Cornell University Library 
 
 T 58.T4 
 Investigation of Taylor system of stiop m 
 
 3 1924 002 380 164 
 
 U. S. Congress. House. Committee on L^bor- 
 
 Investigation of taylor system of ship 
 management . 
 
THE LIBRARY 
 OF THE 
 
 NEW YORK STATE SCHOOL 
 
 OF 
 
 INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR 
 
 RELATIONS 
 
 AT 
 CORNELL UNIVERSITY 
 
£NV^g§flGATION OF TAYLOR SYSTEM 
 OF SHOP MANAGEMENT 
 
 HEARINGS 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 
 COMMITTEE ON LABOH/OF THE HOUSK 
 OF HEPRESENTATIYES 
 
 U.S. 
 
 SIXTY-SECOND CONGEESS, FIRST SESSION 
 
 ON 
 
 HOUSE RESOLUTION 90 
 
 COMMHTTEB OI^ L^BOR 
 
 W. B. Wilson (Chairman) 
 W. L. Henslet, of Missouri 
 James P. Maheb, of New Tori! 
 AETHnE B. EonsE, of Kentucl5y 
 David J. Lewis, of Maryland 
 William S. Howard, of Georgia 
 Frank BnCHANAN, of Illinois 
 
 ctt Pennsylvania. 
 
 FiNLY H. Gray, of Indiana. 
 John J. Gardner, of New Jersey 
 E. B. Vreeland, of New York 
 E. H. Madison, of Kansas 
 W. C. Hawlby, of Oregon 
 J. M. C. Smith, of Michigan 
 
 Agnes H. Wilson, ClerTi 
 
 WASHINGTON 
 1911 
 
[House resolution 90, Sixty -second Congress, Srst session.] 
 
 Wliereas it has been clisclosed tiiiit tbe XJuited States Government has partially 
 installed in certain Government work a sj-stem of shop management known 
 as the " Taylor system " ; and 
 
 Whereas it is now proposed and determined that the said Taylor system, or 
 parts thereof, shall be extended to and installed in other branches of Gov- 
 ernment work ; and 
 
 Whereas the said Taylor system appears to be of such a character and nature 
 as to be detrimental to the best interests of American workingmen, being 
 in its essential parts a " high-speed " process, where none but the strong 
 survive and they being crowded constantly to the maximum point of physical 
 exertion, to the end that an mcreased output may be obtained and at a low 
 labor cost ; and 
 
 Whereas it has ever been recognizd that one of the highest functions of any 
 Government is to guard with zealous care the happiness and welfare of its 
 great army of producers ; and 
 
 Whereas the partial or complete installation of the said Taylor system in 
 Government work is a matter of tremendous importance to the people of the 
 United States, and may be followed by consequences of a far-reaching char- 
 acter both to capital and labor : Therefore be It 
 Resolved, That the Committee on Labor be, and they are hereby, authorized 
 
 and directed to investigate thoroughly and completely the so-called "Taylor 
 
 system " of shop management with especial reference to — 
 First. Its effect on employees. ^ 
 
 Second. Its applicability to Government works. 
 Third. Its efCect on wages and labor cost. 
 Fourth. Its possible reduction of the expense of manufacture. 
 Fifth. To what extent, if any, it is being adopted in Government work, and 
 
 its efCect. 
 
 Said committee to make a full report to this House as to whether, by reason 
 
 of any facts thus ascertained, there should be legislation by Congress with 
 
 reference thereto. 
 
 Said committee as a whole, or by subcommittee, is authorized to sit during 
 
 the recess of Congress, to send for persons and papers, and to administer oaths ; 
 
 and 
 
 Said committee is hereby authorized to employ such stenographic or clerical 
 
 assistance as may be necessary for the purpose of carrying out the provisions 
 
 and purposes of this resolution and to pay the expense thereof from the con- 
 tingent fund of this House upon warrants signed by the chairman of said 
 
 committee. 
 2 
 
INVESTIGATION Of TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 Committee on Laboe, 
 
 House of Eepeesentatives, 
 Washington, D. C, Friday, April £8, 1911. 
 The committee met at 10 o'clock a. m., Hon. William B. Wilson 
 (chairman) presiding. 
 
 The Chairman. Several gentlemen have asked for an opportunity 
 to be heard on House resolution No. 90, and the committee has been 
 called together for that purpose this morning. I suggest that Mr. 
 Pepper, who is the author of the resolution, be heard first. 
 
 STATEMENT OF HON. I. S. PEPPER. 
 
 Mr. Peppee. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, it 
 is evident from a reading of the resolution that any hearing that 
 may be had at this time should not go into the merits of the question 
 of the Taylor system, but only so far as to ascertain in a general way 
 what that system comprehends. [l might say, however, that the 
 question is so important and it is so recognized by both the laboring 
 men of this country and the employers of this country ,nhrat general 
 noticeJiasJbeen taken of it in the magazines- and in the public presa^ 
 It involves such a change in shop management, in the attitude of 
 capital toward labor, and the treatment of labor by capital, that, 
 whatever its merits or demerits may be, it is recognized as a distinct 
 policy, which, if carried to its ultimate conclusion and ultimate end, 
 will result in a decided difference in the condition of the laboring 
 people of this countryH Now, it has grown to be such an im- 
 portant question, and it Eas received such recognition, that the United 
 States Government has started to inaugurate the system in the vari- 
 ous Government works of the country, especially in the arsenals of the 
 United States. I will try to confine myself to the resolution, because 
 there are a number of laboring men here, men from the arsenals of 
 the United States, and other representatives of labor, who can give 
 you answers to any questions with reference to the system itself a 
 great deal better than I can, but I want to call your attention to the 
 fact that it is such a question that this committee, being a Committee 
 on Labor, and being the committee to deal with matters which affect 
 labor conditions in this country to-day, ought to give it their careful 
 consideration. 
 
 I suggest at the beginning that the question may arise in your 
 minds why a resolution should have been introduced calling for an 
 investigation when, oJ=RiCU35RirYmOFtio%}?/f!^*^ ^® ^'^^^ ^^ ^^^^ 
 
 HEW YORK STME SCHit ' 
 
4 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 committee without any resolution being passed by Congress, and 
 that is the point to which I wish to address myself at this time. You 
 will notice in this resolution that I have called attention to the 
 system and then have specified certain details and points which it 
 might be well to investigate. Then I ask that Congress have this 
 committee, either by a subcommittee or by the whole committee, to 
 investigate this question, to sit during recesses of Congress, and to 
 have authority to summon witnesses, books, and papers, to administer 
 oaths, and to pay the necessary expenses for clerical hire from the 
 contingent fund of the House. Now, I think that is a vital point in 
 this investigation. You can not, in my judgment, investigate a sub- 
 ject of so much importance, covering such a wide range of conditions, 
 located in various parts of the country, without complete authority. 
 Now, this system, known as the Taylor system, has been instituted 
 by the War Department in the Watertown Arsenal; it is now pro- 
 posed to institute it in the Rock Island Arsenal ; and, to some extent, 
 it has been instituted in the Brooklyn Navy Yard. This system 
 was formulated by a man named Taylor, a man who has been em- 
 ployed, and who has charge of the employment of labor, in the steel 
 mills of Pennsylvania, in the Midvale Steel Works, and in a num- 
 ber of manufacturing establishments. He has written a book or 
 pamphlet, which I hold in my hand, covering several hundred pages, 
 which undertakes to lay down his theory. He has also written a 
 number of magazine articles. There is a committee here to-day from 
 the Rock Island Arsenal, which has appeared before the Secretary 
 of War to protest against the inauguration of this system in the 
 arsenals of the United States, and which comes before you gen- 
 tlemen this morning, who probably have not had this matter called 
 to your attention. I simply want to state the objections they have 
 urged, without going into a discussion of the merits or demerits of 
 the system, but mereby to show that the matter is one which this 
 committee ought to investigate thoroughly. Here are some of the 
 points : 
 
 (1) The replacing of the skilled mechanic by the laborer and the consequent 
 ■owering of the wages to little better than laborer's wages. 
 
 (2) The relentless speeding up of workmen to the extent that only a small 
 tiercentage of workmen are able to stand the pace. 
 
 (3) The use of the stop watch in ascertaining " unit-times." 
 
 ^4) The system of promotion, which seems to be based on the contest prln- 
 <'tple; that the man who has the least regard for his fellows if he also has 
 ability wins. 
 
 (5) The bonus and differential rate systems for fixing compensation and 
 the piecework system with Mr. Taylor's methods for ascertaining what shall 
 constitute a day's work. 
 
 (6) The system of discipline advocated, which starts with punishing the 
 most flagrant of offenses, principally those against other workmen, and which 
 Increases the number of acts to be regarded as offenses until the required sub- 
 mission on the part of the workman is secured and the " factor of safety " in 
 human endurance is reached. 
 
 (7) The principle that workmen must be dealt with individually and not 
 in masses or through committees, that it is no concern of one workman what 
 happens to another. 
 
 Now these are some of the objections. Whether or not these ob- 
 jections are good, as applied to the Taylor system, is a question which 
 I think should be investigated. I am not here, as I stated, to argue 
 either on the merits or the demerits of the Taylor system; I only 
 want to call attention to the fact that it proposes such radical changes 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 5 
 
 in the conduct of the working establishment of this country, and that as 
 it is being applied to Government work and will affect the employees 
 of the National Government, and that it is of such importance that 
 in the interests of labor it should be investigated. Now, it may be 
 that some of these objections are not good ; it may be that the objec- 
 tions raised by labor at this time are not well founded, but that is 
 not an argument against the investigation of the subject. If the 
 objections are not good, the investigation will so show, but if they are 
 good, then it is of the more importance that some legislation should 
 be enacted which will have a tendency to prevent, at least, the 
 National Government setting the example and putting its stamp of 
 approval on a system open to such objections. The Government 
 should not approve a system which reduces the laboring man to a 
 mere machine, to an organism which is to be put to its greatest 
 physical test, not for the benefit of the laboring man, but only for 
 the purpose of wringing from that laboring man the highest possible 
 result, regardless of his health or happiness. Now, I think that 
 would be an unwise policy for both the employer and the employee. 
 
 There are a number of gentlement here who can answer a great 
 many questions, which no doubt will arise in the minds of the com- 
 mittee, in reference to this matter. This question has received the 
 marked attention of labor all over this country, and I do not believe 
 that any investigation that you gentlemen could conduct without 
 the authority contained in this resolution would be effective. I do 
 not believe that you could sit here and listen to argTiments purely 
 from the theoretical standpoint and arrive at any just conclusion. 
 You must ascertain the facts ; find out where this system has been in 
 operation ; what was its effect upon labor and the condition or work- 
 ing people, and determine the line of your investigation from those 
 facts. I might say that this system was in vogue at Bethlehem, Pa., 
 for some time, but was afterwards abandoned. Now, that would be 
 a very important question to investigate; find out why it was aban- 
 doned and how it operated there. We have two stories about the 
 matter, one from the standpoint of the employer and one from the 
 standpoint of the laborer, and it will be a very important question 
 to determine why a system that has received such recognition from 
 the United States Government should have been abandoned by a pri- 
 vate institution. 
 
 Mr. Vebeland. How long has this system been in use ? 
 
 Mr. Pepper. I can not tell the exact number of years, but I think 
 it has been in use for five or six years. You understand this system 
 is so complex that it can not be inaugurated in a day or a month 
 or a year; it takes two or three years to get it into operation. As 
 Mr. Taylor says, if this system should be inaugurated at once there 
 would not be any men working in the shops. You must gradually 
 work it in in order to allay what he calls the suspicions of the labor- 
 ing men. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. Did I understand you to say that Mr. Taylor ad- 
 vocated treating with laborers as individuals and against treating 
 with them collectively? 
 
 Mr. Pepper. That is a part of the theory which he advocated. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Does it necessarily follow that there should be no col- 
 lective relations among the workingmen? 
 
6 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 Mr. Pepper. It does, if the system is carried to its ultimate con- 
 elusion. Under this system every man is put to the highest degree 
 of efficiency. In this book here he attempts to get up \vhat he calls 
 a unit of time system; that is, the shortest space of time in which 
 the best man can produce a given amount of work, and the work of 
 such a man in that given time constitutes the standard. Now, if a 
 man does not reach that standard of efficiency 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Are the men docked for the shortage ? 
 
 Mr. Pepper. Under this Taylor system he has to be put at some- 
 thing that he can do better, but if you follow that to its logical conclu- 
 sion there will always be the average man, a man who is not the best 
 specimen of physical manhood, who can not find work that will re- 
 turn him the living to which he is entitled by reason of the very 
 fundamental principles governing the employment of labor. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. If that system were put into effect, would not 
 every man work at the highest rate of speed he could go, and would 
 not every workingman undergo a strain in the effort to reach that 
 standard ? 
 
 Mr. Pepper. Yes; that would be the standard. I might add that 
 Mr. Taylor says that that standard is only that degree of speed and 
 that degree of wage which the laboring man will be happy and thrive 
 under. 
 
 Mr. Hensley. Who is to be the judge of that? 
 
 Mr. Pepper. The employer, and, therefore, the ultimate result will 
 be that in order to procure bread for his family a man will say that 
 he is happy whether he is or not; otherwise, it would be plain that 
 he has not attained to the standard prescribed in the system under 
 which he works. Now, the question as to whether or not he is happy 
 or is thriving is left to the decision of a partial judge, that is, it is 
 left to the decision of the man who is trying to wring as much profit 
 as possible out of a man's muscles. I may not understand this system, 
 and that is the reason I am asking this committee to investigate it. 
 
 It may be that I have not read the book right ; it may be that the 
 facts I have ascertained from workers under the system may be wrong 
 and misleading; but I submit to you gentlemen that this matter is 
 of such importance and is being opposed by so many laboring men 
 who look to the welfare of themselves and their families that you 
 will be doing a service to this country if you investigate it thoroughly. 
 You will be doing a service to the manufacturers of this country if 
 you can prevent the inauguration of a system which, in its ultimate 
 results, will bring labor to a lower standard than at the present time, 
 because unwise men sometimes in their greed for gain will do thino^ 
 to wring profit from labor which, if they were wise to their own inter- 
 ests, they would not do. So I think we should look at it from the 
 broad standpoint— not even from the standpoint of the laboring man. 
 but from the standpoint of the general welfare of this country. li 
 this system is carried out to its ultimate conclusion, it will certainly 
 result in a complete change of the attitude of capital toward labor 
 and it is, therefore, a matter that ought to receive the attention of 
 Congress and its merits thrashed out. I do not want to take up the 
 time of the committee by discussing the merits and demerits of this 
 sjrstem, because there are gentlemen here who are thoroughly familiar 
 with it. 
 
 Mr. Veeeland. How generally is this system employed ? 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 7 
 
 Mr. Pepper. So far as the Government is concerned, it has been in 
 effect at the Watertown Arsenal about two years, but, as I have 
 already stated, it takes some time to completely inaugurate the sys- 
 tem. It is being tried at the Brooklyn Navy Yard, and it is proposed 
 to install it at the Rock Island Arsenal. Now, a number of private 
 institutions — a number of them in Philadelphia, although I can not 
 now call the names — are now using the system. The Midvale Steel 
 Works and a great number of manufacturers have started it. Some 
 of them have the system only partially, and some of them have it 
 complete. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Has any connection been shown between this system 
 and an undue tendency to accidents? 
 
 Mr. Pepper. I can not answer that ; I do not know. We have here 
 what he calls the factor of safety, that is, he punishes workingmen 
 by a reduction in their wages for the purpose of securing that factor 
 of safety, but this is effective in many cases to simply reduce the 
 wages of the laboring man. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. The wages of the men employed in these arsenals are 
 fixed by regulations of the War Department and not by statute, are 
 they not? 
 
 Mr. Pepper. Yes, sir ; there are some regulations, I think, that gov- 
 ern for periods of time. Of course, the War Department has com- 
 plete charge of that part of it. In fact, they say that the attitude of 
 the arsenals toward wages has been that they will pay as much for 
 eight hours' work in the arsenal as private individuals in the vicinity 
 of the arsenals pay for ten hours' work. That is the general attitude. 
 
 Mr. Henslet. What conclusions have they reached about it since 
 that system has been in vogue at the Watertown Arsenal ? 
 
 Mr. Pepper. Gen. Crozier says that there has been a great saving to 
 the Government, but he has not yet done anything more. I should 
 have stated that the Taylor system comprehends a great deal more 
 than the speeding up of the workmen. That is only one of the things. 
 I think a great deal of the system is not original with Mr. Taylor. 
 I think he compiled a great many things together and advocated 
 them as a general system. One feature of the system is the double 
 check from the storehouse to the factory, so that a man can be sup- 
 plied with the proper material, and not lose time running around to 
 find material for the work upon which he is engaged. There is also 
 a general system of supervision, which is a very vital part of the sys- 
 tem. A planning department is provided where every piece of work 
 is planned out, with written instructions as to what each man has to 
 do. Now, in Watertown, they have done nothing except to put in the 
 general scheme of saving time in the making of tools and things of 
 that kind. Nothing has been done there towards the inauguration of 
 the speeding-up process and trying to eliminate those who have not 
 been able to reach a certain standard. But, of course. Gen. Crozier 
 says that if it works any hardship to the laboring man he will stop 
 short of that ; but he is to be the judge. 
 
 Mr. Taylor himself says that the system must be carried out in full, 
 or he vrill not stand responsible for its effectiveness, and the natural 
 result is that if a man can not attain this high speed — that is, if he 
 can not perform this greatest amount of work in a given space of 
 time — he will find himself without a job. In my opinion, he will be 
 eliminated. One of the illustrations he uses is in the case of carrying 
 
8 ' TAYLOB SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 pig iron and loading it on cars. The men who had been handling 
 the pig iron had been loading 16 tons per day on the car. By 
 various experiments and by picking out the big, husky fellows— that 
 is, the men who looked as though they could do a great deal of work— 
 and by encouraging them, it was found that it was possible for some 
 of these men to carry 48 tons in a day. That became the standard ; it 
 was what the best man he could find could carry in a day, working 
 under a constant pressure all the time, and, while the other men were 
 getting $1.15 per day, he at once paid the man who could carry 48 
 tons per day $1.85. He did not explain how that man felt when he 
 went home to his family and what was the effect on the man himself 
 for putting forth that extra exertion. 
 
 The Chairman. Eeferring to this proposition of finding a man 
 something else to do when he is not able to reach the standard fixed 
 in the work that he is doing, has Mr. Taylor worked out any system 
 by which these men will be able to find work? Has he devised any 
 system by which the men who are removed from the different branches 
 of employment because of the fact that they do not reach the highest 
 standard can be employed ? 
 
 Mr. Pepper. He has made one general proposition ; that is, that a 
 man who can not reach this highest standard in one line of work 
 will find some other kind for which he is better suited. But suppose 
 every industry in this country should adopt this system? You can 
 see what it will result in. Here is only one part of it saying in a 
 general way that these men will be provided for in other places. 
 Mr. Veeeland. What would it result in, in your opinion? 
 Mr. Pepper. In my judgment, it would result in a great many men 
 being thrown out of employment altogether. I think it would result 
 in a great army of unemployed men. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. That would be impossible if the work is required 
 to be done? They can not all be of one standard. There would still 
 be a demand for labor. 
 
 Mr. Pepper. That might be. 
 
 Mr Lewis. What would be the effect of throwing out of employ- 
 ment 100 machinists, say men who are 40 years of age and who are 
 accustomed to a certain line of work and working environment? 
 They would not be able to labor effectively if thrown out of their 
 accustomed employment. 
 
 Mr. Pepper. As a general rule, there are wants always to be sup- 
 Ijlied and labor to supply these wants, but my argument is this: 
 Suppose this system is carried to its ultimate conclusion, and men are 
 put to the greatest physical test that the human organism can stand. 
 In other words, in my judgment, this system has no rp ga.T-d -fm- th ^ 
 physical, welfare of the man. I have this idea about the laboring 
 man : I believe that a laborer can work at a certain standard to be 
 ascertained day by day, taking into account his rest at night and his 
 other bodily wants. He can go on indefinitely and can work at a 
 still greater rate of speed and accomplish more by calling upon 
 his reserve force. By doing so he may attain greater efficiency, but 
 that reserve force, having been called into play for a few years is 
 worn out, and the man is left a charge upon the community. Now, 
 this Taylor system is calling upon the reserve force of the man in 
 order to turn out the greatest amount of work in the least space 
 of time. 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OP SHOP MANAGEMENT. 9 
 
 The Chairman. If an employer has to replace a machine because 
 it is worn out, that would naturally cost him money, but if he has to 
 replace a human machine that has been exausted by this method, it 
 would not cost him anything. 
 
 Mr. Pepper. No, sir ; labor is on the free list. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. To what extent have you investigated this matter ? 
 
 Mr. Pepper. My investigation has been entirely by correspondence, 
 with the exception of the discussion I have had with these gentlemen 
 from the Kock Island Arsenal, who have gone into this subject 
 rather extensively. I have read Mr. Taylor's book and some maga- 
 zine articles about it. 
 
 Mr. Smith. Do laboring men complain about this system ? 
 
 Mr. Pepper. I have here correspondence with men at the Water- 
 town Arsenal, and I have had correspondence with men at the Rock 
 Island Arsenal, and various letters from others where the system is 
 in vogue, and they are complaining. Now, these men are interested, 
 because they constitute a great army of men employed out there. 
 These gentlemen here represent 1,500 or 2,000 men. They have 
 been told that this system will be inaugurated at that arsenal, and 
 they are here this morning, and have been before the War Depart- 
 ment. The War Department has authorized and directed that the 
 system be installed out there, and these gentlemen are here to protest 
 against it. 
 
 Mr. Gardner. As I understand it, this system consists of two parts ; 
 the first part of the system provides for a saving of time in the 
 performance of the work by having one man to do the planning, 
 which would take a part of the time of a great number of men if 
 each man did it for himself. The other part, which you fear, is that 
 which in seeking for efficiency, will drive men to strenuous efforts. 
 Now, as to the other part, which goes only to the matter of reorgani- 
 zation, is there any objection to that? 
 
 Mr. Pepper. I do not think that any one could object to that. I 
 do not think that Mr. Taylor has any particular patent on that 
 proposition, but under this general scheme that he has outlined 
 
 Mr. Gardner. One moment please, I am talking specifically about 
 the Taylor scheme, if I understand you, that is, that part of the 
 scheme outlined by Mr. Taylor, and which has been in operation in 
 the WatertoWn Arsenal, and which Gen. Crozier says has resulted 
 in great economy. If I understand it, up to this time, the other 
 part of the scheme has not been put into operation. 
 
 Mr. Pepper. But simply for the lack of time. At least Gen. 
 Crozier says not. 
 
 Mr. Gardner. If Gen. Crozier is right then in his two assertions, 
 this is established that the adoption of so much of the scheme as 
 appertains entirely to the matter of organization and the manage- 
 ment of details and time, results in great economy, without applying 
 the other and dangerous part of it that drives men too rapidly. 
 
 Mr. Pepper. He makes that claim. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. I will ask yoit whether or not there are any methods 
 of comparison by which to judge the relative efficiency of the men 
 employed in these Government arsenals with the men employed in 
 similar private undertakings? 
 
10 TAYLOE SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 Mr. Pepper. I do not know of anything of that kind. They get 
 their men from all over the country, men who have been engaged 
 in private employment. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. There has been no comparison made of the product 
 per man ? 
 
 Mr. Peppee. I think not ; I do not know of any. 
 
 Mr. Veeeland. Let us hear from some of the men who can tell us 
 about the practical operation of the system. I do not know much 
 about it. 
 
 The Chaieman. I suggest that we hear from some of the gentle- ■ 
 men from the Rock Island Arsenal who are present and desire to be 
 heard. I may state for the information of the committee that there 
 are three gentlemen here, Mr. Alifas, Mr. Dyas, and Mr. Bragdon, 
 who are employees of the arsenal. These gentlemen are here at the 
 present time on leave of absence. Knowing of that fact, and it hav- 
 ing been intimated that if they appeared before this committee with- 
 out being requested to do so it might endanger their employment, 
 I have requested them to appear before the committee and make such 
 statements as they desire. 
 
 STATEMENT OF MR. N. P. AIIFAS, OF THE ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL. 
 
 Mr. Alifas. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, in 
 speaking upon this subject I take it that the matters which are to be 
 brought to the attention of the committee should be such as would 
 lead them to form an opinion as to whether or not this Taylor system 
 should be investigated, so I will not go into as much detail' as I 
 might otherwise do. 
 
 It seems to me that one of the best ways to show just what Mr. 
 Taylor's methods are is to quote from his book, and I can see no 
 other or better way of convicting him in regard to his system than 
 to quote his own work. 
 
 Mr. Veeeland. Would it not be well for you to tell us about the 
 practical operation of the system? I would like to hear something 
 about the practical working of the system, if you are familiar with 
 it. Are you working at an arsenal? 
 
 Mr. Alieas. I am not working at an arsenal where they are em- 
 ploying that system. They are just starting it at the Rock Island 
 Arsenal. 
 
 Mr. Veeeland. Are you a mechanic ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. Yes, sir ; I am a machinist. 
 
 Mr. Veeeland. Where do you work ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. I work at the Rock Island Arsenal. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. I suggest that the gentleman be permitted to go 
 on in his own way. 
 
 Mr. Alifas. I wish to state that my only purpose in reading these 
 few paragraphs from the book is to bring before the committee the 
 specific provisions of the system. Of course, if you decide to investi- 
 gate the system, you will read the book, but you will not wait to read 
 the book through before you decide whether or not you will investi- 
 gate it. That is the only reason I have for wishing to read these 
 paragraphs. 
 
 Now, in the first place, the two principal things that we object to in 
 the Taylor system are the lowering of wages and the speeding of 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 11 
 
 men unduly. Mr. Taylor insists that his system will raise \¥ages^lmt 
 that is only apparent, for the reason that in raising' wages he raises 
 the common laborer, while the common laborer does the wofE that 
 was formerly done by skilled mechanics at much higher wages. 
 
