Full text of Family Allowances in Foreign Countries : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 401

View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

U, S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
JAMES J. DAVIS, Secretary

BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
ETHELBERT S T E W A R T , C om m issioner

BULLETIN OF THE UNITED STATES)
BUREAU OF LABOR S T A T I S T I C S /................. llO*

M I S C E L L A N E O U S

S E R I E S

FAMILY ALLOWANCES
IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES
By
MARY T. WAGGAMAN
Q>if

tJka

States Bureau o f L abor StatietAot

MARCH, 192€

WASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
1926

JA1

AD D IT IO N A L COPIES
O I THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE PROCURED FROM
THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON, D. C.
AT

90 CENTS PER COPY

CONTENTS
Pag*
Introduction and summary.------ ----------------------- --------------1
~
Scope of survey------ ----- —------- -------------------------------Beginning of the movement for family allowances-----------------2-f
Introduction into different countries—------------------------2 ,3
4
Extent of family-allowanee movement---------------------------- ~
Number of persons employed under family-allowanee systems—
Disbursements for family allowances in civil service—----------— 3,4
4, 5
Different kinds of family allowances------------------- —— — ------------Family allowances in public service-------------------— -----------4
Family allowances in private industry----------------------------------5
Collective contracts----------------- --------------------------------------_ 5
Methods of granting family allowances----------------------------------------»-7
Family-allowanee funds-------------------------------------------------------------7-9
Functioning of funds------------------------------------------------------------8,0
Hygiene services of funds----------------------------------------------------0
Family allowances in agriculture------------------------------------------------- 9,10
State control for family allowances----------------------------------------------10,11
Njilure of family allowances-------------------------------------------------------- 11.12
Relation to wages----------------------------------------------------------------11
Relation to the population problem---------------------------------------- 11,12
Viewpoints_____________________________________________________ 12,10
Public officials-------------------- -------------------------------------------------12,13
Private employers---------------------------------------------------------------- 13,14
Public employees----------------------------------------------------------------- 14,15
Workers in private industry--------------------------------------------------in, 16
Conclusion-------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------16,17
France________________________________________ ____________________ 18-59
Public service-------- -------------------------------------------------------------------19 22
State_______________________________________________________ 10-21
Departments and communes-------------------------------------------------- 21, 22
Industry_______________________________________________________ 22-41
Railroads---------------------------------------------------------------------------22
Mining_____________________________________________________ 22, 23
Other industries____________________________________________
23
Family-allowanee funds-------------------------------------------------------- 23 41
Types of funds____________________ ____________________ 2r>. 20
Operation .of funds---------------------------------------------------------- 27.28
Methods of granting allowances____________________ ____ 28. 29
Family-allowanee rates-------------------------------------------------- 20, .30
81
Birth bonuses and nursing bounties______________________
Allowances to foreign workers-------—— _________________
31
Allowances during unemployment________________________ 81-33
Hygiene services________________________________________ 33-35
Funds for the merchant marine_________________________
35
Funds in agriculture------------------------------------------------------ 35 -38
Family allowances for home workers____________________
38
Legal status of funds____ ___________________ __________ 38. 39
Centralization______ ______________ ___________________ _39,40
Annual congresses______________________________________ 40, 41
State control for family allowances_________ ______________ ______ 41 45
Bonowski bill___ .__________________________________________ 41 43
Contracts for public work___________________________ ;_______ 43 45
Cost of family allowances___________________ ____________________ 45 47
Relation of family allowances to wages_____________ ____________ 47-50
Terminology___ _________ __________________________________
47
Complex character of family allowances—:________________ - __ 47, 48
Industrial accidents_______________________ _________________ IS -50

CONTENTS

France—Continued.
Pag*
Kelation of family allowances to the population problem___________ 50-52
Employers’ viewpoints__________________________________________ 52-55
Labor views------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 55-59
The outlook______________________________________ _____________
59
Belgium____________________________________________________________ 60-80
Public service__________________________________________________ 60-62
State----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 60, 61
Provinces and communes____________________________________ 61, 62
Private industry------------------------------------------------------------------------- 62-70
Family-allowance funds_____________________________________ 63-70
Operation of funds_____________________________________ 66, 67
Manner of payment of allowances_______________________
67
67
Age limits of child beneficiaries_________________________
Family-allowance rates_________________________________ 67, 68
Birth bonuses _________________________________________ 68 69
69
Allowances under special circumstances__________________
Welfare work__________________________________________
69
Trend toward centralization_____________________________
70
First congress__________________________________________
70
Contracts for public work_______________________________________
71
Viewpoints_____________________________________________________ 71-80
Employers_______________________________________ ___________ 71-73
Labor organizations________________________________________ 73-77
Trade-Union Commission of Belgium and affiliated organiza
tions_________________________________________________ 73-75
Christian trade-unions___________________________________ 75-77
Social organizations, public officials, and sociologists__________ 77-80
Germany----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 81-98
Public service----------------------------------------------------------------------------81-83
Private industry________________________________________________ 83-90
Methods of payment-------------------------------------------------------------84-87
Effect of family allowances on wage rates____________________
87
Collective agreements----------------------------------------------------------- 87, 88
Family-allowance funds_____________________________________ 89, 90
Family allowances in agriculture________________________________ 90-92
Viewpoints_____________________________________________________ 92-98
Public officials-------------------------------------------------------------------92
Private employers_____________________ ____________________ 92, 93
Workers_________ ___________________________________________93-95
Economists_________________________________________________ 96 98
Netherlands_______________________________________________________ 99-105
State, provincial, and communal services________________________ 99-101
Private industry______________________________________________ 101.102
Movement for State control for family allowances----------------------- 102,103
Viewpoints_____________________________________:_____________ 103-105
Austria__________________________________________________________ 106-111
Public service________________________________________________ 106,107
Private industry_____________________________________________ 107-110
Institution of family allowances by law-------------------------------107-109
Collective contracts_______________________________________ 109.110
Viewpoints__________________________________________________ 110, 111
British Empire___________________________________________________ 112-131
Australia_____________________________________________________ 112-123
Public service______________________________________________
112
Private industry------------------------------------------------------------------112
Family allowances and the “ basic wage” ----------------------------113-117
Viewpoints_______________________________________________ 117-119
Government employees---------------------------------------------------117
Labor unions_________________________________________ 117-119
New South Wales________________________________________ 119,120
Queensland___________________________________________ ____120-122
Victoria__________________________________________________ 122.123
Western Australia__________________________________________
123
Great Britain_________________________________________________ 123 -129
Public service_____________________________________________123.124
Private industry__________________________________________124.125

CONTENTS

British Empire—Continued.
Great Britain—Continued.
Pa**
Viewpoints----------------------------------------------------------- ----------- 125 12!)
Labor------------------------------------- ------------------------------------125,126
Organizations, conferences, etc________________________ 126,127
Economists___________________________________________ 127-129
New Zealand-------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- 120-131
Bulgaria._________________________________________________________ 132,133
Public service---------------------------------------------------------------------------132
Viewpoints----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 132,133
Czechoslovakia___________________________________________________ 134-138
Public service______ - ________________________________________ 134-136
Private industry______________________________________________ 136-138
Viewpoints —_- ________________________________________________
138
139
Esthonia-------- — —________________________________________________
Greece___________________________________________________________140,141
Public service----------------------------------------------------------------------------140
Private industry----- ---------------------------------------------------------------- 140,341
Viewpoints-------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------141
Hungary___ _____________________________________________________ 142,143
Public service_________________________________________________ 142,148
Private industry------------------------------------------------------------------------143
Viewpoints_____________________________________________________
143
Italy_______________ __________________________________ — - _______144-146
Public service________________________________________________ 144,145
Private industry------------------------------------------------------------------------145
Viewpoints___________________________________________________ 145,146
Latvia___________________________________________________________ 147,148
Public service__________________________________________________
147
Viewpoints-- ------- -------------- ------------------------------------------------------148
Lithuania__________________________________________________________
149
Luxemburg_______________________________________________________ 150,151
Public service__________________________________________________ . 150
Private industry______________________________________________ 150,151
Viewpoints_____________________________________________________
151
Poland___________________________________________________________ 152-155
Public service--------------------------------------------------------------------------152,153
State_______ - ____________________________________________ 152,153
Municipalities______________________________________________
153
Private industry----------------------------------------------------------------------153,154
Viewpoints___________________________________________________154,155
Portugal________ __________________________________________ .________
156
Rumania_________ __ ______________________________________________
157
Public service__________________________________________________
157
Private industry------------------------------------------------------------------------157
Viewpoints_____________________________________________________
157
Scandinavian countries________ __________________________________ 158-170
Denmark_____________________________________________________158-162
Public service,____________________________________________158-160
Private industry__________________________________________ 160,161
Viewpoints_______________________________________________ 161,162
Finland______________________________________________________ 162-165
Public service-___________________________________________ 162, .103
Private industry__________________________________________ 163,164
Viewpoints __ ____________________________________ _______ 164.165
Norway______________________________________________________ 165,166
Public service____________________________________________ 165,166
Private industry____________________________________________
166
Viewpoints_________________ _______________________________
166
Sweden______________________________________________________ 166-170
Public service__________________________________________ — 166-168
Private industry__________________________________________ 168,169
Agriculture_________________________________________________
170
Viewpoints «________________________________________________
170

CONTENTS
Pag*

Spain------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 171,172
Public service---------------------------------------------------------------------------171
Private industry---------------------------------------------------------------------- 171,172
Switzerland---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 173-177
Public service------------------------------------------------------------------------- 173,174
Private industry---------------------------------------------------------------------- 174,175
Viewpoints___________________________________________________ 175-177
Employers-------------------------------------.----------------------------------- 175,176
Workers--------------------------------------- -------------------- -----------------176,177
Economists and religious bodies______________________________
177
Yugoslavia-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------178
178
Public service________________________ __________________________
Private industry-------------_______________________________________
178
International action---------------------------------------------------------------------- 179,180
Women’s conventions_________________________________________ 179,180
International Federation of Christian Trade-Unions______________
180
Appendix A—Information sought in this survey-------------------------------181
Appendix B—Constitution of the Family Allowance Fund of the Region
of Paris_______________________________________________________ 182-184
Appendix C—Regulations of the Mutual Agricultural Family Allowance
Fund of the Region of Soissons-------------------------------------------------- 184-186
Appendix D—Statement of Lyon Regional Family Allowance Fund on
purpose and organization----------------------------------------------------------- 187-190
Appendix E—Birth and death rates in various countries, 1912 to 1923.— 191,192

BULLETIN OF THE

U. S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
No. 401

WASHINGTON

m arch ,

FAMILY ALLOWANCES IN FOREIGN
COUNTRIES
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
SCOPE OF SURVEY

The survey of family allowances conducted by the United States
Bureau of Labor Statistics in 1924, which this report covers, in
cluded the following 27 countries: Australia, Austria, Belgium,
Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, England, Esthonia, Finland,
France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania,
Luxemburg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portu
gal, Kumania, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and Yugoslavia.1 Let
ters of inquiry were sent to the ministries of labor and of finance
of these countries wherever such ministries existed and to the
heads of the national federations of employers and of tradesunions. While replies were not received from all these sources
in all cases, there was only one country, Portugal, from which no
report at all was received. However, a little information on the
subject for that country was obtained from published documents.
The various reports from governmental ministries and national
labor and employers5 organizations have been supplemented to a
considerable extent by research in official and private publications.
While the data secured in this survey do not lend themselves to
general combined statistical presentation, some interesting compari
sons may be made between certain countries.
As the term u family allowances” is at times applied somewhat
indiscriminately, and is open to rather broad interpretation, it
seems necessary at the outset to define the subject as treated in this
bulletin. As a matter of fact, maternity benefits immediately be
fore and after childbirth, pensions to destitute mothers whose hus
bands are dead or incapacitated, and provision for dependents in
unemployment insurance and in compensation for accidents embody
the family-allowance principle, and, broadly speaking, might be
included in a report on family-allowance systems; but the present
report deals mainly with allowances for everyday family responsi
bilities aside from special contingencies, although grants for special
occasions and circumstances are also discussed to some extent when
they are closely bound up with the regular family-allowance systems.
*F or previous publications of the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics on the subject of
family allowances,♦see Monthly Labor R eview : October, 1921 (pp. 9 - 1 9 ) , “ Some develop
ments in the movement for family w a g e s” ; October, 1923 (pp. 1 - 1 7 ) , “ Extension of
the ‘ family w a g e ’ system in France and B elgium ” ; January, 1924 (pp. 2 0 -2 9 ) , “ Fam
ily wage system in Germany and certain other European countries ” — all by the present
author.

INTROD UCTIO N AND SU M M A R Y

Tax exemptions for dependent children as indirect grants for
family responsibilities, and separation allowances for the families
of soldiers and sailors, might possibly be included in a study of
family allowances; but a report on these two subjects would exceed
the limits of this bulletin.
Family allowances for regular family responsibilities as here
treated are granted sometimes in close connection with the wage,
and sometimes apart from it, but always with the underlying idea
of supplementing the regular income of the family, in view of its
greater needs as compared with the needs of the single man or
woman without dependents.
BEGINNING OF THE MOVEMENT FOR FAMILY ALLOWANCES

Probably one of the most predominant features of wage negotia
tions during and immediately after the war was the added impor
tance given to the “ living-wage ” theory. This was undoubtedly due
to the unprecedented inflation of the prices of the necessaries of life,
followed by reiterated demands ‘from the workers for wage in
creases. Back of what seemed to be a more generous conciliatory at
titude towTard the contentions of labor may have been the realiza
tion of the value of physically fit workers in terms of man and
woman power in the face of war.
Closely allied with the “ living-wage” doctrine is the “ standardfamily ” theory, namely, that the normal male adult should receive
a wage sufficient to enable him to support a wife and two or three
dependent children. Under the economic strain of war and post
war conditions foreign Governments and private industry felt that
to pay such a wage was an impossibility. The results of cost-of-liv
ing investigations emphasized the fact that the wages of adult males
were utterly inadequate to mtfet even minimum standards of living
for a “ standard family,” and yet to pay every adult male what was
necessary to support such a family was, according to the viewpoints
of the Governments and private industry, prohibitive. The fact that
many families including more than the average number of depend
ents were subject to special hardship was also realized.
In view of the variations in family conditions and because of the
economic difficulties in which certain Governments and employers
found themselves during the period of high prices, recourse was had
to a wage system, whereby the basic wage was supplemented by
allowances to workers with families, thus providing for the greater
need of those having dependents. While in a few instances family
allowances in a limited way had been known before the war, yet the
movement gained its impetus because of the economic conditions
during and following the war, and in a few years extended over the
greater part of Europe. As economic conditions have changed for
the better, however, in some countries family allowances have been
reduced and in some cases abolished.
INTRODUCTION INTO DIFFERENT COUNTRIES

In the majority of the countries family allowances were instituted
during the war in the State civil service or in private industry, but in
Finland, France, Germany, and Sweden, to a certain extent, such
grants had been made some time previous to 1914. The solicitude

EX TE N T OP F A M ILY -A L LO W A N C E M O V E M E N T

of France for those with heavy family responsibilities is of long
standing. Under an act of June 28, 1793, the fathers and mothers
in that conntry who were entirely dependent upon their own labor
had a right to national assistance when their wages were inadequate
for their family needs, while various other measures for the relief of
large families in France were put into effect even before the war.
Family allowances were paid in Finland to certain grades of
teachers as long ago as 1908. Before the war such grants were also
made to some extent in Sweden in the mining, iron, and textile indus
tries and in Germany in a few monopolistic enterprises, among them
the Zeiss Optical Works.
On the other hand, Esthonia and Latvia did not inaugurate family
allowances in State employment until 1919, while Australia and
Belgium did not do so until 1920, although grants of this character
had been made in private industry in the latter country since 1915.
EXTENT OF FAMILY -ALLO WAN CE MOVEMENT
NUMBER OF PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER FAMILY-ALLOWANCE SYSTEMS

Not quite 50 per cent of the countries reported in regard to the
number of persons employed under family-aliowance systems and
the statistics on this subject which were received were not complete.
The number of persons employed under such systems in Belgium,
France, Germany, and Italy in 1924 and in the Netherlands in 1923
combined was more than 7,500,000.
DISBURSEMENTS FOB FAMILY ALLOWANCES IN CIVIL SERVICE

The amounts paid out by the various countries for family allow
ances in the civil service in the years 1921 to 1923, as far as reported,
are shown in Table 1:
T able 1.—A M O U N TS DISBURSED IN F A M ILY ALLOW AN CES B Y SPECIFIED GOVERN
M E N TS TO PERSONS IN G O V E R N M E N T E M P L O Y M E N T , 1921 TO 1923
Country
Austria____
____ . . . . . . . . . __ _____
Belgium________________ ________________
France______ . . _______________________ - _
Germany___ - _______ _______ _________ _
Hungary *
______________ - ____________
Latvia___________________________ - ______
Lithuania________________________________
Luxemburg______________________________
Netherlands. _________________ __ ______
Norway ________ ______ ________________
Ruma/nift ^ ,
__ _
_
Sweden___ _________ . ___________________
Switzerland..._____________ _____ _______

Unit*

1921

Krone______ 1,100,000,000
6,384,508
Franc...........
d o ...........
200,000,000
Gold mark
Paper krone.
40,471,040
Ruble...........
123,000,000
Litas_______
Franc______
3,800,000
Guilder____
Krone__ . __
Leu...........
Krona______
18,714,000
Franc______

1922
11,000,000,000
6,404,009
200,000,000
94,208,200
130,000,000
3,800,000

12,315,000

1923
63,000,000,000
36,756,779
200,000,000
J258,000,000
167,754,880
157,000,000
836,400
1,216,345
3.800.000
10,000,000
*205,477,915
4.600.000
12,600,000

1 Franc at par=19.3 cents; gold mark=23.82 cents; guilder at par=40.2 cents; krona at par=26.8 cents;
krone at par= Austria, about 0.01415 cent; Norway, 26.8 cents; litas at par »10 cents; leu at par—19.3 cents;
ruble at par=51.46 cents. Exchange rate varies.
3In June, 1924; the yearly expenditure in 1921, 1922, and 1923 could not be given because of the continu
ous fluctuations of the grants due to the depreciation of the currency.
» The amounts shown for Hungary are the budget estimates for the fiscal years 1921-22 to 1923-24. The
actual expenditures were much greater because of the depreciation of the currency.
4Nine months

Only three countries, Belgium, France, and Greece, reported on
the amounts disbursed in family allowances in private industry. In
Belgium the figures include birth bonuses, and it is probable that

INTRODUCTION AND SU M M A R Y

such bonuses are included in many of the reports upon which the
totals for France are based.
In Belgium the amounts paid out by the family-allowance funds
from their establishment to the middle of 1924 was 14,000,000 francs.
I f the allowances distributed by the coal mines were added the sum
would approximate 80,000,000 francs. In France, according to an
estimate in June, 1925, the disbursement in family allowances in
private industry aggregated over 660,000,000 francs per annum.
Of the 67,380.000 drachmas3 paid in 1923 to the workers in the
three private undertakings in Greece according family allowances,
2,328,000 drachmas were for such grants.
DIFFERENT KINDS OF FAMILY ALLOWANCES

Family allowances may be roughly divided into two classes: 1.
Allowances paid under legal enactments such as the law of Decem
ber 21, 1921, of Austria, the law of July 22, 1923, of France, and
various laws providing for family allowances in public employment ;
2. Voluntary grants made by private employers. In this survey,
however, for the sake of uniformity, they have been classified as to
whether they are paid in the public service or in private industry.
FAMILY ALLOWANCES IN PUBLIC SERVICE

Except in England, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, and Por
tugal, family allowances are being paid more or less extensively in
the State civil services of all the countries covered. The Norwegian
Government discontinued such grants at the close of 1923. In
Portugal a bill has been recently drafted providing for family
allowances for public employees.
While some countries did not report as to whether the familyallowance system was in operation in municipal employment, specific
information was obtained that such a scheme was followed by at
least some local government services—-provincial, communal, or mu
nicipal—in Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Denmark,
Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Luxemburg,
Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Sweden, Switzerland, and Yugo
slavia. The scope of the local systems varies greatly in different
countries. In France, for instance, the greater number of the de
partmental and communal administrations pay family allowances.
In Belgian and Italian municipal services also the practice seems to
be widespread. On the other hand, there are at present only a few
cantons and towns in Switzerland in which such allowances are paid.
Family allowances are not paid in the States of the Australian Com
monwealth and in the Communes of Greece, and the Assistant Sec
retary of the Treasury of Spain had no knowledge of such grants*
being made in the municipalities of that country.
FAMILY ALLOWANCES IN PRIVATE INDUSTRY

Of the 27 countries included in the survey, three—Australia, New
Zealand, and Hungary—were reported as having no family allow
ances in private industry. In England such grants are neglible, the
British Minister of Labor stating, through his representative, that a
few individual employers may make these supplementary payments,
* Drachma at par—19.3 cen ts; excbango rate varied.

M ETHO DS OF GRANTING F A M IL Y ALLOW AN CES

“ but there is no substantial section of industry or commerce in which
the system has been applied collectively to a group of undertakings.”
No replies to the questionnaire on family allowances in private
industry were received from Bulgaria, Esthonia, Latvia, Lithuania,
and Portugal. In the remaining 18 countries such supplements have
been or are being paid, at least to some degree, by private employers.
In France the system is making striking progress in industry, and
within the last few years there has been a marked development of
the movement in Belgian industry. In the Netherlands, Germany,
and Austria the practice of making such grants has been quite wide
spread, although there was a distinct setback to the German sys
tem in 1923. In the Scandinavian countries family allowances have
been almost entirely eliminated in private industry,
COLLECTIVE CONTRACTS

Of the 27 countries covered in this report, Germany, Czecho
slovakia, Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden have been the most con
spicuous in the regulation of family allowances through collective
agreements. Although in Germany the family-allowance system had
a considerable setback in 1923, in 1924, family allowances were
provided for in collective agreements covering from 3,000,000 to
3,200,000 workers. The total number of workers employed under
collective contracts in Germany in January, 1924, was 13,135,384.
In the Netherlands in June, 1923, there were included under col
lective contracts granting family allowances 62,624 wage earners, or
26 per cent of the total wage earners under collective agreements.
Family allowances were included in the various collective agree
ments of Czechoslovakia in 1919 and 1920, but in 1921 the system
was largely abandoned in private industry in that country, although
these grants are still being paid in greatly reduced degree in agri
culture, the metal and machine industries, sugar mills, the chemical
industry, and banking.
After family allowances were introduced into Poland in private
industry in 1919, they were for a short period provided for in various
collective agreements, but when economic conditions became more
normal many establishments discontinued the practice. They are
still being granted in certain coal mining districts, in some potash
mines, and in the sugar industry. In Great Poland in the last-mentioned industry workers with two children receive a supplement of
1 grosz 4 per hour of work, while in other sections of the country
family responsibilities are taken into consideration by allowances in
kind.
Of 1,250 agreements in force in Sweden in 1921, affecting 219,984
workers and providing cost-of-living bonuses, 443 covering 109,009
workers, granted family allowances. At present, however, family
allowances have been almost eliminated in private industry in that
country.
METHODS OF GRANTING FAMILY ALLOWANCES

The methods of granting family allowances are so diversified and
subject to such manifold modifications that the hope of present
* Gross at par—<0.193 cent; exchange rate varies.

IN TRODUCTION AND SU M M A R Y

ing tabular international comparisons was abandoned. Even in
different industries in the same country a variety of regulations is
found. Among the provisions are—
Allowances for married men regardless of the number of children.
Allowances for children only, but frequently including legiti
mated, illegitimate, adopted, and foster children and stepchildren.
Allowances for both wives and children. The allowances for
wives in various instances include common-law wives and divorced
wives when the latter are entitled to support.
Allowances for widows with dependent children and for unmar
ried mothers.
Allowances for aged parents, sisters, and brothers.
Allowances on an hourly, weekly, monthly, or annual basis, by
the shift, as a higher wage, as a percentage or the basic wage, with
out alleged connection with the wage, or as a part of the cost-ofliving bonus.
Allowances to all employees with family responsibilities or only
to workers and employees in the lower salary or wage groups.
Allowances for a certain number of children only or tor all chil
dren under a certain age.
Allowances for children under 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20, 21, and even
24 years of age.
Allowances for children in the higher age groups, usually under
certain conditions; for example, because such children are con
tinuing their education or are suffering from physical or mental dis
ability which prevents them from earning a living.
Allowances for all children but the first, or for all children but
the first two.
Allowances which increase or decrease in amount according to
whether the child is the second, third, or fourth in the family.
The amounts of allowances vary in different countries and in
different industries or employments and frequently according to
the salary grade or wage group of the beneficiaries. As instances
of the various amounts granted the following are cited:
The Belgian allowance for State employees on July 1, 1923, was
1 franc a day per child, having been advanced from 50 centimes.
In the middle of 1924, the family-allowance fund for the Liege
region, the largest fund of that character in Belgium, paid monthly
allowances of 10 francs for the first child, 20 francs for the second,
80 francs for the third, and 40 francs for each subsequent child.
From June 1 to December 1, 1924, family allowances were granted
in the German civil service as follows:
(a) To permanent and temporary employees for all dependent
children under 6 years of age, 16 gold marks monthly; for children
6 to 14 years of age, 18 gold marks; for children 14 to 20 years of
age, 20 gold marks. In addition a statutory employee received an
allowance of 10 gold marks for a wife.
(&) To workers, 27 gold pfennigs (4 cents) per workday for
a wife and for each child entitled to support.
By a decree which went into effect December 1, 1924, these allow
ances were increased 2 marks per month per wife and per child.
In the early part of 1924 the family-allowance fund of the National
Employers’ Federation of the Saxon Electrical Works, Germany*

FA M IL Y -A L L O W A N C E FU N D S

granted all classes of workers 3 pfennigs per hour for a wife, the same
amount for the first child, and 2 pfennigs per hour for each subse
quent child.
In 1924 the allowances in the French civil service were 495 francs
per annum for each of the first two children and 840 francs for
each subsequent child. The 1925 appropriation bill as submitted
to the Senate provided for family allowances for civil service em
ployees as follows: 540 francs per annum for the first child; 720
francs for the second child; 1,080 francs for the third child; and
1,260 francs for each subsequent child.
In France there has been great variation in the amounts of
allowances paid by the family-allowance funds. The average allow
ances, as reported by the director of the Central Committee on
Family Allowances at the 1924 congress of family-allowance funds,
were 19 francs per month for 1 child, 46 francs per month for 2
children, 81 francs per month for 3 children, and 124 francs per
month for 4 children. The principal funds, however, were reported
as gradually putting themselves in position to pay 20 to 25 francs
per month for 1 child, 50 to 75 francs per month tot 2 children,
and 100 to 150 francs per month for 3 children.
FAMILY-ALLOWANCE FUNDS

One of the most logical and important developments of the
family-allowance movement is the institution of family-allowance
funds for the pooling of the costs of family allowances among
groups of employers and the prevention of discrimination in em
ployment against workers with family responsibilities. This devel
opment has been most remarkable in France where the first fund
was established in 1918 and where there are now 176 such funds.
The astonishing growth of these funds in France is shown in
Table 2:
T a b le

2. — GROW TH OF FAMILY-ALLOWANCE! FUNDS
31, 1920, TO JUNE S, 192*5

Date

Dec. 31,1920..............................................................................
Dec. 31,1921..............................................................................
Dec. 31, 1922.............................................................................
Dec. 31, 1923..............................................................................
May 25, 1924............................................................................
Dec. 15, 1924.............................................................................
June 8,1925..............................................................................

Number
of
funds

57
75
107
130
152
162
176

FRANCE,

Number of Number of
establish
ments be employees
of estab
longing to lishments
funds

6,200
7,000
8,100
9,300
10,000
11,200

500,000
665.000
800.000
950,000
1,100,000
1,200,000
1,210,000

DECEMBER

Annual
disburse
ments for
allowances

Francs
65.000.000
70.000.000
80.000.000
101,700,000
128,000,000
142.000.000
160.000.000

The first Belgian fund was organized in March, 1921, and in the
middle of 1924 there were 12 funds in existence, one of these being
set up by the Christian Federation of Trade-Unions.
In Germany the number of funds has been very restricted.
The mining industry, the heavy-metal industries, and most of the
chemical industries have had no family-allowance xunds, and to the
employers the necessity for the establishment of such funds did not
seem great.

