The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1920-02-29


ce-President Ballard & Ballard
Co, OF Louisville, KY, at the Ken
lucky Conference OF Social Work at
Louisville on November 20-24, 1879
In approach ching my subject, THE
Industrial Relations of Ballard Mills"
I do so from several angles that con
stitute what we have done and hope
TO do in the evolution of things at our
company's mills in this city. To help
you to a better understanding, let me
summarize that Ballard Mills have
been doing business in Louisville for
the past forty years; we have grown
from $4,000 barrels of wheat flour, as
the first annual output, to 100000 bar
rels; we now operate a corn mill Of
1900 bushels daily capacity, and are
fast developing a cereal speciality
business. Our organization is at pres
ent composed of 80 men ard women
in the Louisville office, so in branch
offices in the principal southern cities,
and ESQ workers in the wheat, corn
and cereal plants. Total, $50 men and
women. If it is asked how our mills
are able to grind up 5,850,000 bushels
Of cereal products in Il years opera
ton with such a comparatively small
number of employees in the laboring
department IS $50, let me explain that
labor is the smallest one item of cost
in the manufacture of n barrel of
flour. It's pertinent to say right here
and now that while statistics, com
piled by the u. ). Bureau of Labor,
show that the cost of living on the
basis of a family budget has increased
from 70 per cent to 70 per cent during
the past five years, we have increased
our wages 100 per cent. Bearing in
mind these fundamental things in the
industrial life at Ballard Mills, I in
vite your consideration, first, TO the
subject of
Profit Sharing.
Profit sharing must not be con-
founded with stock subscription plans
and bonus systems. The bonus to en-
ployees Is simply an additional wage;
the stock subscription plan is simply
giving the employee a chance to in
vest. Profit sharing contemp1ates
primarily the earnings of the concern,
fluctuating year by year in proportion
to the results achieved. The essellce ul
true profit-sharing is based upon the
premises that fair share Of the profit
belongs to the worker-that is. a fair
share of the profit inherently belongs
to the worker or employee irrespec-
tive of any profit sharing plan-and
that under the profit-sharing plan the
worker Will produce enough money
additional to pay his profit-sharing
dividend.
If / have made myself plain, it fol-
lows that no company or concern can
esta dish sound profit-sharing plan
&c
to make money for itself 1t then be-
comes scheme to camouflage the
worker, to bait the EMPLOYEE with
potential profits on the one hand and
keep down wages on the other, and as
such is unfair and will in time act
as a boomerang upon the employer.
Our history in profit-sharing dates
back to 1886 when we began the ex
pertinent Of sharing ten per cent Of
our profits with our EMPLOYEES. mart
to the office force and part to rho
men in the mill This ten per cent was
gradually increased until before the
war (April, 1910 it amounted n
about one-third of the profits baforo
any dividend was paid to the stock
holders. Up to this time our ,,i1,,,,..
business, while incorporated, was i,
siiect private firm owned by Chas.
!. ana >. Thurston Ballard Ona-+bira
Of the profits went each To +beso - 49,. -
partners as stockholders! and tho
other third was divided among the
office force and the workers j., ~
mill in proportion to salaries ana
wages paid. The criterion Of a,oh
man worth to the concern was b.sa1
upon the Salary paid, so the praa +e,.
me salary the greater his pronortiop
or profits. The amount of money aivo,,
10 each laborer in the mill tota1od
from three to five weeks wages of
course some years we made a rrea+
oedi OF money: other years very If
TIE MY conviction is that our profi+-
sharlhg plan is a potent thing for
building up loyalty and efficienc,,
among the salarieddnen. such as heads
OF departments. statesmen. boolzlxeeo-
ers and clerks, but that it is not
potent among the laboring men and
women in the mill. Profit-shartng will
not OF itself hold the wage Garner II
he can get higher wages elsewhere. or
II he becomes suddenly discounted
why? Because the wage Garner lives
from week to week, based upon his nav,
at the end of each week. and he is
not sufficiently influenced by a five
weeks check at the end of the wear.
Twelve months is too long to wait
Tor a check representing a division
or certain quota of the concerns
profits, when the check per Sc is not
big enough to count either in meeting
an emergency or in accommodating a
competency.
am firm in my opinion. however.
that our profit-sharing plan, as it
has evolved since 1856, has a great
sentimental value among he people
of our institution, so while frankness
compels me to say that it has not been
n success in dollars and cents among
nIlr mnr.n can.nnnr.s The snlnnr,nn 49,