THE NEW TRADE-UNIONISM. T HE annual meeting of the Trade-Union Conference,
which takes place at Liverpool next week, will be a momentous event in the history of English labour organisations, for at its sittings will be discussed, and in all probability decided, the question whether the workmen shall proceed upon the old lines in their endeavours to sell their labour to the best advantage, or whether an entirely new departure shall be taken. All sincere and well-advised friends of the artisan will hope that a decision to keep to the old lines will be adopted ; but this cannot prevent a grave feeling of mistrust that the vague and unpractical schemes of "the new Unionist," as they are beginning to be called, will prevail, and that in this way a disastrous blow will be dealt to the cause of the labourer. Though the older Trade-Unions have been occasionally misled into unwise and injurious action, their main methods are reasonable and justifiable enough. They desire by the formation of Unions to prevent the employers from making bargains unfavourable to the employed ; and, by a system of mutual help and support, to place the workers in an advantageous position for selling their labour. The capitalist, by the nature of the thing which he offers to exchange, has prima facie a considerable superiority in the process by which the price of labour is fixed. He can afford to take advantage of the fact that he is dealing in a market where, as Bacon says, "if you can stay a little, the price will fall." He need not be in a hurry, but can take time to look about him and make a prudent arrangement. But the labourer, when he stands alone, cannot afford to wait. His is a perishable product, and he starves while he is bargaining. But if he can combine with his fellows, this defect may in a great measure be remedied, and he can meet the employer on equal terms. Naturally enough, then, he looks upon the Union as a very useful piece of machinery, which may prevent his being driven into a corner and forced to sell his labour at a disadvantage either in regard to pay, to hours of working, or any other of the conditions which together constitute the price of his toil. No doubt this mother-principle has often to some extent been left out of sight by the old-fashioned Unions, but in the main the successes they have achieved have been due to its application.
Now, however, a new notion appears to have captivated a portion of the labourers, and they desire to make their organisations perform a further function. They have realised that the price of labour, as of everything else, de- pends upon the ratio between supply and demand,—that is, they see that the less labour there is in the market, the more wages tend to rise. Accordingly, they have come to the con- clusion that the Unions should endeavour to restrict the supply of labour in the market, in order that the rate of wages may thereby be made to rise. Mr. Burns and his colleagues, who represent the new Unionists, have, for example, declared that no more labourers shall be admitted into the Dockers' Union, in order to maintain, or possibly increase, the rate of pay at the docks. Of course, if the Union were simply a voluntary society, it would have a right to make any regulations it pleased as to the admission of members. No one has any claim to object to the regulations to which the members bind themselves. The Union, however, is not in practice a voluntary society. It in effect declares that no man not be- longing to it shall work at unloading ships in the Port of London, and enforces this declaration by ill- treating and molesting all non-Unionists who attempt to undertake such employment. In a word, the Dockers' Union, a body consisting of so many thousand labourers, demands that to it shall be given a monopoly of unloading in the Thames. Like a medireval guild, the members desire to form a close corporation empowered to prevent any infringement of their exclusive privileges.. That this demand is concealed by some talk of only excluding persons Who are proved to be physically incapable, we are well aware ; but that is a mere subterfuge. The moment free admission into the ranks of the Union is stopped, the organi- sation becomes a Guild, which, if left alone, would soon strangle trade, as did the " Mysteries" of five centuries ago. If the action threatened by the Dockers' Union were to be persisted in by that body, and imitated by other labour organisations, we should, in fact, return to the industrial conditions of the Middle Ages, and be confronted with Protection in its very worst form. That such a return will take place in fact, we do not of course believe. The labourers who would be left out in the cold—the residuum of the population—all those interested in cheap production, as well as the capital-holding classes, would certainly com- bine to prevent it. If, however, the Trade-Unions attempt to tread the dangerous path recommended to them by the new Unionists, we may well have an industrial crisis which will break up the labour organisations, and do an incalculable amount of harm to the artisans. Come what may, labour and trade in England must be free, and the forces which overthrew the manufacturer and landlord monopolists, will also crush those who now propose to usurp the control of commerce and industry in their own interests.
The manner in which the new Unionists were led to take up their present position is not difficult to understand. The fact that they were able to ill-treat the non-Unionists till they were unable to remain at the docks, naturally enough suggested the notion of making the unloading of ships a monopoly. It is evident, then, that in the future no force or trouble must be spared to pro- tect non-Unionist labourers. If they are not safe- guarded, we shall find the notion that it is legitimate for a Union to monopolise a particular industry growing apace. Here is the point where the force of the law and of public opinion must be applied. Whatever may be our sympathies with the men in any particular strike, the right of a labourer to work for whom he pleases, at whatever wages he pleases, must be rigidly maintained. To insist upon this does not necessarily imply any dislike or distrust of the -Onions. It will, indeed, be found that the maintenance of free labour will in the end confine the Unions to their proper sphere of work, and make them really useful to the working man. If a Union chooses to do so, it may, of course, declare that none of its members shall wort with non-Unionists. As long as no lawless acts take place, this is no worse than the members of a circuit refusing to work with a barrister who has not been admitted to their mess. Again, a Union has a perfect right to refuse admission to new members, so long as it does not illegally attempt to monopolise employment in a particular trade. We can, for instance, imagine a select Dockers' Union, composed of men of exceptional physique and industry, banded together under strict rules, who might supply a very useful function. Even if they charged exceptional prices, a shipper might very well agree to employ them, knowing that the extra cost would be compensated for by quick and good. work. They might be cheaper at is. an hour than ordinary dockers at 6d. All that must be insisted on is, that the Unions must not prevent the free employment of labour. The unchecked circulation of the blood in the body in- dustrial is necessary to its existence ; and if even a single vein is plugged, the gravest complications will be sure to result. But to keep the blood flowing freely, one thing is essential. No interference with men who desire to sell their labour must be tolerated for a moment. Those who are anxious to see the working classes gain a larger share of the amenities of existence—and none can be more anxious than ourselves—must make "Free Labour" their watchword. Unless this is insisted on as the basis of industrial society, the labourers may be led into trying experiments which must end in their ruin. Capital can, in the long-run, always take care of itself, for it is a welcome guest from China to Peru ; but the English artisan would emerge from any attempt to mediwvalise the conditions of labour in a position worse even than that in which he found himself at the beginning of the century.
Previous page
