THE PROBLEM OF WAGES 135

Even assuming monopoly control on either or both sides
of the wages bargain, this correspondence is still the state
towards which things tend, so far as men know their
economic interests and seek them. For, under a monopoly
on the side of the employer, the marginal productivity of
labour would not be less important than with competition
of many employers, though the monopolised organisation
might give either a higher or a lower value to the productivity
of labour than it would have under competitive organisation.
 The class-standard of living is effective whether the
labourers contract individually or collectively for the terms
of employment. Under collective action, however, the
efficiency of that standard as a point of resistance to
attempts to drive a hard bargain will, commonly, be greater
than under an individual system of contracts.
Assuming that the demand- and supply-prices of labour
differ, there is a greater degree of indeterminateness in the
division of the difference where each side is represented
by one bargainer, that is, when monopoly prevails, than
under competition. But, when the bargain is struck, the
elevation of the standard of living to the level of wages
secured operates as truly in the case of monopoly as in that
of competition, and, on the other hand, the fact that it is
profitable to employ workmen who cost less than they earn
serves as an inducement to extend the margin of actual
employment in either case. The influence of monopoly is
felt in the regulation of the output so as to yield the largest
attainable profit on its production, regulating its amount as
ameans of influencing its value per unit, which consideration,
it will be recalled, forms a distinguishing characteristic as
between monopoly and competition. Thus the monopolist’s
greatest advantage may be realised when the net marginal
utility of labour is measurably in excess of its cost. This,
however, is hardly the same thing as saying that the demandprice
 is in excess of the cost. It is, in this case, hardly
possible to speak of anything other than the contract-price
as the monopolist’s demand-price for labour.