WAGES AND EFFICIENCY REWARD
(_a_) THE REWARD SYSTEM.
The rational study of work and the worker shows the following
principles to be essential when general and continuous efficiency is
the end in view:
1. The greatest efficiency is obtained when the worker is most
contented.
2. There is a limit to endurance, and efficiency cannot be maintained
if this limit be exceeded.
3. The working environment must be agreeable.
4. The nature of the work must be considered in determining the working
hours and conditions.
5. There must be no penalties or price cutting.
6. Suggestions must be encouraged and suitable rewards given for those
which are acted upon.
7. There must be an incentive to efficiency, which should take the
form of an addition to wages when a certain minimum of production is
exceeded.
8. Work must be carefully studied in detail so as to discover
conditions which give every worker the same opportunity of reaching a
high efficiency.
9. Earnings in excess of the day rate should be in proportion to
efficiency.
10. The generally accepted day rate of wages must be absolutely
guaranteed to the worker, no matter what his efficiency.
All this is not pampering the worker or making concessions to him. The
hard fact remains that it is only by adopting these principles that
the greatest efficiency can be obtained--viz., greater production of a
better quality of work for the same or less expenditure in wages and
works costs. That it also gives the worker more income, better health,
less fatigue, greater contentment, are happy circumstances that make
for a rational and equable understanding between employer and worker
with a maximum of benefit to both sides, that entail no sacrifice of
principle on either side, and enable us to look forward to a national
efficiency which will be the achievement and the pride of every class
of which the State is composed.
But under what circumstances can these principles be put into practice?
As they evolved out of the methodical and patient study of production
and the application of common-sense ideas to labour and its ways,
we have not far to seek. The recorded results have been unified into
a system which has been and which may be applied to all sorts and
conditions of labour; this system, so far as it directly affects the
worker, is denoted herein by the short expression, the Reward System.
It is a method whereby a worker is paid according to his efficiency.
There is a guaranteed minimum which is equal to his ordinary wage;
after that, the greater his efficiency the more he is paid.
In order that he may have every opportunity of reaching a high
efficiency without undue strain or discomfort during his work, every
detail of the work, the machines, and the conditions, receives
consideration.
He is not left to do the job in the best way he can think of, with any
tools he may consider suitable. Before he starts any job under the
Reward System, both the job and the machine on which it must be done
have been studied and timed; the best tools for the purpose have been
selected; the right speeds have been chosen; the correct depth and
speed of cut have been decided upon, and so on. Also the comfort of the
worker has received attention, and if he can do the work better sitting
than standing, a chair is provided.
All this means that, as far as possible, the job is equalised for every
worker who is put on it, and every job is put on a time and condition
basis, which results in every worker having an equal opportunity.
It is therefore quite clear that, as conditions are the same for every
worker, the amount of work done, and in consequence the amount of
reward earned, depends entirely on the energy and ability of the worker
himself.
The above is, of course, only a statement, and the worker will want to
know just how the right times and conditions are arrived at, and what
assurance he has that conditions will not be altered once they are
fixed.
Here we will consider the general principles; an example with fuller
detail is given in Part II.
First, all the details of the work to be done, the material of which it
is to be made, the method of manufacture, are carefully considered by
the design and planning departments of the factory.
The particulars of the job, together with a drawing, if necessary, are
handed to the time study engineer in order that he may see the finished
and unfinished sizes, the quality of material, the machine and tools to
be used, etc.
The position of time study engineer is one of the most onerous and
responsible in the whole field of the scientific study of work and the
worker. He should be a man of considerable skill and experience; he
must be thoroughly practical, and should have had a shop training in
addition to his scientific studies; he should be able to divide the
work up into elements suitable for the machine on which the work has
to be done, and to suggest improvements in the methods of performing
it; he must be able to see that the work is carried out in the most
expeditious way; he should be well educated apart from his engineering
training, and should have a knowledge of hygiene, physiology, and
psychology, in order that he may understand the effect of work on
different workers, the causes and prevention of fatigue, and what
surroundings are best for the health and happiness of the worker.
Such a man should be chosen with the greatest care, as so much depends
on his engineering ability, his sympathetic judgment, and his broad
outlook on the question of production from the point of view of both
worker and employer.
