Evening star., 1947-12-03
Output Per Emp|oye
In Telephone Industry
Falls as Costs Rise
'More-Poy-for r-Less-Work'
Evidence Held Shown
In Labor Bureau Report
Rr Dapid Laurence

INDUSTRY a1Cer industry IIldL Gile
more e-pay-for- less work doctrine Is
not only contributing to imitation
but it Is contributing to state OF
affairs which, unless checked some
how, must inevitably bring an eco
nonic maladjustment of serious
proportions to America.
The latest disclosure Is from the
Bureau of Labor Statistics of the
United States Department of Labor
It reveals the facts on output pei
employe in the telephone industry
Almost everybody has been won.
dering why there have been delays
in long distance calls and why tele-
phone service has not been as gooc
as it was in prewar days. The tele-
phone companies say that the calls
are more numerous than ever anc
that shortages of materials anc
bottlenecks in production have de-
layed the manufacture of much
needed equipment. Little has beer
said publicly about the sloWdowns II
service and the general attitude o.
many employees.
Now come the official figures tt
show that, although during the wal
years output per employe was TO-;
per cent higher than in 1889, thu
output per employe now has slipped
back to the 1899 level while the pay,
roll costs have gone up 255 per cen'
of 1899.
Unit Costs Up 1867.
Figured on a unit-cost basis, th'
Bureau of Labor Statistics says tina
units costs are now 1854 per cent O.
what they were in 1899. This Is TIT
highest point they have reached
since 1895. when figures were frs
collected.
The explanation for the change
in output and manhours OF Wori
as given by the bureau is that thes'
show the joint effect OF a larg'
number of separate though inter
related influences such as technlca
improvements, the rate OF opera
tions, the relative contribution tt
service of carriers at different level
OF efficiency, as we'll as the skill ant
effort of the work force, the effici'
ency of management, and the stat
of labor relations"
There is no doubt that the "effor
OF the work force" and the state o
labor relations" have contributed tt
no small extent to the decline IL
output per employe, but it is onl.
fair to say that the decline has no
been as large in comparison will
the war years on the part of tele
phone workers as it has been il
such industries as building and con
struction.
The term productivity as define'
by the bureau with respect to tn
telephone industry is in terms o
message units per manhour of worl
per employe" While productivit
per manhour declined between 1874
and 1943, it increased from 1943 Il
1945 and then started to decline II
1899 levels. The bureau suggest
that this may have been due ito
marked increase in employment IL
certain Occupation groups, partic
ularly construction, installation ant
maintenance which are not directl,
engaged in switchboard operations.
Rise in Overall Costs.
But the overall costs for the tele.
phone industry have risen substan'
TALLY during the same period The
public, on the other hand, has beer
paving lower rates for the call!
themselves while the Government
has come along with a high tax or
messages so that telephone bills ar
necessarily higher to the consumer
The rates to the companies on serv
ice have by no means been raised II
correspond to the higher unit costs
The Bureau of Labor Statistic
has also given out its surveys of tn
telegraph business, where output pc
employe has declined from 1945, bu
is still 106 per cent higher than il
1889. The unit costs, on the othe
hand, are now 64.5 per cent highe
than they were in 1889.
There is a tendency in officia
Washington to regard increases il
labor costs in a particular industr
without relation to the highe
costs of materials or supple
bought from other industries wher
labor costs have risen. Thus Secre
tary of Labor Schwellenbach in hi
testimony before Congress this wee
compares the price increases in Coz
and steel, respectively, with the in
creased wage costs in those in
dustries, forgetting that the price c
an article is made up of two majo
factors-the direct costs of manu-
facture of ones own product and tn
direct costs of materials ora ma
chinery or other items in the cos
budget of each business or industr,
rejecting the other fellows costs {
labor. These have been less con
spicuous, but just as inf1ationary.
Thus the telephone and telegrap
companies have to pay, in additio
to their own labor costs, highe
price for the things they buy in til
way of equipment.
Reproduction Rights Reserved)