Categories
Columbia Industrial Organization Labor Socialism Syllabus Undergraduate

Columbia. Excerpt from Contemporary Civilization Syllabus. Industrial Problems, 1921

Columbia College’s freshman course on Contemporary Civilization, a.k.a. “CC”, has been a core element in the undergraduate experience for over a century. This is the second post providing an excerpt of the third edition of the course syllabus (1921) that should be of particular interest for economists. Topics include: industrial organization, regulation, organized labor, and alternate systems of economic control. As in the earlier post, links to all the items referenced have been added.

_________________________

Another Post from the Syllabus

Book III, Sections 1-5. Historical background of contemporary civilization, 1400-1870.

_________________________

BOOK VIII. INDUSTRIAL PROBLEMS

1. A survey of the prominent features of the modern industrial system.

  1. Private property.
    *Seligman, Principles of Economics, 125-138; *Hamilton, Current Economic Problems, 762-775; R.T. Ely, Property and Contract in their Relation to the Distribution of Wealth, Vol. I, 165-190.
    1. The meaning of the right of private property: the exclusive control over valuable things by private persons.
    2. Theories concerning the basis of property rights
      1. Occupation, or seizure.
      2. Natural rights.
      3. Labor.
      4. Legal theory
      5. Social utility.
    3. Property rights — rights vested in the owner of private property.
      1. Right of gift.
      2. Right of disposition by contract.
      3. Right of use.
      4. Right of bequest.
      5. Right of unlimited acquisition.
      6. Right to exclude.
    4. Limitations on property rights: social considerations limit the extent of private property rights.
      1. Right of use limited by principle of “eminent domain.”
      2. Right of use restricted by laws against “nuisances,” etc.
      3. Right of bequest limited by inheritance tax laws.
      4. Proposed limitations on the right of unlimited acquisition; the modern attitude toward great fortunes.
    5. Property and social authority. In the modern economic system private property is the chief basis of social authority and power.
  1. Competition as an economic principle. (See 3.A. below)

The doctrines of individualism and laissez faire are still regarded by modern business and industry as the basis for economic operation. It is felt that competition stimulates producers and protects both producers and consumers.

  1. The use of machinery and artificial power.
    *Marshall and Lyon, Our Economic Organization, 207-227; *Clay, H., Economics for the General Reader, 21-27; Marshall, Wright & Field, Materials for the Study of Elementary Economics, 158-160, 198-199.
    1. The standardization and mechanization of industrial processes and of industrial labor.
    2. Resulting tendency toward an elaborate technical division of labor, and toward a reduction of human effort to the simple repetition of a single operation. This mechanical character is typical of modern productive processes even where machinery is not employed.
    3. Limitations to the use of machinery.
      1. Unadapted to processes incapable of reduction to routine.
      2. Not applicable where tastes of individual consumers must be considered; the demand for quality and distinction.
  1. The factory system. (See above, p. 29.)
    *Hamilton, 112-113.
  2. The wage system.
    *Hamilton, 121-122; 617-619.
    1. The elaboration of the means of production has rendered ownership of the productive equipment by the laborers impossible under the present system.
    2. Modern industrial workers are thus in large part detached from direct personal control and responsible interest in the production and sale of commodities; dependent for livelihood upon employment as wage-workers by the owners of the means of production. The wage connection (“cash nexus”) the primary bond between the worker and his work. The proletariat.
    3. The mobility of labor under the wage system.
  1. The extensive use of capital and credit in promoting and conducting business and industrial undertakings.
    *Ely, Outlines of Economics, 212-230; *Hamilton, 110-112, 185-195, 206-208, 211-215; Clay, 97-104.
    1. Distinction between business and industrial units.
      1. The business unit: the unit of promotion and management. Types of business units.
        1. The individual business enterpriser.
        2. The partnership. (See (c) below.)
        3. The corporation. (See (c) below.)
      2. The industrial unit: the unit of production; the store, workshop, and factory.
    2. The necessity of capital and credit in industry today.
      1. The use of extensive plants and complicated machinery.
      2. The interval between production and sale may be long. Stock must be carried, workers must be paid, and other business and industrial expenses met in the meantime.
    3. Means of securing capital and credit.
      1. Individual and partnership enterprises.
        1. Use of capital of individual owners of the business.
        2. The use of bank credit.
          1. Banks as depositories of idle capital.
          2. Banks as agencies of credit.
      2. The corporation.
        1. Capital secured by sale of stock.
          1. Types of stock — common and preferred.
          2. The function and rights of stockholders.
        2. Capital secured by borrowing; the issuance of bonds.
          1. Types of bonds.
          2. The function and rights of bondholders.
      3. The use of bank credit.
    4. The relation of the business enterpriser (entrepreneur) to the owners of capital.
      1. The function of the promoter or organizer of a large corporation.
        1. The work of promotion.
        2. The relation of the promoter to the investors.
        3. The rewards of the promoter.
      2. The function of the executive officials of a corporation.
        1. The powers of the board of directors.
        2. The theoretical and actual relation of the directors to the investors and creditors.
      3. The possibility of misuse of power by the business representatives of owners of capital.
    1. The social importance of the separation of the actual ownership of property from direct control of that property.
      1. Corporate type of organization is breaking the direct relation of ownership between men and goods.
      2. Resulting change in the nature of the institution of private property.
  1. The dominance of large-scale enterprise in certain lines of industry.
    *Taussig, Principles of Economics, Vol. I, 49-66; Clay, 123-127. (Note — This section treats only the “legitimate” aspects of large scale production. Monopolies, combinations and “trusts” are treated under 3.B below).
    1. Marked increase in the size of the industrial unit within recent years.
    2. Reasons for the development of large-scale enterprises.
      1. Industrial reasons.
        1. Tendency toward increasing returns in industry.
        2. Advantages of standardization of product.
        3. Utilization of by-products.
        4. Economy of power.
        5. Greater division of labor possible.
        6. Scientific and technical research possible.
      2. Business reasons.
        1. Elimination of cost of competition.
        2. Selling advantages.
        3. Buying advantages.
        4. The stimulus of promoter’s profits.
    3. Restriction of the tendency toward large-scale production to certain industrial fields.
    4. Large scale enterprise and wide markets. As local specialization develops and the size of the productive unit increases, the entrepreneurs are driven to more distant markets to sell their produce. Large-scale enterprise is therefore dependent upon good means of transportation.
      1. Requirements for effective means of transportation.
        1. Speed: the importance of the time element in transportation, especially in the case of perishable goods. Refrigeration cars. Interest on invested capital while goods are in transit.
        2. Regularity: e.g. the milk supply of New York City. Commutation.
        3. Safety: passenger traffic, fragile goods.
        4. Cheapness: high rates reduce the size of the market. “Discriminating rates” in U. S.
          *Marshall, Wright & Field, 259-266.
        5. Elasticity: ability of the transportation systems to meet
          1. the peak-load requirements; e.g., coal in U. S. The after-the-harvest situation.
          2. the needs of the localities off the main lines of communication. The great increase in motor-truck transportation in the U. S.
      2. [Can the economic and social demands for means of transport be met by private companies? See 5.B.f below]
  1. The interdependence of all parts of the industrial structure.
    *Hamilton, 113-115, 204-205, 208-211; L. Alston, How It All Fits Together, 14-49.
    1. Industrial and geographical division of labor; resulting interdependence of different industries and regions. The whole industrial system thus constitutes what is in effect a single productive machine.
    2. The credit structure knits all modern business and industry together. The credit basis typical of modern business.
    3. Modern monetary and banking systems international in their scope.
    4. Manifestations of this interdependence: financial panics and industrial depressions. (Business cycles.) Railway strikes.

2. The organization of production: problems arising from the conflicting interests of certain of the agents of production.

  1. The agents of production.
    *Ely, Outlines of Economics, 116-130; *Clay, 46-63, 92-94; Seligman, Principles of Economics, 283-287; Seager, Principles of Economics (Second Edition), 122-169; Marshall, Wright & Field, Materials, 58-61, 106-108, 204-206.
    1. Natural agents: the basis of all production; the source of raw materials.
      1. Types of natural agents.
        1. Agricultural land.
        2. Urban land, furnishing sites for dwellings, stores, office-buildings, factories, etc.
        3. Forests.
        4. Mines and quarries.
        5. Waterways and harbors.
        6. Sources of natural power: wind, waterfalls, etc.
      2. Certain characteristics of natural agents.
        1. Incapable of material increase in amount.
        2. Different units may vary in productivity.
        3. Varying locations make different units more or less accessible.
    2. Labor: physical and intellectual activities conducing to production.
      1. Labor and natural agents are the two primary factors in production.
      2. The gain in efficiency secured by division of labor. (See above, p. 30.)
      3. Different individuals possess varying degrees of productive ability.
    3. Capital.
      1. Technical meaning of the term “capital”: goods produced by man and used by man to assist him in further production.
      2. The money value of capital goods not to be confused with the concrete capital goods.
      3. The function of capital in production.
        1. Increases the efficiency of man’s labor by enabling labor to be more effectively applied.
        2. Enables labor to be supported during the process of production.
    4. Business enterprise, or organization.
      1. The necessity of an organizer in modern production. In the modern highly complex industrial system natural agents, labor and capital have to be brought together and suitable arrangements made for their cooperation in the production of any desired commodity. The task has become especially important under modern industrial conditions, for the productive factors are in general separately owned.
      2. The function of the business enterpriser in production.
        1. To organize the factors in production.
        2. To evaluate the services rendered by each factor to his undertaking.
        3. To assume, in part, the business risks involved in the enterprise.
      3. The relation of the enterpriser to production under the corporate form of organization. (See above.)
      4. The work of the business enterpriser may involve labor of management, which is separately remunerated. The business enterpriser may invest his own capital, for which service he is also separately remunerated.
  1. The relation of the business enterpriser to labor; conditions underlying the labor problem; the conflict of interests.
    *Hamilton, 615-619, 628-635.
    1. The business interests of the employer.
      1. Maximum profits : ordinarily secured by
        1. Efficient and well-disciplined labor force.
        2. Low labor costs.
        3. Production on basis of market conditions. The process of production is normally subordinated to that of sale, for advantage must be taken of changing market conditions, (e.g., coal.) This may result in irregular production.
        4. Limitation of expenditures on plant to those which will increase profits.
      2. Complete control of his own business and of his working force.
    2. The interests of the laboring force.
      1. High wages.
      2. Short hours.
      3. Protection against industrial accident and disease by elimination of dangerous and insanitary working conditions.
      4. Regular employment.
      5. Participation as responsible agents in the industrial process.
    3. These competing interests, together with the necessity of cooperation in production, give rise to the labor problem.
  1. The machinery of agreement; methods of adjusting the conflict of interests.
    1. Individual versus collective bargaining.
      *Hamilton, 32-37, 636-640. M.R. Beard, A Short History of the American Labor Movement, 19-21; L.C. Marshall, Readings in Industrial Society, 560-569.

      1. The system of individual bargaining.
        1. The meaning of individual bargaining. Separate agreements made between employer and each of his employees as to wages and general conditions of employment; both parties to the contract free and equal agents; laborers free to work for any employer and to leave at will; employers free to employ any one they choose, and to terminate that employment at will.
        2. The assumptions underlying the system of individual bargaining.
          1. Laissez faire; the interests of the whole are advanced by allowing complete freedom to each individual. (See above: Competition, p. 71, and also below, p. 88.)
          2. Bargaining equality of employer and employee.
          3. The rôle of the employer in this concept of the industrial relation: a private individual engaged in a private enterprise, employing private property and subject to no control, except that furnished by business competition.
        3. Advantages claimed for the system of individual bargaining.
          1. Costs kept down and production increased by allowing full liberty to the employer.
          2. A mobile, elastic labor supply is thus secured. The employer is free to increase force when business is good, and to decrease force when business conditions call for limited production. The free and independent laborer, following his own interests will be found where he is wanted and when his labor is needed. Supply and demand given free play.
          3. Domination by organizations of laborers prevented when each man is free to bargain individually with the employer.
          4. Each individual worker secure in the superior advantage of his own efficiency.
        4. Defects charged to the system of individual bargaining.
          1. Fallacies in the assumption of complete equality between the parties to the bargain.
            1. The stakes at issue are not the same: for the employer it is a question of one employee more or less in any individual case; for the worker it is a question of the means of livelihood for himself and his family. He is thus forced to accept employer’s terms, and is not free to bargain in regard to them.
            2. The employee may be a minor, in which case there can be no equality of bargaining power.
          2. The system has resulted in the exploitation of minors and of many classes of male and female workers.
          3. The right of the employer to take on and discharge at will, depending upon business conditions, leads to irregularity of employment and consequent suffering on part of workers.
      2. The system of collective bargaining.
        Different interpretations of “collective bargaining.”

        1. The right of wage-earners within a given industrial unit (e.g., a factory or mine) to organize and to bargain with their employer through representatives elected from their own number.
        2. “The right of wage-earners to organize without discrimination, to bargain collectively, to be represented by representatives of their own choosing in negotiations and adjustments with their employers in respect to wages, hours of labor and conditions of employment.” (Resolution presented to Industrial Conference at Washington, October 22, 1910, by Labor Group.)
        3. The concept of full collective bargaining: bargaining between representatives of organized employees and of organized employers in a given industry. (e.g., New York Garment Workers; English Industrial Conference program.)

(The use of the system of collective bargaining, and its advantages and defects, will be considered in connection with the discussion of labor organizations below.)

    1. Collective bargaining further considered ; the combination movement in labor.
      1. Causes of the movement toward combination.
        *Hamilton, 619-622.
        1. Development of large-scale industry with increased use of capital after the Industrial Revolution led to a sharp differentiation between employers and workers, creating a class of industrial wage-workers divorced from the land. (See III.4.F)
        2. Weakness of the individual employee under a system of individual bargaining.
        3. Desire of workers to escape labor competition in regard to hours, wages, and conditions of employment. “The union organization attempts to cover the industrial field within which there is labor competition with respect to hours, wages, and conditions of employment.” Hoxie.
        4. Development of class consciousness among the permanent wage-workers. (The Communist Manifesto.)
      1. Main types of labor combinations. Labor unionism is complex, many-sided, and opportunistic.
        *Hoxie, Trade Unionism in the United States, 31-53.

        1. Structural division of labor combinations.
          1. The craft or trade union: an organization of wage-workers engaged in a single craft.
          2. The federation of craft unions.
            1. The local trades council.
            2. The state or district federation.
            3. National or international federation. In a federation the constituent organizations retain a large part of their individual independence.
          3. The industrial union: an organization of wage-workers employed in a given industry; attempts to unite skilled and unskilled in a single group. Industrial unions may be plant, local, district, national, or international, (e.g., the I.W.W.; the French syndicates.)
          4. The labor union: an organization of all workers in a given district regardless of craft or industry (e.g., The Knights of Labor).
          5. The “inside union” (employers’ union).
        2. Functional classification of unionism. (Hoxie.)
          1. Business unionism.
            1. Characteristics: trade conscious, conservative, aiming at immediate results, “more.”
            2. Methods: collective bargaining, trade agreements, strikes and boycotts as last resort, (e.g., R.R. brotherhoods.)
          2. Friendly or uplift unionism.
            1. Characteristics: conservative, law-abiding, idealistic.
            2. Methods: collective bargaining, mutual insurance, profit-sharing and cooperation, (e.g., Knights of Labor.)
          3. Revolutionary unionism.
            1. Characteristics: class conscious, radical in view-point and action, repudiating existing institutional order, and refusing to be bound by prevailing morals and laws.
            2. Methods: direct action, sabotage, strikes. Collective bargaining and mutual insurance regarded as conservative. (e.g., the I.W.W.)
          4. Predatory unionism.
            1. Characteristics: opportunistic, selfish and ruthless.
            2. Methods: may be those of open bargaining combined with secret bribery and violence (e.g., those of certain building trades organizations) or a secret “guerilla” warfare (e.g., that carried on by Bridge and Structural Iron Workers a few years ago).
      1. Labor combinations in the United States.
        Hoxie, Trade Unionism in the United States, 89-98, *103-135; Brissenden, The I.W.W.; C. H. Parker, The I.W.W., Atlantic Monthly, November, 1917; Marshall, Wright & Field, Materials for the Study of Elementary Economics, 668-694, 700-704.

        1. The early character of labor combination in both England and U. S. was idealistic, friendly, and altruistic. The members favored political action, cooperation and education. The Knights of Labor in the U. S. is an illustration.
        2. The American Federation of Labor.
          1. General characteristics.
            1. A loose federation of virtually independent unions. Because of the elastic character of the organization room has been found within the A.F. of L. for many diverse types of unions. Originally a federation of craft unions. Recently several industrial unions have been admitted to membership (e.g., United Mine Workers of America).
            2. Non-theoretical and opportunistic. Immediate results sought.
          2. Types of subordinate organizations.
            1. National and international unions.
            2. Local unions.
            3. Local and district councils: organizations of local craft unions in the same or allied industries to govern interrelations and deal with employers.
            4. City central labor unions: composed of delegates from the local unions of the A.F. of L. in a given city.
            5. State federation: organization of A.F. of L. union bodies within a given state.
            6. The departments: federations of allied national and international unions.
          3. Organic character of the A.F. of L.
            1. The annual convention, the sovereign power.
            2. The permanent executive council, to carry out the will of the convention.
          4. General functions of the A.F. of L.
            1. Administration of intercraft union affairs; settling jurisdictional disputes.
            2. Advancing labor’s interests by labor legislation.
            3. Maintenance of a labor press.
            4. Promoting the organization of wage-workers.
            5. Promoting the use of the union label.
            6. Mediation between unions and employers.
            7. Giving financial and moral assistance to unions on strike.
            8. Education and publicity.
          5. Weaknesses charged to the A.F. of L.
            1. Limited membership: less than 10% of workers.
            2. Lacks adherence of several strong unions, (e.g., R.R. brotherhoods.)
            3. Inability to organize laborers in great trust-controlled industries.
            4. Failure to organize and help unskilled labor.
            5. Jurisdictional disputes within A.F. of L.
            6. Tendency to pursue immediate results; opportunistic policy said to have limited its accomplishments.
            7. Craft form of organization not adapted to progressive specialization found in scientifically managed industries.
        3. The Railroad brotherhoods.
          1. General characteristics.
            1. Models of pure craft unions.
            2. Highly centralized control, disciplined membership.
            3. Skilled, specialized and highly paid membership.
            4. Conservative type business union.
            5. Recent tendency to change policy because of problem of government ownership of railroads — The Plumb Plan.
          2. Methods:
            1. Collective bargaining, trade agreements. Avoidance of strikes except as last resort.
            2. Legislation.
            3. Mutual insurance.
            4. Recent movement for Plumb Plan.
        4. The unions in the clothing industry.
          Budish and Soule, The New Unionism, 27-45, 256-273, 191-204.

