_Page 10 — P. A. Features, January 20

Friendship Strengihened

By ILYA EHRENBURG

\ \ 7 HEN France lay bound and gagged and the Germans thought that Paris was a cafe
chantant, that liberty was-a statue that can. be photographed and smashed, that
Verdun was a place where they make sugared almonds, and the Marne a river for German

drill sergeants to bathe in—

in those black and gloomy years

we silently fought, up to our
_ knees in blood. —

When some hastened to bury
_¥rance, breathing with a sigh,
“The late lamented was a
charming creature,” and add-
ing with a grin, “—but a fine
legacy, what?’ When mutila-
ted and all bloodied she was
watered with hypocritical tears
that resembled obscene expec-
torations, we went on doing our
duty—fighting Giermans. We
kmew that France was, is and
will be.

)
AN? when she rose in her
wrath, indomitable, accus-

tomed to fighting from her in-

fancy, a land of warriors and

revolutions where the cobble-

‘stones leap out of the ground

of their own accord, when

France rose again in all her

grandeur, there were some who

. were struck with bewilderment.
They had forgotten that such

a country existed. The table’

was laid, but you see, there was
no place for France. Her cre-
dentials would have to be look-
ed into; who knows, she might
-be an impostor: :

We, however, did not sigh; we
had no doubts and we went on
fighting Germans. We knew
that France was with us. —

long before a treaty was
solemnly signed between our
two countries, there was an un-
written treaty between our two
peoples. It was an invisible
treaty, written not in ink, but
in tears—tears of grief and
wrath; in the ashes of Nov-
gored and Rouen, in the woe
of Paris and Leningrad. It was
written in bile, in that hatred
which burns but is not consum-
ed—hatred of the vile, eruel,
doltish and arrogant invaders
of that country—where corpu-
lent vallkyries, belching, say to
glassy-eyed nibelungs: “Put me
on a mattress made of the hair
of the vanquished and cover
me with peonies grown in Mai-
danek.”

That unwritten treaty was
‘written in blood, the blood. of
the heroes of Stalingrad and
the blood of Bir Hakeim, the
blood of the Smolensk guerillas
and the Savoy Frane Tireurs
the blood of Zoya Kosmodem-
-yanskaya and of Gabriel Peri,
the blood of the- pilots of the
Normandie Squadron and of the
stern Russiar? infantry.

WE were joined by geography;
between us lay the land of
the robbers. In one human life-
time Russia has known twice,
~ and France thrice, the tread of
the German jackboot one choos-
es one’s friends, but one doesn’t
choose one’s neighbors. It is
our misfortune that to the west
of us live villians. It is Fran-
ce’s misfortune that to the east
of her lives a breed of fiends.

But Strasbourge has no ear
for sermons nor Lithuania for
universal forgiveness. The
women of Lutsk know what life
was like in Metz. The mothers
of France know what it is to
awake Russian
Between us lies Ger-

sit over a
eradle.
many—breeding ground of cri-
minals, den of child assassins,
country of evil. Our two people
live at two different ends of
Europe. And the one-eyed pre-
datory German eagle is a men-
ace to both:

The two peoples have one
will—the will to protect that
profound of
peace, when ears ripen and bees
hum, when litle children frolic,
carefree—yet when on _ the
banks of the Seine, as on the
banks of the Volga, the heart
may suddenly be frozen by the

midsummer day

vile tread of the German jack-
boot.

We were joined by history.
Wrance is not a noyelty to us;
nor a landscape. We know what
she has given to the world. Her
rulers haye come and gone, and
will come and go again, but
her sons marched, are march-
ing, and will march, to meet
death with the immortal words
of the Marseillaise’ on their
lips.

We that day in
March when the people of Paris
refused to surrender their can-
non to the enemy and to trait-
ors, and covered themselves

with glory. It is not Talleyrand
that Franee honors, but the
lad, Joseph Bara, who when
seized by the enemy, cried,
“Long liye the Republic!”

remember

The history of France is
closely interwoven with ours.
We love the French language.
It is the language in which Ra-
cine and Hugo, Stendhal and
Balzae wrote.

The language in which the
sans culottes cried, “Liberty or
Death.”

The language in which the
poilus of Verdun swore, “They
shall not pass!” We have bor-
rowed much from France, but
we have not remained in debt
to her. Twice in a lifetime we
saved France: in the summer
of 1914, when the enemy was

nearing Paris, and now again, .

when we smashed the strongest
of the German armies and with
our blood corroded the iron
shackles fetering the body of
France. ;

We gave great writers who
became teachers of the French
people. We gave the French
lhope—the dawn of the East on
that gloomy Autumn day which
cannot be stricken from the
book of history.

E are joined by the heart.
That is the hardest of all to

talk about; here no atlas and

no chronology are of any use.
One would think that the Rus-
Sian and the Frenchman are
unlike one another, just _like
the alder is unlike the birch
and the damp mist is unlike the
Siberian frost. But our two

Incentive Pay

peoples have long been drawn
to each other. That is inex-
plicable and yet simple, like
every fenuine sentiment.

And maybe at the bottom of
ail there is a spiritual affinity:
vivacity of mind, love of liber-
ty, the impress of ability and
boldness. Both peoples love
their land and are exempt from
the arrogance characteristic
of so many nations.

