The Walkato Times With whloh ls inoorporatad The Waikato Argua. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 2, 1930. BRITISH WORKS COUNCIL.

Waikato Times, Volume 108, Issue 18139, 2 October 1930, Page 6

The Walkato Times With whloh ls inoorporatad The Waikato Argua. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 2, 1930. BRITISH WORKS COUNCIL.

Of industrial experiments there are no end, and most of them have a value—whether negative or positive. The experiment known as the-Whitley Council has so many positive merits that we can surely learn something from its—comparative—failure. The object of the Whitley Council is to seek co-operation in industry by enlisting the knowledge and goodwill o? employees. The councils are purely voluntary and have a purely consultative and advisory function. Absolute control still remains in shareholders through the directors but, where a genuine spirit of co-operation exists, the council has proved' a very useful medium for its fuller expression. That •some such institution has a permanent place in industrial organisation seems clear. The moral of the failure and the conditions of future success are matters which it is .important that we should determine. Mr Geoffrey Mander, M.P., for Wolverhampton, who has himself experimented very successfully along this line in the business of Mander Bros., Ltd., varnish manufacturers, is convinced that the reason for the general slump in Whitley schemes is that because of their purely voluntary basis, they lack the force of law to their decisions. In order to place the matter on a more satisfactory basis Mr Mander recently introduced in the House of Commons a Works Councils Bill. His intention, as he stated it, was “ to try to introduce ttie personal element, the human touch, into industry once more; to try

to make everybody feel that every business is the joint concern of all those who are connected with it; to try to set up machinery which will enable the workers as well as the employers to share in the control, in the conduct and in the profits, and what is more, take their own share in the increased dividends of human happiness and industrial prosperity which would arise from a measure of this kind.” Now this is altogether admirable and goes, as we thin 1 :, to the root of the matter. But what do we find in the Bill? Every factory employing more than 50 persons is compelled to set up a works council representing every grade of employee, to consider, in consultation with the management, such questions as hours, overtime, wages, holidays, dismissals, etc. The ultimate responsibility still rests-with the management but a degree of “government by consent” is introduced and no man may be dismissed without, at least, being heard by his fellows. Provision is also made foiythe discussion of other subjects such as works organisation, conditions of employment, apprenticeship, welfare, and suggestions. Such is the scope of the Bill, and reading it in conjunction with Mr Mander’s speech we are reminded of Clemenceau's criticism of President Wilson’s plan at the peace conference: “But what cohid he do with an assembly of talkers to whom he saw himself obliged to refuse all executive power? Excess of confidence in words can only lead to disappointments." It seems to us, in fact, that the lesson we must learn from these councils is that, to have real value, they must have more than advisory powers; they must be the natural means by which real and not imaginary power is expressed. Mr Mander is setting up machinery, very excellent machinery, but he is not supplying the dynamic force with which to drive it. The contributor of service in industry is seeking self-expression not merely for material gain but to satisfy a deepseated human need. That need can be satisfied only "with realities. If partnership is made real, if the human status is recognised and placed in its due relation to the material, then councils will spring up and the machinery of co-operation will be a real thing. It w’ill avail little that the State he'ps to make the rules and that the debates are of high quality if, at the foundations, there is no recognition of the justice of the relationship. Profits must be shared, not primarily because it pays to share them, ’ but because the shares are rightly earned. Control must be shared on exactly similar principles. The Whitley Council control is a shadow because its only real and lasting foundation is not legally recognised nor generously conceded. There is no hope then, in our opinion, for the Works Council unless it is preceded by some such enactment as the New Zealand “ Companies Empowering Act, 1924.” Under that Act service is placed alongside capital as a qualification for membership of a company, and the human element given a status by virtue of human service for the first time in industrial history. Starting fair and clean, based on national justice and truth to fact., and principle, partnership may grow and flourish. Its powers will be real powers, partners will be real partners and the machinery whether of works council or welfare committees will be set to real tasks, tasks incidental to the success of their own business. Mr Mander may, by' his personal qualities and by the spirit he-brings to his task, make an individual success of a works council, but, in order to make his work enduring and widespread, he must build upon foundations of true partnership.