WHY ARE THERE SO MANY STRIKES ?
[To THE EDITOR OP THE "SPECTATOR."]
Sin,—Is not the epidemic of strikes largely attributable to the interference of the Government which has become so fashionable in trade disputes ? Why cannot the Govern- ment mind its own business instead of trying to help master and workman to manage their businesses for them P Surely no Government official (even if as able as Mr. Askwith) can understand the intricacies of an industry as well as the workman and employer engaged in it. When Mr. Lloyd George was at the Board of Trade he came down to Manchester when there was a strike in the cotton trade. It is true that peace resulted, but it was currently reported that Mr. Lloyd George declared that never again would he intervene in a cotton dispute. I believe that after that dispute both the masters and the workmen's representatives also declared that never again would they allow a third party to interfere between them. Is it not much better for trade disputes to be thrashed out by those immediately concerned? So long as master and workman look to a third party to settle their own disputes, they admit that they are not capable of managing their own concerns. If the Government stops interfering then strikes will not be of such frequent recurrence, but by constantly interfering they are
really driving a wedge in between capital and labour. It is just as unwise to interfere between a master and his work- man's representatives as to interfere between husband and
Previous page
