Marx, in Capital, notes that Ricardo had commented that, often, machines are only introduced when wages rise above a minimum level. As noted earlier, this is part of the dynamic of the long wave cycle, by which the relative surplus population is used up, capital overproduced relative to labour supply/social working-day, wages rise, demand for wage goods rises, stimulating aggregate demand, and conditions of boom, which turn into crisis, as profits are squeezed, resulting in capital engaging in a new technological revolution to replace labour, and create a new relative surplus population, starting the cycle all over again.
“In England, strikes have regularly given rise to the invention and application of new machines. Machines were, it may be said, the weapon employed by the capitalist to quell the revolt of specialized labour. The self-acting mule, the greatest invention of modern industry, put out of action the spinners who were in revolt. If combinations and strikes had no other effect than that of making the efforts of mechanical genius react against them, they would still exercise an immense influence on the development of industry.” (p 154-5)
The arguments of the Ricardians that wages were determined by the interaction of the demand and supply for labour-power, were, then, correct, as far as they went. As Engels pointed out, in The Condition of The Working-Class,
“The history of these Unions is a long series of defeats of the working-men, interrupted by a few isolated victories. All these efforts naturally cannot alter the economic law according to which wages are determined by the relation between supply and demand in the labour market. Hence the Unions remain powerless against all great forces which influence this relation. In a commercial crisis the Union itself must reduce wages or dissolve wholly; and in a time of considerable increase in the demand for labour, it cannot fix the rate of wages higher than would be reached spontaneously by the competition of the capitalists among themselves.”
Capital always had the whip hand, because it determined the demand, and, if wages rose too high, the demand fell, in part, because capital engaged in technological development. That's what happened in the 1870's, 1920's, and 1970's. Thatcher's government could not have survived in the conditions of the 1960's, and nor could the policies of Paul Volcker at the Federal Reserve. It was not Thatcher that did for the British labour movement, but the microchip.
Marx quotes Proudhon's account of a meeting in Bolton, which Proudhon put forward as evidence that British workers were also turning away from trades unions. Marx dismantles the argument and report. The workers in Bolton, Marx notes, were the most advanced, and most revolutionary. But, those workers were refused entry to the kinds of meeting referred to in the report, where it was only the foremen and other agents of the bosses that were permitted.
“At the time of the great agitation in England for the abolition of the Corn Laws, the English manufacturers thought that they could cope with the landowners only by thrusting the workers to the fore. But as the interests of the workers were no less opposed to those of the manufacturers than the interests of the manufacturers were to those of the landowners, it was natural that the manufacturers should fare badly in the workers' meetings. What did the manufacturers do? To save appearances they organized meetings composed, to a large extent, of foremen, of the small number of workers who were devoted to them, and of the real friends of trade.” (p 155)
Until 1843, the long wave cycle was in a period of downtrend/stagnation, which, as with the 1880's, 1930's, and 1980's, put workers in a weak position to negotiate wages. In such conditions, competition between workers outweighs the potential for combination of workers, in competition with capital. After 1843, when a new upswing began, it takes time for workers to rebuild confidence and their organisations, as also seen in the post-war period. Often, the upswing, with increased employment and wages, may even deter workers from joining unions, as they think they can raise their wages without them, simply by moving jobs, as was also seen in the 1950's, and is seen, now, with the rise in the Quit Rate, and the fact that the average rise in pay for workers moving jobs is 14%, as against an average rise in wages of workers remaining in the same job of only around 7%.
No comments:
Post a Comment