          1. The nature of the clothing industry.
            1. Seasonal demand and seasonal unemployment.
            2. Highly competitive system and “contracting out” in small producing units.
            3. Prevalence of immigrant labor, large percentage of women.
          2. Union organization of the industry.
            1. Early prevalence of the sweat shop with low wages and bad sanitary conditions.
            2. Early failures to correct these evils by legislation and union organization.
            3. Rapid growth of unionism after 1914.
            4. The establishment of trade agreements and joint boards with impartial chairmen.
          3. Policies of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers as a type.
            1. Belief in industrial unionism.
            2. Ultimate aim to establish self-government and control in industry.
            3. Encouragement of collective bargaining, shop committees and “industrial government.”
            4. Opposition to sabotage as a hindrance to the training of the workers in self-government.
            5. Promotion of workers’ education and cooperative enterprises.
            6. Anti-restrictionist attitude toward immigration.
            7. Promotion of separate political action.
        5. Revolutionary Unionism.
          The types of labor combinations given above stand for the modification and improvement of the status of the laborer under the existing systems of government. Revolutionary unionism is opposed to the existing political as well as economic organization. It believes that no real improvement of the position of labor can take place under the present political regime. It is organized therefore with the expressed purpose of over-throwing the governments as they are, and reorganizing society so that labor will receive its proper share of the national dividend. The Industrial Workers of the World is the most prominent example of this form of labor combination in the U.S. (See 5.B.h.iv below. American Syndicalism: the I.W.W.)
      2. Labor combinations in Great Britain.
        S. & B. Webb, Industrial Democracy; G.D.H. Cole, An Introduction to Trade Unions; G.D.H. Cole, The World of Labor.
        British industry is rather thoroughly organized into unions of many varieties and types. Craft unions, industrial unions and general labor unions are found side by side, often competing for members in the same industry. Since these unions have grown up haphazardly, without control or direction, no common principle of organization is found. In England, as in the United States, there are two rival types at present contending for supremacy: craft unionism and industrial unionism.

        1. The growth in strength of organized labor in Great Britain.
          1. 1892: total population, United Kingdom, 40,000,000; membership of unions, 1,500,000; 4% of population organized; 20% of male manual workers organized; 3% of women workers organized.
          2. 1915: total population, 46,000,000; membership of unions, 4,127,000; 9% of population organized; 45% of male manual workers organized; 10% of women workers organized.
          3. In 1917 the total membership in the unions was 5,287,522.
        2. Types of labor organizations in Great Britain.
          1. The Miners’ Federation of Great Britain: a strong industrial federation.
            S. & B. Webb, Industrial Democracy, 51, 57, 146.
          2. The National Union of Railwaymen: an industrial union.
          3. Transport Workers’ Federation: a federation of unions among dock and vehicle workers.
            Webb, History of Trade Unionism, 499-502.
          4. Cotton, engineering (steel-working), and ship-building industries organized into a great many separate craft unions, of which the Amalgamated Society of Engineers (A.S.E.) is the most powerful.
          5. General labor unions: strong organizations including unskilled and general laborers in many industries. General labor unions have developed comparatively recently, for up to 1890 craft unions of skilled workers dominated the labor movement in Great Britain. The organization of unskilled workers has been carried forward rapidly since that date.
        3. Mechanism of unification and cooperation.
          S. & B. Webb, Industrial Democracy, 265-278.

          1. Trades’ councils; federations of local trade union branches in each particular district; workers in different industries included.
          2. National federations of trade unions: federal combinations of local or of national trade unions. These federations, many of them strongly centralized, add strength and unity to labor organization.
          3. The Triple Alliance: the first great inter-industrial federation in the British labor movement. A general alliance between the Miners’ Federation of Great Britain, the National Union of Railwaymen and the Transport Workers’ Federation to secure joint action in industrial disputes. The disintegration of the Triple Alliance in 1921. S. and B. Webb, History of Trade Unionism (1920), 516-517.
          4. The Trades Union Congress. (Approximately 75% of the membership of British trade unions are included in this Congress.)
            S. and B. Webb, History of Trade Unionism (1920), 561-575, 649-663.

              1. Character of the Congress: an annual conference of delegates from affiliated societies.
              2. The Parliamentary Committee of the Trade Union Congress. The central executive authority of the Congress.
                1. Limitation of powers, because it cannot enforce any obligation upon the affiliated unions.
                2. Resemblance to Executive committee of the A.F. of L.
              3. The functions of the Trade Union Congress and its parliamentary committee primarily industrial.
          5. The Labor Party. A federation of trade unions, socialist and other societies organized for purposes of political action. (See below: The use of the political weapon by labor.)
            Ogg, Economic Development of Modern Europe, 441-447.
        4. Policies and methods of British unions.
          1. Policies.
            1. Earlier policies: conservative uplift unionism.
            2. Radical character of recent policies: the fight for nationalization and participation in control. (See below.)
            3. The proposed use of the industrial weapon for political purposes.
          2. Methods.
            S. & B. Webb, Industrial Democracy, 796-806.

            1. Mutual insurance and benefits.
            2. Collective bargaining.
            3. Trade agreements; the standard rate.
            4. Legislation.
            5. Combined industrial action: the methods of the Triple Alliance.
    1. Combination among employers.
      *Hoxie, 188-206; Marshall, Wright and Field, Materials, 694-699.

      1. Types of employers’ organizations. There are many structural and functional types, corresponding closely to similar union bodies. In general, two main functional types may be distinguished.
        The conciliatory association, seeking to maintain industrial peace

        1. largely through bargaining and conciliation.
        2. The militant association, one of the chief objects of which is to break union organizations.
      2. Methods of militant employers’ associations.
        1. Effective counter organization, paralleling union structure.
        2. War on closed shop, by action and propaganda; blacklisting.
        3. Mutual aid; assistance given employers in time of strikes.
        4. Establishment of welfare plans, insurance and pension schemes which are subject to forfeiture in case of strike.
        5. Organization of counter-unions.
        6. The use of the law: injunctions and damage suits, etc.
        7. Methods of political action.
      3. Mediatory employers’ associations.
        1. Organization paralleling union structure.
        2. Collective bargaining and conciliation. (See below.)
      4. The employers’ associations and the principle of individualism. Significant departure from strict laissez-faire principles is involved in the formation of strong employers’ organizations.
    2. Relations between labor combinations and employers.
      1. Typical forms of collective bargaining in operation.
        *Hoxie, 254-275; Seager, Principles of Economics, 548-572; Taussig, Principles of Economics, Vol. 2, 313-322; Hamilton, 638-650, 663-666, 602-605, 731-739, 788-793; Marshall, Wright and Field, Materials, 683-691; Arthur Young, The International Harvester Industrial Council Plan; J. D. Rockefeller, Jr., The Colorado Industrial Plan.

        1. The “inside union”; collective bargaining with Works Committees. The Colorado plan; the Midvale plan; the International Harvester plan.
        2. Negotiation and trade agreements between organized workers and organized employers.
          1. Examples of negotiation in American industry: the bituminous coal situation; the garment workers.
          2. Subjects of negotiation and character of agreements reached. The principle of uniformity; the standard rate; the minimum wage.
          3. The legal character of trade agreements.
        3. Mediation, conciliation and arbitration by outside agencies as modes of securing industrial peace.
          Report of President Wilson’s Second Industrial Conference.

          1. Limited applicability. Questions of recognition of union and of open versus closed shop not usually open to arbitration.
          2. Boards of arbitration, public and private.
        4. Compulsory arbitration: employers and employees must accept decision of a judicial arbitration tribunal; the case of New Zealand.
          1. The object of compulsory arbitration: to prevent industrial stoppage due to strikes and lockouts.
          2. Difficulties of compulsory arbitration.
            1. Difficulty of enforcing findings against labor.
            2. In attempting to determine what are “fair” wages the tribunal must determine what are “fair” profits and “fair” interest. Whole distributive process thus subject to regulation.
          3. The present status of compulsory arbitration: the attitude of labor; the situation in New Zealand and Australia.
        5. Kansas Industrial Relations Court plan.
          Allen, Party of the Third Part.
          Some provisions of the law:

          1. Creation of a tribunal vested with “power, authority and jurisdiction” to hear and determine all controversies which tend to threaten the operation of essential industries.
          2. All essential industries must be operated with reasonable continuity. Permission to discontinue must be given by Court.
          3. Right of collective bargaining is recognized.
          4. Violations of the act are punishable by fine or imprisonment or both.
      2. The appeal to force.
        *Hamilton, 650-659, 677-680; Marshall, Wright & Field, Materials, 705-709; Adams and Sumner, Labor Problems, 175-212.

        1. The weapons of the unions.
          1. The strike in relation to collective bargaining.
            1. Definition: The refusal of a number of workingmen to sell their labor for less than a stipulated price or to work under other than specified conditions of employment, coupled with the refusal of the purchaser of that labor to accede to their demands.
            2. The sympathetic strike.
            3. The utility of the strike as a weapon for the attainment of union ends. The right to strike considered by labor to be an essential element in collective bargaining.
            4. Criticisms of the strike. Strikes and violence. Proposed laws prohibiting strikes.
          2. The ostracism of non-union workers.
          3. The boycott and the “unfair list”: means of discouraging the purchase of products of a hostile employer. The law against the boycott; the Danbury Hatters’ case.
        2. The weapons of the employer.
          1. The lockout.
          2. The black-list.
          3. The use of strike-breaking and detective agencies.
          4. The employers’ associations sometimes in a position to use the power of the state in breaking strikes.
      3. The weapons of revolutionary unionism. Disavowal of collective bargaining, conciliation, arbitration, and trade agreements.
        1. The strike.
        2. The general strike: a general stoppage of work in all industries.
          1. Attempts to utilize the weapon of the general strike in the past.
          2. The general strike as the weapon by which the revolutionary unionists hope to achieve their final objects.
        3. Sabotage; “Ca Cannie”; the “strike on the job.” The reduction of output by disabling machinery, working less efficiently, or destroying part of the product.
  1. Points of conflict between labor and capital and proposed solutions.
    *J. B. Andrews, Labor Problems and Labor Legislation, 23-44.
    (The discussion above has been confined largely to a description of the machinery of agreement, the means by which cooperation in production is normally secured. Some of the points at issue, other than that of collective bargaining, are now to be considered.)
    1. The struggle for higher wages.
      Hamilton, 586-602; 591-593; Marshall, Wright and Field, 643-647, 659-669; Seager, 583-590.

      1. Factors in the wage dispute.
        1. Earlier theories of wages according to which the remuneration of the laborer was fixed by agencies not in his control.
          1. Malthus and the subsistence theory of wages.
          2. The wages-fund theory.
        2. Wage levels in the early years of the Industrial Revolution. (See above, p. 30.)
        3. The standard of living and the fight for higher wages.
          1. Education and the standard of living.
          2. The struggle to maintain and to raise the standard of living an ever-present cause of conflict over wages.
          3. The standard of living and rising prices.
        4. The wage question and unionism. The standard rate an essential element in collective bargaining.
      2. Methods of adjusting wage disputes.
        1. Trade agreements as to wages. Such agreements constitute merely temporary solutions.
        2. Profit-sharing: an attempt to eliminate wage disputes, increase efficiency of workers and harmonize the interests of employers and employed by giving the workers a share in the profits.
          1. Types of profit-sharing.
          2. Advantages and defects of profit-sharing.
          3. Failure of profit-sharing to eliminate industrial disputes.
        3. Bonus and premium systems, involving additional rewards to exceptional men for added output.
          1. Object: increase in output without increase in labor cost per unit.
          2. Opposition of organized labor to these systems, based upon
            1. Tendency of such arrangements to weaken collective spirit in laborers.
            2. Danger of pace-making.
            3. Alleged cutting of rates by employers if earnings of men become large.
        4. The legal minimum wage.
          1. Definition: A minimum wage established by the state for work of a certain sort or workers of a certain class.
          2. The argument against the minimum wage: wages are automatically adjusted to the productive ability of the worker, and cannot be set above this point by legal enactment.
          3. The argument for the minimum wage.
            1. Exploitation of workers, especially women and children, must be prevented.
            2. Adequate standard of living must be maintained, and it is the duty of the state to see that this standard is not lowered.
          4. The application of minimum wage laws presents the problem of providing for the inefficient and the unemployable.
    2. The struggle for shorter hours.
      *Andrews, Labor Problems and Labor Legislation, 45-69; Hamilton, 784-787; Seager, 574-583; Goldmark, Fatigue and Efficiency; Marshall, Wright and Field, 716-721; Commons and Andrews, Principles of Labor Legislation, 221-286.

      1. The efficiency argument for short hours.
        1. Investigations concerning the relation of fatigue to efficiency.
        2. The experience of the war: the economy of short hours.
      2. Other arguments for short hours.
        1. Necessity of protecting women and children.
        2. Necessity of regulating hours in dangerous occupations.
        3. Short hours and democracy. Necessity of leisure for education and participation in the life of the democracy.
      3. The legal regulation of hours.
        1. Laws regulating hours of labor of children. State and federal legislation in United States.
          1. The federal law of 1916 forbidding interstate traffic in goods produced by children working long hours; set aside by Supreme Court.
          2. The federal tax on the profits of establishments employing children between 14 and 16 at night or for more than 8 hours daily. 1919.
        2. State legislation limiting hours of labor of women.
        3. Recent movements toward legal regulation of men’s hours. The Adamson railroad law establishing 8 hours as the standard for pay.
      4. Limitation of hours through collective bargaining.
        1. The 8-hour day being largely established through direct bargaining.
        2. The movement toward further reduction of hours: the 44-hour week.
      5. Increased productivity versus shorter hours.
        *Hamilton, 700-705.
    3. Conditions of employment.
      Andrews, Labor Problems and Labor Legislation, 69-82, 83-92; Hamilton, 566-570; 577-578, 584-586; Seager, Principles, 583-590; Seager, Social Insurance; Marshall, Wright & Field, 721-723; Ogg, Economic Development of Modern Europe, 568-641. Commons and Andrews, 323-382.

      1. Safety.
        1. General nature and causes of industrial accidents. Types of dangerous occupations.
        2. The cost of industrial accidents.
          1. The burden as borne by the workers; the theory that wages are adjusted to risk.
          2. Social results of this system.
        3. Methods of reducing the number of industrial accidents.
          1. Trade union regulations concerning working conditions.
          2. Industrial safety laws.
        4. Workmen’s compensation laws as a means of relieving the worker of the cost of accidents.
      2. Health.
        1. Nature and causes of occupational diseases.
        2. The improvement of working conditions and the reduction in amount of occupational disease through legal and trade union action. Prohibition of dangerous substances and regulation of working conditions.
        3. The movement for social insurance as a method of relieving the worker of the burden of sickness.
      3. Working conditions under the “sweat-shop” system.
        1. The evils of tenement house manufacture: congestion, unsanitary conditions, low wages, long hours, child labor.
        2. The fight against the sweating system.
    4. Scientific management.
      *Hamilton, 705-713; *Hoxie, 296-348; Marshall, Wright & Field, 219-233; Goldmark, Fatigue and Efficiency, 192-210; Marot, Creative Impulse in Industry, 29-55.

      1. The meaning of “scientific management.”
        1. The application to machines and workers of scientifically established laws governing the processes of production and the modes of payment for the purpose of increasing efficiency in industry.
        2. Time and motion study the method by which the facts and laws of efficient production are to be established.
          1. Narrow conception of time and motion study: an instrument for task-setting and efficiency rating merely.
          2. Broader conception: time and motion study as a method of analysis applicable to every feature of the productive and distributive process.
      2. Scientific management and production. Systematic scientific study of productive processes and methods affords possibility of great increase of world’s productive efficiency, a possibility which should be utilized.
      3. Scientific management in the mechanical and in the human sphere.
        1. The unquestioned success of scientific management in dealing with the mechanical, material factor in production; efficient mechanical arrangements and processes have been established.
        2. Inability of scientific management to discover objective laws of universal validity in regard to the human factor.
        3. Danger that scientific management will reduce workers to a little-skilled, interchangeable, unorganized mass.
          1. The tendency to extreme specialization.
          2. Traditional craft knowledge systematized in the hands of the employer; the workers’ skill vested in the foreman and manager.
          3. Established crafts and craftsmanship tend to break down.
      4. The opposition of organized labor to scientific management.
        1. Reasons given for labor opposition.
          1. Danger of narrow specialization and loss of craftsmanship.
          2. Undemocratic character of scientific management, with tendency to break down collective bargaining.
          3. Unfair character of tasks set and wages paid.
          4. Scientific management a device for increasing production and profits.
          5. Scientific management a speeding up and sweating system.
          6. Work under scientific management is monotonous routine.
          7. Continuity and certainty of employment lessened.
        2. Fundamental antagonism of scientific management and dominant type of modern unionism, the essential principle of which is uniformity.
      5. The problem of securing the benefits of increased productivity which scientific management can give, without reducing the status and craftsmanship of the worker.
        1. Antagonism of labor will persist if scientific management is used as an instrument for profit-making and exploiting the workers.
        2. Human defects of scientific management may in part be overcome by
          1. A broad and universally applied system of industrial education.
          2. Fuller and more intelligent participation by labor in the processes of industrial production.
    5. Insecurity of employment.
      Hamilton, 545-566, *547-549, 554-566; Marshall, Wright and Field, 709-715; W.H. Beveridge, Unemployment; Andrews, 7-21; F. C. Mills, Theories of Unemployment and of Unemployment Relief, 118-164.