And, in consequence, his standing in the firm should be correspondingly
high, if he is to fulfil his duties satisfactorily to himself and to
those with whom he is associated--worker, trade-union, and employer.
When the job goes into the shops, a few of the articles are passed
through each operation in order that the worker may become familiar
with it. This also enables the time study engineer to see that tools
and speeds are satisfactory and to cut out useless motions.
A special time study is then made of each detail or element of the
work from the time it comes to the worker to the time it leaves him.
Every change that occurs--for instance, when the machine is stopped or
another tool is brought into position--is the end of one element and
the beginning of another, and each element is timed and recorded. For
this work a good average worker is chosen, and he is paid time and a
quarter during the study.
The reason for this separation into elements and the careful timing
of each is in order to find out exactly what time each element should
take. These are averaged out when a certain number have been timed, and
the average is assumed to be the correct time for each element. Then
the average times of all the elements are added, and this gives the
time of the operation which that particular worker is engaged upon.
In this manner the best method is found, and one that puts all workers
on exactly the same basis, which is the essence of the system.
It is not claimed that the time study is perfect and that the records
obtained are absolutely exact. Even with the greatest care errors
will creep in and the times will be incorrect. This especially is the
case with hand work. Again, the skill of the worker increases very
considerably, and he himself finds quicker methods of doing the work.
All that is claimed for the time study method is that the dividing
up of the operation into elements, and timing them as carefully as
possible and eliminating all unnecessary movements, gives the nearest
approach to perfection of rate setting yet discovered; there is a
bed-rock character about it that is not found in any other system.
The time thus obtained is considered to be the fastest time in which
the operation can be done. Actually, it is not the fastest time for
two reasons, one being that any time so obtained may be improved on
when the worker becomes thoroughly used to the job, and the other
being that a good _average_ worker is chosen for the time study, and
therefore a first-class man can improve on the time obtained. But it
is _considered_ to be the fastest time, and we will call it the "base
time."
It is quite evident that this cannot be reached regularly by every
worker, and this is taken into consideration when determining the
standard time.
To obtain the standard time--namely, the time in which the work is
_expected_ to be done--an allowance is made on the base time. This
allowance depends on the nature of the work, greater allowances being
made for jobs that necessitate a good deal of handling than for jobs
that are nearly all cutting, because cutting is independent of the
worker.
(_b_) THE BASIS OF REWARD PAYMENT.
This standard time is the basis of the Reward System, and is therefore
the most important time. It is so fixed in relation to base time that
every worker put on that work should be able to reach it. If he does
so, he is said to have reached an efficiency of 100 per cent.
A worker who reaches continuously 100 per cent. is a high efficiency
man.
This efficiency should always be reached by a worker who follows the
instructions and works diligently.
Reward begins, however, considerably before this point is reached,
because it may be necessary for a worker to be on a job some time
before he reaches a high efficiency. Again, sometimes one worker is
naturally slower than another, and although his work is good he can
reach 100 per cent. efficiency only by special effort. There would
be little encouragement if reward did not begin until the worker had
reached the 100 per cent. point.
For these reasons, and as an incentive to every man to become as highly
efficient as possible, reward begins when the worker reaches 75 per
cent. efficiency.
(This particular figure of 75 per cent. is taken to illustrate the
method, and because it is frequently used as the reward point. Any
percentage may be used, and several methods are given in Part III.)
This means that a time addition of 33-1/3 per cent. is made to the
standard time or standard production in order to obtain a new figure,
which is called "reward time" or "reward production," because it is the
point where reward begins.
The following are three brief examples showing the working out of the
reward earned:
I. II.
Base time 12 hours 8 hours
Standard time (= base + 25%) 15 " 10 "
Reward time (= standard + 33-1/3%) 20 " 13.3 "
Time taken 16-1/2 " 8.5 "
Time saved 3-1/2 " 4.8 "
Rate per hour 9d. 9d.
Reward 3-1/2 x 9 = 2s. 8d. 4.8 x 9 = 3s. 7d.
Reward, week of 48 hours 7s. 9d. 20s. 2d.
