Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-09-09
l3-MOnth Year Held
Economically Sound

To the Editor Of The Star:
Advocates of the II months equal
lzed quarters plan of calendar reform
and those who oppose any kind Of CAL
endar reform criticize that Is equal
months plan by saying that it is not
economically sound. They contend
| that l3month year would add one
twelfth to the labor and cost of the
present monthly statement system.
Ihat Is TO say. because profit and
less accounts. sales reports cost reports.
trade statements, bills. premiums, in
Slaliment notices, meter readings. etc.
would have TO be prepared Is times a
year instead of u, the cost of doing
business would be that much more ex-
pensive.
Theoretically this criticism sounds
all right. but it is a theory not support
ed by economic experience. 1t is equiv
a!ent to saying that the present system
OF preparing statements every month is
not economically sound There was a
Tune in business practice when business
statements were most commonly pre-
pared every three months The use Of
the monthly statement was not general
Most reports and bills were quarterly
with the expansion of economic life. a
more frequent time check on its &C
tlvlties was needed. Also it became evil
Gent that shorter interval for turn
over OF money required less working
capital. Hence, the development of the
monthly statement system, IL state
ments year instead of T. Who will
say that this change was not econom-
ically sound. or that the additional labor
and cost involved was not worth it.? In
some businesses certain statements are
now made every week, or So times a
year.
1t is the very fact that We have
adopted the monthly statement system
that has chiefly created the demand
that the months be equal ana com
mensurate with the weeks. This is
only possible by the adoption of l3-
month year, each month having ex-
actly 4 weeks.
Thirteen monthly statements not
only Will provide a closer time check
on business activities and further re-
duce the amount needed for working
capital. but the uniform time basis for
SUCH statements makes for efficiency
that Will actually save labor and ex-
pense. strange as 1t may seem to some.
There is ample testimony that this is
so from business concerns which are
actually using the 13-month year.
Advocates of the IL months eoualizad
quarters plans have yet to show that
it would confer an economic bene6t
w JNoNAAF ~ dOOpIlOH. Inc
best that can be said for the scheme
of merely revising the present IL
months is that it equalizes the quarters
of the year. 1t does not equaiize the
months nor does it remove the economic
inconvenience Of broken weeks at the
beginning and end of months. Claims
that its 80 and 81 day months would
be comparable in the number of their
weekday working days, if not in the
actual number of days, do not stand up
because some of these working DAYS
in every month belong to fifth weeks.
This revised II months system has
never been tried. and naturally SO be-
cause its arrangement of months and
weeks offers no advantages over that
of the present calendar. On the other
hand, the Is months system has been
tried and proven success. subject to
the handicaps which the regular calen-
dar causes in its use
To ask the world to adjust itself to
a change in the months without being
able to show that any substantial
benefits would accrue Is unreasonable.
MEREDITH N. STILES.