INTRODUCTION AND SU M M A R Y

In 1922 there were 11 funds in Germany, most of which have now
ceased to function.
Both Austria and the Netherlands have funds. In the former
country these funds are established under the law of December 21,
1921. In June, 1922, the procedure for pooling the costs of allow
ances for agricultural and certain other workers was abolished. The
64cumbersome ” fund machinery is reported as being out of all pro
portion to the negligible amounts of allowances for children.
The municipal government of Arnhem in the Netherlands has
instituted a children allowance fund for municipal employees and
for private employees in so far as private enterprises may be able to
arrange with this fund for such grants. Funds have also been
created in the boot and shoe, baking, and cigar industries in the
Netherlands.
A cost-of-living fund was established in the printing industry of
Copenhagen, Denmark, in January, 1917, which paid family allow
ances, but it was abolished in July, 1921.
FUNCTIONING OF FUNDS

Family-allowance funds are of two types, regional funds and
trade funds, the former with a membership of establishments or
industrial groups operating in the same locality, and the latter com
posed of employers or industrial groups in the same or allied trades.
There are arguments both for and against both types of fund (see
pp. 26, and 66 and 67).
While these funds have been created to equalize the distribution of
expenses arising from the payment of family allowances and to pro
tect the workers with family’ responsibilities from being thrown out
of employment or from not being hired at all, the methods of pre
venting such discrimination are not the same in all funds. The three
principal plans of determining the employers’ contributions to the
French funds are based on (1) the number of days worked, (2) the
total number of workers employed during the month by the mem
bers of the fund, and (3) the total wages bill.
Reductions are sometimes made in the assessments for establish
ments employing large numbers of youthful workers who have no
dependents. There have been cases in which differentiation in the
rates paid by commercial undertakings affiliated with regional or
intertrade funds was necessary because the personnel of such under
takings had fewer dependents in proportion to the industrial
workers. In most instances the Belgian funds base the assessments
of their affiliated members on either the number of their employees
or the total wage bills.
Among the methods adopted by agricultural funds for fixing the
assessments of member establishments is that of basing the con
tribution on the number of hectares cultivated.
It is estimated that the allowances in 1923 for all the funds in
France taken together averaged from 1.6 to 3 per cent of the pay
roll, while the allowances of the Belgian funds in 1924, constituted 2
per cent of the wage bill.
The Central Committee on Family Allowances organized in 1920,
acts as a permanent liaison for the French family-allowance funds.
Five annual congresses of these funds have been convened at the

FA M IL Y ALLOW ANCES IN AGRICULTURE

call of this committee, the first meeting being held in Paris in 1921.
These conferences have undoubtedly given great impetus to the
movement, and the reports of the proceedings of the various sessions
constitute valuable contributions to the literature on family allow
ances.
In Belgium also the family-allowance funds are headed by a cen
tral committee which gathers information for these funds and studies
in a general way the technical, demographic, juridical, and social
problems resulting from the establishment of the family-allowance
system.
* The first congress of the Belgian Family Allowance Funds met
at Brussels November 4, 1924.
HYGIENE SERVICES OF FUNDS

As an outcome of the experience of French and Belgian familyallowance funds hygiene services have been organized by them for
the benefit of the families of the workers. At the fourth annual
congress of the French funds 20 of these funds were reported as hav
ing such services, some of the schemes being quite elaborate.
In November, 1924, the Liege and Brabant funds in Belgium were
maintaining notable visiting-nurse services with allied activities.
A visiting nurse who is a graduate midwife was at that time em
ployed by the Verviers fund, another Belgian organization for the
payment of family allowances.
In general, the family-allowance funds in the Netherlands do not
carry on welfare services. It would seem also from the reports
concerning the German family-allowance funds that such servicesare not an important feature ox these funds.
FAMILY ALLOWANCES IN AGRICULTURE

The family-allowance principle is followed in agriculture in vari
ous countries, particularly through payments in kind.
In France there is a growing movement for the creation of familyallowance funds in agriculture. In February, 1925, there were 15 of
these funds. As already stated, one of the bases of computing assess
ments for members in some of these funds is the number of hectares
cultivated.
The French Ministry of Agriculture has recently sent an appeal
to the prefects and presidents of the agricultural offices of his ad
ministration and to the heads of the departmental bureaus of agri
culture and labor for the expansion of the family-allowance system for
agricultural laborers, special attention being called to the need for
the encouragement of agricultural family-allowance funds and to
the importance, in the face of depopulation in the rural regions, of
making every effort to keep large families on the land.
In Austria the procedure for pooling the cost of family allow
ances for agricultural workers, provided for under the law of De
cember 21,1921, was abolished in June, 1922.
In Germany family allowances are paid in agriculture to both per
manent and independent workers. A permanent worker is provided
by his employer with a dwelling and a tract of land which he can
cultivate for himself. His wages in kind correspond to the needs
of his family. A much more substantial part of the independent

INTRODUCTION AND SU M M A R Y

worker’s wages is in cash. A number of different methods of paying
independent workers, however, are found in collective contracts.
In Czechoslovakia the permanent workers are, as a rule, the only
agricultural workers who receive family allowances.
STATE CONTROL FOR FAMILY ALLOWANCES

A bill to make family allowances compulsory in industry in France
wa«s introduced by Maurice Bonowski in February, 1920, but failed
to pass. Vigorous opposition was registered by various important
conventions to proposals to make such grants obligatory in industry.
The first four congresses of the French family-allowanee funds
have declared themselves in favor of the free development of these
funds through private initiative.
Even in connection with requiring family allowances in contracts
for public works the compulsory feature has been contested, but it
was finally established by decree of July 13, 1923, concerning bids
for public works approved by the State.
In Belgium certain public administrations have already made it
compulsory for contractors for public works to affiliate with a familyallowanee fund or to pay family allowances themselves to their
workers. Moreover, a bill was introduced early in 1924, providing
for the inclusion of a provision for family allowances in contracts
for public works. The Belgian Committee for the Study of Family
Allowances opposed the passage of the proposed measure, pointing
out the grave danger which the committee considers such legisla
tion involves.
In addition to the above bill there have been various proposals
tc place the whole family-allowanee system in Belgium under the
Government. The attitude of the Belgian employers on the matter
is similar to that of the French industrialists, namely, that it is
repugnant to them to have a voluntary liberality made compulsory;
that the efficacy of the system depends upon its flexibility and free
dom; and that such a scheme would lead to the imposition of an
enormous tax, to be used for the most part to meet the immense
costs of official administration.
The Austrian law of December 21, 1921, made family allowances
compulsory for industrial employers.
In the children’s maintenance bill introduced in the New South
Wales Parliament in 1919 it was provided that the contributions
to the children’s maintenance fund were to be made by employers.
In the 1921 bill, however, the general public was to be assessed
for such fund. Both measures were defeated.
A bill which was presented to the New Zealand Parliament in 1922
stipulated that every employer of adult workers, except employers
of domestic labor, should pay into a child-sustenance fund such
amount as should be assessed for each day or part day worked by
each employee.
Difficulties arising from industrial rivalry in connection with the
family-allowanee system in the Netherlands have resulted in propo
sitions to establish by law for the whole country a common fund for
children’s allowances, to which employers would be compelled to
contribute. The creation of such a fund has been urged again and
again before the States General by the Minister of I^abor. In

N ATU RE OF FA M IL Y ALLOW ANCES

May, 1923, a bill had been drafted in this connection, but its intro
duction was postponed until the economic situation of the country
was more favorable.
An unsuccessful attempt was made in 1924 to include in the
English agricultural wages bill a provision for the establishment of
a fund for the payment of children allowances.
NATURE OF FAMILY ALLOWANCES
RELATION TO WAGES

In France there has been voluminous discussion as to the actual
nature of the family allowance when granted by employers, the crux
of the contention being whether or not these allowances constitute a
part of the wage. Jurists and economists have split hairs on this
question. In industrial accident cases courts have handed down
apparently diametrical decisions on the matter. Belgium is also
beginning to be agitated over the same problem. At the first con
gress of family-allowance funds in that country, one of the principal
addresses was on the legal aspects of family allowances.
The need for more scientific statistical studies on the subject of
family allowances is realized, especially in France and Belgium
where the system of payment has been so elaborated. In the esti
mates of the number of children per 100 workers the question some
times arises as to whether all children are included or merely those
eligible for alloAvances. The reports on the number of heads of fam
ilies are not always subject to as careful delimitation as one would
wish.
At the 1923 congress of French family-allowance funds, the neces
sity of precise terminology for family allowances was emphasized.
RELATION TO THE POPULATION PROBLEM

Not the least interesting aspect of the family-allowance system is
its alleged relation to the problem of the future labor supply and,
in the eyes of some militarists, to the problem of future man power
for the respective nations in the event of war. In the case of France
particularly this relation is more conspicuous than in any other coun
try because of its grave concern over depopulation and the dread of
military invasion.
The proceedings of the congresses of French family-allowance
funds indicate how closely linked up the movement for family
allowances is with the question of the birth rate. At the first annual
congress the following statement was made in the opening address:
u The Avar has revealed the terrible danger to which the paucity of
births brings our country—the lack of labor is the end of industry
and agriculture, the lack of soldiers is the end of the nation, the
extinction of the race.55 Another speaker pointed out that not only
were these funds established to adjust wages in accordance with
economic conditions but the spirit in which such agencies were
created called for an interest in the individual relations of employ
ers and employees, a general interest in the affiliated members of
61243°—26------2

IN TROD U CTIO N AND SU M M A R Y

these funds, and a still broader interest in the country. These
interests imperatively demanded that France be assured of future
labor reserves.
The director of the Central Committee on Family Allowances de
clared at another congress that France was depeopling itself, that
its life was compromised, and cited family allowances as the most
effective means that had been instituted to encourage large families.
At the 1924 meeting the subject of the birth rate was a prominent
one.
On the other hand, filtienne Villey, in his L ’Organisation professionelle des Employeurs dans l’Industrie (p. 297), flatly denies that
the family-allowance system has “ for its principal objective the in
fluencing of the birth rate.”
In other countries there are evidences that at least some nationali
ties have realized that such a system might have an important bear
ing on population problems. In Belgium the marked interest of the
Committee on Large Families and the National League for Large
Families in the movement for family allowances may be cited as an
instance of this.
Edouard Heimann, of the University of Freiburg, Germany, calls
attention to one point upon which he claims he finds widespread
agreement in connection with the social wage in that country,
namely, that “ the subsidizing of the father of a family must not be
carried to such lengths as to offer him an inducement to parenthood.”
Quite a different attitude was taken by W. Kulemann wTho de
clared, in the Sociale Praxis of April 20, 1921, that marriages were
“ being made more difficult because the incomes of most men are not
sufficient to support a family. It seems therefore only proper to
place the married men in a more favorable economic position. Not
only consideration as to increasing the population but also equity
calls for the procedure. The minimum of existence, whether meas
ured from a physiological or social viewpoint, is manifestly much
higher in the case of a family man than that of a single person. The
same income which makes a favorable existence possible to the latter
will mean starvation or at least great deprivation to the former.”
A. B. Piddington, of Australia, has prophesied that the principle
of child endowment established on a 64sensible scale ” would counter
act “ the impelling force of what Mr. Knibbs has called the 4Mal
thusian drift ’ which can be discerned in all the western races.” 5
Behind the advocacy of family allowances by Catholic and other
Christian economists and by the Christian federations of tradeunions one may discern the religious ideal of the family.
VIEWPOINTS
PUBLIC OFFICIALS

According to the Austrian Ministry of Finance family allowances
would be abolished altogether in Government employment if salaries
could be restored to the pre-war level, and the General Director of the
Royal Treasury of Italy holds that these grants in his country will
5
For a discussion of the alleged possible influences of fam ily allowances upon the
quantity and quality of the population, see Pigou, A. C . : Essay in Applied Economics.
London, 1923, pp. 8 7 -9 1 .

VIEW PO IN TS

be discontinued in the State service of that country when economic
conditions become normal.
According to the German Ministry of Finance the practice of pay
ing family allowances to those in the Federal service is somewhat
different from making such payments in private industry because of
the prevalent theory that compensation paid under public law “ does
not represent a pure and simple working wage ” but a return to the
employees “ for putting their whole personality into the service of
the State.”
The Czechoslovak Ministry of Finance announces that the con
tinuation of the family-allowance system complicates the wage prob
lem, and the reports from the Danish Government are for the most
part unfavorable.
On the other hand, the Assistant Director of the Belgian Ministry
of Justice thinks we may expect greater peace and happiness for all
men through perfecting family allowances and making the system
general. The Director of the Budget and Financial Control of
France states that “ it seems the family-allowance system should
bring forth its expected fruits ” ; and an official representative of the
Latvian Ministry of Labor holds that “ family allowances are in
dispensable ” in view of the present high cost of living. In the
judgment of the Secretary General of Labor, Commerce, and In
dustry of the Netherlands such grants are as a rule in the interest of
society. The chief of the Swiss Federal Department of Finance
approves of them as advantageous both to the Government and its
personnel.
Conspicuous among official advocates of special provision to meet
family responsibilities is Hon. Thomas W. McCawley, president of
the court of arbitration of Queensland and chief justice of the
supreme court of that State. He declares that the next move should
be the establishment of children’s allowances on a national scale as
he “ can see no other way of substantially raising the standard of
living of those who are at present the most unfairly treated, mar
ried men with young dependent children, who now receive the basic
wage or a little more.”
Judge L. V. Frazer, of the New Zealand court of arbitration be
lieves that in the matter of wages “ justice to all can not be attained
by working on the basis of an average family.”
PRIVATE EMPLOYERS

The remarkable multiplication of family-allowance funds in
France within the last few years and the enthusiasm manifested at
the annual congresses of these funds seem to indicate that the French
employers in general are more favorable to family allowances than
the industrialists of any other country. Their attitude on this sub
ject in connection with the population problem and the taking over
of the family-allowance system by the State has already been re
ferred to. In addition, it is interesting to note that such bonuses
are in keeping with the French spirit of thrift; for, according to
Etienne Villey, these allowances, being based on verified actual con
ditions, appeal strongly to practical industrial leaders. Kough aver
ages and estimates are replaced by close calculations founded on fact.
Bonvoisin, the director of the Central Committee on Family Allow

IN TROD U CTION AND SU M M A R Y

ances, also emphasized the economy of these grants in an address
before the second congress of the French family-allowance funds in
1922. A growing solicitude for the welfare of the families of the
workers is also one of the prominent characteristics of the French
movement.
Many Belgian employers are apparently sanguine over the sys
tem. The secretary of the Belgian Committee for the Study of
Family Allowances declares that the institution of these grants
“ has permitted the realization of the most truly democratic and
fruitful of reforms—one of the most far-reaching and important
social reforms of the era of big industry.”
On the other hand, the Central Federation of German Austrian
Industry regards family allowances as necessary palliatives in times
of industrial depression, but reports that employers are opposed to
the “ family wage ” as they are keenly conscious of its undesirable
effects on production.
The National Association of Czechoslovak Manufacturers holds
that family allowances are not justified from the standpoint of the
national production. The general secretary of the General Con
federation of Italian Industry considers the system “ antieconomical,” unless offset by the French and Belgian system of familyallowance funds. “ Special demographic reasons ” alone can justify
the institution of these grants.
The president of the Employers Central Association of Finland
states that these grants could be instituted only under exceptional
circumstances. The Scandinavian employers seem to care little for
such a system.
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES

The Federal employees in a substantial number of countries seem
to regard the family-allowance system with favor. The system of
children’s allowances established in the Australian Commonwealth is
backed, with qualifications, by the £<bulk of employees and nearly
every union in the service.” Among the most frequently expressed
wishes of the Federal employees of France is that for family allow
ances. The greater number of the Federal personnel in Austria wish
to have the system continued. The Rumanian Engineers5 Associa
tion requested the Government in 1923 to keep up the practice of
making grants for family responsibilities to the engineers in the
State service. The Federal employees of Belgium, Italy, and Lux
emburg are reported as satisfied with or favoring these bonuses.
The Latvian State Government employees wish to have their system
expanded. In Norway the workers in both State and municipal
services desire to have family allowances reestablished.
In Switzerland, all the Federal service organizations are not
agreed on the matter of family allowances, the federal union ob
jecting to the system and the Christian federation of the transport
personnel looking upon these grants as advantageous.
A very large majority of the public employees of the Netherlands
Government who are members of unions affiliated with the central
independent and neutral trade unions are opposed to children’s
allowances but the central sectarian trade-union federations defend
them. The Federal employees of Czechoslovakia are also divided

V IEW PO IN TS

on the subject, and there is a tendency among them to object to what
they consider the injustice of the family-allowance system.
While the employee - and manual workers in the German Federal
Service are not * strictly hostile ” to family allowances, the majority
of them would prefer to have their basic salaries increased.
The law of March 28, 1923, of Denmark, providing that family
responsibilities should be taken into account in the trade-cycle allow
ance, was opposed by the greater number of Danish civil service
employees.
WORKERS IN PRIVATE INDUSTRY

The secretary of the International Federation of Trade-Unions
sets forth three of the main objections of its affiliated members to
family allowances: (1) The fear that the general efforts of the
workers to secure better wages will be thwarted by the institution of
these bonuses; (2) the dread that it will make it more difficult for
married men and those with heavy family responsibilities to obtain
employment as compared with men without dependents; (3) the
feeling that these allowances would create discord among unmarried
workers who would not understand receiving less remuneration for
equal work.
Among other frequent objections registered by the socialistic
trade-unions are the power that family allowances give industrialists
over the workers and the laborer’s aversion to receiving such grants
as “ liberalities ” from employers.
A close analysis of some of the pronouncements of the national
non-Christian federations of trade-unions in various countries and
of the resolutions of the labor parties of England and Australia
indicates that a number of these bodies are not averse to family
or children endowment provided by the State in a manner agreeable
to the workers and which would protect them from exploitation by
employers.
Even in France and Belgium, where the protests of the socialistic
trade-unions against the family-allowance system have been at times
quite vehement, some of their recent resolutions include recommenda
tions for family allowances regulated by law and subject to more
or less control by representatives of the workers. Indeed, it would
seem that a considerable part of the trade-union objection to family
allowances is rather against the manner of granting them than
against the allowances themselves.
The Christian trade-unions, while sharing some of the dominant
fears of the socialistic trade-unions in regard to the family-allow
ance system, are not so bitterly arrayed against their employers as
the latter group of workers* The economic world program of the
International Federation of Christian Trade-Unions included a rec
ommendation for the establishment of special funds for the payment
of allowances to large families. The Christian trade-unions of Bel
gium have themselves created a family-allowance fund. The Inter
national Federation of Christian Unions of Textile Workers in Sep
tember, 1924, urged the creation of national or regional familyallowance funds under the joint control of employers and workers.
Among the international meetings at which a pronounced interest
either in motherhood endowment or in family allowances has been

INTRODUCTION AND SU M M A R Y

manifested are the quinquennial congress of the International Coun
cil of Women in Christiania in 1920, the meeting of a committee of
the International Women Suffrage Alliance in Rome, May, 1923, and
the Conference of Women Socialists at Hamburg the same month and
year.
CONCLUSIONS
So many matters concerning the family-allowance systems in their
present tentative existence are debatable that the drawing of definite
conclusions is difficult and frequently impossible. For example, it
would be indeed futile to attempt any deduction as to the actual
influence of these systems on the birth rate. Even in France, where
some investigations have been made along these lines, the findings
are of doubtful value. It is perfectly obvious, however, that the
depopulation crisis is very much to the fore in the minds of the
leaders of the family-allowance movement in that country.
Another moot question is the effect of family allowances upon
industrial production. The elements influencing production are so
numerous, however, that any sound conclusions as to what extent
family allowances are to be taken into account in this connection
should be the result of intensive scientific investigation, and par
ticularly so under the abnormal industrial conditions following
the war.
While reports from several countries state that family allow
ances affect production adversely, certain employers in other coun
tries hope by such grants to reduce strikes and to lessen labor turn
over, and consequently to stabilize production.
Varying replies were made to the bureau’s inquiry as to the reac
tion of family allowances on the basic wage. This question, it is
realized by the writer, could not properly be answered in many cases
unless special individual studies had been made on the subject with
due regard to the intricacies of wage adjustments. Such studies,
would, of course, be rendered especially difficult by the extraordinary
fluctuations in currencies, rapidly changing price levels, and wardevised methods of payment running parallel with family-allowance
systems. It is safe to say, however, that in the civil services in
various countries and to a considerable extent in industry family
allowances have without doubt constituted a breakwater against de
mands for higher wages.
While family allowances were being paid in the civil services of
22 of the 27 countries covered in this report, the practice of making
these grants in private industry has declined in almost all of the
countries in which it has been tried out. This decline is especially
marked in Czechoslovkia, Germany, Switzerland, and the Scandi
navian countries.
On the other hand, there has been a recent vigorous development
of the family allowance system in France and Belgium under the
enthusiastic leadership of private employers, and a renewed interest
in the question of family endowment is being manifested in England
and in Australia.
Any attempt to evaluate the various experiments with family
allowances is baffling not only because of the conflicting testimony
of those closely associated with such experiments and of the short

CONCLUSION

period over which they have been made but because of the confusion
of thought as to the nature and character of family allowances and
the varying plans for putting them into effect.
On the one hand, family allowances are regarded as closely tied
up with wages, and the newer system of payment is, as it were,
put in juxtaposition with the standard family wage and is declared
to be more just and more economical because it takes into considera
tion actual instead of hypothetical family responsibilities.
On the other hand, there are schemes for mother or child endow
ment or insurance for family responsibilities apart from the com
petitive wage of the father. Between these extremes there is the
combination to a greater or less degree of the family allowance
system with the standard family theory; for example, the paying
of a wage which will support a man and his wife with supplemen
tary grants for each dependent child, or the payment of a stand
ard wage and the exclusion of the first child or of the first two
children from such grants.
There are evidences, however, in the ever-increasing literature on
family allowances of a trend, in certain countries which are more
vitally interested in the subject, away from concept of the family
allowance as a supplementary wage and toward proposals for State
family endowment or some form of national social insurance for
family responsibilities.
This trend lends support to the fears of those who see in family
allowances or child endowment a more penetrating invasion of
private rights and domestic intimacies, but at the same time reveals
a growing determination on the part of the workers to defend their
rights through effective representation.
It may also be said that the experience under family allowance
systems adds weight to the demand of women for equal pay for
equal work and calls for a more logical response than is frequently
made to that contention.
Furthermore, the establishment of family allowance funds, at least
in France and Belgium, has resulted in a growing solicitude on the
part of employers for child welfare and a keener realization of its
bearing on future citizenship.
Although family allowance systems have aroused bitter antagonism,
and in many cases have been completely abandoned, these experiments
are of real social significance. This survey shows that they have
been made in 25 countries and at present cover some millions of
manual and nonmanual workers. It would seem that such experi
ments are well worth careful consideration in connection with any
comprehensive study of the problem of the living wage.

FRANCE
French legislation providing assistance for large families is quite
voluminous.6 A brief reference to some of these measures will here
be made by way of introduction to a description of the present sys
tem of family allowances in France, which is more highly devel
oped than that in any other country.
Even before the reign of Louis X IV , financial encouragement was
given to large families in certain sections of France where the birth
rate did not reach the desired figure. In the Province of Bourgoyne, for example, households with 12 living children were tax
exempt, and later this exemption was extended to such households
throughout the country. In 1666, an imperial edict was issued at
St. Germain-et-Laye for the purpose of facilitating marriages and
rendering religious vows of celibacy more difficult. This measure
accorded certain privileges and exemptions to persons who married
before they became 20 years of age and to fathers of 12 children.7
A law of October 27, 1790, favored the fathers of three or more
children in the matter of personal property tax exemptions,8 and
under an act of June 28, 1793, fathers and mothers depending en
tirely upon their own labor had a right to national assistance when
their wages were inadequate for their family needs.9
In the early half of the nineteenth century France seems to have
been influenced by the doctrine of Malthus, and interest in large
families waned,10 but after the fearful losses in man power during
the Franco-Prussian war the population problem again became
acute, and at that period certain legislative proposals, of more or
less limited scope, favoring large families were made. The birth
rate, however, decreased from 1870 to 1914, though the National
Alliance for the Growth of French Population (UAllianee na
tionals pour Vaccvoissement cle la population francaise), which was
formed in 1896, conducted a vigorous propaganda. After the World
War this campaign was intensified.11
An interesting law for the relief of large families is that of July
14,1913, providing that “ every head of a family, of French national
ity, having charge of more than three legitimate or recognized chil
dren and whose resources were insufficient to maintain them, receive
an annual allowance for each child under 13 years of age beyond
the third child under that age.” Should a father die, disappear, or
6 Ebl6, M aurice: Mesures legales en faveur des families nombreuses (& la date du l « r
janvier, 1 9 2 4 ). Paris, [1 9 2 4 ],
Such measures include those for tax exemptions, cheaper
housing, facility for securing small holdings of land, reduction of the period of m ilitary
service, reductions in railroad fares, scholarships, allowances to heads o f families, birth
bonuses, special privileges relative to pensions and industrial accident compensation, and
recognition by conferring medals.
I Guesdon, V ic to r: Le Mouvement de Creation et d’Extension des Caisses d’Allocations
familiales. Paris, 1922, p. 23.
8 Dequidt, Georges: Le Statut des Families nombreuses. Paris, 1923, p. 2.
® Guesdon, V ic to r: Le Mouvement de Creation et d’Extension des Caisses d’Allocations
fam iliales. Paris, 1922, p. 24.
10 Dequidt, G eorges: Le Statut des Families nombreuses. Paris, 1923, pp. 3, 4.
II Guesdon, V ic to r : Le Mouvement de Creation et d’Extension des Caisses d’Allocations
fam iliales. Paris, 1922, pp. 25, 20.

PU BLIC SERVICE

abandon his children, leaving them in their mother’s care, an allow
ance is to be granted to every child, beginning with the second,
under 13 years of age. This assistance to large families is made
compulsory on the Departments, in cooperation with the communes
and the State Government.
The amount of the allowance in each commune, to be fixed by the
municipal council subject to the approval of the general council of
the Ministry of the Interior, must not be less than 60 nor more thaii
90 francs a a year for each child entitled to such allowance, unless
any excess of the latter amount be met entirely by the commune.
On April 7, 1917, a law was passed providing for the payment
of family allowances in all State services (see p. 20). Previous to
this date, however, various ministries had in some cases for many
years granted allowances of this kind to certain classes of em
ployees.12
A decree of January 27, 1920, created a superior council of na
tality under the Ministry of Health, Assistance and Social Welfare,
and a natality commission in each department to determine meas
ures “ to combat depopulation, to increase the birth rate, to develop
child welfare work, and to protect and honor large families.” 13
Among the most recent family allowance measures are the law of
December 19, 1922, making it “ permissible ” to include in bidders’
estimates for public works a provision obligating contractors to pay
family allowances to persons employed on such works,14 and the
decree of July 13, 1923, which made family allowances for em
ployees engaged in State public works obligatory.15
On July 22, 1923, a law was passed providing an annual allow
ance from the State of 90 francs for each child under 13 years of
age in excess of three in French families. This allowance may
be granted up to 16 years of age if the children are still in
school, apprenticed, “ invalided, or incurably ill,” except in the
case of children who are cared for in hospitals at the expense of
the State, Department, or commune. The Departments or com
munes may increase these national grants from their own funds.
The allowances granted under this law, however, are not in addition
to the allowances for heads of families employed in the State civil
or military service or by the Departments, communes, and public
establishments, nor to the assistance provided under certain other
laws.16
PUBLIC SERVICE
STATE

The Marine Ministry seems to have been the first to inaugurate
the payment of family allowances in the State Government service,
an imperial decree of December 26, 1862, providing for allow
ances of 10 centimes per day for each child under 10 years of
age to be paid to registered seamen, up to and including quarter
* Franc at p a r = 1 9 .3 c e n ts; exchange rate varies.
32 Bulletin du Ministere du Travail, Paris, March-April, 1020, p. 104.
» L e Journal Officiel, Paris, Jan. 28, 1920, pp. 1496, 1497.
34 Bulletin du Ministfcre du Travail, Paris, January-February-March, 1923, p. 65.
16 Idem, July-Axigust-Septeinber, 1923, p. 100*.
ie Idem, pp. 71*, 72*.

