Factory Legislation Incomplete: Its intention—Sanitary and General Provisions—Causes of Inefficiency—Factory Acts a Compromise—Experts Required—Cubic Space Requirements—Reforms Needed: Health—Medical Examinations—Hygienic Regulations—Employment of Mothers—Need for Statistics—Hours of Labour: Abolition of Legal Overtime—Prevalence of Overtime—Overtime Unnecessary—Taking Work Home—Regulation of Outwork—Child Labour—Extension of the Factory Act Desirable—Laundresses—Nailmakers—Local and Imperial Authority—The Truck Act—Conclusion.
Factory Legislation Incomplete.—There is an idea abroad, which is quite unwarranted, that our body of factory legislation is more or less final in its character, and that it has, in fact, accomplished the purpose for which it was intended by its authors. The provisions of the Factory Acts range themselves for the most part under three heads. They deal either with educational matters, with the regulation of the hours of labour, or with sanitary conditions. It needs no argument to show that great progress in public opinion has been taking place in respect of these three points. The Public Health Act is sufficient evidence of the progressing standard of health in surroundings and conditions; the Education Act is certainly not of a final kind, and on no question has public feeling developed more rapidly of recent years than on that of the adaptation of the hours of labour to human capacity and health. If, on the one hand, the standard by which we are to test the effectiveness of such legislative provisions as come under these heads is much higher than it was a few years luck; on the other hand, it must be remembered that industrial conditions are not a hard and fixed quantity, that they vary with the progress of invention, the incidence of competition, the creation or alteration of tariff frontiers, and many other causes. The knowledge of chemical methods alone has introduced revolutionary changes into many industries, so that regulations which were drawn up ten years ago to meet a given state of things may be out of place or inoperative now. The Factory Acts, for instance, were designed in large part to protect women and children from the exhausting effects of prolonged toil, the idea at the root of the measures being the same great principle which underlies our whole system of public health. But when the agitation for the ten hours’ day culminated in the Factory Act the question, after all, was not settled. It was within the bounds of possibility that such mechanical contrivances could be devised as to make the period of legalised toil quite as harmful to the operatives, or, indeed, more so, than the longer day. The question whether intense toil concentrated into a relatively short period, is more or less trying to the human frame than if the same toil were dispersed over a relatively longer period, cannot be settled off-hand. But the fact undoubtedly remains, as I have shewn in the chapter on textile industries, that machinery has been speeded up to a point which is immensely in excess of that which prevailed when the hours were longer. At the present time, therefore, the strain upon the attention and the wear and tear of the nervous system are greatly in excess of former times, and the worker must be “on the stretch” the whole time to attend properly to the work. The illustration will serve to show how the factors governing the industrial situation shift from time to time, and act and react on one another, and that if factory legislation and administration are to be really effective they must keep pace with the times and adapt themselves to changing conditions.
The fact that so large a number of additions and modifications have been made in our factory legislation since 1802, when the first intervention of the State on behalf of factory children took place, shews that some attempt at least has been made to grapple with this part of the question. It may suffice for our immediate purpose to note the clear intention and spirit of British factory legislation; viz., the protection of those who are unable to help themselves in the matter of securing humane conditions of labour. Thus, the State does not allow children to work all their time in a factory until they are thirteen years of age, and not then unless they have attained to a standard of school proficiency, which is fixed by the Secretary of State; nor does it allow half-timers to begin work until they are eleven. Then again, no child or young person of either sex under sixteen years of age is allowed to enter a factory without obtaining a certificate from the certifying surgeon as to his or her fitness for the work. If a fatal accident happens in a workshop, or a serious or fatal accident in a factory, the certifying surgeon has to give in his report on the case. Then again, night-work is absolutely forbidden for women and children. But the State contemplates much more than this. It provides that workmen as well as women and children shall secure conditions such as are not prejudicial to their health and well-being. There are clauses in the Factory Acts—permissive, it is true, for the most part—bearing upon the efficient ventilation of factories and workshops, and providing for the installation of fans in certain cases; for the purifying of the atmosphere where noxious, poisonous, or offensive matter or injurious dusts are given off in the process of work; and for a certain allowance of space and air. Anyone who goes through the Acts carefully can have no doubt that the protection originally accorded