Evening star., 1922-09-24

sentation systems as fostered by en-
ployers.. Practically every industry
today is national in scope. The for
nation of shop committees or So
independent of the unions OF the
workers always leaves out of consid-
GRAFTON the fundamental fact that the
different employers in a given indus
try are competitors and that unless
there is a fixed standard of minimum
working conditions to prevail
throughout the industry the whole
process becomes anarchical and pref
judicial to the welfare of the indus
try and therefore prejudicial to in
dustrial progress and common well
whether employers fail to see this or
whether reactionary opposition to
trade unions blinds them to every
thing beyond that opposition. do
know that the welfare Of industry in
general as well as the welfare Of
existence and continued growth Of
the trade union movement The trade
union movement and its philosophy
OF voluntary cooperation offers prog
ress to industry and justice to the
workers.
1t SO. happens that the workers in
the United States believe In trade
unions and organise in trade unions.
1t is neither the right nor the prov
ince of employers to attempt to say
how the workers shall organize. That
Is and must remain the unabridged
right of the workers themselves.
The Joker in ProAt-sharinx.
= Analysis will show that every prop
osition put forth by employers and
not accepted by the workers having
for its ostensible purpose the busi-
ness of dealing with the relations be-
tween employers and workers, is at
heart a proposal for some sort of
limitation upon the rights and activi-
ties of the workers.
The profit sharing idea is an excel
fore the public for number of years
The American labor movement has
opposed it from the outset The la
Dor movement naturally wants every
worker to receive the highest possi-
BILE return for his labor. If labor,
system. it must be because it does
something more than bring a money
return to the workers.
The truth about the profit sharing
system is that it does not even bring
money return TO the workers in most
SsSSo ohN hta1t AsO ALoA" OoJCCS 10 "
throw around the workers an influence
which seeks to bind them to their Jobs
The employer calculates almost in
variably that a worker will not insist
upon his rights or will not participate
in a protest against unjust conditions
if he thinks that such action will
jeopardize a possible share in whatever
profits may accrue at the end OF the
year. I'm a great many cases the en-
ployer is right in this thought. The
vast majority Of American workers.
however, have not been deluded by the
, profit sharing idea: They know that
when an employer inaugurates a profit
sharing system he also endeavors to
formulate a wage scale accordingly.
They know that in practically every
case where an employer inaugurates q
profit sharing, system he also for1nu-
lates rules and regulations providing
for forfeiture Of participation, SO that
it is rendered practically impossible for
the worker to make any protest or to
make any demand in connection with
wages or working conditions.
In addition to all original contentious
against the profit-sharing theory there
is another consideration which probably
counts as heavily as any other among
American workmen, and that Is the
ingrained feeling on the part Of Ameri-
can workmen that they want to know
Continued on Thirteenth Page.)