FR A N C S

masters, having over 5 years’ service. In 1908, housing allowances
for married sailors were substituted for the allowances for children.17
The law of July 50, 1913, provided for grants of 200 francs
per annum for each legally dependent child under 16, beginning
with the second child, to be paid to the personnel of specified
grades in the army, navy, and colonial services, more than 3,000,000
francs being appropriated for the payment of such allowances.
Under a ministerial order of December 28, 1911, constables or
bailiffs (huissiers), office watchmen, and day workers of the colonial
office received 150 francs at the birth of each child, 20 francs annu
ally for the first and second child, and 60 francs annually for the
third and each subsequent child, the allowance being paid until
the child became 17 years of age.
Certain allowances for children were granted by the Ministry
of Finance approximately 25 years ago, and from 1908 annual
grants varying with the number and ages of their children were
paid to teachers in the public primary schools of the State.18
Among other State Government services reporting the payment of
family allowances to certain classes of their personnel prior to 1917
were the Ministry of Industry, Ministry of Commerce, postal and
telegraph services, the customs service, the mint, the national print
ing office, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Labor, and the
Ministry of Public Works.19
The law of April 7,1917, extended family allowances to all perma
nent State employees receiving less than a certain specified compen
sation, and to carry out such provisions 45,832,200 francs were ap
propriated. These measures were taken because of the difficult eco
nomic circumstances in which such employees were placed as a re
sult of the war. The allowance was fixed at 100 francs per annum
per child under 16 years of age, there being no age limit in case the
child was infirm, unable to work, or legally dependent on the em
ployee or workman. The laws of August 4, 1917, March 22, 1918,
and November 14, 1918, liberalized certain provisions of the original
act,20 in some cases including employees of higher salary grades in
the classes benefited and in others increasing the amounts of the
allowance per child.
The law of October 18, 1919, increased the allowance to 330 francs
annually for each of the first two children, and 480 francs for each
child beginning with the third, and the law of June 30, 1923,
granted each child beginning with the third an additional allowance
of 120 francs per annum. Temporary supplements provided under
the law of December 28, 1923, raised the allowance for each of the
first two children to 495 francs and for each succeeding child to 840
francs per annum.21
The average amount disbursed in family allowances in each year
from 1921 to 1923 was approximately 200,000,000 francs. In 1924
the annual cost of family allowances was increased by 80,000,000 or
90,000,000 francs because of the law of December 28, 1923.
17 Bulletin chi Minist&re du Travail, Paris, March-April, 1920, p. 105.
18 Idem, pp. 105, 106.
10 France. Ckambre des Deputes, Session de 1916. Rapport fait an Nom de la Com
mission d’Assurance et de Pr§voyance sociales, No. 2711. Paris, 1916, pp. 42, 4S.
^ B u lle tin du MinistSre du Travail, Paris, March-April, 11)20, p. 107.
a D ata furnished by the Minister of Finance of France, May 9, 1924.

PU B LIC SERVICE

State civil-service employees who are heads of families receive
family allowances regardless of sex, which are granted for all de
pendent children under 16 years of age, including recognized chil
dren of unmarried mothers, and also for children from 16 years to
the completion of their eighteenth year if apprenticed under a writ
ten contract. Moreover, allowances are granted for children over 16
and under 21 years of age if such children are studying in educa
tional institutions, and for infirm or incurably ill children without
regard to their age.
In the early part of May, 1924, a uniform system of family allow
ances was made applicable to all civil-service permanent employees,
both manual and nonmanual, whose family responsibilities bring
them within the scope of the law, 270,000 out of a force of 638,000
being entitled to such allowances.
The 1925 appropriation bill, as submitted to the Senate, provides
for family allowances for civil-service employees as follows: For the
first child, 540 francs; for the second child, 720 francs; for the third
child, 1,080 francs; and for each subsequent child, 1,260 francs per
annum.22
DEPARTMENTS AND COMMUNES

More than a dozen of the Departments of France were paying
allowances before 1917. Rhone, Finistere, Gironde, and Lozere were
among the first to make such grants, establishing the practice in
1900, 1903, 1904, and 1905, respectively.23
•
In 1920 the great majority of the 80 Departments had adopted
the same system as the State.24 The allowances paid by 15 Depart
ments having systems which differed somewhat from that of the
State ranged from 50 to 720 francs per annum for the first and
the second child and from 100 to 1,080 francs per annum for sub
sequent children. In the Department of the Rhone the allowance
was 10 per cent of the salary for the first and the second child and
12 per cent for succeeding children under 16. The age limits of
child beneficiaries in the various Departments were from 13 to 18
years.
An investigation made in 1920 by the French Ministry of Labor25
showed that the 185 cities from which reports were received were
paying allowances to 14,987 municipal employees, whose dependents,
including children, wives, and parents, numbered 22,587. Of 206
cities reporting, 99 had uniform allowances, while 99 had progres
sive allowances and 8 had digressive allowances according to the
number of children.
Of 147 cities reporting 17 cities fixed the age limit for receiving
allowances at 13 years, 13 cities at 14 and 15 years, 115 cities at 16
years, 1 city at 17 years, and 1 city at 18 years. In the 99 cities in
which all children in a family received uniform allowances such
allowances ranged from 50 to 360 francs per annum. In the 99
cities in which the allowances were progressive according to the
number of children, the amounts varied from 60 to 480 francs per
annum.
22 International Labor Office. Industrial and Labor Information, Geneya, Mar. 2, 1925,
pp. 35, 36.
28 Bulletin du Minist&re du Travail, August-September-October, 1920. Paris, p. 369.
24 Idem, p. 369.
26 Idem, pp. 377, 381.

FKANCE

The greater number of departmental and communal administra
tions are at present paying family allowances, and are free to fix
the amounts of the allowances and the conditions regulating them,
with the proviso, however, that they must not make higher grants
than the State Government makes to its employees.26
INDUSTRY
RAILROADS

By 1920 family allowances were being granted by all the large
railway companies in France, some of them having paid such allow
ances for many years previous to that date; for example, the North
and Orleans companies since 1890, the Paris-Lyon-Marseille Co.
since 1892, and the State system since 1907. The payment plans
adopted by the different companies varied considerably, but in
November, 1916, agreements were reached with the State under the
terms of which the family allowances granted by the different rail
roads and the regulations governing them were made uniform.27
In January, 1925, the principal French railways inaugurated a
new scale of salaries and wages which eliminated the special costof-living bonus.28 The prominent features of this system are a higher
basic wage, an advance in housing allowances, and an increase in family
allowances. The family allowances paid since then range from 504
to 804 francs per annum for each of the first two children and from
852 to 1,302 francs for the third and each succeeding child. The
higher .allowances are paid in localities in which housing allowances
are granted, the allowance being increased in proportion to the in
crease in the housing-allowance rates.29 Various local steam rail
ways and street railways also pay grants to the heads of families.30
MINING

Even before the war certain mine operators took into account the
family responsibilities of their workers by means of bonuses, and
during the war various companies granted family allowances. The
agreement of December 31, 1917, between the Central Committee of
the Coal Mines of France, the National Federation of the Coal
Mining and Quarry Industries, and the Mine Workers’ Union of
Pas de Calais provided for grants of 3 francs a month per child.
In 1919 and 1920 provision was made by decision of joint commis
sions and in arbitration awards for the payment of family allow
ances by various coal-mining companies. The amounts of the allow
ances varied considerably in different mines, being as low as 3 francs
per month and as high as 1 franc a day per child, and 4 francs per
month to 1 franc per day for a wife.31
Allowances are usually granted for wives and children and in
some cases for parents. As a rule, the age limit for children is 13.
26 Data furnished by the Minister of Finance of France, M ay 9, 1924.
27 Bulletin du Ministfere du Travail, Paris, M arch-April, 1920, pp. 1 1 1 -1 1 5 .
28 International Labor Office. Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Apr. 20,
1925, p. 14.
29 Data furnished by the Director of Labor, Ministry of Labor, Hygiene, and Social
W elfare of France, May 9, .1925.
80 Bulletin du Ministere du Travail, Taris, August-September-October, 1920, p. 373.
31 Idem, pp. 3 8 6 -3 8 8 .

IN D U STRY

Sometimes, however, grants are made for children up to 14 and 16
years of age, the amounts varying from 10 centimes to 1.50 francs
daily per dependent child.
A report presented at the general meeting of the Committee of
French Mine Owners on March 25, 1924, discussed family allow
ances in the industry as follows:
There 1ms been considerable development in the system of family allowances
in the mining industry. The figures for such allowances are beyond com
parison larger than the figures for similar allowances, great as these are, in
kindred industries. The total sums paid during 1923 under this heading rose
to about 80,000,000 francs, which is equivalent to about 5 or 6 per cent of the
total wages bill, whereas the same proportion is not more than 1.2 per cent
for all the industries included in the list of the various benefit funds involved.32
OTHER INDUSTRIES

In addition to the mines and railways various other individual
undertakings not affiliated with family-allowance funds were mak
ing such grants to their personnel in 1920, some of them having
done so for about 10 years preceding that date. These provisions
were incorporated in numerous collective agreements.3,3
Among 240 of these private establishments, which were engaged
in food production, the textile, clothing, leather, wood, stone and
clay, rubber, paper, metallurgical, and chemical industries, large
stores, banks, and insurance companies, there were the characteristic
variations in methods and regulations in disbursing allowances for
family responsibilities.34 In addition to allowances for children,
grants were also made for wives who remained at home to take
care of their children.
FAMILY-ALLOWANCE FUNDS

A logical development of the system of family allowances in
France was the erection of funds to equalize the expenses of groups
of employers for such allowances and to prevent any discrimination
against workers having family responsibilities.
Under a family-allowance system the temptation of reactionary
employers to engage workers without dependents was a strong one.
On the other hand, patriotic and philanthropic employers, concerned
over the depopulation crisis and interested in the welfare of their
wage earners, could not fail to realize the special need of workers
with dependent families for employment and for higher remunera
tion. The situation brought about by these conflicting attitudes,
full of grave competitive dangers for both employers and workers,
together with the necessity for economy in the matter of labor costs,
quickly led to the multiplication of these funds.
The first two funds were established in 1918, one at Lorient under
the patronage of the Alliance of Industry and Commerce and the
other at Grenoble by the Federation of Industrial Engineers and
Metal Workers of Isere (Syndicates des Constructeurs, Mecaniciens,
Chaiidronniers et fondeurs de V Isere). While the former fund was
» International Labor Office. Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, May 12,
10124, p. 31.
!*3 Bulletin du Minislore (hi Travail, Paris, Au<>iist-Septcmber-October, 1920, p. 384.
w Idem, November-December, 1920, pp. 4 9 3 -5 0 2 .

FRAN CE

in operation a few months previous to the latter, it is conceded that
the pioneer in this movement was ft mile Romanet, industrial en
gineer in the Joy a Metal Works at Grenoble, which establishment
had been signalized for years by its welfare activities in behalf of
its personnel.
In May, 1919, a family allowance fund was set up at Saint Dizier,
and in the following month two funds were organized, one at Rouen
and another at Epernay. In December, 1919, a regional fund was
created at Nantes.36 An impetus was given to the growth of insti
tutions of this character through discussion during the Catholic
“ social week ” 87 at Metz in 1919, and by the Natality Congress which
convened at Nancy the same year. The latter assembly passed a
resolution that trade funds for family allowances be established in
all parts of France, and that such funds be supported by contribu
tions from employers’ organizations and individual employers in
proportion to the total pay roll in each establishment.38
Table 3 shows the great increase in family-allowance funds from
December 31, 1920, to June, 1925:
T

able

3 —G R O W TH OF FAM ILY -A L LO W A N C E FUNDS IN
1920. TO JUNE 8. 1925 i

Date

Dec. 31, 1920........................ ...................................................
Dec. 31, 1921........................ ............. .......... ................. .........
Dec. 31,1922....................................................................... . . .
Dec. 31, 1923....................................................................... .
Mav 25, 1924 .......................................................... ...............
June 8, 1925..............................................................................

Number
of funds

57
75
107
130
152
176

F RANC E, D E C E M B E R

31,

Number of
establish Number of Annual dis
employees bursement
ments be of
establish for allow
longing to
ments
ances
funds

5,200
7,000
8,100
9,300
11,200

500.000
665.000
800.000
950,000
1,100,000
1,210,000

Francs
65.000.000
70.000.000
80.000.000
101,700,000
128,000,000
160,000,000

1 Data furnished by the Minister of Labor of France, May 23, 1924; and from ComitS central des Allocationes familiales, IV e Congres national des Allocations familiales, Mulhausgn, May 26-29,1924. Compte
rendu. Lille, 1924, p. 98; La Journee Industrielle, Paris, Juno 21-22, 1925, p. y .

It will be noted from Table 3 that in June, 1925. 160,000,000 francs
were being disbursed by 176 family allowance funds, the system cov
ering 1,210,000 manual and nonmanual workers.
I f similar figures for other private undertakings are included, the
number of wage earners and employees is 2,500,000 and the annual
amount disbursed in allowances is 662,000,000 francs. The addition
of the personnel of the public administrations and the sums paid out
by such administrations in family allowances brings the aggregate
number of workers embraced under the family-allowance system
to 3,500,000 and the amounts disbursed annually in this connection
to 1,017,000,000 francs.39
80
Guesdon, V ic to r : Le Mouvement du Creation et Extension des Caisses tPAllocations
familiales. Paris, 1922, pp. 69, 7 4 -7 6 .
37 The French Catholic socinl week was first held at Lyon in 1904 and has been an
annual occurrence since that date except during the late war. A t the Grenoble meeting
1,800 persons from 19 nations were in attendance.
The “ social week ” has been
termed an “ itinerant social university.”
It. occupies ** a most important place in both
the thought and practical activities o f the patholic social movement.” — International
Labor Office, Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Sept. 14, 1924, pp. 4, 5, 12.
88
Guesdon, V ie to r: Le Mouvement de Creation et Extension des Caisses d’Allocations
familiales. Paris, 1922, pp. 76, 77.
39
La Journee Industrielle, Paris, June 2 1 -2 2 , 1925, p. 7 (report of the director of the
Central Committee on Family Allowances presented at the F ifth Annual Congress o f
Family Allowance Funds, Rouen, June 8 -1 0 , 1 9 2 5 ).

IN D U STRY

The very “ ingenious ” scheme of treating the family responsibili
ties of the workers as an insurance risk for employers was clearly a
development of the growing habit of industry to insure against
hazards for which these employers were made iegally responsible,40
an outstanding illustration of which is industrial accident insurance.
In the case of family allowances the risk involved has been a benevo
lently assumed.” In connection with this assumption a brief examina
tion of some of the variations in family responsibilities is pertinent.
A report on the varying composition of families benefiting under
certain funds submitted at the 1924 congress of family allowance
funds41 stated that of the personnel covered by 30 funds (153,801
wage earners, of whom 35,236 received family allowances), the heads
of families formed 22.9 per cent, as compared with 24.7 per cent the
preceding year. The small difference may be accounted for in part,
it was suggested, by the fact that identical funds were not covered
by the two inquiries.
In the individual funds included in the 1924 investigation the
maximum percentage of heads of families in the personnel was 36.31
per cent and the minimum 7.96 per cent. The average number of
children per 100 workers was 41.57, as compared with 11 in the year
preceding, but the proportion varied considerably in the different
funds, the maximum being 71.55 and the minimum 20.78. The aver
age number of children per family for the funds covered was 1.81,
as compared with 1.66 for the preceding year.
The per cent of families having a given number of children in
1923 and 1924 were as follows:
1923
Per cent

Families
Families
Families
Families
Families

of
of
of
of
of

1
2
3
4
5

1924
Per cent

child________________________________ 58
55.72
children_____________________________ 25
26.41
children_____________________________ 10.7
10.65
children_____________________________ 4.1
4.60
2.80
children_____________________________ 2.2

The report states that, as the figures for the two years are not com
pletely comparable, these statistics are an inadequate foundation
for any sound conclusion.
The figures for the family-allowance funds as a whole reported
by the president of the Central Committee on Family Allowances at
the congress of family-allowance funds in 192442 were as follows:
Number
Number
Number
Average

of wage earners covered by funds___________ 1,100,000
of heads of families per 100 wage earners___
23
of children per 100 wage earners____________
39
1. 69
number of children to heads of families_____

These statistics correspond rather closely with the findings from
the investigation of the 30 iunds.
TYPES OF FUNDS

There are two types of family-allowance funds: (1) Regional or
intertrade funds, composed of chambers of commerce and federations
of employers, and (2) trade funds, organized according to indus
40 Guesdon, V ic to r: Le Mouvement de Creation et d’Extension des Caisses d’ Allocations
familiales. Paris, 1922, p. 86.
41 Comity central des Allocations familiales.
IV e Congrfcs national des Allocations
familiales, Mulhausen, May 2 6 -2 9 , 1924.
Compte rendu, Lille, 1924, pp. 3 3 -3 6 .
42 Idem, p. 135.

FRANCE

tries. Of the 158 funds listed in the 1925 annua! of the Central Com
mittee on Family Allowances (pp. 564-643), 94 are regional funds
and 64 are trade funds.
Some of the advantages of the regional fund, from his point of
view, were summarized by Pierre Ricliemond, president of the group
of metallurgical and mechanical industries of the Parisian regional
fund, at a meeting held by the Paris Chamber of Commerce, as
follows: 43
1. The employers of a given locality or district have a community of
interest in the recruiting of manual workers.
2. Living costs vary by locality and not by industry.
3. Birth rates are subject to regional influences.
4. The majority of allowances imply a certain measure of control which
is effected more easily by a single fund the membership of which is in the
same district.
5. It is expedient to stabilize these allowances as far as possible by making
them independent of a single industry.

The trade fund should not be the goal of the family-allowance
movement, according to Fernand Rey, director of the family associa
tions of the upper Rhine. This type should be regarded merely as a
provisional form justified, perhaps, by exceptional circumstances.
He holds that “ the application of family allowances is a question of
an industrial character entirely detached from trade, which admits
of no bargaining (marchmidage) and which should lead to the estab
lishment of the intertrade (regional) fund—the only guaranty of
complete mutuality and solidarity—which the solution of such ques
tion demands.” 44
At the Congress of Family Allowance Funds in 1921 a resolution
in favor of the formation of intertrade or regional funds paying uni
form allowances was adopted unanimously.45 Notwithstanding the
advantages of the regional fund as set forth above, it is reported that
the different industries object to being absorbed into regional funds
and that trade funds still continue to be formed. This is attributed
to the individualism of the industry and also to the feeling that there
is not the same unity of interest in a fund made up of entirely dif
ferent trades. Moreover, the divergent character of the personnel
in different trades constitutes in some cases a strong element in this
objection to regional funds. For example, the confectionery and
textile industries employ large numbers of young women with few
dependents, while the majority of the workers in the chemical and
building industries are men, many of whom have heavy family re
sponsibilities.
Certain districts as well as certain trades are considered “ sterile,”
declares Fernand Rey, while others have the reputation of being
“ prolific,” and it will be easily seen why. the sterile trades and dis
tricts do not wish to combine with prolific trades and districts for the
payment of family allowances through a central fund.46
43 Bulletin du Comity central industriel de Belgique, Brussels, September 20, 1922pp. 712, 713.
44 Comite des Allocations familiales. CongrSs national des Caisses de Compensation
Paris. July 4, 1921. Compte rendu. Paris, 1921, p. 56.
46 Idem, p. 99.
46
Guesdon. V ic to r: Le Mouvement de Creation et d’Extension des Caisses d’Allocations
familiales. Paris, 1922, pp. 126, 127, 129.

IN D U STRY

OPERATION OF FUNDS

In discussing the remarkable growth of family-allowanee funds,
Victor Guesdon says: “ One of the characteristic features of this
efflorescence is variety—born of circumstances adapted to regional
needs, they [the funds] have chosen the most diverse plans and
adopted, both for the allowances paid and for the compensation as
sessments, elastic and multiple rules.” 47
The funds vary greatly in the number of their member establish
ments, the Paris regional fund having 1,661 affiliated establishments,
the Lille fund for family allowance in the building industry, 896;
the family fund of the Picardy region with headquarters at Amiens,
308; whiie the family-allowanee fund of the region of Castres has
only 10 member establishments, and the Grenoble carpentry fund, 4.48
The methods adopted for the purpose of equalizing the distribu
tion of expenses arising from the payment of family allowances
vary somewhat in different funds but the three outstanding schemes
of computing assessments are based as follows49 on:
1. Number of days or hours tvorked, the total cost of family allow
ances to the yarious establishments affiliated with the fund being
divided by the total days or hours worked by such establishments,
and the quotient multiplied by the number of days or hours worked
by the individual establishment to ascertain the amount of the assess
ment for such establishment.
2. The total number of workers employed during the month by the
members of the fund, the total expenditure for family allowances
being divided by such number and the result multiplied by the num
ber of workers employed by the individual establishment.
Sometimes there is a difference between the assessment rates paid
by employers for male and for female workers because the latter
have fewer dependents.
3. The toted wages bill, the contributions of the various members
of the fund being a certain percentage of the pay roll for a given
period, ordinarily the quarter. This method is the most common
and is said to be both fair and simple. It has the disadvantage,
however, of revealing data which some employers might prefer to
keep to themselves.
Sometimes “ coefficients of reduction ” are used in computing
assessments for establishments employing a very large proportion
of youthful workers, as such workers have, of course, few dependents.
It has been found that the expense of family allowances for com
mercial employees is, as a rule, not so great as that of allowances for
manual laborers, who have on the whole more children. For this
reason commercial establishments are somewhat chary of affiliating
with regional funds having industrial members. Because of this
attitude on the part of commercial undertakings provision has been
made by the Paris regional fund to carry commercial workers in a
47 Guesdon, V ic to r: Le Mouvement de Creation et d’Extension des Caisses d’Allocations
familiales. Paris, 1922, p. 196.
48 Comite central des Allocations familiales.
Annuaire, 1925.
Paris [1 9 2 5 ? ], pp.
3 0 -3 8 , 104, 160, 1 7 8 -1 9 4 , and 2 7 7 -3 7 4 .
49 International Labor Office. International Labor Review, Geneva, February, 1924, pp.
1 6 5 -1 6 6 : “ Family allowances in French industry,’’ by Roger Picard.

61243°—26------3

FRANCE

separate section.50 fn other instances industries are placed in cer
tain classes according to the make-up of their personnel. These
complicated and discriminating measures tend, however, to affect the
solidarity of the system and jeopardize its successful operation.
Members of a fund also assume their share of the overhead ex
penses of the fund, according to the business activity of their estab
lishments and the normal competitive conditions in the same dis
trict.51
In April, 1925, the allowances paid averaged from 1.6 to 3 per
cent of the pay rolls of the establishments making such grants.52
The assessment systems for agricultural funds are described
on pp. 36 and 37.
METHODS OF GRANTING ALLOWANCES

Among the methods of granting family allowances are the fol
lowing : 53
1. No allowance for the first child.
2. Increased allowance for the second and subsequent children.
3. Discontinuance of allowance to the first child unless there is a
second child within a certain period, varying .from one to four years.
4. Same allowance for each child.
5. Same allowance (rather low) for the first two children, and
increased allowance for subsequent ones.
An age limit is generally fixed, beyond which no allowance is
granted for the child. The regular prevailing age limits fixed by
the funds for children benefiting through family allowances are 13
and 14 years. Some funds stipulate that children within the age
limits must be attending school or must be dependent. The age
limits, however, are subject to extension by various funds to 16 years
and sometimes over this age because the child is following higher
school courses or is apprenticed. Exceptions to age limits are also
made for children who are unable to work. Some funds make a
difference between the age limits of boys and girls. Other funds
stipulate that the children must be residents of France.54 The ma
jority of funds pay allowances for natural as well as legitimate
children. Under certain circumstances parents and even grand
parents of the workers receive allowances.
Some funds do not include foreign workers in their family allow
ance system, and other funds do not make these grants to em
ployees who receive a salary above a certain sum.55 Of the 158
funds tabulated in the 1925 annual of the Central Committee of
Family Allowances (pp. 564—642), 48 are reported as fixing maxi
mum salaries beyond which the workers do not receive family allow
ances. Such maximum salaries range from 6,000 to 15,000 francs
per annum. There are 10 other funds which have sections with
50 Guesdon, V ic to r : Le Mouvement de Creation et d’ Extension des Caisses d’Allocations
familiales. Paris, 1922, pp. 176, 177.
51 Bulletin du Ministfcre du Travail, Paris, M arch-April, 1920, p. 101.
52 D ata furnished by the Director of Labor, Ministry of Labor, Hygiene, and Social
W elfare of France, Apr. 5, 1925.
53 Bulletin du Ministfcre du Travail, Paris, October—November—December, 1921, pp.
4 1 8 - 4 2 1 ; also Comit6 des Allocations familiales, I I I e Congr&s national des Allocations
familiales, Nantes, June, 1923, Compte rendu. Paris, . 1923, p. 85.
54 Comity central des Allocations familiales.
Annuaire, 1925.
Paris [1 9 2 5 ? ] , pp.

55 International Labor Office.
International Labor Review, Geneva, February,
167 : “ Fam ily allowances in French industry.”

1924,

IN D U STRY

different methods of granting family allowances so far as maximum
salary is concerned, such grants being made regardless of salary
limits 4n one section while in another section the personnel receiving
beyond a maximum salary are not eligible for the benefits in ques
tion. The remaining funds are reported as having no maximum
salary limits for family allowances,56 except that 6 funds exclude
administrators and delegates, and a seventh fund makes no grants
to directors.
Some establishments not affiliated with funds grant a family al
lowance to a mother who is not gainfully employed. Family-allow
ance funds have not, however, adopted this method, although they
do give birth bonuses and nursing bounties to mothers. (See p. 31.)
When it was first organized the Grenoble metallurgical fund
granted 12y2 francs per month to a worker’s wife who stayed at
home to care for her children and 25 francs per month to a sick or
infirm wife who was unable to perform her household duties. The
matter of finding out why women did not come to work was quite a
problem, and these special allowances were soon discontinued and
applied in a general way to child dependents.57
The Algerian family allowance fund accords an allowance for an
infirm wife and the Paris armament fund for family allowances
makes a grant for a wife.58
Allowances are paid in some cases by the funds themselves and in
other cases directly by the employer, the funds merely computing the
compensation. Some funds grant allowances by the month and
others by the day. The question as to whom the allowances should
be paid has given rise to considerable discussion, certain funds being
in favor of paying these allowances to the father of the family, and
others advocating that tli3 mother is the proper person to receive the
“ sursalaire.” 59
FAM ILY-ALLOW AN CE BATES

There is great diversity in the amounts of allowances paid by dif
ferent funds. The amounts of the monthly family allowances for
children under 13 or 14 years of age for 72 funds in 1923, as re
ported to the Third National Congress on Family Allowances,60
were as follows:
T able

4 .—F A M IL Y -A L L O W A N C E RATES PAID B Y 72 FUNDS FOR CH IL D R E N , 1923

Birth rank of child

First child____ _____ _______ ______________________________________
Second child—____ _____ _________________________ ____ ___________
Third child________________________________________________________
Fourth child.............................................................. ...................... ...........
Fifth and subsequent children_____________________________________

Average
Francs
17.20
22.95
27.35
29.30
30.38

Maximum
Francs
50
75
100
80
75

Minimum
Francs
0
0
5
5
5

56 ComitS central des Allocations familiaies. Annuaire, 1925. Paris [1 9 2 5 ? ], pp.
5 0 4 -6 4 3 .
57 Guesdon, V ic to r: Le Mouvement de Creation et d’ Extension des Caisses d’Alloca
tions familiaies. Paris, 1922, pp. 135, 137.
58 Comity central des Allocations familiaies. Annuaire. 1925. Paris [ 1 9 2 5 ? ], pp. 564
and 620.
50 Guesdon, Victor : Le Mouvement de Creation et d’Extension des Caisses d’Allocations
familiaies. Paris, 1922, pp. 1 3 7 -1 4 8 .
(S0 Comity des Allocations familiaies. I I I e Congr&s national des* Allocations familiaies,
Nantes, June, 1923. Compte rendu. Lille, 1923, p. 82.

