_Economy of minute division._—The advantages, limits and disadvantages of
minute division of labor are worthy of a more careful discussion, since
they bear upon every kind of enterprise and all classes of labor. A large
part of the century’s progress in manufacture, and especially the
development of machinery in production, has grown out of the extension of
this principle of division. An analysis of the particulars by which great
saving is made in the cost of production will help us not only to
understand the facts better, but to extend the principle in various
directions. In the outset it implies the united effort of several workmen
in succession and in close combination upon a single product. It is said
that a pocket knife, which we buy for fifty cents, has involved in its
manufacture the services of seventy-two different persons, doing different
things. The perfection of its finish depends upon the perfection of each
of these persons in his single act. The cheapness depends upon the
readiness with which each act is performed, and the utility of every kind
of power employed.
A good illustration of division of labor may be found in the process of
butchering hogs in a large packing house. The live hogs enter the building
in the upper story, while able to carry themselves on their own feet.
Their weight then moves them easily on through all the stages of the
process. Two men catch the hogs by hooking a short chain about the hind
leg and slipping it into the notch of an endless chain power, which hoists
them to the carrier, a continuous track upon which a roller attached to
the chain may easily move. A single man wields the knife which sticks the
hogs. Two men are sufficient to manage the scalding trough. One directs
the machine through which the body of each hog is jerked to remove by
brushes the mass of hair. Four, perhaps, may handle scrapers as the hogs
are dropped upon a platform, and six more may use the shaving knives by
which every particle of hair is removed. Two are needed with different
tools for beheading; and one makes place for the gambrel. Two remove the
feet at opposite ends, three with different implements are needed in
removing entrails, two are required to halve the body, while another gives
it the final washing. The result is that each hog has passed from the pen
to the cooling room in less than ten minutes, and the hogs pass under the
hands of these several men at the rate of eight a minute. Each man uses
but one tool in one particular spot, and repeats that single act
constantly. By a similar division of labor eighteen men are employed in
skinning a single beef, a different knife being used for each particular
part of the body, and all pass in regular routine over the ten or twelve
beeves undergoing the operation. The rapidity of this motion can scarcely
be conceived by one who has witnessed simply the butchering upon a farm.
All this is due to a minute division of labor into as many tasks as there
are different operations, each man having, if possible, but one distinct
kind of motion. The saving is not only shown in the increased quantity of
work, but in the uniform quality as well. All the workmanship is
essentially perfect. These advantages appear more strikingly in the
manufacturing arts, where the so-called factory system has brought
division of labor to perfection.
A brief analysis of the advantages, limitations and disadvantages is worth
our study, because of their possible application to farm industry. So far
they have been felt chiefly in contributory manufactures of farm
machinery, facilities for transportation, with all attending manufacture,
and the factories consuming raw materials furnished from the farms. They
apply equally well where division of labor is profitable in farm
operations.
_Extra efficiency of labor._—Most obvious advantage is seen in the saving
of the time of a laborer, both in learning the essential parts of his
work, so that apprenticeship is shortened to one-tenth or one-twentieth of
the time required for a full trade, and in the far greater dexterity with
which he works without change of tools or change of location or
distraction of attention. Thus a raw hand in the course of a few months
performs his single task more rapidly and more perfectly than an expert
workman who must know and practice all the parts of the business. While
such a hand can scarcely be called skilled in a technical sense, in the
narrow application of skill to one action he may be more perfect than any
skilled workman. The fact that each man’s work passes immediately under
the inspection of another, whose motion must exactly correspond in time
and adjustment, makes any costly oversight in the shape of executive labor
very much less, since every step in the process tests every other step. It
is also found that minute attention to a single detail tends toward the
highest improvement by invention of every tool and machine employed.
While this system is not likely to foster the inventive spirit which
brings out entirely new principles in machinery, because the work grows
easy by familiarity, it does make the workmen quick to invent the little
devices that perfect such machines. A broader culture and more general
training discovers the difficulties and devises the entirely new method:
the worker hits upon improvements. Watt invented the steam engine, but a
lazy boy employed to move the valve hit upon the automatic movement.
_Increased efficiency of capital._—The efficiency of capital in production
is greatly increased by minute division of labor. The shop room required
for each man is reduced to the minimum space for himself and his material.
His tools, while the most perfect possible, are the fewest possible.