to women and children has now in certain important respects been recognised by the State as a claim to be enforced on behalf of every class of workmen. Nor must we forget, in estimating the functions of the State in relation to labour, that the Factory Acts form one of an entire class of legislation which is based on the principle that human life and health are the direct care of the organised community, and can under no circumstances become, whether by hire or sale or any other form of contract, the property of the employing class. Thus the Mines Regulation Act forbids the employment of women underground, and fixes the age of twelve as that in which boys may go below ground; whilst it formulates a complete and most elaborate code of precautionary measures in the interests of the workmen. The Employers’ Liability Act belongs to the same category, for it throws upon the employer in a large number of cases the responsibility for injury done to his workpeople in the course of their employment.[18] It is clear then that the State is committed to a principle the maintenance of which involves responsibilities of the profoundest importance, and for the carrying out of which in their entirety not only vigilance and a highly organised staff of trained inspectors are necessary, but close and scientific acquaintance with various forms of industry, and with the physiological effects of these various forms upon life and health—in a word, administrative experience of an extremely high order. And this brings us to an inquiry as to the administrative efficiency as well as the legislative symmetry of these great industrial measures.
Reasons for Inefficiency.—But notwithstanding such admirable intentions on the part of the State many abuses still thrive amongst women workers, excessive hours are frequently worked, and hundreds and thousands of women break down every year or become prematurely old from overwork, or from the very unhealthy conditions which the Factory Acts are designed to put an end to. In spite of certifying surgeons and the code of public health enjoined by the Acts the children who enter our factories turn out totally unfitted for the strain, and grow up into half-developed beings or fall victims to some form of industrial disease. To some the criticism may suggest itself that these things cannot be cured by Act of Parliament or by encroaching on the liberty of the individual. However, as modern States have agreed that the protection of human life is one of the first reasons of their existence, and as common-sense, to say nothing of humanity, does not see much to regret in the limitation of the liberty of one class to inflict grave hardships upon another, such an objection will not take us much further. Moreover, there is a sufficient explanation of the comparative breakdown of good intentions without laying the blame upon Acts of Parliament. The gap between intention and performance, which is presumably to be found in most of our institutions as well as in individuals, is in truth not lacking in our protective labour regulations, and the vaguer the intention the greater the gap. And it would not be fair to lay the blame for the failure in giving substance to the Acts altogether upon those who administer them.
Factory Acts a Compromise.—The Factory Acts are of the nature of a compromise between two different social schools. The vague phraseology, the lack of a definite standard, the readiness to grant exceptions to certain trades, and, under certain conditions, the large discretion left in the hands both of the Secretary of State and the Inspectors of Factories, these are amongst the signs of the contending elements among which the Acts represent a compromise. Where, as in the case of the textile trades, a definite working day is laid down and overtime is absolutely prohibited, the administration of the Acts is a comparatively simple matter. The factory inspector and the factory clock between them are a match for the employer who is disposed to let his machinery run beyond the legal limit. On the other hand, where the emphatic “shall” which applies to the textile trades is changed into “may,” where overtime is permitted on account of a press of orders, or of season requirements, or the perishable nature of certain commodities, the standard of administration must inevitably become relaxed like the Acts themselves. Several instances, somewhat too technical perhaps to be given here, might be produced in which the Acts have been so drafted as to place the staff of inspectors in an almost impossible position. Thus they are supposed in a general way to see that factories and workshops are properly ventilated, and that conditions of health are favourable. When overtime is worked each person is supposed to have an allowance of 400 cubic feet of space, and the inspector is expected to be the judge of what is healthy or injurious in various processes of manufacture. These surely are cases in which a feeble and uninformed intention, rather than defective executive measures, must be held responsible for lack of results. It is obviously unreasonable to throw the responsibility upon an inspector of introducing a variety of highly-technical hygienic appliances into buildings which have been designed and erected without regard to health, and in which plant and machinery have been laid down with a single eye to production—just as unreasonable in fact as to try to preserve a town from typhoid fever by taking precautions after a defective drainage system has been completed instead of before.
