Part 3

Such associations of labor manifest themselves in collective bargaining, in an effort to secure better working and living conditions, in providing machinery whereby grievances may easily and without prejudice to the individual be taken up with the management. Sometimes they provide benefit features, sometimes they seek to increase wages, but whatever their specific purpose, so long as it is to promote the well-being of the employees, having always due regard for the just interests of the employer and the public, leaving every worker free to associate himself with such groups or to work independently, as he may choose, they are to be encouraged.

But organization is not without its dangers. Organized capital sometimes conducts itself in an unworthy manner, contrary to law and in disregard of the interest of both labor and the public. Such organizations cannot be too strongly condemned or too vigorously dealt with. Although they are the exception, such publicity is generally given to their unsocial acts that all organizations of capital, however rightly managed or broadly beneficent, are thereby brought under suspicion.

Likewise it sometimes happens that organizations of labor are conducted without just regard for the rights of the employer or of the public; methods and practices are adopted which, because unworthy or unlawful, are deserving of public censure. Such organizations of labor bring discredit and suspicion upon other organizations which are legitimate and useful, just as is the case with improper organizations of capital, and they should be similarly dealt with. We ought not, however, to allow the occasional failure in the working of the principle of the organization of labor to prejudice us against the principle itself, for the principle is fundamentally sound.

In the further development of the organization of labor and of large business, the public interest as well as the interest of labor and of capital will be furthest advanced by whatever stimulates every man to do the best work of which he is capable and to render useful service, by a fuller recognition of the common interests of employers and employed, and by an earnest effort to dispel distrust and hatred and to promote good-will.

Labor unions have secured for labor in general many advantages in hours, wages, and standards of working conditions. A large proportion of the workers of the world, however, are outside of these organizations, and unless somehow represented are not in a position to bargain collectively. Therefore, representation of labor to be adequate must be more comprehensive and all inclusive than anything thus far attained.

Representation on the employers’ side has been developed through the establishment of trade associations, the purpose of which is to discuss matters of common interest and to act, in so far as is legally permissible and to the common advantage, along lines that are generally similar. But here also representation is inadequate. Many employers do not belong to employers’ associations.

In the United States during the war, the representation of both labor and capital in common councils was brought about through the War Labor Board, composed equally of men from the ranks of labor and capital, together with representatives of the public. When differences arose in industries where there was no machinery to deal with such matters, the War Labor Board stepped in and made its findings and recommendations. In this way, relatively continuous operation was made possible and the resort to the strike and lockout was less frequent.

In England there have been made during the past years various important Government investigations and reports, looking toward a more complete program of representation and coöperation on the part of labor and capital. One is the well-known Whitley Report, which owes its distinction to a single outstanding feature, namely, that it applies to the whole of industry, the principle of representative government.

The Whitley Plan seeks to unite the organizations of labor and capital by a bond of common interest in a common venture; it changes at a single stroke the attitude of these powerful aggregations of class interest from one of militancy to one of social service; it establishes a new relation in industry.

“Problems old and new,” says the report, “will find their solution in a frank partnership of knowledge, experience, and good-will.”

Another investigation and report was made by a Commission on Industrial Unrest, appointed by the Prime Minister. This Commission made, among others, the following interesting recommendations:--

(1) that the principle of the Whitley Report as regards industrial councils be adopted;

(2) that each trade should have a constitution;

(3) that labor should take part in the affairs of industry as partners rather than as employees in the narrow sense of the term;

(4) that closer contact should be set up between employers and employed.

A third report was prepared by the Ministry of Labor. This report deals with the constitution and operation of works committees in a number of industries. It is a valuable treatise on the objects, functions, and methods of procedure of joint committees.

Light has been thrown on the general questions treated by these inquiries in an able report by the Garton Foundation on The Industrial Situation after the War. This report is a study of the more permanent causes of industrial friction and inefficiency, and of the means by which they may be removed or their action circumscribed.

Mention of these several reports, taken at random, is made simply as indicative of the extent and variety of the study which has been given to the great problem of industrial reconstruction in England. All point toward the need of more adequate representation of labor in the conduct of industry and the importance of closer relations between labor and capital.

A method of representation similar to the Whitley Plan, though less comprehensive, and which is constructed from the bottom up, has been in operation for varying periods of time in an ever increasing number of industries in the United States. This plan of representation is worthy of serious consideration. It begins with the election of representatives in a single plant and is capable of indefinite development, to meet the complex needs of any industry, and of wide extension, so as to include all industries. Equally applicable in industries where union or non-union labor or both are employed, it seeks to provide full and fair representation to labor, capital, and management, also taking cognizance of the community. Thus far it has developed a spirit of coöperation and goodwill which commends it to both employer and employee.

The outstanding features of this plan of industrial representation, varied to meet the special needs of each plant or company in which it has been adopted, are as follows:

Representatives chosen by the employees in proportion to their number, from their fellow workers in each plant, form the basis of the plan.

Joint committees, composed of equal numbers of employees or their representatives and of officers of the company, are found in each plant or district.

These committees deal with all matters pertaining to employment and working and living conditions, including questions of coöperation and conciliation, safety and accident, sanitation, health and housing, recreation and education. Joint conferences of representatives of employees and officers of the company are held in the various districts several times each year.

There is also an annual joint conference, at which reports from all districts are received and considered.

Another important feature of the plan is an officer known as the President’s Industrial Representative, whose duty it is to visit the plants currently and confer with the employees’ representatives, as well as to be available always for conference at the request of the representatives.

Thus the employees, through their representatives chosen from among themselves, are in constant touch and conference with management and representatives of the stockholders in regard to matters pertaining to their common interest.

The employees’ right of appeal is the third outstanding feature of the plan.

Any employee with a grievance, real or imaginary, may go with it at once to his representative. The representatives not infrequently find there is no ground for the grievance and are able so to convince the employee.