i6o TEE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY 



compel nations to arbitrate their differences. Still others maintain 

 that the most effective weapon against unionism is the proper reward 

 of efficiency, since by that means all reasonable discontent is quieted. 

 Thus H. L. Gantt in an article noted above says : 



If you keep an exact record of what each fellow does, surround the men 

 with conditions under which they can work at high efficiency and compensate 

 the efficient one liberally, no man will spend his spare time trying to find out 

 how to raise the wages of the other fellow. Workmen as a rule will do more if 

 their earnings are increased by so doing, and you will have great difficulty in 

 getting the efficient ones into the labor unions if they are not benefited by 

 joining. 



In passing judgment upon these criticisms, two facts stand out 

 preeminently before the thoughtful student of this question. The first 

 is that some kind of an efficiency system, constructed upon a cost basis, 

 is to become inevitably an integral part of the industrial organization 

 of the future. Men may be apathetic about it, mistakes will be made 

 in its application, labor unions may strive against it, but it is as 

 inevitable as the industrial revolution. Time was — and traces of the 

 spirit still linger — when labor organizations struggled against the 

 introduction of modern labor-saving devices. The Knights of St. 

 Crispan might unite against the use of pegging and sewing machines 

 in the shoe industry; printers might protest against the introduction 

 of the linotype, but it was of no avail — these things were a part of 

 industrial evolution — they increased man's efficiency in production, 

 and they could not be stayed. Exactly the same thing is true of 

 modern efficiency systems — attention has been shifted from capital to 

 labor, but the result will be the same. The employer demands it 

 because his profits are thereby increased; the efficient laborer demands 

 it because it increases his compensation and he feels, rightly, that 

 superior skill should be rewarded; and society as a whole demands it, 

 because in its totality it tremendously increases social wealth and 

 welfare. The sooner unionism recognizes this fact and acts accord- 

 ingly, the better it will be for its cause, both directly and indirectly. 

 For we are loathe to admit that labor and capital are, and must remain, 

 inherently antagonistic. 



The second fact that requires recognition is that no plan which 

 tends to increase the dependence of the laborer upon the employer or 

 that fails to take cognizance of the real, vital well-being of the employee 

 can in the long run prove successful. Because of this, it is essential 

 that the employees in their collective capacity be given a voice in the 

 direction of the shop. With human nature as it is, the temptation to 

 cut piece-rates, to speed up machinery, and the utilization of similar 

 methods must be, so far as possible, removed. In time the employers 

 will undoubtedly come to see that the lack of hearty cooperation that 



