Evening star., 1949-09-11

STEEL FACT-FINDING BOAR
crucial steel dispute are show
right are David L. Cole of Pate
man of New York and DR.. Car
other relevant considerations, the
Board finds:
Cd Productivity: The union
has not satisfied the board that
steelworkers do not share equit-
ably in the increased productivity
of the industry.
(a) It has not succeeded IN
proving it's contention that pro-
ductivity has risen by 49.5 per
cent since 1889.
tb) 1t is the belief of the board
that, as hereinafter explained.
wage rates in a particular indus
try should not be tied directly to
productivity in that industry but
rather should be related to the
general industrial rise in pro-
ductivity, and that any excesses
of productivity in any one in
dustry over the general average
should provide primarily the
means of reducing the prices OF
the products of that industry
Therefore even if the union had
succeeded in showing that the
1939-49 rise in labor productivity
was 49.5 per cent. it still would
not establish an inequity by show
ing that the real average hourly
earnings of steelworkers (present
average hourly money earnings
debated by the general rise in the
cost of living since 1939) had
risen only IA per cent since 1889
Output Per Man-Hour.
The evidence before us reveals
that for our whole national
economy output per man-hour
increased from 1899 to 1889 at. an
annual rate Of about Q per cent
but that, ins the decade winch
followed. the general rise in proc
ductivity was at lesser rate.
Therefore, the SteelWorkers' rise
of IA per cent ip real average
hourly earnings during this de-
cade is fairly consonant with the
apparent rise in labor productive
ity in the whole economy during
the same period and reflects no
inequity in that regard.
(c) The union compared the
productivity of 1899, year of low
volume, with 1948, a year Of prac-
tically maximum volume, which
is an unsound comparison.
Id In computing an index of
productivity for the steel industry
the union used the assumption
that the production mix of the
industry after 1945 was substan-
TALLY the same as during the war
years. This assumption is open to
serious question.
(e) Trustworthy productivity
studies can be made only If the
companies provide fult and &C
curate data upp which such
studies can be made. Such data
were not offered in evidence.
0D The companies also made
invalid comparisons in their own
productivity claims by insisting
that an index of money rather
than real average hourly earnings
was the proper comparison with
the productivity index.
Labor's Share in Profits.
(2) The level of profits of the
steel industry, and labor's share
therein:
(a) The Board has decided to
accept as a basis for comparison
the reported" rather than the
adjusted" profit figures. Each
party claimed these figures should
be adjusted-upward by the union,
downward by the companies-but
the Board finds that it is 1mpos-
sible accurately to compute the
amount of adjustments which
each side has urged should be
made.
(b) The reported profits after
taxes of the steel industry in 1948
were substantial, and in the first
half of 1949 they rose even higher.
In 1948 profits after taxes were
$511,900,0O0 as compared with an
average of $271, 100000 in the
period 194O-41, a rise of 80 per
cent; and in the first half of 1949,
the annual rate of profit was
$6O6, 800 900, or 124 per cent above
the 1940-41 average.
(c) The rates of profit-the dol
lar amounts of these profits fig
ured as percentages of net worth
must be substantially discounted,
however, for we are now consider
ing 1948 and 1949 dollars which
are considerably less valuable than
those of 1899 or 1910 or 1941,
whereas a large part of the capital
assets in-the net worth lis in terms
of dollars of higher value.
(dl The profits of the industry
stated as a percentage of sales are
also substantial for the year 1948
and the first quarter of 1949 (6.3
per cent and 6.8 per cent, respec-
tively); but are not out of line
with comparable prewar years like
1910 and 1941 when the percent
ages were 80 and 81.
Other Years Considered.
(e) In evaluating the amount
of profits in any given year like
1948 or 1949, to determine whether
the workers have received Q fair