Experts Required.—Again, a staff of experts is necessary for carrying out the public health side of such an Act as this, and yet the Home Secretary, with no experts to consult, is expected to preside as a minister of industrial health over the welfare of the vast mass of the working population, whilst duties are thrown upon the inspectors which could only be efficiently discharged with the help of expert sanitarians, engineers, architects, chemists, and medical men. The requirement of 400 cubic feet of space is an instance of the official brain working in a vacuum, and here again the administrative side is not to be blamed. How is a factory inspector to see that every person who works overtime gets his 400 feet? How can he calculate? Is he to set his calculation against that of the manufacturer who is anxious to keep all his hands working extra hours, and who assures him that, after making due deduction for bench room, machinery, and the like, each person will enjoy his allotted share? Assuming that it is a physical possibility for the inspector with his measuring apparatus to get round to every place of work where overtime is carried on, to keep a record of all the alterations made in the workshop and the number of persons occupied and so forth, is it to be supposed that the inspector will carry out what is presumably the intention of the law, namely, that each person shall have 400 feet of air to breathe—a very different thing from 400 feet of space, inasmuch as furnaces and gases breathe air just as much as human beings, whilst nearly every trade sets up conditions which tend to pollute or deteriorate it to some extent? Let us bear in mind that the life and health of multitudes of people hang upon the distinction between a clear and definite regulation which is framed to be carried out and a vague and misty one which may represent a principle and an intention, but cannot be reduced to practice in its clouded shape, and we shall understand the vital importance of a clear, straightforward, and definite regulation.
Reforms Needed.—Our answer then to the question, “How is it that, in spite of Factory Acts, things are still so bad to-day for many of the most defenceless workers?” is, that the State has not troubled to understand where the shoe pinches, and that in its eagerness to concede something to supposed trading interests it has allowed confusion and licence to interfere with the working of those humane enactments. I therefore propose to examine briefly the various points which call urgently for immediate reform.
(1) In respect of Health. (a) Periodical medical examination in trades where women and children are largely employed. The Certifying Surgeon—who by the way ought to be employed directly by the State and not by the manufacturers—at present only examines the children and young persons before they begin work in the factory, and has no jurisdiction over workshops except upon the special order of the Secretary of State. His duties should be extended to workshops, and periodical examination should be made of the women, children, and young persons—especially of the two latter classes—where ground exists for supposing that the conditions of any trade are injurious to health. A body of experience should be brought together as to the special effects of given industries upon health with a view to such improvements and modifications being made in mechanical and other manufacturing processes as to minimise injurious effects.
(b) Definite Hygienic Regulations. Each industry in which injurious processes are carried on should be subjected to periodical investigation by experts, working in conjunction with the Certifying Surgeons and factory inspectors, whose duty it should be to recommend such improvements as are feasible with a view to the protection of health. Steps have already been taken under Section 8 of the Factory Act, 1891, for drawing up special rules for injurious trades, but in view of the constant changes which take place in manufacture, it seems highly desirable that there should be a regular staff of experts in connection with the Home Office, so that the Factory Department could be in touch with such industrial changes and inventions as take place from time to time. Another very necessary step seems to lie in the direction of some system of licensing buildings erected for industrial purposes, so that a proper survey by sanitary and architectural experts may be made, and any necessary structural alterations carried out before the work is begun. Just as the Education Department now lays down definite hygienic regulations to be observed in the construction of schools, so the Factory Department, in connection perhaps with the local authorities, should seek to enforce a standard of healthiness.
(2) The Employment of Mothers. As the law stands at present, the only regulation with regard to the employment of mothers is one which forbids their employment in factories and workshops within a month after the birth of a child. This was one of the recommendations made by the Berlin Conference. In the opinion of Dr. Tatham, for many years the medical officer of health for Manchester, and now head of the Statistical Department in the office of the Registrar-General, as well as of many other medical men who have studied this question for years on the spot, this period is far too short in regard both to the health of the mother and the welfare of the child—two points which it is practically impossible to separate in considering this question.
