TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE ESSENTIAL NEED.
UNLESS we beat the Germans they will bleed us to death, and grind their heels upon our faces. Those who in their hearts nourish a secret feeling that if the worst comes to the worst we can always break off the war, and acknowledge ourselves conquered, but not utterly destroyed, and still able to hold our own as an independent nation, even if on a lower plane, are utterly mistaken. The Germans have come too near defeat ever to risk our continued existence as a free nation. If they win, they will ruin us completely. But the Germans will win if we have not enough shell and not enough of the other necessaries of war. Shell, remember, though the need of the hour, is by no means our only need. How are we to get more shell P We can only get it by abolishing root and branch during the war all those Trade Union restrictions that limit, or tend to limit, production. We are not going to argue whether in peace time it is good policy for labour to restrict production by elaborate rules as to skilled labour and the use of machinery. We will even assume that it is good policy, and in the interest of the workers to insist on such restrictions. What we are sure of, and what every sane man is sure of, is that it is madness to restrict the production of shells in time of war. We cannot have too many. It is virtually certain that we shall have too few. Therefore unless we are content to perish we must get rid, lock, stock, and barrel, of the Trade Union policy of restriction as applied to munitions of war. At present if a Trade Union rule is broken men snaking shell will throw down their tools as light-heartedly as if we were at peace. The thought that they may be killing men by failing to provide war material does not seem to occur to them. The fetish of Trade Union principle outweighs all other considerations. That is terrible, but it is a fact, and one that must be faced.
We cannot in the space of a newspaper article quote the evidence which has brought us to the conclusion that the chief, though not of course the only, obstacles to a quicker and larger production are the Trade Union restrictions on output, and the spirit in the workshop from which those restrictions spring. How is this suspension of Trade Union rules to be accomplished, and production sot free during the war? Mr. William Weir, the well-known Glasgow manufacturer, in his letter to the Lord Provost has made certain most valuable suggestions which have stood the test of criticism. Mr. Weir's proposals are, first, to decree that in no workshop carrying on Government work shall any employer pay any employee a higher hourly rate of wages than the employee is presently receiving, nor shall he hire any employee at a higher rate than that which he is at present paying. The object of this enactment is to prevent the scramble for labour which is now so greatly demoralizing the workshops. Employers contracting with the Government and the Government themselves are now competing with each other for labour and literally bribing each other's workmen to desert. To use a metaphor employed on a famous occasion by Bismarck, four men are trying to cover themselves with one blanket. Mr. Weir goes on to propose that the functions and organizations of Trade Unions as regards the enforcement of trade rights shall be abrogated during the war, leaving such Unions to fulfil their duties as Friendly Societies. Next, he proposes that no federation or association of employers shall take action in any way with regard to labour conditions daring the war- e stipulation which would prevent employers from taking advantage of the suspension of the Trade Union rules. As a further protection for the workers, local Munitions Com- mittees should, he suggests, be set up in each district as Courts of Appeal for workmen against any hardships caused by employers. Such Committees are to have effective labour representation and full powers to impose punishment on em- ployers by fines where required. The Committees would safeguard the rights of the skilled trades to employment, and would regulate the use of unskilled labour and settle its conditions of remuneration. There would also be a Central Munitions Committee, which would be given the fullest powers under the Defence of the Realm Act to enable them to transfer workmen or machinery, to close inefficient or unsuitable manufacturing units, and.
generally to regulate industry for war purposes. The Central Committee would further have the power to place any workshop during the period of the war under military law, if such a step were found necessary.
These provisions seem to us fair and reasonable, but it is of course quite possible that a better machinery could be devised to supply the essential need—namely, the abrogation of the Trade Union restrictions. In any case, it is obvious that they must be supplemented by another provision, and one which Mr. Weir and the bulk of the employers would, we believe, be perfectly willing to agree to. The employers must during the period of the war, and while the Trade Union restrictions are in abeyance, consent to forgo all profit beyond the profits made by them before the inauguration of the new policy. Just as wages must be " stabilized " for the men at existing rates, so all additional profits due to war contracts must be credited, not to the individual employer, but to the State. The principle of no war rise in wages must be strictly applied to profits. Upon this foundation we could build up a sound organization for the increased production of shell and other munitions, and build it up without unfairness either to masters or men. Both would become the agents of the Government, and both would be fairly remunerated, but during the war neither would be able to take advantage of the needs of the State to increase that remuneration unduly.