The machinery and motive power are used to their utmost capacity
constantly, and the economy of larger engines and machines is well known.
Possibly one-fifth of the power required to move all the machines used by
ten men working as independent tradesmen would provide better motion, more
constant and cheaper, for the ten working together under division of
labor. The waste in starting and stopping of machinery is almost entirely
avoided, and the condition of the machine for doing its work well is kept
up to the best. A most important saving is in diminution of waste. The
shortened apprenticeship and the superior dexterity make waste from
blunders almost nothing. Still more noticeable is the saving from any
waste of superior abilities, either strength or judgment, upon actions
requiring little ability.
Under minute division of labor a strong man is kept where he is needed and
the child may serve where his powers are sufficient. The efficiency of
women is recognized wherever applicable, and all the workers have their
full abilities made constantly useful. Moreover, the circulating capital
represented in the raw materials is kept in use much less time than under
the less effective system. Since any article of manufacture passes through
all the operations upon it in very much less time, the interest upon
capital employed in holding the material and in supporting the labor
during its changes is indefinitely less. The quicker returns from this
more rapid manufacture are everywhere recognized.
_Limits of division._—With all its advantages, division of labor is
limited by circumstances. It can never be applied where, because of poor
roads or peculiarities of temper or habit of life, the workers are
naturally separated. The necessary isolation of the farmers for the sake
of space makes any combination for the sake of economy in dividing their
tasks almost impracticable. Even where farms are small, few advantages
from division of labor by different kinds of work can be adopted. The
farmers are too far apart to work directly into each other’s hands. It is
limited, too, by the natural demand for the products of labor. If the
labor of one man can supply all need of iron work in his community, there
is no possibility of employing ten, even with a hundred times the
effectiveness. This is well illustrated in the country store, which sells
everything over the same counter. Not even the grocery department can be
separated until the demand is sufficient to support two store-keepers in
two stores.
But even in places where division of labor is stimulated by demand, it can
go no further than the number of distinct motions required in carrying
through the manufacture of the article made. Indeed, economy requires that
each motion should make a complete round, so that the work begins and ends
for each worker with everything in the same position. The exception is
when a motion with great exertion requires an interval of rest before a
second. Two men with a cross-cut saw, although their motions are alike, do
more than twice as much as one man, because of the relief in pushing back
the saw.
A most important limit, however, is made by the inconstancy of natural
forces employed in any industry. This is notable in all the processes of
agriculture. No matter how many workers combine in raising field crops,
they can gain but few advantages from dividing their tasks minutely. Each
laborer must be employed through the year, and the change of seasons
requires that he be ready for all the operations of the different seasons
in planting and tilling and gathering through all the succession. Ordinary
changes of weather, cold or hot, wet or dry, windy or calm, make necessary
changes in his labor. The uncertainties of each year as to moisture and
heat require a variety of ventures, so that no farmer dares confine
himself to raising but a single crop. Even under the most favorable
conditions the different stages of growth are so intimately related that
the watchfulness of the same interested manager is required at every
stage. A delicate plant must be carried delicately, even in transplanting.
More important still are the conditions of fertility, which make a
rotation of crops and even mixed farming essential to highest
productiveness. If each field must have its definite series of cropping
and tillage, together with the application of animal manures, the
advantage of these combined operations under the oversight and labor of a
single farmer outweighs the advantage of more perfect division of labor.
The result of all these limitations, so obvious in agriculture, is that
farm work is but slightly more effective or more continuous than it was
hundreds of years since. While improved machinery has immensely reduced
the cost of certain processes, a year’s labor involves innumerable changes
of employment, so that no farmer inquires, in hiring his help, for an
expert in any direction, but wants a man of all work whose skill is
largely ingenuity in adjusting himself to the constantly changing duties.
_Suggestions of fuller division of farm labor._—It seems possible, with
the improved condition of agriculture and the nearness of ready markets,
to attempt a larger use of division of labor in several directions. A
group of farmers, well acquainted with the possible advantages, may
classify their farms as grain farms, dairy farms, breeding farms, feeding
farms and market-gardens. Such a community of interests would find not
only the advantages of exchange between each other, as well as the rest of
the world, but would soon build up bodies of expert young men in the
several specialties, whose work would be at a premium everywhere.