Weekly day wage 36s. 0d. 36s. 0d.
Total earnings 43s. 9d. 56s. 2d.
Efficiency 91% 117.5%
III.
Base quantity 40 per hour
Standard quantity (= base - 10%) 36 "
Reward quantity (= standard - 25%) 27 "
Time worked 6 hours
Quantity produced 220
Reward quantity for 6 hours 162
Excess quantity 58
Reward at 27 for 6d. 1s.
Reward for week of 48 hours 8s.
Weekly day wage 24s.
Total earnings 32s.
Efficiency 102%
The two first examples are on a time basis, and the third on a quantity
basis. These are worked out in detail in Part II.
The first thing that strikes one when these figures are examined is
that wages are considerably increased. In view of this increase the
worker will want to know more about the conditions under which the
work is done, and whether such earnings can be maintained continuously
without special effort.
The reply is that such earnings not only can be, but are being, made
regularly, and the workers have a greater degree of comfort in their
work than they have under usual working conditions.
This is because of the time study method. Every detail of the work is
carefully studied, as has been explained, and everything that will
aid the worker to increase his output has been provided. The work is
brought to the machine and taken away by labourers, the tools are all
specially designed and exactly suited to the work. Instruction cards
are given to the worker, so that he can see exactly what he has to do,
how he has to do it, and the time he should do it in. If he can do the
work sitting better than standing, a chair or stool is provided.
In fact, everything is done to assist the worker to reach a high
efficiency, as this means greater production besides greater reward.
The Reward System is, clearly, far better than either day work or
piece work. The time study shows what is the best time in which a
good average worker can do the job. A trustworthy worker and one who
appreciates the time study principle must be selected for the study. If
this were not done, a false time might be obtained, and this would lead
to doubts as to whether the times of other jobs were correct. This is a
difficulty that hardly ever arises, because the worker knows that he is
being fairly dealt with, and there is nothing to be gained by getting a
false time.
Times once obtained are never altered so long as the conditions remain
the same.
Some exceptionally good workmen can make large rewards every week, and
it is to the firm's benefit that they should do so. Suppose the price
was lowered because of this high reward. The general efficiency of
all the workers would fall immediately, and the dissatisfaction with
the alteration in price and with the firm's attitude would result in
serious loss to all concerned.
The following is an example of what happens under an ordinary bonus
scheme when times are reduced:
-------------+---------+-------+-------+-------+--------------------------
| | | | | _Works Costs at 2s.
| | | | | per Hour, including
|_Time |_Time |_Time |_Reward| Labour._
|allowed._|taken._|saved._| at |
| | | | 10d._ +--------------------------
| | | | |_Cost._|_Reward._|_Total._
+---------+-------+-------+-------+-------+---------+--------
| Hours. | Hours.| Hours.| s. d. | s. d.| s. d. | s. d.
Original time| 5 | 4 | 1 | 10 | 8 0 | 10 | 8 10
Cut to | 4 | 3-1/2 | 1/2 | 5 | 7 0 | 5 | 7 5
" | 3-1/2 | 3 | 1/2 | 5 | 6 0 | 5 | 6 5
" | 3 | 7 | -- | -- | 14 0 | -- | 14 0
Increased to | 4 | 7 | -- | -- | 14 0 | -- | 14 0
" " | 5 | 3-1/2 | 1-1/2 | 1 3 | 7 0 | 1 3 | 8 3
Cut to | 4-1/2 | 7 | -- | -- | 14 0 | -- | 14 0
-------------+---------+-------+-------+-------+-------+---------+--------
In this case the original piece time allowed for the work was five
hours, this being an estimate based on the time taken when working
under day work. The men were paid at the rate of 10d. per hour, and the
works costs, including labour, amounted to 2s. per hour. Bonus was paid
on the time saved.
The workers completed the job in four hours, a reduction of one hour
on the time set, and thereby earned a bonus of 10d. The time was cut
to four hours, and the work was done in three and a half hours, the
workers earning a bonus of 5d. It was then cut to three and half hours,
and the workers completed the job in three hours. Again the time was
cut, but the patience of the workers had reached its limit, and the
time taken was seven hours, with a correspondingly increased works cost.