 Now I will read paragraph 319 of this book, which relates to that 
 subject : 
 
 It is true, for instance, that the planning room and functional foremanshlp 
 render it possible for an intelligent laborer or helper in time to do much of the 
 work now done by a machinist. Is not this a good thing for the laborer and 
 helper? 
 
 Section 247 reads as follows: 
 
 ' The full possibilities of functional foremanship, however, will not have been 
 realized until almost all of the machines in the shop are run by njen who are 
 
 ; of smaller caliber and attainment, and who are therefore cheaper than those 
 required under the old system. 
 
 It would seem here that the effect of his system would be to have 
 you work only those of lower caliber and attainments, and that would 
 lower the standard of intelligence, if nothing else, if his process of 
 selection is to be carried out. 
 
 Paragraph 249 reads as follows : 
 
 Of course, they were paid more than laborer's wages, though not as much as 
 sklUedinachinists. 
 
 That is the case where men doing machinists' work are laborers. 
 Now, Mr. Taylor advises that in starting the shop. 
 
 I will now read from paragraph 309. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. On what page? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. Page 1418. In managing a shop, according to Mr. 
 Taylor, he decided that the best way to do it was to select workmen 
 of inferior caliber and train them up to do the work, while on the 
 part of foremen he selects men who are a little too good for the shop 
 to initiate the system. After the g^stem has been started he can sup- 
 plant the foremen by men of inferior caliber, who are cheaper. 
 
 I will read from paragraph 309 : 
 
 If the work is of a routine nature, in which the same operation is allotted 
 to be done over and over again with no great variety, and in which there is no 
 apparent prospect of a radical change being made perhaps through a term of 
 years, even though the work itself may be complicated in its nature, a man 
 should be selected whose abilities are barely equal to the task. Time and 
 training will fit him for his work, and since he will be better paid than in the 
 past and will realize that he has been given the chance to make his abilities 
 yield him the largest return, all of the elements for promoting contentment will 
 be present. 
 
 That is how he proves that men under his system are satisfied and 
 content. 
 Then, in paragraph 308, he says : 
 
 In selecting men to be tried as foremen, or, in fact, for any position through- 
 out the place, from the day laborer up, one of two different types of men 
 should be chosen, according to the nature of the work to he done. For one 
 class of work men should be selected who are too good for the job, and for the 
 other class of work, men who are barely good enough. 
 
 Now, that shows that he proposes to use laborers, although he pre- 
 tends to advance wages. Then, as to the high-speed part of it, I will 
 read from paragraph 149 : 
 
 Each man in the establishment, hlgh.-or low, should daily have a clearly 
 defined task laid out before him. This task should not in the least degree 
 
12 TAYLOR SYSTEM OP SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 be vague or Indeflnite, but should be circumscribed carefully and completely 
 and should not be easy to accomplish. 
 
 Paragraph 153 reads as follows : 
 
 When an establishment has reached an advanced stage of organization, in 
 many cases a fifth element should be added, namely, the task should be made 
 so difficult that it can only be accomplished by a first-class man. 
 
 Paragraph 384 reads as follows : 
 
 The writer has, in almost all cases, solved this part of the problem by fixing 
 a task which required a first-class man to do his best, and then offering a 
 good round premium. When this high standard is set it takes longer to raise 
 the men up to it. But it is surprising, after all, how rapidly they develop. 
 
 Of course, that is due to the pressure which he brings to bear upon 
 them under his methods of discipline. 
 
 Paragraph 101 shows how he arrives at what should constitute a 
 day's work. That paragraph reads as follows: 
 
 His first st«p was to place an intelligent, college-educated man in charge of 
 progress, in thisjjne. ._Tliis man had not before handled this class of labor, 
 although he understood managing workmen. He was not familiar with the 
 methods pursued by the writer, but was soon taught the art of determining how 
 much work a first-class man could do in a day. This was done by timing with a 
 stop watch a first-class man while he was working fast. 
 
 Mr. Veeeland. Has all of this been installed in the Watertown 
 Arsenal ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. No, sir. It has been installed there at present only 
 as far as this gentleman has spoken of, in devising a business method 
 of routing the work in the shop and in reference to instructions as 
 to how the work should be done, subdividing it up and the like of 
 that. 
 
 Mr. Smith. Who is, Mr. Taylor, and where does he live? 
 
 Mr. Alitas. His present address is Chestnut Hill, Philadelphia. 
 
 Mr. Smith. In what business is he engaged ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. He is engaged in the business of installing this sys- 
 tem ; he has a corps of experts aiding him in that work. 
 
 Mr. Smith. Is he a manufacturer or an employer ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. I do not think so. He was the master mechanic for 
 the Midvale Steel Co. about 20 years ago, and while a master me- 
 chanic there he experimented with this system, which he calls by 
 his own name. 
 
 The provision as to gradual speeding up is found in paragraph 
 295, which I will read : 
 
 In reaching the final high rate of speed which shall be steadily maintained, 
 the broad fact should be realized that the men must pass through several 
 phases, rising from one plane of efficiency to another, until the final level is 
 reached. 
 
 Sometimes in trying to get men to work at this terrific pace he has 
 difficulty in finding labor, and in respect to that he has this to say 
 in paragraph 385. 
 
 There is a great difference in the labor of some of the adjoining States in this 
 country, and in one instance in which the writer was aiming at a high stand- 
 ard in organizing a works he found it necessary to import almost all of his 
 men from a neighboring State before meeting with success. 
 
 Likewise, in paragraph 166, he says : 
 
 Whei;e the labor market is large enough to secure in a reasonable time 
 enough strictly first-class men, the piecework rates should be fixed on such a 
 
TAYLOB SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 13 
 
 basis that only a first-dass man working at liis best can earn tlie average 
 amount called for. 
 
 Mr. Pepper. Is it not true that the whole system is based on a great 
 supply of labor and the selection from those of the best specimens? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Gardner. Is not that the same reorganization system that is 
 being put in operation by business houses, particularly in the busi- 
 ness of publishers, the publishers of magazines, and so on? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. I do not know that they make a general practice of 
 that. I know that portions of his system have been incorporated in 
 certain large offices where girls are employed as stenographers. His 
 system is applicable to all kinds of work, from that of the common 
 laborer to that of the skilled mechanic. 
 
 Mr. Gardner. Is this not the agency that has been reorganizing 
 the news agencies which handle matter which does not require a 
 large amount of labor and where labor is the least element? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. I have never heard that ; I am not advised as to that. 
 
 Mr. Gardner. An organization system has been recently applied 
 to all this business, and it was not to the cost of labor that the inves- 
 tigation was directed, because labor was not an important element in 
 it ; that is all. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. How is this efficiency counted in time to the 
 working man ? Do they get shorter hours for their strenuous efforts 
 in work? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. I want to say that if this system is carried out to its 
 logical conclusion, if endurance is to be the test, that would do away 
 with the short working day, because Mr. Taylor in his book says, 
 in discussing the purpose oi his scheme, that workingmen should 
 remember that each shop exists first, last and all the time for the 
 purpose of paying dividends to its owners. This purpose would 
 bring speed and hours to the limit of endurance. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. I want to know about the attendance of the men 
 and the amount of time that a man would get for his strenuous efforts 
 under this system. In some cases it has been found that a man earn- 
 ing a fine rate of pay receives really very little pay for the effort he 
 is called upon to put forth. Is any account taken of lost time? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. I do not believe there would be any great loss of 
 time, because he would select men well fitted for the work. He says 
 that men who worked under this system in the Bethlehem steel works 
 became steadier men. One argument he makes is that drinking men 
 could not work under this system because they could not stand the 
 pace. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. How about the absence of a man from work for 
 any reason under this system? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. I do not know of any absence on their part that has 
 been referred to in his works. I presume, however, that under his 
 discipline he intends to get men who will be there all the time, and 
 that if a man persist in laying off he will be discharged. 
 
 The Chairman. Is there any system of credit or of merit and de- 
 merit under this Taylor system ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. Yes, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. And does that system of merit give credit for 
 .steady work and discredit for loss of time ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. Yes, sir. 
 
14 TAYLOE SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 The Chairman. Is a man, under that system, given demerit marks 
 for loss of time ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. Yes, sir; for everything that interferes with his 
 scheme. If his scheme required that a man should be there ^U the 
 time, he would fix his discipline in such a way that they would be 
 required to be there all the time, or they would not stay. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. There is another question I wish to ask you in 
 regard to the arsenal you are familiar with. Is there any difference 
 in the attendance of the workingmen there, or a difference that would 
 be noticeable ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. This system has not been started yet at the Kock 
 Island Arsenal. The only thing they have done there, that we know 
 of, is to have a number of blanks printed for checking the work 
 and keeping tab on the time required to do a job. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. From your own personal knowledge, you do not 
 know anything about that ? 
 
 Mr. Aufas. No, sir ; I have never seen the system in actual oper- 
 ation. 
 
 Mr. Gray. Does the policy of this system contemplate dispensing 
 with the services of inefficient men or putting the men on lower 
 wages? Does it comprehend that? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. It comprehends doing away with inefficiency. There 
 is no place in this system for the inefficient man unless he can be effi- 
 cient at something. For instance, if a man is not efficient as a 
 machinist, and some other work can be found at which he is efficient, 
 then he would be employed. 
 
 Mr. Lewis, Do you mean efficiency as measured by the product of 
 his labor? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. Yes, sir; but if a man can not attain the maximmn 
 speed at something he would be thrown on the labor market. 
 
 Mr. Gardner. Where do you derive that opinion? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. From the book that I have been reading to you. 
 
 Mr. Gardner. I do not want to be misunderstood and I do not want 
 to impede the progress of the investigation, but I think it ought to 
 be systematic if it is to carry any weight. Now, the gentleman who 
 is being heard was very properly called, because he was supposed to 
 understand the workings of the system, but he now tells us that he 
 has not seen the working of the system and that he is simply draw- 
 ing deductions from a printed book, which is open to everyone. Now, 
 he appears to be simply making statements or comments on what 
 appears in this book. He has not yet qualified as an expert on this 
 subject, but is simply drawing deductions from a printed work that 
 is open to everybody to read. 
 
 The Chairman._ In my judgment, the gentleman should be per- 
 mitted to proceed in his own way; and as to the question of whether 
 or not he is an expert, each member of the committee can determine 
 that for himself after he has concluded his statement. 
 
 Mr. Gray. What is the effect of this system? Does it dispense 
 with the services of inefficient men or does it reduce the wages of those 
 people who are inefficient? Do they dispense with their services 
 altogether ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. According to Mr. Taylor's own printed work, his 
 intentions are, it seems to me, to dispense with the inefficient men^ 
 I wish to say in regard to the statement of the gentleman here oii 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 15 
 
 my right that I have never claimed to be an expert on this system. I 
 am simply here for the purpose of protesting against the inaugura- 
 tion of this system. 
 
 Mr. Gardner. I only had in mind the integrity of the record as it 
 is being made up here. A man states facts within his own knowl- 
 edge or states his conclusion from facts that have been stated, and 
 I think that the record should show which they are — whether they are 
 facts or opinions. I intended no criticism at all. 
 
 Mr. Gray. We would have to call a roll of the committee to find 
 out about that. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. I am not familiar with the methods practiced by 
 committees of this kind, but it seems to me that where men are se- 
 lected, as I understand these men have been selected, to represent a 
 large number of people 
 
 Mr. Alifas. Fifteen hundred people. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan (continuing). Wlien, as I say, these men are se- 
 lected to represent these people and protest against a system that 
 they believe is injurious to them and their kind, so far as I am con- 
 cerned, I am willing to listen to their views of the matter, and they 
 can express their views in whatever form they see fit. ^Vhen it 
 comes to the matter of experts, I suppose that when the committee , 
 gets ready to investigate this question experts will be taken into con- 
 sideration, and it will be for the committee to select them. 
 
 Mr. Gardner. I do not want to be misunderstood, but I think the 
 chairman and the gentleman who has just spoken and all the rest 
 of us want this record to be as strong as the circumstances permit it 
 to be. I think, and suggest with modesty, that if the gentleman who 
 asked the last question — as to what was the effect of this system — 
 had asked the gentleman on the stand what his opinion was of the 
 effect of the system as derived from the printed book that the testi- 
 mony would be a good deal more valuable if it was not in the form 
 of a statement following a previous statement that the witness had 
 no personal knowledge of the matter at all. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. I would like to ask the gentleman whether he 
 represents himself or all of the people who work at the Eock Island 
 Arsenal ? 
 
 Mr. Aldfas. I am representing the employees of the Rock Island 
 Arsenal, and not myself personally. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. How many people do you represent ? 
 
 Mr. Alefas. About 1,500 men. 
 
 The Chairman. I suggest this: That when any gentleman has 
 been recognized, and objections to his line of statements are made, 
 that so far as the chair is concerned, the chair will not take any 
 cognizance of the objections unless it comes in the form of a pro- 
 posed action on the part of the committee ; otherwise, the gentleman 
 who has been recognized will be permitted to proceed in his own way. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. I want to ask whether there is any printed statement 
 available of the Taylor system as it is intended to be applied to the 
 arsenal, with the suggestion that it may be a very modified form of 
 
 the scheme? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. I do not know of any particular document that deals 
 with that special subject. I think if such a document were in exist- 
 ence we would have found it out. His general propositions are well 
 
16 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 known from this paper which he read before the American Society 
 of Mechanical Engineers. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. Do you know what the Government pays, if any- 
 thing, to the agents of this system to put it into effect ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. Mr. Taylor is now receiving $50 per day while at the 
 Watertown Arsenal. He is not there all the time. He is there a 
 number of days in each month to lay out the plans, which are fol- 
 lowed out after he has gone. This statement was given me by the 
 Chief of Ordnance, Gen. Crozier. 
 
 Mr. Smith. Can this plan or a part of it be adopted beneficially 
 to the Government without adopting the speeding-up part. that you 
 complained of? Do you complain of any other part of the system 
 except the speeding-up part ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. We are not complaining about any part except those 
 that affect the workman. Whether these other things can be applied 
 or not depends on the leverage they might get on us. It might be 
 well illustrated by a man with the drinking habit ; he might be able 
 to stop at some time if disposed to do so, but if the habit gets the 
 upper hand of him, he can not stop. We are objecting to the inau- 
 guration of the Taylor system because it is so planned out that one 
 thing leads to another. 
 
 Mr. Smith. Are you objecting to the entire system? Do you object 
 to any part of it being adopted? A while ago you spoke about as- 
 sembling the material required by the workman by means of mes- 
 sengers, or something of that kind, so that he would not have to take 
 his time and go to the supply room and get whatever he needed to 
 work on. Do you object to that part of the system ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. That part of the work is not necessarily the Taylor 
 system. Mr. Taylor, in inaugurating his system, may try to make 
 use of all this, but that is not necessarily his system. His system is 
 primarily based on the time-unit idea. 
 
 Mr. Henslby. I desire to ask one question with reference to the 
 manner of reaching the standard of efficiency. Do you mean that 
 the workman must become expert in some connection or else lose his 
 position ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. That is what I think the method would imply. There 
 is no middle ground apparently ; they must attain to a high standard 
 of efficiency or they can not work there. 
 
 Mr. Hensley. In other words, if they go lower they must attain to 
 the same high standard of efficiency in the lower position. Thev 
 must be experts in the positions in which they work. 
 
 Mr. Alifas. Yes, sir. 
 
 I would like to call attention to what Mr. Taylor calls his method 
 of persuasion. I will read from paragraph 293 of this book : 
 
 A certain percentage of them, with the best of attention, will fall In this and 
 
 find that they have no place In the general organization, while still others— 
 
 and among them some of the best workers, who are, however either stupid or 
 
 stubborn— can never be made to see that the new system is as good as the old • 
 
 , and these, too, must drop out. ' 
 
 You will notice from that that he is the judge as to who shall drop 
 out. The incentive to speed up is the desire of the workman to be 
 among the lucky number who remain. 
 
 I will now read from paragraph 166 : 
 
 For the success of the system the number of men employed on practicallv the 
 same class of work should be large enough for the workmen quite often to have 
 
TAYLOK SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 17 
 
 the object lesson of seeing men laid off for failing to earn high wages and 
 others substituted in their places. 
 
 He uses the illustration of a common laborer in the employ of the 
 Bethlehem Steel Co., which I will read to you : 
 
 Between 12 and 13 tons of pig iron per man had been carried from a pile 
 on the ground up an inclined plane and loaded onto a gondola car by the 
 average pig-iron handler while working by the day. The men in doing this 
 work had worked in gangs of from 5 to 20 men. 
 
 The man selected from one of these gangs to make the first start under the 
 writer's system was called upon to load on piecework from 45 to 58 tons per 
 day. 
 
 Again, in paragraph 125, he says: 
 
 When the writer left the steel works the Bethlehem pieceworkers were the 
 finest body of picked laborers that he has ever seen together. They were practically 
 all first-class men, because in each case the task which they were called upon 
 to perform was such that only a first-class man could do it. The tasks were 
 all purposely made so severe that not more than one out of five laborers (per- 
 haps even a smaller percentage than this) could keep up. 
 
 The Chairman. I believe you stated some time ago that this sys- 
 tem had been inaugurated at the Watertown Arsenal in part, but 
 that it had not been inaugurated in its entirety ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. Yes, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you know of any place, in any department 
 of the Government, where it has been inaugurated in its entirety? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. No, sir; not anywhere in its entirety. 
 
 The Chairman. Have you any information that would lead you 
 to believe that it is the intention of any department of the Govern- 
 ment to inaugurate it in its entirety, including this speeding-up 
 process ? 
 
 Mr. Alitas. Yes, sir ; I have a letter sent to our committee yester- 
 day by the Secretary of War, in which he states 
 
 Mr. Veeeland. Is that in writing? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Veeeland. Suppose you read the letter. Is that letter in 
 response to a letter from your committee to the Secretary of War ? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Veeeland. Suppose you read the letter from the Secretary of 
 War and incorporate the other letter in the record, 
 
 (The letters referred to are as follows :) 
 
 Washington, D. C, April H, J911. 
 Hon. .Tacob McGavook Dickinson, 
 
 Secretary of War, Washington, D. C. 
 Sir: In compliance with your request of the 13th instant that we submit 
 in writing, for your consideration, the reasons why we object to the installa- 
 tion of the Taylor system of shop management at the Rock Island Arsenal, 
 we offer the following statement: 
 
 Some of the features to which we object arc as follows : 
 
 (1) The replacing of the skilled mechanic by the laborer and the consequent 
 lowering of the wages to a little better than laborer's wages. 
 
 (2) The relentless speeding up of workmen to the extent that only a small 
 percentage of workmen are able to stand the pace. 
 
 (3) The use of the stop watch in ascertaining "unit times." 
 
 (4) The system of promotion which seems to be based on the contest prin- 
 ciple ; the man who has the least regard for his fellows, if he also has ability, 
 
 ^^'(V) The bonus and differentia! rate systems for fixing compensation and 
 the piecework system, with Jir. Taylor's methods for ascertaining what shall 
 constitute a day's work. 
 94078—11 2 
 
18 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 (6) The system of discipline advocated, which starts with punishing the 
 most flagrant of ofiCenses, principally those against other workmen, and which 
 increases the number of acts to be regarded as offenses until the required 
 submission on the part of the workmen is secured and the " factor of safety." 
 in human endurance is reached. 
 
 (7) The principle that workmen must be dealt with individually, and not in 
 masses or through committees ; that it is no concern of one workman what 
 happens to another. 
 
 These features of the system seem to be inherent in its entire make-up, as 
 will be seen from paragraph 290 of Mr. Taylor's paper on shop management, 
 which says: "They (the manufacturers) should understand the general philos- 
 ophy of the system, and should see that as a whole it must be in harmony with 
 Its few leading ideas, and that principles and details which are admirable In 
 one type of management have no place whatever In another." 
 
 The leading idea which unmistakably pervades Mr. Taylor's entire system 
 is the one stated in paragraph 312, which reads : "All employees sliould bear in 
 mind that each shop exists first, last, and all the time for t^e purpose of paying 
 dividends to its owners." This complete elimination of all consideration for the 
 welfare of the employees, subjugated to that of profit for the manufacturer, 
 seems to be the fundamental principle of the system. This seems to be the 
 principle which shaped the leading features of the system, and without any 
 effort on the part of the management the workmen, through the system, would 
 work out their own destruction. 
 
 The above considerations were discussed with the Chief of Ordnance on the 
 10th and 11th Instants, with the following results : 
 
 The Chief of Ordnance could see nothing objectionable in Mr. Taylor's 
 methods, and intends to try out the various features and continue them, pro- 
 vided they are found to be to the financial advantage of the Government. Hu- 
 manitarian motives are to have no consideration, but everything must be 
 decided from a business standpoint of view, thus: 
 
 (1) If it is found to be practicable to subdivide the skilled trades, such as the 
 machinists, etc., he would employ unskilled laborers to do as much of it as they 
 can and employ tradesmed* only when absolutely necessary, thus apparently 
 disregarding Rule II, section 5, and Rule V, section 6, of the civil-service rules. 
 
 (2) If it is found to be practicable, and enough men can be secured, he can 
 not see the reason why he should not fix the rate of speed so that only one man 
 out of eight could keep up the pace, I. e., If It becomes necessary to test eight 
 men in order to find one that Is able to stand the pace, and that one man is 
 satisfied and thrives under said conditions, it is no concern of his what becomes 
 of the other seven. 
 
 (3) If it is found to be successful, and is advised by the efliciency expert 
 who is in charge of the Installation of the Taylor system, the stop watch will 
 be used to ascertain " unit times " ; the bonus and differential rate systems of 
 fixing compensation, and piecework with Mr. Taylor's methods for ascertain- 
 ing what shall constitute a day's work, together with such disciplinary measures 
 as will be found necessary to enforce these measures, will be employed. 
 
 The following is our criticism of the Taylor system and of the position taken 
 by the Chief of^Ordnance : 
 
 We believe that the ordinary man Is entitled to an opportunity to make a 
 living, and that the Government should not set the example of eliminating him 
 by using the maximum rate of speed to regulate the standard of efficiency. 
 
 That the adoption of the system by the Government will place its stamp of 
 approval on Mr. Taylor's methods of treating workmen. Even though it does 
 not push the harsher methods to the limit, the private manufacturer will do so 
 from a consideration of profit. 
 
 While we believe in all progressive methods, and that economy is requisite in 
 Government shops, we fail to see the necessity of introducing a system embody- 
 ing such drastic measures and advocating such undemocratic principles as 
 follows : 
 
 (1) The overworking and enslaving of employees. 
 
 (2) The elimination of the skilled mechanic. 
 
 (3) The tremendous unemployed problem which will be caused by the elimi- 
 nation of workmen who can not attain the maximum of efficiency. 
 
 (4) The evil of denying employees a voice in determining the conditions 
 under which they are to work, and the manufacturer assuming the right of 
 doing "his own business" In his "own way," irrespective of the rights of his 
 employees. 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 19 
 
 This State of affairs has resulted iu the horrible labor conditions existing 
 in the steel industries of Pennsylvania, where the maximum of endurance is 
 the test. 
 
 (5) The assumption that the amassing of wealth is the question of prime 
 importance, and the effect upon the working people of secondary consideration, 
 mstead of regarding the industry of the country as being subservient to the 
 welfare of the entire people, and the fortunes made to be allowed only as an 
 incentive for the maintenance of industry. 
 
 (6) The assumption that this system acts as a labor-saving invention which 
 would create a new field for the manufacture of commodities, but is in reality 
 a philosophy which eliminates the average man. 
 
 (7) The assumption that it is proper to use a stop-watch for the purpose 
 of ascertaining the maximum amount of work that can be done by an employee 
 without applying the same principle to the manufacturer and ascertain the 
 maximum amount of wages he is able to pay. 
 
 (8) The process of securing a body of satisfied workmen by eliminating 
 those who are' dissatisfied, thus creating a situation where a workman will 
 refrain from divulging his real feelings in the matter for fear of losing his 
 position. 
 
 We believe that in the manufacture of munitions of war that excellence is 
 the main object, and Ihat any system which advocates the excessive speed of 
 two or three times the present output for each employee will not produce the 
 ■desired results. 
 
 Any system whose fundamental basis depends on Mr. Taylor's stop-watch 
 theory for ascertaining the amount of work a workman should do per day, 
 to wit, timing the best man when he is doing his best, and the giving of extra 
 financial Inducements while he is being timed to accelerate his speed, which 
 all workmen must attain in order to be employed, is inhuman and unjust, and 
 its adoption can be followed only by discontent and serious labor troubles. 
 
 Owing to the fact that the great majority of instances where this system 
 has been started in private establishments it has been found to be impracticable 
 in its entirety, and that nearly every one of the distinctive features of the Taylor 
 system have been discarded in many large establishments, such as the Beth- 
 lehem Steel Co. and the American Locomotive Co., after years of unsuccessful 
 experiments, this is evidence that it is not as great a discovery as Mr. Taylor 
 would have the manufacturer believe. 
 
 There is no true progress unless all classes progress, and we believe in the 
 sentiment expressed by President Taft, in a recent address, and trust that your 
 department coincides with his view, which is as follows : 
 
 " Good busines's is not everything in life ; the making and accumulation of 
 money should not be the chief end of a community. There has been danger in 
 the past that the rush for wealth would injure the moral fiber of our people, 
 and degrade their ideals and standards." 
 
 In view of the abovC'Stated considerations, we request that you abandon 
 your present plan of allowing the Taylor system of shop management to be 
 installed at the Rock Island Arsenal. 
 
 We also trust that the foregoing statement will explain our attitude in regard 
 to the Taylor system, and request an early reply, informing us of the length of 
 time necessary before a decision in our case will be rendered, in order that we 
 may regulate our stay at Washington accordingly. 
 
 Any further explanation pertaining to the contents of this cojnmunication 
 will be furnished you upon request. 
 
 Respectfully, N. P. Alifas, 
 
 P.. D. Dyas, 
 W. H. Bragdon, 
 Committee representing employees of the Rode Island Arsenal. 
 
 (Address: N. P. Alifas, St. James Hotel, Washington, D. C.) 
 
