Evening star., 1939-08-23

IIle UutSllOI1 Will
be asked why the United States at
a time of economic strain should
not begin to lessen the number OF
holidays altogether, so that produc-
ton will be increased and prices
reduced.
Today every national holiday
causes a loss of billions of dollars
in productivity. Labor union nego-
tiators are constantly asking for
more and more holidays to be recog-
nized in contracts either as days
off or as requiring double pay or
''time- and half" payment for work
done. From just few holidays, the
number has been so increased that
whenever a day is set aside for a
celebration, as was done few
years ago with Armistice Day, the
: result is to increase economic loss
American industry is today paying,
= according to recent survey by the
American Federation of Labor,
higher wage rates per hour than
ever before in our history" but
there has been no corresponding
increase in production. Theoreti-
cally, the shorter work week is sup
posed to be humanitarian measure,
but in most instances it is merely
a wage-raising device whereby over
time is paid for at a higher rate.
So it is also with weeks in which
holidays occur. Work schedules are
interrupted, and in some lines of
business where the service rendered
has to be furnished on quantity
basis per week. employers are COM
PEELED to pay overtime in order to
get the same amount of work done.
Originally Days of Rest.
Originally holidays were conceived
OF as days of rest and inclusion of
compensation was a matter of dis
cretion on the part of the employer
Soon this was superseded by de-
mands for payment as matter of
right and now the movement has
gone to the point that in various
States the drive to make more and
more legal holidays is a matter of
serious legislative controversy.
Many of these difficulties would
disappear if there were a guaran-
teed annual wage, but this is not
possible in many businesses or in
dustries where seasonal orders fluc-
tuate, so the next best method of
insuring adequate compensation has
been to raise wage rates on an hour
1y basis or salaries on weekly
basis. But none of these devices
has taken care of the problem of
meeting the production losses. Also
increased hardships now are en-
countered by employers because of
the requirements of the Federal
wage and hour law, which stipu-
lates time-and-a-h payment on
holidays or for overtime work.
In some instances these extra
costs can be passed on to the con-
sumner in the form of higher prices
but in other businesses, where fixed
commissions or prices occur, the
alternative is either a dimunition in
quality, the introduction of labor
saving devices or narrower operat-
ing margin altogether
What may happen this year as a
result of the Thanksgiving Day
change is that some States will stick
to the November 3Oth date and 9TH
ers will celebrate on November %
and there will be economic loss in
both directions, particularly because
there will be a slowing up of pro-
duction in two different weeks in
stead of in one.
Sunday a Way Out.
A possible way out of this dupli-
cation is for the President to desig-
nate Sunday, November 26, as
Thanksgiving Day and let the States
which want to celebrate on Thurs
dav. November 80, stick to that
date, as would have been the case
this year had there been no pro-
posal for change.
The American people could just
as we'll give thanks on Sunday
for the things they are thankful
for as they could on a Thursday
and 1t might conceivably draw more
persons to the churches than would
otherwise be the case, a circum-
stance which would be we'll worth
considering if folks really think oi
Thanksgiving Day in a spiritua
sense, instead of as day of in
dulgence.
With respect to those who wish
to attend football games and sport.
ing events the November 80 day
would still suffice, though the def.
mite fixing of Thanksgiving on {
Sunday every year, or at least on {
Monday, would do more to spare
economic losses than the presen
custom of breaking the week dowr
from Thursday on, with consequent
slowing up of the productive ane