      1. General causes of insecurity of employment.
        1. Seasonal fluctuations in the demand for labor.
        2. Cyclical fluctuations in the demand for labor.
        3. Necessity of labor reserve due to the casual character of employment in many industries.
        4. Changes in industrial structure resulting in decreased demand for labor of certain types.
        5. Deficiencies of industrial training.
        6. Old age and personal deficiencies.
      2. Results of insecurity of employment.
        1. Decreased productivity of industry.
        2. Evil effects of uncertainty of employment upon the worker.
        3. The evil of under-employment and under-nourishment.
        4. The development of the habit of casual employment.
        5. The migratory laborer a product of seasonal and casual demand for labor. Evil results of a migratory existence.
      3. Proposed methods of remedying insecurity of employment.
        1. The organization of the labor market. Haphazard hawking of labor should be replaced by systematic placing of labor through governmentally organized employment offices.
        2. The regularization of industry.
        3. Diversification of industries and systematic distribution of public work to offset fluctuations in demand for labor.
        4. Adequate industrial training.
        5. Unemployment insurance to protect worker during periods of unavoidable unemployment.
    6. Immigration in its relation to the labor problem.
      Hamilton, 496-527; 496-516; Frances Kellor, Immigration and the Future, 227-258. *See Appendix III, 4 (p. 146).

      1. The character of recent immigration to the United States contrasted with earlier immigration.
        1. Marked predominance of northern and western Europeans prior to 1890.
        2. The influx of southern and eastern Europeans since 1890; the stimulation of immigration by steamship companies and large employers of labor.
      2. Date of change in character of immigration practically corresponds with date of exhaustion of free land in U.S. Immigrants after 1890 thus became definitely laborers, rather than settlers and independent farmers.
      3. Problems arising from the changed character of recent immigration.
        1. Language and educational differences; the necessity of immigrant education today.
        2. Differences in standards of living.
          1. Inability of workers with high standards to compete with some of new arrivals.
          2. The forcing down of wages in unskilled occupations.
        3. Difficulties arising from the congestion of immigrant population in large cities; relation to unemployment and to the sweating system.
        4. Recent immigrants and organized labor.
          1. Occasional use of immigrants as strike-breakers.
          2. Difficulty of organizing immigrants.
          3. Successful organization of immigrants in certain industries within recent years.
      4. The problem of future immigration.
        1. Reasons advanced for curbing immigration.
          1. The alleged racial inferiority of certain types.
          2. The question of “hyphenated” Americans.
          3. The maintenance of the American standard of living.
          4. The danger of over-population and of forcing wages to a subsistence level.
          5. The difficulty of educating and absorbing large numbers of immigrants of a different culture.
        2. Arguments advanced for a continuance of our former immigration policy.
          1. There is no basis for the claim of racial inferiority of certain types.
          2. The United States must continue to furnish a haven for the oppressed of the world.
          3. American industries need a large supply of immigrant labor. More labor, not less, is needed, for overpopulation is a very distant danger.
          4. Immigrants make intellectual and moral contributions which are valuable to American democracy.
          5. Education and absorption will not be difficult if congestion in large cities is prevented.
        3. Proposed policies.
          1. The continuance of a selective immigration policy.
            1. Exclusion of paupers and illiterates.
            2. Prevention of stimulation of immigration.
            3. Perfection of machinery for educating and absorbing immigrants.
          2. Complete exclusion, permanently, or for a term of years.
        4. The recent immigration act, 1921.
    7. Recognition of the Union.
      The closed versus the open shop.

      1. Open shop with no recognition of unions.
      2. The closed shop with the closed union may result in a form of labor monopoly.
      3. The closed shop with the open union.
    8. Participation in management. (The demands of organized labor have in the past been confined in the main to questions of hours, wages and conditions of employment. Within recent years, however, questions of management and control have come within the scope of labor’s interest. In England and, to a lesser extent, in the United States, organized labor is now seeking to secure a share in the control of industrial undertakings, especially the large public service enterprises such as mining and transportation. This question is taken up below, in the section on “The problem of control in industry.”)

3. The organization of production: competition versus combination and monopoly.
*Clay, Economics for General Reader, 107-115; Seligman, 139-150. *Hamilton, 429-478; Seager, Chaps. XXIII, XXV.

  1. The meaning and significance of competition.
    1. The doctrine of laissez-faire in industry; its importance during the nineteenth century. The basis of laissez-faire: the belief that an individual in seeking to advance his own interests is thereby, “as if led by a hidden hand,” advancing the interests of society.
    2. The meaning of modern business competition: the struggle to obtain the largest possible amount of wealth in exchange for commodities produced or services rendered.
    3. Competition the regulating factor by which the flow of economic goods is directed.
    4. Relation between competition and cooperation: both a conflict and a community of interests between individuals and groups in the modern economic system.
    5. The extent of competition today.
      1. Limitations placed on competition by government.
      2. Limitations placed on competition by agreement and combination between competitors.
      3. Inherent limitation because of the unnecessary expenses of competition in advertising; duplication of plant and services.
      4. Ultimate limitation claimed by some, who point out the general waste and social loss resulting from unregulated competition. This loss is illustrated by over-production, unequal, “unfair” and cut-throat competition.
  1. Combination in business and industry.
    (Note — Monopolistic control may be obtained by forcing competitors out of business either by underselling or by taking them into a combination. The latter form has been the more prominent in recent years.)
    1. The movement toward combination in recent years.
      1. Causes of movement toward combination. (See above.)
      2. Forms of combination.
        1. The selling agreement.
        2. The pool.
        3. The trust.
        4. The holding company.
        5. The giant (unified) corporation.
      3. To what extent has the movement toward combination been a natural one and to what extent a forced one?
    2. Advantages of combination.
      1. General advantages of large-scale production. (Cf. above.)
      2. Monopolistic or semi-monopolistic advantages due to limitation of competition and partial or complete control of prices and markets through the complete or partial limitation of the supply of the monopolized commodity.
    3. Disadvantages of combination.
      1. Difficulty of adequate supervision and control.
      2. Tendency toward loss of personal initiative among employees.
      3. Burden of uneconomical charges carried (e.g., promotors’ profits, “water” of various types, etc.).
  1. Competition versus combination in relation to the consumer
    1. Productive advantages of combinations in certain industries and avoidance of competitive charges make possible a lowering of price to consumers.
    2. If a combination secures a monopolistic or semi-monopolistic position extortionate prices may be charged. Thus competitive charges may be in some cases lower and in some cases higher than those of a combination. The problem is: How may the advantages of large-scale production be secured without placing unregulated monopolistic power in the hands of combinations? Governmental action has been found necessary to secure this.
  2. The attitude of the state toward combinations.
    1. The historical development of governmental policy.
      1. The early attempts to enforce competition and to prohibit combination. Anti-trust laws: the Sherman Act, 1890, prohibiting monopolies and combinations “in restraint of trade.”
      2. The recognition of the necessity of permitting combination in certain fields; the problem of regulating combination.
    2. The present situation in the United States.
      1. The Clayton Act; reenforces the Sherman Act and makes illegal
        1. Intercorporate stockholding when the effect may be to lessen competition.
        2. Interlocking directorates.
        3. Discriminatory trade practices.
      2. Federal Trade Commission; vested with wide powers of investigation and supervision.
  1. Proposed solutions of the Trust problem.
    1. Regulatory remedies.
      1. Full publicity.
      2. Strict prohibition of unfair competition.
      3. Prevention of monopolistic practices.
      4. Federal incorporation.
      5. Strict regulation by government commissions.
    2. Remedies involving greater changes in the industrial system. (Government ownership, and socialistic and syndicalistic proposals are discussed below.)

4. Problems connected with the distribution of the annual social income.
King, Wealth and Income of the People of the United States, 154-167; Ely, Outlines of Economics, 384-405; Seager, Chap. XI; Seligman, 352-431; Clay, 279-354. See Appendix, III, 5, (p. 147).

  1. General statement of the problem. The total volume of goods produced each year constitutes an annual flow of consumable commodities and services which are apportioned among the agents of production. A share goes to the owners of the natural agents, a share to the owners of capital, a share to the laborers, and a share to the business organizers of production — the entrepreneurs. Money income is merely a claim to a share in the distribution of commodities and services which constitute the real income of an individual or a group. Many of the current economic problems arise from disputes concerning the right of certain of the agents of production to shares in this distribution, and from attempts of the different agents to increase their own shares. As the organizing factor in production the business enterpriser evaluates the services rendered by each of the other factors. Payment of the shares in distribution to the other agents is made through him. The fundamental question in distribution is: What determines the amount the business enterpriser must pay to each of the other agents and the amount he may keep for himself?
  2. Briefly stated, the following are the principles on which distribution takes place today:
    1. The owners of the natural agents of production receive a share in the social income which is called rent. The amount of the rent paid the owner of any particular piece of land depends upon the relative advantage resulting from the utilization of that piece, as compared with others. This differential advantage may be due to
      1. Favorable location.
      2. Fertility (or richness, as in the case of mines). Payment to the owners of these natural agents is based upon the fact of possession. The question as to whether the owner inherited the site, bought it when it was worth little and held it till its value increased, or bought it at its present value with money earned by his own labor has nothing to do with his receipt of a share in the social income, under the present distributive system.
    1. Interest. The owners of capital receive a return which is called interest. The amount of interest paid at any time for the use of a given amount of capital depends upon the amount of available capital in existence and upon the strength of the demand for the use of it. Business men are willing to pay for the capital borrowed because, by the use of capital, the productiveness of labor is increased (e.g., a man with a plough is more effective in tilling the soil than a man with a pointed stick). It is believed that the stimulus of interest is necessary in order to promote saving. Interest is paid to the owner of capital irrespective of the means by which he may have acquired ownership, whether by personal abstinence, inheritance, gift, or other means.
    2. Wages. The share of the annual income paid for labor, physical or mental, is called wages. In general, those who receive this form of income may be divided into six non-competing groups, set off from each other by differences of education and training, environmental differences, and differences of inborn gifts:
      1. Unskilled day laborers.
      2. Semi-skilled workers.
      3. Skilled workmen.
      4. Clerical workers.
      5. Professional workers.
      6. Salaried business managers.

Within each of these groups wages tend to a rough equality. The wage received by an individual within any group is fixed, in general, somewhere between a lower limit set by the standard of living (a standard of bare physical subsistence in the lowest group) and an upper limit determined by the relative degree of efficiency or indispensability of the labor constituting that group. This degree of indispensability will depend upon his productive ability, upon the number of workers within the group of equal productive ability, and upon the character of the demand for workers of that particular type. The point at which wages will be fixed between these two limits is determined by the relative bargaining power of employers and workers.

    1. Profits. The share in income which the business enterpriser receives is called profits. It is a residual share, left over after the other agents of production have been paid. Profits vary greatly in amount depending upon the degree of risk undertaken, the extent to which competition or monopoly operates in a given industry, and the degree of exceptional efficiency found in a given individual. Competitive profits tend to disappear, insofar as true competition operates, but profits based upon a monopolistic advantage do not.
      Summary. The distribution of the annual social income today is thus, in general, based upon the strategic strength of the position occupied by the owners of the various agents of production. Those individuals or groups which are in a relatively strong position, whose services are indispensable, (or relatively so) for any one of a number of reasons, secure a relatively high return. Those whose services are less indispensable, due to weaker demand for their products, greater number of competitors, lower efficiency, receive a lower return. The degree of indispensability, it is important to note, may depend upon personal efficiency, or upon any one of a number of other factors.
  1. Arguments advanced to justify the present distributive system.
    1. Distribution under the present system is based upon competitive efficiency. Society gains by giving high prizes to the highly efficient.
    2. Inequalities of capacity must be recognized; corresponding inequalities of reward are justified.
    3. The various distributive shares at present criticized, such as interest, rent, profits, high salaries, are necessary to secure the services called forth — thrift necessary for accumulation of capital, effective use of land, and high business ability.
    4. Such payments as do not represent services (as rent) are necessarily involved in the retention of the system of private property, and are therefore legally and economically justifiable.
  1. Arguments advanced against the present system of distribution.
    1. Distribution today is based chiefly upon the power to take, and only secondarily upon productive efficiency. Accordingly not all shares in distribution serve as stimuli to production.
    2. Men would save their surplus money, use their land effectively, and develop their individual capacities to the full without the bribe of a special pecuniary reward.
    3. Rent, in particular, does not arise as a result of personal effort and therefore should belong to the community as a whole.
    4. The stimulus of profits has perverted business enterprise from the production of commodities as the chief end to that of profit-making, with a consequent loss to the consumers. Greater profits may be made in some cases by limiting production than by increasing production.
  1. Proposed changes in the system of distribution.
    *Russell, Proposed Roads to Freedom, 86-110.
    1. Continuance of present system, insofar as payments are based upon efficiency and productive ability, but with state appropriation of unearned increments; limitation of great fortunes and of rights of inheritance; the use of taxation as a means of correcting distributive injustice.
    2. [Socialistic and communistic ideals. (See below, p. 94.)
      1. Distribution on the basis of need; i.e., approximately equal distribution, irrespective of work performed.
      2. Distribution on the basis of sacrifice; payment based on irksomeness of various occupations.]

5. The problem of control in industry.

  1. [The present system of control and management in industry: a brief restatement.
    1. Chief characteristics of modern system
      1. The system of private property.
      2. The four-fold division of function in production.
      3. The status, and degree of initiative, responsibility and control resting in each of the agents of production.
      4. The importance of large-scale industry today.
    2. Advantages claimed for the present system of management.
      1. Strong and efficient leaders reach the top and exercise power.
      2. Scope given for initiative and individual ability.
      3. Quantity production secured.
      4. Prices kept down by rigorous competition for markets.
      5. Compatible with human nature; strong instincts of acquisitiveness and pugnacity satisfied in a competitive system based on private property and survival of the strongest.
    3. Defects charged to the present system.
      1. Characterized by inefficiency in production.
        1. Duplication of services; competitive waste.
        2. Business side of industry over-developed at expense of productive efficiency; production subordinated to profits.
      2. Chaotic system of distribution; lack of order and system in marketing organization.
      3. Periodic breakdowns (financial panics and business depressions) constitute a fundamental weakness.
      4. Many individuals performing no useful service continue to share in the social income, while many productive workers continue to live in poverty.
      5. An autocratic rather than a democratic form of government exists in industry.
      6. Continual labor unrest affords evidence that the present industrial system does violence to human nature.
  1. Proposed solutions of the problem of industrial control.
    1. Competitive individualism: continuance of the nineteenth century system without state interference.
      1. Conditions involved in this type of solution.
        1. Maintenance of full private property rights.
        2. Restoration of complete freedom of competition.
        3. Restoration and maintenance of individual bargaining; denial of right of collective bargaining; refusal to recognize labor organizations.
      2. Advantages claimed for competitive individualism. (Cf. above.)
      3. Difficulties involved in this solution. (Cf. above.)
        1. Recent changes in industrial structure, type and size of modern industrial unit, development of corporate form of organization, large scale enterprise, render impossible the maintenance of such a system.
        2. Return to this individualistic system impossible in view of present unrest.
    2. Continuance of present system of control; amelioration of labor conditions and limited degree of regulation of industry by the State.
      Object: The maintenance of the advantages of the present competitive system and the avoidance of competitive excesses by state protection of labor and state regulation of competition and monopoly. ‘The New Freedom.’
    3. Continuance of present system of management with collective bargaining in matters of wages, hours, and general conditions of employment.
      1. Collective bargaining in the organized trades today. (Cf . above.)
      2. Trade union control under this system.
        1. Negative character of trade union control; union rules and regulations necessarily restrictive, in that direct and positive control is exercised by the employer.
        2. This control, though negative, constitutes an important factor in the management of industry today.
      3. Inability of trade unions and industrial unions as at present organized to take over more effective control.
        1. Faulty organization; jurisdictional disputes.
        2. Lack of effective coordination between unions.
        3. Lack of adequate leadership.
        4. Technical experts and managers not included in union organization.
        5. The difficulty of securing capital.]
    4. Full collective bargaining, with a share in control vested in labor; the English program.
      *Hamilton, 716-729; Memorandum of the Industrial Situation after the War, (Garton Foundation), 158-175.

      1. Recognition and encouragement by the State of organization on the part of employers and workers.
      2. The National Industrial Council: a national council to secure joint action between representative organizations of employers and workers, prevent and adjust industrial disputes, and to serve as official consultative authority to the government upon industrial relations.
      3. Machinery of organization within each industry. The Whitley scheme.
        1. Joint Standing Industrial Councils (National) composed of representatives of employers and employed in each industry.
        2. District Councils: representative of trade unions and employers’ associations in each district.
        3. Works Committees: representative of management and workers in particular plants.
      4. Functions of Works Committees, District Councils and National Councils.
        1. To deal with questions of hours, wages and conditions of employment.
        2. To provide security and continuity of earnings and employment.
        3. To provide for technical education, training, and industrial research.
        4. To deal with proposed legislation affecting the industry.
      5. The advantages and limitations of the Whitley Plan and similar proposals: attitude of organized labor.
    5. The Cooperative system.
      Seager, Chap. XXXI; S. and B. Webb, A Constitution for the Socialist Commonwealth of Great Britain, 248-263.

      1. The object of cooperation: the elimination of the managing employer and of private profits; general policy settled and risks assumed by cooperators as a body; ownership and control vested in a body of cooperating equals.
      2. Cooperation in retail and wholesale trading; success of the Rochdale stores and the Schulze-Delitzsch societies.
      3. Cooperation in production. Comparative lack of success in this field.
        1. Character of operations fundamentally different from those of retail trading and banking.
        2. Difficulty of carrying on production on large scale, due to lack of capital.
        3. Failure to secure capable leaders.
      4. Cooperative Credit Societies.
    6. Government ownership of great public service industries (nationalization); control by joint boards representing workers, managers, and public.
      1. The proposed organization of the English coal mining industry; the Sankey Report.
        *Coal Industry Commission Act, 1919 Second Stage, Reports, 5-26.