FRANCE

A t the Fourth National Congress on Family Allowances the direc
tor of the Central Committee on Family Allowances reported that
the average amounts of allowances were 19 francs per month for 1
child, 46 francs for 2 children, 81 francs for 3 children, and 124
francs for 4 children, and that the principal funds whose members
have the largest working forces were gradually putting themselves
in position to pay allowances of 20 to 25 francs per month for 1
child, 50 to 75 francs for 2 children, and 100 to 150 francs for 3
children. Not only was the principle of family allowances con
stantly developing, he said, but the family-allowance-fund system
was becoming more and more trium phant over the “ individualism ”
which people have for so long claimed characterized the employers
of France.” 61
The highest and the lowest monthly family-allowance rates for
132 regional and trade funds shown in the 1925 annual of the Cen
tral Committee on Family Allowances (pp. 532-557) are as follows:
Francs

For 1 child_______________________________
0-31. 25
For 2 children_________________________ ___ 12. 50-125.00
For 3 children_____________________________ 27. 50-200.00
For 4 children------------------------------------------- 45. 00-300. 00
For 5 children____________________________ 62. 50-375. 00
For 6 children____________________________ 75. 00-450. 00
The average weighted monthly family-allowance rates for these
132 funds were:
Francs

For 1 child______________________________________ 19
For 2 children___________________________________ 48
For 3 children________________________ ___________ 90
For 4 children_____________ :______________________ 140
For 5 children___________________________________ 194
For 6 children___________________________________ 253
The highest and lowest monthly allowance rates for the 14 com
mercial funds were:
Francs

For 1 child___________________________________
0-50
For 2 children________________________________ 15-125
For 3 children________________________________ 35-225
For 4 children________________________________ 60-325
For 5 children________________________________ 85-425
For 6 children________________________________ 105-525
As a result of a recent and detailed inquiry made by 10 or more
funds it was reported that the cost of maintaining a child under 1
year of age should ordinarily be 100 francs a month; that the cost
of maintaining a child from 1 to 3 years of age, averaged 150
francs a month, and for a child over 3 years of age it was at least
200 francs and frequently from 250 to 300 francs per month. The
contrast between the actual cost of living for children and the
amounts of the allowances granted by the funds is rather startling,
although it must be remembered that the allowances are not intended
to cover the entire cost of maintenance of such children.62
w Comite central des Allocations familiales.
IV® Congrfes national des Allocations
fainiliales, Mulhausen, M ay 2 6 -2 9 , 1924.
Compte rendu. Lille, 1924, p. 98.
62 Idem, pp. 42, 43, 125.

IN DU STRY

B IR T H BONUSES AND NURSING B O U N TIES63

At the Third National Congress on Family Allowances, in June,
1923, a resolution was passed that the funds “ study and establish
nursing bonuses which would enable a, mother to remain at home at
least three months after her child’s birth and that rooms for nursing
be available for exceptional cases where the necessities of the indus
try call for such rooms.” 64
At the Fourth Annual Congress on Family Allowances in May,
1924, it was reported that 106 funds were paying birth premiums
ranging from 100 to 300 francs and 50 funds were granting nursing
bonuses of from 30 to 125 francs per month. It was also stated that
birth expenses had become increasingly heavy, and while certain
funds had made an attempt to meet all such expenses, all funds can
not stand such a strain on their resources. Emphasis was laid on the
desirability of the public authorities interesting themselves in the
matter of birth expenses.
A nursing bonus is granted by some funds to every mother who
has an infant, if she is employed by a member of a fund or is the
wife of a worker employed by such member. Other funds limit the
nursing bonuses to those working mothers who prolong their stay at
home in order to nurse their children. Statistics have already shown
that where these birth benefits and nursing bonuses are accorded
there has been a considerable reduction in infant mortality.
ALLOW ANCES TO FOREIGN W ORKERS

An important problem which the funds have had to solve is
whether or not family allowances should be paid to foreign workers.
Some funds have decided in favor of their foreign personnel but,
generally speaking, the sentiment is against such procedure. In
localities near the borders of France where there are large numbers
of foreigners, however, it has seemed advisable, as well as just, to
pay family allowances to foreign as well as native workers. Va
rious funds which are not on the frontiers also include immigrants
under their family-allowance system, but the majority of such funds
stipulate that the children thus benefited must be at the time resid
ing in France. Certain funds exclude from these benefits immigrant
workers from countries which have been at war with France.65
It was suggested at the Fourth National Congress on Family
Allowances that the question of the high cost *of allowances as a
result of employing foreign workers with large families should be
included in the annual statistical inquiries into the composition of
households benefiting under family-allowance funds.66
ALLOW ANCES DURING UNEMPLOYMENT

As the practice of making family grants through family-allow
ance funds was inaugurated in a period of unusual activity in indus
63 Except where otherwise specified the data for the section are from ComitS
central des Allocations familiales.
l V e Congrfcs national des Allocations familiales*
Mulhausen, M ay 2 6 -2 9 , 1924. Compte rendu. Lille, 1924, 50, v>l, 134.
64 Comity des Allocations familiales. Ill® Congr&s national des Allocations familiales,
Nantes, June 4 -6 , 1923. Compte rendu. Lille, 1923, p. 151.
06 Guesdon, V ic to r: Mouvement de Creation et d’ Extension des Caisses d’Allocations
familiales.
Paris, 1922, p. 144.
68 Comity central des Allocations familiales.
I V e Congres national des Allocations
familiales, Mulhausen, May 2 6 -2 9 , 1924. Compte rendu. Lille, 1924, p. 37.

PRANCE

trial and commercial enterprises in France, the effect of the post
war unemployment crisis oh the new institution was made the sub
ject of a special inquiry by the Government.67
Industrial depression first made itself felt in the clothing and boot
and shoe industries in the late spring of 1920 and spread little by
little to the other industries. Many establishments were obliged to
run part time and some even to dismiss all or part of their person
nel. In a circular dated February 10, 1921, the Minister of Labor
requested those funds of which he had knowledge to state what
measures they had taken in favor of their unemployed workers
who were heads of families. In the circular he reported that the
Vienne Textile Fund had decided on November 24, 1920, that when
French workers who had been receiving family allowances became
unemployed they should continue to receive such allowances for two
months following the month in which the unemployment began.
These allowances were to be paid at the end of the month at the
office of the factory where the workers had been engaged at the
time their unemployment commenced, the payments to be made,
however, only in case the working man or woman had not found an
occupation elsewhere. This decision, which was to be in force for
two months, was renewed for a like period from January 25, 1921,
and at the time the report was made (April-June, 1921) was said
to be still effective, though the industrial situation was appreciably
improved. The prosperous condition of the Vienne fund made
it possible to take such action, but it was felt that it was too much
to hope that other funds were in a condition to follow similar
measures.
Of the 53 funds to which the inquiry was sent, only 34 replied.
Seven of these reported that they had never before contemplated any
special measures concerning unemployment because it had pre
viously been of such little importance. Most of these seven organi
zations had requested their members to retain as far as practicable
employees having families to support, declaring a readiness in case
the crisis grew more acute to study ways of continuing the allow
ances to the unemployed.
Thirteen of the funds had continued to pay the full allowances
but only to the partially unemployed, the greater number of these
funds reporting that their members retained as far as possible the
men with families, the expense involved being relatively heavier.
While in normal times the membership assessment, by whatever
method of calculation adopted, represented only 2 to 4 per cent of the
manual labor cost, the percentage under the unemployment crisis
had often doubled.
In general, it was found that these funds did not provide in their
regulations for a crisis involving complete or even partial unemploy
ment. The majority of these organizations had not yet become able
to establish a reserve fund which would permit them to continue
allowances in time of an industrial crisis. Moreover, even those which
had taken the precaution to establish a reserve fund had on account
of their recent organization only a very limited sum at their dis
posal for this purpose. Nearly all of these funds felt, however,
that it was necessary to do something to maintain, even at great
91 Bulletin du Minister© du Travail, A pril-M ay-June. 1921, Paris, pp. 1 5 0 -1 5 3 .

IN D U STRY

sacrifice, an institution which they regarded as of such high social
significance, and that the allowances should be continued in case of
partial unemployment and as far as possible even in case of
dismissal.
At the Third National Congress on Family Allowances in 1928
it was reported that during periods of unemployment establishments
affiliated with family-allowance funds had retained as far as pos
sible fathers of families in preference to single men, assuring the
former both their wages and family allowances.68
HYGIENE SERVICES

While the family-allowance funds were at the outset created
mainly to equalize the expenses of their affiliated members in paying
family allowances, these organizations are steadily extending their
activities in behalf of the workers’ families. Even in 1922, at the
Second National Congress of Family Allowance Funds, held at
Grenoble, the reports on the social service of the Grenoble, Lyon,
and Paris funds attracted great attention.
In the latter part of May, 1924, 20 funds were reported as having
hygiene services, some funds specializing in one or two lines and
others covering very broad fields of activity. A brief review of this
work is given below.69
The Dieppe Employers’ Fund for Family Dependents makes use
of the visiting nurses from the hygiene service of the Department
of Seine-Inferieure. In addition, sisters (religious) make monthly
calls. The fund grants a nursing bonus of 15 francs per month for
10 months.
The Grenoble Family Allowance Fund for the Glove and Hides
and Skin Industry has an agent who visits families and looks after
the health of the children. The hygiene service also covers a con
siderable number of home workers.
The Charentaise Fund for Family Allowances at La Rochelle de
pends upon Red Cross nurses for home visitation. Up to May, 1924,
the inspection service was confined to newborn children.
The Family Allowance Fund of the Metallurgical Employers’ As
sociation at Lille is very active in maternity cases and as regards
proper housing for the workers.
The Lille Textile Family Allowance Fund employs agents
who visit expectant mothers during the five months preceding their
confinement and pay them the allowance of 30 francs per month.
The family-allowance fund of Lyon and the surrounding region
and that of the Lyon dyeing, printing, and finishing (textile) in
dustry have two very modern sanitariums, but have no visiting
nurses. The hygiene service of these two funds is under the direc
tion of a noted children’s specialist, with a consulting committee of
competent physicians. For house visits application is made to
existing organizations, the expenses being paid in part by the
funds.
Three visiting nurses are employed by the hygiene service of the
Family Allowance Fund of the Region of Provence at Marseille.
68 Comity des Allocations familiales. I I I e Congrfcs national des Allocations familiales,
Nantes, June 4 -6 , 1923. Compte rendu. Lille. 1923, p. 88.
69 ComitS central des Allocations familiales.
IV e Congrfcs national des Allocations
familiales, Mulhausen, May 2 6 -2 9 , 1924. Compte rendu. Lille, 1924, pp. 7 7 -8 8 .

FRANCE

Free medical consultations for child beneficiaries have recently
been inaugurated by the Family Allowance Fund of the Upper
Rhine at Mulhausen.
The Employers’ Fund for Family Allowances at Nancy is finan
cially responsible for a certain number of beds in a neighboring
44preventorium,” such beds being reserved for the fund’s patients.
A rest house and an open-air school are maintained by the Nantes
regional fund, which also started a dental clinic in October, 1923, and
a prenatal consulting service early in 1924. This fund cooperates
with the Central Office of Labor and Social Hygiene, paying a pro
portionate share of the expenses of such office.
The Paris Family Allowance Fund for Construction and Pub
lic Works has a special social-service personnel and four dispen
saries, and is active in placing children in preventoriums and sani
tariums. It also sends children to nurseries and to places where
they may get clothes. In 1923 it extended vocational aid to 1,366
children. Lodgings were secured for some families, while others
were assisted in buying furniture and obtaining pensions.
The staff of the Family Allowance Fund for the Region of
Paris includes 38 woman assistants, whose principal duty is to
bring the workers’ families into contact with the fund’s social
services. Special supervision is given to the feeding and care of
infants, and through the instrumentality of the fund many chil
dren have been sent to the country. Housing problems and the
question of apprenticeship are being taken up by this organization.
In April, 1924, the Family Allowance Fund of the Textile Em
ployers’ Association of Roubaix-Tourcoing inaugurated a system
of sick allowances.
Registration in the child hygiene service is compulsory for
mothers who receive nursing allowances from the familv-allowance
fund of the Stephanoise region.
The family-allowanee fund of the lower Rhine at Strassburg has
established a preventorium and a vacation home for young girls in
industrial and commercial work.
Approximately one-half of the disbursements of the Family A l
lowance Fund of Region of Thizy and Cours are for birth bonuses,
nursing allowances, and certain other forms of aid, one of the domi
nant interests of this fund being the reduction of infant mortality.
In this connection an effort is being made for the better enforce
ment of the law regarding the quitting of work by women for a
period before their confinement.
The families of the workers benefiting under the family-allowance fund of the Tours region are visited by sisters (religious),
who distribute medicines, layettes, and food to the most needy.
A midwife is employed by the Family Allowance Fund of the
Troyenne Region, who has been successful in increasing breast
feeding.
The Family Allowance Fund of the Textile Employers’ Associa
tion of Vienne supplements its hygiene service by a maternity bene
fit association.
The hygiene services of the funds held a special conference dur
ing the 1924 congress of the funds, the visiting agents and nurses
reporting as to the conditions and methods or work in their va

IN DU STRY

rious fields.70 Because of the success of this conference it was de
cided to arrange for a more comprehensive conference at the next
annual congress. At the same congress attention was called to the
advantage of establishing a permanent relation between the hygiene
services of the family-allowance funds and the Metallurgical and
Mining Association for the Prevention of Tuberculosis, in order that
these two bodies might cooperate in the struggle against tubercu
losis.71
The following resolution was unanimously adopted by that con
gress : 72
Whereas new and marked progress has been effected since last year by the
institution of family allowances;
Whereas in particular the results obtained by the social services of the fam
ily-allowance funds are remarkable; and
Whereas, in the matter of social assistance and of family hygiene, the
public authorities and private initiative each has its r61e to play along par
allel and dependent but distinct lines: Be it
Resolved, That the family-allowance system continue to be made more and
more general by the progressive and voluntary admission of employees of all
classes to family-allowance funds;
That the family-allowance funds make an effort to perfect their efforts in
the struggle against the inevitable evils resulting from the too general mis
understanding of the elementary rules of hygiene and child care;
That the public authorities, while leaving the field free to private initiative,
continue kindly to receive suggestions presented to them by the committee of
the funds, the central organ dealing with questions relating to employers’
aid to workers’ families.
FtJNDS FOR THE MERCHANT MARINE

Since the 1923 congress on family allowances two large familyallowance funds or bureaus have been established to cover the per
sonnel in the merchant marine.73
On August 21, 1924, the Central Committee of Shipowners, in
agreeing to the demands of the National Federation of French
Seamen for a wage increase for the French mercantile marine crews
as regards regular steamship lines, notwithstanding reduced freight
rates, also agreed that the family allowances then being paid should
be continued.74
FUNDS IN AGRICULTURE

Serious efforts have been made from time to time in several sec
tions of France to set up a system of family allowances in agricul
ture and this problem, full of difficulties, has been brought up at
numerous conferences of agricultural societies.75
In a telegram to the Second National Congress of Family Allow
ance Funds in 1922 the national union of the peasants of France
(C. G. A .), stated that it considered the family allowance as one
of the effective measures for meeting economic and social needs in
70 Comit4 central des Allocations familiales.
IV® Congrfcs national des Allocations
familiales, Mulhausen, May 2 6 -2 9 , 1924. Compte rendu. Lille, 1924, p. 111.
71 Idem, p. 60.
72 Idem, pp. 109, 110.
73 Idem, p. 99. For discussion of the means of applying family allowances in maritime
industry, see L ’ Information Sociale, Dec. 6, 1923, p 4.
74 International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Nov. 17,
1924, p. 35.
76 Idem, July 7, 1922, p. 53. See also, Le Musee Social, Paris, April, 1924, pp. 1 1 7 -1 2 4 .

FRANCE

the domain of agriculture and expressed confidence in the organizers
of the congress and a desire that its work might result in a liberal
plan for an agricultural family-allowance fund.76
Adrien Toussaint, the general secretary of the International Fed
eration of Agricultural Unions, in an article in Republique Fran§aise of October 24, 1922, called attention to the slowness with which
agriculturists were following in the footsteps of industrialists in
the matter of establishing family-allowance funds. At that time
there were only three agricultural funds in France—the Mutual In
surance and Welfare Fund for the Families of Agricultural
Workers (lie de France), the Touraine fund, and the Bordeaux
fund.
The first-mentioned fund was established in 192077 under the
auspices of the Regional Federation of the Agricultural Employers’
Associations of the lie de France for the purpose of paying family
allowances to the dependents of the workers of the members of the
fund and to equalize the assessments of such members by basing
the dues on the number of hectares under cultivation by each mem
ber (6 francs per hectare 78 plus 5 francs per 100 hectares or fraction
of 100 hectares).79
There are also honorary and sustaining members, the latter paying
100 francs per annum or 1,000 francs for permanent membership.
Agricultural societies and federations are admitted only as sus
taining members.
The family allowances paid by this fund include maternity benefits
as well as monthly grants for children, beginning with the third
child under 14 years of age, and are paid to the worker or employee
who has been in the employment of a member of the fund for at
least six consecutive months and who works regularly. If, however,
there is a stoppage of work from a legitimate cause, and for which
the worker is not responsible, the allowances are continued; for
example, for six months in the case of disability through an indus
trial accident. The amounts of the monthly allowances are 10 francs
for the third child, 15 francs for the fourth child, and 20 francs
for the fifth and subsequent children. Grandparents, sisters,' and
brothers who have children dependent upon them may be granted
allowances under certain conditions. The allowances do not form
a part of the wage and do not appear on the pay rolls, a separate
account being kept of such allowances.
The Indre-et-Loire fund, at Touraine, makes semiannual grants
to agricultural laborers with at least three legitimate or acknowl
edged children under 14 years of age. Subscriptions to this fund
are based on the amount of land cultivated by farmers or owners.
The annual assessment for active members is 2 francs per hectare of
vineyard, pasture, or arable land and 0.10 franc per hectare of forest
land, the minimum assessment for six months being 50 francs.
76 Comity des Allocations familiales.
I I e Congrfcs national des Caisses de Compensa
tion. Grenoble, May 22, 1022. Compte rendu. Paris, 1922, p. 109.
77 Data furnished by the director of the fund (received July 21, 1 9 2 4 ).
78 H e c ta re = 2,471 acres.
70
Data furnished by the secretary-general o f the Confederation Internationale des
Syndicats Agricoles, July 11, 1924.

IN D U STRY

An agricultural worker is not entitled to family allowances from
the Indre-et-Loire fund until he or she has been in the employment
of an active member of the fund for six months.80
In fixing the amount of the allowances, the sum available from the
assessments of the preceding half year is divided by the number of
children eligible for benefits.81
The organization also has honorary members, whose assessments
and entrance fees are placed in a separate fund, from which are
paid the initial costs of organization and management, additional
allowances to certain families, and contributions to support or
establish social institutions for the benefit of the families of
peasants.82
The assessment charged by the Bordeaux fund is 3 francs per
month for each worker permanently employed by a member of such
fund. In July, 1920, this fund was paying per month, for one
child, 10 francs; for two children, 30 francs; for three children,
45 francs; for four children, 65 francs; for five children, 85 francs;
for six children, 120 francs.83
Among the 11 agricultural funds for which the amounts of family
allowances are given in the 1925 annual of the Central Committee
on Family Allowances (pp. 560-561), the highest and lowest rates
are reported as follows:
Francs

For one child__________________________________________
0-15
For two children_______________________________________
0-35
8-65
For three children_____________________________________
For four children______ - ______________________________ 16-100
For live children_______________________________________ 28-140
For six .children____________ ;__________________________ 38-185

Of these 11 funds, 6 were reported as according birth bonuses but
only 1 as giving nursing allowances.
There are at present 15 agricultural funds for the payment of
family allowances in France. The benefits given are quite diversi
fied, the majority of them taking the form of birth bonuses rather
than family grants to meet the everyday maintenance of dependents.
It is reported that the cost of these agricultural grants to the em
ployers averages 2.5 per cent of the wages bill, but it is hoped that
by expanding the funds the expense may be reduced. Some of the
funds are subsidized to a certain extent by their respective depart
mental agricultural services.84
In view of the exodus of families from the rural districts to the
cities, the following recommendations were made to the Second
National Congress of Family Allowance Funds:85
1. That in order to assist agricultural families having young children family
allowances be accorded them on the same ground that they are now being
granted to workers in the majority of factories.
2. That family-allowance funds be studied and such funds established with
sufficient elasticity to enable them to be adapted easily to each district.
80 International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, July 7,
1922, p. 53.
81 Idem, p. 54.
82 Idem, pp. 54, 55.
83 Idem, p. 55.
84 Idem, Mar. 16, 1925, p. 58.
85 Comity des Allocations familiales. II® Congrfcs national des Caisses de Compensation,
Grenoble, May 22, 1922. Compte rendu. Paris, 1922, p. 59.

FRANCE

3. That a study be made in collaboration with the Committee on Family
Allowances of a model family-allowance fund for agriculture, open to all, but
without legal restriction.

Because of the difficulties in the way of establishing rural familyallowance funds in districts divided into small acreages like Isere,
it was considered probable that such funds would have to be of a
benevolent, noncompulsory, and communal character.80
It would seem that the agriculturists are opposed to compulsory
family allowances, the Association of French Industry and Agricul
ture at its conference in Paris, May 28, 1923, having adopted a reso
lution which favored the expansion of the system of family
allowances, “ on voluntary lines which would render legislation on
the subject unnecessary.’’ 87
The French Ministry of Agriculture has recently appealed to the
prefects and presidents of the agricultural offices of the administra
tion for the expansion of the family-allowance system for agricul
ture, calling attention to the importance, in view of the depopulation
problem in the rural districts, of making every effort to keep large
families on the land. The* desirability of establishing additional
family-allowance funds in agriculture was emphasized.88
FA M IL Y ALLOW ANCES FOR HOME W ORKERS

At the Second National Congress of Family Allowance Funds held
at Grenoble in May, 1922,89 a strong appeal was made for the exten
sion of home work in order to keep women in their own households
and for the payment of family allowances for such work. Atten
tion was called particularly to the glove industry in which so much
home work is done, for the most part under contractors. This class
of home work was especially recommended to the interest of the
funds, as these organizations already provided for home workers
employed directly by member establishments. In this connection it
was suggested that new family-allowance funds for home work be
established; that f amily allowances be paid to home workers through
contractors; that funds facilitate the operation of family workshops
by helping to install small motors; and that the funds study the
problem of housing the workers and facilitate the building of dwell
ings for them. The collaboration of trade-unions should also be
sought for the carrying out of these enterprises.
LEGAL STATUS OF FU N D S90

From a legal and juridical viewpoint the family-allowance funds
may be divided into the following three classes:
1.
Funds organized on the basis of the law of 1901 and forming a
“ well-defined legal society—a voluntary body, whose capacity to
possess and to contract is apparently fully adequate notwithstanding
the restrictions imposed by the law.55
86 International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, July 7,
1922, pp. 52, 53.
87 Idem, June, 1923, p. 3.
88 La Journ§e Industrielle, Paris, Feb. lo -1 6 , 1925* p. 7.
89 Comity des Allocations familiales. I I e Congr&s national des Caisses de Compensation,
Grenoble, May 22. 1922. Compte rendu. Paris, 1922, pp. 5 9 -6 4 .
80 Idem, pp. 4 2 -4 8 .

IN D U STRY

2. Those funds which constitute merely an adjunct of “ another
organization, employers5association, or even incorporated company55
limited to the scope of the trade and consequently dependent, as a
rule, upon the laws of 1884 and 1921 regarding industrial associa
tions. This type of fund has sound arguments in its favor, based on
experience, and also meets legal requirements.
3. A few funds which are merely societies de facto without definite
organization. These funds have no formal regulations and their
very existence is precarious, although funds of this character have
the advantage of the strength resulting from the union of the affili
ated members of the given trade organization, which is a valuable
asset in any attempt at dissolution or disassociation. They are quite
flourishing, and have the advantage of the elasticity of a provisional
organization in France. They also claim a legal status, under article
2 of the law of 1901, which states that “ associations of persons will
be able to form freely without authorization, having first made a
declaration.’5
The independent association has no legal capacity, being unable to
possess either real estate or personal property or to institute proceed
ings at law or even to receive assessments or dues.
To perform acts of a legal nature, the association must make a
formal declaration in writing giving the purpose of the association,
the headquarters of its affiliated members, and the names and pro
fessions of the proposed administrators or directors.
In the opinion of the director of the family-allowance fund of the
textile industry of Lille, family-allowance funds “ should no longer
hesitate to make their declaration.55 This would not affect the indi
viduality or the u regionalism55 of these institutions, each of which
could hold to its own organization and to the procedure adapted to
the particular trade and district.
CEN TRALIZATION

The Central Committee on Family Allowances (le Comite central
des Allocations familiaies) was organized in the latter part of 1920
for study and propaganda, with headquarters at Paris. Eugene
Mathon was the first president of this new agency, which was organ
ized to act as a permanent liaison between the various funds.91 This
committee is composed of titular and honorary members, the former
representing certain family-allowance funds designated each year by
the national congress of family-allowance funds. Each fund thus
designated is represented on the committee by its president or “ by a
member of its administrative council and by a special delegate chosen
by this council.5502 The titular members nominate honorary mem
bers, subject to ratification at the next meeting of the congress.
In 1923 the committee began the publication of a yearbook. The
latest yearbook, published in 1925, is in four parts, dealing with the
following subjects: Part I. The Central Committee on Family Al
lowances (its regulations, its adherent funds, and its annual con
gresses) ; Part II. The administration, benefits, and regulations of
family-allowance funds; Part III. The juridical character of family
91 La Voix du Peuple, Paris, January, 1923, p. 24.
92 Comity des Allocations familiaies.
Congres national des Caisses de Compensation,
Paris, July, 1921. Compte rendu. Paris, 1921, pp. 84, 85.

FRANCE

allowances, with legal opinions, decisions, and decrees regarding such
grants; and Part IV. Laws relating to the formation of the family
and the protection of large families and of working families.93
ANNUAL CONGRESSES

The congress of family-allowance funds convenes at the call of
the Central Committee on Family Allowances. At such meetings
each fund may have as many representatives as it wishes but has
only one vote, which, however, may be augmented by one or more
votes according to the amounts paid out in family allowances by the
fund in the preceding year, as follows: From 250,000 to 1,000,000
francs, 1 vote; from 1,000,000 to 10,000,000 francs, 2 votes; above
10,000,000 francs, 3 votes.94
In addition to the representatives of 79 family-allowance funds
representatives of the following industrial associations and groups
participated in the 1924 congress: 95 General Confederation of French
Production; Union of the Metal and Mining Industries, Mechanical,
Electrical, and Metal Construction, and Allied Industries; Union of
Family Allowance Funds of the National Federation of Construction
and Public Works; Union of Textile Employers’ Associations of
France; Federation of the Master Printers of France: National As
sociation of Wholesale Dealers in Wines, Ciders, Spirits, and Liquors
of France; Federation of Construction and Public Works Contrac
tors of Alsace and Lorraine: United Trade Association of Wire and
Electric Cable Manufacturers; Federation of Producers and Dis
tributors of Electric Power; Association of Metal Construction Con
tractors; Chamber of Commerce of the Hardware Industry; Fed
eration of Industrial Employers of the Creil, Montataire, and
Nogent-sur Oise regions; Association for the Recruiting, Instruc
tion, and Placement of the Personnel of Notary Public Offices;
Chambers of Commerce of Brest, of Havre, of Marseille, and of
Niines; Belgian Committee for the Study of Family Allowances;
Family Allowance Fund of the Liege Region (Belgium); Social
Union of Catholic Engineers; Federation of Family Associations
of the Parisian Region; “ La Plus Grande Famille ” ; FrancoAmerican Committee of Berck; Metallurgical and Mining Associa
tion for the Prevention of Tuberculosis.
Among the subjects discussed at the five annual congresses of the
committee on family allowances are the following, which give some
indication of the complexity and importance of the problems con
fronting the funds:
First congress, Paris, July
1921.94—Family allowances from
legal and social viewpoints; psychological and social reasons for
the diversity of regulations adopted by family-allowance funds; the
different bases for the calculation of contributions to family-allowance funds; the trade or the regional limit for funds; family allow
ances and the industrial accident law; the autonomy of funds and
legislative intervention.
93 Comite central des Allocations familiales. Annuaire 1925. Paris, 1925.
w Comity des Allocations familiales.
Congr&s national des Caisses de Compensation,
Paris. July 4, 1921. Compte rendu. Paris, 1021, r*n. 88. 89.
95 Coniite central des Allocations familiales.
IV e Congrds national des Allocations
familiales, Mulhausen, May 2 6 -2 9 , 1924. Compte rendu. Lili, 1 9 2 4 ; pp. 5, 6.

