> ygt^^oaaiv>iv;^x;5TOOtiia^-2<>^i:;st:';i;^;it^<^ 



PiecC'-Work in the Lumber Yard 





While the sj'stem of paying for hibor by the piece, and on the 

 basis of results accomplished is in nse in many manufacturing plauts, 

 and seems to have justified its existence, it is not the general rule 

 to pay lumber handlers in wholesale yards on this basis. The usual 

 per diem scale of wages is in vogue, and the fact that this has been 

 the method generally followed, gives it the prestige that always goes 

 with precedent. 



Hardwood men, who have learned that the margin of profit in the 

 business has reached a point where they cannot afford to throw away 

 money in unnecessary handling expenses, have been instituting the 

 piece-work system, whereby lumber handlers are paid on the basis of 

 so much for each thousand feet of lumber stacked, and .vice versa. 

 This method is usuallj' objected to at first, especially in the South, 

 where negroes are generally employed, and the proposition that each 

 man must perform a given "stunt'-' in order to get the same amount 

 as before does not look good to the easy-going dusky employe. 



Nevertheless, where the plan ha.s been finally adopted, it has 

 proved to be worth while in more eases than it has fallen down. 

 This is not to be taken as an unqualified statement, but is the im- 

 pression which has been gained by conversations with those who 

 have tried both ways. The fact that advocates of the piece-work 

 method of payment in the lumber-yard are gaining in number would 

 seem also to support the theory that this is the better system. 



It is undoubtedh' true that the necessity for performing a given 

 amount of work stimulates activity on the part of yard crews. When 

 each man knows that he will get his money at the end of the day, no 

 matter whether he handles 5,000 feet of lumber or 10,000, the chances 

 are that he will not exert himself to pile the larger amount. On the 

 other hand, if ho knows that by doing a big day 's work he will get a 

 big day 's j)ay, he will work at a faster rate than he could ever be 

 induced to do unless there were the stimulus of extra pay. This 

 purely selfish incentive must be provided, and it is the only w-ay by 

 which the laborer can be induced to put forth his full efforts all the 

 time — that is, assuming that it is not possible to reform himian 

 nature in the lumber-yard any more easily than elsewhere. 



Manufacturers have found that in some eases the piece-work sys- 

 tem has a bad effect on the quality of the work done. Employes 

 get careless as to their machines in the effort to do as much work as 

 possible, and those who have the more important duty of finishing 

 wood products skimp the job occasionally in an effort to pile up as 

 large a total for the week as possible. However, the objection that 

 has weight with them does not operate in the lumber yard to the 

 same extent. Of course there can be good and fcad work in trucking 

 and stacking lumber, just as in anything else, but the possibility of 

 difference is. less and the chances for poor work in piling are not 

 particularly evident. 



With a good foreman to see that the work is projierly done, yard 

 crews will get lumber from the car to the stack in rapid-fire fashion, 

 and without putting the stock up in slip-shod style either. It is 

 merely a question of keeping the men going at top speed, and in 

 place of the assistance of the suli)huretted vocabulary usually em- 

 ployed by the yard foreman, there is the mental impulse s\ippliod by 

 the prospect of better pay for increased effort. 



The lumberman earns his returns on a basis of thousands of feet 

 handled. His overhead expense is assessed on the basis of quantity 

 of stocks moved. When he is paying his men by the day, without 

 regard to the actual work done, and knowing only the records of the 

 men in a general way, he has a difficult time figuring labor costs into 

 his handling charges. Furthermore, he does not know who is giving 

 the best returns. When the work is done on a piece-work basis, he 

 knows beforehand what it will cost him to handle the lumber. He 

 can figure in advance, knowing his overhead expenses as well as his 

 yard co.sts and how much he must sell his stock for in order to make 

 a jirofit. This is something that cannot always be determined the 

 other way, and this is a real advantage which lumbermen liave learned 

 to appreciate. 



