THE INCOME OF THE INDUSTRIAL WORKER. 219 
bigger premium on efficiency. But the wider resort to dismissal and 
to the threat of dismissal which would follow the abolition of fines might 
result in greater hardship and tend to aggravate the workers’ sense of 
insecurity. It would also give rise to more resentment. While, therefore, 
we recognise the objections to fines and consider that employers should do 
their utmost to reduce them to a minimum, we do not recommend their 
abolition by law. In the case of children, however, on account of their 
helplessness, inexperience and low scale of wages, we recommend that 
fining should be prohibited. In the case of adult workers we recommend 
the regulation of fines, and proceed to show how this can be most 
effectively accomplished. 
Regulation of Fines. 
The object of regulation should be to prevent excessive and 
arbitrary fines. In our opinion, legislation should be based on four 
broad principles. In the first place, the payment of a fine should not be 
spread over too long a period, and we recommend that the maximum 
period should be one month from the date on which the fine was 
imposed. Secondly, we consider that fines should not constitute more 
than a fixed amount out of the worker's wage. As regards the limit, 
we observe that the draft standing order, prepared by the Bombay 
Millowners’ Association and endorsed by the Fawcett Committee, 
fixed the limit at two per cent of a worker’s monthly wages. We 
would prefer, however, a method of calculation which is more easily 
understood by the worker, and we recommend that the maximum 
amount deducted in fines should not in any month exceed half an anna 
in the rupee of the worker's earnings. The payment of wages by other 
periods than a month may necessitate special provisions, but the same 
limit should be imposed. The third principle is in regard to the disposal 
of fines. A number of employers accept no benefit from this source and 
apply the proceeds to welfare work in various forms. It is particularly 
important that the fine should in no case benefit the individual responsible 
for imposing it. ‘We recommend that the sums received from fines should 
be credited to a purpose beneficial to the employees as a whole and ap- 
Proved by some recognised authority. In the fourth place, in order to 
give workers some security against arbitrary fines, employers should be re- 
quired to specify the acts or omissions in respect of which a fine may be 
imposed. These should be embodied in notices posted where they can 
be easily seen by the workers, and fines inflicted for any act or omission 
which is not specified in the notice should be illegal. 
Deductions for Damage or Loss. 
Deductions on account of damage differ from fines in that the 
employer has sustained some definite loss which is attributed to the care- 
lessness or negligence of the worker. Such deductions do not always repre- 
sent the full value of the loss incurred and the main purpose, as in the 
Case of fines, is the maintenance of discipline. The worker’s grievance is 
that both the amount of the damage and the extent of his personal respon- 
sibility are left to the determination of the employer. In India the com- 
monest types of deductions under this category are the debits made on