STATE CONTROL FOR F A M IL Y ALLOW ANCES

Second congress, Grenoble, May 22,1922.m—History of allowances
at Grenoble; social action of family-allowanee funds; social service
of the family-allowanee fund of the region of Paris; the* develop
ment of family-allowanee funds in the region of Lyon; hygiene
service for children in the region of Lyon; child clinics and
preventorium at Nancy; legal status and juridical character of
family-allowanee funds; the extension of family allowances to engi
neers; the organization of an agricultural fund for family allow
ances; general considerations in re allowances and home work.
Third congress, Nantes, June l±-6, 192S,97—The hygiene services
of family-allowanee funds; the distribution of family allowances
according to family responsibilities; the distribution of the cost of
allowances among members of family-allowanee funds; the necessity
of precise terminology for family allowances; action of funds with
a view to facilitating the increase of house and garden privileges;
conditions governing allowances in early infancy in case of pro
tracted illness or death of the head of the family.
Fourth congress, Mulhausen,, May 26-28, 1924.98—The Mulhausen
fund; the Strassburg fund; birth expenses and provision for suc
cessive children; hygiene services and family-allowanee funds; pre
natal hygiene; family-allowanee funds in the face of tuberculosis;
visiting agents for workers’ families.
Fifth congress, Rouen-Havre, June 8-10, 1 9 2 5 —The Rouen
family allowance funds; social institutions of the Lower Seine;
social work of family-allowanee funds—new realizations; inquiry
on workers’ birth rates; sickness allowances; family allowances in
agriculture; vacation colonies; vacation camps; activities of visiting
nurses in medical and social work of an incorporated fund.
STATE CONTROL FOR FAMILY ALLOWANCES
B O N Q W SK I B IL L

A bill for the purpose of making family allowances compulsory
in industry was introduced in the French Chamber of Deputies,
February 24, 1920, by Maurice Bonowski. Under this measure any
person who employed another person on paid work for not less than
150 days per annum and 5 hours per day would be required to be
come a member of a family-allowanee fund, and to pay thereto the
amount necessary for the granting of family allowances. These
allowances were to include wages during two months’ pregnancy,
a bonus amounting to 66 per cent of a month’s wages on the birth
of each child, a nursing allowance equivalent to 10 per cent of wages
for 10 months, and an allowance equal to from 5 to 7 per cent of
wages for each child under 14 years of age. It was estimated that,
were this bill enacted into law, the employers’ assessments for family
allowances would amount to 5 per cent of their wages bill.1
96 Comity des Allocations familiales.
I I e Congrfes national des Caisses de Compensa
tion, Grenoble, May 22, 1922. Compte rendu. Paris, 1923.
97 Comity des Allocations familiales. I I I e Congrfes national des Allocations familiales,
Nantes, June 4 -6 , 1923. Compte rendu. Paris, 1923.
98 ComitS central des Allocations familiales.
IV e Congrfcs national des Allocations
familiales, Mulhausen, May 2 6 -2 9 , 1924. Compte rendu. Lille, 1924, pp. 147, 148.
99 La Journee industrielle, Paris, June 9, 1925.
1 International Labor Office.
International Labor Review, Geneva, February, 1924,
pp. 173, 1 7 4 : “ Family allowances in French industry,” by Roger Picard.

FRANCE

Many employers’ federations and chambers of commerce objected
vigorously to this legislative proposal, and many resolutions criti
cizing the measure were passed at industrial and economic meetings,3
among the first to pass such resolutions being the Congress of In
dustrial Societies of France in June, 1920, which suggested a na
tional union of family-allowance funds with no legal compulsion.
The same year the Natality Congress and the Assembly of the
Presidents of the Chambers of Commerce expressed themselves
strongly in favor of freedom for private initiative in the matter of
granting family allowances.
Early in 1921 the plenary assembly of the agriculturists of France
and the Union of Economic Interests registered their opposition,
which was followed by similar action on the part of 157 groups, in
cluding the General Insurance Employers’ Association, the Federa
tion of Food Industries, and the Employing Shipbuilders’ Association.
The resolution of the First National Congress of Family Allow
ance Funds, held on July 4,1921, is given below as showing in detail
the reasons for the employers’ attitude toward the Bonowski b ill:4
Whereas, all legislative intervention would necessarily include as its basis
an obligation for which employers would be responsible—an obligation to be
condemned in itself, as it would transform a voluntary united movement into
an obligatory payment, having the characteristics of a real ta x ; and this obliga
tion would introduce into our law a new and extremely dangerous principle
which would burden one class of citizens with the responsibility of social wel
fare laws and of creating resources for social welfare work, without recourse
to public funds, which would permit of every kind of abuse;
Whereas, on the other hand, the simple enunciation of the principle of
obligation would be ineffective; it would be necessary to regulate the whole
institution of family allowances from the viewpoint of the minima of assess
ments to be made, of the classes of beneficiaries, of administrative supervision
and sanctions, and such aa organization would be directly contrary to the
object sought, as in effect—
(a) The assessments wTould be increased as much by the contemplated man
ner of making allowances as by the functioning of the administrative machinery
and the new public employees who would surely appear;
(&) The rules voted would be rigid and uniform for all France, when ex
perience shows the necessity of carefully taking account of localities and
customs, and the majority of the funds have themselves been led to modify
their statutes on certain points, as elasticity and diversity of possibilities of
development are the foundation of the progress of the institution still too
new to be stabilized.
Whereas, finally, in view of the results obtained in less than two years by
the effort of independent initiative, employing interests openly condemn this
intrusion of public authorities into their industrial relations: Be it, therefore
Resolved (1) That Parliament reject the Bonowski bill or any similar one
tending to make family allowances a legal obligation for all or any employers ;
(2) That in any case the discussion be postponed in order to permit without
restriction the generalization of the institution and in order that the general
common procedure may be determined from a longer experience.

The 1922, 1923, and 1924 national congresses of family-allowance
funds also declared themselves in favor of the unrestrained develop
ment of the funds through private initiative.5
3 Comite des Allocation familiales.
Congr&s national des Caisses <le Compensation,
Paris, July 4, 1921. Compte rendu. Paris, 1921, pp. 7 0 -7 2 .
4 Idem, pp. 100, 101.
6
Comite des Allocations familiales, I I e Congrfes national des Caisses de Compensation,
Grenoble, May 22, 1922, Compte rendu, Paris, 1922, p. 9 0 ; Comity des Allocations
familiales, III® Congrfes national des Allocations familiales, Nantes, June 4—6, 1923.
Compte rendu, Paris, 1923, p. 1 5 2 ; Comite central des Allocations familiales, IV* Congr&s
national des Allocations familiales, Mulhausen. May 2 6 -2 9 , 1924, Compte rendu, Lille,
1924, p. 109.

STATE CONTROL FOR F A M IL Y ALLOW ANCES

State action in the application of a family-allowance system was
advocated, however, by Abbe Desbuquois in his lecture on 64Economic
reforms” during the fifteenth of the Catholic “ social weeks,” held
at Grenoble, July 30 to August 6, 1923. The family, he thought,
could not wait until the “ good will shown by some had converted
others whose present attitude is one of calculated indifference.” 6
CONTRACTS FOE PUBLIC WORKS

In 1921 the Superior Council of Labor passed a resolution favor
ing provision for compulsory family allowances in contracts for
public work.7
In 1922 a commission of the French Chamber of Deputies re
quested the Government to insert a clause in the estimates for
public works authorized by the communes, the Departments, and the
State, requiring the contractors to belong to family-allowance
funds.8
Members of an important family-allowance fund found that in
public contracts they had to compete with establishments which
were not affiliated with such funds and who because their bids for
public work did not include family allowances could offer to do the
work for less money.7
The paradox arose that the State, which pays family allowances to its
workers, appears, when it gives the work to private contractors instead of
doing it itself, to favor those employers who refuse to pay such allowances.9

As an outcome of this situation the National Federation of Con
struction and Public Works requested the Government to amend the
decrees of August 10, 1899, concerning labor conditions in contracts
for public works, by inserting a clause making it compulsory for
those submitting bids for such works to pay family allowances.7
As a result of these requests a law was passed December 19, 1922,
making it permissible to include in bidders’ estimates for public
works a provision obligating contractors to pay family allowances to
those employed thereon.8 On July 13, 1923, three decrees were is
sued which amended certain existing provisions regarding labor con
ditions on public works.10
The first decree stipulates that in State contracts the payment of
family allowances to workers on account of their family responsi
bilities “ shall be compulsory in all but exceptional cases, when the
Minister of Labor must give his reasons for permitting such exemp
tion. For the payment of these allowances those contracting for
public work must become members of an approved family-allowance
fund or of another institution established by employers for the di
vision among them of the expenses arising from these obligatory
grants. Such membership is not compulsory if the contractor’s
6 International Labor Offiee.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Aug. 24,
1923, p. 4.
7 Bulletin du Ministfcre du Travail et de rilygiene, Paris, April-May-June, 1924, p. 121.
8 International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Jan. 20,
1922, pp. 24, 25.
8 International Labor Offiee. Fam ily allowances.
Geneva, 1924, p. 58.
Studies and
reports series D (wages and hours), No. 13.
10 International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Aug. 3,
1923, p. 20.

61243°—26-----4

FRANCE

working force numbers 2,000 or more and he has instituted a system
of family allowances which meets the conditions required for ap
proved organizations.
Under the other two decrees which applied
to Departments, communes, or public charitable institutions, the
inclusion of a provision for family allowances in contracts for pub
lic works was allowable but not compulsory.13
The following regulations for an approved family-allowance fund
in the Department of the Seine contained in an order issued by the
Minister of Labor August 28, 1923, were afterwards, with certain
exceptions, made applicable to all Departments: 14
1. The fund must have the character of a legal person or derive such
character from the group to which the members constituting tlie fund belong.
2. It must be confined to construction and public works or must have
formed a special section for these industries with separate accounts for such
section.
3. It must include at least 10 building undertakings, employing in all not
less than 2,000 manual or nonmanual workers.
4. It must guarantee allowances at the following minimum rates to every
worker, manual or nonmanual, according to the number of days he has worked
during the month: (a) For one dependent child, 20 francs per month; (ft) for
two dependent children, 50 francs per month; (c) for three dependent children,
90 francs per month; (d) for every dependent child above 3, 40 francs per
month.
In principle an allowance is payable tor (‘very child under 13 years of age.
The regulations of the fund, however, may always provide that the allowance
will not be granted if it is proved that the child, without valid excuse, does not
regularly attend school.
5. The fund shall always have a financial reserve or working cajntal amount
ing to not less than a minimum sum to l>« fixed by the minister, * * *
which sum shall, however, not exceed a sum equal to the total cost of the
family allowances for one quarter. * * *

The order also provides that approved funds shall forward annu
ally to the Minister of Labor a copy of their balance sheets and shall
submit evidence of the agreement of their members to increase their
contribution rates should the original assessment prove inadequate to
meet the cost of allowances. The funds are also required to inform
the Minister of Labor of any changes in their constitutions and
rules.
On September 4, 1923, the Minister ‘of Labor invited the prefects
of Departments to form at once administrative commissions to ad
vise as to conditions to be met by family-allowance funds wishing
to make agreements with the Departments.15
By the second quarter of 1924 the operation of various admin
istrative commissions set up in connection with the payment of fam
ily allowances on public works had resulted in 89 ministerial orders
fixing the terms of agreements with family-allowance funds.16 Such
terms were the same as those in the order of August 28, 1923, with
the exception of the requirement to establish a fund or special section
for construction and the amounts of the allowances to be paid. The
organization of a special section for construction has not been in
sisted upon except in those Departments contemplating contracts
with intertrade funds which might object to such a stipulation except
for those of their members undertaking public work which might
come under the provisions of the decrees.17 As for the amounts of
13 Bulletin du Ministfere du Travail et de riiygiSne, Paris, April-May-Juue, 1924, p. 123.
14 Idem, p. 124.
15 Idem, pp. 123, 124.
16 Idem, pp. 124, 125.

ECON OM Y OF F A M IL Y ALLOW ANCES

tlie monthly allowances, the decrees provide that they should be fixed
according “ to local and regional circumstances,” and in consequence
they vary greatly, ranging from 10 to 25 francs for one child; from
18.fo to 50 francs for two children; from 25 to 90 francs for three
children; from 31.25 to 130 francs for four children; and from 10
to 40 francs for each child after the fourth.18
On June 30, 1924, 37 funds, including local, regional, and even
national organizations, had entered into agreements with Depart
ments, 5 of the funds with almost all of the Departments, 10 regional
funds with the Departments in which they operated, and 22 local
funds with the Departments in which they had their headquarters.19
Through the good offices of the Ministry of Labor cooperation
has been established between the funds and the regional commis
sions. There has, however, been some criticism because of the fact
that on certain Department commissions there were no representa
tives of the funds in their localities nor were such representatives
called in for consultation.20
The insertion of the provision for family allowTances in contracts
for public works being optional on the part of Departments and
communes, the question is decided through general and municipal
councils. On a number of occasions the Minister of Labor has
brought to the attention of the prefects his interest in having such
councils as had not acted on this matter take it up. Besides the
various departments which now impose the payment o f family allow
ances on parties contracting for public work, many other Depart
ments have declared through their prefects that the question will be
presented at the next session of the general council.®
Among the nearly 300 communes which nowT oblige contractors
for public works to grant family allowances are Paris and the 9
communes of the Department of the Seine, Marseille, the 13 com
munes of the Department of the Lower Rhine, Angouleme and La
Rochelle, the 79 communes of La Cote-d’Or, Nantes, the 117 com
munes of La Marne, Metz, and the 30 communes of the Department
of Yaucluse.6
At the Fourth National Congress on Family Allowances in May,
1924, special emphasis was placed on the practical manner in which
the Frcnch labor administration in applying the regulations under
the law of December 19, 1922, and the subsequent decrees relating
thereto has endeavored to prevent any injury to the elasticity of the
system of family-allowance funds which owes its remarkable
strength to the diversity in its rules.21
COST OF FAMILY ALLOWANCES

One of the arguments against family allowances is that these
grants are merely added to the expense of production and therefore
increase the general cost of living.
17 Bulletin du Minist&re du Travail et de l ’Hygifene, Paris, April-May-.Tune. 1024, pp.
123, 124.
is Idem, pp. 125 -1 27 .
10 Idem, pp. 1 2 7 -1 2 9 .
20 Tomite central des Allocations familiaies.
IV e CongrSs national des Allocations
familiaies, Mul^ausen, May 2 6 -2 9 , 1924. Compte rendu. Lille, 1924, p. 187.
Idem, p. 102.
« Bulletin du Mintetfere du Travail et de l’Hygi&ne, Paris. April-May-June, 1924,
pp.

FRANCE

The following report made by the metallurgical industry at
Grenoble is an attempt to show in some detail the economy of family
allowances with a given personnel: 22
Single workers and married employees without children__ 3,604
Married employees with one or more children_______ .___ 1,282
Total employees------------------------------------------------------- 4,886
Children under 13 years of age-------------------------------------- 2,135
(Slightly less than 2 children to a family.)

I f the cost of living rises for the single man 0.60 franc a day
and for the married man with children 0.90 franc a day, and the
establishment should increase wages uniformly by a cost-of-living
bonus of 0.80 franc per day for both married and single employees,
or if it should pay a higher cost-of-living bonus to married em
ployees with children than to single employees (the difference con
stituting a family allowance), the following results are shown:
Francs per day

Cost-of-living bonus of 0.80 franc per day to 3,604 single employees
and married employees without children------------------------------------- 2, 883.20
Increased cost of living for 3,604 single employees and married em
ployees without children at 0.60 franc per day---------------------------- 2,162.40
Excess of cost-of-living bonus over increase of cost of living
for single employees and married employees without chil
dren___ .------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- 23720.80
Increased cost of living for 1,282 fathers of families at 0.90 franc
per day_______________________________________________________ 1,153. 80
Cost-of-living bonus of 0.80 franc per day to 1,282 fathers of families- 1,025. 60
Difference between cost-of-living bonus to fathers of families
and increase in cost of living--------------------------------------------

128.20

Cost-of-living bonus of 0.80 franc per day to 4,886 employees________ 3, 908. 80
Cost-of-living bonus of 0.60 franc per day to 3,604 single
employees and married employees without children-,____ 2,162.40
Cost-of-living bonus of 0.90 franc per day to 1,282 fathers
of families__________________________________________ 1,153. 80
------------- 3,316.20
Saving as compared with cost-of-living bonus of 0.80 franc per
day to all employees____________________________________

592.60

The benefits resulting to employers by making a distinction
between fathers of families and persons without children in reduc
ing the cost-of-living bonus is also shown by the following illus
tration, which supposes a decline in the cost of living of 0.60 franc
a day for single persons and married persons without children
and 0.90 franc a day for heads of families:
Francs per day

Reduction
married
Reduction
children

of cost-of-living bonus for 3,604 single employees or
employees without children at 0.60 franc per day_______ 2,162.40
of cost-of-living bonus for 1,282 married employees with
at 0.60+240.10 franc per day____________________ _______
897.40

Total_____________________________________________________ 3,059. 80
22 Romanet, ISmile: Les Allocations familiales.
Chronique Sociale de France, Lyon,
[ 1 9 2 2 ] , pp. 3 -5 .
28 7 80.80 in report.
354 Reduction for children— one-third of difference between 0.60 and 0.90 franc.

RELATION OF F A M IL Y ALLOW ANCES TO WAGES

Francs per day

Uniform reduction in cost-of-living bonus for both married and
single, 4,886 employees at 0.60 franc per day------------------------------ . 2,931.60
Daily saving to employers----------------------- --------------- -----------

128. 20

RELATION OF FAMILY ALLOWANCES TO WAGES
TERMINOLOGY25

As the system of family allowances expands, the necessity for a
more scientific terminology in this connection is accentuated.
In some cases the same term is applied to the contributions paid
into funds and to the amounts disbursed by them. The worker for
whose family responsibilities the allowance is granted is sometimes
spoken of as “ attributaire ” or u allocataire ”—a grantee. In other
cases he is called “ beneficiaire ”—a beneficiary. It has been held
that the last term should not be applied to the worker at all but to
the child or other person for whom the allowance is granted.
The word “ sursalaire,” which might be translated as supple
mentary wage, has been widely objected to and the demand made for
the general substitution of the term a allocation”—allowance. For
example, the Federation of Industrial Associations of France
(VUnion des Soeietes Industrielles de France) at its congress at
Rouen in June, 1922, passed a resolution in favor of discarding the
term “ sursalaire ” in connection with family allowances and specifi
cally advocated that manufacturers’ associations, when consulted,
should recommend the avoidance of such term in the titles of family
allowance funds.20 Indeed, the variety in the designations of these
funds has been cited as an illustration of the existing vagueness of
the language used concerning the family-allowance system, some
still retaining in their titles the word “ sursalaire,” and others being
entitled funds for allowances, industrial funds for allowances, funds
for family allowances, funds for allowances for heads of families.
The title of one, the Nantes organization, is the Regional Fund of
Working-class Family Institutions (Caisse regionale cles Institutions
ouvrie res) .
COMPLEX CHARACTER OF FAMILY ALLOWANCES

Some of the ambiguity in terminology referred to above arises
from the complex nature of the family allowance itself. As illus
trating the range of interpretation regarding the character of these
grants, the paradoxical conclusions reached in two articles, one
published in Les Documents du Travail of June-July, 1923 (pp.
1-22), and the other in the Bulletin de la Societe d’fitudes et
d’Informations economiques of September 19, 1923 (supplement),
are here cited. In the earlier article! the declaration is made that
these grants would not be understandable in the absence of the work
contract; that they are a part of the compensation which the worker
Comity des Allocations familiales. H I e Oongres national des Allocations familiales,
Nantes, June 4 -6 , 1923.
Compte rendu.
Paris, 1923, pp. 9 0 -9 5 .
26 International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, June 30,
1922, p. 15.

FRANCE

takes into account when he agrees to render certain services. I f
employers should decide to discontinue the system they would un
doubtedly meet with “ vigorous opposition ” on the part of labor or
with demands for higher wages. In the later article27 the family
allowance is said to be “ foreign to the contractual elements of hir
ing, [and] voluntarily given by the employer. * * * The allow
ance relates only to the family situation and social conditions com
pletely independent of the working conditions. * * * The
family allowance is an institution of assistance purely. To speak of
insurance here is exaggeration.”
In contrast to this last statement is the view of Rene Hubert that
from the standpoint of the personal interest of employers these
allowances should be looked upon as a form of insurance "‘ against
labor instability, against the decline of the birth rate and the conse
quent diminution of the supply of manual labor.” 28
Etienne Yillev holds that the institution of family allowances is
not simply a form of philanthropy. It has a substantial economic
significance, and is in fact a “ real innovation concerning the prob
lem of the remuneration of work.” 29
INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS

It was inevitable that the moot character of family allowances
should bring about legal difficulties. In the case of industrial acci
dents to workers who received family allowances, the question arose
as to whether such allowances should be taken into account in com
puting the amount of insurance these workers were entitled to under
the law of April 9, 1898. This problem has created much discus
sion. Abel Durand, the counsel for the Nantes fund, went into the
matter in great detail at the first national congress of the funds in
1921, and the following legal references are taken from his address.30
The crux of the controversy is apparently as to whether allow
ances are remuneration for labor or, according to the court of cassa
tion (Cass. Req., December, 1903 D. 1904, 1373, etc.), whether “ they
form a part of the wage.” The courts for a long time were opposed
to regarding these allowances as a part of wages, and for a number
of years in railroad cases allowances were regarded as gratuities and
assistance, and therefore not to be considered in calculating the
basic salary. The following two decisions involving railway com
panies were exceptions:
The court of Chambery, June 15, 1920 (Le Droit Ouvrier, Jan
uary, 1921, p. 12), declared that indemnity for family responsibili
ties “ constituted really a supplementary part of the wage,” to be
taken into account in determining the basic wage.
The court of Limoges on January IT, 1921 (Le Droit Ouvrier,
April, 1921, p. 108), held that as such an indemnity was not known
27 Quoted in Les Documents du Travail, Paris, October, 1923, pp. 1 6 -2 2 .
28 Hubert. R en e: Sursalaire, Allocations familiales et Caisses de Compensations, Paris,
1921, p. 16 (quoted by Roger Picard in Les Documents du Travail. Paris, .Tun<*-Jii1yt
1923, p. 1 1 ).
20
Villey, fitien n e: reorganization professionnelle des Employeurs dans 1’ Industrie
frangaise.
[Paris,] 1923, p. 294.
80 Comity des Allocations familiales.
Congrfes national des Caisses de Compensation,
Paris, July 4, 1921. Compte rendu. Paris, 1921, pp. 5 7 -6 8 .

RELATIO N OF F A M IL Y ALLOW ANCES TO WAGES

“ to have an existence independent of work,” “ it should be regarded
as forming an integral part of the worker’s wage.” In a judgment
of the tribunal of Wassy, May 11, 1921 (Journee Industrielle, June
12 and 13, 1921), an opposite conclusion is expressed, as is also the
case in the opinion handed down March 21, 1921, by the permanent
Interministerial Immigration Commission to the effect that family
allowances “ do not constitute a supplement to the wage but a benev
olent contribution of certain employers to a mutual fund.”
Because of these apparently antipodal legal conclusions, Durand
emphasized the need for the funds to formulate definite principles
on this subject for their practical guidance before the courts during
the pioneer period. Attention was called, however, to the very
great variety in the family-allowance systems of different funds,
which variety might, of course, easily lead to different legal decisions
relative to the nature of such allowances.
In interpreting article 10 of the law of April 9, 1898, with refer
ence to a worker covered by a family-allowance fund, the Advisory
Insurance Committee ruled that “ in this particular case, and allowed
under this form, these allowances did not form an integral part of
the salary.”
In Durand’s opinion, the right to these family grants is based on
the work contract and is so recognized by the workingman’s family*
but he holds at the same time that this is because of the bond existing
between the worker and the establishment and not because of the
labor performed by him.31 As a proof of his theory, Durand refers
to the fact that under date of February 19, 1921, the Minister of
Labor circularized the family-allowance funds to continue these
grants in the unemployment crisis.32
Under the regulations of a number of family-allowance funds,
“ the right to allowances ” belongs not to the working head of the
family but to the members of his famity included in the provisions
for such grants. The allowances are also declared to be nontransferable and not liable t6 seizure by creditors, and the law of June 25,
1920, exempted such grants from the salary tax.33
At the suggestion of the Central Committee on Family Allowances
additional funds have decided to continue family allowances during
disability from industrial accidents. It is reported, however, that
this practice will be abandoned if such grants are legally consid
ered a part of the basic wage.34
Under the French workmen’s compensation law of 189835 an em
ployer pays a fixed compensation to workers and salaried employees
who are disabled for five or more days as a direct result of their
employment or to the dependents of those who are killed.
Recommendation has been made that in case family allowances
are interpreted to be a part of the basic wage under this law, such
81 Roger Picard, in Les Documents du Travail of June^July, 1923 (p. 2 1 ) , takes issue
with Durand and asks “ W hat bond outside of the work contract can bind the worker
to a commercial establishment ? ”
33
Comit6 des Allocations familiales.
Congrfcs national des Caisses de Compensation,
Paris, July 4, 1921. Compte rendu. Paris, 1921, p. 63.
38 Idem, pp. 62, 66.
84 La Journee Industrielle, Paris, June 8 -9 , 1924, p. 7.
35 U. S. Bureau of Labor. Twenty-fourth annual report, 1909 : Workmen’ s insurance
and compensation systems in Europe.
Washington, 1911, vol. I, p. 685.

FRANCE

legislation be amended to take into account the “ special and essential
character of these allowances.” 36
The adverse attitude of the funds toward the inclusion of family
allowances in the basic wage in connection with compensation for
industrial accidents is due not to a desire on the part of the funds to
exempt their members from the additional and comparatively mod
erate costs but rather to the feeling that the money involved might
be expended to better advantage.37
RELATION OF FAMILY ALLOWANCES TO THE POPULATION
PROBLEM

From an examination of the increasing literature on family allow
ances one can not but conclude that the remarkable growth of the
movement for these grants in France has been influenced, if not con
siderably accelerated, by the widespread concern over the low birth
rate. The French reports on the subject would seem to indicate that
the depopulation problem is an acute one, and the recurring refer
ences to it at the annual congresses of the family-allowance funds
show that in the minds of some of the leading industrialists of
France the matter of family allowances is very closely allied with
the question of encouragement of large families.
In the opening address at the first congress is the following
statement: 38
Tlie war has revealed the terrible danger to which this paucity of births
brings our country—the lack of labor is the end of industry and agriculture;
the lack of soldiers is the end of the nation, the extinction of the race.
We have sought to the limit of our means to remedy this sad state of things,
but as Mr. Isaac, the former Minister of Commerce, said at the congress at
Nancy, the question of the birth rate is above all a moral question.
By family allowances we shall have provided for the material side, but the
other? * * * Now the creation of a household, the responsibility of a
family, involve duties, sacrifices, self-denials; * * * the family is the
real social cell. * * *

Another speaker at the same congress focused attention on the fact
that not only were these funds established to adjust wages in ac
cordance with existing economic conditions, but the spirit in which
the agencies were created called for an interest in the individual
relations of employers and employees, a general interest in their
affiliated members as a corporate body, and a still broader interest in
their country. These interests, he held, imperatively demand that
France be assured of future requisite labor reserves.39
At the second congress there is reference to the “ agonizing prob
lem of the birth rate,” and in the report o f the director of the Central
Committee on Family Allowances the declaration is made that
France is depeopling itself—that its life is imperiled—and family
allowances are cited as the most effective means that have been
instituted to encourage large families.40
36 Comit& des Allocations familiales.
Congr&s national des Caisses de Compensation,
Paris, July 4, 1921. Compte rendu. Paris, 1921, p. 65.
37 Idem, p. 67.
38 Idem, p. 6.
39 Idem, pp. 61, 62.
40 Comite des Allocations familiales.
I I e Congres national des Caisses de Compensa
tion, Grenoble, May 22, 1922.
Compte rendu.
Paris, 1922, p. 106.