Whilst it may be urged on the one hand that any further intervention on the part of the State must proceed with the utmost caution in view of the extent to which married women are employed, it is impossible to regard with anything but feelings of alarm and even of consternation such statistics on this matter as are already available, and it would seem in the highest degree desirable that either a Select Committee of the House of Commons, or a Departmental Committee representing the Home Office and the Local Government Board, should without delay extend and consolidate the researches which have been made, with a view to furnishing in the most reliable manner data upon which any further enactments may be laid down. That there will have to be a further and considerable extension of the period referred to, and that in certain occupations which are shewn to be peculiarly prejudicial to the health of women the prohibition of their labour may be held to be necessary in the public interest, are facts which no one acquainted with the growth of public sentiment can fail to observe.
(3) Regulation of Hours of Labour. (a) The Abolition of Legalised Overtime. Allusion has already been made to the grievous defect which has gradually crept into and tended largely to destroy the efficiency of the Factory Acts. Evidence given before the Labour Commission, and furnished on many occasions in the annual report of the Chief Inspector of Factories by Her Majesty’s factory inspectors, proves conclusively that in the first place such overtime is injurious; in the second place, that it is often totally unnecessary; and, in the third place, that it is impossible to keep an effective check on the period during which work is performed. The character of that section of the Act which enables overtime to be worked may be judged from the following extract: “Where it is proved to the satisfaction of a Secretary of State that in any class of non-textile factories or workshops or parts thereof, it is necessary by reason of the material which is the subject of the manufacturing process or handicraft therein being liable to be spoiled by the weather, or by reason of press of work arising at certain recurring seasons of the year, or by reason of the liability of the business to a sudden press of orders arising from unforeseen events, to employ young persons and women in manner authorised by this exception, and that such employment will not injure the health of the young persons and women affected thereby, he may, by order made under part of this Act, extend this exception to such factories or workshops, or parts thereof.” Employers are thus permitted to work women and young persons—and a child of thirteen bearing her school certificate ranks as a “young person”—for forty-eight days in any twelve months for fourteen hours a day exclusive of meal times, in flax scutch mills, brick and tile making, parts of rope works carried on in the open air, Turkey-red dyeing and glue making (overtime being permissible in these cases because of considerations of weather), letterpress printing, bookbinding, lithographic printing, Christmas present making, firewood cutting, almanac making, Ærated water making, and playing-card making (these trades being licensed because “press of work arises at certain recurring seasons of the year”), the making-up of any article of wearing apparel and furniture hangings, artificial flower making, fancy box making, biscuit making and job dyeing, and the extensive class of workers who are employed in warehouses in polishing, cleaning, wrapping, or packing up goods. The State itself also asks to be exempted from its own laws, and we find that, by an order gazetted September 16, 1889, the milling, perforating, and gumming of postage and inland revenue stamps are made the subject of legalised overtime. But the forty-eight days which are set as the limit in these cases are doubled in respect to that category of trades which deals with perishable articles, so that in processes connected with preserving fruit or fish and the making of condensed milk, women are actually allowed by the law to work for ninety-six days in the course of any twelve months for fourteen hours a day.
