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)
industry produces upon all other sections, and appreciates the danger
of settling strikes in the way the South Wales Coal Strike of 1915 was
settled.
It has been amply proved by bitter experience that no branch of human
activity stands in more urgent need of even administration on uniform
and consistent lines than does labour. Granted that employers and
employed should settle between themselves so far as possible their own
disputes, there comes inevitably a stage when a settlement or failure
to settle intimately affects the community. It is then that the offices
of a properly constituted Ministry of Labour come into play. If it is
desired to leave the public merely as a football between employers and
employed then abolish the Ministry. Far from abolishing it, in my view
it ought to be consolidated and vested with extended powers. It ought to
be made in fact, not merely in name, a real Ministry of Labour. All the
powers of the other Government Departments which relate to labour should
be transferred to it, so that there would be one central department
charged with and responsible for the administration of all labour in this
country. A great part of the labour disorganization during the war which
has been used as an argument for abolition of the Ministry of Labour,
and in derogation of the great national services performed by it, was
entirely due to this clash between different departments in regard to
labour administration: the Admiralty bidding against the Ministry of
Munitions by paying higher wages to the same class of men and settling
strikes on more advantageous terms to the workers; the Agricultural
Wages Board of the Ministry of Agriculture putting up wages of
agricultural labourers to a height that upset the country railway porters
who were drawn from them. Innumerable other instances could be given, all
directly due to the sub-division of labour administration among a number
of different and hostile Government departments. It is not unimportant
in this connection to remember that when, in the beginning of 1917, the
Ministry of Labour, which was originally a conception of the Trades Union
Congress, was formed by Mr. Lloyd George’s first Coalition Government,
it was intended to transfer to it all the labour powers of the other
Government departments. This was fiercely resisted by every department
which it was proposed to denude of any powers, and in great measure
successfully. As a result of that internecine warfare, the present
Ministry of Labour is unhappily but an emasculated edition of the fully
endowed central department that Mr. Lloyd George wisely had in mind. The
wonder is that it has done as well as it has with such a disappointing
limitation of powers. But apart from home labour administration, we
shall get into most serious international complications, and very great
domestic difficulty, if proper touch is not maintained with, and the
interests of the country properly voiced in, the International Labour
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