RELATION OF F A M IL Y ALLOW ANCES TO POPULATION

The president of the chamber of commerce at Nantes, in welcom
ing the delegates to the third congress of the funds, which was held
in that city in 1922, stated that family allowances have aided the
efforts of the Natality Congress.
At this same convention a session was devoted to the question of
depopulation, and Vieuille, a member of the Superior Natality
Council and of the council of administration of the National Fed
eration of Associations of Large Families, expressed the wish that
the family-allowance funds be left free in their activities in behalf
of the general good, for depopulation was still a danger and the
cooperation of all social forces was needed for the preservation of
the country.41
At the fourth congress also the birth rate was a prominent sub
ject, and Vieuille again spoke on the question, declaring that
“ France, which a hundred years ago was the richest of the great
nations in men, had on the eve of the war descended to the fifth
rank; a^ter having constituted a quarter of the population of
Europe she now formed but a tenth.” 42
By allowances to less fortunate families and by lighter taxation
for family men, legislators have made an effort to effect an approach
to economic balance, but they “ have scarcely dared touch the exces
sive privileges of the childless.” 43
Eugene Mat-hon, the president of the Central Committee on Family
Allowances, warned of the danger of the continued decrease of the
French population and called upon the assembly to make the requi
site sacrifices of money, time, and devotion to develop the work in
behalf of the family, which represented the future of France.44
It would be interesting to know to what extent, if any, the familyallowance system has influenced the birth rate, but it is felt that it
would be impossible to reach a statistically sound conclusion in this
connection. In 1922 Victor Guesdon declared that the effect of
family allowances on the birth rate can only “ be presumed as it is
not demonstrable.” Even if an inquiry were made under the
auspices of the Central Committee of Family Allowances, the results
of such an investigation “ would necessarily be subject to caution.” 45
The living births per 100 inhabitants in France for 1920, 1921,
1922, and 1923 were 2.13, 2.07, 1.94, and 1.94, respectively. Birth
and death rates for 1920 to 1923 for certain countries as compared
with France are given in Table 5.
41 Comity des Allocations familiales. I I I e Congrfcs national des Allocations familiales,
Nantes, June 4 -6 , 1923. Compte rendu. Lille, 1923, pp. 159, 165.
42 Comit6 central des Allocations familiales.
IV e Congr&s national des? Allocations
familiales, Mulhausen, May 2 6 -2 9 , 1924. Compte rendu. Lille, 1924, p. 110.
idem, p. 118.
44 Idem, pp. 136, 139.
45 Guesdon, V ic to r: Le Mouvement de Creation et d’Extension des Caisses d'Aliocations familiales. Paris, 1922, p. 165.

FRANCE

T a b le 5.—B IR T H AN D D E A T H 1 R ATES (PER 100 INHA BTTANTS) IN’ SPECIFIED
COUNTRIES, 1920 TO 1923 2
1920

1921

1922

1923

Country
Birth
rate
Australia.................................................
Austria.................................................
Belgium.......... ........................................
Denmark proper....................................
England and Wales 8.............................
Finland......... ........ ..................................
France................................... ......... .......
Germany
...................... ............. .......
Hungary—..............................................
Ireland 8...................................................
Italy..........................................................
Japan_______________________________
Netherlands.............................................
Norway....................................................
Scotland...................................................

2. 55
2. 24
2.21
2.54
2. 55
2. 53
2 .i ?
2. 59
3. ’ 2
2. 22
3.19
3.62
2.80
2, ea
2. hi

Sweden............................ ......................
Switzerland.............................................

2. ;s5
2. 09

Death
rate
1.05
1.91
1.S9
1.29
1.24
1. 59
1. 72
1. 51
2. !2
1.18
1.88
2. 54
1. 19
1.24
1.40
2.38
1.33
1.44

Birth
rate
2. 50
2. 29
2 .19
2.40
2. 24
2. 43
2. 07
2. 53
2. 79
2.02
3.04
3. 51
2. 74
2. 44
2. 52
3. 04
2.14
2.08

Death
rate

Birth
rate

0.99 !
1.69
1.37
1.10
1.21
1.40
1.77
1.40
1.93
1.42
1.75
2.27
1.11
1.13
1. 36
2.11
1.24

127

2.47
2.27
2.04
2. 23
2.04
2.34
1.94
2.28
2.94
1. 99
3.00
3.42
2. 59
2.42
2. Zo
3, 05
1.96
1.96

Death
rate
0.92
1.72
1.39
1.19
1.28
1.44
1.76
1.43
2.08
1.45
1.76
2.23
1.14
1.19
1.49
2.05
1.28
1. 29

Birth Death
rate
rate
2.38
2.23
2.04
2.25
1.97
2.37
1.94
2.09
2.84
2.06
2. 91

0.99
1.53
1.30
1.13
1.16
1.38
1.70
1.39
1.92
1,37
1.65

2.60
2.30
2.28
3.04
1.88
1.94

.99
1.15
1.29
2.12
1.14
1.18

1 Exclusive of stillborn.
2 France, Ministere du Travail, Bureau de la Statistiquo g6n&rale, Annuaire Statistique,
1925, pp. 201, 202.
3 In 1923 figures, inclusion of Wales not specified.
* Exclusive of Mecklenburg, Saaro, and Wurtemberg.
« Figures for 1922 and 1923 are for Irish Free Si:U,e.

1924, Paris,

It will be noted from the above statistics that the birth rate in
France in 1921 and 1922 was lower than that for any other country
listed in the table (except Ireland in 1021) and in 1923 it was lower
than that for any country but Sweden. The death rate for France
in 1922, 1.76 per 100 inhabitants, exceeded that for any other
country for which 1922 death rales are here reported except Hun
gary, Japan, and Spain, the death rates of which were 2.08, 2,23,
and 2.05, respectively.46 In 1923 the death rate for France (1.70),
while lower than the preceding year, was higher than that for all
the countries for which data are given except Hungary and Spain,
the rate for Japan not being given for 1923.
It is possible that the recent decline in the birth rate may arouse
industrialists to even more generous efforts. However, Etienne
Villey in his u FOrganisation professionnelle des employeurs dans
Findustrie frangaise ” (p. 297) flatly denies that the system of family
allowances has “ for its principal objective the increase of the birth
rate. * * * The promoters of the system have never imagined
that a monthly bonus wrould be adequate to reestablish the upward
trend of the birth rate. But employers have considered that elimina
tion of inequalities arising from family responsibilities was a requi
site condition to making repopulation measures effective. Employers
are interested in their own field. When similar measures become
general in all fields, then and then only can.be brought into play
the ethical and social factors alone susceptible of correcting morals.”
EMPLOYERS’ VIEWPOINTS

fitienne Yilley in his “ FOrganisation professionnelle des em
ployeurs dans Findustrie francaise ” (pp. 294, 296) points out that
46 For birth and death rates for various countries, from 1012 to 1923, see p. 194.

E M P L O Y E R S’ VIEW POIN TS

the fixation of wages is the result of two orders of facts operating
inversely. One follows the law of competition, which tends to cut
prices; the other is influenced by the moral and social consideration
“ that the individual should find in the organization of society the
means of participating as fully as possible by his work in the moral
and material advantages of civilization: this consideration—which
naturally guides labor’s action—tends to increase wage rates.”
In a period in which the trend has been towards greater and
greater industrial concentration the following situation has been
created from the interaction of these conflicting principles. Real
wages have on the whole risen somewhat, but the increase has been
irregular and slow as a consequence of these diametric elements in
the remuneration of labor, which have naturally been influenced by
the fluctuations in industrial conditions. In times of crisis and acute
competition wages declined sometimes even below the amount re
quired for normal living. In periods of prosperity when competi
tion was less rigorous wages advanced to a point which “ brought
even a certain ease to the worker.”
During the war the ordinary principles of production based on
competition were disregarded by the State, which assumed control
over industry and proceeded to speed up production at any cost.
To keep labor placated in the face of the high prices of the neces
saries of life, cost-of-living bonuses were introduced. These bonuses
were an important contribution to wage theory. They “ consecrated
and made practical that purely moral element, which will perhaps
be found to contradict the laws of competition, that the wage should
be exactly adapted to the cost of living.” When industry was re
turned to private control it was found impossible to pay to every
worker a wage which would support the alleged typical family of
four, which had been arbitrarily introduced in the war-time adjust
ment of wages, whereupon many important employers proceeded to
institute family allowances, which are “ but high-cost-of-living
bonuses perfected and adapted to economic exigencies.” These
*allowances, being based on verified actual conditions, appealed
strongly to practical industrial leaders. Rough averages and esti
mates were replaced by close calculations founded on fact. In this
way, Villey explains, the two different elements in the wage problem
are taken into account—one by the wage, properly so called, “ cor
responding to the economic value of the work performed,” and the
other by the family allowance based on the “ social value of the
worker.”
Bonvoisin, the director of the Central Committee on Family Al
lowances, also emphasized the economy of these grants in an address
before the second congress of the funds in 1922, stating that family
allowances seemed fortunately to effect a harmonizing of two appa
rently conflicting needs—the reduction of the general expenses of
industrial establishments and the relief of large families.47
On the other hand, some employers object to family allowances
because of the extra expenditure involved. This was one of the
points of view shown in a report of an inquiry made by the Social
Union of Catholic Engineers {Union Sociale cPIngenieurs Gathoi47 Comity des Allocations familiaies. I I e Congr&s national des Caisses de Compensation,
Grenoble, May 22, 1922. Compte rendu. Paris, 1922, p. 71.

FRANCE

iques) which appeared in the July, 1923, issue of the Echo de
l’Union Sociale d’Ingenieurs Catlioliques.48
It would seem quite evident from what has been said of the
population problem (see pp. 50 to 52) that the declining birth rate
is and has been a spur to the activities of employers for the exten
sion of the system of family allowances. The fact that Vieuille, who
is prominently connected with a number of propagandist organiza
tions having for their objective the increase of the birth rate, was
invited to address both the 1923 and 1924 congresses of the family
allowance funds has been cited to illustrate that the leaders of the
family-allowance movement thought that the purpose of the organi
zations represented by Vieuille was closely related to one of the
objects of their organization. The following unanimous resolution
of the Sixth Natality Congress held at Strassburg, September 25-28,
1924, constitutes still another public recognition of the bond between
the above-mentioned organizations:
Resolved, That all employers without exception extend to their personnel the
benefits of the system of family allowances by joining family-allowance funds.
That these funds, under the protection of administrative regulation, con
tinue to develop their operation with a view to an ever-improving production.49

The following extract from Victor Guesdon’s comprehensive and
scientific study of family allowances50 indicates that he also at
tributes at least some of the energy behind the system of family
allowances to the desire of leading industrialists to avert what Paul
Haury calls “ the suicide of a great people.” 51
Thanks to this movement of the funds, which is broad and really effective,
positive defensive measures have been taken in industrial centers in response
to the immediate interest of the present hour, which should be the increase of
the birth rate.

The views of various groups of employers as to making family
allowances compulsory have already been presented (see pp. 41 to
43). For the most part the general trend of opinion has been
against such compulsion, because of the alleged fear of paternalism,
with its rigid regulations, its heavy administrative expenses, and the •
proposed greater financial demands upon employers.52
According to a prominent French industrial authority “ the liberty
allowed employers has been in this matter [family allowances], as in
many others, one of the principal factors of success. Funds would
not have been able to develop in the midst of such varied conditions
but for the privileges of self-government which they enjoyed. Any
legal regulation might result in paralyzing this movement.” 58
As already pointed out, there has been a somewhat different atti
tude in the case of contractors for public work, especially in con
struction work. As the result, in part, of the lively competition be
tween contractors for public works who accorded family allowances
and those who did not make such grants the law of December 19,
48 International Labor Office. Family allowances. Geneva, 1924, p. 64.
Studies and
reports, series D (wages and hours), No. 13.
49 La Journee industrielle, Paris, Oct. 5 -6 , 1924, p. 7.
80 Guesdon, V ic to r: Le Mouvement de Creation et d’Extension des Caisses d’Allocations
familiales. Paris, 1922, p. 199.
51 Haury, P a u l: La Vie ou la M ort de la France. Paris, 1923, p. 1.
53 Comity des Allocations familiales. I I I e Congr&s national des Allocations familiales,
Nantes, June 4 -6 , 1923, compte rendu, Paris, 1923, p. 6 7 ; Congnes national des Caisses
de Compensation, Paris, July 4, 1921. compte rendu, Paris, 1921, pp. 100, 101.
53 Bulletin du Comite central industriel de Belgique. Brussels, September 20, 1922, pp.
714, 715.

LABOR VIEW S

1922, was enacted. This legislation, together with certain subsequent
decrees, has brought about the rapid multiplication of provisions for
family allowances in bidders’ estimates for undertakings authorized
by the State, the Departments, and communes. Indeed, it would
seem as if State intervention in the matter of family allowances in its
contract work is appreciated by the funds, despite their jealousy of
their autonomy. At their 1924 congress an eloquent tribute was
paid by one of the speakers “ to the spirit of impartiality as well as
the understanding of the facts with which the Ministry 01 Labor had
endeavored to apply the regulatory provisions, avoiding any injury
to the elasticity of a system which manifestly owes its remarkable
progress to the variety of its applied rules.” 54
In addition to the economic and at least partially patriotic motives
of employers and their rather militant attitude toward what
Mathon has termed “ the microbe of State socialism ” in the matter
of Government interference with the industrial family-allowance
system a number of other motives are more or less plainly dis
cernible. Among them is a growing sympathy with the family
needs of the workers, the outcome probably of a closer knowledge of
actual living conditions as revealed by inquiries necessitated by the
family-allowance system. The increase and elaboration of the
hygiene services of the funds are a concrete manifestation of this
sympathy, commingled with a desire to improve industrial relations
and preserve industrial peace. Some employers are of course much
less enthusiastic over family allowances than others. For example,
the president of one of the family-allowance funds does not consider
the system a universal panacea, but thinks that there are conditions,
times, and places to which the institution is not universally ap
plicable. He also suggests the following three general principles in
making such allowances: (1) The allowances must be sufficient; (2)
they must be supplemental to a fair wage proportioned to the work
accomplished; and (3) they must be the beginning of closer coopera
tion between employers and workers.55
LABOR VIEWS

One of the most frequently expressed desires of civil-service em
ployees has been for the payment of family allowances, the ad
vantages of which are appreciated by members of the service who
have family responsibilities.50
While some employers declare that the workers approve of the
system of family allowances, there is evidence that the present
private system is looked upon with considerable suspicion, at least in
certain sections of the labor world.57
The subject of family allowances was not originally placed on the
agenda of the seventeenth congress of the General Confederation of
Labor (C. G. T.) of France, which was in session .at Paris, January
30 to February 2, 1923, but as certain unions had become interested
in this problem the confederation published in the January, 1923,
“ 'Comity central des Allocations familiales.
IV e Congrfcs national des Allocations
familiales, Mulhausen, May 2 6 -2 9 , 1924. Compte rendu. Lille, 1924, p. 102.
65
International Labor Office. Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, May 25, 1923,
pp. 23, 24.
m Data furnished by the Minister of Finance of France, May 9, 1924.
iHternational Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, July 6,
1923, p. J.9.

FRANCE

number of its official organ, La Voix du Peuple (pp. 15-82), a re
port on the subject. After the program of the convention was made
up the Federation of the Unions of the North requested that the
question of family allowances be brought before the congress because
of the importance of the new system and the necessity for defining
labor’s attitude in the matter. The following resolution, adopted by
the congress, reiterates in somewhat different language a number of
the objections to family allowances which were set forth in the abovementioned report.58
The congress considers that assistance for large families and maternity and
nursing allowances constitute a form of social protection which should be
organized by the community in the same way as protection against unemploy
ment, sickness, disability, and old age. These questions can not be adequately
dealt with by systematic resort to private charity or philanthropy, and such
a system is liable to encourage extremely dangerous forms of dependence.
The congress warns the workers against the practice of granting additional
wages for workers with families.
This measure was invented by the employers in the course of their contest
wTith the trade-unions, and constitutes a danger to the latter. It has the
effect of lowering wages, and it is liable to result in a conflict between the
claims of workers with families and those of other workers.
If the measure is applied by individual employers only, it may encourage
them t*o dismiss workers with families in order to decrease the costs of their
undertaking. If it is applied with the assistance of compensation funds, it
means that the employer is in possession of flies giving particulars regarding
his workers. He is thus enabled to interfere in the private life oi! the workers
in an unjustifiable way, and an undesirable system of regulations is set>np,
by means of which the workers are kept in subjection and all their effo'fcfc*
toward emancipation frustrated. In whatever way it is organized, the system
in fact results in increasing the influence and means of domination at the
disposal of capitalism.
Instead of such false and dangerous philanthropic m e a s u re s , the burden of
which is, in the last resort, borne by the workers, the congress demands the
establishment of minimum wages at rates fixed by the trade-unions.
The congress demands that an effective system of assistance for large fami
lies, in the form of family allowances and ^maternity and nursing benefits,
should be organized by the community as a whole. The expenses should be
covered by compulsory contributions from the employers and by contributions
from the State. The management of the funds and the distribution of allow
ances should be intrusted to officially appointed committees, including repre
sentatives elected by the various interests concerned.
The right to family allowances is of a social character, and should be com
pletely independent of employment. They should not be affected by the fluctua
tions of employment, and the families which are entitled to them should not
lose them owing to sickness or to unemployment in any of its forms.

The assistant secretary of the General Confederation of Labor
and the secretary of the Federation of Textile Workers express them
selves in published interviews as personally in favor of taking the
payment of family allowances out of the hands of employers and of
placing the matter under Government direction. The former advo
cates that these allowances be made a form of social insurance regu
lated by law. He also calls attention to the possibility of employers
reducing generally their hourly wage rates to counterbalance the ex
penses of affiliating with family-allowance funds. The latter tradeunionist is of the opinion that family allowances should be paid not
only in unemployment and sickness, but also during strikes.59
Other trade-union opinions are reported in “ Le Peuple” (during
December, 1922, and January, 1923), as follows: Family allow
58 International Labor Office. Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Feb. 16, 1923,
pp. 11, 12.
59 La Jour nee inclustrielle, Paris, Dec. 31, 1922— Jan 1, 1923, p. 7.

LABOR VIEW S

ances are a means of reducing wages. The financial burden of these
grants are really carried by workers with few or no family responsi
bilities. Objection is registered against the woman social workers
employed by the family-allowance funds who go into the homes of
working families and tell them what they should do. All employ
ers should be compelled to belong to funds in order to bring about a
greater uniformity in wages in the same localities. Attention was
also called to the fact that the instability of employment in the
building industry resulted in a large number of workers failing to
receive family allowances for weeks at a time, because as a rule
these allowances are granted only after a worker has been on the
pay roll of a given employer for at least a month.60
The resistance of the confederation shows signs of waning, how
ever. Recently in “ Le Peuple ” the following statement was made:
We are obliged to bow before an accomplished fa ct: an institution which has
begun to interest 3,000,000 wage earners is a fact with which one must reckon.41

The Christian- Trade-Unions.—The attitude of the Christian labor
unions on family allowances is, on the whole, more pacific than that
of the unions affiliated with the General Confederation of Labor of
France.
The Christian trade-unions, according to Eugene Duthoit, pro
fessor in the Catholic University at Lille, were “ the first to call
attention to the relation between wages and the family. They aimed
at securing labor and wage conditions which would enable the worker
to carry out fully his family duties.” 62
j
The French Federation of the Unions of Catholic Employees, on
May 10, 1921, submitted a resolution to the permanent commission of
the Superior Council of Labor, declaring themselves strongly in
favor of 'legally established family allowances, dispensed through
funds subsidized by the State.68 These workers also urged—
That the control of the State, notably in the fixing of the rates of allowances
and other regulations, be exercised over the funds through the meeting of
joint trade commissions elected regionally by the employers’ organizations and
trade-unions interested.

A similar resolution was presented by certain labor members of the
Superior Council of Labor at the November 16, 1921, session of that
body.63
The following resolution was submitted at the Second National
Congress of Family Allowance Funds at Grenoble, May 22, 1922:64
The engineers of the Professional Union of Catholic Engineers request that
the congress of family-allowance funds study favorably the question of allow
ances for family responsibilities granted engineers, and decide, if it be oppor
tune, in the different industries, that married engineers and fathers of families
shall benefit by these allowances at the same rates as the workers.

This resolution was referred to the permanent commission of the
Central Committee on Family Allowances.
60 International Labor Office. Family allowances. Geneva, 1924, pp. 66, 67.
Studies
arid reports, series D (wages and hours), No. 13.
61 La R4forme Sociale, Paris, February, 1925, p. 129 : “ Les allocations familiales dans
l’agriculture.”
62 International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva. Aug. 24,
1923, p. 2.
08 Data furnished by the general secretary of the Confederation franeaise des Travailleurs chrStiens, April 25, 1924.
64 Comit6 des Allocations familiales. I I e Ctmgrfes national des Caisses de Compensation,
Grenoble, May 22, 1922. Compte rendu. Paris, 1922, p. 48.

FRANCE

At the congress of the Federation of Christian Women Workers’
Unions at Paris, January 26-29,1923, a resolution was passed*recommendiixg that the family allowances paid by the funds should be large
enough a to make it unnecessary for mothers to work outside their
own homes.” 65 A measure somewhat along the same line was passed
by the Tenth Congress of Women’s Free Unions (Catholic, in the Silk
Industry of the Isere, May 19 to 21, 1923. Pending the advocated
reform the free unions “ should insist upon the adding of family
allowances to the mothers’ wages.” 66
Family allowances were again advocated at the January, 1924,
congress of the Federation of Christian Women Workers’ Unions,
a resolution being adopted declaring that such grants “ contribute to
the restoration of the working family * * * and assure to the
country an era of prosperity and peace.” The desirability of the
mother’s remaining in her own household to bring up her children
was pointed out, and the demand made that an allowance be
given, beginning with the second child, which should fully meet the
cost of living of a child.67
A report on the progress of family allowances was made at the
June, 1924, congress of the French Confederation of Christian
Workers, and it was stated in connection with such progress that
“ much remained to be done to overcome the selfishness of employers
and the apathy of the wage earners. * * * The trade-unions
should take action to influence opinion, the heads of industrial under
takings, and legislators.” A resolution which was unanimously
adopted is given below as showing the attitude of this particular
body of workers at; that date, even though in some instances the
measure merely reiterates previous viewpoints:68
Whereas the inerease of the birth rate constitutes a moral, social/ economic,
and national problem which no one should ignore;
Whereas the fathers and mothers of families who are courageous enough
completely to fulfill their rOle are entitled to the recognition and aid of their
fellow citizens;
Whereas the heads of businesses especially should contribute in the largest
measure to the well-being of those who contribute greatly to the prosperity of
the business and who by increasing their families provide for the recruitment
of the labor of the future;
Whereas the system of family allowances has amply proved its efficacy as
well as its vitality; whereas these allowances should correspond more and
more to what their promoters expect of them;
Whereas it would be unjust and dangerous for certain employers, less
generous and less humane than others, by escaping the responsibilities which
the others have assumed, to impose upon them a quasi disloyal competition in
their business territory;
Whereas, finally, a number of employers’ organizations which have adopted
the system of family allowances have clearly pronounced themselves in favor
of the obligation;
The national congress of the Confederation of Christian Workers therefore
resolves:
(1) That family allowances be made legally obligatory through the medium
of existing trade and regional funds which satisfy certain conditions.
(2) That State control, notably in the fixing of the assessments for allow
ances and other regulations, be exercised through conferences of joint trade
65 International Labor Office. Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Mar. 2, 1923,
pp. 14, 15.
66 Idem, Aug. 10, 1923, p. 43.
67 Data furnished by the general secretary of the French Confederation o f Christian
Workers^ April 25, 1924.
68 Confederation franqaise des Travailleurs chr£tiens.
Circulaire mensuelle No. 45,
Paris, July 31, 1924, pp. 314, 315.

T H E OUTLOOK

commissions elected by organizations of the employers and workers interested,
In accordance with the principle of proportional representation.
(3) That the age limit of the children benefiting by allowances be not less
than 16 years, at least for those who are still pursuing their studies or whose
parents have apprenticed them under a regular contract.
(4) That at the time when the child reaches the age limit the discontinued
allowance shall correspond to the birth rank of that child.
(5) That no account be taken of the amount of salaries or wages, however
high these may be.
THE OUTLOOK

In 1924-25 new family allowance funds were in process of forma
tion and others were being planned.
A resolution at the May, 1924, congress of family allowance funds
favored the study of the possibilities of extending family allow
ances to all workers, manual and nonmanual, irrespective of the
amount of their regular remuneration.69 At the same convention
the director of the Central Committee on Family Allowances an
nounced that the family-allowance system was already being studied
by various groups in collaboration with the committee with a view
to establishing such system in some of the liberal professions.70
Smile Dollfus, the president of the Family Association of the
Industry of the Upper Rhine, has likened the system of family al
lowances to a young plant which will grow, declaring that the past
“ is a sure guaranty of the future.” 71
That the system of family allowances may be merely transitional
is suggested by Robert Pinot, wTho says: “ Like all human work, em
ployers’ institutions, either individual or collective, can not bring
about a definite solution to a problem the terms of which are in
perpetual evolution.” 72
Roger Picard mentions the possibility of the future conversion of
the employers’ contributions to family-allowance funds into obliga
tory payments for social insurance subsidized by the State, to which
the workers would also contribute.73
Victor Guesdon visualizes a potential family-allowance fund for
the whole nation—a federation of the various family-allowTance
funds, which would equalize the employers’ expenses for such allow
ances all over France.74
Indeed, the increasing interest of the State, in its assistance to
heads of families, notably to civil service employees, the rapid
development of the family-allowance system through inclusion in
contracts for public works, the repeated demands of trade-unions
for State control of family-allowance funds through joint trade
commissions, the diminishing antagonism among certain employers
to State intervention in connection with family allowances, and the
trend of the family-allowance fund movement toward centralization
seems to point to the assumption of further responsibility by the
Government in connection with these highly important experiments
with the “ social wage.”
«•Comity central des Allocations familiaies.
IV e Congrfes national des Allocations
familiaies, Mulhausen, May 2 6 -2 9 , 1924. Compte rendu. Lille, 1924, p. 110.
70 Idem, p. 99.
71 Idem, p. 125.
72-K?£otv R obert: Les Oeuvres sociales des Industries metallurgiques.
Paris, 1924,
pp. 156, 157%
Labor Office.
International Labor Review, Geneva, February, 1924,
p. 176 :
Family allowances in French industry,” by Roger Picard.
74 Guesdon, V ic to r: Le Mouvement de Creation et d’ Extension des Caisses des Alloca
tions familiaies. Paris, 1922, p. 198.

