THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. FRIDAY, MARCH 8, 1912. PROFIT SHARING.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10578, 8 March 1912, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. FRIDAY, MARCH 8, 1912. PROFIT SHARING.

Among the many alluring features of the 'Speech -which was placed in the hand., of the Governor prior to the recent session of Parliament, none was more attractive to the worker than that .having reference to the sharing of profits between employers and employees. The scheme of profit sharing is l'lot new. It has been tried in various parts of the world, hut, so far as can be ascertained, in no part has it proved successful. Theoretically, it would seem right and proper that the labourer, who plays so important « part in production, should receive a fair share of the profits accruing from his labour. In practice, however, it will be found that this would not work out entirely to the satisfaction of .the worker. Let us -take as an illustration the coal-mining industry. The State coal-mines, in which some hundreds of thousands of pounds are at stake, last year showed a profit of only a few hundred pounds. If interest a.t a fair rate were allowed on the sum involved, together with a reasonable sinking fund, it would probably ibe discovered that there had been an actual loss on the year's operations. To create a profit under existing circumstances, it would be necessary for tho wages of the workers to be

substantially reduced. .Would this reduction be acceptable to the average worker. There- are many enterprises in this country which, at the present time, do not -show a profit of more than tlirec or four per cent, upon the capital involved. The only way to show an increased profit would be to put up the price of the articles produced, and this would mean, in turn, an increase in the cost of living. This is the very thing which the country does not want. There may bo some cases iu which, for the time being, the worker would 'benefit 'by a division of the profits. The meat-freezing industry is one of these. But, assuming that the .bottom were to fall out of the frozen meat market, who is going to stand the loss? (Would the worker be in a position to do so? That is the crux of the question. . If the worker is going to share in the profits, if there are any, he must be prepared, also, to bear his portion of the loss, when that occurs. In the meantime the Arbitration Court will have to be wiped out, and wages will have to be brought down in a great many cases to permit of a profit being shown at all. And what will happen when a bootmaker, for instance, earns £SOO a year in the profit-sharing scheme, whilst the boiler-maker, who is less fortunate, receives only £100? Will there be provision whereby the one set of producers will divide with another ? If not, there will soon be trouble. The only way to adjust matters would be to pass legislation requiring that every enterprise shall show the same profit per capita. This would .be an exceedingly difficult .proposition. The whole scheme, as outlined in the Governor's Speech, is elusive. It is a poJitical scheme, pure and simple. An actuary would dismiss it- without a moment's hesitation. Why, then, do people allow themselves to !be trapped by such transparent humbug