The time was immediately increased to four hours, but with no effect.
On increasing the time to the original five hours the workers completed
the job in three and a half hours, and earned a very good bonus. Once
again the time was cut, with the result that the workers' suspicion was
aroused, and the time promptly jumped to seven hours. The workers had
learned their lesson!
Neither worker nor employer can be satisfied with such a result, and
mutual suspicion is the natural outcome. Yet all rates must be juggled
with in this manner in the absence of a method whereby the time may be
accurately determined.
It follows that, in the first place, the firm will not cut prices,
and, in the second, that the first-class worker may earn the highest
reward in his power, with the knowledge that he is not injuring the
welfare of his fellow-workers in any way.
Now, suppose for some reason a worker takes longer than reward time to
do a job, or suppose he produces less than reward quantity. It only
means that he gets no reward. His day wages, 36s. or 24s. a week,
or whatever it may be, are absolutely guaranteed. Whatever happens,
his day wage is not interfered with. It must be kept in mind always
that--_Day wages are for attendance; reward, is for efficiency._ The
two things are distinct, and it is advisable to pay wages and reward
earnings at different times. The firm must see to it that when the
worker is in the works he earns his day wage, and in this respect the
day wage standard is equivalent to reward production or reward time. If
the worker does less than these he is not earning his wage, although he
gets it, and such a case calls for the immediate attention of the firm
as well as of the worker.
Let us sum up the foregoing points:
1. The time study gives all the workers the same opportunity of earning
reward.
2. Reward is paid for all production above a certain minimum.
3. Reward begins at such a production that everyone should be able to
earn some reward.
4. The standard production is so calculated that all workers should
reach it by diligence and careful attention to the instructions.
5. No matter how large a worker's reward may be, prices cannot be cut.
6. The worker is safeguarded by the conditions of the system.
7. The day wage is guaranteed even if the production be less than the
reward point.
8. As reward is proportional to profit (the higher the reward the
greater the efficiency, and the greater the efficiency the greater the
firm's profit), the worker is encouraged to earn high reward. This can
only be done by good conditions and freedom from fatigue, and therefore
the comfort of the worker is assured by the principles of the system.
(_c_) SPECIAL REWARD FOR HIGH EFFICIENCY.
Besides the reward described in the foregoing explanation, special
reward is given to all high efficiency workers--that is, to those who
reach 100 per cent. efficiency all through the week.
This special reward takes the form of paying the worker a bonus either
in the form of a sum of money or an additional percentage on the
standard time.
If the worker's efficiency reaches 100 per cent. or more for any one
week, and the hours on reward are, say, forty or more, a cash reward of
1s. or 2s., or other suitable amount depending on the status, etc., of
the worker, is given in addition to the reward earned by production. It
is necessary to base this special reward on the number of hours worked;
otherwise, if the worker happened to be only an hour or so on reward
during the week, and his efficiency for that hour was 100 per cent., he
would get the special reward, and this would be absurd as well as being
unfair to workers who had been on reward all the week.
In the other case, when the worker reaches 100 per cent. efficiency
on any one job, no matter how long it takes, his reward for that job
jumps 5 per cent. or 10 per cent., or whatever special proportion be
decided upon. If the reward point be 75 per cent., then at 100 per
cent. efficiency the reward is 33-1/3 per cent. of the job rate. To
this would be added, say, 5 per cent., thus making the reward 38-1/3
per cent. of the job rate.
(_d_) THE CLASSIFICATION OF WORK.
A very important matter in connection with the Reward System is that of
deciding the right kind of worker for the different classes of work.
For work requiring much skill and close application, or work which
requires skilled handling, the highest class of worker is necessary
and the job rates will be high. For work which is automatic or
semi-automatic, boys or girls may be employed. For work such as rough
drilling or heavy unskilled handling, men who have no special skill
or training may be suitable. But the point where one grade of labour
merges into another is not easily defined and needs very careful
consideration.
The circumstances of different trades vary so greatly that it is
impossible to apply any rules in such general notes as these. It must
be left to the employer, the workers, and their trade-unions, to settle
these grades between them, and from the trade practice there should not
be much difficulty.
