over what would have happened had the market system of adjusting wages been followed, with all its accompanying friction. Had not the Fleet Corporation interposed, there is little doubt that the standard of living, instead of being maintained, would have been impaired.

f) During the period after the Shipbuilding Labor Adjustment Board and the Industrial Relations Division were functioning and prior to the signing of the armistice, there were no strikes or lockouts, save of momentary character, in yards doing work for the Fleet Corporation.' Industrial peace was thus roughly attained. This should not be understood to mean that there were no rumblings of discontent, but merely that no actual interference with production occurred during hostilities. When the temper of both employers and workmen is considered, this is perhaps the most outstanding proof of the success of the efforts of the shipyard labor administration. There can be little question that had it not been for the Labor Adjustment Board and the Industrial Relations Division the tonnage built would have been less by several hundred thousand tons.

V. THE FUTURE

The Shipbuilding Labor Adjustment Board, though its duration was not limited by either of the memoranda creating it, was dissolved on April 1. During the months of February and March many efforts were made to devise some machinery to take its place. The peace-time problem is naturally different from that of war, if for no other reason than that the shipyards will soon be producing primarily for private and not for government account. By July 1 of this year the wood-ship yards will be practically through with Fleet Corporation work, while 30 per cent of the steel-ship yards formerly occupied on government work will be freed for private construction. By December, 1919, over 60 per cent of the steelship ways will so be free.2

'The Seattle shipyard strike which led to the general strike occurred January 21, 1918. This is a story in itself. The settlement was in strict accord with the principles which governed the Shipbuilding Labor Adjustment Board and the Industrial Relations Division.

2 The prohibition upon the building of steel ships for foreign account has not as yet been raised, but it is expected that it will be very shortly.

The Emergency Fleet Corporation therefore could no longer presume to act for the builders as it had been compelled to do during the war. The shipbuilders themselves, who had not been parties to the formation of the Board, were the only ones who could enter into a general agreement with the unions.

After a series of conferences it seems to be undoubted that several boards will replace the Adjustment Board. After a stormy two weeks' conference in Washington between representatives of the local unions and employers from the Pacific Coast, together with representatives of the international unions and the Fleet Corporation, an agreement was drawn up providing for the creation of a board for the Pacific Coast with ten members, with a continuation of the principal conditions established by the Adjustment Board, save that the 44-hour week was established for the entire year, and not merely for the summer months, as at present. The board, if constituted, will have power over wages, hours, conditions of labor, classification, grievances, etc. The local coast unions will undoubtedly have a larger voice in representing labor on this board than the international unions, and thus one cause of friction will be removed. This agreement has been approved by the employers and will be voted upon by the local unions, by whom it will undoubtedly be rejected.

Although some employers on the Atlantic Coast and Great Lakes are refusing to sign collective agreements with the American Federation of Labor, it is probable that the vast majority of them will do so. The American Shipbuilding Company, a concern with six yards on the Great Lakes, has already signed such an agreement. The two agency yards of the Fleet Corporation (the American International Shipbuilding Corporation at Hog Island and the Merchant Shipbuilding Corporation at Bristol, Pennsylvania), have also signed such an agreement, as have the various plants of the Bethlehem Shipbuilding Company. Many others are about to fall in line and it is probable that from these individual agreements district boards for the Atlantic Coast and Great Lakes will ultimately be built up.

Until some machinery is set up and functioning the Emergency Fleet Corporation will maintain the rates and conditions of labor established by the Adjustment Board and will probably use these

rates as the basis of reimbursement for all its contract settlements, although of course yards may out of their profits pay the workmen more than the scale.

Whatever boards are set up will be based upon and will take over the principles and policies established by the Labor Adjustment Board and the Industrial Relations Division. Thus in this newest of industries, perhaps chiefly because of the lack of longestablished business inertia, the governmental policies evoked under the stress of war-time pressure are to be taken over as the basis for future peace-time action. One, at least, of war's gains is apparently to be made permanent.

P. H. DOUGLAS

Emergency Fleet Corporation

F. E. WOLFE

Ohio Wesleyan University

NOTES

A MISSING CHAPTER IN OUR WAR-LABOR POLICY

The President of the United States set forth the beginnings of a national war-labor policy in his proclamation of April 8, 1918. In this proclamation he gave official approval to the findings of the War Labor Conference Board and particularly to their statement of the "principles and policies to govern relations between workers and employers in war industries for the duration of the war." From that date it could properly be said that we had a national labor policy covering the following points:* 1. There should be no strikes or lock-outs during the war.

2. The right of either workers or employers to organize should not be interfered with, and neither party should use coercive measures with respect to union membership.

3. Existing conditions with reference to the open or closed shop should be maintained.

4. Established safeguards and regulations for the protection of the health and safety of workers should not be relaxed.

5. Women should receive equal pay for equal work and should not have tasks disproportionate to their strength.

6. Practices tending to limit production either by employers or workers should be discouraged.

7. Certain practices with reference to mobilization of labor should be encouraged.

8. The customs and practices of localities should be regarded in fixing wages, hours, and conditions of labor.

9. The right of all workers to a living wage which would insure the subsistence of the worker and his family in health and reasonable comfort should be recognized.

The various government departments accepted this statement of principles and policies as a constituent part of their labor programs. As time went on, however, it became apparent that not all of the situations which arose were adequately met. In particular there was no provision for the standardization of wages and working conditions in the various war industries, which came to be regarded as desirable by most persons concerned with the work of labor administration. In October, 1918, 'There was also a colorless utterance concerning hours of labor.

the President was asked to supplement his earlier proclamation. A document setting forth the points to be covered was approved by the Secretary of Labor and sent to the President with the request that it be issued as a second proclamation on labor policy. For reasons that are not known to the writer delay after delay occurred, and the armistice was finally signed without such proclamation having been made. The time has gone by when any unfortunate consequences could follow the publication of the document concerned. It is full of interest for students of the labor problem, in that it reveals (1) something of the conditions under which the wage-adjusting agencies of the government labored, and (2) the general principles upon which they came to agree' as a result of their operations.

The outstanding events connected with the development of the document are as follows. A decision covering wages, hours, and working conditions for the shipbuilding plants of the entire country had been prepared by the Shipbuilding Labor Adjustment Board in August, 1918. The members of the Board realized that the promulgation of this decision might disrupt labor conditions in the metal-trades industries of our railroads and munition plants. It was accordingly desirable that opportunity should be given to other wage-adjusting agencies to consider the feasibility of establishing national standards of wages and working conditions in our war industries. It had, of course, been the expectation that the War Labor Policies Board would lead the way in the establishment of such standards. That Board had at various times discussed the standardization of wages of common labor, the standardization of wages of building-trades workers, and the standardization of wages of metaltrades workers outside of shipyards. But the activities of the War Labor Policies Board had, after all, been characterized by much talk and little performance.

The situation seemed to the members of the Shipbuilding Labor Adjustment Board sufficiently acute to justify disregarding the theoretical position of the War Labor Policies Board and to justify an attempt to cut through the difficulties involved and secure an elaboration of our national labor policy. They accordingly asked for a conference with the President and laid the entire situation before him. He requested the Board to withhold publication of its decision pending his securing, through the Secretary of Labor, action looking toward uniformity of policy of the various wage-adjustment agencies of the government.

The representatives of the War Labor Board did not sign the document. That Board felt that it must be guided by local conditions in arriving at its decisions.