61243°—2<>----- 5

BELGIUM
The subject of family allowances has recently been attracting
much attention among Belgian industrial organizations and eco
nomic groups. The striking progress of the movement for such
allowances in France has no doubt given additional impetus to the
development of the family-allowance system in Belgium. In fact,
the secretary-treasurer of the Belgian Committee for the Study of
Family Allowances suggests that the success of the system in
Belgium is due in part to the fact that that country has had the
benefit of the comprehensive and “ quasi-scientific ” studies on this
subject which have been made in France.76
PUBLIC SERVICE
STATE n

The State Government of Belgium first instituted family allow
ances on March 1, 1920, 100 francs77 per annum being granted for
each child under 21 years of age, including stepchildren and legally
or actually adopted children for whose support a government em
ployee was wholly responsible. Two months later this grant was
raised to 0.50 franc per day, or 182.5 francs per annum, per de
pendent child, and on July 1, 1923, an allowance of 1 franc per
day per dependent child was provided. Allowances are granted
for abnormal children or those prevented from earning their living
by permanent infirmity or illness, irrespective of their ages, unless
such children have resources of their own. Female employees re
ceive family allowances provided they do not have husbands holding
remunerative State positions.
Allowances are paid temporary and part-time employees accord
ing to the number of days worked instead of by the year. Family
allowances are also paid when employees are temporarily relieved
from duty because of reorganization or discontinuance of operation
in the interest of the service, or because of ill health, but are not
paid when there is any question of such allowances taking the place
of a pension. Family allowances are not paid to substitutes nor to
persons in the State civil service called to the colors.
As will be seen from Table 6 a large proportion of the employees
in the various State services have no dependent children, about
47 per cent of the service as a whole receiving no family allowances:
75 Comity d’Etndes des Allocations familiales. Rapport pr£sent6 en stance du Novem
ber 15, 1923, par M. Paul Goldschmidt, secretaire, Brussels, 1923, p. 15.
76 The data on which this section is based was furnished by the Belgian Ministry of
Finance, July 26, 1924.
77 Franc at p a r = 1 9 .3 cen ts; exchange rate varies.

P U B L IC SERVICE
T a b le 6 .— NUM BER

OF G O V E R N M E N T EM P LO Y E E S, N U M B E R TH E R E O F R E C E IV
IN G F A M IL Y AL LO W A N C E S, A N D N U M B E R OF C H IL D R E N FOR W H O M A L L O W
A N CES AR E M A D E , JULY, 1924

Service

Agriculture__ ________ _________ _____ ___________ _______ _______
Public w orks____ ___ __ __ ______ ___ _______________ __ _____
Sciences and arts. ________ _______________ ________ __________ ___
Economic affairs
___ ______ ___________________________________
Industry and labor __________ ____ _____ ______________________ _
Interior and hygiene______ ___ _____ ______ ___ _____ ___________
C olonies
_ _ ____ __________________________________________
____
cvtirm»1 rlofrvnsp
.
TJVjrfliern affairs
Total.......................................................... ................ ..........................

Number of Number of
children
Number of employees for whom
employees receiving
family
family
allowances allowances
are made
1,303
3,375
4,955
5,266
2,960
644
1,141
358
8,113
140,842
647
15,344

709
1,875
% 065
1,901
551
275
461
157
3,974
69,428
193
5,060

1,570
3,975
4,125
4,017
936
570
936
318
6,795
126,983
331
10,422

184,948

86,649

160,978

The annual disbursements for family allowances in the different
services of the State for 1921, 1922, and 1923, are given in Table 7:
T a b le

7.—A M O U N TS PAID OUT B Y VARIOUS STATE SERVICES IN F A M IL Y AL LO W
ANCES, 1921, 1922, A N D 1923

Amounts paid i n State service
1921

Agriculture.....................
Public works........ ........
Justice.........................—
Sciences and arts-------Economic affairs---------Industry and labor----Interior and hygiene—,
Colonies...................... —
National defense...........
Railroads, marine, etc.
Foreign affairs............. .
Finance................... ........
Total____________

1922

1923

Francs
265,575
715,870
752,900

Francs
279,407
739,300
754,200

683.033

725,501

190,069
98,945
167,350
56,605
1,569,000
65,517
1,819,644

198,729
107,524
165,912
56,192
1,427,000
0)
76,707
1,873,597

Francs
430,964
1,090,225
1,134,500
1,116,537
276,026
161,897
261,754
83,932
1,860,000
27,321,973
99,178
2,919,793

6,384,508

6,404,069

36,756,779

! It was not possible to determine the exact amount of the family allowances as they were combined with
allowances for housing.

The payment of family allowances has not affected the basic
salaries, as these allowances are entirely separate fgom such salaries.
The civil-service employees are favorable to family allowances and
these grants also have the personal approbation of the SecretaryGeneral of the Ministry of Finance.
PROVINCES AND COMMUNES

During the war a number of Belgian local public services inaugu
rated family allowances. In the Provinces the same system as that

B ELG IU M

of the State service now prevails, but in the different communes the
system varies.78
In 1923 the city of Louvain granted to its workers 50 centimes
per day per dependent child under 16 years of age. In March of
the same year the city of Brussels voted to grant to its employees
75 centimes per day, or 273.75 francs per annum, per child. Several
other communes provided for family dependents of employees in the
cost-of-living bonuses. In Etterbeek a married municipal employee
who is the father of a family is allowed 19 francs per month and in
addition 30 francs a month per child. The annual salary of a single
man is limited to 8,000 francs and that of a married man without
children to 10,000 francs, while the father of a family may receive
10,000 francs and 1,000 francs additional per child. A father of 10
children may thus receive as much as 20,000 francs annually. Fur
thermore, the commune of Etterbeek exempts a household in which
there are two children under 15 years of age from paying a tax on
the first servant and one in which there are more than five children
from a tax on the first two servants.79
PRIVATE INDUSTRY

Family allowances were paid in private industry in Belgium as
far back as 1915, being paid by the coal mines of Tamines and of
Carabinier and Pont cle Loup. In 1919 the coal-mine operators of
Werister granted their workers 0.40 franc a day for a wife, 0.40
franc for the first child, 0.60 franc for the second, 0.80 franc for the
third, and 1 franc beginning with the fourth child. With a per
sonnel of 1,200 the sums disbursed in such allowances amounted to
as much as 140,000 francs per annum. On July 1, 1920, the coal
mines of Roton-Farciennes instituted family allowances. Shortly
afterwards the coal mines of Nord de Gilly, d’Ormon, de MarcinelleNord, and Noel- Sart-Culp art began to make these grants, the mines
of the Caroloregienne district paying 0.25 franc per day each for
the first and second child and 0.60 franc per day for each subsequent
child beginning with the third. In 1921 the building contractors of
Enghien-Saint filoi inaugurated an allowance of 15 francs per month
for the third child, 18 francs for the fourth child, and 21 francs for
subsequent children. They also grant unemployment and sick bene
fits and progressive reduction in the rents of workers with families
to support.80
The proportion of certain industrial workers under the familyallowanee system in 1923 is shown in Table 8.
78 Data furnished by the Secretary-General of Finance of Belgium, July 21, 1924.
TORevue du Travail, Brussels, May 1, 1923, p. 955.
80 Idem, July, 1923, p. 1 4 1 1 : “ Les Allocations familiales en Belgique/* by M. MidoL

PRIVATE IN DU STRY
T a b le 8 .— N U M B E R

OF E M P L O Y E E S IN VARIOUS P R IVAT E IN D U STR IES IN B E L G IU M
U N D E R T H E F A M IL Y -A L L O W A N C E SYSTEM AS CO M PAR ED W IT H T H E T O T A L
N U M B E R OF E M P L O Y E E S IN SUCH IN D U S T R IE S 1

Industry

Total
number
of em
ployees

Employees under
family-allowance
system
Number

Coal mines_____________________________ __ ______________ __________ ___
Iron, steel, and metal construction______ _________ ___ ________ _________
Quarries, cement, building industry_____________________________________
Special metals, chemical industries, ice manufacture, ceramics, and glass
manufactures, etc_____________________________________________________
Textiles................................................. .......................... ........ ................................
Food, paper, tobacco, and transportation_______________________________
Agricultural workers, and other industries not specified___________________
Home workers___ _____ _________ ____ ____ __________________________ __

Per cent

160,000
125.000
174.000

160,000
45.000
23.000

100
36
13

91,000
165.000
118.000
400.000
130.000

19.000
4,000
(2)
(3)
0

21
3

* Revue du Travail, Brussels, November, 1923, pp. 2329-2332.
* Not reported.
* None except in a few sporadic undertakings.

It was estimated that in the early part of August, 1924, nearly 20
per cent of the workers in private industry in Belgium were under
the family-allowance system.81
FAMILY-ALLOWANCE FUNDS

The first family-allowance fund was established on March 1,
1921, by the small mechanical industries, in the Verviers district,
39 firms being affiliated with the fund. The combined working
forces of these establishments numbered approximately 2,000. In
the beginning the allowance was 18 francs per month per child under
14 years of age, provided the worker “ had at least two children.”
The allowance, however, like the salary, varied according to the
cost-of-living index number.
After June 1, 1923, allowances were also paid for the first child,
the scale being 12, 20, 28, and 36 francs per month for the first,
second, third, and fourth child, respectively. On July 1, 1924, the
following monthly allowances were being paid: One child, 14 francs;
2 children, 38 francs; 3 children, 72 francs; each subsequent child,
43 francs.
This first family allowance fund did not receive whole-hearted
approval even in the industrial world and aroused opposition among
certain trade-unions, some labor leaders looking upon the scheme
as destructive to the system of equal pay for equal work.82
81 Data furnished by Willy Julin, of the Belgian Ministry of Industry and Labor.
Aug. 0, 1924.
83 Revue du Travail, Brussels, July, 1923, p . 1411: “ Les allocations familiales en
Belgique,” by M. Midol.

BELGIU M

Table 9 gives data as to the various family-allowance funds and
their operation in 1924:
9 . — N U M B E R OF FIRM S AFFILIA TE D W IT H B ELG IA N F A M IL Y -A L L O W A N C E
FUNDS, N U M B E R OF T H E IR EM PLOYEES, A N D T O T A L D ISBU RSEM EN TS FOR
B EN EFITS, 1924 i

T a b le

estui)lished or of
beginning
operations

Name of fund

Compensation Fund for FamilyAllowanees and Social Insurance of the
District of Verviers.............................
Compensation Fund for Family Allow
ances of Tournaisis...............................
National Fund for Family Allowances
and Social Insurance for Construc
tion and Public Works.......................
Family Allowance Fund of the Fed
eration of Zinc, Lead, Silver, Cop
per, and Nickel Foundries.................
Compensation Fund for Family
Allowances of the Chamber of Com
merce of Renaix.................... .............
Compensation Fund for Family
Allowances of the Liege Region.........
Compensation Fund for Family
Allowances of the Region of Char
leroi and La Basse-Sambre................
Compensation Fund for Family
A llowances of Brabant........................
Antwerp Association for the Distribu
tion of Family Allowances.................

Compensation

Fund

fo r

Family

Date figures
reported

Total disburse
Total ments for benefits
Num number
ber of of em
affili ployees Per
ated of affili month During
period
(ap
ated
firms
proxi of opera
firms
tion
mate)

Mar.

1,1921

July 31,1924

2,200

Francs
16,400

Francs
358,000

Sept.

1,1922

June 30,1924

5,000

42,300

977,000

Oct.

1,1922 ........do---------

178

12,000

73,000

1,370,000

14,300 235,000

3,253,000

........d<)

____

Nov.

1,1922

June 30,1924

Dec.

1,1922

...... do_____

143

July 31,1924

6,500

104,000

64,600 330,000

4,900,000

44,700

610,000

2,600

Feb.

1,1923

Aug. 31,1924

Mar.

1,1923

July 31,1924

Apr.

1,1923

.....do..........

...... do..........

2,300

20,000

112,000

(*)

3,600

32,000

•128,000

Allowances of the Quarries of the
Region of Soignies and Maffies.......... Jan.
1,1924
Provincial Compensation Fund for
Family Allowances of Antwerp........ .
(’ )

7,650

12,600 103,000 ; 1,340,000
5,050

58,000

612,000

i Bulletin du ComitS central industriel de Belgique, Nov. 19, 1924, pp. 1002-1007.
* Not reported.
* For 4 months of operation.

The number of firms affiliated with the family-allowance funds
listed in the above table is 578, representing 121,900 employees.
Among the industrial activities carried on by the firms included
under these 11 funds are: Machine shops, blast furnaces, steel and
• sheet-metal works, zinc, silver, copper, lead and nickel foundries,
glass manufacture, establishments affiliated with the Belgian Brew
ery Association, tanneries, dyeing establishments, manufacture of
arms, munition works, chocolate and confectionery establishments,
street railways, building and public works.83
On April 1, 1924, the only trade-union fund, the Federated Fund
of Christian Trade-Unions for the Payment of Family Allowances,
was established. Each member of the trade-union organizations
affiliated with the fund pays 275 francs per annum. The federation,
however, obligated itself to pay 75 per cent of the expenses for the
first nine months of the fund’s operation. All members of the af
filiated unions 21 years of age and over come under the plan.84
83 Bulletin du Comity central industriel de Belgique, Brussels, Nov. 19, 1924, p. 1007.
84 Revue du Travail, Brussels, March, 1924, pp. 494, 495.

PRIVATE IN D U ST R Y

In May, 1923, it was estimated that, exclusive of State and pro
vincial employees, there were between 225,000 and 250,000 covered
by the family-allowance funds and the coal-mine family-allowance
systems.85 The estimate in November, 1924, was 280,000 workers.
The amounts that had been distributed in family allowances and
birth bonuses up to the middle of 1924 by the funds approximated
14,000,000 francs. I f the allowances distributed by the coal mines
are added the sum would reach 30,000,000 francs.86 As previously
indicated, the family allowances disbursed by the Government in
1923 amounted to 36,756,779 francs.
Table 10 shows the changes in the number of firms affiliated with
the family-allowance funds and the number of their employees from
May, 1923, to the middle o f 1924:
10.—N U M B E R OF F IR M 8 A F F IL IA T E D W IT H B ELG IA N F A M IL Y -A L L O W A N C E
FUNDS A N D N U M B E R OF EM P LO Y E E S OF SUCH FIRMS M A Y 1, 1923, AS CO M
PAR ED W IT H T H E M ID D L E OF 1924»

T a b le

May 1,1923

Name of fund

Compensation Fund for Family Allowances and Social Insur
ance of the District of Verviers.......................................................
Compensation Fund for Family Allowances of Toumaisis..........
National Fund for Family Allowances and Social Insurance
for Construction and Public Works..............................................
Family Allowance Fund of the Federation of Zinc, Lead, Sil
ver, Copper, and Nickel Foundries— •_........................................
Compensation Fund for Family Allowances of the Chamber
of Commerce of Renaix....................................................................
Compensation Fund for Family Allowances of the Liege region.
Compensation Fund for Family Allowances of Soignies............ _
Compensation Fund for Family Allowances of the Region of
Charleroi and La Basse-Sambre.....................................................
Compensation Fund for Family Allowances of Brabant............
Antwerp Association for the Distribution of Family Allowances.
Compensation Fund for Family Allowances of the Quarries of
the Region of Soignies and Maffles................. .............................
Provincial Compensation Fund for Family Allowances of Ant
werp___ . . . . . . . . . ___________________ . . . _____ . . . . . . ________

Middle of 1924 *

Number
of
Number workers
Number
of affili employed of affili
ated
ated
by affili
firms
firms
ated
firms

39
30

Total
number
of em
ployees
of affili
ated
firms

1,973
5,461

38
36

2,200
5,000

170

10,000

178

12,000

11,997

14,300

16
83
8

2,195
35,097
2,000

22
143
(•)

2,600
54,600
(3)

416
31
6

4 5,681
5,513
2,500

30
79
24

7,650
12,600
5,050

(*)

(•)

2,300

(«)

(*)

3,600

i Revue du Travail, Brussels, July, 1923, pp. 1416-1419, Bulletin du Comity central industriel de Bel
gique, Brussels, Nov. 19, 1924, pp. 1002-1007.
* The exact date of the report for each fund is shown in Table 9.
8 Apparently was not functioning in October, 1923. Not listed in the 1923 report to the Committee for
the Study of Family Allowances.
4 In October, 1923. International Labor Office. Family allowances, Geneva, 1924, p. 77. Studies and
reports, Series D (wages and hours), No. 13.
* Not in existence on May 1, 1923.

On the whole, there has been considerable expansion of the familyallowance-fund system in the period specified. It will be noted
that there are 60 more establishments in the Liege fund in the middle
of 1924, than in May, 1923, that the family-allowance fund of the
region of Charleroi and La Basse-Sambre has almost doubled its af
filiated members, that of Brabant has increased from 31 to 79 estab
lishments, and the Antwerp Association from 6 to 24. One family85 Revue du Travail, Brussels, July, 1923, p. 1415.
86 Bulletin du Comity central industriel de Belgique, Brussels, Nov. 19, 1924, p. 1008.
The date up to which the coal-mine allowances are estimated is not given.

BELGIU M

allowance fund established in March, 1923, is omitted from the 1924
report. There were three funds, including the Christian trade-union
fund, established in 1924.
OPERATION OF FUNDS

The family-allowance funds are frequently organized as non
profit associations, in which case they have an administrative coun
cil. In other cases funds are administered by a commission com
posed of delegates from each region represented. In most instances
the assessments of establishments affiliated with the funds are based
on the total wage bills of such establishments or the number of
their employees. It is estimated that the granting of allowances
increases the general expenses of the establishments by an amount
equivalent to 2 per cent of the total pay roll. The administrative
expenses of the funds are paid from the combined assessments of
affiliated establishments.87
It would be practically impossible to institute exactly the same
regulations for family allowances throughout the whole country
because of the variations in population, statistical surveys showing
an average of 30 to 40 children under 14 years of age to 100 workers
in certain regions and as many as 230 children per 100 wTorkers in
others.
In Belgium, as in France and other countries, some industries
employ large numbers of adult males while in other industries the
employees are chiefly youthful workers. These marked differences
in the make-up of the working forces call for very flexible regula
tions. Statistical inquiries into the demographic conditions of the
various regions of the country and into the general composition of
the working force of a given industry before the rates of allowances
are fixed are therefore recommended by the secretary of the Com
mittee for the Study of Family Allowances.88
Because the birth rate in Belgium is generally somewhat higher,
at least in the Flemish country, than it is in France, the cost of the
system under the same scale of allowances would be greater in Bel
gium, but it is estimated that “ appreciable55grants could be made by
an assessment equal to 4 to 5 per cent of the pay roll.80 The sub
stantial additional expense involved in such grants, however, is cited
as among the obstacles to the extension of the family-allowance sys
tem in Belgium,00 which is still in an experimental stage.
In general, the regional or intertrade funds seem to be better
adapted to Belgian needs than the trade or interregional funds.
With a few exceptions, the proportion of children benefiting by
family allowances in similar industries in the same regions shows
very little variation.91
The trade or interregional funds, with affiliated members all over
the country, are confronted with many serious problems of adminis
87 Data furnished by W illy Julin, of the Belgian Ministry o f Industry and Lahor,
Aug. 9, 1924.
88 Comity d’lStudes des Allocations familiales.
Rapport presents en stance, Nov.
14, 1923, par Paul Goldschmidt, secretaire. Brussels, 1923, p. 5.
80 Revue du Travail, Brussels, May, 1923, p. 962.
80 Comite d’fitudes des Allocations familiales.
Rapport presente en seance, Nov.
14, 1923, par Paul Goldschmidt, secretaire, Brussels, 1923, p. 11.
91 Idem, pp. 5, 6.

PRIVATE IN D U STRY

tration, especially because of lack of uniformity in the amounts of
allowances in the same industries. In the case of construction and
public works, however, the trade fund is apparently preferable.
The National Fund for Family Allowances and Social Insurance for
Construction and Public Works has operations all over the country,
procuring its labor from various districts. The number employed is
extremely variable. The construction firms would not find it easy
to become members of regional funds, and it would seriously incon
venience such funds to admit these firms to membership.91
On the other hand, the regional funds are made up of different
industries and the composition of the working forces of these in
dustries varies considerably in the matter of family responsibilities.
The French practice of reducing assessments for industries employ
ing large numbers of young persons has been suggested as a solution
to this difficulty.91
MANNER OF PAYM EN T OF A L LO W A N C E S92

In order to make a clear-cut distinction between the family allow
ance and wages, family-allowanee funds ordinarily pay such allow
ance at the worker’s home. When the father and mother are employed
by different establishments, one only is entitled to an allowance. I f
both husband and wife are working, one in an establishment affiliated
with a fund and the other in an establishment not affiliated with a
fund or one is a home worker, or a merchant, or follows some other
trade, the one working in the establishment affiliated with a fund
may receive only one-half of the family allowance.
AGE LIM ITS OF CHILD BENEFICIARIES

Some funds limit the allowances to children under 14 years of
age and some to children under 15 years of age, while others include
children up to 16 years of age.92 The Verviers fund pays allow
ances for children up to 16 years of age who daily attend school.
The fund for building and public works makes grants for children
over 14 years of age who are delicate and for children up to 16 years
of age who are apprenticed or who attend trade schools.93
F A M IL Y -A LL 0 W ANCE RATES

The family-allowanee rates being paid by the various funds in the
middle of 1924 were as follows: 94
District of Verviers fund.—One child, 14 francs; two children, 38 francs;
three children, 72 francs; each subsequent child, 43 francs p6r month.
Tournaisis fund.—First child, 0.50 franc; second child, 0.50 franc; third
child, 0.75 franc ; each subsequent child, 1 franc per day.
National-construction and puMic-works fund.—First child, 10 francs; second
child, 12 francs; third child, 14 francs; each subsequent child, 16 francs per
month.
Federation of Zinc, Lead, Silver. Copper, and Nickel Foundries fund.—Re
gion of Antwerp: Second and each subsequent child, 15 francs. Region of
Campine: First child, 15 francs; each subsequent child, 25 francs. Region of
81 Comity d’Etudes des Allocations familiales.
Rapport presents en stance, Nov. 1 4 ,
1923, par Paul Goldschmidt, secretaire, Brussels, 1923, pp. 5, 6.
92
Data furnished by W illy Julin, of the Belgian M inistry o f Industry and Labor,
Aug. 9, 1924.
* Bulletin du Comity central industriel de Belgique, Brussels, Nov. 19, 1924, pp. 1002*
1003.
Idem, pp. 1 0 0 2 -1 0 0 7 .

BE L G IU M

Liege: First and second children, 15 francs each; third child, 30 francs; each
subsequent child, 40 francs per month.
Chamber of Commerce of Remix fund.—Third child, 0.50 franc; fourth
child, 0.50 franc; each subsequent child, 1 franc per day.
Liege Region fund.—First child, 10 francs; second child, 20 francs; third
child, 30 francs; each subsequent child, 40 francs per month.
Region of Charleroi and La Basse-Sam'bre fund.—First child, 10 francs;
second child, 20 francs; third child, 30 francs; each subsequent child, 40 francs
per month.
Brabant fund.—First child, 10 francs; second child, 20 francs; each subse
quent child, 30 francs per month.
Antwerp Association fund.—Each child, 16.50 francs per month.
Quarries of the Region of Soignies and Maffles fund.—One child, 0.25 franc;
two children, 1.50 francs; three children, 3 francs; four children, 4.50 francs;
five children, 6 francs; each subsequent child, 1.50 francs per day.
Antwerp provincial fund.—First child, 10 francs; second child, 20 francs;
third child, 30 francs; each subsequent child, 40 francs per month.
Federated Fund of Christian Trade-TJniom—Third and each subsequent
child under 16 years of age, 500 francs per annum.

In the majority of these funds the family-allowance rate is a
monthly one, being a daily rate in only three cases. The Christian
trade-union-fund benefit is reported as 500 francs per annum, but
it is possible that this amount is paid in installments.
The daily rates range from 0.25 to 0.50 franc for the first child;
0.50 to 1.25 francs for the second child; from 0.50 to 1.50 francs for
each subsequent child. The fund of the Chamber of Commerce of
Renaix, however, which has daily rates, pays no allowance for the
first two children.
The monthly rates range from 10 to 16.50 francs for the first
child; 12 to 24 francs for the second; from 14 to 34 francs for the
third; 16 to 43 francs for each subsequent child. The only instance
in which the first child receives no monthly rate is under the Family
Allowance Fund of the Federation of Zinc, Lead, Silver, Copper,
and Nickel Foundries in the Antwerp region. In the region of
Campine and Liege this fund makes grants for the first child.
In the coal mines and certain glass works which are not members
o f funds the amounts of family allowances the workers receive
also vary, but in general they are 10 fi*ancs per month for the first
child, 20 francs for the second, 30 francs for the third, and 40
francs for each subsequent child. In some districts the first child re
ceives no allowance.90
B IR T H BONUSES

All but two of the family-allowance funds are reported as grant
ing birth bonuses. The amount per birth, however, is not given
for the Antwerp Association, although such bonuses are included in
the statement of monthly expenditures for allowances.
The various amounts paid by these funds as birth bonuses are as
follows: 97
District of Verviers fund.—First birth, 190 francs; each subsequent birth,
145 francs.
05 Revue du Travail, Brussels, March, 1924, pp. 1416, 1417.
06 Data furnished by W illy Julin, of the Belgian Ministry o f Industry and Labor,
Aug. 9, 1924.
97 Bulletin du Comite central industriel de Belgique, Brussels, Nov. 19, 1924, pp.
1 0 0 2 -1 0 0 7 .

PRIVATE IN D U STRY

NaHonal-constructi&n, and public-worhs fund.—Each birth, 100 francs.
Federation of Zinc, Lead, Silver, Copper, and Nickel Foundries fund.—
First birth, 150 francs; second birth, 200 francs; each subsequent birth, 250
francs.
Chamber of Commerce of Renaix fund.—Each birth, 100 francs.
Liege Region fund.—First birth, 250 francs; each subsequent birth, 150
francs.
Region of Charleroi and La Basse-Sambre fund.—First birth, 250 francs;
each subsequent birth, 150 francs.
Brabant fund.—First birth, 250 francs; each subsequent birth, 150 francs.
Antwerp provincial fund.—First birth, 250 francs; each subsequent birth,
150 francs.
Federated Fund of Christian Trade-Unions.*8—Each birth, 200 francs.

Two funds give the same amount for each birth—100 francs, while
the Christian trade-union fund pays 200 francs for each birth. One
fund grants 190 francs for the first birth and 145 francs for each
subsequent birth; another fund, 150 francs for the first birth, 200
francs for the second, and 250 francs for each subsequent birth;
while four funds have adopted the practice of giving 250 francs for
the first birth and 150 francs for subsequent births.
ALLOW ANCES UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES

In case of unemployment or accident family allowances are con
tinued, but workers on strike forfeit these grants." In the Verviers
fund these grants are made during involuntary unemployment for
not more than three months, but this period may be extended if
conditions warrant such action. Regulations for allowances during
unemployment are also applied to absence for military service. The
fund for building and public works makes allowances during the
*
pJ1
1 r and f or three months in case of illness
)f Soignies and Maffles pays family al
lowances to workers injured in accidents during the period for
which they are entitled to compensation for temporary disability and
in cases of illness during the current and the following month.
When workers who have been receiving allowances die, these grants
are continued for their children for three months.2
W ELFARE W ORK

The Verviers fund employs a visiting nurse who is a graduate
midwife, and her services are available Doth before and after con
finement.3 The Liege and Brabant funds are reported as having
notable visiting-nurse services, with allied activities.4 A resolution
passed by the first congress of the family-allowance funds commends
the activities of these funds along these lines (see p. 70) and recom
mends the extension of welfare work to all funds.
,e8 Revue du Travail, Brussels, March, 1924, pp. 1416, 1417.
" D a t a furnished by W illy Julin, of the Belgian M inistry of Industry and Labor.
Aug. 9, 1924.
1 Bulletin du Comit6 central industriel de Belgique, Brussels, Nov. 19. 1924. pp. 1002.
1003.
2 Idem, p. 1006.
4 Idem, p. 1002.
* L a JournSe industrielle!, Paris, Nov. 9, 10, 1924, p. 7.

