Manpower

by Lincoln C. Andrews

The processes of modern industry, through its introduction of machinery and the consequent development of its vast modern enterprises, took the tools of his trade from the personal hands of the laborer into company ownership, stripped him of all but his bare power to work, and cut him off from the former close personal relationship with his employer. So the laboring man found himself again an isolated individual, this time in the competitive markets of labor, where he fought alone for his existence against the cold impersonal organizations which bought his services in the cheapest market and discarded them at will. And as once long ago he found his salvation and opportunity for development through combination with his fellows, so now he again learned that his future could be secured only through combined effort. Thus came organized labor to protect with force if necessary the human rights of its members and to assure their equal opportunity for development in the progress of the race.

We thus see that this organization of labor with its potential power to fight was but a natural logical step in the evolution of modern industry—as natural and as necessary as were the organizations and combinations of capital. Both are the products of evolution. And as is generally true, the application of the laws of evolution to individual cases often caused hardship and distress and even loss of life, but without changing their inexorable course in the purpose of progress.

It was the accepted philosophy of the time that labor was a commodity to be taken to any market at the will of the laborer and sold to the highest bidder, who was likewise free to buy labor at the lowest figure and to employ it only at his pleasure. The rapid increase in the size of enterprises having eliminated the personal relationship between the employer and his men without finding anything to replace it, it was natural that labor became little more than a chattel and that all consideration of the human equation was forgotten in the excitement and keen competition of managing these enterprises of such novel magnitude and unknown potentialities. Meantime public opinion failed to appreciate that the welfare and social development of these laborers was a matter of vital concern to the community, and that the rights and responsibilities of the management of these big concerns were equally matters of grave importance to community welfare. In short, public opinion had to be taught that the community is a party to industry, and must be concerned with how industry conducts its affairs.

It was therefore a naturally accepted condition that labor should be treated as any other soulless commodity. And it is fair to assume that it would have long continued to be but for the valiant spirit of the laborer demanding recognition of his rights as equally a son of God and a self-respecting, responsible member of the democratic community. These rights are now recognized. Splendid minds have given their best efforts toward evolving the means and methods for the conduct of big business on bases which admit full recognition of these rights, with opportunity for the fuller development of the laborer through the free play of his nobler instincts. Many progressive firms have found a way for adopting a policy embodying these ideas—others are seeking a practical solution of this problem as it is presented to them by the peculiar conditions of their particular business. Many are so organized that union leaders themselves find that everything is being done which they could ask. Public opinion has largely accepted the thesis of labor, and feels that its laboring citizenry must be given opportunity to develop. It is futile then for either capital or labor to fight against either of these organizations, and unreasonable to consider either of them the product of man's viciousness or ignorance. It were far better that both parties accept the inevitable fact of their existence and learn to develop their vast possibilities for increasing efficiency. There is no just cause for recriminations—unless for the slowness of human intelligence to grasp the true conditions.

So it appears that the fight of the unions is almost won, and this phase of evolution nearing completion. But it is evident that even so unions must persist. They are demanded by strong human instincts and make for fuller development and better service. Organization and co-operation, more and more comprehensive, are pronounced characteristics of modern development. Therefore the present unions may well be continued with the purpose of social betterments and of increasing the efficiency of labor, meantime designed to continue the fight only where employers fail to find the way themselves to give labor its opportunity to work and grow to advantage. Where well organized, each union may certainly render great service to its members, to industry, and to the State, by interesting itself in the development and welfare of all men engaged in its line of work, and by keeping available for immediate reference complete industrial and social data of all this personnel. Such statistical work requires time and expense, but it gives the unions the benefit of feeling that they are rendering a valuable service to the community as well as to themselves.

A union of the future, certainly a natural and efficient one, will be the union within each separate enterprise of the two elements essential to its success—management and laborers. And this union will find its greatest usefulness in close liaison with the third party to industrial effort—the community. For the efficient conduct of the community's business of providing law and order, schools, sanitation, transportation, banking, shopping, etc., is as essential to the life of industry as is industry's production and proper management to the life of the community.

Many such unions exist already, a most notable example being the Loyal Legion of Loggers and Lumbermen. Most notable because of its great size, the variety of interests and human types involved, and the vast area covered in its operations. Originally organized for the patriotic purposes of getting out spruce for the war, it soon became a practical co-operative union of employers and employees. Their combined intelligence and effort met the war needs in a tremendously increased production, and have since met the strains of reconstruction without a break. It thus made the unique record of stabilizing labor conditions while doing rush war production instead of upsetting them as was done in many other enterprises. All this resulted from the fact that representatives of both employers and laborers were required to sit around a common council table and there discuss and settle all questions of the conduct of the work. In doing this, both parties learned that they really spoke the same language and that success and good feeling were the natural result of working together. They therefore continued the organization on a permanent basis, with the added element of keeping in touch with local community affairs.

These co-operative unit unions should be of great psychological benefit and become strong political influences, particularly in affairs of local government. The topics of informal discussion among the men and of talks from their leaders may be no longer matters of antagonism toward their employer but rather those of common industrial and community interest. And as industry is sure some day to realize how dependent it is on the integrity, wisdom and statesmanship of the public officials chosen by the people to make and administer the laws, so it will surely come to take an active part in selecting these public officials and in determining the policies they are to further. Well for industry then if it be organized and accustomed to the co-operative functioning of capital and labor. No political appeal can then be made to class distinctions, and industry can then bring into the political field the same strong co-operative purpose for the common good that it is accustomed to exercise in its management of business.

In these unions employee and employer come to find that both are laborers in the common cause, each according to his skill and training doing his own part in the industrial machine and receiving respect and credit in accordance with how well he does it. Both come to appreciate the true meanings of democracy, that opportunity lies equally open to all on their merits, and that men are classed in accordance with their fitness for positions. Here they come to realize that demagogic appeals to class are unreasonable and often of questionable motive, as the fact is brought home to them that employers are mostly but graduates from the ranks of labor—or more accurately, are but leaders of the class.

The word "class" with its European meaning is quite out of place in discussing American conditions. Classifications we have, based on accomplishment, etc., but there are no insurmountable barriers between them. All doors stand wide open for any individual if he but have the will to attain the necessary qualifications. And there are back doors which stand equally wide open, from which the unfit are being daily ejected to find their true level according to their individual worth. Such are the laws of democracy and of progress, and all schemes to thwart them must sooner or later end in failure.