 Wak Depabtment, 
 Washington, April 27, 191]. 
 
 Messrs N. P. Altfas, B. D. Dya.s, W. H. Bragdon, 
 
 Committee representing employees of the Boole Island Arsenal, 
 
 Rock Island, III. 
 Gentlemen- I received, on April 17th, your communication of April 14th, 
 setting forth your reasons why you object to the installation of the Taylor 
 system of shop management at the Rock Island Arsenal, and have carefully 
 considered the same. 
 
20 TAYLOR SYSTKM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 The system concerns the general systemization of an industrial establish- 
 ment, embodying features which, however, do not affect the efforts which the 
 worlcmen are expected to put forth or their hours of worlc or compensation, 
 and also features which relate to the output of the individual worlvman, in- 
 cluding instructions for improvement in his methods of work and the stimula- 
 tion to induce him to do his best and act in general accord with the management. 
 
 At the Watertown Arsenal they have not yet gotten beyond the features of 
 the system which concern systemization only, and have attempted nothing 
 affecting the workmen directly, or the terms or conditions of their employment. 
 I learn on inquiry that there has been no determination as yet to introduce 
 any features of the Taylor system directly affecting the workmen at any other 
 establishment than at the Watertown Arsenal, where it is proposed first to give 
 them a trial. 
 
 Certainly it seems that there could be no reasonable objection to a practical 
 trial of them at one of the arsenals. That would demonstrate whether or not 
 your objections are well founded. At any rate, there is no present purpose 
 to introduce such features at the Rock Island Arsenal, and therefore your 
 protest in that respect is premature. The board which was convened has 
 recommended only the introduction at other arsenals of some of the features 
 which have already been in use at the Watertown Arsenal, which, as stated, 
 are not those which affect the workmen directly or the terms or conditions of 
 their employment. 
 
 It is believed that much has been accomplished at the WatertoviTi Arsenal 
 In respect of the features now proposed to be introduced at Rock Island, to wit, 
 those which concern the systematization of the method of putting work into the 
 shops, so that orders for manufacture now go from the office to the shops with 
 a much more complete arrangement and supply than formerly of drawings, 
 specifications, lists of parts, bills of material, and orders relating to particular 
 parts of the structure to be produced, so that the foremen are relieved from 
 much of the semiclerical and other office work which they used to have to do. 
 There has been a systematization of the work of planning the course of com- 
 ponent parts of the structures to be manufactured through the shops of the 
 arsenal, so that this course shall be regular and orderly, and the work shall 
 at no time be held through the lack of some component which is not at hand 
 when needed, and so that no wasteful effects shall arise through congestion of 
 work at particular machines, or the Idleness of other machines or workmen 
 while waiting for the assignment of operations which should have been planned 
 for them in advance. There has been installed a planning room equipped with 
 personnel and appliances for the regular production of what might be called 
 the time-tables of the thousands of pieces which must travel through the pattern 
 shop, the foundry, the forge shop, the machine shop, and the erecting shop on 
 their way from the stage of raw material to that of finished product without 
 collisions or unnecessary delays. They have systematized the issue of material 
 for manufacture from the storehouses to the shops and have jjlaced the task 
 of estimating the amount of material required among the duties of persons 
 other than those who are to make use of the material In manufacture, so as to 
 reduce the likelihood of overestimates, to insure the possession of the material 
 at the time when it is needed, and the return to the storehouse of surplus ma- 
 terial. The result has been a useful reduction of the amount of material Issued 
 for particular fabrications. It has resulted in greater care of material in store 
 and in the accountability for it. The method pursued has resulted in greater 
 care of machines and tools so as to preserve their efficiency. Estimates based 
 upon the results have shown a material benefit to the Government from the 
 changes which have been instituted there. 
 
 It would seem that there could be no reasonable objection to extending the 
 usefulness experienced along the lines indicated to other arsenals, especially as 
 the changes thus far put into practice in no wise affect the efforts which indi- 
 vidual workmen are called upon to make or the method by which they are 
 compensated. 
 
 In view of what it is proposed to do at the Rock Island Arsenal, and looking 
 to the benefits which such systematization seems to have brought to the Water- 
 town Arsenal, I do not fell justified in acting up apprehensions of what may 
 take place in respect to other features and forbidding the Installation of im- 
 provements whose value has already been /lemonstrated. 
 Very respectlfuUy, 
 
 J. M. Dickinson, Secretary of War. 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 21 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. I would like to ask you this question : You stated 
 to the chairman that this syfetem had not been installed in its entirety 
 anywhere ; did you have in mind only the departments of the Govern- 
 ment when you made that statement? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. I was speaking of Government work. The gentleman 
 who introduced this resolution was the one who stated that it had 
 been installed somewhere. 
 
 Mr. Peppek. It has been tried in any number of private establish- 
 ments, and in many places it has been found impracticable. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Can you give us the names of the establishments where 
 it has been tried and found wanting, so that the committee can call 
 upon them for information. 
 
 Mr. Alifas. I can not give you a list of all of them. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Will you later submit a list of them to the chairman? 
 
 Mr. Alifas. Yes, sir. 
 
 I wish to state that I have talked longer than I expected to do, and 
 my talk has been rambling because of the interruptions from gentle- 
 men present. I am not used to speaking under such circumstances 
 and the interruptions caused me to lose the train of thought, and it 
 may be that I have not presented the case in the best way that I 
 would be capable of doing otherwise. 
 
 I wish to say in conclusion that some of the reasons why this com- 
 mittee should investigate this question are that they have put a time 
 limit on work and limits in other things. The United States Con- 
 gress has put a limit on the time of work and has provided a working 
 day of eight hours. If physical endurance is to be the test, and that 
 seems to be Mr. Taylor's intention, it would not be necessary to limit 
 the working day to eight hours, because you could possibly find men 
 who would be willing to work 12, 14, or 15 hours, and you could find 
 men who might say that they enjoyed it. Besides, we have speed 
 laws to prevent people from exceeding a certain speed limit with 
 automobiles. We also have child-labor laws to prevent the employ- 
 ment of children under a certain age, and it is all for the purpose 
 of curbing the greed of individuals who desire to make money out of 
 the efforts of other people. It seems to me that this matter should 
 be thoroughly investigated for the reason that if the system is in- 
 augurated in a Government plant it will be a strong incentive for 
 private manufacturing concerns to adopt the same system, and, while 
 the Government might not convert its workmen into mere machines, 
 the private manufacturer would be liable to do so and push the thing 
 to the very limit. It seems to me that there is no surer way of causing ex- 
 tensive trouble in this country than to introduce a system of that kind. 
 
 I will conclude my remarks, as there are ether gentlemen here who 
 wish to be beard. I thank you, gentlemen, for your attention. 
 
 The Chairman. There are other gentlemen present who desire to 
 be heard; Mr. Gompers has considerable information on the subject, 
 and so has Mr. O'Connell, and they desire to be heard; and there are 
 some other gentlemen who desire to be heard. It Avould possibly 
 require one or two more hearings to give all of these gentlemen who 
 desire to be heard that opportunity. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. I move that the committee adjourn until 10 o clock 
 tomorrow morning and continue the hearings. 
 
 (Accordingly, at 12 o'clock noon, the committee adjourned to meet 
 to-morrow, Saturday, April 29, 1911, at 10 o'clock a. m.) 
 
22 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 HorrsE of Representatives, 
 
 THE Committee on Labob, 
 
 Saturday, April 89, 1911. 
 The committee met at 10 a. m., Hon. William B. Wilson (chair- 
 man), presiding. 
 
 The Chairman. The committee will come to order. Mr. Gompers, 
 are you ready to proceed this morning? 
 Mr. Gompers. Yes, sir. 
 
 STATEMENT OF HON. SAMUEL GOMPERS, PRESIDENT OF THE 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR. 
 
 Mr. Gompers. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I 
 urge that the resolution now under consideration be reported favor- 
 ably to the House and adopted, and the committee authorized to 
 make an investigation into the subject or the scheme of what has be- 
 come popularly known as the Taylor system. 
 
 During the statement made yesterday by the representative of the 
 employees of the Rock Island Arsenal, some questions were put to 
 him, and the statement was made that it was perhaps unnecessary to 
 read from the book from which he quoted, because it was in print 
 and could be read by every member of the committee. That is 
 very true, but I think it is also true that the Members of Congress are 
 usually very busy men, and if it is expected that each Member of 
 Congress is going to read all that has been written on all the subjects 
 coming under his consideration, he could live a long lifetime and then 
 be scarcely prepared to deal with any one subject fully and com- 
 prehensively. I think it is the duty of any man appearing before a 
 committee of Congress to try and point out the essentials of the sub- 
 ject for the consideration of the committee. What better authority 
 can be submitted than the book which bears the author's name — the 
 author whose name is identified more than the name of any other man 
 with the subject under inquiry? These books are entitled " Scientific 
 Shop Management; the Taylor System of Efiiciency," and so forth, 
 the quotations from which were amply submitted to you yesterday. 
 
 Mr. Smith. Would you allow one question ? You ask the question. 
 What better authority could be presented than the book itself — do you 
 mean as to the theory? 
 
 Mr. Gompers. In substantiation of that theory. 
 
 Mr. Smith. But would it not be well to have evidence from some 
 one who is employed under the system and who knows of its practical 
 workings ? 
 
 Mrr Gompers. Yes, sir ; but if I did not have more regard for your 
 time and patience, I would submit to you evidence from this book that 
 organization among the working people under the operation of this 
 system is practically impossible, and that the spirit of independence 
 or self-assertion, in order that the men iriay present their side of this 
 subject, is wholly eliminated by the system itself. These books are 
 not difficult to obtain. 
 
 Mr. Smith. I only mentioned that for the reason that a great num- 
 ber of theories are presented by books that are not practical at all in 
 operation. 
 
 Mr. Gompers. That is true. I want to read two brief passages 
 from this book by Mr. Frederick W. Taylor on Shop Management. 
 
TAYLOE SYSTEM OE SHOP MANAGEMENT. 23 
 
 The matter I desire to read appears upon page 1396, paragraph 253. 
 I quote : r ^ , r o r- 
 
 Until very recently In the organization of work he has found it best to first 
 introduce five or six of the elements of functional foremanship quietly, and get 
 them running smoothly in a shop before calling attention to the principle in- 
 volved; and when the time for this announcement comes, it invariably acts as 
 the proverbial red rag on the bull. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. "Will you have noted the page and paragraph you 
 are reading from ? 
 
 Mr. GoMPERS. I have already given that. The other statement I 
 desire to read from Mr. Taylor's book is contained on page 1480. 
 In answer to a question by Mr. Hawkins, who is seemingly not satis- 
 fied with the results, for he [Mr. Hawkins] says : " I have waited six 
 years now." Mr. Taylor makes this reply : 
 
 Have you tried the incisive plan of centering on one man, instead of going 
 at the whole shooting match at once? I think the failure is due to a lack of 
 patient persistence on the part of the employers and then to a lack of centering 
 right on to a single man. No workman can long resist the help and persuasion 
 of five foremen over him. He will either do the work as he is told to or leave. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. What were they trying to have the workmen do 
 under that? 
 
 Mr. GoMPEES. To speed up to the very top notch. ^-^"'^ 
 
 Mr. Mahee. Is not the last thing there the task system? 
 
 Mr. GoMPEKS. That is one of the elements of the system. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I am sure that you have in mind the statements 
 made by Mr. Alif as yesterday, and I shall not repeat them. I want 
 only to say in connection with them that the book is available. I 
 think that the gentlemen who advocate this system — the Taylor sys- 
 tem of shop management as understood by the Taylor system — ought 
 to join with us in an effort to have this subject thoroughly investi- 
 gated by a committee of Congress. If the system is all that the ad- 
 vocates of it claim for it, then no greater advertisement of, and no 
 greater impetus to, that system could be given than would be af- 
 forded by the indorsement of Congress. On the other hand, if it 
 results in what we believe or know or apprehend, then it ought to 
 receive the condemnation of Congress and the abandonment of it by 
 its promoters. So that, apart from the merits of the system, au- 
 thority to investigate the system ought to be conferred by Congress. 
 
 Let me say just this : It is conceded by every thinker and observer 
 that in so far as quantity is concerned, the products of the United 
 States far transcend that of any other country, but it is equally true 
 and undeniable that in so far as quality is concerned, we have lagged 
 in the rear. 
 
 The Chairman. In speaking of the quantity of production, do you 
 mean the production per individual employed, or in the aggregate? 
 , Mr. GoMPEES. In both — per man and in the aggregate. 
 
 The Chairman. In a given length of time? 
 
 Mr. GoMPEES. Yes, sir ; in a given length of time. Men who have 
 given this subject serious consideration have tried by various schemes 
 to get to a condition where quality shall also be considered as one of 
 the elements in production. Some will say, let us go back to the old 
 times of hand labor; but, of course, that is out of the question in 
 our modern civilization. But there are others who say that with 
 the division and subdivision and specialization which has gone in the 
 
24 TATLOE SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 industries by reason of inventions, new machinery and new tools, that 
 there should be a system of industrial, vocational education. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Is it not true that comparisons have been instituted 
 between the United States, Germany, France, and England, which 
 showed that the product per man in the United States was the highest 
 and that the quality of the product was the lowest of the four nations 
 concerned ? 
 
 Mr. GoMPERS. That has been demonstrated time and again, and the 
 official figures from all sources verify that fact. 
 
 I want to come for a moment to this subject of the industrial and 
 vocational education as an element in trying to overcome the diffi- 
 culties and shortcomings which have resulted from modern industrial 
 conditions. Now, there is a bill in Congress providing for the ex- 
 penditure of considerable sums of money, in addition to State appro- 
 priations, for industrial and vocational education. It is the idea of 
 putting men's brains into operation in order that they may do more 
 and better work — in order that they may be able to do more and 
 better work. We have been for years importing men from foreign 
 countries to take the places of superintendents— that is, men who have 
 been all-around mechanics and who have received industrial educa- 
 tion in their own countries, fitting them for just such positions 
 as that in our country. Now, because of the rush for profit and 
 dividends on the part of employers and companies in this country, 
 we have neglected this side of the mental development of the work- 
 men, in order that he may be a better producer in quality as well 
 as in quantity. Now, this Taylor system, it appears to us, is the 
 very antithesis of industrial education, because it robs the man of 
 initiative. Now, we can all understand and appreciate such business 
 management as will obviate duplication in work, prevent the waiting 
 for material, and provide that the materials shall be at hand, that 
 the bookkeeping shall be simple and expeditious, and that the Avork 
 shall be turned out in the easiest way and in the shortest possible time. 
 These things are all right, but it is a bad system under which all of 
 the thinking and planning is done in the office and under which the 
 man at the wheel or lathe or machine is robbed of all opportunity 
 to think for himself ; where he is not permitted to think out any prob- 
 lems in mechanics, but is driven to the fullest top notch of his physi- 
 cal and mental endurance. Let us consider the men whose names are 
 known to us and are upon our lips as the greatest inventors of ma- 
 chinery and useful appliances. Is it not a fact, though perhaps not 
 generally known, that behind these men whose names bear the title 
 of inventors is the man at the lathe, the machine, and operating table 
 of industry? Take the incentive away from the man, drive him at 
 the top notch of speed, and he has to do what he can to keep up, and 
 then for a very short time at that. 
 
 I do not know whether I ought to say anything in regard to some 
 matters that are pressing for expression. 1 do not loiow whether I 
 shall have another opportunity to appear before the committee; cir- 
 cumstances are such that no one can tell whether I may have an 
 opportunity to appear before the committee again for probably a 
 year. I do not know, and I am anxious to say a word to you now 
 because of that fact. The subject upon which I would like to submit 
 a few words deals in a way with the merits or with what we know to 
 be connected with the inauguration of this system. It would not take 
 more than 10 minutes, probably. 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 25 
 
 The Chairman. There is no objection. 
 
 Mr. GoMPERs. I want to call to the attention of the committee the 
 fact that Mr. Taylor, who is the inventor of the system with which 
 his name is associated, " Scientific Shop Management," says that he 
 first developed his idea in the Midvale Steel Co.'s plant. Now, I want 
 to read to you some testimony which the president of this Midvale 
 Steel Co. gave before this committee, the Committee on Labor of 
 the House of Eepresentatives, on Thursday, March 1, 1900, and which 
 is printed in the hearings of the Committee on Labor, pages 65 to 94. 
 On page 72 Mr. Harrah, the president of the company, answers a 
 number of questions and makes some statements in connection with 
 them. Mr. John J. Gardner, who is now a member of this Committee 
 on Labor, was chairman of the committee at that time, and this col- 
 loquy ensued : 
 
 The Chairman. You stated a while ago, or I understood you to state, that 
 when you worked them in eight-hour shifts each man worlced the entire eight 
 hours? 
 
 Mr. Haeeah. Yes; but we were experimenting then, and we had our in- 
 spectors watching the men very close, so as to see that there was absolutely no 
 time lost. We had men with stop watches over the workmen working on an 
 axle lathe, or whatever else it might be, and every time a man looked up they 
 took his time ; every time he stopped to breathe they took his time, and in that 
 way they got absolutely the amount of time employed in doing a certain amount 
 of work. * * * 
 
 In economics I am a free-trader; in politics I am a Republican; in religion 
 i am an Episcopalian, and in theory I am a Socialist. I am following the lead 
 of the President. Now, I believe it is only a question of time when we will 
 have an eight-hour labor law, but it will not be a law on the statute books; it 
 will be a custom — that is to say, we all work too much. * » * 
 
 Mr. GoMPEES. Are they (the workmen) permitted to leave the mill to take 
 meals? 
 
 Mr. Haeeah. No, sir. Once a man passes inside the gate and gets inside the 
 red fence, he stays there until his day's work is through. * * * 
 
 Mr. Geaham. I was going to ask whether you thought that you could put 
 your machines so as to accomplish getting out more work In eight hours than 
 you can now in nine hours? 
 
 Mr. Haeeah. No; the machines are worked to their fullest capacity now. 
 
 Mr. Graham. You would have to get some kind of improved machinery? 
 
 Mr. Harrah. We have the most improved kind of machinery now; but we 
 make it a rule to run a machine to break. For instance, the life of a hammer 
 bar may be two years. If that hammer bar does not break inside of the two 
 years I go for the foirgemaster, because 1 know he is not getting the work he 
 ought to out of the forge. It is the same way in the machine shop. If a lathe, 
 the natural life of which might be two years, does not break down before that, 
 I would go for the engineer In charge. 
 
 Mr. Graham. Everything is run to Its full capacity now? 
 
 Mr. Harrah. Absolutely; yes, sir. We have absolutely no regard for ma- 
 chinery or for men. 
 
 Mr. GoMPESs. I think every member of the committee feels under obligation, 
 I am sure I do as one of the men Interested In this investigation, for the gentle- 
 man's frankness as to his 
 
 Mr. Harrah. Will you tell me your name? My name Is Harrah. 
 
 Mr. GoMPEES. My name is Gompers. 
 
 Mr. Haeeah. Mr. Gompers, when you become better acquainted with me you 
 will know that there is nothing I hold back. I am like you ; I am very anxious 
 to have this thing settled. It means a great deal to me. 
 
 Mr. GoMPEES. So anxious am I to have it settled that I have associated myself 
 with my fellow-workers in order to see that it is settled. You say that In the 
 event of these hammers and lathes not being broken down much before the 
 supposed limit of time they should last, you find fault with the men because 
 they haven't got as much work out of the machines as they possibly could? 
 
 Mr. Haeeah. Yes, sir. * * * 
 
26 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you know whether Mr. Taylor was in charge 
 of the Midvale shops at that time? 
 
 Mr. GoMPEES. He was in charge of a large part of it, and he grad- 
 uated into a higher position. 
 
 I do not know whether you gentlemen, on the morning of April 16, 
 caw in the newspapers the horrible story about the large number of 
 men who were killed and of others who were burned to death and 
 injured by burning by reason of a plug coming out of a tank which 
 contained tons and tons of molten steel in the Midvale Steel Co.'s 
 works. It might be an interesting story to see whether there is any 
 connection between this accident and this sort of system 
 
 Mr. Lewis. I would suggest that you incorporate it in the record 
 because there may be some connection between the intensity of action 
 in labor and liability to accidents. 
 
 The matter referred to is as follows: 
 
 [Washington Post, Apr. 16, 1911.] 
 
 Six Die in Molten Rain — Steel Poues Oveb Wobkmen in Midvale Plant— 
 One Othee Can Not Live. 
 
 twelve moee injured through bukning out of a cbucible and subsequent 
 upsetting of big container — one man buened to crisp as he stood — victims 
 of accident suffer terribly. 
 
 Philadelphia, April 15. 
 
 Six workmen were killed, 1 was fatally injured, and 12 others seriously hurt 
 •at the Midvale Steel Works, at Wayne Junction, this afternoon, when a huge 
 container filled with molten steel gave way, the fiery liquid pouring or splashing 
 over more than a score of the employees. 
 
 The dead : James Tobin, head stamper, 44 years old ; Patrick Perrin, foreman, 
 43 years ; Patrick Joyce, 24 years ; Patrick Myers, 35 years ; Michael Panas, 42 
 years; George F. Steel, superintendent. Fatally injured: Patrick Cunningham. 
 
 Among the seriously injured in the hospital and who may die is Bryan Glynn. 
 
 how accident occurred. 
 
 The accident occurred in what is known as open hearth No. 1. Several tons 
 of the molten metal had been poured into a huge container, and it was being 
 slowly propelled along a traveling crane across the shop to waiting molds. More 
 than 20 men were under and around it, guiding the huge vessel with long tongs, 
 when, without warning, a plug in the bottom of the container burned out, and 
 the molten steel instantly began pourifing through the hole. It spluttered and 
 splashed over some of the men, and they were compelled to let go of the tongs. 
 
 In thus releasing their hold the huge kettle became unsteady, and in the next 
 Instant it tilted over and poured down a solid stream of molten steel. Seven of 
 the workmen were caught almost directly under the full flood of the fiery stuff, 
 but all except one, James Tobin, managed to get from under the container. 
 Tobin dropped in his tracks and burned to a crisp. 
 
 men TEHEIBLT BURNED. 
 
 The big whistle of the Midvale works brought prompt assistance, and those 
 who were not seriously burned were treated in the emergency hospital within 
 the works, while ambulances rushed the others who were horribly burned, to 
 the Germantown Hospital. A quick examination showed the physicians that 
 nothing could be done to save 6 of the men, and 5 of them died within a short 
 time of one another to-night. 
 
 The physicians say there Is no hope for Cunningham. All the victims taken 
 to the hospital were in a terrible condition. Their clothing was burned, and in 
 taking it off patches of skin and flesh came with it. 
 
 You will observe that Mr. Harrah says that when men are inside 
 the gate, they are in there until the day's work is done. You see the 
 principle of the thing and the result of the thing in the Triangular 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 27 
 
 Shirt Waist Factory fire in New York, where 150 women were locked 
 m and could not get out until their day's work was done, and they 
 did not get out until the grim destroyer burned them. 
 
 I grant you that if this Taylor system is put into operation, as we 
 see It and as we understand it, it will mean great production in 
 goods and things, but in so far as man is concerned it means destruc- 
 tion. So long as the supply of human labor is not exhausted the 
 system can go on. I mean by human labor not only that now in 
 the United States and not only that on the American Continent, but 
 I mean labor from wherever the supply can be brought. It is pro- 
 ducing wealth but grinding man, and, while I think we all agree that 
 production is one of the essentials of life and that while greater pro- 
 ductions must go on in order to satisfy our growing needs, there are 
 other considerations of a primary and more important character, and 
 that is that the intelligence, that the physique, that the spirit, the 
 mind, hopes, and aspirations of man shall be also cultivated and 
 given an opportunity for higher achievements. 
 
 Why should employers want a system that preys upon the in- 
 dependence, the development, and the character of the worker? 
 This last statement by Mr. Taylor, in reply to the query, discloses 
 at once the idea. It is that four or five formemen shall stand over a 
 worker and by a species of industrial " third degree " compel 
 obedience. Consider this same principle as applied to the operation 
 of railroads. Some engines can not be run more than 20 miles an 
 hour; others run 40, 50, or 60 miles an hour. How about this so- 
 called production or the accomplishment of 300 per cent more upon 
 the railroads? The engineer, because he is trained, runs his engine 
 as fast as he is told, and sometimes faster than he is told, but as fast 
 as he is expected to run it. The street-car men operate their cars 
 upon schedule. Workers in the United States in every industry of 
 which we know anything, or, at least, of which I know anything, 
 work harder, quicker, and more effectively, so far as results are con- 
 cerned, than the workers in any other country. When workers from 
 foreign countries come to the United States for the first few months 
 they are simply dazed with the rapid motion and the great produc- 
 tion of the American worker, and it is only after months and some- 
 times a year before they can acquire the same movement. Some- 
 times they never attain the rapidity of movement and effectiveness 
 of result possessed and demonstrated by the American worker. If 
 we had a dearth of workers, if our production lagged, if we needed 
 as essential to our well-being all these things, they might be justified 
 for a time. But there is no need ; we produce and can produce with 
 economy applied all around and under a humane system of manage- 
 ment all that is required. I wish to say this for the men of labor — and 
 I speak not only for the men of labor, because I am a worker myself — 
 I worked at my trade for 26 years and I have a right to speak as a 
 worker — that there are some limits beyond which we will not allow 
 you to go with your domination as captains of industry. You are 
 our employers, but you are not our masters. Under the system of 
 government we have in the United States we are your equals, and 
 we contribute as much, if not more, to the success of industry than do 
 the employers. We are not bent serfs nor docile workers; we give 
 the best that is in us for the wage that we receive, and we bend no knee, 
 neither politically, socially, nor industrially. We propose to have 
 
28 TAYIiOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 our voices heard in any discussion of the conditions under which we 
 shall labor. Nor are we going to permit, without a protest, the in- 
 troduction of a system that places a premium upon a man's mere 
 vitality, to be exhausted to the fullest, to the neglect of his own well- 
 being m all respects. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you and the gentlemen for the 
 courtesy of listening to me. I only hope that the resolution may be 
 voted upon favorably and passed by the House. 
 
