TRADE UNIONS. 402 TRADE UNIONS. Regulation of- Wages. The most essential function, .as well as the explanation and justifica- tion of trade unionism, is the determination of the conditions of employment by collective in- stead of individual barsaining. The most im- portant condition of employment is the rate of wages, as is well illustrated by the fact that in both England and the United States more than 50 per cent, of the strikes which occur are caused by disputes about wages. The conditions and characteristics of the regulation of wages by trade unions may be briefly sunnned up under three heads. (1) The standard rate as main- tained by American unions is a local rate fixed by the local union. In a few trades working largely by piece, such as the Potters, Glass Blow- ers, etc.. the scale of prices is fixed for the whole country by the national union ; and in a few other iinions, such as the Brewery Workmen and the United Hatters of North America, a national mininnun time rate is prescribed. But in the vast majority of unions the regulation of wages is left wholly to the local union, and no strong demand for uniformity seems to exist. (2) Con- trary to general opinion, the majority of trade unions, in trades in which it is possible, favor work by the piece rate system. In England. Mr. and Sirs. Webb have made a careful study of the wage system of every trade union having more than 1,000 members, unskilled laborers and transport workers excepted. Of these. 111 unions, having 1,003,000 members, were examined: forty-nine, with ,573.000 members, insisted on piece work; twenty-four, with 140.000 members, willingly rec- ognized piece work ; and thirty-eight, with 290,000 members, insisted on time work, A similar in- vestigation in the United States was made by the Industrial Commission. Information was secured concerning 50 important imions in which piece work was possible. Of these unions 28 accepted the piece-w-ork system in some depart- ment without active opposition, while 22 unions either forb.ade or actively discouraged piece work. The reasons for this diversity are clear. In some occupations, such as spinning and weav- ing, the intensity of the lalior is determined by the speed of the machine, or. speaking generally, the employer finds it possible to set the pace for the employee. In such occupations it is evident that the workers will insist upon piece payment to prevent forcing and over-exertion. In other occupations, such as ordinary carpentering or re- pair work in general, it is impossible to esti- mate how much skill or tin-.e will be required to perform a given 'job' or piece, -and here the time rate is the workman's only defense against exploitation. The testimony collected by the In- dustrial Commission amply proves that the ma- jority of the labor leaders of the United States would abolish the piece-rate system instantly if it were possible. The leaders hold that under the piece-work system the most proficient workmen set the pace and fix the standard rate, thereby depressing the earnings of the less talented but no less indistrious or deserving shopmate. In addition the argument is made that the piece-rate system either encourages excessive production, and thus depresses prices, or throws the work into the hands of a few workmen, thus increasing the amount of non-employment, both of which results tend strongly to reduce wages. The feel- ing is also prevalent that the piece system stimu- lates employees to over-exert themselves and to work themselves out at an early age. It must be admitted that the piece system in practice may be, and often is, manipulated to the injury of tlie general body of wage-earners. It is undoubtedly true that employers are disposed to reduce piece rates as soon as the more efficient workmen in their employ demonstrate an ability to earn an unusually high rate by the system ; and furthermore, the testimony seems convincing that in many instances the piece-rate system does lead over-ambitious employees to injure their health in the attempt to earn unusually high rates of pay; but the objection to piece work on the ground that it leads to over-pro- duction, and the defen.se of a uniform wage irre- sjjective of productive power, are on the face of tiiem evils and vmtenable, if not from the stand- point of the trade union, at least from the standpoint of the general public. Hours of Labor. In the eyes of the American labor leaders the regulation of the hours of labor is an even more important function of the trade luiion than the regulation of wages, as the ques- tion of the working day. is primarily one of health, morals, and the necessary leisure for edu- cation, and social and religious duties. In this re- spect the trade unions have from the beginning placed unusual reliance upon the law. But they have also worked incessantly to reduce the hours of labor by direct negotiations with employers, by strikes, and by boycotts. The normal day, like the standard wage in the great majority of American unions, is left almost entirely to the separate locals, and even in the few nationals which have a maximum working day for the Avhole country the locals are left free to secure a shorter working day if possible. But although the locals are accorded a wide dis- cretion in fixing the normal day, the national organizations and leaders constantly urge them to reduce the number of hours, and among the national organizations strong enough to lead in this matter, laws requiring increased rates for overtime, or wholly forbidiling overtime except in cases of extreme emergency, are common. IvESTRlCTlON OF OUTPUT. The preceding section makes it plain that trade unions do restrict the industrial output openly and systematically. The restriction of the output of individual work- ers is accomplished in several ways: by adopting a normal day and discouraging or prohibiting overtime : by limiting the daily task or the earn- ings of piece-workers ; by discouraging or pro- hibiting the grading of time-workers, and thus leveling wages; by forbidding piece work, time work, contract jobs, or the butty system; and in some cases by encouraging the go-easy system of secret loafing, or 'the adulteration of labor.' A variety of arguments are brought forward in defense of the general policy of the limitation of output. Trade unions claim that this is the only way of preventing over-exertion on the part of workmen, particularly under the piece sys- tem; that it tends to prevent unemployment and moderates the destructive competition of the army of the unemployed ; and finally that it tends to prevent over-production. There is a large degree of truth in all these contentions. The history of the factory system is one long proof of the truth that, under a regime of free- dom of contract in the sale and purchase of
