2

THE  PROBLEM  OF  TIIE  UNEMPLOYED

waste  of  labour-power  regarded  from  the  social  point  of
view.  This  method  has  the  advantage  of  strict  accord
with  the  position  held  by  Mr.  Charles  Booth,  who  urges
that  “  the  total  number  of  the  superfluous  is  the  true
measure  of  the  unemployed.”
Let  us  first  try  to  ascertain  how  far  the  various  classes
of  those  who  at  any  given  time  would  be  found  to  be
“  off  work”  can  be  reckoned  as  “  superfluous”  or  as  waste
of  labour-power.
Many  workers,  especially  in  employments  which  severely
tax  the  muscular  energy,  prefer  at  times  to  earn  their
weekly  wages  by  hard  labour  during  four  or  five  days
in  the  week  rather  than  spread  their  energy  more
evenly  over  the  six  days.  This  voluntary  “  play”  of  the
miner  or  the  gas-stoker  clearly  cannot  rank  as  “  unemployment”, ­
  nor  does  it,  if  confined  within  reasonable
limits,  involve  any  waste  of  labour-power.  On  the  other
hand,  when  “  short  time”  is  either  forced  upon  employees,
or  accepted  by  them  as  an  alternative  to  a  reduction  in
the  number  of  employed,  such  off-time  will  rightly  rank
as  “  unemployment”,  and  implies  waste  of  labour-power.
§  2.  Leakage  in  “  Season  "  Trades.
Season  trades  with  short  engagements  usually  involve
a  certain  “leakage,”  as  in  the  intervals  between  “jobs”
in  the  building  trades.  A  census  of  “  unemployed,”  taken
on  a  given  day,  would  be  apt  to  include  a  certain  number
of  masons,  bricklayers,  etc.,  who  were  at  leisure  for  this
reason.  Yet,  so  far  as  this  leakage  belongs  to  an  irregularity ­
  inherent  in  the  trade,  it  cannot  rank  as  “waste”,
nor  could  the  labour  thus  temporarily  displaced  be  regarded
as  “  superfluous.”  But  a  strict  limit  must  be  assigned  to