Let it not be retorted that

France betrayed us in the sinis-
ter days of Munich. It was not
only we she betrayed; she be-

By BERT MARCUSE

Director, Pacific Goast Labor Bureau

A PRECEDENT was set by the National War Labor Board in Ottawa on Decem
18, 1944, when they approved an inc entive
ployees of Lever Brothers Limited, Toronto, Onta

Workers’ Union Local 23623, APL.

This bonus scheme provides
for the replacement of the
former 48-hour week worked
by the employees concerned by
a 40-hour week, with no reduc-
lion in overall earnings, and
premium overtime pay at the
rate of time and one-half after
40 hours.

QN September 23, 1944, the
Ontario Regional War la-
bor Board turned down an ap-
plication “to establish a 40-
hour week and pay employees
amounts commensurate to those
earned for 48 hours, and to pay
a premium rate of time and
one-half beyond 40 hours.”

This rejection was upheld by
the National War Labor Board
on Noy. 1, 1944, by virtue of
the provision of Section 20 (1)
(a) of P.C. 9384, the War Labor
Board claiming that no “gross
injustice or gross inequality”
could be shown to exist.

However further representa-
tions were then made to the
National War Labor Board. It
was shown that the company
and the union had set up an In-
dustrial Production Coopera-
tion Board and that this joint
board had conducted experi-
ments during the 3 month per-
iods starting December 1943
and September 1944.

The result of this scientific
approach to the problem show-
ed no increase in unit produc-
tion costs. In other words the

inerease in production and ef-_

ficiency resulting from the 8-
hour reduction in the work
week could be demonstrably
proven to have cost the com-
pany no more per unit than
under the 48-hour week.

‘

[eee findings put a new
light on the problem and per-

mitted the National Labor
Board to “justify the adoption
of an incentive production

bonus plan within the spirit and
intent of Section 20 (1) , (e)
(v) and Section 24 of PC.

9384, provided that the applica- .

tion of such a plan would not
result in any increase in estab-

lished unit production costs.”

Reasonably enough,
the limitations of P.C. 9384, the
board has approved the bonus
plan (i.e. 20 percent bonus) as
an experiment for a period of
six months commencing Janu-
ary 1, 1945. At the end of that
period production figures - will
be reviewed by the board and
if production costs have not in-
creased it will undoubtedly be
approved for a further period
of time.

Is this speed-up ?

Definitely not. Although it
may be admitted that a reduc-
tion in hours with no inerease
in unit production costs can be
concommitant with undesirable
speed-up, the fact remains that
in virtually every instance
effective union - management
production planning can reduce
hours of work without increas-
ing unit production costs.

There are many ways in
which this can be attained. Go-
operative union - management
planning can usually find do-
zens of ways in which efficien-
ey can be increased. Produc-
tion techniques can be improy-
ed, joint time studies made, dis-
tribution problems solved, ab-
senteeism reduced, and so on.
Any union member of a plant
will know how, where there is
a functioning | labor-manage-
ment committee, production
methods have been improved
and unit production costs de-
creased. Similarly, an employee
of a plant where, there is no
labor-management committee or
a labor-management committee
that has degenerated into a
grievance committee, will know
how much productivity could be
increased without sweat-shop
methods.

HE reduction of work hours

in the week, alone may re-
sult in increased production.
The Bureau of Labor Statis-
ties, USA, is now working on
a study of the effects of a
lengthened work week in six
metal-working plants on vari-
ous schedules .of hours.

Initial results have just been
published and include the very
important finding that over an

production bonus for hourly rated ¢)

tio, members of International Chem |
extended “period produe

within dropped on a schedule of 7},

than 40 hours. |

labor a lead. Organized 12) :

trayed herself. Hrance wa,
vished by France. Perfidy —
lies drove her into the ‘dun
of the “new order.” She |
to the bottom and then
again to the surface, ang —
first words were, “Thank, }

Stalingrad.” i |

Having found herself, fy.)
found us; she found us ; :
heart, in the dismay of the »
man generals, in the thu:
storm sweeping the earth, |
in our simple, comradely gp °
ing. # |

—Continued on Page i

ada as

Meiers 7

It must be constantly bi
im mind, however, by 1a’ \\
management production ¢
mittees that the reductior
hours alone does not ne
sarily increase hourly proj
tion. There are, as indie;
above other factors which |
be equally or more importan |
building up a union’s case
a reduction in wekly hours
the grounds that unit PLO:
tion costs are not increasec ||,
shortened hours. |

Tf the vital role-and: the - 4
sibilities of L.M. product
committees ever needed pr |
here in this case is tang |p
recognition. of the pres |
grafted a responsible lat
management cammittee. M
over a fully realistic appr
to the problem must bring ji
ganized labor to acknowle $j;
the absolute essentiality
such a joint approach tk |
problem of this nature. An ¥
plication from labor alon }
however valid—would poss »
not have received any con |
eration from the War Le 7
Board whatsoever, certa |
nothing like the considera” H
accorded this application. /#

S @

HE workers may have all

moral and ethical argume Fi
in the world, but against the |}
flexible restrictions of the W
time Wages Control Order, 1
9384, they have been sho
during the last few years f
ticularly, to be generally
availing. Facts, objective sc: #,
tifically based realities, are
best weapons of the wort |
and they must learn how to §
these weapons. In the post
world particularly organl
labor will find that its ca”
for a shorter work week ©
other economic and social
vances, will have to be scie @
fieally validated.

The National War tia
Board has, in this case, at
sciously or otherwise, giv)

i (ae

must not ignore this direct 2
sign! :