ABSTRACT
It is not, therefore, to be asserted that a generalised shift from Situation III principles of wage-fixing to those of Situation IV would automatically improve the situation for everyone . On the contrary, it might well worsen the position for a limited number of workers who had previously exercised the most effective monopoly powers . It is, however, safe to reach the following conclusions about the effect of the change :
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
It would result in increased employment if there were initially any substantial group of available unemployed persons. It would increase the wages for those workers who were not initially able to exercise much or any monopolistic powers of wage-fixing. It would thus tend to equalise earnings by increasing the demand for those workers who had been excluded from privileged monopolised occupations relative to those who had been included in these privileged groups. Among those who would gain would be the employers of labour, the unemployed, and workers who had not been employed in the occupations most effectively protected by monopolistic wage-fixing. There might be some losses among those who had been most effectively protected. The gains would certainly outweigh the losses, since the total national product would be increased partly by increasing the general level of employment and partly by the attraction of workers from positions of low pay and productivity into previously protected positions of high pay and productivity . There would thus be a larger total cake available for the redistributive effects of taxation, social welfare services, social benefits, etc .