        1. State purchase of coal royalties and coal mines.
        2. Control by councils of workers, consumers and technical experts, under the general supervision of a Ministry of Mines; the National Mining Council, District Mining Councils, and Local Mining Councils.
      2. The Plumb Plan for railroad re-organization in the U.S. [Plumb Plan Weekly: Vol. I, No. 1; Vol. I, No. 2; Vol. I, No. 3; Vol. I, No. 4; Vol. I, No. 5; Vol. I, No. 6; Vol. I, No. 8; Vol. I, No. 9]
        *The Sims Bill. [Representative Thetus Sims of Tennessee was the ranking Democrat of the House Interstate Commerce Committee]

        1. Government purchase of all railroad systems, on basis of capital invested.
        2. Administration.
          1. Operation of roads by a board of fifteen directors, five representing the public, five the managers, five the classified employees.
          2. Rate-making by Interstate Commerce Commission.
        3. Division of surplus between government and employees, provided that if surplus exceeds a certain percentage of the operating revenues, rates must be reduced; deficits to be met by government.
      3. The present status of the Sankey scheme and the Plumb Plan. Significance of these proposals.
    7. Collectivism: ownership and control of all industrial undertakings by the state; State Socialism.
      *Hamilton, 847-860; *Russell, Proposed Roads to Freedom, 1-31; Ogg, Economic Development of Modern Europe, 477-567; Gide and Rist, History of Economic Doctrines, 407-479.

      1. The general principles of Socialism.
        1. Abolition of private property in the means of production (land and capital), with retention of private property in articles of personal use. Collective (State) ownership of means of production.
        2. Administration of collectively owned industrial system through a democratic political organization.
        3. Abolition of wage system as at present constituted.
      2. The basic doctrines of Marxian Socialism.
        1. The materialistic interpretation of history. All human phenomena can be explained in terms of the underlying material facts of life. Irresistible economic forces shape human history.
        2. The law of the concentration of capital. Capitalistic undertakings tend to become larger and larger; small competitive enterprises tend to disappear, and to be replaced by great trusts.
        3. The class war. Increasing concentration of capital leads to division of society into two great classes, the capitalist class and the wage-earning class, bourgeoisie and proletariat. Between these two classes a struggle will go on until all wage earners combine, locally, nationally and internationally, and take over the ownership and control of land and capital for the common good. View of Marx that this process of concentration of capital, increasing misery, class war and ultimate social control is natural and inevitable, a working out of irresistible economic forces. The Communist Manifesto. The great influence of Marx on socialist thought.
      3. Other types of socialistic doctrine; the Fabian policy of securing reforms and collective ownership gradually, by the use of constitutional methods; the Socialist Party in politics.
      4. The Socialist program today; arguments advanced for a Socialistic organization of industry, and objections to it.
    8. Syndicalism: ownership and control by the workers in each industry. (See above: The Industrial Workers of the World.)
      Russell, Proposed Roads to Freedom, 56-85; Kirkaldy, Economics and Syndicalism; Gide and Rist, 479-483; Brissenden, The I.W.W., 155-177, 259-282.

      1. General principles of syndicalism.
        1. Organization of industry by the workers as producers, not as consumers. The industry as the unit of ownership and control; ownership by organized labor.
        2. Substitution of industrial (direct) action for political action; boycott, union label, strike, and sabotage. The general strike the chief weapon.
        3. Destruction of the state.
      2. Syndicalism in practice.
        1. French syndicalism: The C.G.T.
        2. [American syndicalism: The I.W.W] (See iv below.)
      3. Syndicalism as a working principle of industrial organization; advantages claimed for it and objections to it.
      4. The Industrial Workers of the World.
        C. H. Parker, The Casual Laborer.

        1. Their principles.
          1. Class conflict. “The working class and the employing class have nothing in common. Between these two classes a struggle must go on until the workers of the world organize as a class, take possession of the earth and the machinery of production, and abolish the wage system”: Preamble of the I.W.W. Constitution.
          2. Abolition of the wage system.
          3. Organization on industrial instead of craft lines.
            1. The doctrine of working class solidarity, “One Big Union.”
            2. The organization of the unskilled together with the skilled; opposition to labor aristocracy.
          4. Accomplishment of ends by direct industrial action.
            [Note: A seceding wing of the Industrial Workers of the World (Detroit Branch) favors political action, but the dominant group (Chicago Branch) disavows political organization.]
          5. Ultimate complete control of the industrial system by the workers; control of the political system will necessarily accompany industrial control.
        1. The structure of I.W.W.
          1. The local industrial union.
          2. The District Industrial Council.
          3. The International Industrial Department.
          4. The General Executive Board.
            1. Power originally strongly centralized in the Executive Board.
            2. The movement toward decentralization; present weakness of the central authority.
        2. Method and tactics of the I.W.W.
          1. Direct action; various forms of direct action; sabotage.
          2. Free speech fights as means of propaganda.
          3. The general strike.
        3. The I.W.W. today.
          1. Membership.
            1. Confined to textile, steel, lumber, mining, farming, railroad construction and marine transportation industries.
            2. Majority of members migratory unskilled workers; a radical, militant, relatively unstable group recruited from industries characterized by irregularity of employment and bad working conditions.
            3. Numerical strength: not over 60,000 members at present. Actual influence not measured by paid-up membership.
          2. The I.W.W. as a social phenomenon; conditions and causes of its existence.
          3. Weaknesses of the I.W.W.
            1. Inability to maintain stable membership.
            2. Organic weaknesses due to internal conflict.
              1. Centralization of power versus decentralization.
              2. Constructive industrial unionism versus the revolutionary ideal of uncontrolled agitation, “guerilla” warfare against authority.
            3. Financial weakness.
            4. Membership unfitted for constructive endeavor.
          4. The future of industrial unionism in the United States; the agitation for industrial unionism in the A.F. of L.; dual unionism versus “boring from within.”
    1. Guild Socialism: a compromise type of organization, standing between collectivism and syndicalism.
      *Russell, 80-85; G.D.H. Cole, Self Government in Industry; S.G. Hobson, Guild Principles in War and Peace; *Hamilton, 860-870, G.D.H. Cole, Guild Socialism, 187-195.

      1. General principles of guild organization.
        1. Ownership of the means of production by the State, as trustees for the community.
        2. Management of industrial undertakings by guilds or workers in each industry, acting also as trustees for the community; payment of tax or rent to State.
        3. The Guild Congress: a body consisting of representatives of all National Guilds, and having supreme authority in industrial matters.
        4. Parliament to retain supreme authority in political matters; Parliament to represent consumers.
        5. Joint Committee of Parliament and Guild Congress to deal with conflicts arising between the two bodies; Joint Committee to reconcile interests of producers and consumers.
        6. Adjustment of prices by Joint Committee.
        7. Adjustment of pay within each industry by the National Guild controlling that industry.
      2. Guild socialism as a possible working principle; advantages claimed for it; objections to it.

Source: Columbia University. Introduction to Contemporary Civilization — A Syllabus, (Third edition, 1921), pp. 70-96.

Image Source: Cover of Labor Problems and Labor Legislation by John Bertram Andrews (1919).

 

 

 

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Labor

Harvard. Exam for Problems of Labor. Ripley with Lauren Carroll assisting, 1907-08

 

Problems of labor constituted the first semester of William Zebina Ripley’s sequence on organized labor and capital. Trade unions were the focus of his labor course and corporations during the second semester.

His teaching assistant, Lauren Carroll, was a recent Harvard undergraduate who was to go on to Harvard Law School. A few details regarding Carroll’s life and subsequent career are included below.

The principal artifact for this post is the final examination for the course.

__________________________

Ripley’s teaching assistant:
Lauren Carroll

Lauren Carroll was appointed at the rank of assistant in economics. Boston Evening Transcript (Nov. 16, 1908), p. 12.

1886: born July 16 in Manhattan, New York City.
1906: A.B. Harvard College
1911: married Akrata von Schrader July 19.
1909: LL.B. Harvard Law School
1945: died in Poughkeepsie, N.Y.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Self-Report for the 15th anniversary
of the Harvard Class of 1906

At the time of our Decennial I was practicing law in New York City as a member of the firm of Gould and Wilkie. I was also serving my second term as a member of the New York Board of Aldermen. A rather diverse number of businesses required my attention after the death of my father in December, 1916, and finally compelled me to resign from the Board of Aldermen in the Summer of 1917. I continued my activity in the Republican Organization, however, and later served two terms as president of my Assembly District Republican Club, which has a membership of 1500 men and women.
Soon after the United States entered the Great War, the work of organizing the sale of Liberty Bonds over the counters of retail stores throughout Greater New York fell to my lot because my law firm represented several of the large department stores. This took practically all of my time during the 1st and 2d Liberty Loans. In December, 1917 I made a trip through Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Iowa and the Dakotas, for the purpose of assisting in the formation of War Savings Stamp organizations in those states. From February until May, 1918 I worked in the Publicity Department of the New York Liberty Loan Committee. I had charge of outdoor advertising in our Federal Reserve District during the 3d Loan, and at the same time supervised the newspaper advertising of the Department Stores Committee.
After the 3d Loan I was appointed Executive Secretary of the Capital Issues Committee for the New York Federal Reserve District. During the next six months our committee passed on many hundred different security issues submitted to it by private and public corporations. The various issues of stocks and bonds considered by the committee in our district aggregated nearly two billion dollars in par value. The above work naturally took me entirely away from the practice of law, and when the Capital Issues Committee disbanded some six weeks after the Armistice, I decided to take advantage of an opportunity to continue in the financial world with Messrs. Brown Brothers & Co. The business of that banking firm has brought me to the city of Brussels on this glorious Sunday afternoon, which finds me writing a dull summary of the past when we might be sipping Porto Rouge on the boulevards.
Member: University Club; Union League Club; Harvard Club of New York; Bar Association of the city of New York; National Republican Club; Harvard Club of Boston.

Source: Harvard Class of 1906. Quindecennial Report (1921), p. 61.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Obituary

Lauren Carroll, lawyer, businessman and civic leader of New York City, and the father of Miss Kyra Carroll, an official of the local Red Cross organization, died on Wednesday in a nursing home at Poughkeepsie, N. Y., after an eight-month illness. He was 58.
A strong advocate after World War I of American entry into the League of Nations, he had in recent years supported the idea of world cooperation. He served as chairman of the New York State Committee for World Federation and in 1943 presided at a “Win the Peace” rally at Carnegie Hall.
In addition to the foregoing, another daughter, Miss Rosemary Carroll, a member of the staff of the OWI in London, and his wife, Mrs. Akrata von S. Carroll, are surviving.
Funeral services were held yesterday in Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church, New York.

Source: Press of Atlantic City, 31 March 1945, p. 2

__________________________

Problems of Labor:
previous semesters

1902-03
1903-04
1904-05
1905-06
1906-07

__________________________

Course Enrollment

Economics 9a 1hf. Professor Ripley, assisted by Mr. Carroll. — Problems of Labor.

Total 67: 5 Graduates, 24 Seniors, 24 Juniors, 12 Sophomores, 2 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1907-1908, p. 67.

__________________________

ECONOMICS 9a
Mid-Year Examination, 1907-08

  1. What is the difference between a “jurisdiction” and a “demarcation” dispute? Illustrate.
  2. Does the New Zealand or the Victorian legislation interfere more with the personal freedom of the individual workman? State concisely in what respects this holds good.
  3. Based on Massachusetts’ experience, what compensation in respect of production is alleged to have followed the progressive shortening of the hours of labor? Are any unforeseen social results possible if this be continued?
  4. What are the main provisions of the Canadian Act of 1907 concerning trades disputes?
  5. What if any is a possible defect in it, as of any similar legislation? Has Australia any experience of value concerning this matter?
  6. What is Webb’s attitude toward Employers’ Liability Laws? Outline his main argument.
  7. Would Workmen’s Compensation Acts meet this argument or not?
  8. When was Government insurance adopted in Germany—approximately? What political objects were in view? Have these been realized?
  9. State in three distinct propositions, what in your own opinion, are the principal defects of American trades unionism of the present day. What remedy for each, if any, may be suggested?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Mid-year Examinations, 1852-1943. Box 8, Bound Volume: Examination Papers, Mid-Years 1907-08.

Image Source: Harvard University Archives.  William Zebina Ripley [photographic portrait, ca. 1910], J. E. Purdy & Co., J. E. P. & C. (1910). Colorized and noise reduction by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Categories
Chicago Economists Gender Labor Vassar Wellesley

Chicago. Economics Ph.D. Alumna Emily Clark Brown, 1927

 

EMILY CLARK BROWN

1895. Born in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

1917. B.A. Carleton College.

1917-19. High school teacher in Delavan, Minnesota.

1919-20. Graduate study in social work at the Chicago School of Civics and Philanthropy.

1920-25. Research assistant with the United Typothetae of America.

1923. M.A. University of Chicago.

1927. Ph.D. University of Chicago.

1927-28. Research Fellow of the Social Science Research Council. Study in England and in New York, Boston, and Baltimore of industrial relations in book and job printing.

1928-29. Industrial economist. Department of Labor, Women’s Bureau.

1929-32. Assistant professor, Wellesley College.

1932-33. Assistant Professor. Vassar College.

1933-39. Associate Professor. Vassar College.

1936. Trip to the Soviet Union as a tourist.

1937, 1938. Teacher at the Bryn Mawr Summer School for Women Workers.

1938. Researcher. National Resources Committee.

1939-1961. Professor. Vassar College.

1942. Teacher at the Hudson Shore Labor School (summer).

1942-44. Operating analyst. National Labor Relations Board.

1944-45. Public panel member. National War Labor Board.

1946. Member of the panel of arbitrators, American Arbitration Association.

1950-54. Chairman of the Economics Department at Vassar.

1955. Vassar faculty fellowship. November-December. 30 day visit to Moscow, Leningrad, Kiev, and Kharkov to study the Soviet labor market. Five factory tours.

1959. Social Science Research Council grant. January-February. Research visit to Soviet Union. 10 weeks, 17 factory trips. Tours of Alma Ata, Tashkent, Samarkand, Rostov, and Tbilisi.

1961. Retired from Vassar College.

1962. Awarded grant from the American Council of Learned Societies and the Social Science Research Council to finance a trip to the Soviet Union to study labor relations. [newspaper account that she was a resident of Minneapolis following retirement from Vassar]

1967-1976. Volunteer librarian for the Twin Cities Opportunities Industrialization Center.

1980. Died October 13 in Minneapolis.

Publications:

Joint Industrial Control in the Book and Job Printing Industry, Bureau of Labor Statistics Bul. 481, 1928.

Book and Job Printing in Chicago, 1931. (Ph.D. Dissertation 1927)

“The New Collective Bargaining in Mass Production,” J. Polit. Econ., 1939.

“The Employer Unit in NLRB Decisions,” J. Polit. Econ., 1942.

“Book and Job Printing” in How Collective Bargaining Works (ed. H. A. Millis), 1942.

“Free Collective Bargaining or Government Intervention?” Harv. Bus. Rev.,1947.

“Union Security” in N.Y.U. 2nd Ann. Conf. on Labor, 1949.

(with H. A. Millis) From the Wagner Act to Taft-Hartley, 1950.

National Labor Policy: Taft-Hartley after Three Years and the Next Steps, 1950.

“The Soviet Labor Market,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review (January 1957).

“Labor Relations in Soviet Factories” Industrial and Labor Relations Review (January 1958)

“The Local Union in Soviet Industry,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review (January 1960).

“The Current Status of the Soviet Worker: Not Good—But Better,” Problems of Communism, 1960.

Soviet Trade Unions and Labor Relations. (Harvard University Press, 1966).

[Some other titles can be found in: A Bibliography of Female Economic Thought to 1940 By Kirsten Kara Madden, Janet A. Seiz, Michèle A. Pujol p. 80.]

Sources: Fellows of the Social Science Research Council, 1925-1951. p. 49.

Vassar Miscellany News, Volume XXXXV, Number 23 (26 April 1961), p. 3.

Image Source: Vassar College, The Vassarion 1940, p. 36

Categories
Berkeley Economists Education Labor

Berkeley. UC President, former economics professor, Clark Kerr dismissed in 1971.

Perhaps it is because I am an economist that I have been particularly sensitive regarding those of our discipline who have gone on to head colleges and universities. Or perhaps economists have indeed constituted a disproportionate share of such presidents/chancellors/deans. In either case, I feel sufficiently motivated to begin a new series “Economists gone university leaders” with this post dedicated to Clark Kerr, a Berkeley economics Ph.D. (1939). The title of his thesis was “Productive enterprises of the unemployed, 1931-1938”. He was the founding director of the UC Berkeley Institute of Industrial Relations and later became the first chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley and the twelfth president of the University of California.

Fun fact: Not only did then Governor Ronald Reagan vote to dismiss Clark Kerr but so too did the chairman of the UCLA Alumni Association and member of the University of California Board of Regents, Harry R. (Bob) Haldeman of Watergate infamy. 

There are two morsels of Clark Kerr’s wit to be enjoyed near the end of the post as a reward for reading two newspaper reports from 1967.

But first we begin with an inspirational thought from Clark Kerr’s early presidential years and an insight by the columnist James Reston as to how it was even conceivable that Clark Kerr could be fired. “As usual, the articulate and activist extremes have prevailed over the moderate and indifferent middle.” A lesson for our political times?

________________________

The duties of a great university

“A great university has a duty to the future as great as its duty to the present. It must do more than serve the immediate society which provides its support: it must preserve the heritage of the past; it must try to open new doors. Intellectually it must be both more conservative of established values and more bold in trying innovations than may be fashionable at any given moment. It must maintain scholars in studies which a layman might consider archaic. It must support novel explorations which most people consider speculative. In the interests of future generations it must take the long view and may often have to defend the unpopular.”

Source: Office of the President, University of California. Unity and Diversity. The Academic Plan of the University of California, 1965-1975, p. 2.

When the Center could not hold

“The feeling against Governor Reagan and the Regents for their clumsiness, insensitivity, and even brutality in dismissing Kerr like an incompetent janitor is very strong here [in Berkeley]. Faculty and students, who were remarkably silent when he really needed them, are now all rallying to his support, but it is too late. As usual, the articulate and activist extremes have prevailed over the moderate and indifferent middle.”

Source: James Reston, “Berkeley: The Dismissal of Clark Kerr,” The New York Times, January 27, 1967, p. 44.

________________________

Hail the New Chancellor!

CHANCELLOR AT BERKELEY

A civic dinner in honor of Clark Kerr, new Chancellor at Berkeley, has been planned the evening of Dec. 10 in the Peacock Court of San Francisco’s Mark Hopkins Hotel by a special Committee of the Regents in co-operation with President Robert G. Sproul.

