1920.] Profit and Loss Sharing in Agriculture. 259 



would have been agreed upon between employer and 

 employees. This latter fact, however, does not 

 detract from the value of the table as an illustration 

 of the principle of profit and loss sharing. 



(c) It is clear that had the scheme started in 1909-10, 

 it would almost certainly have failed, simply because 

 there were no prohts to share for a period of 4 years 

 in succession. On the other hand, a start in 1905-06 

 might have enabled the scheme just to survive 

 the lean years of 1909-10 to 1912-13, for by this time 

 the employees would have felt the benefits during 

 1905-06 to 190S-09. 



(d) In any case, it must be emphasised that if the objects 

 of profit and loss sharing had been realised, not only 

 would the profits have been greater in the good years 

 but also the losses would have been less in the poor 

 years. The table shows that during the 14 years 



. 1905-06 to 1918-19 the sum of £2,635 was distributed 

 amongst the employees, while £1,390 was allocated 

 to the employer. This is equal to about £188 per 

 annum to employees and about £100 per annum 

 to the employer. Assuming an average of 10 regular 

 employees, the net result is that each employee 

 would receive over £iS per annum, or about 7s. 

 per week on the average. 



Xow, the result of the operation of a profit and 

 loss sharing scheme should be to increase the total 

 profits over a period of years — such increase being due 

 not only to increased effort on the part of the 

 employees but also to better organisation on the part 

 of the employer and to the much greater confidence 

 which it gives him in the direction of more intensive 

 production in every way. Unfortunately, it is 

 impossible to make any useful estimate of what this 

 increase in profit might amount to, but it is clear that 

 unless the employer is satisfied that there is an increase 

 he will, rightly or wrongly, be inclined to think he 

 is giving " something for nothing." 

 {e) The question is commonly raised : In what way do 

 the employees share in the losses ? The table given 

 should make it quite clear that they do share. 

 Assuming that during the years 1909-10 to 1912-13 

 the employees had done their utmost, but that for 

 reasons beyond the control of either employer or 



