EDITORIAL COMMENT 751 



a part of our forest workers. Here again research must point the way 

 toward handling the forests as a renewable resource on a permanent 

 basis. 



"What is true in forestry is, of course, equally true in all other lines 

 of activity. Everywhere scientific research, adequately encouraged and 

 supported by enlightened public opinion, must take the lead in bringing 

 about improvements that will contribute to the welfare of the people in 

 general and of the worker in particular. When the worker by hand 

 sees in the worker by brain a true collaborator who works not for the 

 benefit of a few but for the benefit of all, science will effectively render 

 a high social service. It is most encouraging that the leaders of the 

 labor movement in this country should have so unequivocally recog- 

 nized this fact." 



An Independent American Federation oe Technicae Workers 



The editorial in the April issue of the Journal, "Why not a Union 

 for Foresters ?" contains the germ of a big idea. 



W. S.'s reply, proposing a "National Federation of Technical Work- 

 ers," contains the germ of an even bigger idea. 



But W. S., in my opinion, interjects a fundamental error when he 

 proposes that his "National Federation of Technical Workers" afifiliate 

 itself with the American Federation of Labor. 



I had better say, in the first place, that I am not opposed to organized 

 labor. On the contrary, I am for it. Neither can I plead guilty to 

 "white-collar" snobbishness, though realizing the prevalence of some 

 such malady. But W. S. overlooks the real power in his own idea when 

 he proposes to join hands with labor. The real power in a federation 

 of technical workers lies not in an alliance with labor, nor yet with 

 capital, but in holding the balance of power between labor and capital. 



What is the real predicament of the technical worker today? It is 

 this : Organized capital is raising prices to offset the wages exacted by 

 organized labor. Organized labor is raising wages to offset the prices 

 exacted by organized capital. The unorganized technical worker pays 

 both, but controls neither. And this in spite of the fact that the net 

 gains made by either side come either out of his head or his pocket. 

 Why? Because there can be no absolute net gain, either in prices or 

 wages, except through (i) increased efficiency of production, which is 

 largely made possible through the inventions of technical men. or (2) 

 a net loss to a third party, which pays the increased cost of living with- 

 out increased remuneration. We all know the identity of the third 

 party in question. It is the technical worker. 



