Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1926-10-02

1r. Fora IS a paterndllSt ana, as
such, is no friend of the organized
labor movement" said James Duncan,
first vice president of the A. F. of l..
end the veteran of that body's eXecu-
tive council. But his good policies
will be comforting blessings on the
labor movement long after his indi-
vtdualfstic opposition to uniOnism has
been forgotten"
And as Mr.. Ford puts 1t:
THE right kind of wage increa Sc
BONES as a result of management hav-
1ng the wage motive. The way to
check threatened depression is to
cut tho price and increase the wages.
High wages with high prices do not
help any one; 1t just means that every
thing has been marked up. But higher
wages and lower prices mean greater
buying power, more consumers.
Cutting wages Is no cure for low
consumption; it only makes the con-
sumption still lower, by reducing the
number Of possible customers"
Coincident with the five-day week
announcement, 1t was said that a gen.
eral readjustment of wages in Ford
plants would be undertaken Skeptics
among labor leaders have predicted
that this readjustment will deprive
many workers Of some part of their
incomes, so that the five-day week will
not actually carry siX-day pay.
View Based on Experience.
The writer has no way of knowing
what the Ford management has i'll
mind, but glance backward will set
at rest suspicion that the shorter week
viii result in reduced wages for work
erS. The 10-hour day, the nine-hour
day and the eight-hour day all brought
about increases in workers incomes.
it would be tiresome to recite reasons,
but 1t is well established fact that
reduction in working hours has al
ways resulted in better wages.
1t was suggested a few months ago
by a widely read writer that it would
profit Mr.. Ford to subsidize the labor
movement IN order that a great share
of American prosperity might be
placed in the hands of prospective au-
tomobile buyers. Undoubtedly, if
other employers follow the example of
Mr.. Ford in reducing working hours,
the automobile business will be bene
fited-Something must be done with
the added hours of leisure-but, if
some workers choose to ride, others
will prefer the radio. Whatever they
do with their time will help some
business. And it will also help the
cause of more education and the ac-
ceptance of cultural opportunities that
come with leisure.
Machinery Held a Factor.
II, with the aid of machinery, man
can increase the share of comforts
and luxury available for the indi-
vidual. the world will be made hap
pier Mr.. Ford is pioneering. He will
make the five day week profitable no
doubt. But it doesn't follow that all
other industries can adopt the same
course overnight. If the plan was
Immediately followed in all industries,
the resulting financial disturbance
would destroy business equilibrium
The late Lord Leverhulme. British
cotton goods manufacturer. advocated
the siX-hour day in industry as a
production stimulus and proved his
point in practice. His theory was
that machinery should be worked
more extensively, and human work
ers, because they were subject to
fatigue, less extensively. He stated
his theory in this way:
We must have a six-hour working
day for men and women, and by
means Of six hour shifts for men and
women we must work our machinery
-, IS or "a hours a day. The change
from r. 4S-hOur week to a 72-hOur
week of two shifts of So hours each
would affect the cost of production
somewhat as follows:
Cost of Production Itemized.
working a 4S-hOur week, and as
Stunning that the product was l 900
items per week at a cost of fl 900
per week for overhead charges and
of Ell geo per week for wages, the
resulting total cost Of production per
item, exclusive Of raw material and
such other prOpOrtionate costs as
would always he in exact relation to
volume produced, would be 40s per
Stem
If such factories adopted the g.
hour working day system they would
work - hours in two shifts of Sc
hours each, and. assuming that no
tncfease OF production per hour was
achleved-not necessarily the case
Rnd that the wages paid for sc hours
were the same as for as hours, then
the resulting product would be 1900
items. Production costs for overhead
changes would not be greatly affected.
as machinery almost invariably be-
comes obsolete before II wears out
and fxed capital in plants and build
ings and equipment would be the
same The cost of overhead, there
fore, would again he FL 900. but the
cost for wages would now be $4,000,
a total OF $4,000 for 500 items, or
again Il cost Of +0s per item.
But, surprising, 49, one is justified
N doing by past experience. that the
Satig1Ied worker could produce in six
hours as much as was produced IN
eisht hours. then the figures as to
cost OF production would be somewhat
like the following, showing a great
gain in economical production: 1000
!tems would then he produced in
F2.hour week of two shifts of 81 hours
each at cost Of l l 900 for overhead
end e, 900 for wages. which would be
a reduction of - per cent when COM
pared with the 4Shour week.
"Th1s economy might be used in in
creased pay 10 workers and reduced
prices to the ultimate consumer. The
eu1ployer-cap italist would not need TO
share IN economy Of production be
cause his share would come TO him on
his increased production and quicker
%urnEer of capital. with resulting in
creasN in Notwithstanding capacity"
That is one way to bring employer
and employe closer together. Whether
the scheme appears practical or not
Lord Leverhulme put it into practice
and made 1t a success. or course, 1t
isn't SO simple as it sounds. Neither
IS Henry Ford's idea of a five-day
week.
The point of interest here is that
the labor federation is committed 10
a policy of demanding incfeaS ed pay
for workers as production increases
and a reduction in working hours 10
provide every man with a JON. and
here Ii an anti-union employer under
taduRs4o prove the practicability of
the demand. The situation contains
elements of interest