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