32 



MB. P. MYERS (A.S.E.) : Both speakers have emphasised the need 

 for men in the trade union movement to make themselves masters 

 of their particular industry. Human nature being what it is, trade 

 unions should hold out to their men the incentive of the possibility of 

 improving their position by their intelligence, and we should try to 

 bring about the conditions favourable to the development of the most 

 intelligent. I personally would fear the control of industry by the 

 workers at the present time, as Labour is not qualified for the task. 

 The application of Scientific Management all round might make it 

 possible for an enormous number of men and women now casually 

 employed to improve their position, and so raise the standard of life 

 of a large number. There may be some danger of labour being exploited 

 to a still greater extent, but the most intelligent are the least in danger 

 of exploitation. By intelligently understanding our own industries 

 we could raise the level of our members, and put them in such a position 

 that they could not be exploited. We must fit ourselves in this respect, 

 and having done this we shall have found out the method of assuming 

 control. 



MB. W. B. NEVILLE (Royal Arsenal Co-operative Society) : I repre- 

 sent a section of the workers who are controlling industry. As a 

 Co-operative official, Scientific Management has occupied my spare 

 moments for some time not only the human element, but also the 

 workshop and factory ; and it is only when the workers thoroughly 

 understand Scientific Management in all its phases that they will be 

 fitted to control industry. My own society has recently established 

 a bakery on the most advanced scientific principles, not only with 

 machinery but also with organisation of labour, and the result is that 

 we are able to sell a cheap loaf, and this has brought increased trade 

 to the society. The better the understanding of Scientific Management, 

 the more will the worker be able to prove his fitness to take control 

 of industry when the day comes. 



MB. COLE'S REPLY. 



Management may be responsible for a very great amount of the 

 increase in production, but I do not see why the results of these improve- 

 ments should go to the shareholders rather than to labour : the dis- 

 tribution of wealth ought to be independent of who creates it, and 

 should be distributed on just principles, which in the last resort would 

 mean equality. I am not opposed to efficiency in industry, but to 

 ' efficiency systems ' of payment, by which the employer tries to get 

 the last ounce out of the worker. Mr. Renold has said that he had 

 in his firm been able to absorb all surplus labour, but I do not think 

 the general adoption of Scientific Management will make it possible 

 to absorb all skilled labour. Another point, with which I am in 

 agreement with Mr. Renold, is that the method of paying wages is 

 not of fundamental importance in Scientific Management. I was very 

 glad to hear him say that if the trade union offered a fundamental 

 objection to any efficiency system of payment he would not regard 