One thing stands out--namely, the worker who has a continuously
high efficiency in any grade is easily distinguishable, and would be
selected to pass into a higher grade with higher wages when opportunity
occurred.
(_e_) REWARD DERIVED FROM INCREASED PRODUCTION.
It may be asked how it is that a firm can afford to begin paying reward
when a job is done in twenty hours, while the time study shows that the
same job can be done in twelve hours?
The reply is, First, that under ordinary day work the waste of time
on the job is so great that the job would certainly take longer
than twenty hours; second, that by giving reward there is a decided
incentive for the worker to do the work in a shorter time; third, that
twelve hours is the shortest possible time with a good average worker
working under the most favourable conditions, and this happens so
seldom that it may be considered accidental, though it is necessary to
observe these conditions when making a time study in order to find an
absolute basis on which to pay reward; fourth, for every hour saved
on the job the overhead charges are reduced proportionally, and this
lowers the works cost.
If a job takes twenty-four hours under day work, it is clear that, if
the same job be done in nineteen hours, some reward may be allowed,
while if it be done in fifteen hours an extra bonus may be given.
The training in efficiency habits of work is also very valuable, and
means economy all round. A man not used to these habits may expend
twice as much energy and produce half as much work as an efficient man.
(_f_) SAFEGUARDS.
The time study is in itself an absolute safeguard against cutting
times. It is quite impossible for a job to be done in less than a
certain time by an average worker after all the elements have been
studied and tested. So long as the elements do not change, the times
must hold good, and a new study will confirm this if any doubt arises.
So that if the workers are all taking high rewards it is clear proof
that they are of high efficiency.
Suppose a firm cuts the time with the object of getting more profit.
One result is shown on p. 27. Another result is that the good workers
will leave, because efficient men can always get good jobs elsewhere.
As a matter of fact, however, rates are practically never cut. It
does not pay to cut rates, because if efficient men leave, and only
inefficient men are left, the firm loses heavily, and their own time
studies together with the general efficiency of the workers show how
valuable their men are.
This is why the time study is a decided safeguard against cutting rates.
One method of rate revision sometimes occurs. When a job is found to
be rated too highly from some cause or other, and the worker is taking
excessive reward on that job, a change is made in the conditions of
the work and the job is restudied. Two reasons are given for this
procedure: first, that it is unfair to the other men for one man to
be taking exceptionally heavy reward, and, second, under the new
conditions the job is still on exactly the same basis as all other jobs
in the factory, and standard efficiency with its proportionate reward
can be made just as easily as in other cases.
There is another safeguard. The relation between standard and reward
times is so arranged that when a worker reaches standard he gets at
least 25 per cent. of the job rate. This is an accepted principle, and
must be conceded always. It is an irreducible minimum in connection
with the Reward System.
It may be said that, however much the principle is accepted, it does
not follow that the employer will stick to it.
But he must! If he does not do so, what is the alternative? Either he
gives less than 25 per cent. reward or he gives none until the standard
time is reached. In the first case, if he gives less than 25 per cent.,
reward is not worth working for, and the worker will not trouble about
it, thereby rendering the whole system useless. If the worker gets no
reward until standard time is reached, the effort required by the men
is so great in order to get reward that it is not worth it, and the men
do not try for it.
So that this principle must be accepted by the employer whether he
likes it or not, if the system is to be a success.
It is not to the interest of the employer to treat the worker badly.
Firms with brains and foresight enough to adopt time study methods are
not going to spoil the whole business by getting the workers up against
them. It is more to the firm's interest than to the worker's to get a
continuously high efficiency; that is why time study and reward methods
were introduced by the employers, and not by the workers.
(_g_) ATTENTION TO SERVICE DETAILS.
It must be clearly understood that the Reward System does not pretend
to be by any means a solution of all the difficulties between employer
and worker.
Without mutual good-will no system will work satisfactorily. What is
claimed for the Reward System is that it provides a basis upon which a
good understanding and a mutual interest in increased production can be
built up and maintained.