Chancellor Kerr will be the principal speaker on the program, which will also include remarks by Governor Earl Warren and President Sproul, and music by the Glee Club, under the direction of Robert Commanday.

Approximately 450 civic, faculty, student, and alumni leaders are being invited to the affair which will introduce Chancellor Kerr to the Bay Area in his new capacity.

Chancellor Kerr was born in Pennsylvania and holds the bachelor degree from Swarthmore College, the M.A. degree from Stanford University, and the Ph.D. degree from the University of California. He completed his studies in 1939 and has since been an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of Washington, from which post he came to the Berkeley campus in 1945.

That was the year in which the Institute of Industrial Relations was established by the State Legislature, at the Governor’s request, and in recognition of the fact that labor-management relations had come to be a crucial problem in the life of California and the nation. Chancellor Kerr organized the Institute, recruited a well-qualified staff, and directed a program of teaching, research, and public service, the success of which is attested by the co-operation of both management and labor.

In addition to his academic achievements Chancellor Kerr has a record of public service both local and national, including service as a member of the Federal Advisory Council on Employment Security, U. S. Department of Labor; public member and vice-chairman of the National Wage Stabilization Board; consultant on industrial relations,

Atomic Energy Commission; chairman of the Labor-Management Advisory Committee, United States Conciliation Service; vice-chairman of the Twelfth Regional War Labor Board; and member of Federal Fact Finding Boards in important labor-management disputes.

Upon assuming the chancellorship at Berkeley Kerr relinquished his position as Director of the Institute of Industrial Relations, a position which was assumed by E. T. Grether, Flood Professor of Economics and Dean, School of Business Administration. Chancellor Kerr retained his title as Professor of Industrial Relations, School of Business Administration, and in addition is serving as Research Associate, Institute of Industrial Relations.

Source: University Bulletin, A Weekly Bulletin for the Staff of the University of California. Vol. 1, No. 17 (December 8, 1952), p. 89.

________________________

The Backstory to Clark Kerr’s Dismissal as President of the University of California

1964 Turmoil Caught Kerr in Ironic Web
UC President, Skillful Negotiator, Unable to Settle Campus Strife Leading to Ouster

By William Trombley, Times Education Writer
The Los Angeles Times, (January 21, 1967), p. 15

Clark Kerr earned an international reputation as a negotiator of labor disputes.

But ironically it was his failure to settle campus conflict which set off the train of events leading to his being fired as president of the University of California Friday.

When Kerr returned to Berkeley from an Asian trip in September, 1964, he found the campus in an uproar.

Edward W. Strong, then chancellor, had ordered a halt to student political activity in an area outside Sather Gate where it always had been allowed.

Kerr thought the Strong order a mistake but also thought it would be awkward to reverse the decision.

Instead, he proposed that students be permitted use of Sproul Hall steps, instead of the banned Sather Gate area. He also recommended certain other concessions.

Sought Discussion

He did so, he said in later interview, because “I thought we could get things back into channels of discussion if we showed reasonableness. But it didn’t work.”

Instead, the Free Speech Movement exploded across the campus and onto the nation’s front pages and television screens.

From that time Kerr has led a troubled life.

Conservative members of the Board of Regents, who had never been happy about Kerr’s selection as president in 1958, solidified their opposition.

They were especially angry because Kerr opposed then Gov. Edmund G. Brown’s decision to call in police to arrest demonstrators during the Sproul Hall sit-in at the height of the FSM protest.

Strategy Has Worked

Kerr thought the demonstrators would leave the building eventually if the police were not called, a strategy that has been followed successfully in dealing with demonstrations on other campuses since then.

When a few students and nonstudents displayed four-letter words on signs and shouted four-letter words on the campus in the spring of 1965, some regents demanded that Kerr and Martin Meyerson, who had replaced Strong as Berkeley chancellor, dismiss the offenders.

However, Kerr and Meyerson thought that to punish the students without due process would revive all the bitterness of the fall and destroy the tenuous peace which prevailed on the campus.

The two officials announced their intention to resign, but later agreed to stay when the regents decided to permit them to settle the “filthy speech” incidents themselves.

Ouster Move

Regental opposition to Kerr reached a high point at the June, 1965, meeting of the board in San Francisco, when regents Edwin W. Pauley and John E. Canaday led a move to oust the president.

However, a coalition of “liberal” and “moderate” regents formed behind Gov. Brown to prevent the ouster.

The newly formed coalition of regents insisted, however, that Kerr carry out recommendations for decentralization of university administration which had been included in the Byrne Report.

This report, prepared for a regents’ committee by a staff headed by Beverly Hills attorney Jerome C. Byrne, found that the mammoth university was too highly centralized. It recommended that substantial administrative authority be delegated from the regents to Kerr and from him to the chancellors of the nine campuses.

More Power

Kerr moved immediately to grant more power to the chancellors. The regents also agreed to pass on some of their powers, and for about a year talk of Kerr leaving his post faded away.

The Berkeley campus was troubled by demonstrations against U.S. policy in Vietnam during 1965-66, but Kerr remained in the background, permitting Roger W. Heyns, the third Berkeley chancellor in three years, to work out the problems.

However, speculation that Kerr might quit or be fired was revived during the Brown-Reagan race for the governorship. Kerr made strenuous efforts to avoid involvement in the campaign, but there was little question that his administration in Berkeley was linked with Brown’s administration in Sacramento.

Doubt Remained

Even after Reagan’s overwhelming victory, however, there was doubt that Kerr would go.

The addition of Reagan, Lt. Gov. Robert H. Finch and Allan Grant, newly named president of the State Board of Agriculture, clearly gave the anti-Kerr forces a majority on the Board of Regents. But many observers thought the new governor might be reluctant to be identified with an educational purge.

When a new student protest led to further disorder, including a strike, at Berkeley in December, most regents supported Kerr in his determination to permit Chancellor Heyns to handle the trouble without regental interference.

However, the current controversy over the university’s budget evidently solidified the anti-Kerr votes on the board and persuaded them that this was the time to move against the president.

Kerr probably saw the end coming, however. A few weeks ago he concluded an interview with this reporter with the observation:

 “I had six good years in which to plan for the future of the university . . . then things went wrong in the fall of ’64, and I haven’t had that kind of support (among the regents) since.”

[…]

________________________

Clark Kerr’s Dismissal

Reagan Sides With Majority in 14 to 8 Decision

By Daryl E. Lembke, Times Staff Writer
The Los Angeles Times (January 21, 1967), p. 1.

BERKELEY – President Clark Kerr of the University of California was fired Friday in a surprise move by the Board of Regents. The vote was 14-8.

Gov. Reagan was present at the two-hour, closed-door discussion of Kerr’s fate and voted with the majority to dismiss the president from his $45,000-a-year post.

The dismissal was effective immediately. University Vice President Harry R. Wellman, 67, was named acting president pending selection of Kerr’s successor.

Theodore R. Meyer, chairman of the Board of Regents, said at a news conference that the subject of a successor was not discussed during the session at which Kerr was dismissed.

Reports of Dissatisfaction

Although there have been frequent reports for two years or more that the regents were about to fire Kerr, the move came as a surprise. The two-day meeting ostensibly had been called to discuss Reagan’s proposals for slashing the university budget and charging tuition for the first time.

Asked the reason for the dismissal, Meyer commented:

“We felt the state of uncertainty prevailing for many months should be resolved without further delay.”

 He added:

“President Kerr, being human, has strengths and weaknesses even as you and I. His strengths are obvious to all. His weaknesses I don’t intend to discuss for obvious reasons.”

Talked with Governor

Asked if Reagan requested the regents to fire Kerr, Meyer replied:

“The governor discussed the subject with me and others. I regard that conversation as confidential.” In response to another question, Meyer said: “Mr. Reagan didn’t fire Dr. Kerr and he won’t pick his successor.”

Voting with the governor for dismissal were these regents: Lt. Gov. Robert H. Finch, Meyer, Allan Grant, H. R. Haldeman, Edwin W. Pauley, Edward W. Carter, Mrs. Dorothy B. Chandler, Mrs. Randolph A. Hearst, John E. Canaday, Philip L. Boyd, William E. Forbes, Laurence J. Kennedy. Jr, and DeWitt A. Higgs.

Opposing the action were Assembly Speaker Jesse M. Unruh (D-Inglewood), Samuel B. Mosher, Norton Simon, William M. Roth, Mrs. Edward H. Heller, Frederick G. Dutton, William K. Coblentz and Einar Mohn.

At another news conference, Unruh describe Kerr’s dismissal as most

“unfortunate coming on the heels of an attempt (by the new Reagan administration) to depart from a 76-year tradition of no tuition for higher education in California and coming in a year of an attempted cut in the university budget.”
“Regardless of whether this was a partisan move, that will be its effect,” Unruh said. “It will be interpreted as a political move.”

Unruh Comment

Unruh maintained that although he and Kerr had their differences, Kerr was “no more culpable for the things for which the university was brought to task than the entire board of regents.”

“It is a bad precedent to fire a university president concomitant with a change of political party in the state administration.”

Kerr, 55, has been president of the university eight-and-a-half years.

[…]

Factor in Election

Reagan’s criticism of the university administration was credited as one of the principal factors in his defeat of Democrat Brown in November.

Kerr took the dismissal philosophically.

He said he was asked by chairman Meyer to leave during the regents’ discussion of a “personnel matter.” As the university president, Kerr also served as a regent.

Kerr and Dr. Max Rafferty, who as state superintendent of public instruction is also a regent, were the only members of the board absent during discussion and the vote on dismissal.

“Rumors have been around,” Kerr said at his own press conference following his removal. “I have felt like being in the ‘Perils of Pauline.’ Pauline always got saved, until to-day.”

He said it is not his nature to be “bitter or vindictive” and that he has no rancor over the regents’ action.

Reviews Policies

Kerr reviewed at his press conference policies under his administration which he said he hoped would be continued.

They include:

The “open-door” policy for qualified students who apply for admission; no tuition; dispersal of campuses rather than concentration of students in two or three mammoth institutions; decentralization of administration and striving to “make size acceptable to the individual student; achieving balance among teaching, research and service functions; stressing quality in choosing the faculty, and providing adequate facilities such as student unions and places for cultural attractions for students when they are out of classes.

Kerr also said he has fought hard for freedom on the campus.

He suggested that efforts be continued in seeking ways to give students a greater voice in governing the university or at least in advising the administration.

“Along with freedom goes respect for law,” he said. “I regret the occasions when there hasn’t been respect for law but in the totality of the university, those occasions have been minor.
A university can’t be run as a police state.”

Criticizes Regents

He criticized the regents for what he termed “yielding to the political winds in the state,” contending that the board members are appointed for 16-year terms to guard against political influence in the university administration.

“I don’t believe in the principle that because there is a new governor, there should be a new president of the university,” he said.
“Now this has happened. This is not done in the good universities of the nation and it is even out of fashion in the mediocre and poor ones.”

Kerr said he has received a number of job offers, including some made after his dismissal but has made no decision on his future.

He joined the Berkeley faculty in 1945 as director of the Institute of Industrial Relations and still retains the title of professor of industrial relations, a position to which he could return at a salary of more than $20,000 annually.

Recent Appointee

Unruh revealed that Allan Grant, recent Reagan appointee as president of the State Board of Agriculture and in that office automatically a regent, brought up the subject of dismissing Kerr at Friday’s meeting.

Unruh said that Grant, because he is new on the board, withdrew his motion to dismiss Kerr to allow Laurence Kennedy to initiate the action.

Unruh said the reasons given for the dismissal during debate on Kennedy’s motion were that Kerr “had lost the confidence of the regents and the people and that he was no longer useful.”

Executive Session

The regents met in executive session on Kerr’s status from 12:30 to 2:30 p.m.

At 3 p.m., Thomas C. Sorensen, vice president for university relations, made the announcement of the president’s removal.

Mrs. Hearst said she voted to remove Kerr “because he was inadequate as an administrator.”

William Coblentz attended Chairman Meyer’s press conference and, upon its conclusion, issued a statement charging that “the errors, mistakes and much of the blame of the majority (of the regents) have been foisted upon one man—Clark Kerr.”

Coblentz said that Kerr has been an outstanding administrator and that “the problems of unrest at Berkeley, the restlessness of students cannot be cured by the termination of employment of one man.”

The regents are expected to take up the question of a successor at their next meeting, Feb. 16 and 17 in Santa Barbara.

________________________

Two Samples of Clark Kerr’s Wit

“The chancellor’s job had come to be defined as providing parking for the faculty, sex for the students, and athletics for the alumni.”

— 1957 remark picked up by Time & Playboy

“The university president in the United States is expected to be a friend of the students, a colleague of the faculty, a good fellow with the alumni, a sound administrator with the trustees, a good speaker with the public, an astute bargainer with the foundations and the federal agencies, a politician with the state legislature, a friend of industry, labor, and agriculture, a persuasive diplomat with the donors, a champion of education generally, a supporter of the professions (particularly law and medicine), a spokesman to the press, a scholar in his own right, a public servant at the state and national levels, a devotee of opera and football equally, a decent human being, a good husband and father, an active member of a church. Above all he must enjoy traveling in airplanes, eating his meals in public, and attending public ceremonies. No one can be all of these things. Some succeed at being none.”

The Uses of the University, 1995

Source: UC Berkeley News: Press Release (December 2, 2003).

________________________

IN MEMORIAM

Clark Kerr
Professor of Business Administration, Emeritus, UC Berkeley
Chancellor, Emeritus, UC Berkeley
University of California President, Emeritus
1911 – 2003

Clark Kerr died on December 1, 2003, at his El Cerrito home overlooking the San Francisco Bay Area and the University of California, Berkeley campus. As Sheldon Rothblatt wrote shortly after, “He had always appeared indestructible, his intellectual powers invariably on automatic pilot. He survived nasty attacks from the political left and right, and overcame the humiliation of an abrupt dismissal from office by the Board of Regents. At his death, his renown was never greater.” (“Crosstalk” [National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education], 12(1), Winter 2004, p. 2.)

Kerr’s professional interests were mainly in three areas. His academic fields were economics and industrial relations; he had a second career as a skilled labor management negotiator and arbitrator; his worldwide reputation, however, was largely based on his work as an academic administrator whose final years were mostly devoted to research and writing on higher education in its American and worldwide contexts.

Kerr received his bachelor’s degree from Swarthmore College in 1932, where he also joined the Society of Friends, a lifelong commitment. After receiving his master’s degree at Stanford University in 1933 and his doctorate (all in economics) in 1939 from the University of California, Berkeley, he taught at the University of Washington for five years and was heavily engaged in ensuring industrial peace during World War II as vice chairman of the 12th Regional War Labor Board.

He was one of the founders of the professional association in his chosen academic field, the Industrial Relations Research Association. He was also a major contributor, perhaps the major contributor, to two major streams of industrial relations research and theory: (a) the so-called “California School” or “neo-classical revisionist” approach, which tried to bridge the two major then-current economics camps, the neoclassical and the institutional; and (b) “Industrialism and Industrial Man,” probably the first theoretically oriented study in what is now known as comparative international industrial relations. He continued to pursue this theme throughout his life (see, e.g., The Future of Industrial Societies: Convergence or Continuing Diversity? [Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1983]).

In 1945, he returned to Berkeley as director of its newly-founded Institute for Industrial Relations. When the infamous loyalty oath controversy arose in 1949, Kerr was a member of a relatively unimportant Academic Senate Committee on Privilege and Tenure, a committee that rapidly became central in the dispute. As a result of his efforts during that heated time, Kerr became well-known as a voice of reason, a calm negotiator and an able conciliator. When, in 1952, the Regents established the new position of chancellor at Berkeley, Kerr appeared the best choice to the Berkeley faculty, to then-President Robert Sproul, and to the Board of Regents.

During his six-year term as Berkeley’s first chancellor, Kerr set to work to repair the damage done by the oath controversy. As described in the first volume of his memoirs, Chancellor Kerr concentrated on building faculty excellence and planning for the academic and physical growth of the campus that would be needed shortly as the “tidal wave” of students—the first of the “baby boomers”—was expected to inundate higher education beginning in the early 1960s.

In 1958, Robert Gordon Sproul, UC’s president since 1930, retired and Clark Kerr was selected to replace him. As president, Kerr led the development of the California Master Plan for Higher Education (enacted in 1960) which provided for orderly growth among the state’s three public segments of higher education and also included the private sector in planning for the oncoming surge of students. He oversaw the administrative decentralization of the University of California, turning over most day-to-day decision-making to the campuses, under general university-wide policies. The staff of the Office of the President was reduced by 750 persons whose positions were returned to the campuses.

Developments during Kerr’s presidency included building, staffing, and opening three new UC university campuses, at Santa Cruz, San Diego, and Irvine. The existing units at Davis, Santa Barbara, and Riverside became “general” campuses, offering them equal opportunities with other campuses to engage in graduate work and research. Unlike many state systems, there would be no “flagship” campus within the University of California; similar faculty structures, admissions requirements, and expectations for excellence would be provided for all. In that vein, the University of California, Los Angeles, was given what Kerr referred to as “a place in the sun,” receiving equal resources with Berkeley in most areas.

Among other innovations, Kerr sponsored a university-wide library plan, increased the number of UC medical schools from two to five (and turned the University of California, San Francisco, from a local medical school into a leading medical research facility), enhanced facilities for student engagement in social and athletic life, established an Education Abroad Program, developed a Natural Reserve Program, and encouraged programs for arts and culture on the campuses.

While Kerr concentrated on improvements that would lead the American Council on Education, in its 1964 ranking of American research universities, to declare Berkeley to be both the most “distinguished” and the “best balanced” in the nation, political developments in the state and nation brought that campus the more dubious distinction of being the first to suffer major student disruptions.

Throughout his tenure as chancellor and president, Kerr had been under more or less constant attack from the political right wing in California and its legislature, led by State Senator Hugh Burns, chair of the senate’s Un-American Activities committee. Burns’s views were echoed by those of J. Edgar Hoover, longtime director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, who once wrote at the bottom of a memo, “I know Kerr is no good….”

