COLLECTIVE BARGAINING, ARBITRATION, AND CONCILIATION. Modern political economy recog nizes in collective bargaining a legitimate and the most important function of trade unionism. This concerted action, by which employers are pre vented from fixing wages at the rate acceptable to the neediest competitor, is the goal and aim of trade unionism. The walking delegate. or busi ness agent, who represents a body of union work men, advises them what rate of wages to de mand, and conducts their negotiations for them, is thus not an ugly incident, but an essential necessity of trade unionism—the very heart of the institution.
In England systematic collective bargaining by recurrent joint conferences was first introduced in the hosiery trade about 1 SGO. At the present time Mr. and Mrs. Webb estimate "that in all skilled trades where men work in concert on the employer's premises 90 per cent. of the workmen find either their rate of wages or their hours of work and often many other details predetermined by a collective bargain in which they personally have taken no part, but in which their interests have been dealt with by representatives of their class." And in the United States the system has been introduced to an extent scarcely realized by the general public. Thousands of local agree ments exist in the cities, particularly in the building industry; and in about a dozen trades national agreements exist. The history of trade arbitration and collective bargaining shows that the value of these agreements lies in the concilia tory spirit engendered by conferences in which employees and employers meet on a footing of friendly equality. The arbitrator or umpire, with decisive vote, is relatively unimportant. The reason for this statement lies in the important difference between the adoption of new contracts and the interpretation of existing contracts. The latter function is judicial in nature and may safely be left to authoritative arbiters. On the
other hand, the adoption of new principles, or the determination of future conditions, is a mat ter of competitive struggle, which, except on ex traordinary occasions, should not be left to outside parties, however disinterested. Recog nizing this truth, trade union leaders generally oppose compulsory arbitration; and even in col lective bargaining arbitration seems to be going out of favor both in England and the United States. In the printing (newspaper) and gen eral foundry trades agreements for arhitration exist, but none of the national systems of collec tive bargaining in the United States contain a provision for arbitration in ease the representa tives of employers and employees fail to agree.
Collective bargaining is to a degree dependent upon the organization of employers, and it increases in extent and efficiency as employers' organizations increase. Associations of employ ers are not new, but in the last few years they have become not only more numerous than in the past, but more systematic and more thoroughly managed. (See TRADE ASSOCIATIONS.) Most of the existing manufacturers' associations, like the Stove Founders' National Defense Associa tion and the National Association of Builders, encourage collective bargaining and thus make for industrial peace. A large majority of American unions officially indorse arbitration and conciliation. In Great Britain Mr. and Mrs. Webb think that the opposition to arbi tration in the strict sense is steadily grow ing. In the United States opinion is divided. and it is impossible to say whether opposition is increasing or decreasing. It is, however, in disputable that the employees far more frequent ly invoke the aid of State boards of arbitration than the employers, and that they are practically undivided in support of collective bargaining on the one hand and in opposition to compulsory arbitration on the other hand.