MAN-POWER ON THE LAND
By FRANK SYKES
THE recent debate on agricultural man-power was inconclusive. However, it did serve to make public the relevant figures. The plain facts are that agriculture is short of labour to meet its present commitments—this despite the employment of 146,000 prisoners-of- war and of 35,000 members of the Women's Land Army. The per- manent agricultural staff on the farms has fallen by 36,000 since the outbreak of war. Although 5o,000 erstwhile farm-workers have yet to be demobilised under Class "A," the Minister of Agriculture does not expect more than thirty or forty thousand of these men to return to the land. The use of prisoners-of-war as labour on our farms long after the war has ended smacks of slave labour, and the public conscience may not stand for it much longer. The Women's Land Army, like the old soldier, slowly fades away. Thus, before the
harvest of 1947, by present standards, it seems as if the industry will be short by about 150,000 workers, and this calculation makes no allowance for a call-up of those hitherto exempt from military service \or for a wastage which might be expected as a result of the abnormally large proportion of those employed being in the high age-groups. In other words, agriculture will face the peace with much the same man-power as at the beginning of the war, but with orders to maintain • production at the peak.
Taking a short view and recognising the fact that we live in a hungry world, one finds the position serious ; but the long-term balance is not all on the debit side of the ledger. Unless it is our fate to live in a world permanently short of cereals and dollars, much of our marginal land must soon grow more milk, mutton and beef, which would absorb less labour than it does at present. If agricultural machinery were more readily available, mechanisation of the farm could be intensified. The future size of our agricultural industry will inevitably be smaller than at present. The extent to which it may shrink depends on the efficiency which the industry may achieve over the next few years, on the success or failure of our export drive and to some extent on the trend of political thought— all factors which are hard to predict. But if agriculture is to sur- vive at all, production per man must rise. The post-war output of a pre-war labour staff on our farms already represents a consider- able increase in production over the 1938 level, and output per man will rise further as farms are keyed to economic production, as opposed to maximum production as at present. It is quite possible to have a much larger agricultural industry in terms of output as compared with 1938, even with fewer men and women employed on the land.
Farmers, except through the war years, have been accustomed to an ample supply of labour, with the result that only recently has the skill of the first-rate farm-worker come to reap a reward appre- ciably higher than the minimum wage. Nowadays, a good head cowman can earn a wage which will compare favourably with that earned by the townsman, the reason being that the demand is far greater than the supply. Equally, such a man is usually well housed, and enjoys much the same amenities as the townsman because he can afford to pick his job. One herdsman of my ac- quaintance has a brother, a tailor working in London, who spent a holiday with him on the farm. Not unnaturally there was a dis- cussion as to which was the better off. It was agreed that they both worked much the same hours, if travelling-time were taken into account, but that the cowman earned about kr per week more money if rent, rates and fares were taken on balance.
Conditions vary from farm to farm, but the minimum rate of wages is too often the standard rate. Those men with skill who are capable of high output are kept on a low scale until they decide to offer their labour where it is better appreciated ; or, on occasion, the farms lack the organisation which would allow such men the opportunity to learn to achieve a high output. Many pro- gressive farmers realised long ago that the highly paid expert farm- worker provides the cheapest labour if measured in terms of pro- duction. It remains for the average fanner to discover this truth, and a shortage of labour in the industry may well help him to do so. The Farm Workers' Union now demands a minimum wage of £4 los. a week, but, if the minimum wage is to remain near-about the standard wage, even this rise of Li per week over the present level would do little to attract to the land the type of man the industry will need most in the future. When the world food-supply returns to normal the drift from the land may provide its own cure, but a general scaling-up of wages to compare with skill will take time. Rural housing and the lack of amenities deter any flow of labour out of thp Forces.
For the next harvest the Women's Land Army and German prisoners will see us through. There remains the question of how farmers can maintain production at the present level until the 1947 harvest garnered. Ploughing orders are ready to be sent out to farmers in order that the cereal acreage may be maintained at the present high level. It is not too early for us to be told who will help harvest these crops when they are sown. To the townsman this concern with the distant future may seem unreasonable, but orders from the War Agricultural Committee would be given and taken with less reserve if the farmer knew how his difficulties were to be met. In those areas where corn-production has been increased most farmers and their men have worked for six years under great strain and with -nothing -to spare. Another straw which might have been cheerfully borne in wax time may break the camel's back next year.
Previous page
