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)
Nothing in industry is surrounded by so much confusion and ignorance,
both among employers and employed, as the question of payment by
results. The value of this method of payment in promoting production is
indisputable. I have many actual cases in mind where the introduction of
piece-work in place of time-work resulted in an increase of output up
to 110 per cent., thereby materially reducing the cost of production.
Yet while in some trades, for example the cotton trade, the operatives
refuse to work on any basis other than piece-work, in other trades,
for example carpentering and many sections of engineering, piece-work
is considered a “pestilential system” [_sic_] tending to unemployment,
degradation of the worker, and untold evils. It is in regard to payment
by results on the premium bonus system that the greatest misconception
prevails amongst both masters and men. That is a system under which a
time is fixed for each job. If the job is done in less than the fixed
time, the time saved is divided in a definite proportion between employer
and worker—generally half and half in England—and the latter paid for
his portion at his ordinary time-rate. The system has provoked in this
country, unlike the United States of America, the greatest animosity on
the part of the Trade Unions. Their point is that on a piece-work basis,
where the man is paid a definite price for each article or operation,
the more he does the more he is paid. For all time he saves in finishing
an article, he receives the full benefit, the employer’s benefit being
the lower cost of production resulting from increased output. What right
then, it is argued, has the employer, like a parasite, to make anything
out of the time which the worker saves on the premium-bonus system. The
argument is plausible, but misleading. It entirely overlooks the fact
that under a piece-work system, where the workman is paid for all the
time saved, prices are necessarily fixed on a much less liberal basis
than time allowances on a premium-bonus basis. In the latter case, just
because the employer gets a share of the time saved, he can adjust the
rate generously, or as rate-fixers put it, “fix the price loosely.”
If production is to be furthered in this country, the whole system of
payment proportioned to output must be lopped free of its perversion by
certain employers, and emancipated from the prejudice of Trade Unions.
When displayed intelligibly in its true economic characteristics, the
system will speak for itself. The actual rates to be fixed under any
particular system are, of course, a fair matter for collective bargaining.
Subdivision and Simplification of Process
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