The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

20 MARINE REVIEW. [November 22, and in the line of improvement, from the rules as applied to two large freight twin screw steamers we are now building. I have found that the skill of the experts at Lloyd's, and the careful study of every proposition made to them, not only protects all parties, but insures a steady forward movement, consistent with the proper protection of all the interests in- volved. I believe, however, that an American register of shipping that would be accepted by the ship owner and by underwriters the world over, would be a great heip to the American ship builder, as it would no doubt lend itself more readily to the tendencies of American design. The Brit- ish ship is the result of British experience, gained by British ship owners and sailors, embodied in British designs by the British naval architect, finally taking form in British ship yards; the result carrying with it much of the traditions and practice of the people and place where the work is done, "Now can we in America do better than this? We are very likely to do a little different, as much differ- ent probably as the limitations re- ferred to will allow, and these dif- ferences will, I think, take the form of a closer adaptation of the ma- terial used to its place and function in the complete design. In this the steel manufacturer will likely take a share, As he becomes better ac- quainted with the special needs of ship. construction, we will find him ready to undertake new sections better adapted to take the strains and stresses of ship structure, and reducing built up work to a mini- mum. We are on this point now abreast of the British builder, and, in methods of handling, ahead of most of them. In skill I think the American naval architect is quite abreast of his British cousin, and if he has plenty of practice there need be no fear of him keep- ing in that position. In some of the great ship yards of Britain and Europe they have acquired a greater experience in the pro- Ty duction of the largest ocean steamships, both for passengers and freight, than we have; but we are in the way of obtaining this experience, and it will come to us just as it came to them, by a steady and skillful application of what we now have. I find also, especially among the younger naval architects in Britain, an opinion they are ready enough to express, that the United States is to be in the near future a rich field for the practice of their profession. I have found this opinion naturally strongest among those who feel the limiting power of British ship building traditions strongest. Such men, if they come to our side, will have an effect in moulding what may become American traditions in the future history of the art. Mr. Theodore Lucas. LABOR COST IN BRITAIN AND THE UNITED STATES. "Granting, therefore, that there is nothing lacking in skill on the part of our designers, how are we in regard to the second factor in the problem of competition--that of the cost of labor? This is the one factor that presents the greatest difficulty in dealing with the problem of relative cost as between the ship yards of Great Britain and those of America. We work under different conditions in regard to a large por- tion of the work. The whole steel work of a ship may be said to be done under the piece work system in Britain, the price per unit being fixed for certain ship building districts between the ship builders and the unions representing the men, This method has its advantages, as it simplifies the estimating--a certain known portion of the work having a certain fixed value. While a considerable portion of the work with us is done on some piece work system, every yard appears to have its own way of fixing prices with the men. In the British yards, as with us, while practically all the steel work is done under some kind of piece system, yet on inquiry it appears that it is with them very much as it is with us; the number of men on wages on the very work supposed to be done by piece is greater than that of the piece workers, and skill in man- agement is directed to the reduction of the number of men on wages as compared to the number on piece work. "From combining what information I have been able to gather, I find that on an average the steel work of construction cost in the British yards from £8 17s. to £4 per ton of material worked. This, I think, we can about equal in labor cost here. But when it comes to fitting out, includ- ing carpenter and joiner work, painting and general finish, where piece work does not cut any figure, the cost, I think, is directly as the wages paid. We employ the same class of men as they do; in fact, our best men come from the British yards, and while in some of our yards we may have some advantages in climate, this does not apply to all, and where we are paying 50 per cent. more wages, the cost of labor that is reckoned in wages will be 50 per cent. more here than it is in the British yard. And if half the labor cost for any given ship built in a British yard is paid in wages--and this is very nearly correct--and that half costs 50 per cent. less than the corresponding part in our yards, our total labor cost will be 25 per cent. greater than theirs. This is very nearly correct, as tested by comparisons I have been able to make of actual costs as between our yard and one or two in Britain, where I have been furnished with labor costs. I am convinced, however, that although we pay higher wages to our office staff of draughtsmen, that part of the work does not cost any more than in the British yards, as we seem to be able to do a like quantity of work with a smaller force. The managing staff in our yards are, I think, paid less than corresponding officers in the large yards there, and they devote much more time to their duties. "As to what we may be able to do in regard to equalizing the cost of labor as between our yards and those of Great Britain, I do not think that it will be brought about by any attempt to equalize the rate of wages paid throughout the ship building world, but I have hopes that some of our rising ship builders among the younger members of our profession may be able to devise some method whereby