 Mr. Hensuey. Mr. Gompers, before you conclude, I would like for 
 you to submit just a few remarks on the subject of mechanical inven- 
 tions; that is, whether the Government protects such inventions for 
 the purpose of encouraging inventions generally and, also, for the 
 purpose of relieving labor of some of its burdens. That thought just 
 occurred to me, and I would like to have your ideas upon that subject. 
 
 Mr. GoMPEKS. The theory of Goveriiment protection for inventions 
 in the form of patents is the recognition, first, that the invention 
 itself, or some of its advantages, ought to revert to the inventor be- 
 cause of the benefit that the invention is supposed to give to society. 
 But even in the governmental guaranty of protection to the inventor 
 there is a limitation of time, for it is recognized that after a specified 
 period of time, I think about 17 years, the benefit of the invention 
 must revert to all the people, and that the inventor has no further 
 claim to protection. It is, as suggested by your question, protection 
 to the inventor, and the provision that it shall finally become public 
 property is intended to be of service to the people and to lighten their 
 burdens. 
 
 The Chairman. Some time ago I ran across an article — I do not 
 recall now what it was — that treated of the effects of the strain and 
 constant application of the workers under the English factory system 
 upon the workers themselves and of the physical deterioration that has 
 taken place in the English or British wageworkers during the past 100 
 years as a result of the introduction of the factory system and the 
 strain incident thereto. Do you know anything of the results of the 
 system generally? 
 
 Mr. GoMPEES. The results were first demonstrated during the Boer 
 War — that is, it was first demonstrated in that war in recent years, 
 although it had been demonstrated before that time. In that war, 
 when the Britons were appealed to to enlist in the war, the 
 measurements taken by the representatives of the military authori- 
 ties showed a diminution in the stature o'f the British workmen 
 in many industries. Their chest measurements, their height, and 
 weight were found to be entirely disproportionate and had deteri- 
 orated. A few years ago, when I went to Europe as the representa- 
 tive of the American Federation of Labor to the International Con- 
 gress of Labor, I visited a number of factory cities. Among them 
 were Manchester and Leicester, Liverpool, and other places too nu- 
 merous to mention. I went also to Blackpool, where the British trade 
 unions were having a congress. Blackpool is known as the poor 
 man's watering place and corresponds to Coney Island in New York. 
 There the sight of the weazened, thin-chested, and undersized men, 
 women, boys, and girls was most impressive. In a conversation with 
 a newspaper representative there, I called his attention to what was 
 quite patent to me and asked him whether it was general. He said : 
 " Yes, that is general ; and think of it, that these boys and girls are 
 
TAYLOK SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 29 
 
 to be the fathers and mothers of future Britons! " The industrial 
 status m Crermany was most marked by the physical development of 
 the Germans. This is due to the fact that in Germany more consid- 
 eration is being given to the industrial condition of the worker, be- 
 cause it IS contemplated that the German worker shall be developed 
 into the German soldier. Instead of being bent-over, narrow-chested, 
 low-browed men, the industrial and military conditions of Germany 
 have made the German physically a better and bigger man and have 
 made him hold his chin in the air. I am not trying, however, to 
 extol the German army system or any military system. 
 
 The Chairman. I understood from a statement made by you 
 heretofore that the production in this country per man in a given 
 length of time is greater than in England. 
 Mr. GoMPEES. Yes, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. Our industrial system is not as old as that prac- 
 ticed in England. 
 
 Mr. GoMPERS. No, sir ; it is not, by many decades. 
 Mr. Veeeland. Is there not some limitation on that? While it 
 may be true that production in the United States is larger than in 
 that country, is it not because we make gerater use of machinery, and 
 is it not true, also, that in trades where handwork must be employed 
 that we are unable to compete with many of the countries across 
 the sea? 
 
 _Mr. GoMPERS. We have done so by both methods. We have ap- 
 plied machinery more generally than in any other country, and, 
 therefore, our production is greater; but in addition to that it has 
 also been demonstrated in all the activities of the workers in Amer- 
 ica, even in trades where machinery is not employed, that our pro- 
 duction is greater. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. As an illustration, take the watch industry : Where 
 we use machinery in the manufacture of watches we can, of course, 
 make them, and we do export a great quantity, but when you take 
 the high-priced watches, on which a great amount of hand labor 
 must be expended, we do not undertake to make them. 
 
 Mr. GoMPERS. Oh, no; the watchmaking industry is one of cen- 
 turies of study and close application, as in Switzerland; but we 
 have never applied ourselves very seriously to the making of watches 
 by hand; ours has been the machine production. As an illustration, 
 take my own trade. Now, the best class of that work is done by 
 hand, puirely handwork, but there is no country on the face of the 
 globe where hand workmen in that trade produce as much as we do 
 m this country. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. Is it not a fact that in this country the greatest 
 amount of efficiency obtains where workingmen are paid the highest 
 wages and work the shortest hours ? Under these conditions, do they 
 not perform the greatest amount of labor consistent with the char- 
 acter of work they are doing? 
 
 Mr. GoMPERS. There is no question about that, Mr. Buchanan. 
 But, after all, the truth is that a man of a high order of intelligence 
 will drift to a trade of that character, where the highest wages, 
 shortest hours, and best conditions prevail. Such a system not only 
 does that, but it also has the effect of developing the character of 
 the men who are enjoying better conditions than obtained before. 
 I know that is true in many trades, and it is true in mine also. 
 
30 TAYLOK SYSTEM OP SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 Mr. Smith. Are the men employed at the Rock Island Arsenal 
 pieceworkers? 
 
 Mr. GoMPERS. I think not, sir. 
 
 Mr. Alifas. They work both ways. 
 
 Mr. GoMPEES. I should say in the matter of the Eock Island 
 Arsenal that there are probably some gentlemen present who are 
 better qualified to speak of it. 
 
 Mr. Smith. In reading over that pamphlet, do you think there 
 would be any serious objection to it by laborers on piecework? 
 
 Mr. GoMPERS. I think so. 
 
 Mr. Smith. They would have their time under their own control 
 and would be different in that respect from men who were working 
 by the day. 
 
 Mr. GoMPERS. People who do piecework have very little more 
 control over their time than those who work by the day. The men 
 must occupy a certain amount of space and use the machiuerj', etc. 
 
 May I volunteer a statement that came to me in a rather circuitous 
 way as one of the things incidental to this so-called efficiency system ? 
 On yesterday the time-unit proposition was discussed and some ques- 
 tion was asked as to whether attendance at work was included in 
 the elements that go to make up the system. Now, of course, it is 
 generally known that in the event of any great trouble with a work- 
 mgman, even if he is working for a pretty heartless concern, the 
 employer will have some consideration for him, especially if he has 
 some domestic trouble. Now, in the Rock Island Arsenal a niiin was 
 absent from his work and he could not commutiicate with the arsenal 
 authorities. His boy was down with diphtheria, and- the house was 
 quarantined and isolated. In about a week the boy died; the house 
 was fumigated and some of the clothing destroyed. The man had 
 to give two days to that and to the burial of his boy. He reported 
 back for work and was marked for demotion and a reduction in 
 his wages by reason of his absence. 
 
 Mr. Pepper. I may say that the gentleman who Hat over here on 
 this side yesterday is the man who had that experience. 
 
 Mr. GoMPEKS. It came to me in another way. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. Is he still demoted ? 
 
 Mr. GoMPERS. His demotion in rank reduced his wages by reason 
 of the absence. Of course, one might say that that is an incident; 
 that is one of those human incidents or a part of human life. All 
 of the stories depicted by Harriet Beecher Stowe in Uncle Tom's 
 Cabin did not generally prevail in the slavery system of the South, 
 but these incidents related by her were sufficient to arouse the 
 conscience of the people, and this incident of inhumanity I haA^e just 
 referred to is an incident of that character. The question is, if you 
 do not come up to the top notch, no matter what the cause may be, 
 you have to suffer for it. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. According to your observation, are not incidents 
 of the kind you have referred to very rare ? 
 
 - Mr. GoMPERS. I say that in places where thai, system would not 
 prevail, the employer would say : " This man has had enough trouble 
 without my reducing his wages and his standing in my employ- 
 ment." Probably, if he had a little of the milk of human kindness 
 in his nature he would pay him his week's wages. 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OP SHOP MANAGEMENT. 31 
 
 Mr. Vkeeland. It seems almost incredible, in my experience, which 
 fhi^rSe t'hat''"' ^^"^"' '^'' "" "'"^ '^^"^-^ ^^ punished for a 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. I have recently taken up with the Post Office 
 iJepartment the case of a mail carrier who had become overheated 
 while carrying the mail in the city of Chicago. He asked for a 
 leave of absence for a year on account of it, but at the end of that 
 time because he had not regained his health sufficiently to satisfy 
 the department, he was not permitted to go back to work. I have 
 taken that matter up myself, and know of it. I know that is the 
 system. 
 
 • ^^- .CfOMPEES. I submit the statement of the author of this system, 
 m which he says he intends to introduce it quietly, secretly, and 
 slowly, because otherwise it will arouse such opposition as may be 
 compared with the shaking of a red rag before a bull. Now, I sub- 
 mit, that before that system should be adopted by the Government 
 o± the United States in its own works the subject ought to be fully 
 mvestigated. 
 
 Mr. Vkeeland. I have heard a great deal in the past few years 
 about increased efficiency in manufacturing establishments, but I did 
 not suppose that it applied particularly to what has been called the 
 speeding-up process— that is, by a method of making work harder. 
 I supposed that it would apply more to the matter of preventing 
 waste, promoting a more careful study of the details of the business, 
 and the cutting out of unnecessary steps ; in other words, not to call 
 for a greater expenditure of energy on the part of a given workman, 
 but to see to it that his energy is directed toward making the 
 product on which he is engaged. I asked the question yesterday in 
 relation to the book, because I did not suppose that this committee 
 was going to investigate a book. I supposed'that it was the practical 
 application of it in Government institutions that the committee 
 would investigate. Now, I have read some of the book — that is, what 
 I had time to read in the evening. Are there not some good ideas 
 in it? 
 
 Mr. GoMPERS. I would like for you to particularize before attempt- 
 ing to give an answer to that question. 
 
 Mr. VKEELAND. I mean as to what the author states to be his pur- 
 pose in writing the book, in which he says : " This paper is written 
 merely with the object of promoting high wages asd low labor cost." 
 I suiDpose that all will agree that that is desirable. 
 
 Mr. GoMPEKS. The question is how the high wages and low labor 
 cost are going to be effected. There are several ways by which it 
 can be done. For instance, if you want to get the best work, if you 
 want to get the largest amount of work out of a man and pay him 
 the highest wages m the shortest possible time, then work him 24 
 hours continuously. By this means you have given him higher 
 wages and you have gotten the greatest product out of him. 
 
 Mr. Vkeeland. I would not agree that that would be a sound 
 economic method. 
 
 Mr. Go3iPEKS. But it would be -the largest product you could get 
 out of one man in the shortest possible time; while that would be 
 true, stated without the conditions surrounding it, -yet, when sifted, 
 it would be found to be absolutely unjustifiable and improper. If 
 
32 TATLOB SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 you want to get the largest amount of work out of a man for a 
 period of 10 or 15 years work him 10 hours per day, but if you 
 want to get the best out of a man for a period covering a reasonable 
 lifetime 8 hours is the proper working day for him. Then you 
 will give him the highest pay, as well as an eight-hour day ; you 
 will give him the best possible working conditions; and, man for 
 man, in that industry, you will produce as much, if not more, as the 
 man in the same industry working nine hours a day. 
 
 Mr. Maker. Is it not possible, under the eight-hour system, for 
 a man engaged on piecework to so speed himself for those eight 
 hours as to injure his health if he continues ? 
 
 Mr. GoMPEES. That is true; but that is better than 10 hours, because- 
 he could use the two hours for recuperation. 
 
 Mr. Maker. It has been proved that under the eight-hour system 
 a man may so speed himself in doing piecework as to injure his 
 health and become prematurely old at 40 years. 
 
 Mr. GoMPERS. I have found that to be a fact. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland, you spoke about planning the work of a factory so as 
 to avoid the taking of unnecessary steps. Now, that is very true so 
 far as steps are concerned, but it is also true that the time that a man 
 ordinarily devotes to extra steps or an extra motion is frequently 
 that moment when the divine spark of a new thought comes to him. 
 If it had not been for the fact that Watts had time to watch a kettle 
 boil, we might not have known of the power of steam. If Edison 
 had not tried to get some sleep in the company's time and invented 
 the electric bell that aroused him from his slumber, we might not 
 have the advantage of the duplex system of telegraphy. If Frank- 
 lin had not had time to fly his kite and study electricity, we might 
 not know of the telegraph. That brief leisure time, the minute, the 
 half minute, or the 10 seconds of mental and physical relaxation 
 is necessary in order to get the best results. You know in your expe- 
 rience in Congress that you must change the stenographer every now 
 and then if you want to get the very best work out of him. If you 
 go on talking for three cfuarters of an hour, as I have done, the 
 stenographer does not mind it, because he has a chance to think 
 between my words. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. I will agree with you upon this proposition, that 
 it is desirable to get the shortest number of hours for working people 
 and everybody else that we can get along with and supply ourselves 
 with the necessary products, but is it not desirable for men who have 
 developed expertness in that line to study the question of the waste 
 of energy? I am not talking about speeding up the man and mak- 
 ing him trot with the wheelbarrow ; I am talking about complicated 
 methods of work and the study of experts to eliminate useless waste 
 of energy in doing the work. Certainly no one could have any ob- 
 jections to that sort of increased shop efficiency. 
 
 Mr. GoMPERS. No one objects to that and all that it implies. 
 
 It is very difficult for any one to appreciate the workingman's 
 position, the workingman's point of view, and the workingman's 
 situation in a factory when at work. We may hear of this and read 
 of it. There is no mysticism or mystery about it, but there is that 
 state of feeling which no one can understand thoroughly and abso- 
 lutely unless he has been a factory workman or a wage worker in an 
 industrial plant. Is it, imaginable that our great captains of indus- 
 
TAYLOE SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMEKT. 33 
 
 try have gone on for these past 10 or 20 years without taking ad- 
 vantage of every opportunity for real efficiency? If I vrere in the 
 business of stigmatizing things, I would say that a most excellent 
 word — efficiency — has been used here in order to carry through a very 
 crafty proposition. 
 
 The Chairman. Admitting that this Taylor system does accom- 
 plish a high wage rate at a lower labor cost, would you then con- 
 sider that that is all the wage worker is entitled to, or that there 
 is nothing else to which he would be entitled but to a higher wage 
 rate that would enable him to live ? 
 
 Mr. GoMPEES. I should say no; that that is not^all he is entitled 
 to. He is entitled to a full share of his increased productivity. 
 
 The Chairman. But aside from the productive part of it, would 
 you not consider that the wage worker has some brains, and growing 
 out of that brain some sentiment, some notions of liberty, and some 
 conception of his personal prerogative and of his rights as a citizen 
 and a man ? 
 
 Mr. GoMPERS. Yes, sir. There are no workmen who object to 
 superintendence; but they do object to such domination as would 
 make the position of the workman practically so docile that he does 
 not or can not say anything in his own defense. The workmen of 
 our country are usually very easy to handle, and if you handle them 
 with consideration you will get the best results out of them. If they 
 are handled solely with a view of wringing profit, unsatisfactory re- 
 sults will be obtained. The American workman has come to con- 
 sider that he is something more than a worker, or, rather that he is 
 not alone a worker ; that he should not be regarded solely as a wealth 
 producer, but that his character, manhood, and his rights, his life 
 and opportunities are entitled to proper consideration. These de- 
 mands are being made upon modern society, upon the employers of 
 the country, and upon the Government — ^municipal. State, and na- 
 tional. It has been a struggle for ages and ages — the struggle of the 
 masses to attain that degree of recognition that they are not slaves 
 or sergs, but that they are men entitled to every right with their fellow 
 citizens as men. This Declaration of Independence of ours means 
 something in 1911 to the workingmen of America, even if it does not 
 mean much to men occupying other positions in life and who regard 
 the declaration simply as a string of glittering generalities. We are 
 trying to make these principles a rule of our every-day lives. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. Are there not a good many concerns in the" country 
 that advertise to furnish expert men to go to manufacturing plants 
 and inaugurate improved methods — methods that will result in 
 greater efficiency and avoid waste of time and energy? 
 
 Mr. GoMPERS. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. Has Mr. Taylor done anything more than to collect 
 together a lot of things that have been supplied to these concerns for 
 a great while ? I see that paper was written in 1903—8 years ago. 
 Is there anything new in this, or has he simply collected them to- 
 gether and put them in book form ? , i . i 
 
 Mr. Gompers. It is something new and far-reaching ; at least he so 
 claims If you have read the book carefully you will find that much 
 of it consists of discussions between Mr. Taylor and a number of 
 employers of labor in regard to this subject. A few who were par- 
 
 94078—11 3 
 
34 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 ticipants in the conference at which this discussion, took place had 
 their own systems which they called efficient shop management, and 
 they would not accept his system as a substitute for theirs. But, 
 whether justifiable or not, the fact is that the system has become to 
 be known as the Taylor system. I suppose, as a great engineer, Mr. 
 Taylor is entitled to great consideration and credit, and anything he 
 might say would have weight, but the question of dealing with men 
 is a somewhat different proposition from dealing with exact measure- 
 ments and machines. 
 
 Mr. Veeeland. That is true. 
 
 Mr. GoMPEKs. I thank you, gentlemen, for your attention. 
 
 STATEMENT OF ME. JAMES O'CONNELl, INTERNATIONAL PRESI- 
 DENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS. 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. I want to acquiesce in Mr. Gompers's statements, 
 that we can not appreciate that there should be any opposition on 
 the part of Mr. Taylor or anyone else connected with his scheme to 
 a full investigation of it by this committee, because if the system 
 amounts to anything it will stand a public investigation^ and oppo- 
 sition to an investigation would be convicting the proposition before 
 the- committee and the country. I am sure that no one will appear, 
 before this committee in opposition to the passage of this resolution ; 
 I feel that that position will not be taken by anyone. As the com- 
 mittee has only to consider the question of recommending the pas- 
 sage of this resolution by the House, it may not be necessary to go 
 into the details or the merits of the proposition itself, fexcept to give 
 the committee some idea as to what the system is in order that you 
 may be in a position, if you see fit, to report favorably on the resolu- 
 tion, and to give your reasons for so reporting. 
 
 The Taylor system is not a new proposition by any means. Mr. 
 Taylor has written a great deal on the subject. I refer you to three 
 articles written by him quite, recently. These articles appeaxUnjthe 
 M-arch,-ApT-ih and May nunibers of the American Magazine, and are 
 accredited to him. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Do these articles modify the system as described in this 
 book? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. No, sir; I think they strengthen it; he is trying 
 to strengthen it, at least. In one of these articles, published in the 
 May issue of the American Magazine, he sets forth that the system 
 has been in operation, or that he has been working on it and trying 
 to put it in force, for 30 years. So that it has been for 30 years in 
 application in some form or other. It is therefore not a new propo- 
 sition. In this same article however, or in one of them, he has stated 
 that there are approximately about 50,000 people working under the 
 system. So that in 30 years this wonderful scheme is one under 
 ■which he has succeeded in inducing the employers of labor of this . 
 country to the extent of about 50,000 men out of probably thirty or 
 forty million men to adopt. As was stated to you yesterday at the 
 "Watertown Arsenal, where the system has been in use for a couple 
 of years, it has only reached a very small percentage of people em- 
 ployed in the arsenal. I suppose that he means to include in the 
 figures he gives of 50,000 men all the men who are employed in 
 and around the Watertown Arsenal — that is, he means to say that 
 they are employed under the Taylor system. 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 35 
 
 ^.^fi"- Veeeland. Was Mr. Taylor employed and did he go to the 
 Watertown Arsenal to institute the changes there? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. Yes, sir. Mr. Taylor's plan is this: He will come 
 to your establishment and say to you: "I want to look over your 
 lactory. After looking over it, he will say that he finds that you 
 hare a great amount of waste in every line of industry in your fac- 
 
 *°n'i'V ^^^^ ^® ^^^^ ^^y • " ^°'^' ^ ^^^^ P^* "^*o effect a system that 
 wiJl be the means of savmg you a great deal of money, and it will 
 cost you so much. I will put a man here, an expert in this line of 
 business, who aviII successfully put this scheme into operation for 
 you. ' Now, m one of these magazine articles, he says that no mat- 
 tei- how small the plant is, do not attempt to put the system into 
 effect completely within a j^ear or two years or three years, or better 
 still, not withm four or five years. Why? There can be only two 
 things that I can see that would cause the making of that statement. 
 One would be the financial reason ; but in this age in which we are 
 living a business man can not wait five years to change his business; 
 he turns it over year in and year out; and when machines break down 
 or wear out, they replace them with good ones. So that it is quite 
 plain that the real reason for the gradual inauguration of the system 
 is to enable them to sneak into a factory or to slip into it a change 
 of employment, a change of condition or of the mode of work or 
 living to which the men have not been accustomed, and add something 
 that is so absolutely unfair that were it done openly the men would 
 rebel against it. The men at the Eock Island Arsenal, of the United 
 States Government, 1,500 of them, when it became generally known 
 that the Taylor system would be put into effect, these men, regardless 
 of their trade or calling, whether mechanics or laborers, this army 
 of men arose as one man and said : " No ; no Taylor system for us. 
 We are working for one of the best employers in the world, the 
 United States Government; we have an eight-hour working day; 
 the wages are as good as those paid by private employers; but we 
 will not accept the Taylor system." 
 
 Our association, the International Association of Machinists, has 
 the largest number of men employed in the mechanical departments 
 of the Government — that is, about 75 per cent of them. These men 
 at the arsenal met and appointed a committee, and that committee 
 waited upon the officials oi the War Department to protest against 
 the inauguration of that system at the arsenal. Why? Because 
 they did not want to strike; we wanted the men to come to Washing- 
 ton and lay the matter before the officials of the War Department. 
 This committee has also called upon President Taft to-day in refer- 
 ence to this proposition. As I have stated, the committee called upon 
 the officials of the War Department, and they have declared that 
 they are now about to put this system into effect ; that they mean to 
 put it into effect at this arsenal. We now come before this Com- 
 mittee on Labor, because these men are employed by the Government 
 of the United States, and you are representing the people of the 
 United States. We say to you that this system that is threatened to 
 be put in effect in one of the great factories of the Government should 
 not be adopted by this Government and that these men are indiscreet 
 in what they are doing. 
 
 We state to' you that this system is wrong, because we want our 
 heads left on us. Mr. Taylor says: "Give us strong men with l)ig 
 
36 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 physical bodies, but take their heads off; we do not want men with 
 heads; we want men with big hands, strong arms, and strong bodies, 
 but without heads. We will do the thinking for them. We do not 
 want anybody around here who can think. We will have a man 
 who will do the thinking and tell them when to stop work and when 
 to start, and how much they must do, and if they do not do it, then 
 they go out to the scrap pile." Now, that is the proposition, pure 
 and simple. We are going to stunt manhood in the United States. 
 We are going to prevent any higher standard of manhood being 
 brought about in this country. We say to the Labor Committee, 
 and we say to Congress through you, and we say to the people of 
 the United States through Congress, that the laboring men of this 
 country will not permit the Taylor system to be introduced in the 
 factories in this country on the basis that Mr. Taylor proposes to 
 introduce it. It is true that it has been introduced here and there 
 in spots, and the great factory which is always mentioned by Mr. 
 Taylor and by everyone who speaks about it is the Midvale Steel 
 Works. Well, God help us if we have to work there, and God help 
 us if we have got to work at any other factory where this system is 
 in operation. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland asked if there were not other systems that had been 
 applied toward facilitating business. Yes ; here is another one right 
 in this book. Mr. Brandeis talked about this system before the 
 Interstate Commerce Commission when the hearings were on a short 
 time ago in reference to freight rates. This system is called the 
 Emerson system, and we have also the standard time system. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. How does that differ from the Taylor system ? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. In this system they have an efficiency mark. In 
 other words, if your efficiency is 100 — if that is the standard — if you 
 reach, say, 76 or 80, you are within the right to work, but to get a 
 premium or to get more money you must come up to the standard 
 or about the standard. The standard is the highest. 
 
 Then we have advocates of piecework, and advocates of the pre- 
 mium system, and gang profit-sharing system, and several others. If 
 we oversleep ourselves, some morning we will wake up in an entire 
 new industrial proposition in this country. We ask you, gentlemen, 
 without consuming more of your time, so far as I am concerned, 
 because the subject has been fairly well covered, to report this reso- 
 lution- favorably, because we hold that it has within its make-up no 
 higher authority for it than the man whose name it bears; that this 
 system proposes to stultify our American manhood ; that it proposes 
 to stop any effort toward education of any kind, toward building up 
 the mechanical skill and genius of our time and of our country. We 
 do not want that. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. If you are right in your statement as to what this 
 system proposes to do, why need we investigate it? We could pass 
 a resolution without investigation upon the statement of facts made, 
 and certainly ought to. 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. Yes ; but, as I say, we come to you as the repre- 
 sentatives of the Government, because it is being threatened to be 
 introduced into your factory. You are the boss of the job here. 
 
 Mr. Henslet. What impetus would it give the system should the 
 Government adopt it in some of its departments? 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 37 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. It would give it the impetus of making it a 
 practical proposition for every manufacturer of this country to say 
 that the Government has given it its stamp of approval. The com- 
 mission appointed by ex-President Roosevelt in connection with 
 the miners — the chairman of this committee knows what impetus 
 that gave toward that position or that decision of that committee. 
 It was used imimediately by the manufacturers all over this country 
 because of the so-called open-shop theory expressed in that report, 
 and they stated : " It is acquiesced in by the President of the United 
 States and it is acquiesced in and given out by the commission ap- 
 pointed by him." And it became the watchword and byword of every 
 hostile employer in this country. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Might not private concerns of the country, because of 
 better profits they would make out of the employment of this system 
 in its entirety, use it as a burden to labor beyond what the Govern- 
 ment would use it? 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. Undoubtedly. 
 
