsory Socialism might be successful in equalising the division of products, it was certain there nould be less products to divide than at present. On tho other hand, co-opera-tion had failed generally because of tho ro'.ity of organising and directing ability Profit-sharing would not be subject tc these disabling limitations, because, a.< he defined it, it was ''a modification o; fiie wages system which makes the work er a partner to a specific extent in th< profits realised, while strengthening till industrial efficiency by which those pro fits are produced." Mr. Bevan gave in stances of casus in which profit-sharing had been tried in industries. One of tin pioneers of the system, he said, was : French house painter and decorator, M Le Clair, who commenced the system ii 1843 and continued it with splendid re suits. In this business 90 per cent. <> the outlay went in wages, and only II per cent, for materials. A French fim of paper makers, which paid oompara tive-ly little for wages as compared wit l other costs, tried a profit-sharing scheme and increased the earning capacity <; it 9 workers by 40 per cent. There wen no strikes on the part of the worker? The head of this firm had declared tha it was not a matter of the employer giv ing away part of his profits, but of doinj an excellent stroke of business, and tha if strikes and industrial unrest were ti be stopped there must be a division o profits between directing intelligence capital and labor. ' The experience o other Continental firms had been equall; favorable to the principle of profit-shai ing. Profit-sharing had also been trie< in the Pillsbury Flour Mills, Minnesota United States, and though in two year no dividends were paid to the workers owing to a continued fall in the pric of breadstulTs, the employees were kep at steady work, and wages were main tained' during the period of depression Some American firms made their cm ployees profit-sharers by assigning then shares in the business. Bonuses oi wages, based on the amount of th year's profits and distributed in propor tion to the wages received by each em ployee, were paid by other firms. Sys terns of co-partnership with workers hai been introduced by some large Englisl landowners. An English colliery firn tried a system of dividing half of all pro fits over 10 per cent, net with its em ployees. This system put a stop ti strikes and greatly increased the profit; of the business for some years, but i period of depression, following a perioi of unusual prosperity, brought about r strike, and the system was discontinued The South Metropolitan Gas Company had the most, complete and successfu system of profit-sharing in the world al present, profits being shared betweei shareholders, consumers and workers Over ,£500,000 had been paid to work ers by way of bonuses in twenty-om years, and £450,000 of this was held b\ employees in tho company's stock, wliieli was at present at a premium of 21 pei cent. Tlieso examples have led Mr Beaven to the conclusion that profitsharing is both practicable and advisable although he realises'—as must every student of the industrial situation —that no arrangement will be satisfactory that does not possess sufficient elasticity to permit of its intelligent application to varying conditions and circumstances, Xo one, is likely to dispute the contention that "the ideal trade union will be that in which employer and employed are united to advance the interests of the industry by which they earn -their livelihood." That is the ideal. Its attainment is still in the future; but Mr. A. W. Beaven is of opinion that the universal adoption of the principle of profit-sharing would tend to bring the goal of industrial peace in sight