Evening star., 1943-04-06
Incentive Payments

4ue announcement CFdL the war
Production Board is giving serious
consideration to proposal for in
augratlon OF an incentive payment
plan in a few aircraft plants is an
encouraging indication that this
tested method of increasing produc-
ton and conserving manpower is
about to receive official sanction in
this country.
1t Is easy, of course, to claim too
much for the incentive payment
system. This device, under which
workers, in effect, are paid a bonus
for more and better work, is not
cure-an. Other factors, such as
better planning and scheduling
better plant supervision, better
training methods, ETC., also can play
a significant part in increasing war
production. But when due allowance
is made for these aspects of the
production problem, it can hardly be
doubted that more money for more
work would be greater stimulus
to the production of war materials
than any other inducement which
might be offered.
This unquestionably has been the
experience in Russia and ENGLAND.
where incentive payment systems
have had long and successful trial.
1t also has been true in certain
American factories that have had a
lair test OF various forms of incen-
tive payments. The question of the
overall increase in production that
could be achieved through adoption
OF incentive payments in all of our
war industries obviously is a specula-
tive one. WPB seems to be we'll on
the conservative side in estimating
an increase Of "at least" 10 per cent.
Some authoritative estimates run as
high as 1919 per cent, and the con-
census among those who have made
real study OF this question probably
would be somewhere in the neighbor-
hood OF Is per cent. Should this
last figure be approximately correct.
however, 1t means that we have at
our disposal an unused productive
force equivalent to the output OF
about 100000 additional workers.
Certainly any prospect OF salvaging
this supply Of wasted manpower is
deserving OF the most serious and
sympathetic consideration,
The opposition to general adop-
ton OF incentive payments seems to
come principally from two sources
certain union spokesmen and those
who fear that the payments would
have an inflationary effect.
Part of the union opposition rests
on past experience with piecework
systems, and it should be recognized
that there Is justification for this
attitude. Other labor leaders are
apprehensive lest the higher pro-
ductlvlty per man-hour of work
would become standard for peace
time operations, and still others are
AFRAID that the adoption of an in
centlve system would carry an i'm
plication that labor is not now doing
its best in behalf of the war effort
and that the workers will give their
best efforts only in return for a
cash reward. 1t does not seem that
these objections should prove in
surmountable, however, provided a
sound incentive plan is worked out
and properly administered.
The objection that incentive pay
ments are inflationary may cause
more concern. But it should be
remembered that the real test of this
lies IN the extent to which produc-
ton is increased. 1t would seem.
certainly, that the payment of in
centive wages to increase output is
less inf1ationary than overtime pay
ments, and no more inflationary
than the hiring of additional
workers. If they can be found,
we could hire 1000 900 more workers,
or, through incentive payments. we
could get that much extra production
from the men and women now in the
factories. In either event, the in
crease in total purchasing power
would be about the same.