488 OBSERVATIONS ON SIR VICTOR SASSOON’S MINUTE,
definite recommendations. We have so acted because we conceived this
to be the purpose for which we were appointed and out of a desire to
avoid unnecessary public expenditure.

On the question of hours in factories, Sir Victor Sassoon mis-
conceives our argument. He deals throughout with the effect of a
reduction of hours on the industry, but in the sentences he cites as the
“ kernel ” of our argument we are dealing with the effect on the opera-
tive; on the other hand he makes no reference to the passage which
immediately follows, which is related to the question he discusses. So
tar as the operative is concerned, the kernel of our argument is tm the
statement that “ a reasonable amount of spare time away from the fac-
bory is indispensable for the building up of citizenship, for the develop-
ment of life, as opposed to mere existence, and for the maintenance
of physical efficiency ”. On this vital question our colleague offers no
observations,

So far as the effect of a reduction on the cotton mill industry
is concerned, Sir Victor Sassoon’s argument appears to be directed
against the contention that, if hours are reduced with the existing methods
of work, the operative will give the same output. We have nowhere
put forward such a contention, nor is it part of our argument. While
we believe that, when a shorter day hasbeen in operation for some time,
there should be a higher production per hour in many mills and there
might be a higher total production in some, the increase that the industry
may expect in this direction is probably small compared to that which
might be secured by resorting to shifts and by altering the methods of work
within the mills. The evidence our colleague adduces, which he himself
admits is not conclusive even on the point which he is endeavouring
bo establish, has no bearing on the possibility of demanding higher stand-
ards of working, and, although it cites recent examples of shift working,
it makes no reference to their financial effects. The conclusion which he
reaches is expressed in the words “ I feel that I am on sure ground in
stating that, where a mill is now run on efficient lines, a reduction of
hours will inevitably lead to diminished production”, This statement
appears to us to beg the whole question for two reasons. In the first
place, a mill cannot be regarded as run on efficient lines unless a reason-
able standard of efficiency is demanded not merely from the management
but also from the operatives, and we doubt if Sir Victor Sassoon, who has
himself been a pioneer of efficiency methods, would contend that this
is true of any large number of mills. But apart from this, the statement
appears to confuse a reduction of hours for the operative with a reduction
of hours for the industry. It is only the former that we have advocated ;
and in the very instances which our colleague cites, the mills, although
they shortened the hours for the operatives on one or both shifts, secured a
substantial increase in the total working hours.

Our colleague, in suggesting that we have fallen into a psychologi-
cal error, states that “the chief difficulty lies in the complications caused
by the differing climatic conditions in this country ” and suggests that
“ hours of work which might appear unendurable in one province might be