The time study shows beyond argument the very quickest time in which
a job can be done by an average man with the means at his disposal. If
this is followed up by a rational organisation, the Reward System will
be entirely successful. But if an employer endeavours to foist the time
study and Reward System on an existing rule-of-thumb organisation, it
will undoubtedly fail, and will cause deep suspicion in the mind of the
worker as well as being wholly unsatisfactory to the employer. It will
be looked upon as an endeavour to get more out of the worker without an
adequate return, and this, as a matter of fact, is just what it will be.
One thing is certain: No employer will adopt the Reward System unless
he sees clearly that it is to his direct financial benefit, and there
is no reason why he should. He, on his part, would be foolish to take
on an increased responsibility without adequate return.
It follows, therefore, that the system is part of the rational
organisation of production, and it cannot be properly carried on
without such organisation.
Even when such a system is adopted, there are ample opportunities for
letting things slide and for unfair conditions to creep in. This is why
the worker should understand the system, because then only will he be
able to assert his position and see that conditions are fair.
The following are some of the things to watch out for:
Time study must not be used for speeding up day workers. There is a
tendency to do this when it is found that a job can be done in half the
time, but it must be remembered that conditions are quite different and
the incentive is lacking. The remedy is to put all workers on reward
as far as possible, and to adopt a profit-sharing or other scheme to
stimulate day workers.
Overstrain and fatigue must be carefully guarded against. This means,
as a rule, guarding the worker against himself. He wishes to earn as
much reward as he can, but if he feels tired out at the end of the day
he is doing too much, and he will wonder why his efficiency drops. One
part of the system is to consider fatigue, and to make an allowance on
the base time to cover necessary rests during the day.
Cutting the rates need hardly be mentioned, because it is very bad
policy on the part of the employer, and always means loss of efficiency
and hence loss of profit.
The question of keeping machinery in order and bringing up supplies is
one that the worker must watch. It is no use trying to reach a standard
time when one gets let down by lack of attention on the part of other
people. It is true that a day time allowance may be given, but this
is not altogether satisfactory. It means that reward cannot be earned
for the day time period, and, besides that, there is a possibility
of not receiving the allowance. It is possible, also, that the
superintendent may refuse allowances, and so dissatisfaction results.
Day time allowances and allowances for exceptional conditions (such
as bad metal), which increase the machine time, are open to abuse. If
a worker reach 99.5 per cent. efficiency or thereabouts, it is quite
possible that an unfair allowance of an hour, or even half an hour, on
the job will put him over the 100 per cent. efficiency mark, and his
reward rate would be considerably increased. With regard to bringing
up supplies and attending to slight machine breakdowns--broken belts,
for instance--the labourer or other person responsible should be put
on reward, his reward being in proportion to the average reward of the
workers he serves.
The worker must see that proper allowances are made for bad work
which he is not responsible for. For instance, if he is on small parts
on an automatic machine, and the inspector throws out several pieces
as spoiled, it may be the fault of a bad adjustment which the worker
cannot help. It is the worker's duty to stop his machine and draw
attention to the fault; but if it can only be found on close inspection
in the inspection room, and if it consists of, say, a capstan becoming
loose, it may be impossible for the worker to detect the fault while
the work is in process, and it is no fault of his.
The proper counting of the quantity of work done is a point that must
be insisted on. On large work it is simple enough, but on small parts
that are counted by weighing it is easy to make serious mistakes.
Proper check must be kept on the gears used for a particular job. On
automatic machinery a change of gear is frequently necessary, and if
the change is not properly recorded it may mean that cycle time--the
time of all the elements done by the machine on that part--is quite
wrong, and an efficiency much too high or too low is the result.
Reward is reckoned either on each job taken by itself or on the net
result of the week's work. The former is better for the worker, but it
is not always fair to the employer, because there is a tendency for
the worker to take it easy on difficult jobs where there is little
chance of earning reward. With an exact time study and close attention
to instructions, such cases, theoretically, should never occur; but
they do, because it is impossible to get every job on exactly the same
basis, and the worker after a little experience knows what jobs are
easy and what are difficult. In some shops the experiment of deducting
inefficiency from efficiency has been tried. That is, suppose a worker
was 10 per cent. below reward efficiency one week, then that 10 per
cent. has been deducted from his efficiency the following week before
reward has been allowed. Result: Disaster! The fairest way is to take
the balance of efficiency on the week's work, and if a particular
job is a bad one from the worker's point of view, he can always draw
attention to it.
