Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1916-02-28
Says Mr.. BorIand's Comment
on Lab0r's 8-Hour Demand
Is an Easy Nut to Crack

To the Editor Of The Star:
In the controversy relative to work
ing hours for the government service
Representative Borland has handed
Mr.. Gompers an easy nut for cracking
to the effect that labor organizations
have been contending all along for an
e1ght-hour day. The fact is that these
organizations fought for an eight-hour
day simply because it is the best they
have been able to dc so far, but not
because they regard it as conducive to
any ones well being to spend one
third OF existence in routine employ
ment, especially that which is seden-
tary and deadening. Advanced re-
formers are looking forward to a six
hour day for Office work.
However, another member of the
House, Representative Gallivan, has
the principle and practice of eight
hour legislation, as achieved by organ
lied labor, is for not exceeding eight
hours. Such law in the government
service would put all who should at
any time exceed the eight-hour limit
in the class of "scabs."
Speaks Of the "Comparison."
There is much comparison made in
ment service and private business But
sufficient stress has not been laid on
the fact that the government of a first
class power might and should aspire to
something better than modern bust
ness methods" The millennium has not
as yet been achieved in the business
world In theory the object of legiti-
mate business is to supply the wants
or the world. But in practice the
baker bakes bread not because the
people need bread, but because ne
needs the money. This fosters the
temptation to run his business as
cheaply as possible, regardless of the
interests of others, in order to increase
profits. And so, in many cases, be-
cause of cut-throat competition and
other causes, a wouldbe honest bust
down his employees and lower the
standard of his product in order to
keep afloat. Hence comes all the trou-
BILE.
But. the government, not being a
mere money-making institution, can
and should take higher level and set
higher standards. There should be no
comparison between the government
service. and business except to go
business a few better. But along here
comes a congressman holding forth to
the effect that his constituents are
working ten and twelve hours a day
This strikes me as the poorest logic /
ever heard. Where is the connection?
1t is difficult to see why he should
care to acknowledge such Il consti-
tuency, anyway; it looks like ineffi-
cheney somewhere, either among en-
ployers or employees.
No Chance for Development.
man who works ten or twelve hours
a day habitually (excpt in creative
work. Is rather a failure-as an all
round man. He has no chance for in
dividual development. I used to meet
an old patent attorney who was fond
of Dragging that he worked thirteen
hours a day Che seemed proud of 1t).
But l always felt like saying to him.
well, you look it," In appearance he
resembled dried herring.
Also it is really difficult to compre-
bend just how this congressman's
overworked constituents are going to
benefit by an increase of hours of la
Dor in Washington, unless, perhaps, on
the basis of the old bromide that they
pay the government salaries. But it
is interesting in such connection to
speculate as to how much the individ-
ual burden of each constituent would
be lightened by an addition of an hour
| to the federal working day. Once when
a man in outside business told me that
he paid my salary l replied that If he
ninety-flve millions I would refund to
him his share. But he never called for
his money. HINDA BURKE.