But in the fall of 1964 the attacks on Kerr and the university’s administration came from the political left in the guise of the so-called Free Speech Movement. Throughout the remainder of his service as UC’s president, Kerr would contend with forces from both the left and the right, many actively engaged in attempts to oust him from his position. After the election in fall 1966 which brought Ronald Reagan to California’s governorship, membership on the Board of Regents shifted to the right, and on January 20, 1967, Kerr was abruptly dismissed. Later he stated that he left the presidency of the university as he had entered it, “fired with enthusiasm.”

Kerr was not long unemployed, almost immediately becoming the chair and research director for the newly established Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. In 1973 that organization was transformed into the Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education, again chaired by Kerr. During the 13 years of the Commission and Council, over 140 volumes of research and commentary on higher education were produced, many written or drafted by Kerr himself, comprising the most complete examination of higher education ever produced.

After the Carnegie series was completed in late 1979, Kerr continued to write both on industrial relations and higher education, including studies of university administration and governance for the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges, and culminating in his two-volume memoir of his life as a UC faculty member and administrator, completed shortly before his final illness (The Gold and the Blue: A Personal Memoir of the University of California 1949-1967. Volume I: Academic Triumphs (2001); Volume II: Political Turmoil (2003); University of California Press).

Perhaps Kerr’s best known book is The Uses of the University (Harvard University Press), based on his 1963 Godkin Lectures at Harvard and updated with additional chapters and republication every decade (1963, 1972, 1982, 1995, and 2001). In it he popularized the term “the multiversity” to characterize the modern research university. Other important publications included Industrialism and Industrial Man (1960, 1973 [Pelican revised ed.]), 1975 [Industrialism and Industrial Man Reconsidered]), written with others of the team that made up the Inter-University Study of Labor Problems in Economic Development; and Marshall, Marx, and Modern Times (1969).

Kerr served not only the university but also his country, as a member of numerous committees (among others, President Eisenhower’s Commission on National Goals, President Kennedy’s Advisory Committee on Labor Management Policy) and as chair of the National Committee for a Political Settlement in Vietnam. He was a member of the board of trustees/directors of the Rockefeller Foundation, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Swarthmore College, the American Council on Education, and the Work in America Institute (again—among others).

In 1964 he received the Alexander Meiklejohn Award for Contributions to Academic Freedom, awarded by the American Association of University Professors, and in 1968 he was the first recipient of the Clark Kerr Award for extraordinary and distinguished contributions to the advancement of higher education, presented by the Berkeley Division of UC’s Academic Senate. He received numerous honorary degrees from universities in the United States and abroad.

Kerr was an avid gardener, taking special interest in cultivating an array of flowers for his wife to enjoy, and apple trees. He claimed that, as a boy on his family’s Pennsylvania farm, he could recognize 50 species of apple trees by sight—even in the winter, after they had lost their leaves. Pennsylvania State University named its antique apple orchard in his honor, a tribute he especially treasured. He is also memorialized by buildings on UC’s campuses named for him, but the living tribute pleased him more. Kerr was the quintessential “egg-head,” both physically and intellectually, but possessed a strong sense of humor that enlivened both his conversation and his writings. He claimed, for example, that during his university presidency, he would take out his frustrations on the weeds in his garden, naming a small weed after a student who was giving him trouble; a larger weed would be called by the name of an annoying faculty member; and as he yanked it out, he would name the largest weed for a recalcitrant regent.

He was devoted to his family, and when one of his sons moved to western Australia, he visited every year to help with constructing farm structures and bringing in the crops.

Clark Kerr is survived by his wife, the former Catherine Spaulding, whom he met at Stanford, and his three children and their spouses, as well as seven grandchildren and a great-grandchild.

Marian L. Gade
George Strauss

Source: University of California Senate website.

Image Source: University of California, Berkeley. The Bancroft Library website. Fiat Lux Redux: Ansel Adams and Clark Kerr Exhibits. Detail from a portrait of Clark Kerr ca. 1966

Categories
Economists Gender Labor UCLA

UCLA. First woman economics Ph.D. Gene Bunning Tipton, 1953

For our irregular series “Meet an economics Ph.D. alumnus/a” we introduce you now to the first woman economics Ph.D. (1953!) from the University of California, Los Angeles, Gene Bunning Tipton. I have been unable to find any bibliographic references to her research, probably because she clearly chose a path as college educator. She served as the chair of the department of economics and statistics at California State Los Angeles.
Can anyone find an example of an interview where a male economist is asked what his family’s favorite recipe is? Seventy years ago, Gene Bunning Tipton was asked for hers. Here it is:  Bonus Material. To be honest, it looks pretty good.

______________________

Gene Bunning Tipton

  1. Born September 20 in Bellflower, Los Angeles County, CA to Percy Jay Bunning (1882-1937) and Mattie May Forquer (1883, 1917).
  1. Married Albert Vern Tipton, Jr. (1912-1996) February 16 in Pasadena, Los Angeles County, CA. Three children.
  1. California Voter Registration: Registered Democrat. Occupation: Housewife.
  1. A.B. from the University of California, Los Angeles. Summa cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa. Economics major. Transfer from Pasadena J.C.
  1. M.A. from University of California, Los Angeles. Economics.
  1. Los Angeles Evening Citizen News. May 11, 1960, p. 6.

“Problems of California government and society will be studied under three research fellowship grants awarded for 1950-51 by the Haynes Foundation of Los Angeles.
Graduate students to whom fellowships have been awarded are…and Gene B. Tipton, UCLA economics student, who will study the labor movement in Los Angeles during the 1940’s.
Each of the students is a candidate for the doctoral degree at his respective institution. The fellowship carries a stipend of $2000 for the academic year.”

  1. Ph.D. in economics from UCLA, first woman.

University Bulletin: a weekly bulletin for the staff of the University of California (March 23, 1953), p. 144.

“During the 1940’s the number of union members in proportion to the labor force increased nearly 15 per cent in Los Angeles County, according to a doctoral dissertation recently completed by a student in the Department of Economics.

Mrs. Gene B. Tipton of El Monte, the first woman ever to receive a Ph.D. degree from the Department, credits this growth to the past decade’s high prosperity and a favorable governmental climate. Also important were court decisions upholding directives of the National Labor Relations Board limiting the activities of organizations which advocated laws to ban the union shop in California.”

  1. The Whittier News. September 17, 1953, p. 7

“Officials of Whittier College have announced the appointment of ten faculty members for the 1953-54 school year…

New in the department of economics and business administration will be Dr. Jesse S. Robinson and Dr. Gene B. Tipton…

Dr. Tipton received her degree from UCLA where she was the winner of a fellowship from the John Randolph and Dora Haynes Foundation.

Her teaching background includes service at UCLA and Pomona College. More recently she has been an investment specialist with the Prudential Life Insurance Co.

  1. Daily News. October 20, 1954, p. 23

Article with photo. “Woman economist puts theory into practice in her cooking” by Martha Grayson. Includes recipe: Roast Canadian Bacon. To give a free seminar “Family Finance Forum” in the Whittier Woman’s Clubhouse on October 26, 1954 sponsored by the Whittier Savings and Loan Association in commemoration of the 34th anniversary of its founding.

Full-page ad in The Whittier News, October 25, 1954, p. 9.

  1. East Review. October 26, 1958, p. 3.

“Members of Soroptimist Club of Whittier will hostess a joint dinner meeting Tuesday evening of women’s service clubs in Whittier. Included on the guest list are members of the Business and Professional Women’s Club, Quota and Altrusa Clubs. The 6:30 dinner will be held in the Campus Inn at Whittier College.

Speaker for the evening will be Gene B. Tipton, Ph.D., who will speak on the subject, ‘Inflation in Our Time.’ Dr. Tipton is assistant professor of economics at Los Angeles State College. She graduated Summa cum Laude, Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of California at Los Angeles in 1953. She is the wife of A. Vern Tipton and they have three children.”

  1. Independent Star News (Pasadena, CA), p. 4.
    Elected to the Executive board of the L.A. State chapter of the American Association of University Professors for the coming year.
  1. Promotion to associate professor of economics, Los Angeles State College.

“Notes.” The American Economic Review, vol. 51, no. 5, 1961, p. 1165. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1813901.

1963-64. August 1963 to April 1964.

Fulbright scholar at the Indian Institute of Economic Research. Associate Professor of Economics at Los Angeles City College.

  1. South Pasadena Review, March 24, 1965, p. 1.

Dr. Gene B. Tipton, Associate Professor of Economics, 12116 Magnolia, El Monte elected Secretary-Treasurer of the Cal State L. A. alumni chapter of Phi Beta Kappa.

  1. Star-News (Pasadena, CA). May 6, p. 7.

“Dr. Gene B. Tipton of 12116 Magnolia St., El Monte, has been promoted from assistant [sic] professor to professor of economics at Cal State Los Angeles. She earned her B.A., M.A. and Ph.D. degrees at UCLA and was on the faculty of Whittier College before joining Cal State.

  1. 26 full-time faculty members under leadership of department chairman Donald A. Moore and associate chairman Gene Tipton. Cf. In 1960 the department of economics was 11 full-time, 5 part-time members.
  1. September. Becomes chairman of the department of economics and statistics.

“Notes.” The Journal of Business, vol. 46, no. 2, 1973, pp. 331–47. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2351382.

  1. Star-News (Pasadena, CA). June 15, p. A-6.
    Dr. Gene B. Tipton, chairman of the department of economics and statistics at Cal. State L.A.

1984-85. Vice-President of the State Association of Emeriti Professors.

1985-86. President of the State Association of Emeriti Professors.

  1. Died in March 20 in Arcadia, Los Angeles County, CA.
Obituary

Gene B. Tipton, Emeritus Professor of Economics who was serving as the 1985/86 president of the Emeriti Association, died on March 20. Gene served on the University faculty as a teacher and administrator for 26 years (1957-83). Prior to coming to Cal State L.A., she taught at Whittier College and UC Riverside. A native of El Monte, Gene prepared for her career in economics by earning her BA, MA, and PhD degrees at UCLA, graduating summa cum laude. She was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. In addition to her academic achievement, Gene also was an outstanding tennis player, winning state titles in her collegiate days. A highlight of her tennis career was defeating Alice Marble, an international star in her day. In addition to her teaching, Gene was in demand as a consultant. She served as a special economic consultant to the Federal Reserve Board in San Francisco for 17 years. A Gene Tipton Memorial Lecture, under the joint sponsorship of the Emeriti Association and the Department of Economics in the School of Business and Economics, is being arranged for the Fall Quarter at the University. Gene is survived by her husband, Vern, three children and six grandchildren.

Source: The Emeritimes. Vol. VII, No. 3 (September 1986)

______________________

Bonus Material

From: Woman economist puts theory into practice in her cooking
By Martha Grayson (Daily News food editor)

As a noted economist and busy instructor at Whittier College and Los Angels State College in subjects ranging from consumer economics and family investments to public finance, it’s a miracle that Dr. Gene Tipton has had time to develop a favorite recipe.

But this she has done. And her Roast Canadian Bacon, hot from the oven, is a great favorite with her husband and her three teen-age children, as well as with the Tipton’s many friends who dine from time to time at their home in El Monte….

Roast Canadian Bacon

2½ Ibs. Canadian bacon
2 teaspoons dry mustard
4 tablespoons brown sugar
2 teaspoons ground cloves

Put bacon in water to cover, bring to boil and cook for 45 minutes. Remove from water and place in a greased baking dish with one-fourth water in bottom. Mix mustard, sugar and cloves thoroughly; press mixture into meat, covering it thoroughly. Bake without cover at 350 degrees for 1½ hours. (Start in cold oven.)

With this tasty roast Doctor Tipton likes to serve sweet-sour green beans cooked with a little finely chopped onion, baked potatoes, a tossed green salad, cornbread squares and apple sauce.

For dessert she serves an assortment of fresh fruits frequently. A frozen berry pie and ice cream, obtained from the freezer cabinet at her market, also are favorite desserts in the Tipton household, since admittedly there is not too much time for baking.

When the family has a special yen for cake, however, Doctor Tipton obliges with either an angel food or a devil’s food, which she makes from a prepared mix.

Source: Daily News (Los Angeles, CA), October 20, 1954, p. 23.

Image Source: Daily News (Los Angeles, CA), October 20, 1954, p. 23.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Labor

Harvard. Enrollment and Final Exam, Labor Problems. Ripley, 1906-1907

This post provides material from William Zebina Ripley’s fifth iteration of his labor economics course at Harvard. A quick search using the usual internet sources that have proven handy for Economics in the Rear-view Mirror picked up a few facts about the teaching assistant for the course who would have been a law student at the time.

__________________________

Meet the course teaching assistant

Edwin DeTurck Bechtel.

b. 19 Aug 1880 in Bechtelsville, Pennsylvania
d. 4. Jul 1957 in Bedford Four Corners, New York

Home: Calcium, Pennsylvania. High School in Reading, Pennsylvania. Recipient of the Price Greenleaf Scholarship.
Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President, 1901-02, p. 116.

A.B. (Harvard) 1903, A.M. (Harvard) 1904. ― Resident Graduate Student, 1903-04. ― Student of Social Science at Harvard. Continuing his studies in social science in Europe, as Robert Treat Paine Fellow (1903-04).
Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President, 1903-04, p. 157.

Student, Harvard Law School
Source: Harvard University. Annual Report of the President, 1904-05, p. 161.

Worked for theWall Street law firm Carter, Ledyard & Milburn at least as early as December 1916. Represented American Express in London and Paris for some urgent matter in early 1917. (Passport Application from December 21, 1916: includes a signed statement by his sister that the family settled in Pennsylvania prior to 1750). According to his World War II draft registration form (25 Apr 1942), he was still working at the same Wall Street law firm. He died in Bedford Four Corners, New York on July 4, 1957. He became a noted expert on roses.
Source: Items at the genealogical website ancestry.com.

__________________________

Other Labor Related Posts
for William Z. Ripley

Problems of Labor and Industrial Organization, 1902-1903.

Problems of Labor, 1903-1904.

Problems of Labor, 1904-05.

Problems of Labor, 1905-06.

Short Bibliography of Trade Unionism, 1910.

Short Bibliography of Strikes and Boycotts, 1910.

Trade Unionism and Allied Problems, 1914-1915.

Problems of Labor, 1931.

__________________________

Course Enrollment

Economics 9a 1hf. Professor Ripley, assisted by Mr. E. DeT. Bechtel. — Problems of Labor.

Total 100: 8 Graduates, 35 Seniors, 33 Juniors, 18 Sophomores, 6 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1906-1907, p. 71.

__________________________

ECONOMICS 9a
Mid-Year Examination, 1906-07

  1. What is the difference between an “Allied Trades Council” and a “Federal Union”? Where are they to be found respectively, and what are their functions?
  2. Is there any difference in principle between the British Workmen’s Compensation Act and the German Compulsory Insurance Acts? If so, what is it?
  3. What are some of the legislative remedies proposed for the abuse of the injunction as applied to labor disputes? Criticise them.
  4. In what respects are American Industrial conditions different from those of the Australian colonies? Do these explain the differences in labor legislation in part? If so, how?
  5. What are the two most tangible results of the Australian labor legislation? Explain how they have come about.
  6. In the Higgling of the Market to determine rates of income, what are some of the advantages, or “bulwarks” as Webb styles them, which are enjoyed by the employer? What offsets has the workman?
  7. In what different ways may the non-union man be dealt with in Collective Bargains? Instance concrete examples.
  8. State briefly, but without discussion, three points in favor of, and three arguments against the German Compulsory Insurance Acts.
  9. What is the attitude of Trade Unionists in general toward incorporation? What substitute for incorporation, which will accomplish the same purpose, can you suggest?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Mid-year Examinations, 1852-1943. Box 7, Bound Volume: Examination Papers, Mid-Years 1906-07.

Categories
Education Harvard Labor Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Reading list for economics of education and technology. Bowles, 1967-68

The following reading list comes from a Harvard course on the economics of education and technology offered by assistant professor Samuel S. Bowles in the spring semester of the 1967-68 academic year. Bowles was 28 years young then. Here is a link to his Santa Fe Institute webpage.

Only the pages of the syllabus with the reading lists were submitted to the Harvard library for the purpose of putting books on reserve. Not included were the couple of paragraphs of motivation/description for each of the seven sections of the course. I had to insert approximate titles for sections IV and VII and have put those words between square brackets.

__________________________

Most likely spot to find more course content

Samuel Bowles, Planning Educational Systems for Economic Growth. Harvard University Press, 1969.

[When you get an account with archive.org, it is like having an old fashioned library card and you will have access to this book for an hour at a time when it is not being borrowed by another user.]

__________________________

Course Announcement

Economics 151 (formerly Economics 177). Economics of Education and Technology (Offered jointly with the Graduate School of Education)
Half course (spring term). M., W., F., at 9. Assistant Professor S. S. Bowles

Attention will be given to the economics of the education process, the theory and implications of innovation, the effects of education and technological change on the distribution of income and the role of education and technological change in economic growth. Relevant case studies and current policy issues related to the United States and underdeveloped countries will be considered.

Source: Harvard University. Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Courses of Instruction, Harvard and Radcliffe, 1967-68, p. 124.

__________________________

Reading list
Ec. 151
Sam Bowles

I. THE DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME — RECENT U.S. EXPERIENCE

A. Batchelder, “Decline in the Relative Income of Negro Men,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November, 1964, pp. 525-48.

*H. Miller, Rich Man, Poor Man, chapters 1, 2, 4-6, pp. 54-134.

I. Kravis, “Relative Income Shares in Fact and Theory,” American Economic Review, 1959, pp. 917-947.

R. Lampman, The Share of Top Wealth-Holders in National Wealth, chapter 1, pp. 1-26; also Table 97, p. 209.

(Supplementary)

*G. Kolko, Wealth and Power in America.

H. Miller, Distribution of Income in the United States.

II. EDUCATION AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME
  1. Education and Earnings

*H. Miller, Rich Man, Poor Man, Chapters 8 and 9, pp. 148-194.

  1. Education as Investment

I. Fisher, The Theory of Interest, Chapters 4, 7, 10, and 11, pp. 61-98, 159-177, and 231-287.

T. Ribich, Poverty and Education, Chapter I, pp. 1-17 and 23-32, mimeo.

G. Becker, Human Capital, Chapters 1-5; 7 and 8, pp. 1-123; 136-159.

  1. Equality of Educational Opportunity

J. Coleman, “Equal Schools or Equal Students,” in The Public Interest, Summer, 1966, pp. 70-75.

*P. Sexton, Education and Income, pp. 58-69.

