218

CHAPTER XII.

caused, fines have an irritating effect on the worker and create a sense
of injustice. In the case of the other compulsory deductions, the work-
er usually pays for something definite ; but even here experience
elsewhere shows that protection is necessary to ensure that the
deductions are made for a legitimate purpose and that the worker
secures in return commensurate benefits. The enquiries which were
instituted in 1926 disclosed instances of deductions, such as compulsory
contributions to charities selected by the employer, which appear to
be wholly unjustified. Our conclusion, therefore, is that legislation is
both necessary and desirable, and we proceed to consider separately
the protection which the law should provide in regard to each of
the three classes of deductions.
Possibility of Abolishing Fines.

Fines constitute the commonest form of deduction and the one
which is most open to abuse, and there is some justification for the view
that they should be made illegal. But the main purpose of fining, namely,
the maintenance of efficiency and discipline, is legitimate, and if
fines are abolished, other means must be employed for securing this end.
[t is admitted that the fine, and particularly the harsh fine, does, at a cost,
achieve its purpose; thus an employer, who abolished the system of
deducting two days’ pay for one day’s absence, was subsequently faced
with increased absenteeism. It is necessary, therefore, to consider the
possible alternatives. One large company informed wus that it had
practically eliminated fining, and we found on enquiry that the practice
of suspension had taken its place. This was said to be less unpopular
with the men as, unlike a fine, suspension does not enable the employer
to obtain work for which he has not paid. It is probable, too,
that, were suspension generally substituted for fining, punish-
ments would be fewer and more carefully imposed. On the other
hand, suspension involves loss for both worker and employer, for
presumably the employer has to secure a less competent substitute
or leave the work undone. Moreover, suspension would involve for
the worker greater hardship than a system of fines. Another alternative
bas been adopted by some employers, namely, a system of marking,
deducting marks for irregular attendance and other causes, and paying
a bonus on the total marks obtained. This has the advantage of securing
a definite irreducible wage to the worker and of minimising the possibility
of arbitrary action, and its psychological effects are better in that it sub-
stitutes for punishments what appear to be rewards. We fear, however,
that if fines were abolished the bonus system might easily be developed
into something almost indistinguishable from a system of fines. Finally,
there is the possibility of dismissal or of the threat of dismissal for
repeated offences. The main argument always adduced in favour of
fines is that the worker would rather be fined than dismissed. As
a rule this is true, but the argument is not as strong as
it looks, for employers would not dismiss all the men who are
now fined. Even if inefficient or lazy men were dismissed more fre-
nuently than at present. the effect might be oood. for there would be a