著者

大東 英祐

出版者

経営史学会

雑誌

経営史学 (ISSN:03869113)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.22, no.4, pp.1-30, 1988-01-30 (Released:2010-11-18)

---

In the early days of railroading, locomotive engineers were recruited from among mechanics. It was a great recommendation if they had worked for a locomotive manufacturer. They were paid by day, in the same way as mechanics were. Since mechanic turned engineers were skilled in the two trade, they tend to be too proud to be obedient to orders. In the 1870s, however, many railroads including the C.B. & Q. introduced new methods of wage payment, such as the trip system and classification system. At the C.B. & Q., R. Harris introduced a new method by combining the two mentioned just above on Sept. 1, 1876 and reduced wage rates on June 10, 1877. Under the new method, engineers were graded into the four classes in terms of the length of the service which were paid accordingly. Judging from remaining company records, this was due partly to the financial pressure of the prolonged depression of the 1870s. The work can be done for less money than before, by replacing the first class men with the second and the third class men with lower wage rates. However, we must not ignore the long term significance of the new method, under which in order to climb up to the first class one has to be promoted step by step every year. In other words, the method was inseparably tied with the policy of promotion from within. On Nov. 20, 1884, Mr. Rhodes, the superintendent of the motive power, send a circular letter to all the master mechanics of the company instructing “Hereafter please do not employ engineers and firemen who had worked on other roads… In doing otherwise, we are likely to import the bad elements of other roads.” And by the middle of 1880s, the company had developed well a designed employment practices, by which it had attained self-sufficiency in well trained engineers. It goes without saying that this is a great achievement. At the same time, however, it bred discontent among engineers and their brotherhood and caused a bitter strike in 1888.

著者

大東 英祐

出版者

経営史学会

雑誌

経営史学 (ISSN:03869113)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.15, no.1, pp.111-120, 1980-04-30 (Released:2009-11-06)

著者

大東 英祐

出版者

経営史学会

雑誌

経営史学 (ISSN:03869113)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.8, no.2, pp.26-58, 1973-02-25 (Released:2009-10-14)

---

In 1925, with the intention of joining hands in marketing of synthetic gasoline, B. A. S. F. began to approach Jersey Standard. Though Jersey held a different view on immediate commercial value of coal hydrogenation process, Jersey appreciated its great potential and decided to buy the patent right of this process.The purpose of this paper is to analyze the inter-action of these two companies with the aid of the theory of bargaining. Whole process can be divided into several stages. The further the negociation proceeded, the more subjects were taken up for discussion. As time passed by, each party percieved the other party's aims more accurately.In those days, new petro-chemical industry were emerging between chemi cal and oil industry. Having rather limited interests in this new fields, Jersey admitted the prefered position of I. G. Farben in chemical industry. And at last, they concluded a series of contracts which contained many provisions for co-operation in braod commercial and technical fields.

著者

大東 英祐

出版者

経営史学会

雑誌

経営史学 (ISSN:03869113)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.5, no.2, pp.47-71,ii, 1971-03-25 (Released:2010-11-18)

---

It is generally believed that American workers move much more freely than Japanese employees. But relatively little attention has been paid to the fact that the rate of turnover in the period of World War I was reduced to one-third in the 1950's.For the main reason why the rate of turnover has become lower, we can point out the fact that the seniority system has spread throughout the industries in America since the 1930's. In those days, seniority, though the debate about seniority and management prerogatives in furious, governs not only lay-off and re-call but also promotion, transfer, paid holidays, and many other fringe-benefits.Under these circumstances, the problem of the gain accompanied with long service and the loss accused by the employment change is important. Therefore, it is no wonder that American workers no longer quit so freely as before.Historically, seniority was not the management but union policy. The Management, however, seemed to have good grounds for accepting the unions' demands and we can attribute the rapid diffusion of seniority to the following two factors.First, according to several studies, work organization, with the growth of mass-production, had been formed as a promotion ladder by the 1930's, and it had been a rather common practice to fill a job vacancy, not with the one from outside, but by promotion within the firm.As a result, in the absence of unions, the order of lay-off by and large, comformed to the seniority principle.Second, the principle of seniority, as Reader pointed out, is consistent with the American sense of fairness, ie, the first come, first served.But in pre-union days, much was done through the foreman's personal favoritism without centralized policy, and so intra-firm wage structure was often in a chaotic condition. Confronted with union demand, the management in the 1930's tried to systematize its practice. Personnel departments were expanded and job analysis and evaluation plans were executed and so on. By these efforts the present personnel management system was to be established.