LABOR 



3284 



LABOR LEGISLATION 



LABOR, DIVISION OF, the name given by 

 political economists to the conditions which 

 exist in modern industry under which one man 

 performs only one function, or at most a few 

 functions, in a long series of operations. A 

 better word for this condition of affairs would 

 be cooperation, for all the workmen are en- 

 gaged in completing one thing; no one of them 

 alone could finish it without the cooperation 

 of the others. In the manufacture of shoes, 

 for example, there are a dozen or more proc- 

 esses; the old cobbler still cuts out the leather 

 and builds up the entire shoe piece by piece, 

 but in the modern factory one man cuts soles, 

 another cuts uppers, another the tongues, and 

 in nearly every step the workman is either 

 helped by machinery or he merely operates a 

 machine. The division of labor is, as a matter 

 of fact, the result of the development of the 

 factory system and of the accompanying use 

 of machinery (see FACTORY AND FACTORY SYS- 

 TEM). 



The arguments in favor of the division of 

 labor are easily understood. It divides a com- 

 plicated process into a series of simple opera- 

 tions, in which the workman becomes skilful 

 in a shorter time than if he had to learn all 

 the other operations as well. This fact means 

 ;i Diving of time, and therefore a saving of 

 money and a reduction in the cost of pro- 

 duction. Another great advantage is the in- 

 ducement to invent new machinery and the 

 tendency to use all machinery more efficiently. 

 While it is probably true from the point of 

 view of the community that the division of 

 labor means economy, it is equally true that 

 it may harm the individual workman. It in- 

 creases the latter's skill in one field, but it 

 lessens his experience and usefulness as an 

 ill-round workman. The objection is fre- 

 quently heard that the modern factory, with 

 its minute division of labor, destroys the 

 individuality of its workmen and makes ma- 

 chines of them. The movement usually called 

 Arts and Crafts (which see) is chiefly a protest 

 i gainst this tendency and an attempt to restore 

 individuality to the craftsman and his products. 

 LABOR DAY, a legal holiday, usually the 

 Monday of September, observed in all 

 of the states of the American Union and in 

 province of Canada. In New Orleans it 

 is celebrated on the fourth Saturday of Novem- 

 ber, and in North Carolina on the first Thurs- 

 day of September. It is not in effect in Alaska, 

 ihe Philippines or Porto Rico. The celebration 

 >i' Labor Day on the first "Monday of Septem- 



ber was inaugurated by the Knights of Labor 

 in 1882. Different organizations of workingmen 

 then petitioned for legislation making the day 

 a legal holiday; in 1887 Colorado passed the 

 first law to that effect. The occasion is marked 

 by cessation from usual labor, and by parades, 

 meetings and addresses by prominent labor 

 leaders. 



Since the Labor Congress in Berlin in 1890, 

 the first of May has been set aside for labor 

 demonstrations in some European countries. 



LABOR LEGISLATION, a general term re- 

 ferring to all laws regulating the conditions of 

 labor and the relations of employer and em- 

 ployee. The great number of laws now in 

 existence, in Canada, in the United States, in 

 England and practically every other civilized 

 nation are the product of little more than a 

 century of development. They ate the direct 

 result of the introduction of the factory, and 

 their general purpose is to protect the workman 

 from unfair and unhealthful conditions of labor. 

 In other words, labor legislation is designed to 

 win for the workman rights or privileges which 

 he is not individually strong enough to secure. 



As long as the employer himself was a work- 

 man a master workman surrounded by his 

 artisans and apprentices a kindly, human re- 

 lationship existed between master and man. 

 But the introduction of automatic machinery 

 in various branches of manufacturing wrought 

 a great change. The employer gradually be- 

 came a capitalist, not a worker; he had little 

 direct contact with the operatives, and was 

 not intimate with their surroundings and their 

 daily life. His chief interest in them, possibly, 

 was to get a maximum amount of work for a 

 minimum amount of pay. The workers were 

 often forced to labor too long hours, some- 

 times under miserable working conditions. 



In 1750 the relation of employer to workmen 

 was somewhat paternalistic ; by 1800 the pendu- 

 lum had swung sharply in the reverse direction, 

 and extreme individualism was the rule. By 

 1900 the pendulum was far back on its way to 

 a paternal attitude, but this time it was the 

 government, not the employer, whose duty it 

 was to protect the workman. The first laws 

 regulating labor in factories were passed in 

 England in 1802, and in Germany, France and 

 other European countries soon afterward. But 

 the great body of labor legislation now in 

 force is the product of the last half century. 

 In almost all European countries labor legisla- 

 tion is national in its scope, and the entire 

 field of the relation of labor and capital is ;i 