 Mr. Smith. How extensive and what sort of investigation would 
 you suggest? Supposing such a report is made, what method of 
 investigation would you suggest? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. That the parties in interest on both sides be 
 heard, those representing the so-called Taylor system or other sys- 
 tems — the mere name does not imply anything — and the representa- 
 tives of labor and the laborers themselves who are working under 
 conditions as set forth by those representing the other side, all par- 
 ties in interest. I know of no subject in which the Government 
 could interest itself to a higher degree, because, as President Gompers 
 said a moment ago, there are bills in Congress and legislation being 
 enacted or sought in this Congress with a view to establishing a 
 higher and a more efficient degree of technical education and educa- 
 tion of every kind, educating the mind as well as the hand. If we 
 are interested in that phase of it, we certainly should be interested 
 in something that is directly opposite to that, and this certainly is 
 directly opposite to the education of the mind. The subject is a 
 broad one, and every employer in this country is interested in it, 
 and every laboring man is interested in this country, because with 
 turmoil, with strikes, with differences between employee and em- 
 ployer, the public must be interested, and investigation would put 
 either side in a position, in the eye of the public, at least, to justify 
 their position either for or against the proposition. 
 
 I have made some study of this system and of the introduction of 
 such schemes in manufacturing. For 20 years I have been interested 
 in the question of piecework. I have studied it here and I have 
 studied it abroad, and I want to emphasize what President Gompers 
 has said. In all my experience here and abroad, in all my knowledge 
 of the industrial world, so far as it aj^plies to the mechanical trades, 
 the American workman, as to skill, ingenuity, and quantity of output, 
 has no equal, let alone a peer, on the face of God's green earth ; and 
 the employer of this country does not have to introduce schemes and 
 systems to grind down his workmen or to shorten life, or to make it 
 necessary for a man to compete against his fellow man day in and 
 day out In order that he may make a fair living, and a fair employer 
 does not attempt to do so. It is the unfair emploj^er, in conjunction 
 with the lead-pencil faddist, who is attempting to introduce such 
 
38 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 schemes and isms with a view to making it appear that labor is being 
 benefited and labor is going to receive more money. That is a huge 
 joke. If the laborer wants more money he has to go out and get it 
 himself. No employer is going around handing money to laborers on 
 a silver platter. Do not let anybody tell you that. In the factories 
 and workshops where the Taylor system and other systems aping it 
 are in 'effect, labor is absolutely helpless, absolutely shackled. They 
 are dependent because individuality has been driven out of them 
 absolutely by that system. 
 
 Mr. Vheeland. If the Taylor system, the piece system, or any 
 other system is introduced into a factory where there are a thousand 
 men employed, why can not they bargain collectively so as to get 
 their just portion of the profits, as well under one system as another? 
 Why should that take away their power and right? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. Under the Taylor system it does not permit of 
 collective'bargaining at all. There is not a statement made by him 
 in any place except in opposition to collective bargaining. 
 
 Mr. Veeeland. Perhaps Mr. Taylor does not provide that, but the 
 men themselves can provide it. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Is that an inseparable feature of the Taylor system? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. Not necessarily; but we can only speak of the 
 future with reference to things that exist now or have existed in the 
 past. I can imagine a man, or two or three men, or a committee of 
 men, waiting upon the officials of the Midvale Steel Co. to adjust 
 their rates of wages. I can imagine what would happen to them. 
 Maybe you can. They would get out of the gate before the day 
 was up. They would not have to wait until 6 o'clock to get out. 
 They would be thrown over the fence. They would not wait to open 
 the gate. 
 
 Mr. Veeeland. Has the Government employed Mr. Taylor or any 
 other one of these so-called experts to introduce a system at the Eock 
 Island Arsenal? Is it being instituted by some one employed by 
 the Government? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. Mr. Taylor, or some one representing him, has 
 been employed by the War Department to go to Eock Island, as 1 
 understand, for the purpose of putting into effect this system. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. You are familiar with railroad Work in the machinists' 
 line, I presume? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. Perfectly. 
 
 Mr. Liswis. Will you tell us to what extent the product _of machin- 
 ists in railway work, railway-engine construction, to begin with, and 
 also the repair of railway locomotives, to what extent sudi work can 
 be sufficiently standardized into units to permit of a comparison of 
 the work of one machinist with another ? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. I am of the opinion it has been so largely stand- 
 ardized now, so largely specialized, that there is not room for much 
 improvement, although some of our people on the opposite side 
 disagree very strongly with us. I think the business has been 
 specialized. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. I do not mean specializing. 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. That is practically standardizing. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. I mean, are there accurate methods available by which 
 the work of John Smith and John Jones in a machine shop of a 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 39 
 
 railway, and the product of their work, can be computed at the end 
 of a day ? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. Yes. They have printed slips and keep a record 
 of everything. If you work to-day boring out a cylinder on a loco- 
 motive, you put in so many hours on locomotive number so-and-so, 
 and they know what it costs exactly. No matter what you do, the 
 next day they can say just what it costs the company. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Is that true in repair work? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. That is true in everything. If I go out one day 
 for repair work on a locomotive, no matter what it is, I charge that 
 time to that particular job, and that goes to the office and a record 
 is kept of it.- 
 
 Mr. Lewis. You have not fully caught my meaning. A locomotive 
 may come in in a partial state of bad repair, and it may require one 
 degree of work in one case and another degree of work in another. 
 What I am trying to ascertain is whether the work itself can be sepa- 
 rated into units, quantitative units, to such a degree that one can say 
 whether John Smith or John Jones will do the work the quicker ? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. Yes ; every piece of work. There are some rail- 
 way companies in this country that operate their plants entirely on a 
 piecework basis. They constitute a very small per cent, however. 
 Every piece of work, either new or repairing, has a price set for it, 
 and that price was worked out by some method of speedometer, some 
 method of stop-watchism, some method of a man watching and timing 
 the man and working it out on that basis. They have what they call 
 a time-setting committee, or a trying-out committee. That is the 
 system of one road I know of, but I shall not mention the name of the 
 road. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. Is not the piece system the fairest method o± pay- 
 ing for work ? ^ 
 
 Mr. "O'CoNNELL. No. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. Provided 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. No ; under no circumstances. I will prejudge the 
 question. . . 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. Provided they adopt and maintain a tair price tor 
 the units of production. 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. Experience of a hundred years m this country has 
 taught us there is no such thing in connection with piecework as 
 
 TR,11*HGSS. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. Why can not the power of the workmen, acting 
 collectively, be brought to bear just as well upon the payment they 
 receive by the piece system as the day system? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNBLL. Because it has this effect, the same as the iaylor 
 system collective bargaining has been driven out, the organization 
 of men has been driven out in every way, in every capacity, and the 
 men are helpless. They are not treated collectively, and they would 
 not be Piecework has driven out all methods of bargaining with 
 them The boss sets the price, the speeder sets the pace, the strong, 
 stout, energetic young man sets the standard of life for his oldei 
 brothers That is piecework. The average man will probably get 
 along for a year or two, but he is soon gone, and the old man dis- 
 annears and goes to the scrap pile. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. I do not see why that should follow as a matter of 
 
 principle. 
 
40 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. But it has followed. 
 
 Mr. Vbeeland. I can understand that the manufacturer, in fixing 
 the rate of wages, would want to pick out the most skillful man, a 
 man that could turn out the largest number of units in eight hours, 
 whereas the men, working for their advantage, would take the slow- 
 est man. Now, the fair price would be a subject of agreement be- 
 tween those two points. Why could not your men collectively bar- 
 gain just as well upon that as upon a day's wage? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. There is no reason in the world why they could 
 not, if they were permitted. 
 
 Mr. Veeeland. I do not understand they have to be permitted. 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. There are things we won't bargain about even 
 collectively, in our organzation, and probably that is one of the 
 things. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Is not there a sentiment among labor unions that they 
 are brothers, and that the small differences of ability ought not to be 
 the subject of a difference in wages ; that they ought to go out of the 
 shop as equals and come into the shop as equals? 
 
 Mr. O'Connell. Well, that may appear to be the theory, but it is 
 true, nevertheless, that it is not all brotherly love, by any means. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Is not that the sentiment prevailing among working- 
 men who work together? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. There is a great deal of selfishness about it when 
 it comes down to the actual proposition. Self-protection does not 
 permit me to stand idly by and permit you to be imposed upon and 
 have your wages reduced and your hours increased and your condition 
 of employment imposed upon. I must expect soonor or later to suf- 
 fer the same thing. That is very largely one of the things which 
 makes us brothers. We are brothers in this proposition against the 
 Taylor system. / 
 
 Mr. Veeeland. You are an expert, and I would like to ask you a 
 question, although it may not bear especially upon the hearing. In 
 your opinion, how much truth is there in the assertion recently made 
 that a very great economy could be made in the conduct of railroads 
 by following the example of the great industrial concerns, if modern 
 methods were applied? 
 
 Mr. O'CoNNELL. I imagine there are opportunities for great econ- 
 omy, but from what I know of the statements made before the In- 
 terstate Commerce Commission, and I presume you refer to that, they 
 all speak about the laboring man. He was the fellow they were aU 
 after, and the great heads of the corporations and the great other 
 things in the proposition seemed to escape them. They all seemed to 
 think that to get down into the shop where the workingman was 
 that there was where the great economy could be accomplished. That 
 may be true, in a sense. I was in a shop only a few days ago in 
 New York City where there were 27 workmen and 32 bosses. The 
 man was having trouble with his men, and he asked me to come there 
 to settle it, and I did settle it. I advised him to discharge three- 
 fourths of his bosses, which he did, and the shop is now running all 
 right. 
 
 (The committee thereupon adjourned until Monday, May 1, 1911, 
 at 10 o'clock a. m.) 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 41 
 
 Committee on Labor, 
 
 House of Representatives, 
 
 Monday, May 1. 1911. 
 The committee this day met, Hon. William D. Wilson (chairman) 
 presiding. 
 
 The Chairman. We have not very much time this morning, as the 
 House meets at 11 o'clock. Mr. Stimpson desires to be heard on the 
 resolution. 
 
 STATEMENT OF ME. HERBERT F. STIMPSON, OF NEW YORK CITY. 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I 
 may begin by saying that I want to very heartily support this reso- 
 lution. 
 
 Mr. Vkeeland. Tell us whom you represent, if anybody? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. As far as representation goes, I am chief engineer 
 of the Universal Audit Co., of New York. That company ren- 
 ders complete commercial service, of which the efficiency engineering, 
 similar to that comprehended, more or less, under the Taylor sys- 
 tem, is only a part. It believes that the development of the business 
 as a whole is the essential thing, and not the ultradevelopment of any 
 section of it. In other words, the production end is only one part 
 of it. There are the sales end, the financial end, and other ends. 
 
 I may say that in this case I am speaking from the standpoint of a 
 man whose father was an apprenticed workman in the sheet-metal 
 trade, and that I am not a college man. I sujjpose Mr. O'Connell 
 would call me, to a certain extent, a lead-pencil faddist ; but I do not 
 think that I am exactly that. I have had nearly 30 years' experience as 
 an engineer, a great deal of it in connection with large manufacturing 
 companies like the General Electric Co., but I have been out of the 
 direct production line and have been in the line of planning the 
 plants and arranging the processes, and therefore, perhaps, I have 
 as unprejudiced a pomt of view as a man possibly could have and be 
 near the work at all. Then I have had direct charge, at times, of a 
 considerable number of men engaged in constructive operations. 
 
 It is not for me to- write a brief for Mr. Taylor ; I have never had 
 the pleasure of meeting the gentleman, although I have known some- 
 thing of his work, and it interests me. I have come up through the 
 stages of studying the planning of a building and then of the appa- 
 ratus which went into the building, why it went into the building, 
 why it was arranged as it was, and then the management of the busi- 
 ness operations, and I found that the latter was by far the more 
 interesting part of the whole. I was associated for a year with Mr. 
 Harrington Emerson, who appeared before the Interstate Commerce 
 Commission at the time Mr. Brandeis did, and I got more light on 
 the subject then than I had ever had before. I subsequently found 
 that it was necessary to consider something more than the study of 
 the man and the machine; that unless the other departments of the 
 business were properly correlated it was like riding in a wagon with 
 one big wheel and three little wheels. 
 
 The gentlemen who have spoken previously have studied the sub- 
 ject at pretty long range. In my actual experience I have been 
 pretty close to it, but before I get to that I want to speak on the ques- 
 
42 TAYLOE SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 tion of standards. These gentlemen are, and I think with reason, 
 apprehensive of the establishment of standards entirely by the em- 
 ployer. I am equally apprehensive of a standard determined upon 
 entirely by the employee. I do not think either direct party should 
 establish the standards. The thing I want to draw to your attention, 
 therefore, is a wider view of this proposition than has yet been 
 brought out, and the fact that because the standards which Mr. Tay- 
 lor may seem to be adopting may be open to question, you can not 
 reason from that that an absence of standards is a desirable condi- 
 tion. In my experience as an efficiency engineer I have come to see 
 that what I need more than anything else are standards from which 
 I may make proper determinations in the apportionment of tasks to 
 workers of every sort. I think the interests of both organized labor 
 and capital and, still more, the interests of the consumer — to which 
 class everybody belongs — would be tremendously conserved by the 
 determination of a standard by which labor could be measured. Now, 
 let me explain what I mean by that 
 
 Mr. Smith. Do you not think the capacity of a man will determine 
 the standard ? Do you think there could be a standard by which all 
 laborers could be gauged? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. That is what I am going to explain. Now, if you 
 take a machine and put into it a piece of raw material, it is possible 
 for a mechanical engineer to determine the resistance which that raw 
 material will oppose to the operation of the machine. You set up 
 your work, you start your machine, and the material develops a cer- 
 tain amount of resistance to its operation. You can trace that back 
 through the different parts of the machine and you can determine 
 the mechanical energy which is necessary to overcome this resistance 
 and to drive the machine. Energy is measured, speaking from an en- 
 gineering standpoint, by what we call a compound unit; this is- com- 
 posed of distance, time, and resistance. That is a perfectly sound 
 principle of engineering, and by the application of that principle you 
 determine the power you need to drive the machine — that is, on the 
 mechanical side. On the other side you have a certain amount of 
 energy which is applied by a man in the control of the machine. 
 Take your locomotive engineer; he applies his .physical force to the 
 control of the locomotive, but the power which moves the locomotive 
 is generated from the coal. The amount of energy which we utilize 
 we can also determine. If we drive a machine electrically, we can de- 
 termine as to the motor, the wires, the generator, the engine, and 
 boiler and, finally, the amount of coal that is necessary to generate 
 power enough to move that machine. Now, go back the other way; 
 you have a man applying his hands to the control of the inorganic 
 machine. The man's body is a machine — and. I say it respectfully. 
 You have his mind as a motor energizing that machine; you have 
 the mental energy coming to his mind through the foreman, assistant 
 foreman, assistant superintendent, superintendent, general manager, 
 vice president, president, executive committee, directors, 
 holders. 
 
 Now, it is known, and it is on record in Kent, and other'en|, 
 
 ing handbooks, that a man's capacity to generate energy is about one- 
 tenth the power of a horse. ^ 
 
 Mr. Lewis. That does not measure his endurance? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Yes; it does. 
 
TAYLOK SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 43 
 
 Mr. Lewis. It does? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. I mean his day-to-day capacity, not his capacity in 
 a spurt ; I mean his day-to-day capacity on the theory of nonexhaus- 
 tion. As I said, the capacity to generate energy in the average man 
 is about one-tenth the power of an average horse. Now, I can figure 
 back and I can determine how much horsepower I want to drive my 
 plant, and I can bargain for it. For instance, in New York the Edi- 
 son Co. will sell me so many horsepower hours. Is that expression 
 clear to everybody? That is the power of a horse for one hour. It 
 may be clearer to say a kilowatt hour, which is a little more, just as 
 a meter is more than a yard. I can buy a horsepower hour from the 
 Edison Co. for 2 cents, which will do anything I want; I can move 
 anything I want with it. If I get the same amount of energy from a 
 man who is paid 20 cents an hour, the same amount of energy would 
 cost me $2. Therefore the human physical force is 100 times as ex- 
 pensive as the electrical or mechanical physical force. It is perfectly 
 easy for me to determine how big motors, wires, generators, engines, 
 and boilers I need in order to generate any desired amount of me- 
 chanical energy, because I know something about the strength of 
 materials, hence I can design machines which will give me any 
 energy I want. What I only have a comparatively slight knowledge 
 of is the power-generating capacity of the normal man, and that, as 
 an engineer, is just what I want and I want it badly, because I am up 
 against this especial problem. An employer asks me, " How much 
 can my men do ? " While I can make certain approximations, I do 
 not find as much data as I want. I am at present engaged in an 
 effort to find the line of action which is necessary to cause that stand- 
 ard to be determined. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. What occupations have you investigated in an effort 
 to find out ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Metal work and the handling of bulk commodities^ 
 a certain amount of textile work, and a number of others. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. What branches of the metal work ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. The fabrication of structural steel. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Have you ever investigated coal mining? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. No, sir; but the utilization of energy is absolutely 
 independent of the particular line of business. For instance, if you 
 were running a steam engine, you do not_ care whether that engine 
 is pumping water out of a mine or driving an automobile, except 
 as you vary your types and sizes of engine. The basic problems 
 are no different. A man is a portable power plant, speaking 
 mechanically. He has a boiler down here, the stomach, where he 
 consumes his food. If the man is not supplied with food, he varies 
 from a boiler in this respect — that a boiler, barring consumption 
 by rust, will continue to exist; but if a man does not get fuel, he 
 does not continue to exist; he will starve and die. The processes 
 in the stomach are not dissimilar to burning coal in the grate. He 
 has an engine in here, his heart, which is a pump. If I want to lift 
 my arm, I pump blood through valves controlled by nerves into a 
 muscle; that dilates the fibers of the muscle, shortens it, and my arm 
 comes up ; it is a perfectly mechanical proposition. 
 
 But man generates another kind of force, which is the mental 
 force, and it is an entirely distinct and separate entity from the 
 physical force. Transmission between mind and mind is akin to the 
 
44 TAYLOE SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 transmission of messages by wireless telegraphy ; you do not see any- 
 thing going through the air, but something does go because the other 
 instrument operates. Anyone who has had the duty of directing 
 workers knows that when you throw yourself into the job and force 
 your mind to act on their minds, and when, through their minds, you 
 control the machines of their hands, you are just about as tired at the 
 end of the day's work, if you have devoted yourself to your task, as 
 you would be if you had pushed the tool. Therefore, mental energy 
 has a certain physical character which we do not yet know much 
 about, and therefore we need an investigation into the mental energy- 
 producing power of man as well. The curious thing about it is that 
 whereas the mental energy-producing ability is the distinguishing 
 characteristic of man as differentiated from the animal, we know the 
 least-about it. 
 
 Now, on the assumption that a man' can generate about one-tenth 
 
 the power of a horse 
 
 • The Chairman. That would also differentiate the human machine 
 from all other kinds of machines ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. It does. But the physical part of the human ma- 
 chine is not unlike the physical part of any other machine. But 
 you have another quality in it, and if you try to study both of those 
 qualities simultaneously you get balled up. It is only when you 
 analyze and set apart the things which belong to one kind of energy 
 from the things that belong to the other kind of energy that you are 
 able to clearly grasp the characteristics of each of them. 
 
 At present the friction between capital and labor, in ray opinion, 
 is due to the fact that neither side has a definite unit for measuring 
 what it is buying or selling. So far as the physical part goes the 
 workman thinks the unit ought to be one thing and the employer 
 thinks it ought to be another. In both cases, with all due respect 
 to the gentlemen on both sides of the question, they are simply 
 guessing at it. 
 
 Let me tell you of one or two things which have come under my 
 observation. In a foundry in Manhattan, where a man was working 
 at the job of making molds in a molding machine — and if I use r.ny 
 technical term that is not clear, I trust the gentlemen will ask me to 
 explain — the man was observed during eight repetitions of the opera- 
 tion. He was under normal conditions, he was not under ])res&ure; 
 he was working by the day, and he did not know he was observed; 
 therefore he did exactljf what he had been in the habit of doing. 
 He repeated that operation eight times, but varied in time from 5.2 
 minutes to 23.6 minutes- per operation; his elapsed time was 104 
 minutes. If he had made 8 molds in 5.2 minutes his 
 
 The Chairman. What do you mean by elapsed time ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. I mean that the total time of all the 8 operations 
 was 104 minutes. 
 
 The Chairman. I did not know but what it might have been the 
 time between the operations ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. No; it was the inclusive time for the whole eight 
 operations. If the man had performed each of the operations in 5.2 
 minutes, he could have gotten through in 41.6 minutes, or about 42 
 minutes. He did the worif in 5.2 minutes without any urging, with- 
 out any pressure at all, and, therefore, reasoning by analogy, he spent 
 62 minutes longer in doing that job than he need to have done. Now, 
 
TAYLOE SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 45 
 
 because the time that went into the office was the elapsed time, the 
 total time, they reasoned that the unit time was one-eighth of 104 
 minutes, or 13 minutes, and they would make future estimates of cost 
 on that basis. I do not suppose the man thought very much about 
 it ; there was no incentive for him to hurry the work, because if he 
 satisfied his immediate foreman he got just as much money. 
 
 Mr. Pepper. You say he could have done it in 5.2 minutes. Would 
 you consider any element of physical weariness and rest, any connec- 
 tion between the two, as being essential to his welfare ? 
 
 Mr. SriMPSON. I would. But when a man was working under 
 those loose conditions I consider he was going at a gait that was 
 entirely within his powers. The 23.6 minutes, those longer times, 
 were due to the fact that he went away from his work for various 
 reasons or he talked with other men; but nevertheless his employer 
 was paying him for that time. But, as I say, he had no incentive 
 to give attention to the time ; if he satisfied his foreman that was all 
 that was necessary; I do not blame the man and have no criticism 
 of him to make at all. But you can see that because of these condi- 
 tions somebody has to pay for the wasted time, and perhaps the man 
 himself was one of the somebodies. 
 
 When I go in to set a standard time for work I desire to set a 
 time which is amply within the resources of the ability of the man. 
 I want to explain what I mean by that. In structural work we 
 know and we have determined by experiments in different grades 
 of material that certain kinds will ultimately break at a certain strain 
 per square inch. The average ultimate strength of high-carbon 
 steel, the strain at which it Avill tear apart, is about 80,000 pounds ; 
 some pieces run as low as 78,000 and as high as 83,000 or 84,000, 
 but the average is about 80,000. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. That is the breaking strain ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Yes. We know that if we stress that steel up to 
 half of that we reach what is known as the elastic limit. Whenever 
 you put a strain on the steel it stretches it, just as you stretch a rubber 
 band if you have any tension on it, but if you do not stretch it over 
 the elastic limit it goes back again and it is not permanently weakened 
 or elongated. 
 
 The Chairman. If you put that elastic strain on your material, at 
 frequent intervals, will it not ultimately result in destroying the 
 elasticity of it ? 
 
 Mr. SiiMPSON. Not if you do not exceed the elastic limit. 
 
 Now, let me explain that. What I am talking about is the direct 
 pull and not the bending action. When you put a bar under a bend- 
 ing stress, you set up a strain which bears hardest on the lowest 
 fibers; these are the most strained, and therefore we are careful not 
 to strain our material over half its elastic limit. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. What do you consider the elastic limit? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. We have determined by experiments that it is 
 about half the ultimate. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. Half of the breaking strain ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Yes. So we do not put a working strain on any 
 portion of the material of over half the elastic limit, because we 
 can not do that without producing appreciable deterioration in the 
 material. Now, I think, and I am perfectly willing to say so, that 
 the tendency in discussions of the tasks for workers has been to set 
 
46 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 that standard too near the ultimate point. I do not think it is right; 
 I think that at least the same consideration should be given to the 
 man which would be given to a steel bar. But until we determine 
 what the facts are we can not tell whether we are going up near the 
 ultimate strain or whether we are away down below. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Reference has been made to the work of a carrier of 
 pig iron being increased from 14 tons to 49. What do you think of 
 that? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. I am absolutely unable to determine whether the 
 14 tons or the 49 tons were right; I do not know; I would like 
 to know. I do not believe the 14 tons, speaking roughly, were a 
 reasonable day's work. Wliether the 49 tons were away up near the 
 breaking point I do not know; I never saw the man; I never hap- 
 pened to investigate that problem. But I do know this, that I have 
 recently made some investigations of carrying or moving large bulks 
 of commodities. I want to say .before T go any further that the 
 rules of my company prohibit me from mentioning the name of the 
 client; I am sworn not to do it. I separated the operations into 
 factors — that is, if a man was to take up something from that pile 
 and put it on this table [indicating] he would do two things; he 
 would carry it a certain horizontal distance and he would raise it a 
 certain height, and I had to separate it into these two elements in 
 order to draw a deduction. Now, taking the data which I have been 
 able to get, and which was found by observations of what men had 
 done, I so separated that work, and I found in 31 operations, taking 
 the elapsed time — that is, the time it took the men to go to a certain 
 place and handle one lot of packages and then to another place 
 and handle another lot — that the average efficiency was not over 27 
 per cent ; that was because the men stopped for various purposes and 
 did not work, sometimes having to wait for trucks and other things, 
 and when we took the time in which they were actually engaged in 
 work, their efficiency was not over 50 per cent. 
 
 Mr. Pepper. What did you use as a basis in order to get the 
 percentage ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. I used the data contained, in William Kent's Me- 
 chanical Engineers' Handbook, which is an accepted engineering 
 authority. I think you will find it on page 509, but I will not swear 
 to the page. Now, I will tell you of another instance. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. Does that book establish a standard of human energy 
 for a day's work and an hour's work ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. It gives the performances of men in doing various 
 kinds of work, such as lifting, turning a winch, etc. Now, in a cer- 
 tain rivet operation, which I once had to do with, one boy heats the 
 rivets in the furnace and throws them over to another man, who 
 takes up a rivet with tongs and sticks it into the hole; another man 
 takes a bar of steel, about 2 feet long, called the " dolly," and holds it 
 up against the formed head of the rivet; another man takes a pneu- 
 matic hammer, which is operated by compressed air, and with it ■ 
 forms the new head. Now, I found that the men, at that time, were 
 driving 600 rivets per day, and it was known that that was way below 
 normal. • 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. What size of rivets ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Three-quarter inch. 
 
