F.— ECONOMICS. 115 



not common to both sexes. The comparison would seem to be as to 

 the linie-vvuges, say the averiigo weekly eaiTiings, ot" the two clasives. 

 The institution of the average presents dil'l'ieulties. Still, I submit it> as 

 an inference based on general impressions and ordinary experience that, 

 even if all restriction of tlie competition between male and female 

 workers were removed, we should still find the average weekly earnings 

 of the former to be considerably higher. 



12. The following fuller statement of the matter is submitted as 

 intelligible and probable. Let us suppose at first that work can be 

 defined in such precise and neuter terms that it makes no difference to 

 the employer whether a unit of work is performed by a man or a woman. 

 The definition should include not only a specification of the product, as 

 in the case of the boot above instanced, but also the time taken up 

 (affecting the ' overhead ' charge), the expenditure on apparatus (which 

 may be greater for weaker persons), and so forth. In ideal competition 

 men and women shall be equally free to choose any of the occupations 

 so defined. It may be expected that there are some branches of industry 

 into which women only will enter, others into which they will never, or 

 hardly ever, enter. Let us call the former A, B, 0, . . . F, and the 

 latter, M, N, . . . Z. I^et the average weekly earning in each of 

 the former occupations he a, b, c, . . . f; and in the latter m, n, . . . z. 

 Then I submit that the average of a, b, c, . . . / will be less than 

 the average oi in, n, . . . z. There remain occupations that are 

 entered by both sexes : say G, H, I, K, L. For any one of these, I, 

 the (rate of) pay, say t, for unit of work in the sense above defined is 

 the same for men and women; but the weekly earnings will not be the 

 same, say ii, for the female and u for the male workers; u less than iz. 

 The letters may be applied so that /i, gi, hi, . . . h will form an increasing 

 series; on which supposition it may be expected that §2, lu, . . . h, im 

 will also form an increasing series, rising from the female to the male 

 level . 



The conception thus presented may be illustrated by an Australian 

 ruling. Judge Higgins fixed the minimum rate for fruit-picking at 

 one shilling an hour, observing that ' the majority of fruit-pickers 

 are men,' that 'men and women should be paid on the same level,' 

 the employer being left free to employ persons of either sex. But 

 for the operations in the packing-sheds the minimum for (women) 

 workers in these processes, in which men are hardly ever employed, 

 should be fixed at 9d. per hour (' Commonwealth Arbitration Reports, 

 1912,' vol. vi., p. 72, and context). Fruit-picking and the operations 

 in the sheds might correspond to our L and G respectively. 



If the rates attached to each specification of work are proper the 

 distribution will be ideal. Suppose that a slightly different system of 

 rates, a', p', . . . i', . . . (j.', v' . . . &c., is adopted. There will be a 

 slight difference in the distribution of work and pay. But by the 

 property of a maximum above noticed the difference to the community 

 considered as a sort of collective monopolist, the difference to the 

 national income will be not merely slight, but very slight. 



13. It should be understood that the preceding representation 

 relates only to the present, or rather to a short period in the immediate 