Another important matter is that of determining the class of work
which is to go to the worker. Automatic work will go to comparatively
unskilled workers, but the dividing line between classes of work is
sometimes a very fine one. Skilled handwork must be given to the
skilled worker, of course; but it is impossible to lay down any rules
in this connection, and the worker must keep his eyes open, and either
draw attention to doubtful cases or consult his trade-union.
The greatest difficulty is in fixing the allowance on the base time in
order to obtain standard time. It is easy to fix it so that the worker
cannot reach standard time, and that means a loss of efficiency and of
reward. This is essentially a point for trade-union interference, and
it is here that the supreme value of the time study is best appreciated.
Most of the foregoing items are in connection with the practical
working of the system, and it is to the interests of both employer and
worker that all such interferences with production should be prevented.
Each trade will have its special loopholes where miscalculations can
creep in, and the worker must watch for these and have them corrected
immediately they are discovered.
(_h_) LOSS OF SKILL DUE TO THE REWARD SYSTEM
It is sometimes stated that under time study methods a man cannot
attain the same skill as a day work man, and that he loses what skill
he had if he becomes a "team" worker.
Let us consider this contention.
Suppose a man leaves a "reward" shop and goes to work in a day work
shop; is he any less efficient under day work because of his training
under the Reward System?
Now, in the first place, he has been trained and used to care
and diligence, to working to definite instructions. Is that any
disadvantage to him? It is clear that such an experience is a distinct
advantage. But has he the same knowledge and adaptability and
initiative as the older-fashioned worker? Can he tackle a difficult job
with the same chance of success?
Well, what difficulties has he to face? It does not follow that
because he has been working to instructions he remains in ignorance
of the essential factors of his trade. On the contrary, instructions
scientifically worked out give him far more knowledge than if he is
compelled to work them out for himself. The men who work out these
instructions are highly paid men who have all the advantages of a shop
training and a scientific engineering education combined, and this is
an expensive and arduous business. If a man prove a failure, one may be
sure he will not be allowed to continue planning out such instructions
as we are discussing.
Therefore one must assume that the men who make out the instructions
have studied every element of the case. The brains of these men are in
the methods and instructions used by the workman, and if the latter is
worth his salt he will soon know far more than the old rule-of-thumb
man.
If the worker is a man of ordinary common sense, he cannot help but
take notice of the ways in which jobs are done; of the best and most
satisfactory tools, both shape and material; of proper speeds and
proper depths of cut for roughing and finishing; and many other details
that are constantly before him.
"But this system converts the workman into a mere machine, and already
his work is too dull and mechanical!" That has been said, but not by
anyone who understands the system or who has had direct experience of
it.
That work under _present_ conditions is often dull and mechanical
is only too true. One of the reasons why this Reward System is so
attractive to the worker is because it removes these conditions. When a
man knows he is being paid for efficiency, the work immediately ceases
to be dull; as soon as a man is interested in producing as much work as
he can, that work immediately ceases to be mechanical. Some jobs will
always be mechanical and dull, and the only thing to do in such cases
is to change the worker at frequent periods.
The conditions under which the Reward System is run must be agreeable,
because it means a loss of efficiency if they are not; and when a
man is working under agreeable conditions, when he knows he gets a
reward for his efficiency, when he knows that rates cannot be cut,
when he knows he is doing no injury to his fellow-workers by earning
big rewards, he is happier at his work, he takes greater interest in
it, he comes to it with a certain degree of pleasure, and he leaves it
with far less fatigue and with greater contentment than under any other
system.
One can say with certainty that a man who is a good workman under any
other system will be a better workman under the Reward System. A bad
workman will be bad under any system, but such a one can "find himself"
much more certainly under the Reward System than under any other. In
many cases, too, a very moderate workman will find some one particular
job where he can do good work and earn good money. He will want to stay
on that job, of course, and if he keeps up his efficiency the employer
will agree that he shall stay on it.
There is one remarkable thing that no other method of wage payment
shares--namely, it is to the direct and immediate benefit of both
worker and employer that the greatest efficiency be obtained.