LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
[Letters of the length of one of our leading paragraphs nee often more read, and therefore more effective, than those which fill treble the space.]
THE COAL INDUSTRY.
[To ma EDITOR Or me " SPECT/TOR...] Ste,—I beg to suggest a scheme for fair dealing between the colliery employer. the colliery worker, and the public (the State). There must be a fixed determination honestly to remove from the relationship between employer and employed the root cause of the trouble, which is suspicion and mistrust. Want of confidence is the cause of all the troubles between Capital and Labour. The problem is how to remove it.
This industry of winning coal must in the rotor° be curried on in a threefold honest partnership between those who find the capital, those who provide the labour. and [ho general public (the State). Each is dependent upon the other. Capital is only entitled as such first of all to its interest, which is something higher than State Bonds or Consols. Labour (under_ ground skilled or unskilled) is entitled first of all to a living wage—a higher one than a surface worker. The State is entitled to its separate share for services rendered.
How are these three shares to be apportioned fairly P At first sight this seems almost too difficult a problem for solution. I do not think it is. There are, of course, collieries which lose money, and plenty of it, but which the country nevertheless cannot afford to Abandon. There are the collieries -which simply exist, and are only carried on in hope like the first- named: Then there are collieries -which do make money, and some of them make plenty! It is not always 'due to bad management either that-some collieries lose money. There is no industry I know of which lends itself better CO a -peeling scheme than that of mining for coal—first, because the coal itself should originally have been kept in the State's own possession, and secondly, became of the natural difficulties which abound in most of the coalfields. .I would here say that it is not fair to leave to private enterprise the winning of these difficult seams of coal.
I cannot me any other fair way than by pooling the results di all the coalfields—good, bad, and indifferent. But all are now necessary. If there be any other way than that of nationalim- tion, I would try it, for individual effort has made the country what it is to-day. (1) Matiegement.—This would be a joint' affair by arrangement of all three parties (the responsibility of the mine always resting upon the shoulders of the mine manager). (2) Finances.—Before striking the final balance of the working of the mine, the agreed .interest on the capital invested shall be charged. There shall also be charged the salary of the proprietor or directors, and a proper Depreciation and Sinking Fund for the redemption of the capital. Then the balance debtor or creditor shall be carried to the Pool Fund. Na taxation or local rates shall, however, be charged. This is explained later.
Now comes -the division of the net balance of the 'Pool Fund, after providing, of course, for the expenses of the Pool Fund management. I suggest that this be divided into three equal parts—for Capital, Labour, and the State. The capital of each individual colliery takes its proportionate share of the third part of the Pool Fund—after Government audit of the accounts. Labour takes the same amount as Capital and the State propor- tionately to its labour bill, which is divided proportionately to the amount earned by each person employed. -Thus no man in whatever coalfield he may he employed receives a greater pro- portionate share than the man in any other coalfield. The State Cakes its third share for taxation—Imperial and local. (Both Imperial and local taxation should be collected from the same office, to the financial advantage of all, as also should Work- men's Compensation, Health and Unemployment Insurances.) Observations.—The representatives of Labour on the manage- ment would require to have some standard of qualification, and need not necessarily be selected from the persons employed at the mine. A district body on the coalfield might take the part. The representatives of the State would be appointed by the State. TP70 parties out of three would decide any point on a vote. No new capital could be introduced, and no item of capital expenditure could be incurred, without the concurrence of a Central Body consisting of the representatives of all three parties. This new Central Body would-be in continuous session. Numberless advantages could accrue in purchases and in sales. The Central Body would fix the selling prices everywhere. No Home Office Inspectorate would he needed. The Board of Trade would have its 'special Department for the coal industry. The Head or Chief Inspector should not be a mere theorist; but really practical. The housing of all colliery employees would be in the care of the Central-Body. Any a the Miners' Federation officials, as also those colliery officials not required, would be pensioned off. The by-products industry waet not be included in colliery management There should be a minimum Beale of wages according 'to a standard of cost of living, and beyond this a rise and fall according to the Index figure pub- lished in the-Board of Trade Gasette, to be fixed quarterly.
The result of this scheme would be that " slackers" would cease to exist. The workers would not allow it. The statement is often made by colliery-owners (and rightly so) that if the workers share in the peifits they should share in the losses. This scheme alters all that. The pooling scheme provides for the losing collieries -being assisted by the paying collieries. Many details will, of course, require to be worked out, but when the three parties meet, each imbued with the idea of. absolutely fair play, these would be arranged all right —I am, Sir, 8,c.,
CAASTRRED ACCOUNTANT.
Previous page