The only objections that can be urged to putting factories in general upon the same footing as those in the textile trades are the arguments which were adduced against the principle of State regulation of the hours of labour. If the textile trades can be conducted without overtime—trades which are dominated by changes of fashion and season just as much as any other trades—is it not absurd on the face of it to allow printers, pork-pie makers, and a host of other manufacturers whose business is supposed to be affected by liability to sudden pressure of orders and by season demands to remain untouched by the Act? Granted that excessively long hours are necessary for certain periods in the case of operations that have to be conducted out of doors, or such operations as fish curing and the like, the way to meet the difficulty is not by over-taxing the strength of those employed, but by working double or, if necessary, treble shifts. It cannot be too strongly urged that these exceptions are entirely contrary to the spirit of factory legislation, which is based upon the doctrine that trade must adapt itself to what is necessary for the workers in regard to their health and requirements as human beings, and that it is entirely opposed to the theory that human beings must adapt their standard of health and leisure to the conveniences and exigencies of trade. Whether the maximum hours of labour fixed for the textile trades, viz., fifty-six per week, are not too many is another question. In the opinion of the operatives themselves forty-eight hours are long enough, and the textile trades are promoting a bill to give legislative force to their belief. It has been shewn in previous chapters that the intensity of work has greatly increased, and that the demands made upon the strength and endurance of the workers are probably more severe than was the case before the passing of the Acts. It must not be forgotten that a law which has been made by the national legislature in such a matter as this imposes a responsibility of the very gravest kind upon the nation. In other trades the hours of labour are now, generally speaking, shorter than those in the textile trades. London builders, taking the year round, do not work more than an average of forty-eight hours a week, engineers work fifty-two and a half, and so do boiler-makers and iron-founders. This is not the place for a detailed treatment of the demand for a shorter day, but the fact cannot be overlooked—a fact which was insisted upon in the fifth chapter—that as motive power and machinery replace manual work so the claim for longer periods of rest and leisure grows stronger. There is a danger lest society in its intense pre-occupation with the multiplication of commodities should take up a false position simply by forgetting this fact. But if the arguments in favour of a general reduction of the hours of labour are strong anywhere, they are peculiarly strong in the case of women, for in a vast number of cases a woman, when she leaves her daily work, has to begin a second spell of work at home.
(b) Continuation of Work at Home after Factory Hours.—This is a practice which is openly encouraged by some manufacturers, and more or less secretly by others. It is a common sight, for instance, in Belfast, to see women returning home from the handkerchief or other works in which they have been employed during the whole day, with bundles of work to make up at night, so that the worker has to stitch often till midnight, or later, in order to take the finished bundle back the next morning. In London, too, this practice obtains. Obviously, if such an infringement of the spirit of the Act is allowed, the factory regulation becomes worthless in respect of hours.
(4) The Regulation of Outwork.—By a clause in the Act of 1891 the Home Secretary was empowered to schedule certain trades in which work was given out by a middleman or manufacturer—either to contractors or to workpeople direct—to be done off the premises; to enforce the keeping of a register giving the names and addresses of such persons, so as to enable the factory inspector or the sanitary authority to investigate the conditions under which the work was being done. The Home Secretary has made an order which brings the clothing trades, the cabinet trade, and the electro-plating industry under this provision, and energetic steps have been taken to trace the work thus given out. Obviously, however, such a task involves a large staff of inspectors; and in cases where the duty devolves upon the sanitary authority the expense suddenly thrown upon the ratepayers to provide an adequate staff, added to other considerations, has led to practically nothing being done, so that the order remains inoperative. It is unquestionably desirable that the person who gives out the work should be made responsible for the sanitary and other conditions under which it is performed, a provision which would act as a deterrent to a practice which is admittedly full of hardships for the workers and of risks for the consumers. As to the latter consideration, the whole question of the administration of the workshops part of the Factory Acts by the local authorities will have to be revised. As things are at present, there is no power of compelling them to do the work, whilst the division of authority which exists between the Factory Department and the local sanitary authority is very far from tending to the efficient carrying out of the measures laid down. The great thing is, however, that the principle of throwing the responsibility for the conditions of labour upon the person who practically employs such labour—whether by means of the sweating system or not—should be recognised, and a first step in this direction has undoubtedly been taken by the registration order referred to.
(5) Child Labour.—Both the educational and physiological experts who have given attention to this question are agreed that two things should be done. The system of half-time, under which a child spends half the week in the factory and half in the school, is a double evil to the half-timer, as both education and health suffer from the process. In the opinion of many competent observers the system of half-time should be abolished. So long, however, as it is permitted to continue, the age of eleven which was fixed under the new Act is undoubtedly too low, taking the general level of European nations as a standard, for, after all, the work in school is to the average child as hard as work in the factory, and it is too much to demand of young children the double strain entailed by mental, nervous, and physical causes which is involved in the school and factory rÉgime. The age of thirteen, at which the child passes into the “young person” stage—to use the legal expression—and obtains the privilege of working full time, may be warranted in certain trades, but it is highly desirable that the field of occupation should be differentiated, and that occupations such as the textile trades, which involve special strain upon the physique of growing children, should be regulated by a scale of age.
