REDUCTION OF WAGES
[To the Editor of the SPecesT0n.1 SIR,—The railway companies have felt compelled to request their employees to consent to an all-round reduction of wages ; and I have been informed by friends who are usually well informed in such matters, that other industries are about to make similar requests. In every case the reason given is-- that it has become absolutely necessary to reduce running costs and cost of production ; and that labour must make its contribution to this end.
It also appears that the employees in these industries are preparing to resist the proposed reduction of wages, and there is already talk of strikes. In view of this, it may be assumed that the employees and their leaders—prejudiced perhaps by their own immediate personal interests—are not convinced of the necessity or justice of the employers' demands.
I venture to suggest that it would strengthen enormously the case of the employers, if the shareholders (who are in a sense the employers in most of these concerns) would agree to share directly in the sacrifice involved.
If, for instance, it is considered necessary to reduce the wages in any given industry by ten per cent., the shareholders might agree that the dividends payable while the reduction of wages is in force should be ten per cent, less than, say, the average of the dividends paid in the previous three years (thus if the average dividend for the past three years has been F-5, it should be reduced by ten per cent. to FA, 10s.), and that, in the future, dividends should only be increased pani passu with an increase in wages. Such an undertaking would go far to convince the employees that a sacrifice (in which all would share) is indeed necessary. And it would be an act less of generosity than of sympathy and justice.
It may not be beside the point to mention that I have no connection of any sort with Labour. I have retired from active life, and am living (very Modestly) entirely on dividends from
invested savings.—! am, Sir, &C., SHAREHOLDER.
Previous page
