Labour policy—false and true : $b A study in economic history and industrial economicsMacassey, Lynden Livingston
History
Labour policy—false and true : $b A study in economic history and industrial economics
Macassey, Lynden Livingston
Industrial policy -- Great Britain; Labor economics -- Great Britain; Labour Party (Great Britain)
It only applied to “controlled establishments,” and until the later
introduction of the Excess Profits Duty the owners of non-controlled
establishments were allowed to make such profits as they thought fit. But
it was shutting the stable door after the steed was stolen. Throughout
the war, Labour never got rid of the notion that the profits of employers
were not restricted until Labour had forced the Government to restrict
them, and that even then the restriction was on a wholly inadequate scale.
Failure of Compulsory Arbitration
The substantial effect of the Munitions of War Act, 1915, was to give
statutory force to the “Treasury” Agreements. The obligations which
the Act imposed upon the owners of controlled establishments were
substantially the safeguards for Labour contained in the “Treasury”
Agreements, and upon Labour the provisions contained in those Agreements
preventing stoppages of work. Part I of the Act provided for the
settlement of labour differences and in certain cases for the prohibition
of strikes and lock-outs, and for compulsory arbitration. It might well
be thought that the circumstances of the war provided a unique occasion
for the success of compulsory arbitration, but it was a failure, signal
and complete. A great many Unions at first acquiesced in arbitration
because as long as prices continued to rise, advances of wages were more
or less automatically awarded, so as to adjust wages to cost of living.
When, however, the Unions refused to go to arbitration, or, if they went,
to comply with the award, it was impossible to make them. If 100,000
men cease work it is impracticable to prosecute or fine all of them;
to select a certain number soon raises cries of victimization, those
prosecuted are made martyrs, and funds are raised by their colleagues
for payment of their fines. While the pretence of enforcing awards was
maintained for a certain time, everybody concerned in the administration
of the Munitions Act knew that compulsory arbitration was a broken reed.
This was proved in the very month the Act was passed, namely, June 1915,
in the case of the miners’ strike in South Wales, to which reference is
made on p. 156. But in view of the absolute dead-lock at which collective
negotiations between employers and trade unions had arrived by the end
of 1914, it was essential for the Government to undertake the general
regulation of labour itself, and the powers for doing so were conferred
on the Minister of Munitions by the Munitions of War Act, 1915. Much
adverse criticism has been levelled at the labour administration of the
Ministry, but State regulation was the sole remaining remedy; if this be
remembered, it must be conceded that labour was regulated as efficiently
as circumstances allowed.
Effect of Relieving Employers of Responsibility for Labour Management
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account