122 TWELFTH REPORT. 



ill building- trades monopolize their crafts? Then, the number demanded 

 remaining the same, the price of houses will rise. Does it cost more 

 labor to produce a bushel of wheat? Then that bushel will bring more 

 on the market. Or if the demand for sirloin steak increases very much 

 the price of steak may rise even though the cost may decrease some- 

 what. Probably, when the question is put, what is the cause of the 

 recent high prices, no answer is so frequently in the mouth of the non- 

 scientific man as "organized labor." 



In approaching this phase of the problem it will be well first to 

 analyze the theoretical possibilities and then to bring such statistics 

 as are available to bear. 

 1. Relative Produetirity (a) Produciwity: 



One way of putting the case is this: If wages are raised relatively 

 to productivity the price must be raised or the capitalist enter})riser 

 will lose. I say ''raised relatively to productively" — it will be noticed 

 that this may take place in one or both of two ways : either the rate 

 of wages may be raised, |)roductivity remaining the same; or product- 

 ivity may be decreased, the rate remaining unchanged. Let us consider 

 the latter event first. 



Now labor's productivity, equal opportunity being assumed, is re- 

 ducable to three factors, — energy, time and skill. If a workman puts 

 forth great effort for a maximum length of time^ on a high plane of 

 skill he is very productive. If anyone of the three factors is lowered 

 or diminished, his productivity decreases. 



Of course a similar result would come from poorer opportunities in 

 natural environment or a lower margin. This would not be attributable 

 to labor, however, and is mentioned only that it ma}' be borne in mind 

 as an alternative or modifying factor. 



Does organized labor, then, decrease productivity relatively to wage? 

 If so, through which of the preceding factors does it operate? 



As to the energy factor, I am unable to get any data which can be 

 taken as proof. It is a matter of common knowledge that the "go-easy'' 

 or ''make-Avork" or Avork-fund idea has been widespread and still ex- 

 ists. We know that laborei'S work harder in years of depression than 

 in boom periods, etc. But these ideas and moral characteristics are 

 not confined to union laborers, and are becoming more and more dis- 

 claimed by union leaders. It seems that all that can be said is (1) that 

 if the go-easy policy obtains among all laborers equally prices will not 

 be affected by it; (2) that if in particular trades laborers have adopted 

 this policy within recent years, recent price advances in such trades 

 might be due to this policy; (3) that we have small reason, however, 

 to lay the exercise of this policy at the door of organized labor, and 

 none for attributing to it the recent rise in prices, for there is no 

 evidence of any recent change in this regard. 



More evidence can be obtained as to the second or time factor. There 

 has been a steady decrease in hours throughout the decade, the index 

 number for 1898 begiug 99.7- while that for 1907 was 95.0, — a decrease 

 of 4.7%. The demand for and prevalence of the eight-hour day is 

 greater than ever before. To the extent that this means decreased 



^From a long-time point of view the worliing day would not be so long as to shorten 

 the total working period of the laborer's life unduly. 

 ^Average for 1890-99^100. 



