EMPLOYMENT  PSYCHOLOGY

298
bureau  claims  that  its  choice  was  a  good  one  but  that  the
man  selected  was  not  properly  handled.  The  foreman  or
superintendent  maintains  that  the  choice  was  a  poor  one.
Each  side  claims  to  be  in  the  right,  but  since  there  is  no  definite ­
  basis  or  standard  upon  which  to  rest  a  decision,  the
matter  remains  indefinitely  unsettled.  Moreover,  in  the
very  nature  of  the  case  it  must  remain  unsettled,  because
the  personal  opinion  of  one  man  is  balanced  against  the
personal  opinion  of  another.  In  the  long  run,  however,  the
employment  bureau  is  usually  found  at  fault,  not  because
the  final  fault  necessarily  rests  there  but  because  the
weight  of  numbers  is  against  it.  The  employment  bureau
is  like  a  man  surrounded  by  accusers  on  all  sides,  and  for
the  lack  of  any  reliable  criterion,  the  majority  rules.
In  order  to  illustrate  roughly  the  intricacies  of  this  problem, ­
  the  following  series  of  typical  situations  is  given:
1.  The  employment  manager  may  select  an  applicant
whom  he  considers  the  right  man  for  a  place,  but  the  foreman, ­
  for  any  number  of  reasons,  may  object  to  the  selection. ­

2.  The  foreman  may  accept  the  man,  but  discharge  him
at  the  end  of  a  week  or  a  month  as  unfit  or  undesirable.
3.  The  foreman  and  employment  manager  may  both
agree  on  the  value  of  a  man,  but  the  man  himself  may
leave  because  of  dissatisfaction  with  his  work  or  salary,
or  for  some  other  personal  reason.
4.  The  employment  manager  may  hire  a  man  for  one
kind  of  work  and  the  foreman  may  put  him  on  a  different
kind  of  work,  causing  him  to  leave.
5.  The  employment  manager  may  refuse  to  hire  a  man
because  he  judges  him  to  be  unfit.  In  this  case  all  trace
is  usually  lost.
6.  The  employment  manager,  the  foreman,  and  the