(6) Extension of the Factory Acts.—The Acts should be extended so as to cover the case of laundresses, who ought never to have been left out. The sanitary conditions under which vast numbers of these women work are extremely bad, the hours of work are excessively long and far above the standard set by the Factory Acts, and in steam laundries there is a quantity of machinery used without any safeguards being adopted for proper fencing, so that accidents are very frequent. The arguments used for keeping laundries outside the Acts are, that it is a more or less domestic industry, that any limitation would fall very severely on the small employer, and that the nature of the trade is such as to necessitate long working hours during the latter part of the week, when most of the work is done. Against this, however, we must set the facts that no attempt has really been made to organize the work, which could as well be spread over a longer period as crowded into a few days each week; that individual employers have successfully done so; that for the protection of the women as well as of the public, sanitary supervision is most essential; and, finally, that the health and safety of those employed are severely compromised by the conditions under which work is done at present.
(7) Co-ordination of Local and Imperial Authority.—Reference has been made to the difficulties which arise in the dual control exercised by the Factory Department and the local sanitary authority, which latter body is responsible for the sanitary conditions of workshops, subject to a final reference to the Factory Department. Experience in past years has proved that when it has been sought in the same way to devolve upon the local authorities these important powers, general neglect has been shown by a large number of districts, so much so indeed, that after a trial it was found necessary for the Factory Department to resume the work of inspection. This portion of the Act has in fact been tossed backwards and forwards with results that can scarcely be called satisfactory. It remains to be seen whether some plan cannot be adopted by which the local authorities can be utilised without the provisions of the Act being allowed to lapse—a plan which should be checked by head-quarters either at the Local Government Board or the Home Office, or by an executive Labour Department of the future, so that a given standard of efficiency may be secured. There remain certain administrative reforms which will no doubt be carried out as time goes on. Already large additions have been made to the existing staff of factory inspectors.[19]
Whilst much of the work is of a more or less routine and simple character, and can be discharged best by those who are acquainted with the technicalities and methods of the trade, there are certain departments which call for the highest scientific skill, for full statistical information, as well as for unceasing vigilance. A word or two must be added as to the penalties which are inflicted under the Acts. The scale suggested by the Acts is very low, and the magistrates often inflict a merely nominal penalty, so that employers who infringe the Acts have little to fear except from the annoyance caused by proceedings being taken against them. This is a thoroughly unsatisfactory state of things.
(8) The Truck Act.—For the protection of women workers an amendment to the Truck Act is sorely needed; the system of arbitrary fines and deductions, to which reference has already been made, is an unmitigated evil, and tends more than any other condition of labour to degrade the workers, and hold them in bondage.
Conclusion.—During the next few years we are likely to see great changes, for the agitation which has taken place in the labour world in recent times is not of a spasmodic kind. It is the outcome of years of struggle and suffering and thought, and of many defeats on the part of the workers. For them the Factory Acts are of quite incalculable importance. They stand for industrial health, for the safeguard of the worker’s leisure and standard of life, for the civic principle in the affairs of the labour market and the workshop. They stand, too, for the ratification by the State of the will of the people as expressed by their common voice and common organisations. It is not true to say that they spare them the trouble of doing something which they might equally well do for themselves. The Acts give a statutory validity to what the workers have already decided upon in times past. They secure the ground already won, so that the workers may go forward, and on that ground raise their standard of living higher; so that the manufacturers may put their houses in order, introducing better management and mechanical methods; so that the standard of living and the standard of general efficiency may advance together. Under the guiding intelligence of the nation these great human enactments, which have been a godsend to the people of this country in the past, will become ever more fruitful as higher civic ideals and a deeper conception of human welfare and industry take the place of the conceptions which have prevailed during the transition period from which we are now emerging.