(Supplementary)

*Harlem Youth Opportunities Unlimited (HARYOU), Youth in the Ghetto: A Study in the Consequences of Powerlessness, Chapter 7.

*J. Conant, Slums and Suburbs, Chapters 1, 2, and 3.

*P.  Sexton, “City Schools,” in The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, March 1964, reprinted in L. Ferman, et al., eds., Poverty in America.

  1. A Model of Education and the Distribution of Earnings

G. Becker, “Human Capital and the Personal Distribution of Income: An Analytical Approach,” mimeo, 59 pp.

  1. Education and the War on Poverty

B. Weisbrod, “Preventing High School Dropouts,” in R. Dorfman, (*) Measuring the Benefits of Government Investments, pp. 117-148.

J. K. Folger and C. B. Nam, Education of the American Population (U.S. Department of Commerce).

(Supplementary)

O. Lewis, “The Culture of Poverty,” Scientific American, October, 1966, pp. 19-25.

*Haryou, Youth in the Ghetto, Chapter 12.

C. A. Anderson, “A Skeptical Note on Education and Mobility,” in H. Halsey, J. Floud, C. Anderson, (*) Education Economy and Society.

III. TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME
  1. The Theory of Production and Distribution

M. Brown, On the Theory and Measurement of Technological Change, chapter 2, pp. 9-28.

*J. Meade, Efficiency, Equality and the Ownership of Property, Chapter 1, pp. 11-26.

J. Hicks, Theory of Wages, Chapter VI, pp. 112-135.

  1. Commentaries, Past and Present

A. Smith, The Wealth of Nations, Book I, Chapter 1.

D. Ricardo, The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, Chapter 31, “On Machinery.”

K. Marx, Capital, Volume I, Chapter XV, sections 3, 5 and 6, pp. 430-456; 466-488. (Pages refer to Modern Library edition.)

P. Sweezy, The Theory of Capitalist Development, Chapter 5, pp. 75-95.

R. Solow, “Technology and Unemployment,” The Public Interest, Fall, 1965, pp. 17-26.

(Supplementary)

R. Eckaus, “The Factor Proportions Problem in Underdeveloped Areas.” American Economic Review, September, 1955, reprinted in A. Agarwala and S. P. Singh; (*) The Economics of Underdevelopment, pp. 348-78.

  1. Making the Most Out of Technological Change

*J. Meade, Efficiency, Equality and the Ownership of Property, Chapters 2-7, pp. 27-77.

*National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress, Technology and the American Economy, Vol. 1, chapters 1-4, pp. 1-58.

IV. [ECONOMIC GROWTH: MEASUREMENT, THEORY, PRODUCTIVITY]
  1. The Measurement and Characteristics of Economic Growth

S. Kuznets, Postwar Economic Growth, Lecture II, “Characteristics of Modern Economic Growth,” pp. 36-68.

*C. Cipolla, The Economic History of World Population, Chapters 1 and 2, pp. 15-58.

*E. Denison, The Sources of Economic Growth in the United States, Chapters 1, 2, and 3, pp. 3-22.

(Supplementary)

M. Abramovitz, “The Welfare Interpretation of Secular Trends in National Income and Product,” Abramovitz, et al. (*) The Allocation of Economic Resources, pp. 1-22.

*S. Kuznets, Modern Economic Growth.

*O. Morgenstern, On the Accuracy of Economic Observations, Chapters 1 and 2.

  1. Theories of Economic Growth

G. Winston, “The Power Growth Model,” mimeo, 18 pp.

*J. Schumpeter, The Theory of Economic Development, Chapters 1 to 4, pp. 3-156.

*J. Meade, A Neoclassical Theory of Economic Growth, Chapters 1 and 2, pp. 1-18.

  1. The Advance of Productivity in the U.S. Economy

J. Kendrick, Productivity Trends in the United States, pp. 3-12, 59-77.

(Supplementary)

M. Abramovitz, “Resource and Output Trends in the U.S. Since 1870,” American Economic Review, 1956.

R. Solow, “Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Function,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 1957.

V. EDUCATION AND GROWTH

T. Schultz, The Economic Value of Education, pp. 1-70.

S. Strumilin, “The Economic Significance of National Education,” in J. Vaizey and E. A. G. Robinson, The Economics of Education, pp. 276-323.

B. Weisbrod, “Education and Investment in Human Capital,” Journal of Political Economy Supplement, October, 1962, pp. 106-123.

W. Bowen, Economic Aspects of Education, Essay I, “Assessing the Economic Contribution of Education,” pp. 3-38.

*E. Denison, The Sources of Economic Growth in the U.S. and the Alternatives Before Us, pp. 23-46; 66-80; 84-87.

T. Schultz, “Investing in Farm People,” in T. Schultz, (*) Transforming Traditional Agriculture, pp. 175-206.

(Supplementary)

T. Schultz, “Investment in Human Capital,” American Economic Review, December, 1961.

W. Bowman, “The Human Investment Revolution in Economic Thought,” Sociology of Education, Vol. 39, No. 2, Spring, 1966, pp. 112-137.

*B. Weisbrod, The External Benefits of Public Education.

A. Harberger, “Investment in Men vs. Investment in Machines: The Case of India,” in M. Bowman and C. A. Anderson, Education and Economic Development, pp. 11-33.

Carl Shoup, et al., The Fiscal System of Venezuela, pp. 406-409.

M. Bowman and C. Anderson, “Concerning the Role of Education in Development,” in C. Geertz, Old Societies and New States, pp. 247-279.

S. Bowles, “Sources of Growth in the Greek Economy,” mimeo.

VI. TECHNOLOGY AND GROWTH
  1. The Production of New Technologies

J. Enos, “Invention and Innovation in the Petroleum Industry,” in National Bureau of Economic Research, The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity, pp. 299-322.

H. Dickenson, “The Steam-Engine to 1830,” in Charles Singer et al. A History of Technology, Volume IV, pp. 168-198.

(Supplementary)

Articles by Peck, Mueller and Nelson, in National Bureau of Economic Research, The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity.

R. Nelson, “The Economics of Invention: A Survey of the Literature,” in Journal of Business, April, 1959, pp. 101-127.

J. Schmookler, Invention and Economic Growth, Chapters 6 and 7.

  1. The Spread of New Technologies

W. E. G. Salter, Productivity and Technical Change, Chapters 4, 5, 6 and appendix to Chapter 7, pp. 48-82, 95-99.

Z. Griliches, “Hybrid Corn and the Economics of Innovation,” Science, July 29, 1960, Vol. 132, pp. 275-280.

(Supplementary)

J. Habakkuk, American and British Technology.

  1. Technology and Growth

E. Denison, The Sources of Economic Growth in the United States, pp. 154-255.

Z. Griliches, “Research Costs and Social Returns: Hybrid Corn and Related Innovations,” Journal of Political Economy, October, 1958, pp. 419-431.

  1. Efficiency of Resource Allocation in Research and Development

R. Nelson, “The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research,” in Journal of Political Economy, June, 1959, pp. 297-306.

(Supplementary)

K. Arrow, “Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention,” in National Bureau of Economic Research, The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity, pp. 609-625.

VII. [ECONOMICS OF EDUCATION]
  1. The Concept of Efficiency in Education

H. Johnson, “Economics and Education,” in School Review, Autumn, 1957, pp. 260-269.

(Supplementary)

Project Talent, Studies of the American High School, Cooperative Research Project 226, U.S. Office of Education. Chapters 6, 9, and 10.

J. Coleman, Equality of Educational Opportunity, U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Education.

  1. The Market for Educated Labor

H. Leibenstein, “Shortages and Surpluses in Education in Underdeveloped Countries,” in M. J. Bowman and C A. Anderson, Education and Economic Development, pp. 51-62.

K. Arrow and W. Capron, “Dynamic Shortages and Price Rises, The Engineer-Scientist Case,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, May, 1959, pp. 292-308.

  1. Market Solutions to the Problem of Efficient Resource Allocation in Education

M. Friedman, “The Role of Government in Education,” in R. Solo, Economics and the Public Interest, pp. 123-144.

A. Daniere, Higher Education in the American Economy, chapters 2 and 4-5 pp. 13-19, 33-55.

(Supplementary)

C. Jencks, “Is the Public School Obsolete?” in The Public Interest.

  1. Educational Planning

M. Blaug, “Conflicting Approaches to Educational Planning,” mimeo, 34 pp.

H. Johnson, “The Economics of the Brain Drain,” Minerva, 1965.

A. Daniere, “Rate of Return and Manpower Approach in Educational Planning” in Harvard Graduate School of Public Administration, Public Policy, 1965, pp. 162-200.

(Supplementary)

F. Harbison and C. Myers, Education, Manpower and Economic Growth.

J. Tinbergen, et al., Econometric Models of Education, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 1965; An Experiment in Planning by Six Countries, 1966.

H. Parnés, Forecasting Education Needs for Economic and Social Development, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 1962.

R. Hollister, A Technical Evaluation of the First Stage of the Mediterranean Regional Project, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 1966.

R. Eckaus, “Economic Criteria for Education and Training,” Review of Economics and Statistics, (May, 1964), pp. 181-190.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1967-1968, Box 9. Folder “Economics, 1967-68”.

Image Source: The Boston Globe (December 5, 1969), p. 15.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Labor

Harvard. Report assignments and final exam for Problems of Labor. Ripley et al., 1905-1906

Professor William Zebina Ripley’s courses at Harvard ranged from economic and social statistics, through transportation economics, industrial organization and regulation, and (as we see in this post) labor economics/industrial relations. Besides the enrollment figures and the final exam questions for the course, we were able to fish copies of the report assignments for 1905-06 from the Harvard archives. This course material has been transcribed and can be found below.

Fun fact: the teaching assistant Mr. Houghton can be identified as William Morris Houghton who received an A.M. from Harvard in 1904 and went off to work as a writer for the New York Herald Tribune, first as a reporter/feature writer and then as an editorial writer (and was included in the 35th anniversary of the Yale Class of 1904 as a member of the class who did not graduate from Yale).

__________________________

Other Labor Related Posts
for William Z. Ripley

Problems of Labor and Industrial Organization, 1902-1903.

Problems of Labor, 1903-1904.

Problems of Labor, 1904-05.

Short Bibliography of Trade Unionism, 1910.

Short Bibliography of Strikes and Boycotts, 1910.

Trade Unionism and Allied Problems, 1914-1915.

Problems of Labor, 1931.

__________________________

Course Enrollment

Economics 9a 1hf. Professor [William Zebina] Ripley, assisted by Messrs. [Vanderveer] Custis and [William Morris] Houghton. — Problems of Labor.

Total 96: 7 Graduates, 23 Seniors, 42 Juniors, 17 Sophomores, 7 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1905-1906, p. 72.

__________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 9a

ASSIGNMENT OF REPORTS

Group A

            Students will report upon the comparative conditions respecting Trade Union organization, functions, and efficiency in corresponding industries in the United States and Great Britain. The particular industry assigned to each man is indicated by a number on the enrolment slip, which refers to the Trade Union number on the appended list of National Labor Organizations.

Group B

            Students will report upon the comparative efficiency of Trade Union organization in two distinct lines of industry in the United States. Numbers against the names on the enrolment slip refer to the numbered Trade Union list, appended hereto.

Group C

            Students will report upon the nature of Trade Union organization in two distinct lines of industry in Great Britain. Names on the enrolment slip as numbered refer to the industries concerned in the appended list of Trade Unions.

          → The letters preceding the assignment number against the student’s name refer to the group in which the report is to be made. Thus, for example: “98 A” on the enrolment slip indicates that the student is to report upon the Cotton Spinners’ Unions in the United States and Great Britain; “9 & 98 B,” that a comparison of the Spinners’ and of the Boot and Shoe Workers’ Organizations in the United States is expected; while “9 & 98 C” calls for the same comparison for the two industries in Great Britain.

NATIONAL LABOR ORGANIZATIONS
IN THE UNITED STATES

*Indicates that the Trade Union journal is in the Library. [Loeb Fund.]

† Reference to Reports, U.S. Industrial Commission, is given within parentheses.

*The KNIGHTS OF LABOR
*THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR

  1. Actors’ International Union.
  2. Asbestos Workers of America.
  3. Bakery and Confectionery Workers.
  4. Barbers’ International Union.
  5. Bill Posters and Billers of America.
  6. International Brotherhood of Blacksmiths.
  7. *Boiler Makers and Iron Ship Builders of America.
  8. International Brotherhood of Bookbinders.
  9. Boot and Shoe Workers’ Union. († VII, 356; XIV, 333.)
  10. United Brewery Workmen.
  11. *Brick, Tile and Terra Cotta Workers’ Alliance.
  12. Bridge and Structural Iron Workers.
  13. Broom and Whisk Makers’ Union.
  14. Brushmakers’ International Union.
  15. *United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America.
  16. Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners.
  17. International Carriage and Wagon Workers.
  18. International Wood Carvers’ Association.
  19. International Association of Car Workers.
  20. Brotherhood of Cement Workers.
  21. Chainmakers’ National Union.
  22. *Cigarmakers’ International Union. († VII, 257, 715.)
  23. Retail Clerks’ International Protective Association.
  24. United Cloth Hat and Cap Makers.
  25. Commercial Telegraphers’ Union of America.
  26. International Compressed Air Workers’ Union.
  27. Coopers’ International Union.
  28. Amalgamated Lace Curtain Operatives.
  29. International Union of Cutting Die and Cutter Makers.
  30. International Union of Electrical Workers. († VII, 375.)
  31. International Union of Elevator Constructors.
  32. International Union of Steam Engineers.
  33. International Association of Watch Case Engravers.
  34. International Brotherhood of Stationary Firemen.
  35. International Association of Steam and Hot Water Fitters and Helpers. († VII, 964.)
  36. International Union of Flour and Cereal Mill Employes.
  37. International Brotherhood of Foundry Employes.
  38. International Union of Interior Freight Handlers and Warehousemen.
  39. International Association of Fur Workers.
  40. United Garment Workers of America. († VII, 182.)
  41. International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union.
  42. Glass Bottle Blowers’ Association. († VII, 102, 920.)
  43. *Glass Workers’ International Association.
  44. International Glove Workers’ Union.
  45. *Granite Cutters’ International Association. († XIV, 422.)
  46. Pocket Knife Blade Grinders’ and Finishers’ National Union.
  47. Table Knife Grinders’ National Union.
  48. United Hatters of North America.
  49. Hod Carriers and Building Laborers’ Union.
  50. International Union of Journeymen Horse-Shoers.
  51. Hotel and Restaurant Employes’ International Alliance and Bartenders’ International League.
  52. Iron, Steel and Tin Workers. († VII, 84.)
  53. International Jewelry Workers’ Union.
  54. International Union of Wood, Wire, and Metal Lathers.
  55. International Union of Shirt, Waist, and Laundry Workers.
  56. United Brotherhood of Leather Workers on Horse Goods.
  57. Amalgamated Leather Workers’ Union.
  58. International Protective and Beneficial Association of Lithographers.
  59. International Protective Association of Lithographic Press Feeders.
  60. International Longshoremen’s Association.
  61. National Association of Machine Printers and Color Mixers.
  62. *International Association of Machinists.
  63. International Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes.
  64. International Association of Marble Workers.
  65. *Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen.
  66. International Union of Metal Polishers, Buffers, Platers, and Brass Workers.
  67. International Alliance of Amalgamated Sheet Metal Workers.
  68. *United Mine Workers.
  69. International Molders’ Union.
  70. American Federation of Musicians.
  71. Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators and Paper Hangers.
  72. United Brotherhood of Paper Makers.
  73. Pattern Makers’ League.
  74. International Union of Pavers, Rammermen, Flag Layers, Bridge and Stone Curb Setters.
  75. Paving Cutters’ Union.
  76. International Photo-Engravers’ Union.
  77. *International Piano and Organ Workers’ Union.
  78. International Steel and Copper Plate Printers’ Union.
  79. International Association of Operative Plasterers.
  80. United Association of Plumbers, Gas Fitters, Steam Fitters, and Steam Fitters’ Helpers.
  81. National Federation of Post Office Clerks.
  82. National Brotherhood of Operative Potters. († XIV, 636, 643.)
  83. United Powder and High Explosive Workers.
  84. National Print Cutters’ Association.
  85. International Printing Pressmen’s Union.
  86. International Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite and Paper Mill Workers.
  87. Quarry Workers’ International Union.
  88. *Order of Railroad Telegraphers. († XVII, 821.)
  89. Brotherhood of Railway Clerks.
  90. Amalgamated Association of Street and Electric Railway Employes. († VII, 205.)
  91. International Brotherhood of Roofers, Composition, Damp and Waterproof Workers.
  92. Saw Smiths’ National Union.
  93. *International Seamen’s Union.
  94. International Shingle Weavers’ Union.
  95. International Union of Shipwrights’ Joiners and Caulkers.
  96. International Slate and Tile Roofers’ Union.
  97. International Union of Slate Workers.
  98. Spinners’ International Union. († XIV, 564, 573, 581.)
  99. Theatrical Stage Employes’ International Alliance.
  100. The Steel Plate Transferers’ Association.
  101. International Stereotypers and Electrotypers’ Union.
  102. Stone Cutters’ Association. († VII, 201.)
  103. Stove Mounters’ International Union. († VII, 860.)
  104. Switchmen’s Union of North America.
  105. *Journeymen Tailors’ Union.
  106. International Brotherhood of Teamsters.
  107. United Textile Workers. († VII, 343.)
  108. International Ceramic, Mosaic and Encaustic Tile Layers and Helpers’ Union.
  109. Tin Plate Workers’ Protective Association.
  110. International Brotherhood of Tip Printers.
  111. *Tobacco Workers’ International Union.
  112. International Union of Travellers’ Goods and Leather Novelty Workers.
  113. *International Typographical Union. († VII, 268.)
  114. Upholsterers’ International Union.
  115. Elastic Goring Weavers’ Amalgamated Association.
  116. American Wire Weavers’ Protective Association.
  117. International Brotherhood of Woodsmen and Saw Mill Workers.
  118. International Union of Amalgamated Wood Workers.
  119. *Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers. († XVII, 821.)
  120. *Order of Railway Conductors of America. († XVII, 821.)
  121. *Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen. († XVII, 821.)
  122. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen. († XVII, 821.)
  123. Brotherhood of Railway Trackmen.