But though the steps we have described are necessary, they are not all that must be done to array the nation for the task of providing war material in the greatest possible quantity and in the shortest possible time. If we search the matter to the bottom, the essential difficulty of the moment is a shortage of labour, or, to put it more scientifically, a shortage of industrial energy. As a nation we are trying to wage a desperate war, and yet to go on with the rest of our business as usual. To return to our Bismarckian metaphor, there are too many men trying to cover themselves with the industrial blanket. But the blanket is wanted first for the war. Therefore a certain number of pullers on the blanket must be summarily got rid of in order that there shall be sufficient to cover the war workers. To vary the metaphor, we are like a ship in a storm, and a certain amount of industrial activity must during the war be thrown over- board in order to lighten the ship. Luxury trades and trades which are subject to profitable demands from abroad, which are now drawing away workers and machinery that might be employed in making munitions of war, must cease work till the strain is over. Power must be taken and used to jettison such impediments to war production. Of course this throwing overboard must be done judiciously, but where necessary it must be done. There are plenty of things, from lace curtains to fancy hosiery, which we can very well do without during the war. If the closing down of unnecessary factories is adopted, there will be no difficulty in finding work for the workers. Billets at equally good wages in munition workshops could at once be found for them all. Great care, however, must be taken not to increase our industrial chaos by unwise efforts to put an end to it; but, subject to that proviso, the present industrial crisis, which is partly the cause and partly the effect of a shortage of labour, must be got rid of. We must clear out the unnecessary trades to make room for the necessary. Further, we must deal quite as sternly with bad and selfish employers as with bad and selfish workmen. Heaven knows we have no wish to suggest that the employers have a monopoly of virtue and patriotism and the workers a monopoly of selfishness and idleness.
We shall be told, no doubt, that the suggestions which we are making are impossible, that the workers would never consent to them, and that if they did not consent and force had to be employed the consequent friction would lead to far worse chaos and far greater loss of time than anything which exists now. We do not believe there would be any resistance to the abrogation of Trade Union restrictions. We fully admit that in normal times Trade Union rules are regarded almost as a fetish by many working men, or at any rate as the rules of an Indian caste are regarded by its members—something which demands an almost religious veneration. We are certain that if the men are made to understand what the present situation is, how great and terrible are its perils for the nation as a whole, and how appalling is the effect upon the men fighting our battles at the front of a shortage of war production, they will abandon even caste rules to put matters right. An Anglo-Indian statesman of experience was once asked how it came about that we who had always found it impossible to interfere with minor caste rules in India had yet succeeded in abolishing Suttee, a religious and caste law apparently of the greatest possible sanctity. His answer was that we were able to fight and vanquish caste by means of the law abolishing the burning of widows because the men affected were betrayed to the side of the Government by their own hearts and consciences. We were forbidding sons to burn their mothers, and the sons, in spite of the shibboleths of their ancient faith, were only too glad to yield to the decree We had the conscience of mankind on our side. So now, if we forbid the workmen to sacrifice the Motherland to the caste rules of Trade Unionism, we shall have a similar instinct with us. When we tell them that Trade Union restrictions must be abrogated during the war to save the lives of their brothers and comrades in the trenches, does any one seriously suppose that they will tell us that they will resist the law in order to maintain some trade rule as to the use of skilled or unskilled labour, or as to the number of machines which may be worked or supervised by one man? They will do no such thing. They are men, not murderers of their fellow-citizens. The State has only to give a clear lead, and to make the men realize that they are being asked to sacrifice their rules, not to increase the profits of employers, but in the interests of the nation as a whole, and they will follow that lead. We rely upon the patriotism and the good conscience of the worker.
We must at once make it clear what is required of him. We must not be afraid of asking for sacrifices. To ask for them, indeed, is the best and right way to make the worker understand the full need of the hour. To tell him that he is a bad political economist leaves him cold, or worse. To tell him that he must sacrifice himself, nay, work himself to death if necessary to save the nation, i■ to inspire him, not to enslave him. Tell him that there is a great and overwhelming duty before him which lie must perform, and he will do all, and more than all, you require. Try to bribe him instead of telling him that he must do his duty, and he will haggle with you till the end of the chapter. Do not be afraid to remind both the worker and the capitalist that they are the sons of one Mother, and must do a son's work to defend her, and they will do it.
Previous page