 Mf. Buchanan. And that was in the shop, was it not? 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 47 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Just outside of the shop. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. It was done in the work of assembling, was it not ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Yes; it was not out in the field, it was on a plat- 
 form just outside of the shop. Now, by observing what those men 
 did, I found that they repeatedly moved themselves in a way that 
 was not necessary, and that by so doing they used up their energy, 
 and, also, that they unnecessarily handled heavy tools. For instance, 
 the men went down the line of rivets from left to right; the open 
 holes were behind the forearm of the man holding the dolly as he 
 packed up the rivets, and the man who picked up and placed the 
 rivets could not put a rivet into the next hole until the man with 
 the dolly moved, because this man was in the way. I suggested 
 that they turn around and go the other way, that the man with the 
 dolly should protect his arm with a leather shield so he would not 
 burn himself with the hot rivets, and in that way the open hole 
 would always be accessible to the man placing the rivets. The man 
 was working in a cramped jaosition, and it was a considerable effort, 
 taking much strength and time, to move himself out of the way for 
 this other man to put the rivet in, and when they went the other way 
 he did not have to do it. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. How many hours were occupied in putting in (300 
 rivets ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Ten hours, I think. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. You do not remember the hours? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Yes, I am very positive it was 10 hours; it might 
 have been 9f hours, or something like that. Then I found that after 
 the man had driven a rivet or two there would be something the 
 matter with the hole and they could not get the rivet in ; they would 
 then ]'Ay down this heavy hammer, take up a heavier tool, called a 
 reamer, ream the hole, lay down the reamer, take up the hammer 
 again and drive the rivet. I said to them, " Drive one rivet, lay down 
 your hammer, pick up your reamer once and ream or try all the 
 holes, lay it down once, and in that way overcome 90 per cent of the 
 energy required to lift that heavy reamer. Then I told them to take 
 up their hammer and drive all the rivets in a seam; then to straighten 
 up, get the kinks out of their backs, rest two minutes, and then drive 
 the rivets in another seam. In three or four days we set a higher 
 staridard. These standards are not alwn3'S as severe as has boon 
 thought. We set a standard of 1,200 rivets; we gave a man 20 per 
 cent bonus for coming up to the 1,200 standard, and we offered them 
 1 per cent more bonus for each per cent of efficiency beyond the 
 standard; we left that to the men, and they, of their own volition, 
 drove between 1,500 and 1,600 rivets, and there was no pressure 
 brouo-ht to bear on them whatever, except that there was a_ bonus, and 
 if they wanted it they might have it ; and they did it easily, because 
 they used to better advantage the strength which they had previously 
 used in unnecessarily handling the tools. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. Were these 1,600 rivets on the same character of 
 
 work ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Exactly ; it was the same work, done by the same 
 men, with the same tools, in the same place. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. Was it what you would call buckle-plate girder 
 
 work? 
 
48 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. No; it was some big square sheet hoppers, 5 or 6 
 feet deep, about a foot square at the bottom, and about 6 feet square at 
 the top. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. It was exactly the same work? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Henslet. Is the labor you speak of, which was performed 
 under your system, performed under the Taylor system 1 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. The gentlemen who know more about the Taylor 
 system must answer that. I have never been in a shop where the 
 Taylor system was used, and all I know about the Taylor system is 
 what I have read, and I do not talk about another man's work. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. As I understand you, Mr. Stimpson, you maintain, 
 then, that there were 1,600 rivets driven by the same gang of men 
 with no extra effort ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Yes. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. Just turned out that much work with no more 
 effort than when they drove 600 rivets ? 
 
 Mr. Stimson. Well, now, I will not say that exactly, because when 
 they were driving 600 rivets they were not working continuously, 
 and they had no reason to do so; if they did not get censured by the 
 foreman it was not to their advantage to work any harder than was 
 necessary to escape censure. When we gave them a reward for in- 
 dustry they were found to be willing to put forth their full efforts, 
 but I do not mean that they worked at a ruinous pace. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. You have determined upon a unit for a normal man, 
 namely, one-tenth of a horse, but, of course, that is purely a me- 
 chanical proposition. Now, will you give the committee the benefit 
 of your judgment on this question, as to whether, with a view to the 
 physiological value of the man when working at a normal rate of 
 exertion, 8 hours or 10 would be the better for him ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. I say four. I do not like Mr. Gompers, because he 
 wants to make people work eight hours. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. You say four hours are enough ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Enough. And, gentlemen, my experience is that 
 these long hours are almost entirely due to this waste of energy and 
 waste of time. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. How many hours should a man work, in order to be 
 able, with some pleasure in his work, to repeat his performance in- 
 definitely from day to day? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Well, will you allow me to answer that in a round- 
 about way? 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Yes; in your own way. 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. I can not answer your question directly. A man's 
 mechanism has this peculiar characteristic, that a man has in his 
 nervous system something which corresponds to an accumulator or 
 storage battery which carries him over peak loads. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. What do you mean by that ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Well, on your electric railway systems, in the morn- 
 ings, when everybody is coming down town at once, and at night, 
 when they are going home, you have a peak load. Do I make myself 
 clear ? 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Yes. 
 
 The Chairman. The highest point of the load? 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 49 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Yes. In other words, it provides for a high rate 
 of energy for the time being, because you must bear in mind, gen- 
 tlemen, that you have always got time and distance in these things, 
 as well as resistance. Now, suppose j'ou have a barrel full of water 
 and you have water running into it through an inch pipe ; you begin 
 to dip out of that barrel with a big cup or take out the water through 
 a lot of little pipes. If you do not take the water out any faster 
 than it runs in through the inch pipe, your water level in the barrel 
 will not vary. If you draw the water out faster than it comes in, 
 sooner or later that water level will sink, although the stream is 
 running in all the time, and you will get to the point where you can 
 not dip any more out. Now that barrel represents my idea of a 
 man's capacity as an accumulator. His energy is generated at a 
 certain rate, and it does not make any difference, in one sense of the 
 word, whether the day's work is 8 hours or 10 hours, but you must 
 not take energ}^ out of him any faster than his system is generating 
 it, or sooner or later you will exhaust his capacity and the man vrill 
 collapse. Does that answer the question to your mind? 
 
 Mr. Lewis. It supplies one of the conditions. 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. You see it is not a simple proposition; it is a com- 
 plicated proposition. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. As a practical thing, do you think the inauguration of 
 standards that would definitely make certain what each man was 
 doing, thereby cutting out the soldiering, would necessarily give us 
 an eight-hour day ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. I think it would give you a four-hour day ; I have 
 not any more question of it than I have that I see you. 
 
 Mr. Vkeeland. Is not that a rather extreme view ? 
 
 Mr. Stibipson. No. It has been so held by men who have inves- 
 tigated this thing for a good many years, and if it were not for the 
 views of those men and my own observation I would not speak so 
 confidently. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. I suppose you mean by that that in 4 hours 
 you could get as good results as you now get in 8 or 10 hours; but 
 would that satisfy the employers ? Would they not still_ require a 
 workman to work as many hours as they could get out of him ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. I will answer that in this way: If you take, as 
 you might say, a census of our people as a whole, and, gentlemen, 
 the people that I am talking for are the people as a whole — the con- 
 sumers I am only talking for the capitalist and the laborer as 
 
 they are a part of the whole; if you take a census of the people of 
 this country as a whole and the things which they want (you will 
 find that one man wants a horse and another wants an automobile, 
 and that people do not like the same kind of clothes), you can 
 determine the energy necessary to produce those things. If, then, 
 you determine the energy-producing power of the individual and 
 multiply it by the number of available workers, excluding the aged 
 and the children, you can determine the length of the working day 
 by dividing the available units of energy into the amount of energy 
 required If you have to spend $100,000 and have 100,000 men, 
 that means a dollar apiece, but if you only have 50,000 men they 
 have got to give $2 apiece. The amount of energy which each 
 
 94078—11 4 
 
50 TAYLOE SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 individual would have to contribute per day could be determined 
 in a similar manner. 
 
 Mr. Pepper. If the number of workers grew sufficiently small, you 
 would have to have a working day of 16 hours in order to supply the 
 wants ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Yes ; if those conditions obtained, but those condi- 
 tions will never obtain. At the present time you have a tremendous 
 army of unemployed. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. I am a structural-iron worker by trade, and your 
 views have been very interesting and, I believe, profitable to me. Ij 
 want you to answer this question : Have you taken into consideration 
 the lost effort on the part of men due to wrong directions on the part 
 of the people who have charge of the work — have you studied that 
 feature of it? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. I have studied it more than anything else. 
 
 Mr. BtrcHANAN. It has been my experience that companies have 
 foremen to direct the men who are not competent, and the men under 
 them know more than they do. 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. This is a wrong condition. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. And yet if those men, who might know more, 
 should venture to suggest or advise the foreman he would become 
 offended and it would probably result in a discharge ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Yes. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. I have seen conditions of that kind. 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. So have I. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. I have quit jobs on account of wrong directions 
 as to the work ; you have to take all of those things into consideration 
 and I want you to explain your experience in regard to that. 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. I will see that each member of the committee gets 
 a copy of these articles which I have published in the Iron Age for 
 the last three months, the title of which is " Business Administration 
 as a Constructive Science." 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. I want to make myself plain. I claim that lack 
 of interest in the work is often due to the fact that the work is not 
 properly directed. 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. You are absolutely right. For that reason my 
 company makes this point, that we begin with the chief executive; 
 we say that if the chief executive selects the proper subordinates all 
 the way down that then the men will receive the instructions which 
 ffiey ought to have, and, furthermore, all obstacles will be taken out 
 ©f their way. And I have also stated to a great many executives, and 
 that is why I do not hesitate to say it here, that 75 per cent of the 
 inefficiency in manufacturing operations is not due to the men at all, 
 but it is due to the fact that there is no correct understanding of the 
 amount of energy which the men can generate, there is not sufficient 
 eare taken to prevent their wasting it, and that is the most interesting 
 phase of the whole situation. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Do you know whether any of the plants that are inter- 
 ested in the application of this scientific management proposition 
 have determined as a policy that when the highest efficiency is se- 
 cured they will so reduce the hours of labor as to afford an oppor- 
 tunity for men who might be out of employment, and thus har- 
 monize the demand for workers with the supply? 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 51 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. I do not think that has been done for the reason 
 that nearly all the efficiency work has been confined to the considera- 
 tion of the productive department of the business alone, and it is for 
 that reason that I have associated myself with a company that con- 
 siders the other departments. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. So far as the thing has proceeded it has been purely a 
 mechanical question of output? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Very largely. 
 
 Mr. Smith. Are you an employer of labor — do you manage men? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. I am chief engineer of the Universal Audit Co., 
 which advises as to the management of men and also as to the man- 
 agement of the business as a whole. 
 
 Mr. Smith. Did you ever recommend that your factory run four 
 hours a day? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. No. 
 
 Mr. Smith. Do you know of that being done ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. No, sir ; we are not ready for it as yet. 
 
 Mr. Vkeeland. You have not furnished us any theory upon which 
 work could be done in four hours a day, because you are leaving out 
 the element of machinery. You take the railroads; the railroads 
 to-day, we will say, are performing the transportation of the country. 
 Now, what part in total energy expended does man take? A very 
 small percentage of it. A reduction in hours from eight to four a 
 day supposes the reduction of energy by machinery? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. No, sir; because 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. The engines keep right on running? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Because you can run an engine 24 hours a day by 
 runing six shifts of men. The engine requires so much human en- 
 ergy for its operation, but it does not all have to come from one man 
 per day. 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. As I have said, you have not furnished, so far, a 
 theory upon which this could be done. 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. That is what I meant. You first have to determine 
 the amount of mechanical energy, and then the amount of human 
 energy to control that. I am now speaking of the human energy, 
 the energy which a man furnishes, and he must furnish energy to 
 control the machinery, and the more machinery we have the bet- 
 ter 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. I do not want to get away from this other ques- 
 tion, the question I first asked you. You say you have investigated 
 it from the point of view of the wrong direction by foremen. Have 
 you investigated from the point of view as to how much loss there 
 is due to worWen Imowing they are doing an extra amount of work 
 for nothing and becoming disgusted with that method of doing work ? 
 In other words, that they get tired and annoyed and do not have the 
 same interest in the work as they would have if they were moving 
 to accomplish what they desired? , ■, ^ -,■ 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. I have never taken it up on ]ust exactly that line, 
 because it did not come to me that way. But what you say is per- 
 fectly true ; I have been in that fix myself and know what you mean. 
 
 Mr. Buchanan. So have I. t j. i • 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. But I have investigated this theory : I found m a 
 plant' in Connecticut, where I investigated 213 operations, that only 
 
52 . TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 14 per cent was performed as the result of specific directions and 
 that only 33 per cent was made the subject of specific, intelligent 
 reports, so I said to the president, "If you are only directing 13 
 per cent of your operations and you are only getting reports from 33 
 per cent, I do not see where your administration comes in." The 
 work which we did for him was to show him how to create a human 
 machine which would take the concentrated information that came 
 from the sales department and transmit it properly through his 
 factory so his men would know what was wanted of them. 
 
 Mr. Hensley. What is your attitude, now, toward this resolution? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Absolutely favorable (I see the time is nearly up; 
 we could talk on this thing at great length; I can not condense the 
 experience of five or six years in a half hour) , but I hope the gentle- 
 men will see to it that they do not stop at investigating the Taylor 
 system, which is only one little bit of detail, but investigate the whole 
 subject of industrial efficiency. This whole problem is a great big one, 
 and you can be of great service to organized labor by working out 
 something that will take in every part of the subject; you have an 
 opportunity to do a big, elegant piece of constructive work by taking 
 some action, if it is possible, which will work out the theory that I 
 have only outlined to you, the determination of correct standards for 
 the protection of both capital and labor, and hence the protection of 
 the people as a whole in such a way that they can be easily applied 
 to everyday business. 
 
 Mr. Gray. You say you have no connection with this Taylor system ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. No, sir. 
 
 Mr. Gray. May I ask you what special interest you have in this 
 present hearing? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. My interest in the proposition as a whole is a matter 
 of public spirit and because of my particular and specific knowledge 
 of facts. 
 
 Mr. Gray. At whose instance are you here before the committee? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. At my own instance, with the approval of my com- 
 pany. We are doing a certain amount of research work at the same 
 time, and we know that it is profitable for our clients. We have no 
 other interest whatever. 
 
 The Chairman. May I ask if you have given any attention to the 
 effect on the human frame of the subdivision of labor as related to 
 the well-known fact, at least well known to those who have performed 
 physical labor themselves, that a change of work is often a rest? 
 What I have in mind is this: The subdivision of labor frequently 
 compels men in the particular subdivision in which they are engaged, 
 to apply the same muscles continuously during their entire day of 
 employment, and whether or not there might not be an increase in 
 the general efficiency, if not in the efficiency of the one man, if the 
 subdivisions of labor were such that there might be a change of the 
 labor during the working- day, so that different muscles would be in 
 play at different periods? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. I can answer that question from my own experi- 
 ence. For a great many years I was actively employed in building 
 and structural work, and when I went into this employment it kept 
 me tied down to my desk; it was brain work and not body work, 
 and my health began to deteriorate. While I found it necessary to 
 stick to mv desk durin<y office hours in order to do mv work, I had 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 53 
 
 to get a change and relaxation out of office hours, and my doctor sug- 
 gested to me to ride horseback, which has done the trick. In order, 
 however, to be of value to my company I must stick to my last 
 while 1 am making shoes. If you can reduce the hours of labor, the 
 man who is engaged in making shoes then has an opportunity to make 
 the change you speak of, not in another kind of work, but in play. 
 I would rather do it that way myself. The other change would dis- 
 organize industrial conditions to a mutual disadvantage. 
 
 The Chairman. If I were to use a pick for eight hours continu- 
 ously, I could not accomplish the full amount of work which I could 
 accomplish in eight hours' working with a pick if there was a rest 
 between ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Yes, sir ; that is true. 
 
 The Chairman. If I were to work for an hour or two with a pick 
 and then I should have a half hour with a drill and an hour with a 
 shovel and a half hour with a sledge hammer and then should go 
 back again to the pick, my efficiency for the next hour or so with the 
 pick would be greater than it would be during that same period of 
 the day if I had kept on continuously with the pick. What I wanted 
 to find out was whether or not you had given any attention as to the 
 effect of the subdivision of labor upon workmen in that way ? 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. That is more a physiological question, but your 
 theory is perfectly sound, in my judgment, because you are parallel- 
 ing the rotation of crops by the farmer, and I can not see any objec- 
 tion to taking men in a gang and rotating them so that if you have 
 four operations each performs all of the four consecutively. I think 
 it would be good. I do not see any objection to it. In some places 
 I think it is sometimes done in a rough way. 
 
 The Chairman. The time has come when we must adjourn. I 
 would like to inquire if you have brought out all you desire or if 
 you would like to come before the committee again? 
 
 Mr. Vreeland. I would suggest that we can give the gentle- 
 man permission to extend his remarks before the committee, if he 
 desires to do so, and it can be printed in the hearing. 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. I thank you. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. Please answer this question in doing so [handing Mr. 
 Stimpson question]. 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. Yes, sir. I have given to your chairman a couple 
 of articles which may be of interest to the committee. The only 
 thing I want to ask of the committee is that you do not simply 
 turn this investigation into a little bit of an investigation of the 
 Taylor system, but take it up from every point of view, and, if 
 possible, enlarge the scope and determine the whole proposition of 
 industrial efficiency, and make a great big elegant constructive piece 
 of work. There are a great many good things about Mr. Taylor's 
 system, but I think that the Government is the only one which can 
 determine the standard independently and scientifically. I do not 
 think it should be left to either side. I thank you very much. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. If we should attempt to get the testimony of the work- 
 men under this system, would their jobs be perfectly safe? 
 
 Mr Stimpson. You would have to ask the employers. I should 
 think' they would be, but you know perfectly well what the attitude 
 is where men have been called on for military service. I will say 
 this- I have found nearly as much opposition, in talking with a 
 
54 TAYLOE SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 great many firms, among the employers, as among the men, and! 
 will also make this statement, that it is due to exactly the same cause, 
 that human nature does not like to be taught. 
 
 Mr. Lewis. There is no doubt about that. 
 
 Mr. Stimpson. The boot leg is just as long on one leg as on the 
 other, and I have had just as difficult arguments with the one side 
 as with the other, so I am strictly impartial. 
 
 (Thereupon the committee adjourned.) 
 
 Question by Mr. Lewis (submitted in writing). What is the effect upon an 
 Individual workman wbo has been trained to an intense degree as a specialist 
 and who has been deprived of an opportunity to perform more than one 
 operation ? 
 
 Answer by Mr. Stimpson. If I understand the question correctly, I think 
 such a case would be extremely exceptional. Take the case of any machine 
 tool ; the work Itself would vary to a very large degree usually. Standard 
 Instructions would have to be completed for handling each kind of product. 
 It is believed to be true, however, when a man accustomed to following 
 closely clear, explicit directions undertakes work for which no such directions 
 have been formulated, that he has acquired habits of swiftness and certainty 
 In his physical movements and In his mental grasp of the conditions which 
 cause him to perform this new work with much more advantage than a man 
 who has been accustomed to the looser methods of his own personal devising. 
 
 In accordance with the suggestion of Mr. Vreeland that Mr. Stimpson be 
 given permission to extend his remarks in writing, the same to be Included 
 in the printed report of the hearing, the following articles written by Mr. 
 Stimpson were presented: 
 
 (1) "Business administration as a constructive science." (Reprinted from 
 the Iron Age, New York, of Jan. 26, 1911.) 
 
 (2) " Business administration as a constructive science." (Reprinted, with 
 an editorial, from the Iron Age, New York, of Mar. 16, 1911.) 
 
 (3) "Business administration as a constructive science." (Reprinted from 
 the Iron Age, New York, of Mar. 23, 1911.) 
 
 (4) "The economics of eflSclency." (Manuscript.) 
 
 (5) "The Instability of money." (Manuscript.) 
 
 Business Administeation as a Constkuctive Science — Operative Methods 
 Well Developed, but Directive Methods Still Lack Much — The Usk of 
 Standards and Records. 
 
 [By H. F. Stimpson, chief engineer. Universal Audit Co., Singer Building, New York. 
 Reprinted from tlie Iron Age, Jan. 26, 1911.] 
 
 The object of civilization, physically speaking, is to provide the individual 
 with a sufficient quantity of such of Its products as he may desire. Let us see 
 why this is not done. 
 
 We have an abundance of raw material or of productive soil ; our mines are 
 not exhausted, nor is our soil cultivated to the ultimate degree of possibility. 
 We have an abundance of equipment ; the trade journals tell us that the tool 
 manufacturers are not as busy as they might be. 
 
 We have an abundance of labor or the material from which it can be de- 
 veloped. There are always many persons who desire to work, yet who find 
 no opportunity for doing so. There are many others who are physically capable 
 of working, but who do not desire to work. Many of these are supported by 
 the worker in some form of restrictive institution. These same workers curi- 
 
lAYLOE SYSTEJM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 55 
 
 ously, seem to prefer to support these people at the cost of added effort oa 
 their own part rather than to allow those so supported to earn their own living. 
 We have no lack of skilled methods for the operation of equipment upon the 
 material. These have been supplied to us in abundance as the result of study 
 and experiment, both by direct workers and, later, after being formulated, by 
 our technical schools. 
 
 TBAINED ADMINISTBATOES LACKING. 
 
 Where then is the lack? I assert that it is in the supply of trained adminis- 
 trators in sufficient quantity to combine all of the material, equipment, and 
 labor which are necessary for the production of the amount of the things which 
 we need. 
 
 The reasons for this shortage are : First, in contradiction to the plain teach- 
 ings of our experience in every other line, we hold to the absurd doctrine that 
 a manager is born, but can not be trained ; hence, second, our system of educa- 
 tion provides for instruction in the management of things and not of men. 
 
 Management or administration is an exact and constructive science which 
 can be as well formulated and taught, without reference to the business ta 
 which it is to be applied, as can the science of mechanics. We are beginning 
 to see that scientific management will pay when applied directly to the worker 
 at the bench. It is even more profitable when applied to every individual 
 through whom the efforts of the worker at the bench are directed. This science 
 is being formulated to-day by men who have been studying it for years. They 
 are the only source from which immediate relief can be secured ; but the pro- 
 fessional educator should bestir himself in the remodeling of the present an- 
 tiquated methods, so as to meet the new demand and in order that coming 
 generations may receive the Instruction which their forefathers were unable t9 
 procure. 
 
 STANDAEDIZING AS LAKGE CORPORATIONS WERE FORMED. 
 
 The business organization known as a corporation is as necessary and logical 
 a resultant of the development of our civilization as are the uses of electricity. 
 With the increase in the volume of ascertained fact it has been found impossible 
 for any one man to acquire a sufficient knowledge of all the phases of a subject 
 by personal contact therewith to draw entirely comprehensive conclusions re- 
 garding it. For this reason the collaboration of many individuals becomes 
 necessary In the conduct of any business, and the ability to coordinate and 
 direct the efforts of these individuals is as much a science as is the work of 
 any one of them, and it is entirely distinct therefrom. The effort of this 
 article will be to show that it is constructive in its character. 
 
 About 1899, when the loose federations of business firms known as trusts 
 began to crystallize into giant corporations having complete ownership and 
 operating from central points, it became apparent that while the ultimate power 
 was being focused in fewer hands the resulting change in the organization, 
 which became necessary in order to properly connect the executive with the 
 worker, was one of kind rather than of quantity. Each of the unit businesses 
 before these combinations took place had its individual methods and peculiarities, 
 and so long as these affected itself only, no inconvenience resulted. Subse- 
 quently it became essential that all the units should adopt one single method 
 of performing any common act. This Involved a decision as to the merits of 
 the different methods, and some sort of a standard became a necessary pre- 
 requisite to such a decision. Mere whim or personal opinion had to stand the 
 fire of conflicting opinion, and there was a search for a basis of sound logic 
 upon which to erect these standards. 
 
 POSSIBILITIES, NOT RECORDS, THE STANDARD OF EFFORT. 
 
 The determination of these standards, furthermore, necessitated a radical 
 departure from previous habits of thought. This departure as yet has been 
 completely made in only a few cases. The decisions necessary to the conduct 
 of business up to that time had generally been based upon a reflective con- 
 sideration of the historical records of accomplishments rather than upon a 
 constructive consideration of future possibilities. Effort, while energetic, was 
 then and is now largely directed toward the surpassing of previous achievements 
 rather than toward the attainment of a definite result. It was not realized. 
 
56 TAYLOR SYSTEM OP SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 apparently, that many data which already existed as to the possibilities within 
 our power were but very slightly utilized. Take the case of labor : The amount 
 of " a fair day's work " has been the subject of endless discussion, when it is 
 really a nlatter of comparatively simple, though rather voluminous, calculation. 
 Frantic guesses were and are made both by employer and employee as to its 
 amount, and many bitter battles have been fought in consequence. Yet a day's 
 work for a normal ni.'in can be determined with mathematical exactness, and the 
 variations due to individual characteristics can be equitably covered by a 
 logical application of the piecework or the task and bonus systems. 
 
 DIEECTIVE METHODS. 
 
 In any body of men commonly engaged in organized effort the number and 
 type of those directing the work has a direct relation to the volume and type 
 of effort. A director needs to know, not all that the one directed already 
 knows, but rather that which he does not know. Duplication of knowledge is 
 highly uneconomical and is one of our material failings. This arises from 
 the day of small things, when the master stood at the workman's elbow ready 
 and able to take the tools and give him a direct and practical illustration of 
 proper methods if it became necessary. This function is now performed by 
 a demonstrator who is not even a foreman, bat is purely an adviser. The 
 higher processes of the directive function, whereby equipment and material are 
 combined in the execution of received orders, are not now exercised directly 
 as of old, but through the medium of a number of individuals which is, as has 
 been said, in direct proportion to the volume and kind of the desired perform- 
 ance. The large employer of to-day has often allowed his direct knowledge of 
 productive methods to diminish without correspondingly increasing his knowl- 
 edge of directive methods and thereby has directly lowered the efficiency of his 
 whole organization. 
 