Entirely apart from the question of expense is the matter of service 



—36— 



to cust(]MH'rs and iiiiprciviug tlio general spirit of the yard. If lunilier 

 is being luuidled rapidly and efficiently, the rush order which comes 

 in late in the afternoon can be gotten out in a hurry the same day, 

 because the nu'n, knowing that they are to get returns on the work 

 they do, pitcli in witliout grumbling and make every lick count. That 

 means that the business is in a little better condition than it was 

 before, and that things can be done which are impossible where vigor- . 



ous and whole-hearted effort is not to be had when it is needed. I 



A veteran hardwood man who had used the per diem system of pay- " 



inent for many years and who insisted that it was the proper method 

 of handling the yard proposition, discovered one day that it was cost- 

 ing him more to yard and handle his stocks than anybody else in town, 

 and that most of the other fellows had put their work on a piece 

 liasis. He then promptly adopted the new idea. His men kicked a 

 little at first, some of them threatened to quit, but finally decided to 

 try it out. The results were favorable to them as well as the lum- 

 berman, and the system is in use today. 



The IrQn Age, that dean of trade papers, recently printed the 

 following, which, while it discusses the question from the standpoint 

 of the metal-worker, is just as applicable to the hardwood business: 



' ' The piece-work system has stood the test of years and has demon- 

 strated its wortli, its application to manufacturing now being wide- 

 spread. Because of this, a defense of its value may seem to many 

 to be superfluous. Yet it is a fact that there are numerous establish- 

 ments in which there is either no attempt to introduce piece-work or 

 else its adoption is only partial. To such it will not be amiss to 

 explain more fully it possibilities. There is little excuse for any shop, 

 which manufactures in quantity, to have any of the producers work- 

 ing on day work, and it is quite possible as well to arrange to pay 

 some of the so-called non-producers on a piece-work basis. 



'"Piece work has two points of especial worth, either of which is 

 of sufficient value to vindicate its introduction. The first, and perhaps 

 the most important, of these points is the incentive to increased 

 production which this method of payment, when properly admin- 

 istered, can be shown to build up. 



' ' History telh repeatedly of the workings of incentive on nations, 

 showing just as often the deplorable results which inevitably fol- 

 low the loss of incentive. Here we are dealing with a natural law, 

 of all laws the most rigid; obedient to this law we find the most 

 rugged tree growth in the spots where the tempest beats with the 

 greatest violence. And in the growing efficiency of our manufac- 

 turers, in the progress they have made, the incentive supplied by the 

 piece-work system has played an important part. Although there 

 will be some who will defend the efficacy of other means of speeding 

 up the help, it will hardly be denied that there can be no stronger 

 incentive than the full pay envelope, nor is there any steadier, more 

 constant influence than definite, well-chosen piece rates."' 



The figure at wliidi the handling of lumber is to be paid for can 

 be set reasonably accurately from data in hand as to present lalior 

 costs. Inasmuch as it is usually safe to assume that a greater volume 

 can iSe handled under the influence of a piece-work system, it is well 

 to fix the rate low rather than high, especially in view of the fact 

 that increasing I lie rule lalcr on will be a much more popular move 

 than reducing it, as might be the result if the initial .amount were 

 made too largo. It is well to have in mind the fact that the lumber- 

 man will save money by the aiiplication of the new plan, and that tlie 

 workmen will make more nionoy by doing a greater amount of work 

 in a given t imc. 



The iiiece-work svslcm uivohi's .-liso tiic aiiplicarion of a well- 

 planned system of handling lumber in the yard. If the lumberman 

 has the habit of laying .i lot of stock on the ground after it has been 

 unloaded from the car, and does not truck directly to the jiile, the 

 time and labor involved in liaudliiig will be greater and the men who 

 are used will not lie able to make as good a showing as they could 

 under more favorable conditions. Likewise, if the yard system is not 

 sufficiently well arranged to enable men to be kept at one kind of 

 work continuously, the proposition becomes unwieldly. In some viirds 