every part of a ship, both huil and machinery, will have a labor value fixed for it that will not exceed what such a piece of labor costs elsewhere, and that whoever, by his labor, contributes to the production of that piece shall receive as recompense his portion; that is, the percentage that his labor represents in the total labor required to complete the part on which he worked. Something of this kind must be the foundation on which any true settlement of labor values must rest, and as it is done now with eminently satisfactory results in some of the most prosperous machine manufacturing estab- lishments in England, it only needs the right kind of skill, honestly applied, to make it work in ship building and engineering establishments in this country. I am so impressed with this, to me the only just way of recompensing labor, that were I twenty years younger I should take it up as a life work. QUESTION OF ENGINE AND BOILER COSTS. "T find that the marine engine and its boilers cost less in proportion to the hulls than they do with us. This is no doubt due to the fact that neither there nor here does piece work prevail in the production of the marine engine or its boilers, while machinists and boilermakers receive at least 50 per cent. more wages with us. In small tools I think we are better equipped than the engine works attached to the large ship yards there, but in heavy tools we are not better off than they are. Some prom- inent engine builders in this country seem to be able to compete with engine builders in Great Britain, sending their engines to the very centers of engine building in that country, and, so far as we know, with profit to themselves. At least they continue doing it, which would indicate that it is profitable. If this can be done with land engines it can also be done with marine engines, but not on present methods. We must be content without the professional luxury of introducing some engineering novelty with every ship we engine. I do not say that we should be satisfied with- out making substantial progress in marine engineering, but healthy pro- gress is not inconsistent with a standard system of working that would greatly reduce the labor cost of producing a modern marine engine, "In a large and prosperous engine works that I visited in England, building a special type of engine, but in all sizes from 10 to 3,000 H. P., I found that the term erection was not used. Every part of their engine is made to gauge, and when finished from the tools is sent to an expert examiner at a large surface table, with accurate measuring instruments, whose business it is to determine if every operation performed by the tools on that piece has been accurately done; that every hole has been bored properly; that every face is in its proper plane. He signs the work- man's card that did the work if it has been done correctly; if not, the work is returned to him for correction, or rejected if it cannot be cor- rected. Every piece of work has a fixed labor value. Every man gets his regular wages. If the work he produces exceeds in labor value the wages, he is credited with 50 per cent. of the difference. If the labor value of his work is continually less than the wages paid him he cannot continue to work in that establishment. The pieces thus produced that gu to make an engine when brought together are not erected as we do, fitting each piece to its place by file or chisel, as may be, owing to defective tooling; but they are placed in stock ready to be assembled in a few hours, on receipt of an order for an engine of the size they represent. A system to insure correct tooling on every piece entering into the construction of our. marine engines would, in my opinion, reduce the cost of erection by one-half. Some such system, and making every man a partner, so far as the result of his own labor is concerned, would place us in marine engineering where we are now in the production of land engines. If we are to pursue the same methods as we are now doing, which are just the same as those that prevail in the ship building and marine engineering centers of Great Britain and Europe, our labor costs will be very nearly in proportion to the wages of rates as compared with theirs. But in the development of some plan whereby we can fix a labor value for all our work that will not exceed theirs lies our salvation, and the American workman would, in my opinion, profit largely by the , general adoption of some such plan. "On our present methods our labor cost is, as near as I can com- pute it, 25 per cent. greater on the . hull and 50 per cent. greater onf the machinery of an average ocean going freight and passenger steam- er. I trust this statement will be carefully discussed by any member of this society who has any knowl- edge on this question of labor | costs, for much of our future pro- gress in ship building depends upon how we are able to solve it. [ COSTS OF MATERIAL, "Now in regard to the cost of material: I am afraid that this part of my subject is beyond my ability to in any satisfactory way compare our conditions with those of the British or European ship builder. The most important material affecting the cost of ship building is steel, and the tremendous fluctuations that at times take place in the price of that material in this country is the most serious question we have to contend with in trying to predict anything in regard to the future of ship build- ing, The tariff On steel plates and shapes makes it possible for us to nd the British ship builder working into his ships American steel from Pittsburg at a less cost to him than the English material, and at less cost than is charged the American ship builder for the same material in Pitts- burg. I saw in a yard on the east coast of Scotland steel being worked into a vessel that was delivered in the yard irom Pittsburg at less than £1 es. Gd: per loneton, If the American steel manufacturer can meet the British steel manufacturer on equal terms in the British ship yards, somehow it seems ag if it might be possible for the American. ship builder to get his steel material as cheap as the British ship builder gets his.) "his 15 all that 1 possibly can advance on this part of my subject. Mr. Harrison S. Taft.