 No one man in the space of life allotted to him for preparatory work can 
 assimilate complete knowledge of all the functions of a business. Some one 
 man in the organization mvist, however, carry all of the responsibility. Prom 
 this combination of conditions arises the necessity for individuals termed 
 " staff assistants," who advise the executor or administrator along their especial 
 lines in the performance of his duties. The allocation of these men and the 
 definition of their duties and responsibilities has also been a subject of much 
 discussion. Yet here again it is possible to determine with almost absolute 
 accuracy the number and character of these men and their relation to the other 
 members of the organization. 
 
 THE PLACE OF COST ACCOUNTING. 
 
 Having secured and used competent assistance in the determination of reliable 
 standards as a guide in the issuance of his direction, the administrator next 
 needs accurate records of the resulting performances, from which by comparison 
 with the predetermined standards, he can ascertain the efficiency or inefficiency 
 of his practice. This- is the true function of cost accounting and much mis- 
 apprehension commonly exists in relation thereto. A record in itself is of but 
 comparatively little value and can not become so without the corresponding 
 standard. The initial records of operations must be, so far as possible, in prime 
 or indivisible terms. Combinations can be made later. The methods used should 
 be such as will completely convey the necessary information to every member 
 cf the organization from the top to the bottom, and in such shape that it shall 
 correspond to the predetermined standards. The civil engineer traces the 
 stresses set up in each member of a bridge or other framed structure by each 
 pound of dead or live load on its way to the ground underlying the foundations. 
 In like manner the trained accountant traces every bit of data in its course 
 to the successive and ultimate persons interested thereto. 
 
 THE SCIENCE OF ADMINISTRATION APPLIED. 
 
 The reason which obtains in the conduct of any business for the collaboration 
 of individuals of varymg experience, as given at the opening of this article 
 applies with equal force to the conduct of the enterprise of advising business 
 men in the application of the science of administration. The grasp of the p»ob- 
 Jem must be complete in order to insure success. Piecemeal methods are ex- 
 ceedingly dangerous. It is perhaps a necessary phase of evolution In this line 
 
TAYLOE SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 57 
 
 that many persons, actuated by the highest motives, should have endeavored 
 and are now endeavoring to remedy the various defects In our business methods 
 Whose existence is becoming more and more apparent every day. They have 
 attacked defects in sales methods, cost accounting, and shop engineering and 
 have produced results which were good so far as they went, but these efforts 
 nave railed to be as completely or as permanently useful as might have been 
 the case had they been properly correlated and adjusted to each other. This 
 result, as in any other line of work, and for the same reasons, can only be 
 brought about by a properly designed organization embracing the necessary 
 individual experience, operating under competent direction and, therefore, able 
 to undertake the analysis of all details of administration, from the charter of 
 the corporation, or its equivalent, to the shipping platform, and frcm one side 
 of the business to the other. Such facilities are now at the disposal of business 
 men who are willing to put personal prejudice and policies aside and get down 
 to logical deductions based on ascertained facts. When this becomes the com- 
 mon practice and it is realized that administration Is a science which can be 
 as well formulated and taught, without regard to the business in which it is 
 to be employed, as can the science of mechanics, our educational methods will 
 be Improved accordingly, the era of cut-and-dry methods will end, and the 
 ensuing extravagant use of our resources will gradually pass into history. 
 
 [Reprinted from the Iron Age, Mar. 16, 1911.] 
 EFFICIENCY AND ITS BROADER APPLICATION. 
 
 The voluminous discussion of greater efficiency as the thing most needful in 
 our industries to-day has dealt with it almost entirely as applied to production. 
 The analysis of manual and machine operations, with a view to the elimina- 
 tion of superfluous motions by the workman and for the use of the machine in 
 the most effective way, has been put forward as a chief feature of the new 
 campaign. Much has been said also concerning functional foremanship as an 
 essential to Intensive production. The tendency has been to concentrate expert 
 study upon the problems of the operating department, particularly on the 
 devising of means of increasing the output of men and machines, with larger 
 earnings to the workman for his cooperation in the plan. 
 
 It is pointed out in the article on another page, discussing " Business admin- 
 istration as a constructive science," that emphasis has been thus put upon the 
 manufacturing department as the field of administrative effort, almost to the 
 Ignoring of the other highly important coordinate branches of industrial organi- 
 zation, as selling, purchasing, and financing. Management has been so often 
 Interpreted as the managing of men employed in the manufacturing processes 
 that its far broader scope has been missed. Administration as the science of 
 all the forms of power employed in business is found to be vastly more than 
 finding ways of speeding up the human machine and every other form of power 
 employed in turning out product. 
 
 Practical examples of the mistake of putting operating experience in the 
 saddle will come readily to mind. The economies strained after in the pro- 
 duction department are often minute. In steel manufacture they are fre- 
 quently measured In cents per ton of product. Yet mistakes in cost finding, in 
 the price at which product is sold, in the price paid for materials, or in credit 
 improperly extended may often neutralize all that the best equipped manu- 
 facturing department has accomplished in lowering the unit of production cost. 
 President Farrell, of the United States Steel Corporation, said in his paper at 
 the New York meeting of the American Iron and Steel Institute last week : 
 
 " Without any desire to belittle the practical value and importance of effect- 
 ing a saving in cost of producton, however small, it has always seemed par- 
 ticularly hard upon the men who have accomplished what may appear as an 
 Insignificant reduction of the previous month's costs of producing pig iron or 
 Ingots or wire rods, to have this saving in mill costs dissipated by the sales 
 department ' quietly meeting the market ' with a reduction of $1 or $2 per ton 
 at the first sign of any cloud on the commercial horizon. Good salesmanship 
 and sound business principles In the conduct of the selling of iron and steel are 
 just as essential and vital to the prosperity and continued success of the 
 industry as low costs and up-to-date machinery and manufacturing practice." 
 
58 TAYLOE SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 While Mr. Farrell's argument was intended to bear directly on tlie policy of 
 cooperation in the selling departments of the large steel companies, it illustrates 
 well how. far the study of operating problems falls short of meeting the de- 
 mands of successful business administration. It is probably true, so far as the 
 steel industry is concerned, that what is commonly thought of as its engineering 
 side — the field of economical production — has been more highly developed in 
 the past 20 years than any other department. With all the boasted economies 
 in administration, due to consolidation in the steel trade, it is a question if 
 the selling side of the United States Steel Corporation, for example, with its 
 duplication of organizations along product lines, does not offer opportunities 
 for savings that have been missed in the strain to shade mill cost sheet figures. 
 
 What is here said of the steel industry is merely illustrative; in other form 
 it may be applied to other industries. So much has been made of the wage 
 issue in recent years that it is not surprising that the outlay for work done in 
 the manufacture of product has been a special challenge to efficiency engineers. 
 Works management and production systems, moreover, were lines of least 
 resistance; the study to improve them did not involve the status of individuals 
 " higher up." Naturally, the advance of the efficiency engineer upon the 
 broader problems of administration, in which the organization of a business as 
 a whole comes under review, will be much more difficult. 
 
 In a recent article in these columns' I endeavored to show that administra- 
 tion may be considered as an exact science, having its own peculiar formulae, 
 which can be applied to any line of business as well as the science of applied 
 mechanics or that of arithmetic. The object of this article is to correct a 
 somewhat common misapprehension as to the real purpose for which this 
 science is employed. 
 
 Interviews with prominent men in many of the larger cities of the United 
 States have furnished me with abundant evidence that the purpose of adminis- 
 tration is commonly believed to be the direct control of physical force, either 
 human, animal, or mechanical. This belief, however, does not seem to be 
 warranted by the facts. 
 
 MENTAL FORCE AND PI-ITSICAL FORCE. 
 
 Man differs from an animal or a machine in that he possesses a mental 
 force through which he can direct not only his own physical force and that of 
 other men, together with that of animals and machines, but by which also 
 he can control the mental force of other men and through them the physical 
 forces which they may control or direct. 
 
 If such are the facts, it is even of more importance that we should under- 
 stand the laws governing the control and direction of this mental force than 
 the laws regarding physical force. That such are the facts may be inferred 
 from the following : 
 
 1. Man is dependent on commodities for both existence and pleasure. 
 
 2. A commodity is material to which force has been applied with such results 
 as to fit it for the use of man. 
 
 3. Force may be divided into two types: (a) Physical force, which is ap- 
 plied directly to the material and may be of either animal or mechanical 
 origin; (6) mental force, by which the physical force of men, animals, or 
 machines Is either controlled or directed. 
 
 4. Mental force is a prerequisite to the intelligent use of physical force 
 toward a given end. 
 
 5. Mental force is one of the peculiar possessions of man which distinguish 
 him from animals. 
 
 C. The real value of a commodity among men is, then, proportionate to the 
 amount of mental force, even more than to the amount of physical force, 
 which has entered into its production. Real commerce, therefore, is to be 
 found in the exchange of mental force far more than of physical force, or of 
 the commodities produced by force, or even of money, which is not a force at 
 all but a mere token of force. 
 
 7. Mental force is an inherent possession of man from birth, and is, there- 
 fore, his prime trading capital. 
 
 iThc Iron Age, Jan. 26, 1911, p. 248. 
 
TAYLOU SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 59 
 
 8. Education develops but does not create mental force. 
 
 It is easy enough to say that the force produced by falling water or that 
 produced by animals working in a treadmill is due to the action of gravity and 
 that the force produced by the utilization of steam is due to the liberation 
 and transformation of the energy which the sun long since stored up in coal or 
 other fuel. But how much do we really know about it after all? What we 
 really know the most about is not the origin of the force but what it will do 
 under given conditions. If, then, we consider mental force as of unknown 
 origin and are content, for the present, with observing its effects under given 
 conditions, may we not, by analogical reasoning, rob it of some of its mysteries 
 and predict its behavior with somewhat reasonable certainty? 
 
 MBASTJKEMENT OF FOBOE. 
 
 We have demonstrated above that mental force controls physical force, and 
 we know that — • 
 
 9. Physical force can be and now is measured by a compound unit composed 
 of distance, weight, and time, commonly known as a horsepower. 
 
 10. The amount of physical force which a normal man can generate daily 
 is now known with some degree of certainty and is expressed in units known 
 as man power, having a definite relation to a horsepower. 
 
 11. It is therefore possible to determine the amount of physical force which 
 a man can physically control as well as that which he can generate. 
 
 12. Either of these may be the measure of a " fair day's work " according 
 to conditions. 
 
 13. Until the units by which mental force can be measured are discovered 
 we may measure it by the units of physical force controlled or directed by the 
 mental force. 
 
 14. It should be possible to determine, on this basis, the amount of a fair 
 day's mental work. 
 
 APPORTIONMENT OF PHYSICAI^ FOKCE. 
 
 Let us now consider the use of physical force. We already determine, with 
 a fair degree of certainty, the amount of force which must be imparted to the 
 machine by its individual motor, and we regulate the size and capacity of the 
 feed wires, cables, generator, engine, throttle valve, and boilers accordmgly. 
 We also determine the amount of coal, according to its richness m thermal 
 units, which will be necessary as being, humanly speaking, the prime source 
 of the desired force. The knowledge by which we are enabled to do these 
 things has been obtained by specialists through study and experiment, and 
 thev have placed their discoveries at the disposal of all mankind. By sucn 
 means we are enabled to determine either the number of machines which a 
 given amount of coal will operate or the amount of coal and other things which 
 are necessary to the operation of a given numbor of machines. 
 
 The physical force of the human body is comparable to the force of an 
 uiert machine: and while we have some information on the subject it is not 
 Ts defi^Ue or as extensive as it should or might be. Hence the frequent and 
 bitterstrife between capital and labor over the amount of a "fair day's work. 
 It is true that certain experiments have shown that a man power _ is about 
 one tenth of a horsepower, but what we sorely need is an exhaustive i^vestiga- 
 tk>n into the relation which should exist between the periods of rest and 
 relaxation for dfffernet volumes of load, In order that they may be so adjusted 
 to the predetermination of industrial operations that the maximum of work 
 Say be oMained without exceeding the elastic limit of the worker any more 
 than in the case of inert machinery. 
 
 THE HIGH COST OF MAN POWER. 
 
 The reason why this investigation has been neglected, is, perhaps our monu- 
 ,v,I^ni fail, re to grasp the tremendous excess of the cost of human over 
 mental /aili-re }« S^dfty electric power companies will quote prices 
 
 """'^nSt^ hour of from Wcente per klKt hour for as little as 200 kllo- 
 per kilowatt hour or lyom xo ce v kilowatt hour for as much as 
 
 ^^-^ ^?^' Ff^oT^LZlm Ind I have known current to be bought for 
 ^'^..^i'ns 2 cents per kiCatt hour in very large quantities. If a man power 
 ^^ ^i"= hPPn stTted by a rKOgnized engineering authority, is about one-tenth 
 0? a Lrsepower then, on the basis that a horsepower is seven-eighths of a 
 
60 TAYLOE SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 kilowatt, and that labor is paid 15 cents per hour, human physical force is 
 from 16.5 to 82.5 times as expensive as electromotive force — the force in each 
 case being purchased from the generator. 
 
 Consider the elaborate investigations which are made into questions of 
 mechanical and electrical engineering; the money and effort put into educa- 
 tional institutions for the education of the young along these lines ; the struggle 
 to produce mechanical refinements and power-saving devices ; the tests of coal 
 and other fuels ; the gauges for measuring the use of power — and then consider 
 the great, lack of consideration, along anything like parallel lines, of the 
 economical use of human power, each unit of which costs so many more of our 
 dear American dollars, which we are supposed to chase so madly. 
 
 THE WASTE OP SKILLED MAN POWEB. 
 
 In our employment of " unskilled " labor — the man who sweeps the street 
 or office, the porter in the store or terminal, the roustabout in the factory 
 yard or on the wharf — we are madly extravagant, but even more so in the 
 case of skilled abor, which costs several times as much. And the consumer 
 pays the bill. Yet the efficiency engineer, who has discovered this waste and 
 Is able and ready to remedy it, is the scorn and the jest of the average manager 
 from Maine to Frisco; and even the laborer, who is more to be excused, not 
 understanding the matter correctly, does not always recognize him as the 
 friend he really is to all men. The most efficient way to utilize the physical 
 strength of man is to employ it in the control of machinery by which the work 
 is actually performed, rather than in the actual manipulation of the tool itself. 
 The loconiotive engineer, through his valves and levers, controls a far greater 
 amount of force than he can personally generate, and in such cases any lack of 
 efficiency is all the more manifest and deplorable. 
 
 APPOHTIONMBNT OF MENTAL FORCE. 
 
 Passing now to the control of the mental force, let us compare the mind of 
 the worker to the individual motor on the machine tool ; the foremen to the 
 feed wires; the superintendents to the feed cables; the managers, and vice 
 presidents to the generator and engine; the general manager to the engineer; 
 the board of directors to the boilers, where the latent force of the stockholders, 
 who in turn correspond to the coal, is collected and transformed. Is it not 
 reasonable to take the ground that, in the transmission of this force, the same 
 fundamental principles may be made applicable as in the handling of any other 
 force? May we not measure the amount of mental force expended by the 
 amount of physical force controlled, as in the case of the foremen ; or the amount 
 directed, as in the case of the higher official, who deals with subadministrators 
 only? Must we not secure proper proportions between the administrators and 
 the demands upon them, as' well as proper connections between them through 
 which this force may flow? Must we not determine proper standards for their 
 performances and obtain proper records of the results which they produce? 
 Must we not adequately insulate the lines over which this force is transmitted 
 and guard against cross connections and short circuits, which tend to produce 
 waste and confusion? And should, we not also introduce intensifying forces 
 at the proper points, even as oxygen is introduced into a flame with a blow- 
 pipe, in the shape of specialists who have special knowledge of certain subjects 
 which can only be attained by long and special study? All these things would 
 appear to be reasonable assumptions in the light of our experience with more 
 tangible matters. 
 
 PEODtrCTION ONLY ONE FIELD OF APPLICATION. 
 
 • From bi5th the previous article and the foffegoing it may have been errone- 
 ously inferred that this conception of administration as the science of the con- 
 trol of power, both mental and physical, is of value In connection with only one 
 certain department of a business variously designated as the producing, operat- 
 ing, or manufacturing department, and that the other departments— those con- 
 cerned in selling, financing, etc. — are controlled along other lines. 
 
 This is one of two ideas which are tremendous stumbling blocks in the way 
 of progress. In every line of effort it is the mental force of those who are 
 behind the movement which not only energizes those at the head of the active 
 operations, but is by them so transmitted and directed as to energize all whom 
 they control or direct. This is the force that "gets things done." Money Is 
 not itself, as said above, any kind or type of force. 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 61 
 
 COORDINATE DIVISIONS OP BUSINESS. 
 
 The other idea which is a stumbling block is that one of the fundamental 
 divisions of a business is superior to or inferior to another. Unless a logical 
 and true balance is preserved among these the development of the business will 
 be one-sided, resulting in maladministration. Many businesses are far less 
 successful than they might be because the manager has gained his experience 
 largely in one or two divisions and thus has been unable to acquire a compre- 
 hensive grasp of the business as a whole. 
 
 We need men who are trained chiefly in the fundamentals of administration 
 and supplementarily In the details of all of the divisions. It is only because 
 administration has not been and as yet is not generally recognized as a science 
 in itself that men have failed to recognize its dignity and importance ; have 
 been content with this one-sided training and have given the first place in 
 their minds and attention to one of the subdivisions of a business rather than 
 to the business as a whole. No man can be a good general manager because 
 he Is an exceptionally good financier, salesman, or producer. If he gains 
 eminence^ It will be in spite of this fact. It is the ability to surround oneself 
 with able men in the different lines; to give directions as to what is desired 
 In such a manner as properly to supplement the information at present pos- 
 sessed by the subordinates ; to determine proper standards for performance ; to 
 secure proper records of achievements and to judge departmental results 
 broadly and equitably from a comparison of these that insures success. 
 
 The field of application of the science of administration, or the direct control 
 of mental force, and through it of physical force, lies, therefore, in the direc- 
 tion of the business as a whole, and it must be so applied in order to secure the 
 best results. If, then, we are dealing with a very real, if somewhat intangible, 
 force and one which is amenable to much the same formulae as are other 
 forces with which we deal more complacently, though we know but little more 
 about them, may it not be possible that men who have made a long study of 
 this subject are better able to devise effective means for the utilization of this 
 force than those who have not approached the subject from this point of view? 
 Is it not even more important that the control of this mighty force, over and 
 above all lesser forces, should be intrusted to those men who have demon- 
 strated, when dealing with other matters, their right to the title of engineer, 
 who has been defined as one who " controls the forces of nature for the use 
 and convenience of man? " 
 
 [Reprinted from the Iron Age, Mar. 23, 1911.] 
 
 [Note. — A series of three articles. The first appeared In the Iron Age of Jan. 26, 1911, 
 p. 248 ; the second in the Iron Age of Mar. 16, p. 662.] 
 
 The old proverb says: '"First catch your hare; then cook it." So, in consid- 
 ering the application of the science of administration to business, we must first 
 select the business itself. This will depend upon various things — the personal 
 tastes experience, and abilities of the individual, the location, the conditions of 
 supply and demand, etc. The individual will find, as at all future stages of 
 the proceedings, that while he can and should get the advice of many, he can 
 not delegate the responsibility of digesting and applying the advice. Having 
 carefully considered various lines of business in the light of the above, and 
 having settled upon some line as the most suitable one for him under the circum- 
 stances the prospective business man will find that this one decision, together 
 with the circumstances in connection with it and him, has practically estab- 
 lished a foundation from which all future action must be developed and with 
 which it must be in harmony. ., ^ ,, ., ^ ^ u 
 
 Assuming that the intention is to manufacture, a unit of the product must be 
 minutely separated into its prime or indivisible factors as to material, form, 
 and process This reveals the physical operations which are necessary for its 
 nroduction 'and the operations determine the apparatus which must be em- 
 ployed to perform them, each successive step being a logical development from 
 that preceding it. 
 
 THE PEODUCTION OF FORCE. 
 
 At this point we are confronted with the problem of producing the force by 
 wWch this apparatus is energized, and, as has been seen in the foregoing article, 
 il is of two principal types-physical, which may be either of mechanical or 
 animal origin, and mental. 
 
62 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 The physical force must be determined, both as to character and quality, and 
 traced back to its origin, which may be in coal or other fuel, in the rushing 
 stream, in the wind, or in an animal, and the necessary apparatus for transmit- 
 ting, controlling, and generating it must then be determined. Each unit of me- 
 chanical force and of animal force, except that of human origin, requires human 
 physical force to control it and human mental force to direct it ; so that we must 
 not only determine the quantities of these, but trace the mental force bacis: to its 
 point of origin in the minds of the owners of the business and determine the 
 necessary means for its transmission, control, and generation. 
 
 RELATION OF DEPARTMENTS. 
 
 It is at this time that we discover the relations which exist between the pro- 
 ducing, selling, financing, and other divisions of a business and their natural 
 and logical sequence, this sequence being one of chronology rather than of 
 intrinsic importance. It is only when these relations and sequences are prop- 
 erly adjusted that the ultimate measure of success can be achieved. Because 
 the possibilities resulting from such an adjustment are realized or even Lmag- 
 but with their small numbers and low efficiency. As the case, usually presents 
 One hears much complaint regarding the burden imposed by the large number 
 of so-called " nonproducers." The real trouble is not with their large numbers, 
 but with their small numbers and low efficiency. As the case usually presents 
 itself, most of the administrators are simply "human telephones," who merely 
 transmit descriptions of desired results. The formulation of the methods by 
 which these results are to be obtained is largely in the hands of the actual 
 workers or their immediate supervisors. This is all wrong. A number of 
 comparatively poorly trained workers ably directed will be more efficient than 
 an equal number of skilled workers poorly directed. If, then, in any concrete 
 instance, we consider the training of the workers as a fixed quantity for the 
 time being, it is obvious that, in order to bring about the most immediate im- 
 provement, the primary efCort in that direction should be exerted by the directors 
 or administrators of the enterprise. 
 
 OWNERS AND MANAGERS. 
 
 At this point consideration must be given to the dual character, seldom real- 
 ized to the fullest extent, of organizations. First, we have the owning element, 
 which may be either one or more individuals. This element possesses and exer- 
 cises the right of decision as to what things are to be done. Second, we have 
 the operating element, always composed of many individuals of varying degrees 
 of authority and responsibility, which does or should possess and exercise the 
 right to decide how things are to be done. 
 
 The science of administration is manifestly applicable almost solely to the 
 second element; and the point of application should, therefore, be at its head, 
 which is also the point of contact with the first element. This point of contact 
 is usually personified by the individual acting as president and general manager. 
 He is the " dividend maker " for the business, and is, therefore, presumably 
 open to every influence which will legitimately increase their volume. But 
 because, as has been said in the last article, the general manager is frequently 
 without broad administrative training, but has attained his position through 
 marked ability in one of the divisions of a business, he is so bound up in such 
 division that he sacrifices, or at least is indiflferent to, the interest of the other 
 divisions. Hence, when the dividends become impaired, the first element often 
 finds itself obliged to decide that one of the things to be done is the application 
 to the business of the services of a specialist, in order to determine what must 
 be done to restore the destroyed balance between the divisions. This condition 
 Is always to be deplored, because the man who should eagerly receive, assimilate, 
 and act upon the advice so tendered, makes its reception needlessly difficult. 
 When, however, the application is made at a point much further down the line, 
 or when the specialist is unable to cover the entire field, an infinitely worse 
 condition Is created. This is the reason why many specialists in betterment 
 lines, where work is excellent so far as it goes, are unable to produce as great 
 or as lasting benefit as they and their clients desire. The different phases of 
 a business are so interwoven that it is almost impossible to improve one 
 division without coming in contact with the. others. Because it is far more 
 difficult to coordinate the work of several specialists than to do the work of 
 any of them, such coordination is generally far beyond the client's ability, and 
 therefore, what should be sought is the advice of an aggregation of specialists, 
 ■coordinated under a competent head. 
 
TAYLOK SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 63 
 
 PLANNING OF ORGANIZATIONS. 
 
 In the design of a building the engineer begins witb the arrangement of the 
 features for which it is necessary to make iirovisiou in the first story of the 
 structure. Subsequently he determines the necessity for and arrangements of 
 succeeding stories until all the accommodations required have been planned for. 
 The engineer then retraces his path, working downward from the roof to the 
 foundations because the supports in each story must carry the accumulated 
 weight of the part of the building which lies above, and designs the structural 
 work accordingly. He then goes over the work a third time, and actually 
 constructs the building from the ground up. 
 
 In like manner an organization must be studied : First, the workers neces- 
 sary for the operation; second, the various grades of supervisors and directors, 
 gradually decreasing in number with increase in rank, until the apex is readied. 
 Means for the formulation and transmission of directions (not merely the 
 telephoning of orders) as to performance, including the necessary standards 
 from the chief administrative officer down to the lowest employee, must then be 
 devised. The next step is the provision of means for the collection and trans- 
 mission of accurate records of actual performances, from the lowest worker 
 to the chief executive, in such a manner as to correspond exactly with the 
 standards accompanying the directions. This will facilitate the making of the 
 comparisons which are essential to the efficient conduct of the business. 
 
 STANDARDS AND RECORDS. 
 
 From this analysis we perceive a curious thing which has taken place in the 
 development of most lines of business — namely, that cost and other records 
 were developed before standards. Their development, therefore, has been 
 largely empirical rather than logical. Hence many elaborate systems have 
 failed to produce satisfactory results. This trend of effort, moreover, has had 
 the efCect of causing business men to endeavor to get the information from one 
 element which can only be obtained from a comparison of two elements. It has 
 also blinded their eyes to the omission of the determination of standards from 
 its proper place in the sequence, which is before the records. 
 
