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 defi nite 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 prob lem, 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 fore man, for any number of reasons, may object to the selec tion. 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