            The constitutions of most of the Trades Unions for the United States will be found in Vol. XVII, Reports, U. S. Industrial Commission. Similar data for Great Britain is in the Appendix to “Foreign Reports, Vols. 1-2,” Royal Commission on Labour, pp. 15-324. [Volume I, United States; Volume II, Colonies and Indian Empire] [Both reserved in Gore Hall.] For early history of British Unions consult Reports, Royal Commission on Organization and Rules of Trades Unions, 1867-69; Parl. Papers, 1867, Vol. XXXII; 1867-68, Vol. XXXIX; 1868-69, Vol. XXXI. The Annual Report on Trade Unions by the Labour Department of the Board of Trade also contains up-to-date material on English conditions. Additional evidence as to labor conditions in each industry will be found in Vols. VIIVIIIXIIXIV, and XVII, U. S. Industrial Commission (consult Digest and Index in each volume); in the 11th Special Report, U.S. Bureau of Labor, on Restriction of Output; in the annual reports of the state bureaus of labor of New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, etc. [See index under Unions in Special Index published by the U.S. Department of Labor; and in the Reports of the British Royal Commission.] The student should also consult Charles Booth’s Life and Labor of the People;

[(Original) Volume I, East London; (Original) Volume II, London; (Original) Appendix to Volume II; Note: the previous three original volumes were re-printed as four volumes that then were followed by Volume V, Population Classified by Trades; Volume VI, Population Classified by Trades (cont.); Volume VII, Population Classified by Trades; Volume VIII, Population Classified by Trades (cont.); Volume IX, Comparisons, Survey and Conclusions];

Webbs’, Industrial Democracy and History of Trade Unionism; and other books reserved in Gore Hall.

            Data respecting the various unions among railroad employees in the United States will be found in a separate section on Railway Labor, in Vol. XVII, U. S. Industrial Commission: as also in Vols. IV and IX. (See Digests and Indexes.)

            In cases where the American Trade Union journal is not in the library, the student will be expected to procure at least one copy from the Secretary of the Union. [See list of post office addresses posted with the enrolment slip.] These are to be filed with the report.

→ Exact references by title, volume and page must be given in foot-notes for all facts cited. This condition is absolutely imperative. Failure to comply with it will vitiate the entire report.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003, Box 1, Folder “Economics, 1905-1906”.

__________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 9a

ASSIGNMENT OF REPORTS

            → Exact references by title, volume and page must be given in footnotes for all facts cited. This condition is absolutely imperative. Without such foot-notes the report will be rejected. General references listed separately are of no value.

Group F

            Students will prepare a connected and logical statement of the course of a labor dispute, as indicated by number on the appended list. The particular year being given in this reference, proceed at first to fix the date of beginning and close of the contest. Poole’s Index of Periodicals should be carefully searched for references. Note, however, that the more serious studies do not appear until a year or two after the event. A Select List of Books (and periodicals) on Strikes, published by the Library of Congress in 1903, may conveniently be used. The World Almanac often contains data worthy of consideration. Rely upon the Economic journals, where possible, but always seek many different authorities. The various reports of state Bureaus of Labor, which might take cognizance of the strike, should also be examined. Newspapers, to be found at the Boston Public Library, are useful; but statements therein should be carefully weighed. Clearly distinguish among other things: the cause of the strike; the policy of workmen and employers in its conduct; legal processes invoked; and the results to both parties. Summarize your conclusions succinctly at the end.

  1. Pennsylvania Railroad, 1877.
  2. Chicago Printers, 1880.
  3. Railway Telegraphers, 1883.
  4. Southwestern Railways, 1886.
  5. Anthracite Coal Miners, 1887-88.
  6. Homestead Strike, 1890.
  7. Spring Valley, 1890.
  8. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad, 1891.
  9. Cripple Creek, 1893.
  10. Anthracite Coal Miners, 1893-94.
  11. Northern Pacific Railway, 1894.
  12. Pullman Strike, 1894.
  13. The Army of the Commonweal, 1894.
  14. New York Tailors, 1895.
  15. Bituminous Coal Miners, 1897.
  16. Marlboro, Mass., 1898-99.
  17. Chicago Building Trades, 1900.
  18. New York Cigar Makers, 1900.
  19. Anthracite Coal Workers, 1900.
  20. Steel Workers, 1901.
  21. Louis Street Railway, 1901.
  22. Boston Teamsters, 1901.
  23. Machinists Strike, 1901.
  24. Anthracite Coal Miners, 1902.
  25. Boston Brewery Workmen, 1902.
  26. Pawtucket Weavers, 1902.
  27. New York Building Trades, 1903.
  28. Colorado Miners, 1903-04.
  29. New York Garment Workers, 1903-04.
  30. New York Subway, 1904-05.
  31. Fall River Cotton Mills, 1904-05.
  32. Chicago Butchers, 1904

[Note: nothing listed between items 32 and 51]

  1. London Docks, 1889.
  2. Scottish Railways, 1891.
  3. English Coal Miners, 1893.
  4. Lancashire Cotton Mills, 1900.
  5. English Coal Miners, 1901.
  6. French Coal Miners [Carmaux], 1902.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003, Box 1, Folder “Economics, 1905-1906”.

__________________________

ECONOMICS 9a
Final Examination, 1905-06

  1. Criticise Compulsory Insurance Acts from the distinct points of view of (1) thrift, (2) efficiency, and (3) morality, stating the nature of the evidence in each case.
  2. In what domains of social legislation are the following countries more advanced than the United States: (a) Great Britain, (b) the colony of Victoria, (c) the colony of New Zealand, (d) Germany? In what branches of such legislation does the United States surpass Buropean countries? [Answer by merely naming, without descriptive matter.]
  3. How do the Australian colonies deal with the non-union man in their labor laws?
  4. Defend the Minimum Wage policy from the workman’s point of view, and state the employers’ objections thereto.
  5. In what kinds of social legislation is the Federal character of our government a serious bar to experimentation? Show clearly the reasons why.
  6. What policies in the matter of apprenticeship on the part of employers do the trades unions seek to thwart by their rules on the subject?
  7. How does an injunction differ from an ordinary rule at law; and why is it so commonly used in labor disputes?
  8. What is a Federal Union as distinct from a Trade Union?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination Papers 1873-1915. Box 8, Bound volume: Examination Papers, 1906-07Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, Government, Economics,…,Music in Harvard College (June, 1906), p. 35.

Image Source: Four strikers of the Ladies Tailors union on the picket line during the “Uprising of the 20,000”. Photo dated February 1910. Strike ran from November 1909 to March 1910. From the George Grantham Bain Collection, Library of Congress.

Categories
Business Cycles Distribution Economic History Exam Questions History of Economics Industrial Organization International Economics Johns Hopkins Labor Money and Banking Public Finance Public Utilities Statistics Theory

Johns Hopkins. General Written Exam for Economics PhD. 1956

 

One is struck by the relative weight of the history of economics in this four part (12 hours total) general examination for the PhD degree at Johns Hopkins in 1956. Also interesting to note just how many different areas are touched upon. Plenty of choice, but no place to hide.

________________________

Other General Exams from Johns Hopkins

________________________

GENERAL WRITTEN EXAMINATION FOR THE PH.D DEGREE
DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL ECONOMY

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

PART I
June 4, 1956, 9-12 a.m.

Answer two questions, one from each group.

Group I.
  1. Write an essay on the theory of capital. It should include a discussion of the place of capital theory in economic analysis: for what purposes, if any, we need such a theory, Do not omit theories or issues which were important in the history of doctrines, even if you should regard them as irrelevant for modern analysis.
  2. Discuss and compare the capital theories of Böhm-Bawerk, Wicksell, and Hayek.
  3. Write an essay on the theory of income distribution. Organize it carefully, as if it were designed for an article in the Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Include discussions of alternative theories such as imputation theories, residual theories, surplus value theories, etc.
Group II.
  1. The following statements attempt to show that marginal productivity theory is inconsistent with factual observation. Accepting the stated facts as given, discuss whether they call for the rejection or major modification of the theory. If so, how? If not, why not?
    1. “In the most important industries in the United States wage rates are set by collective bargaining and are largely determined by the bargaining strength of the parties. Marginal productivity of labor is neither calculated nor mentioned in the process.”
    2. “In many industries competition among employers for workers is so limited that most firms are able to pay less than the marginal productivity of labor.”
    3. “Workers in some trades — say, carpenters or bricklayers — work essentially the same way as their predecessors did fifty years ago; yet their real wages have increased greatly, probably not less than in occupations where productivity has improved considerably over the years.”
  2. The determination of first-class and second-class passenger fares for transatlantic ocean transportation involves problems of (a) joint or related cost, (b) related demand, and (c) discriminatory pricing. Discuss first in what ways these three phenomena are involved here; then formulate a research project to obtain the factual information required for an evaluation of the cost relationships and demand relationships prevailing in the case of two-class passenger ships; and finally state the criteria for judging whether the actual rate differential implies conscious discrimination in favor of first-class passengers, conscious discrimination against first-class passengers, wrong calculation and faulty reasoning on the part of the shipping lines, or any other reason which you may propose.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

PART II
June 4, 1956, 2-5 p.m.

Answer three questions, at least one from each group.

Group I.
  1. There is a running debate on the question whether trade unions are labor monopolies. This debate obviously turns on the meaning of monopoly and on what effects union have had on their members’ wages, output, and conditions of work. Give both sides of the argument.
  2. Write an essay on the demand for labor.
  3. Write down everything you know about the incidence of unemployment among various classes of workers and about the fluctuations of unemployment over time. Discuss some of the problems of developing a workable concept of unemployment. Indicate whether the statistical behavior of unemployment throws any light on its causation.
Group II.
  1. What is a “public utility”? According to accepted regulatory principles, how are the “proper” net earnings of a utility company determined? And, finally, what factors are considered in setting an “appropriate” rate structure?
  2. What is the major purpose of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890? What are some of the more significant problems in determining what constitutes “restraint of trade”? What tests would you apply? Why?
  3. Analyze the economic effects of a corporate income tax. Be as comprehensive as you can.
  4. What are flexible agricultural price supports? Explain how they are determined and applied. Evaluate their use in the light of reasonable alternatives.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

PART III
June 5, 1956, 9-12 a.m.

Answer three questions, one from each group.

Group I.
  1. Describe briefly Schumpeter’s theory of economic development, and comment upon the possibility of testing it empirically.
  2. Describe briefly Keynes’ general theory of employment, interest and money; state its assumptions, structure, and conclusions; and evaluate it critically in the light of more recent theoretical and empirical findings.
Group II.
  1. What characteristics of economic cycles would you consider important in a statistical study of business cycles?
  2. In the study of long-term trends, what criteria would you use in constructing index numbers of production?
  3. What measures of economic growth of nations would you us? Consider carefully the various characteristics that you would deem indispensable in measurements of this sort.
Group III.
  1. Give a brief definition, explanation and illustration for each of the following:
    1. variance;
    2. confidence interval;
    3. coefficient of regression;
    4. coefficient of correlation;
    5. coefficient of determination;
    6. regression line.

[Note: Indicate where you have confined yourself to simple, linear correlation.]

  1. Write an essay on statistical inference by means of the following three techniques:
    1. chi square;
    2. analysis of variance;
    3. multiple regression.

Indicate the types of problem in which they are used, and how each type of problem is handled.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

PART IV
June 5, 1956, 2-5 p.m.

Answer four questions, one from each group.

Group I.
  1. Political arithmetic is a term that is applied to certain writings that appeared from roughly 1675 to 1800. What gave rise to such writings? What were the contributions of the different members of the “group”? Why should Political Arithmetic be given a terminal date?
  2. Discuss Quesnay’s Tableau Économique, Do you see in it anything of significance for the subsequent development of economic theory?
  3. Present arguments for the contention that J. B. Say was far more than “a mere disciple of Adam Smith”.
Group II.
  1. Discuss the relations between the English economic literature of the first half of the 19th century and the events, conditions, and general ideas of that time.
  2. Select three episodes in American economic history, and use your knowledge of economic theory to explain them.
Group III.
  1. Analyze the economic effects of a large Federal debt. Be as comprehensive as you can.
  2. At one time or another each of the following has been proposed as the proper objective or goal of monetary policy: (1) The stabilization of the quantity of money; (2) The maintenance of a constant level of prices; (3) The maintenance of full employment.
    Explain for each policy objective (a) what it means, that is, exactly what in “operational” terms might be maintained or stabilized; (b) how the objective could be achieved, that is, what techniques could be used to achieve it; and (a) the difficulties with or objections to the proposal.
  3. Irving Fisher and others have proposed that all bank be required to hold 100% reserves against their deposits. This was designed to prevent bank failures and, more important, to eliminate the perverse tendency of money to contract in recessions and expand in booms.
    Explain whether the proposal would have the effects claimed for it, and if so, why, and discuss what other effects it might have.
Group IV.
  1. Discuss the “law of comparative advantage” in international trade.
  2. Discuss “currency convertibility”.
  3. Discuss the “transfer problem”.
  4. Discuss the “optimum tariff”.
  5. Discuss the “foreign-trade multiplier”.
  6. Discuss alternative concepts of the “terms of trade”.
  7. Discuss the “effects of devaluation upon the balance of trade”.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Source: Johns Hopkins University. Eisenhower Library. Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy Series 5/6.  Box No. 6/1. Folder: “Comprehensive Exams for Ph.D. in Political Economy, 1947-1965”.

Image Source: Fritz Machlup in an economics seminar. Evsey Domar visible sitting third from the speaker on his right hand side. Johns Hopkins University Yearbook, Hullabaloo 1956, p. 15.

Categories
Economists Exam Questions Harvard Labor

Harvard. Enrollment, Course description, Final exam. Problems of Labor. Ripley and Custis, 1904-1905

Professor William Zebina Ripley of Harvard had comfortably settled in his fields of statistics, labor problems and corporate finance/industrial organization by 1904-05. In that year he co-taught his labor course with his dissertation student Vanderveer Custis, who went on to teach economics at the University of Washington and later at Northwestern University where he attained professorial rank.

Fun fact: According to the 1907 University of Washington yearbook Tyee (p. 22), Assistant Professor of Economics Vanderveer Custis was a lineal descendant of Martha Custis Washington.

__________________________

Other Labor Related Posts
for William Z. Ripley

Problems of Labor and Industrial Organization, 1902-1903.

Problems of Labor, 1903-1904.

Short Bibliography of Trade Unionism, 1910.

Short Bibliography of Strikes and Boycotts, 1910.

Trade Unionism and Allied Problems, 1914-1915.

Problems of Labor, 1931.

__________________________

Vanderveer Custis
[1878-1961]

Chicago, June 17. Vanderveer Custis, Emeritus Professor of Economics at Northwestern University, died today in a rest home in Arlington Heights. He was 82 years old.

Mr. Custis studied at Harvard University, where he took degrees of Bachelor of Arts [1901], Master of Arts [1902] and Doctor of Philosophy [1905].

He taught economics at the University of Washington from 1905 until 1922, when he went to Northwestern as Associate Professor of Economics. He was made a full professor in 1937 and retired in 1944.

Source: New York Times (18 June 1961).

__________________________

Vanderveer Custis
Ph.D. exams

Special Examination in Economics, Wednesday, June 7, 1905.
General Examination passed May 20, 1904.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), Ripley, Bullock, Sprague, and Wyman.
Academic History: Harvard College, 1897-1901; Harvard Graduate School, 1901-04; A.B. (Harvard) 1901; A.M. (ibid.) 1902.
Special Subject: Industrial Organization.
Thesis Subject: “The Theory of Industrial Consolidation.” (With Professor Ripley).

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examinations for the Ph.D. (HUC 7000.70), Folder “Examinations for the Ph.D., 1904-1905”.

__________________________

Course Enrollment
1904-05

Economics 9a 1hf. Professor [William Zebina] Ripley and Mr. [Vanderveer] Custis. — Problems of Labor.

Total 128: 10 Graduates, 29 Seniors, 59 Juniors, 23 Sophomores, 7 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1904-1905, p. 75.

__________________________

Course Description
1904-05

[Economics] 9a 1hf. Problems of Labor. Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 1.30. Professor Ripley.

The work of this course will be concerned mainly with the economic and social questions relating to the relations of employer and employed, with especial reference to legislation. Among the topics included will be the following, viz.: methods of remuneration, profit sharing, cooperation, collective bargaining; labor organizations; factory legislation in all its phases in the United States and Europe; strikes, strike legislation and legal decisions, conciliation and arbitration; employers’ liability and compulsory compensation acts; compulsory insurance with particular reference to European experience; provident institutions, friendly societies, building and loan associations; the problem of the unemployed; apprenticeship, and trade and technical education.

Each student will be expected to make at least one report upon a labor union, from the original documents. Two lectures a week, with one recitation, will be the usual practice.

Source: Harvard University. Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Division of History and Political Science Comprising the Departments of History and Government and Economics, 1904-05 (May 16, 1904), p. 43.

__________________________

ECONOMICS 9a1
Year-end Examination, 1904-05

  1. State two objections to a general policy of insurance against unemployment, as tried in Switzerland.
  2. What peculiar trade conditions may make the National Union outweigh the locals in importance? Illustrate.
  3. State the two principal grounds on which employees were first denied damages for injuries about 1837.
  4. As a commercial venture how does compulsory insurance, as in Germany, differ from ordinary insurance, as it exists in the United States.
  5. What is the present status of the “closed shop” before English and American courts?
  6. In what respects does the British Trades Union Congress differ from the Annual Convention of the British Federation of Labor?
  7. What were the main causes of the downfall of the Knights of Labor? How is the American Federation protecting itself in these regards?
  8. How far has arbitration in labor disputes by governmental agency proceeded in the United States?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination Papers 1873-1915. Box 7, Bound volume: Examination Papers, 1904-05;  Papers Set for Final Examinations in History, Government, Economics,…,Music in Harvard College (June, 1905), pp. 29-30.

Image Source: The 1907 edition of the University of Washington yearbook, Tyee.