Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 16.djvu/502

* PROFIT SHARING. 434 PROGRAMME MUSIC. seen in larger dividcnils. The stookhoWcrs did not profit dircotly by this selicuie, but the better prolited at the expense of the poorer workmen. Wlien the firm became a stock company, in 18IJ0, wage-earners were to receive a dividend of 12 per cent, on wages, whieli was the same as the profits on common stock. The number of employees re- ceiving profits increased from 225 in 1887 to 550 in 18!)!), the latter number being 92 per cent, of the total number of wage-earners. Kmployees are encouraged to become owners of stock and 80 of them own 101 shares. Beginning with 18'.U. .$500 is set aside semi-annually as a pension fund, of which one-half is contributed by the company and the other half comes from the bonuses of the eui- ployees. Since the beginning of the experiment no strikes or labor dilfieulties have arisen. In 1894 the labor cost, including the 12 per cent, bonus to wage-earners, was only 63 per cent, of what it had been in 1880. The N. 0. Nelson Co., brass manufacturers of Saint Ijouis, Mo., begana profit-sharing enterprise in 1880. The company pays out all sums needed in cases of sickness and disability as they occur, as a part of the costs of the business. Allowances are made for funeral exjienscs, and upon the death of an employee his family is supported to the extent of two-thirds of his wages, until it is able to supiiort itself. The crucial test of profit- sharing enterprises is given in periods of crises, when extra efforts of wage-earners are not re- warded by dividends. It is then that wage-earn- ers lose interest in them, and the mortality rate of profit-sharing enterprises is high. For the first ten years, 1887-1897, the dividends to em- ployees were large. In two years. 1893 and 1890, there were no dividends for employees. That no labor difiiculties arose and that wage-earners did not lose interest in prolit sharing, even though wages were reduced one-fourth, was due largely to the wisdom of the company. Salaries and inter- est were reduced to the same extent as wages, but the one-fourth thus deducted from these shares was to be paid out of future profits before an.y bonuses were to be paid. In each instance it was not long before the company w.is on a divi- dend-paying basis and profit sharing weathered the storm in safely. One other feature of the management of the N. O. Nelson Company shows how prolit sharing may pave the way to indus- trial cooperation. In 1890 the company made a proposal to employees in the cabinet-making shop which provided for the gradual purchase and management of the enterprise by the employees. The proposal, at first rejected, with a few changes was soon after accepted, and at present this de- partment is owned and managed exclusively by employees. On January 1, 1903, the United States Steel Corporation announced a plan of profit sharing. Only those employees who hold positions of re- sponsibilit,y share directly in the profits of the corporation. If the net earnings for the year ex- ceed .$80,000,000, but are less than .$90,000,000. one per cent, of such earnings is to be distributed among the employees, the share to be determined by the finance committee, so as to permit the fullest recognition of merit. With every $10,000,- 000 increase in net earnings, the share to be dis- tributed increases by % per cent, of such increase of earnings. Employees of lower classes are given favorable opporf unities for becoming owners of the corporation stocks. To further encourage the holding of stocks, those who buy such stocks and remain in the service of the company are to re- ceive at the end of five years a liouus of 5 per cent, annually on the face value of the stock held over and above the regular dividends, and the promise of a bonus at the end of another five years is given. A large number of the employees have already acquired stock. It is hoped that this plan will insure stability on the part of the mass of the workmen and the maximum of zeal en the i^art of the higher employees. The recent record of profit sharing in the I'nited States has not been such as would give encouragement to its ardent supporters. In 1889 there were thirty-four institutions in the L'nited States, while there were but twenty-three ten years later, and of these twelve have been organ- ized since 1899. Aside from these failures several others were attempted and soon after abandoned. A variety of causes contributed to the abandon- ment of these institutions during this period. The long period of the financial crisis went hard with all of them, and especially with those which had but recently attempted profit sharing. Changes in management were responsible for its abandonment in other cases. Impatience of suc- cess, and abandonment before a fair trial was given, was the situation in a number of other cases. To lack of .scriou.sness in dealing with the matter and to unwisdom in management may be attributed still other failures. That profit sharing is a scheme which will settle the great difiiculties between labor and cap- ital none but its most sanguine advocates would claim. But that it may be used in many enter- prises to bring about harmony between the em- ployer and the employee, to elevate workmen and to prepai'e the way for industrial cooperation, has been proved by experience in institutions which have passed beyond the experimental stage. BlULiooKAPHY. Roberts, La suppression des grcves par Vassociation avx benefices (1870); ISohmerts, Die (leinimbctheilir/UHg (Leipzig, 1878; Paris, 1888) ; Taylor, Sedley. /Vo/i7 .SVtor- iiifi lirtivceii Capital and Labor (London. 1884); Giddings, "Rep<nt on Prolit Sharing." in Xine- teenth Annual Report of the ilassaclnisetts Bu- reau of Statistics of Labor (Boston, 1880) ; Gil- man, Profit Sharin;/ (Boston, 188!i) ; .1 Diridend to Labor ( Boston. 1899) : Monroe. "Prolit Shar- ing in the United States," in American Journal of Sociolorjy, INIay, 1890. PROGNO'SIS (Lat.. from Gk. -irpbyvwan. fore- knowledge, from TTpoyt.'/vuaKei.v, profiiiinf)!«l;eiii, to know beforehand, from irpb, pro. before + yiyvii- aK€iv, gifiiioskein. to know). The opinion or de- cision of the physician as to the yjrobable course and termination of a disease. As the case pro- ceeds, the rapidity or severity of the symptoms, the condition of the circulation, ability to take food, the integrity of the nervous system, are points which influence the prognosis. The usual questions to be answered by a skillful prognosis are as to whether the disease will terminate in death or recovery; if in recovery, whether pi'niia- nent damage to any organ will result ; if in death, the probable duration of the disease. PROGRAMME MUSIC (Lat. prof/rainma, from (ilk. Trp6ypap./xa. edict, from irpoypdipai', pro- firaphrin, to write before, from irpS, pro. before -f 7pd0et», yrnphcin. to write). A term in music applied to purely instrumental works which are