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)
Anyone acquainted with industry in the United States of America and in
England cannot fail to notice one further striking contrast. In the
United States of America time- and labour-saving appliances, machines and
methods are being continually put into service by employers, and loyally
operated by labour. It is recognized as being in the joint interests
of them both. It clearly is. Anything that results in a net reduction
of output-cost, after allowing for extra interest and depreciation,
benefits not merely employers, but also employed. In England, however,
workpeople seriously regard time- and labour-saving devices as inimical
to their interests, and subversive of trade-rights. It is contended that
the introduction of such devices leads to the displacement of labour
and to unemployment. In this connection labour has learned nothing from
experience. Improved machinery has enormously bettered the worker’s lot.
In the United States of America the resultant reduction in output-cost
is admittedly the reason for the much higher real wages of American
workmen as compared with their English and Scottish confrères. Nor
has it led to unemployment in the United States of America. There is
no reason why it should do so even temporarily. The introduction of
time- and labour-saving appliances is always a gradual process in any
factory. Ordinary foresight and organization by an employer ought to
enable any men displaced still to be retained in employment. But many
English employers have impeded the introduction of labour-saving devices
by haggling over the readjustment of piece-rates in respect of the
installation of machines giving improved output. The American employer,
on the other hand, tries, after allowing for the costs of the new
machine, to maintain, as far as possible, the old piece-rates, with the
result that the workmen’s daily earnings are increased by its use. The
English employer is inclined to think that he is justified in reducing
piece-rates so long as the workmen’s daily earnings are maintained. It
is unnecessary to point out which policy is most likely to attract the
wage-earner to the use of improved machinery.
Payment by Results
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