With these interests recognized, still greater division of labor is
possible. An expert in the care of trees and prevention of diseases to
fruits and vegetables can quickly find employment, and may perfect himself
in all the requirements of successive seasons. A dairy expert may find use
for his superior knowledge and skill on successive tours among the dairy
farms. Every farm large enough to employ several men gains some of the
advantages of division by making each man responsible for a definite part
of the farm work. The less the workmen are handled in gangs, the better
each one’s abilities can be trained to meet his responsibilities. These
possibilities are greatly increased by every device for diminishing the
effect of weather changes. Under-drainage gives large advantages in this
direction from lengthening the time during which the same operation can go
forward. Means of protecting crops in the field serve a similar end.
Perhaps the easiest application to be made in any neighborhood is a system
of marketing, through keeping an expert collector and distributor of
produce busy in a limited region. All the waste of articles too few to be
carried to market is practically saved, and constant association with the
markets of the world is made possible. Especially is this applicable to
small fruits, milk, butter and eggs. If this market wagon can also serve
to carry the daily mail for all the neighborhood, the problem of rural
delivery would be almost solved with a trifling expense. Even where such a
measure is not possible, neighboring farmers may approach such results by
combining for market and mail days in a circle, each taking a different
day of the week when he will do his neighbor’s errands.
With increased confidence in mutual interests, it seems possible that
specialists in various directions might grow up among a united circle of
farmers. The use of machinery and blooded stock can certainly be greatly
increased by careful adjustment of interests. Great improvements in seed
and in methods of culture may be discovered by agreement among a body of
farmers that certain individuals shall make a specialty of those
improvements. It is even conceivable that a rotation of crops might be
carried on upon a dozen farms, while each farmer gives his attention to
his specialty. It would require, of course, a much closer combination in
credit with each other than has yet been found among farmers. At the very
best, however, farming must still remain the most prominent illustration
of limitation in the application of the great labor saving and capital
saving by minute division of labor.
_Disadvantages of extreme division._—The great addition to wealth so
distinctly traced to division of labor is not gained without some
disadvantages to the community. Almost certainly the inactivity of body
compelled by confinement to a simple portion of a trade induces physical
weakness. The health of workers in factories is often uncertain, and the
average of life is known to be reduced. While steadiness of employment
contributes to steady habits, the reduced activity contributes to
weakness. Perhaps even more perceptible is the tendency toward narrowness
of mind. Ingenuity is developed in the “Jack of all trades,” although his
information in regard to each one may be limited. The man who knows all
about a very small part of one trade has little to stimulate his mind to
exertion. Indeed, habit is liable to make his very action and judgment
purely automatic. The fact that the raw hand can be quickly made effective
makes the stimulation to self-education even less than in ordinary
circumstances. The constant dependence of each laborer upon the routine of
his work and his absolute dependence upon authority for his employment
lead naturally to lack of self-control. A man may grow almost like the
machine he handles, responding only to the demand of his overseer. These
tendencies foster also a growth of class distinctions. Such workmen are
thought of as operatives, held in a class by themselves. They may be
expected to know little of the interests of community outside their own
circle, and are often distrusted in matters of common welfare. They
themselves distrust the leadership of those upon whose management they
depend for employment.
All these disadvantages may be overcome by more community of interest
among workers of all classes for their comfort and improvement outside
their tasks. It is a fact that associations for the advancement of workers
in social and political freedom and mutual self-support have grown most
rapidly in the neighborhood of factories, where division of labor is
extreme. A truly philanthropic spirit may be in entire agreement with the
massing of labor for greatest accomplishment. The places of least
development are always found where crowds of laborers work in mere gangs
or wholly unorganized. The wholesome influences surrounding rural life are
everywhere granted so far as physical development goes. They may also be
granted in communities of general enterprise with reference to ready
ingenuity and judgment. The farmer’s boys moving to the cities carry not
only physical strength and endurance but a mental capacity for ready
adaptation to emergencies which develops into wisdom. The majority of
leaders in great enterprises are still expected to grow up on the farm.
This is undoubtedly in part due to the impossibility of cramping by
extreme division of labor. At the same time a partial application of its
principles is needed to bring leisure for some general culture and larger
acquaintance with the progress of the world. As the evils of factory life
can be cured by attention, so the weaknesses of rural life can be removed
by a careful study of its needs. True education in both quarters is
essential as a means of mutual understanding and adjustment of interests.