The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1917-03-24
CHARITY OR JUSTICE?
BY SCOTT NEARING.

/ The United, States Department of
Labor has issued bulletin in which
the various methods of profit-sharing-
are described and analysed. The de-
partment separates the methods of
prot1t-sharing into two classes. In
the first class are those employers
who distribute specific proportion
OF the net profits to at least one-third
OF the total number employed, includ-
ing Wage-earners as we'll as clerks
and officials. In the second class are
the employers who do not distribute
profits to as many as one-third of
their employees.
The department of labor inds en-
establishments in the United States
operating under the first plan. Tn
these 60 establishments the nrofits
distributed vary from to 100 per cent
VI the wages paid. Thirteen of the
hrms are in Massachusetts, and 26
are manufacturing establishments. or
the "a esta blishments from which de-
saileo reports were secured more than
lour-n1ths OF the employees who
participated in the profits were
wage-earners.
The department states that the
number of firms conducting a, lin
tied prof1t-sharing plan is very large
VI II reporting, almost all bar the
Wase-earner or manual worker. =
IN IL establishments approximately
"a per cent of the participating en-
ployes were executives, clerks or sales
people. In ten of the establishments
the proportion of participants was
less than 10 per cent of the number
employed"
Most of the profit-sharing in the
second class-which is the big class
is not Intended for the wage-earners
VINO constitute from three-fourths to
nlneteen-tWentieths of the total num-
per OF sainfully occupied people in the
larger and more highly organized in
dustries Of the country Still, the
practice may spread, as it's advocates
urge, tc all industries.
The time has come to ask oues-
tlon-"Is this charity or justice ?"
Have the wage-earners earned these
profits or do they represent philan-
thropic, paternal sentiment of the en-
ployer?
The department of labor states that
under many of the bonus plans the
employees share is merely gift and
bears no relation to the profits real
lzed.' If a wage-earner takes a share
of the profits under these circum-
stances, does he remain a self-respect-
ing member of the community, or has
he placed himself on the charity roll
OF the employer?
The department of labor sums ND
the situation by stating that these
various actual and so-called profit
sharing plans have resulted in estab-
fishing more satisfactory relations be-
tween employers and employees and
have contributed considerably to the
sterilization of the working force, but
employers are not agreed as to the
results achieved with reference to in
creasing. the individual or collective)
efficiency of participating employees"
Is this true? AS yet it is too early
to make any definite statement. For
tunately the proft-sharing idea has
not gained a strong footing in the
United States. Sixty firms, engaged |
in all classes of business have adopted
a profit scheme that reaches the bulk
of the employees. Sixty firms is not
even a handful when compared with
the total for the country. In the
manufacturing industry alone at the |
time of the last census there were !!
26S,491 firms. This includes only one !
line of business in which profits may
be shared.
Is profit-sharing justice or charity?
Until that question is answered it is |
to be hoped that the proportion of
esta hliShments which indulge in nrof.
it-sharing will not increase. If the |
workers in these establishments earn
the returns which go to them in the
form of profits why not pay it to them
in the form of wages? If they do not
earn them, why pauperize and insult
them by offering them something
which is not their due?