 In this connection another circumstance, previously alluded to, is of interest. 
 The employer, being pushed further and further away from the worker by the 
 size of the business, has decreased in the ability to give clear directions as to 
 the desired performances without making provision for the supplementing of 
 his ability in this respect. His directions, acquired by experience, having been 
 given orally, he does not realize that they are no longer given. Because he has 
 generally recruited his administrative assistants from the clerical ranks these 
 directions are less and less frequently supplied, and the workers are forced 
 more and more to depend on their own initiative. The result is to-day that the 
 majority of information as to proper methods is possessed by the workers 
 rather than by the administrators or executives. This information is at pres- 
 ent largely in the nature of transmitted legend and grows more and more vague 
 with each generation. Unless scientific men are not only allowed but urged 
 to take up the study of the productive methods for the operation of human 
 minds and hands, as well as the operations of machinery, we shall surely and 
 certainly come to a standstill. We know very httle to-day about the possi- 
 bilities of human physical effort and next to nothing about mental effort. 
 
 WORK OF THE SPECIALIST. 
 
 When the business man, therefore, decides to avail himself of the services of 
 an association of specialists in the development of his business he should give 
 them his full confidence and cooperation. This should be warranted by his 
 Sous investigation of their standing. Every facility should then be afforded 
 for a ttiorough examination of the business as a whole They should first mal^ 
 Hn exMt statement by text and charts of the conditions encountered From 
 ?his should be evolved a comprehensive plan of the remodeled organization and 
 Its methods of operation. This should be earnestly studied by the client m con- 
 
 '''when ttfplanlfal'been perfected and the client is thoroughly conversant 
 .n^tn harmony therewith, the work of installation may begin. It will gener- 
 «nv be S that the administrators and supervisors are far too few to iiandle 
 the work properly,. No new man should be brought in from the outside if any 
 
64 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 present employee can be developed to fit tlie demands. It is not necessary to 
 wait for tlie full development of tlie subject matter of tlie directions and rec- 
 ords before filling up tbe gaps in and realigning the organization, providing the 
 proper lines of transmission have been worked out. Direct improvement in a 
 considerable measure can be secured from a correctly apportioned organization, 
 even if some of the members are rather new to their duties. It is manifest that 
 in an electric installation all the units of apparatus must be in place before 
 the current can be made effective in any degree. The service, however, can be 
 greatly Improved by careful adjustment as time goes on. Hence, the full com- 
 plement of organization, by being enabled to give greater attention to the meth- 
 ods then in use, can secure better results from the start. 
 
 Standards are the basis of directions. These must next be determined by the 
 client's employees delegated for the purpose and acting under the guidance and 
 instruction of the specialists. Standards for human performance must be 
 based on the amount of force a normal man can generate without loss of 
 elasticity under proper conditions. As these are determined it will gradually 
 become possible to comprehend the conditions which do or should exist, and 
 hence to issue more adequate directions. 
 
 The next step is to revise the conditions so as to make it possible for the 
 workers to comply with the standards. Every stumbling block in their path- 
 way must be removed if they are to achieve the anticipated results. Simul- 
 taneously the records must be so developed as to correspond accurately with tlie 
 standards and directions in every detail. There must be both a record and a 
 standard for every operation performed. The comparison between these two 
 is of the most vital importance and can not be overestimated. 
 
 STIMtTLATION FOB ADMINISTEATOES. 
 
 When a proper organization and conditions have been created, together with 
 safe and sane standards for desired performances and accurate records of 
 actual achievements in every department, it is possible to stimulate and encour- 
 age the workers to come up to the standards by making their compensation 
 dependent in part upon their effort and commensurate with its amount. In con- 
 sidering this phase of the subject too much stress can not be laid on the 
 importance of applying this principle to the administrators and supervisors as 
 well as to the manual workers. One of these' individuals, since he controls 
 many workers, is responsible for a larger amount of concrete results than any 
 one of them ; therefore his compensation should be determined on a correspond- 
 ing basis. 
 
 The usual supervisor or administrator is too often a human telephone, and is 
 of correspondingly little value. The trained supervisor or administrator must 
 be developed by his employer, in view of the shortcomings of our educational 
 system in this respect, and is correspondingly valuable. This principle is appli- 
 cable to the entire operating organization, from errand boy up to general 
 manager. 
 
 After these methods have been installed and placed In operation much thought 
 should be given to their maintenance and continued improvement. The records 
 should be continually searched for indications as to the possibility of improve- 
 ment. Suggestions from the operating organization should be referred to the 
 standardlzers who can work them out to the best advantage, and should do so 
 as a part of their routine work. The makers of the suggestions should, of 
 course, be adequately rewarded. 
 
 WHAT specialists' STUDY DISCLOSES. 
 
 The specialist, as has been said, should be an association of specialists, 
 rather than an individual. It is to the client's interest to place the matter in the 
 hands of such an organization from the start. This will result in his being sup- 
 plied with the proper men whom he needs as permanent advisers, and in plac- 
 ing him in a position to secure from time to time harmonious advice in other 
 lines where only occasional assistance is required. 
 
 No specialist, whether permanently or temporarily a part of the organization, 
 should ever give an order or direction. The exercise of this power should be 
 confined strictly to the members of the operating organization. The function of 
 the specialist in administration is to intensify the mind of the administrator 
 by his advice just as the gas flame is intensified by the oxygen introduced by 
 the blowpipe. 
 
TAYIiOE SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 65 
 
 The specialist should make close observations of operations, deduce Ms con- 
 clusions and communicate them to the administrator of the proper grade but 
 it Is only as he can inject his mental force into the mental force of the adminis- 
 trator that he can attain success. He should only discuss the work on the spot 
 as a last resort, and when the mind of the administrator is such that an ocular 
 demonstration is essential to his receipt of the suggestion. A study of the usual 
 administrative methods from the scientific standpoint discloses : 
 
 (o) The terrific load of petty detail carried by men whose time Is too valu- 
 able to devote to such things. 
 
 (6) The Inability of administrators to work at arms' length through the 
 mediums of standards and records and their infatuation for close contact and 
 its consequent loss of perspective. 
 
 (c) The widespread failure to use well-known, efiEort-saving devices— tele- 
 phone, telautograph, pneumatic tube, etc. 
 
 id) The lack of realization of the necessity of using the cheapest man for 
 the job in administration as well as manual work and, coincidently, that the 
 best is always the cheapest. 
 
 (e) The lack of realization that the coal, boilers, engine, and generator must 
 be adequate to the task or the lamps will not burn or the motors move. 
 
 (/) The lack of realization that the advice of specialists Is absolutely essen- 
 tial In order to create a proper organization. 
 
 (g) The lack of fealizatlon that the chief executives, must devote their per- 
 sonal time and effort to the study of the advice of the specialist and to its 
 application. 
 
 (ft) The lack of realization that administration, or the operation of this 
 human machine, is a science in itself. 
 
 THE INSTABILITY Ot IfONEY. 
 [By H. P. Stimpson, chief engineer, Universal Audit Co., Singer Building, New York.] 
 
 "We are accustomed to think of money as one of the stable thinks of life. 
 The gold and silver pieces look much the same from year to year. Recently we 
 have heard much discussion of " the purchasing power of the dollar," and this 
 causes some of us to think that perhaps money is not quite as stable as It has 
 seemed to us in the past. Let us, therefore, consider the functions which money 
 performs and the basis upon which our money or that of any other people 
 really rests. 
 
 Money has been glibly defined as " a medium of exchange." Exchange of 
 what? The commodities used for food, clothing, shelter, or amusement? Not 
 at all. That is the view of the savage, but it should not be that of the civilized 
 man. 
 
 A commodity is raw material to which energy has been applied in such a 
 manner and with such a result as to fit it for the use and convenience of man. 
 Take, for example, oak wood. Consider the values, per unit of bulk or weight, 
 of the rough lumber ; of plain, substantial furniture ; and of i-Ichly-carved fur- 
 niture. As the oak grew without the aid of man, the real values to man have 
 been added to the material by the energy generated or directed by man. Hence, 
 the real exchange is that of the energy generated or directed by one individual 
 in producing a commodity for that of another individual producing another 
 commodity. The exchange, then, can only be equitable when the energy which 
 has been applied to one commodity equals that which has been applied to the 
 other. Also, if the statement as to the amount of energy which has been 
 applied to material In the production of a given commodity, in terms of money. 
 Is inacdurate, the exehahge is likely to be inaccurate and therefore inequitable. 
 
 Under present conditions we cause the Government to control and guarantee 
 the amount and quality of the g61d In one of the dollars which are the basis 
 of our monetary system. Why should we not cause the Government to control 
 Or guarantee either the relation between the gold dollar, or its representative 
 in bills, and a definite quality or quantity of energy, or, to speak more correctly, 
 the quantity and quality of energy expended in the production of any com- 
 modity? TJpon this, as we have seen, the true value of the commodity depends 
 and it would seem to be even more important that the purchaser should be 
 
 94078—11 5 
 
66 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 assured of this than that he should be assured of the character of the medium 
 with which he purchases it. 
 
 It has been contended by many able minds that price is the expression of the 
 law of supply and demand. If the true relation between the cost of production, 
 or energy absorbed, and the selling price was always known, then this might 
 be true. As a matter of fact, neither the producer (or seller) or the buyer 
 know this relation with any accuracy, and the buyer the least of the two. 
 
 The reasons for this are threefold : 
 
 First. The present average cost of production or operation is much higher 
 than it need be. This has been repeatedly demonstrated by eflBciency engineers. 
 The cause of this, to the extent of at least 75 per cent, lies in the insufficient 
 training and management of administration organization, which are generally 
 but one-third as large as they ought to be to develop the full capacity of the 
 workers. As the administrative section is very much smaller than the section 
 embracing the direct workers this is plainly a source of loss to the business as 
 a whole. 
 
 In one instance, by proper instruction alone and without any material changes 
 in plant or equipment it was made possible for one man to do the work for 
 which three had previously been employed. In another case, due specifically 
 to incomplete and undeveloped organization, four men are employed where only 
 one is really necessary. These are fairly representative cases. The wages of 
 the extra men are actually paid, in the long run, by those purchasing the 
 necessaries of life and who, as a rule, can least afford to bear the extra burden. 
 
 Second. The accounting of the cost of production, as generally practiced, is 
 far from accurate; especially as to the processes by which the original raw 
 material, as a growing tree or ore in the ground, is first transformed Into a 
 commodity. Thus an element of error is introduced which grows rapidly with 
 every successive transformative process. 
 
 Third. There is a deliberate unnecessary and short-sighted inflation of price 
 all down the line. This is as true of the transactions involving the sale of 
 labor as of commodities. In many cases the worker has failed to realize that 
 the increase in wages which seems so advantageous at the moment speedily 
 reacts upon other workers in such a manner that they demand increases for 
 themselves. These, sooner or later, are sure to destroy the original temporary 
 advantage. This theory of increased prices and " passing it along " has been 
 found not only to be of but temporary advantage to a few but to be absolutely 
 harmful to society as a whole, in the long run. 
 
 The price of the transformation of raw material into a commodity, there- 
 fore, is largely affected: First, by ignorance of the results which it is possible 
 to attain; second, by ignorance as to the facts respecting the processes as 
 actually carried on ; and third, by a deliberate padding of the so-caUed costs at 
 each successive sale. 
 
 These factors have nothing to do with the law of supply and demand. In 
 many instances they are under the control of persons who have no immediate 
 connection with the process of the sale of the finished commodity. Yet these 
 persons usually have it in their power to effect large and arbitrary increases in 
 the cost of the finished product which certainly affect its selling price eventually. 
 There is now no definite relation between terms of energy and terms of money. 
 Yet the price, in terms of money, is all the guide which the purchaser has to 
 enable him to determine whether the energy by whose exertion he has ac- 
 quired his money is, to any extent, equal to the energy which has been ex- 
 pended in the creation of the commodity which he is purchasing. 
 
 Hence, the importance of knowing that the gold dollar or its representative 
 is standard as to quality or quantity sinks into insignificance when contrasted 
 with the question of quality and quantity of that which is exchanged by its 
 means. The vital question, then, is whether the dollar for which a man is paid 
 for his energy will purchase for him an equal quantity of the energy of others. 
 This is the true measure of the value of money, and beside it the intrinsic 
 characteristics of the unit of money are quite unimportant. 
 
 Let us see what the Government does in the act of coining. It establishes 
 two characteristics of the unit of money — quantity and quality. The unit of 
 money must contain a certain volume of gold, and it must be of a certain degree 
 of purity. The establishment of these facts is of importance to all. No one 
 wishes to give more gold for a commodity than is necessary or to receive less. 
 If then, as we have seen, the value of commodities lies in the quality and 
 quantity of the energy which has been applied to the raw material from which 
 the commodity has been produced, why should we not cause the Government to 
 
TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 67 
 
 certify to these facts? When shall we comprehend that the mdivl(5;ial who 
 hopes to gain by inflating the price of the energy which he sells will surely 
 and certainly find himself, to his sorrow, overbalanced by similar acts on the 
 part of the individuals whose energy he buys? It is only in the country of the 
 blind that the one-eyed is king. 
 
 On the other hand, the average purchasing or energy-generating power of 
 the individual being fixed, if the common tendency is to eliminate waste and 
 overcharge, the individual will just as surely find that his unselfish efforts in 
 behalf of the community will be as surely and certainly overbalanced to his 
 joy by the acts of those about him. The golden rule, that it is well to do to 
 others as you would have them do to you, is not a mere empty sentimentalism, 
 but the accurate expression of a fundamental law. 
 
 THE ECONOMICS OF " EFFICIENCY." 
 [By H. F. Stimpson, chief engineer, Universal Audit Co., Singer Building, New York.] 
 
 The articles on efiBciency which have appeared, especially since the decision 
 on fi'eight rates of the Interstate Commerce Commission, have merely skimmed 
 the surface of things and have failed to consider the economic questions which 
 are at the bottom of the whole matter. Therefore, the angle from which the 
 subject is considered in this article may be of interest. 
 
 Most men will admit that we have been experiencing a continuous increase 
 in costs in every phase of life for a considerable time. It is not the arbitrary 
 amount of either income or outgo, but the relation between the two which 
 determines wealth or poverty. Hence the increase in prices received has been 
 seen to be fruitless if followed by an equal or larger increase in the prices paid. 
 
 It was only a question of time when this vicious cycle of increase had to 
 stop. It was not a matter of accident that the brakes were applied to the 
 railroads. It was for the reason, perhaps more instinctive than logical, that 
 freight rates, which enter many times in the cost of production, are, with one 
 very important exception, the last factor in the determination of cost to the 
 consumer. That exception is the cost of retail distribution and its accompany- 
 ing profits. This Is the point where the brake should have been applied con- 
 sistently with the line of procedure which has actually been initiated. That 
 this line of procedure is perhaps unwise may be shown later. 
 
 Every argument which has been advanced in support of a demand for greater 
 economy and efl5ciency on the part of the railroads Is applicable to the retailer 
 on the one hand and to every link in the chain down to the lowest grade of 
 manual workers on the other side. Because the manual worker usually labors 
 under disadvantageous conditions which it is exceedingly difficult for him to 
 change, at least directly, he should be regarded with much leniency. As, how- 
 ever, he constitutes numerically a large proportion of the people as a whole 
 who actually determine the conditions under which we live, he must assume his 
 corresponding share of responsibility. 
 
 The root of the present difiiculty is in the possession of a mistaken idea, by 
 every man in the line, that the way to increase wealth is to get more rather 
 than to give more. The original trading capital of every man is his natural 
 force or power, which is of two kinds— mental and physical. The possession 
 of the former is what differentiates man from an animal. The ratio between 
 the two forms is the true measurement of his civilized development. It is by 
 means of his mental force that he directs and controls his physical force and 
 that of animals and machines. The true wealth of a nation, then, is in its 
 brains and not in its muscles or its dollars. The two latter are useless without 
 the former. The muscular idiot is a liability rather than an asset. 
 
 The commodities which constitute both the necessaries and the luxuries of life 
 consist of material to which physical force, directed by mental force, has been 
 so applied as to fit it for the use of man. Consequently their real value to man 
 must lie in the amount of mental force so applied. As our means of measuring 
 both the generation and expenditure of this force are as yet crude, we have 
 to measure it largely by the amount of physical force which our mental force 
 directs. The amount of physical force which an individual can command, 
 whether generated by himself, his animals, or his machinery, is the working 
 Index of his wealth. This applies to associations of individuals and even to 
 nations I repeat, therefore, that the true value of a commodity is in the 
 
68 TAYLOE SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 amount of mental force which has been applied to it. This is indicated by 
 the amount of physical force so applied. 
 
 Money, in various forms, has long been used as a " medium of exchange," 
 but because we have failed to realize that force and not substance was its real 
 basis of value, the logic of our prices has become seriously deranged. Mr. 
 F. W. Taylor has recently described the methods whereby a laborer was enabled, 
 by scientific management, to increase the amount of pig iron handled from 
 approximately 3,2 tons per day to 48 tons per day. His wages were increased 
 from $1.15 per day to $1.85 per day, or 60 per cent. Note the relation between 
 money and work at either of these stages. If $1.15 was a correct wage for 
 the exertion of the force, in foot-pounds, necessary to handle 12 tons, then 
 when the force was increased fourfold the worker should have been paid $4.60. 
 If, however. $1.85 was the correct wage for the exertion of the force necessary 
 to handle 48 tons, then the man should have received only 46 cents for handling 
 12 tons. 
 
 I suggested over a year ago that our medium of exchange should be based 
 directly on units of force. If this were the case, we would have to determine 
 and combine the forces expended in the operation itself and in the production 
 of the necessary material and equipment. Our present method of handling this 
 problem is to determine and combine the expenditures of money, which have 
 often no accurate relation to the expenditures of force for which they stand. 
 Hence our impressions are delusive. In the first place, the correct determina- 
 tion of costs, even in terms of money, is by no manner of means a common 
 occurrence. In the second place, there is no kind of common or logical ratio 
 between the amount of money paid and the amount of force expended. With 
 human labor at 15 cents per hour and electromotive power at 2 cents per kilo- 
 watt hour the human power costs about 85 times as much as the electric. 
 What is needed, therefore, is — 
 
 1. A determination of the amount of energy which can be generated by the 
 stomach and heart of an average man, and which constitute his boiler and 
 engine. 
 
 2. A unit for expressing this determination. 
 
 3. Methods for applying this unit in the process of measurement of Individual 
 capacities. 
 
 4. Methods for measuring the expenditure of heart power under different 
 conditions, such as (o) walking unloaded, (6) carrying a burden, (c) pushing 
 a truck, (d) turning a winch, etc. 
 
 5. The capacity of the human body when acting as a storage battery or 
 accumulator. 
 
 6. The determination of the true ratio of costs between human, animal, and 
 mechanical force, taking the human physical power as the basis. It is of course 
 recognized that there are many different varieties of animals and machines. 
 
 When these things have been ascertained we shall have gone a long way 
 toward determining the true cost of any article. 
 
 Into each factor of production (material, equipment, and labor) enters the 
 overhead charge. The most difficult element of this Is the supervisory or 
 administrative. Our adjustment of mental force to the physical force which 
 it directs, or the mental force which it controls, is about the most haphazard 
 thing in the world. If we reason backward we can determine how much 
 physical force is directed by any one mind. Also, in succession, by a process 
 of combination, the amount of physical force controlled by any one mind 
 acting through the minds of others. But we are as yet unable to predict 
 how much physical force one mind can direct. Hence we are unable to adjust 
 the division of mental work or the assignment of mental workers with even 
 the low degree of accuracy which we have attained in the disposition of 
 physical force. 
 
 A crying need of our civilization at this date is deliberate experimentation 
 along this Ime by well-equipped specialists having this definite object before 
 them. Most of the large organizations with which I am acquainted have 
 far too few mental workers The inevitable result is a great uncertainty and 
 extravagance m the utilization of physical force. 
 
 The antagonistic attitude which organized labor has generally assumed 
 toward labor-savmg methods and appliances does not proceed from unworthv 
 motives, but sunply from a misconception of facts. The supposedly better- 
 informed persons, their employers, with whom they naturally come in contaS 
 are but little in advance of them in this respect, hence the opportunl^ for 
 improvement on the part of the employee has been small "i'Poitunity lor. 
 
TAYLOE SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 69 
 
 A. unit of human physical force can produce and control a large number of 
 units of mechanical force; hence, the human physical force Is more valuable 
 than the mechanical force. In like manner mental force, each unit of which 
 controls a far greater number of units of physical force, is more valuable than 
 human physical force. The reason the civilized man has more comforts than 
 the savage is because he first exchanges his valuable physical force for the 
 cheaper mechanical force and, secondly, his valuable mental force for the 
 cheaper physical force, and thus makes a profit on each transaction. The sav- 
 age pays for the physical force he requires with physical force of exactly the 
 same value, and so makes but little if any profit. The section man applies his 
 physical force directly to the operation of the tool and gets a low wage. The 
 locomotive engineer applies his physical force to the control of the far greater 
 mechanical force which operates the tool and, consequently, gets a higher wage. 
 The superintendent depends but little on physical force, but his mental force 
 controls the mental forces of many engineers, and so gets a higher rate of 
 wages. So it goes up the ladder. As long, therefore, as a man insists on de- 
 pending for his existence on the development and sale of the lowest grade of 
 force which he can produce, just so long will he remain poor. 
 
 It is only when he exerts himself to take advantage of such educational facili- 
 ties as may be within his reach, and thereby becomes enabled to produce a 
 higher grade of force than formerly, that he can possibly become rich. He can 
 legislate on the subject of wages till the crack of doom, but his purchasing 
 power is unalterably fixed by the quantity and quality, first, of physical and, 
 second, of mental force which he can generate and sell. From 1889 to 1899 I 
 was in charge of the free evening drawing school in an eastern city. The 
 pupils ranged In age from about 18 to 45 years, most of them being arobitious 
 mechanics. Such of these men as completed the course bore testimony to the 
 fact that it was directly and financially beneficial to them. Most of these men 
 were metal workers, but the total enrollment was an exceedingly small per cent 
 of the workers in that locality. I urged a number of men in other trades to 
 attend the school. They replied that it was easier to increase their wages 
 through the medium of the union. When, however, the increase in the subse- 
 quent price of commodities took place, and which was caused by a process, 
 applied to labor, which was exactly similar to that known as " stock watering," 
 the advantage of their forced increase vanished. This is the inevitable result 
 when natural values are artificially inflated. 
 
 Because organized labor has never fully realized these facts, it has always 
 persisted in clinging to what we now see is a state of only partial development. 
 The common welfare, as well as its own, requires that it should proceed fur- 
 ther. They who stand still really go backward. 
 
 The reason why this truth is not more generally realized is in our defective 
 methods for conducting the process of exchange. The real exchange is that 
 of force for force, not that of force (or labor) for money, or of money for 
 commodities. There is not half as much trouble with our banking system as is 
 generally supposed. The solitary man cuts wood for his fire, hunts game for 
 food, dresses skins for clothes. When he secures associates they specialize 
 and exchange the fruits of their labor, each one still remaining a producer. 
 Finally comes one who offers to effect the operation of exchange for a toll 
 from each commodity handled. The others being busy, he takes advantage of 
 their preoccupation and gradually Increases his toll from an amount which 
 corresponds to the force which he has exerted and which is the measure of 
 his service, to a greater amount. So long as he has to take his toll in commodi- 
 ties there is small temptation to increase it because of the depreciation by 
 decay or theft, the inconvenience of storing the bulk, and because its existence 
 is a visible monument to his greed. 
 
 The invention of money and the illogical relation which has always existed 
 between money and the force which it represents in the process of exchange 
 have afforded" splendid facilities for the concealment of this excessive toll, 
 and the Imposition of accompanying abuses upon the community. 
 
 Hence the most vital questions before the human race to-day are these: 
 
 1. The determination of proper methods of measuring physical and mental 
 
 force. 
 
 2. The establishment of a correct relation between units of force and our 
 
 medium of exchange. ,^^ ^. r. -u ^^ , ^ ;, ^ 
 
 3. The standardization of the amount of force which should be expended for 
 
 each given operation. 
 
 4. The establishment of correct cost keeping in correct units. 
 
70 TAYLOR SYSTEM OF SHOP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 6. The limitation of tolls which may be exacted for the performance of com 
 mercial service to amounts which shall accurately correspond with the power 
 expended. This is the true measure of the service rendered. 
 
 The man of large ability in the generation and the utilization of force should 
 be rewarded in proportion to his efforts. The man who profits at the unjust 
 expense of others and by concealment of the real facts should be prevented 
 from committing further depredations. 
 
 Early in this article I questioned the wisdom of the line of procedure which 
 has been adopted. The real issue is not between capital and labor, but between 
 buyer and seller. The problem is that of devising an equitable and fair 
 method of conducting the process of exchange. I have heard of a case where 
 a seller of automobiles charged $100 for tops which cost him but $35. This was 
 an unjust toll, yet no more so than where a mechan^, office assistant, or 
 domestic worker endeavors to reduce the amount of service rendered, i. e., 
 force generated and applied, below a reasonable amount. At present this 
 amount is a matter of guessworls on both sides. It should be so no longer. 
 Correct standards hurt no honest person. The purchase of human physical 
 or mental power at a definite rate per unit would be mutally beneficial by 
 preventing mutual Injustice. This article has defined the problem. Who will 
 solve it? 
 

 DATE DUE 
 
 
 
 __s^i 
 
 
 
 a^mMat '. 
 
 ^-tifsr 
 
 
 
 ■B*' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i.t '^ ISJ 
 
 l£L^ 
 
 
 m 
 
 ^i>^ 
 
 Tv7 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 /> ,D,S. 
 
 
 
 
 Hten' 
 
 """^m^ 
 
 {&■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CAVtOKO 
 
 
 
 PMINTCO IN U.S.A. 
 
 Cornell University Library 
 T 58.T4 
 investigation of Tayior systf HJ o| shop m 
 
 3 1924 002 380 164 
 
[mm «,'.()- 
 
 Wi 
 
 mwm