B ELGIU M
TREND TOW ARD CENTRALIZATION

Toward the close of 1922 the national-construction and publicworks fund, the regional funds of Verviers and Tournaisis, the fund
of the Renaix Chamber of Commerce, and the fund of the Federation
of Lead, Zinc, Silver, Copper, and Nickel Foundries held a confer
ence to discuss their experiences and to compare the results of in
vestigations which they had made. At this conference the Committee
for the Study of Family Allowances was organized. The purpose
of this committee is to coordinate the principles adopted in the dif
ferent regions and industries in order to avoid in the future certain
inequalities in the situation of the workers in similar or allied in
dustries. The committee is not to interfere with the autonomy of
existing funds or funds in process of organization, but merely to
be a link between them, to gather information which may be of
service to them, and to study in a general way the technical, demo
graphic, juridical, and social problems which the establishment of
the family-allowance system has created.5
FIRST CONGRESS*

The first congress of the Belgian family-allowance funds was held
at Brussels November 4, 1924. The congress was called by Henri
Lechat, the president of the Committee for the Study of Family
Allowances and the founder of the Liege fund, and more than 200
employers were present. Among the subjects discussed were the
operation of certain funds, the division of costs relative to family
allowances, the legal aspects of family allowances, and government
aid in connection with such grants. The following resolution was
passed:
Considering the results secured up to the present by the institution of fam
ily allowances in private industry and by the initiative of employers,
The congress desires to see family-allowance funds become general in Bel
gium and their operation extended under a system of freedom and also to
see public and private organizations regard as essential the family-allowance
principle in the interest of working families.
Considering the result obtained in the matter of infantile and general
hygiene by the organization of the visiting-nurse services and related activities
inaugurated by certain funds, notably by those of Liege, Brabant, and
Verviers,
The congress desires to see family-allowance funds follow these lines for
the well-being and health of the children of the workers.

That the development of the movement for family allowances
and funds in France and Belgium tended to bring about a closer
collaboration between the two countries, which was conducive to
the success of their common efforts, was pointed out by C. Bonvoisin, the director of the French Committee on Family Allowances.
5
Data furnished by W illy Julin, of the Belgian Ministry of Industry and Labor,
Aug. 9, 1924.
e La Journ^e industrielle, Paris, Nov. 9, 10, 1924, p. 7 ; Btdletin du Comity eentVal
tndustriel de Belgique, Brussels, Nov. 12, 1924, pp. 971, 972.
For proceedings o f the
congress see Comit6 d’lStudes des Allocations familiales, Congres Restreint des Caisses de
Compensation pour Allocations familiales, Brussels, Nov, 4, 1924, compte rendu, Brus
sels [19251.

V IEW PO IN TS

CONTRACTS FOR PUBLIC WORK

Certain public administrations in Belgium have made it obligatory
for contractors for public work to affiliate with a family-allowance
fund or to pay family allowances themselves to their workers.7
On January 31,1924, a bill was introduced in the Chamber of Rep
resentatives which would make obligatory the inclusion of a pro
vision for family allowances in contracts for public work for the
State. The bill provided that preference should be given to con
tractors affiliated with family-allowance funds which grant a mini
mum of 10 francs per month for each child under 14 years of age.
In comparing amounts of bids the bids of nonaffiliated contrac
tors were to be increased 2 per cent and such a contractor was to be
required to pay his workers and office employees an allowance of 0.50
franc per day for each child under 14 years. In case of nonpayment
of the allowances the State was to pay the same to the employees
entitled thereto and to deduct the amounts paid from the sum due
the contractor. These allowances were not to be taken into account
in determining the minimum wage to be paid by the contractor. The
object of the bill was to increase affiliations with fafhily-allowance
funds.
The Belgian Committee for the Study of Family Allowances op
posed the bill. It pointed out that the system of family allowances
is being regarded more and more favorably by industry, that the
workers’ families are grateful for the benefits accorded thereunder,
and that the public hopes for happy social results therefrom. All
this, however, the committee declared, was compromised by this bill,
which had been hurriedly formulated without consultation either with
the parties interested or those competent to advise on the subject.
Instead of benefiting the fathers of families, such a law would ex
clude them from all kinds of public work. The bill failed of
passage.
VIEWPOINTS
EMPLOYERS

In addition to the attempt to make family allowances obligatory
in contracts for public works in Belgium there have been various
proposals to place the whole system under the Government. The
attitude of Belgian employers toward such a plan, it would seem, is
very similar to that of the French industrialists, namely, that it is
repugnant to them to have a voluntary liberality made compulsory;
that the efficacy of the system depends upon its flexibility and free
dom; that legal restraint would render the system futile, would
create artificial costs without consideration for the possibilities of
the individual industry, would lead to the imposition of a disguised
but enormous tax to be used for the most part to meet the vast ex
pense of official administration. In brief, making the system general
and uniform through legal action would be an “ economic impossi
’ Data furnished by the secretary general of the International Organization of Indus
trial Employers, Sept. 17, 1924.

B ELGIU M

bility.” 8 The elimination of the element o f liberality would seri
ously compromise the maintenance of Belgium’s production.9
At the first congress of the Belgian family-allowance funds the
statement was made by George Herlant that to make family allow
ances compulsory by law “ would ruin, without profit to anyone, a
precious guaranty of social peace.” 10 He declared that there is u no
connection between the payment which constitutes an allowance and
the work furnished. The father of a family who receives the allow
ance works no more and no better than the single man who is ex
cluded. Moreover, he continues to receive it, although absent from
the shop as a result of illness or accident.” A recent amendment to
the income-tax law which exempts from taxation 66family allowances
granted for each dependent child beyond three,” but not exempting
the allowances for the first three children, is criticized by Herlant as
a “ hybrid solution.”11
As the trade-unionists have objected to the term “ liberality ” in
connection with the granting of allowances, the secretary of the
Committee for the Study of Family Allowances points out that
“ liberality ” does not mean beneficence and that there is nothing
whatever in *the principle or application of allowances which is
hurtful to the dignity of the beneficiaries,12 and suggests the substi
tution of the term “ mutual interest ” (solidarity) for “ liberality.” 10
The family-allowance system does not create antagonism between
husbands and wives but rather tends to harmonize marital relations,
as under it the woman has her special role and domain,18 according
to one of the speakers at the first congress of family-allowance funds.
The family-allowance system tends to break down the barriers be
tween labor and capital—between employers, overwhelmed with
commercial anl technical problems, and the workers, who are in
closer touch with trade-unions than with the managers of industrial
establishments, according to a report presented at the meeting of
the Committee for the Study of Family Allowances in November,
1923.14 The very large and the less important industrial undertak
ings are also brought together through the funds.
It is felt that in “ the present economic and social chaos solutions
should be sought in the way of bringing the classes together and not
by way of struggle, and that production will be improved when
important classes of workers, and among them the most worthy, will
be less a prey to material cares which are difficult to surmount.”15
Willy Julin, of the Belgian Ministry of Labor, also refers to this
conviction of the employers that family allowances will tend to
create better industrial relations. He speaks specifically of their
hope, through regulations providing that these grants shall depend
8 ComitS d’lStudes des Allocations familiales.
Rapport present# en stance, Nov. 14,
1923, par Paul Goldschmidt, secretaire. Brussels, 1923, p. 13.
0 Idem, p. 4.
10 Bulletin du Comity central industriel de Belgique, Brussels, Nov. 12, 1924, p. 9S0.
11 Idem, pp. 974, 978.
12 Idem, Nov. 19, 1924, p. 1010.
13 Idem, Nov. 12, 1924, p. 977.
11 Comity d’ Etudes des Allocations familiales. Rai>port presents en stance, Nov. 14,
1923, par Paul Goldschmidt, secretaire. B ru ^ ols, 19*23, p. 4.
15 Bulletin du ComitS central industriel de Belgique, Brussels, Nov. 19, 1 9 24, p. 1001.

V IE W PO IN TS

upon the workers’ presence at the factory for fixed periods, to stabil
ize their labor forces, notably by preventing strikes among those
receiving these benefits. Family allowances, they claim, have already
increased the diligence of workers and effected a notable reduction
in Monday absences from industrial plants.
Probably one of the most enthusiastic statements in regard to this
new system in Belgium is the following, by the secretary of the Com
mittee for the Study of Family Allowances:
A flexible and exact plan and a well thought-out terminology have permitted
the realization of tlie most truly democratic and fruitful of reforms—one of
the most far-reaching and important social reforms of the era of big industry.17
LABOR ORGANIZATIONS

A substantial number of trade-union leaders look upon the familyallowance system as a “ war machine.” Many of the rank and file of
the workers, however, are favorable to the institution, and antago
nism to the system seems to be on the wane.18 A brief resume of
some of labor’s views in connection with the progress of the move
ment is given below:
TRADE-UNION COMMISSION OF BELGIUM AND A F FIL IA TE D ORGANIZATIONS

The opposition of the Socialist unions is said to have impeded the
advance of the family-allowance movement in Belgium.19
In December, 1922, speaking of the family-allowance system, J.
Bondas, then assistant secretary of the Trade-Union Commission,
said that “ he was quite disposed to support a project which will be
come better established.” He was, however, in accord with his
fellow unionists in wishing to reject the gilded chain offered by the
“ public-spirited ” employers whose liberalties were prompted by
self-interest.20
Less than two months later the following resolution was adopted
by the National Committee of the Trade-Union Commission:21
The National Committee of the Trade-Union Commission assembled on Feb
ruary 6, 1923, to examine the problem of “ family allowances ”—
Points out, in the first place, that the essentially socialistic principle “ each
according to his needs ” has always been supported by the Belgian trade-union
committee; that in the application of this rule a large number of trade-union
organizations long ago incorporated in their system of indemnities of all kinds
a supplement for the wife of the beneficiary and for his children under 14 or
16 years of age;
Recognizes that aid and assistance to large families are necessary and indis
pensable in the interest of the proletariat.
But the committee is not deceived by the action of the employer who is
not really philanthropic but who has in view only the subjugation of the
workers, not only in the factory but even in their homes.
It considers, on the other hand, that charity debases him who receives it
more than him who bestows it, and this being so, labor organizations can accept
only a system based on social solidarity.
17 Comit6 d’Etudes des Allocations familiales. Rapport presents en seance, Nov. 14,
1923, par Paul Goldschmidt, secretaire. Brasses. 1923. p. 15.
18 Data furnished by W illy Julin of the Belgian Ministry of Industry and Labor, Aug.
9, 1924.
19 L a Journee industrielle, Paris, Nov. 9 -1 0 , 1924, p. 7.
20 Les “ Cahiers ” de la Commission syndicale de Belgique, No. 2, Brussels, December,
1922, p. 2 8 : “ Le sursalaire et les allocations fam iliales.” by J. Bondas.
21 Le Mouvement syndical Beige, Brussels, Feb. 17, 1923, p. 51.

BELGIU M

The National Committee believes that family allowances as well as birth
bonuses and nursing allowances constitute social services which it is the duty
of the community to provide, as it has provided protection against involuntary
unemployment, industrial accidents, sickness, invalidity, and old age.
It demands these allowances as an inalienable social right entirely independ
ent of work and wages.
Urges the affiliated organizations to accept the principles enunciated in the
present resolution, and to instruct tlieir delegates to take definite action at
the national congress of the Trade-Union Commission.

This resolution was approved by the twenty-second national tradeunion congress at Brussels the following July, the congress direct
ing the bureau of the National Committee to confer with the Social
ist members of Parliament on the most effective means of providing
family allowances by law.22
The congress also requested its affiliated bodies to oppose strongly
“ employers who would impose family allowances by means of
promises binding the workers.” 23
As further illustrating the trade-union attitude in the matter of
family allowances disclosed in the above resolutions, it may be noted
that at the 1923 congress the assistant secretary of the Trade-Union
Commission held that by paying these benefits employers hoped to
create divisions among the workers to divert them, and to 44classify '’
them. Fathers of families will be benefited, and therefore in indus
trial controversies there will not be the same unanimity among the
workers, as some will fear to forfeit their allowances. Employers
may well look forward to accomplishing much through these grants
if the trade-unions are not vigilant in exposing the motives of these
industrialists.24 The workers were counseled to avail themselves of
the advantages employers are willing to grant but to deflect them
from their original purpose. Even the regulation of family allow
ances by law, how7ever, will leave the employer opportunities for
dominating over the workers in connection with these grants, accord
ing to ttie same speaker.25
Another trade-unionist at this congress advocated propaganda for
the legalization of family allowances as the most effective method of
fighting the system, suggesting that if these benefits were made
compulsory employers themselves would wish to abolish the system.2®
In the spring of 1923 various congresses of Belgian federated
trade-unions affiliated with the Trade-Union Commission passed
resolutions on family allowances, among them that of the National
Federation of Belgian Miners on March 17-19, which directed its
delegates to urge employers to make family allowances general and
to regulate them by a national agreement.27 The bookbinders at
their twenty-fifth congress decided that they could not support the
family-allowanee system in the printing industry unless such system
was made general by a collective agreement determining the method
of application.28
22 Le Mouvement syndical Beige, Brussels, Aug. 4, 1923, p. 227.
23 Commission syndicale de Belgique. X X I I e Congrfcs syndieal, July 27 and 28, 1923,
Compte rendu stenographique. Brussels, 1923, pp. 94, 95.
28 Idem,’ pp.* 87,’ 88*
26 Idem, pp. 92, 94.
27 Commission syndicale de Belgique.
Rapport annuel pour 1923.
p. 15.
28 International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information,
1923. p. 12.

Brussels
Geneva,

[1 9 2 4 ],

June 8,

VIEW PO IN TS

At the annual congress of the Federation of Belgian Metal Work
ers* Brussels, April 22, 1923, a report on family allowances was
submitted and a resolution adopted almost unanimously, urging that
these benefits be made general by means of “ legislation regulating
the conditions for the granting of allowances under the supervision
of public authorities in cooperation with the workers’ organizations,”
and that the administration of family-allowance funds should be in
the hands of the workers themselves.29 At a previous meeting of the
Federation of the Metal Workers it had been suggested that such
allowances be accepted and used to swell the organization’s strike
fund.30
The Federation of Stone Workers in its session of April 29, 1923,
adopted a resolution that its members demand of employers the
same wage for the same work under the same condition. It was
emphasized, however, that such demand will never be met by em
ployers who refuse to grant wage increases or who defend wage
reductions on the ground of payment of family allowances or who
pay allowances at the same time they pay wages and for the same
period.31 Legally regulated family allowances were favored by the
May, 1923, congress of the glass workers and the congress held the
following July by the food and agricultural workers, the former
body taking the stand that family-allowance funds “ should be taken
over by the State.” 32
The National Congress of Miners in March, 1924, demanded the
immediate examination of a proposal for a system of family allow
ances which had been submitted by the National Federation of
Miners to the National Joint Commission of Mines.83
C H R IST IA N TRADE-UNIONS

The Belgian Christian Trade-Union Workers have been in favor
of the family-allowance system from the beginning.34 Various spe
cial sessions have been held by them for the consideration of this
subject, at which a number of the discussions centered around the
question as to whether these benefits should be confined to large
families.35
In a circular issued by the Confederation of Christian TradeUnions to various Christian trade-union propagandists, emphasis
was laid on the distinction that “ it is proper to establish between
the wage, which is remuneration for labor furnished, and family
allowances, benefits paid to workers having family responsibilities.”
This distinction it felt was necessary to prevent the fixing of wages
in a manner which would adversely affect the minimum wage. It
was also pointed out that to fix wages in accordance with the number
29 International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, May 11,
1023, p. 3.
80 Commission syndieale de Belgique. X X I I e cocgrfcs July 27 and 28, 1923.
Compte
rendu stenograph ique. Brussels, 1923, p. 83.
81 Commission' syndicate de Belgique.
Ilapport annuel pour 1923.
Brussels [1 9 24 ],
pp. 19. 20.
32 International Labor Office, Industrial and Labor Information, Brussels, June 8, 1923.
p. 1 2 ; Commission syndicate de Belgique, Rapport annuel pour 1923, Brussels [1 9 2 4 ],
p. 25.
83 Revue du Travail, Brussels, March, 1924, p. 491.
34 Idem, July, 1923, p. 1413.
35 Idem, February, 1923, p. 250.

01243°-—26------ 6

B ELG IU M

of dependent children and not in accordance with the work per
formed would have grave economic drawbacks, for the extinction
of the hope of receiving a larger wage for more and better work
tends to paralyze the efforts of ambitious workers to equip them
selves for more highly skilled service. Workers were advised not
to regard family allowances as the employers’ liberality or charity,
but as “ industry’s debt to large families ” which are a guaranty of
a future labor supply.85
In May, 1928, the sixth congress of the confederation, which met
at Antwerp, passed the following resolution: 36
(1) The congress reaffirms the decision of the fifth congress of Christian
trade-unions demanding as a fair wage remuneration commensurate with the
work done, and as a minimum wage a sum sufficient for the needs of a family
of average size;
(2) Appeals to the affiliated organizations to continue trade-union action
with a view to securing such wages;
(3) Reaffirms the demand of the fifth congress of Christian trade-unions for
the allocation of family allowances to families with more than the average
number of children;
(4) Declares that family allowances represent an act of solidarity on the
part of industry as a whole with regard to workers with more than an average
number of children, and that such allowances must not prevent the workers
from securing an adequate wage as defined above, nor should the introduction
of a system of family allowances be allowed to lead to the adoption of the socalled “ relative family wage/’ i. e., remuneration of labor based on the indi
vidual needs of each worker;
(5) Considers that a system of family allowances consisting in the payment
of a comparatively small allowance for small families and a much larger allow
ance for children in excess of the average number, is not necessarily contrary
to the principles set forth but is of opinion that it is always preferable to
grant allowances only to families with more than an average number of chil
dren ;
(6) Reaffirms also the decision declaring that family allowances should be
paid by national compensation funds set up for each industry and subsidized
by the State;
(7) Protests against the proceedings of certain employers who take ad
vantage of the position of workers with heavy family responsibilities to restrict
the liberties of workers and even to assume a certain control over their private
life ;
(8) Declares that, contrary to the views expressed by certain employers,
the workers are entitled to share in the administration of the compensation
funds just as much as the employers, and reaffirms the demand of the fifth
congress of Christian trade-unions that compensation funds should be adminis
tered by joint committees, consisting of representatives of the workers’ and
employers’ organizations;
(9) Declares that it is the duty of the affiliated organizations (a) to en
deavor to secure adequate representation in the administration of existing
compensation funds, and (&) to take every opportunity to enforce the recogni
tion of the principles set forth above;
(10) Considers that in order to prevent abuses in the application of the
family-allowance system, it is essential that the system should be regulated
by law.

In 1923 the Federation of Christian Miners laid before the Na
tional Joint Commission of Mines a tentative agreement on family
allowances, which included the establishment of a family-allowance
fund for the coal industry of Belgium.37 Among some of the in
teresting features of this proposal were the following: The miners
themselves were to contribute a certain percentage o f their salaries
35 Revue du Travail, Brussels, February, 1923, p. 250.
86
International Labor Office. Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, June 2 9 , 1923,
pp. 18, 19.
37 Revue du Travail, Brussels, June, 1923, pp. 11 2 5 -11 2 7 .

VIE W PO IN TS

to the fund; the employers were to pay into it an equal percentage,
the amount of such percentage to be determined by the council of
administration of the national family-allowance fund. A com
mittee of eight representatives of employers and eight trade-union
delegates were to administer the fund.
SOCIAL ORGANIZATIONS, PUBLIC OFFICIALS, AND SOCIOLOGISTS

Social organizations.—The Christian Federation of the Middle
Classes created a commission of inquiry with a view to establishing
an intertrade family-allowance fund for the Flemish country, the
birth rate in that section differing from that of other parts of Bel
gium.38
The plan recommended by the commission included a wage to
the head of a normal family which would be adequate without sup
plements, and allowances for children, beginning with the third, up
to 14 years of age. The suggested amounts for such allowances were
25 francs per month for the third child, 30 francs for the fourth,
and 40 francs for subsequent children. To receive allowances the
worker must have been in the service of the employer for two
months. The proposed assessment for the family-allowance fund
was 2 per cent of the total pay roll, including both manual and
nonmanual workers.88
The Committee on Large Families at its meeting on April 30,
1923,39 adopted a number of conclusions and resolutions concerning
family allowances, which not only show how strongly that body ad
vocates such allowances but also analyze the principles upon which
the practice of making these grants is based. For example, the com
mittee declares that it is reasonable to consider the “ social value of
the father of a family ” in addition to his value as a worker; that the
family is actually the source of “ the necessary renewal of all human
forces and activities, and that the father of a family assures to the
society in which he lives future prosperity and security, while the
celibate and the childless married worker generally provide only for
their personal needs.” It is equitable that society should fully com
pensate the father of a family because of the benefits society secures
from his assumption of responsibilities. It is also pointed out that
employers have a special interest in the stability and renewal of their
labor supply. On the other hand, the committee emphasizes the
importance of making a clear-cut distinction between the remunera
tion for the labor of a father of a family and the payment for his
socio-economic services.
In the judgment of the committee compensation funds for family
allowances are the best institutions known for carrying out the theo
ries just cited. Large families themselves are, of course, particularly
interested in seeing the movement for the establishment of such
institutions extended as far as possible to all kinds of workers, intel
lectual as well as manual.
The committee also holds that the most equitable and most prac
ticable way to solve the difficulties of large families is the granting
of allowances in proportion to the responsibilities and services of
such families. Furthermore, these grants must never be confounded
88 La Femme Beige, Brussels, May, 1923, pp. 781, 782.
80 Revue du Travail, Brussels, M ay, 1923, pp. 963, 964.

BELGIU M

with the assistance given needy families. The amount of the family
allowances should be increased sufficiently to correspond to the re
sponsibilities for which the grants are made. As the inadequacy
of salaries and actual wages is particularly obvious in the case of
large families and the available sums for the payment of allow
ances are limited, the committee suggests that the needs of such
families be provided for first of all by granting them higher allow
ances than the families which have few children.
It is recommended that the allowance per child per day should not
be less than 1 franc after the family has four children, and that
amount should be increased as soon as possible to 2 francs per
child per day. The suggested age limit is 16 years, except in cases
where older children are dependent upon the head of the family
because of more advanced courses of study, apprenticeship, or poor
health.
The committee is in favor of continuing allowances under condi
tions to be defined, in case of the unemployment, sickness, invalidity,
or disability through accident or death of the head of the family, and
possibly in other circumstances.
The State, Provinces, and communes, the committee believes,
should encourage the expansion of the family-allowance system,
and it suggests the propriety of these respective governments mak
ing at least as large grants as are made in private enterprises.
The practice of paying wages on the “ standard-family ” basis is
declared to be illogical in a report to the Committee on Large
Families published in the Revue du Travail, May, 1923 (pp. 956,
957). Why, it is asked, should the wages of all persons that have
families to support be measured by the responsibilities of some?
The responsibilities of males at least 21 years of age are, accord
ing to this report, as follows: 42.6 per cent have no family responsi
bilities; 14.6 per cent have 1 child; 13.1 per cent have 2 children;
9.2 per cent have 3 children; 20.5 per cent have 4 children or more.
It will be noted that only 29.7 per cent have more than 2 children.
The report further declares that neither public administration
nor private industry would be able to meet the expense of paying
wages to every adult male sufficient for him to raise a large family
according to the modern standard of living. Even if such a wage
could be paid from Belgium’s present resources, it would not bring
about the hoped-for results, because this would give the majority of
the population abundant means, which would lead to high prices and
the rise of the general standard of living, and large families would
still be at a great disadvantage.
The uniform increase of wages is an advantage to those without
family responsibilities and results in “ inequality between the single
worker and the worker who is the father of a family.” The con
clusion is that “ resources should be proportioned to responsibilities.”
Heads of families should be better provided for than adults without
children. u I f not, life will become impossible for families, above all
for large families, and they will disappear.”
The third congress of the League for Large Families of Belgium
held at Brussels in the latter part of October, 1923, thanked the in
dustrial employers “ who have generously undertaken to establish

VIEW PO IN TS

the family-allowance system, a highly humanitarian reform.” 40
The congress also recommended extensive propaganda by the various
regional sections of the league, especially the Flemish section, with
a view to including under the system all. classes of workers, both
manual and nonmanual; that the central committee endeavor in the
most effective way to bring about the provision for family allowances
in contracts for public works; that the allowance be fixed on a pro
gressive scale and the amounts be “ really efficacious for large
families, due account being taken of local conditions.” 41
Among the Belgian assemblies of 1924 which specifically favored
family allowances were the congress of the Federation of Christian
Stone, Cement, Ceramic, and Glass Workers, the congress of the
National League of Christian Workers, and the National Congress
of Women’s Christian Social Work of Belgium (the biennial con
gress of an organization closely allied with the Catholic women’s
trade-union movement).42
Public officials.—In a public address before the conference of the
League for Large Families, at Brussels, June, 1923, M. Masson, the
Minister of Justice, declared that family allowances are a right.'43
Willy Julin, of the Belgian Ministry of Industry and Labor,
states that family allowances have not affected wages determined
by collective agreements or based upon the changes of the cost-ofliving index. Allowances, he reports, have always been and still
are looked upon as gratuities from the employers, and entirely apart
from the worker’s remuneration for his labor.
Joseph Bienne, assistant director of the Belgian Ministry of
Justice, sets forth as follows the results which he thinks may be
expected from the general extension and perfection of the familyallowance system: 44
A modest ease replacing the unmerited privation of large families, and con
sequently more of social justice;
A restraint on the exaggerated demand in the matter of wages, and a re
sultant guaranty for industry;
The stabilization of the most experienced manual labor; the assurance of its
future recruitment;
The amelioration of the relations between industrial leaders and the
workers;
The restoration of the dignity of the father of the family, an extension of
his liberty;
The conservation of the woman in her household; the hygiene of childhood;
the best education, instruction, and industrial training for children;
The reduction of the expenses of public and private welfare;
A checking of the decline in the birth rate;
The increase of economic production, more satisfaction, happiness, and peace
for all men.

Sociologist.—The following analysis made by a Belgian sociolo
gist suggests that in his country, as well as in France, there is need
for precise definition of the character of the family allowance: 45
First of all, it is averred that the right to the allowance belongs not to the
wage earner, but to the beneficiary—the family—which renders such allowance
40 Revue du Travail, Brussels, November, 1D23, pp. 2333, 2334.
** Idem, p. 2334.
Idem, October, 1924, pp. 1 9 5 0 -1 9 5 1 ; La Femme Beige, Brussels, August-September, 1924. p. 183.
** Commission syndicale de Belgique.
Rapports soumis aux deliberations du X X II*
CoBgr&s syndical, July 27 and 2 8, 1923. Brussels [1 9 2 3 ], p. 10.
44 Revue Mensuelle, Brussels, January, 1925, p. 318. Oeuvre nationale de l’enfance.
46 Revue du Travail, Brussels, March, 1924, p. 574.

BELGIU M

inalienable and exempt from seizure. Note also the mode of paying the allow
ance; although the wage is ordinarily by the day, the allowance is almost
always monthly; furthermore, it is disbursed outside the pay service, often
by an agency not personally connected with the employer, and generally to
the mother of the family. Finally, there is no correlation between the amount
of the allowance and the economic value of the service furnished by the
worker; the allowance is independent of the quantity and of the quality of the
work. That which gives the right to the allowance, that which is the juridical
cause and determines the share, is family responsibility.

Besides, if the allowance formed a part of the integral wage, why,
he asks, would not the worker receive the grant during his whole life,
and not merely while his children are growing, and why is the
employer able to augment the allowance without reciprocally increas
ing the rates of wages? Moreover, if the allowance is a part of the
wage, why can not such allowance be secured until after a prelimi
nary period in the employment, and for what reason do nearly all
the family-allowance funds fix a maximum salary beyond which the
allowance is not accorded? And in the discussion which the oppor
tunity for the extension of the allowance to foreign workers has
sometimes provoked, one can not help seeing, he declares, the con
firmation of the idea that, as the allowance is a method of social
protection, the benefit apparently from the very first has been re
served for national labor.

GERMANY
PUBLIC SERVICE

Federal civil service**—Family allowances have been paid in the
German Federal civil service since October 1, 1915. When the
system was first inaugurated the grants were made only to mar
ried, widowed, and divorced permanent employees, with salaries up
to 2,100 marks47 per annum, who had one or more dependent chil
dren under 15 years of age. The allowance was 6 marks per month,
and for each child beyond the second an additional allowance of
3 marks was paid.
As a result of the steady rise in the cost of living the pre-war
salaries of the employees became more and more inadequate, and
the family-allowance system, instituted at first for the lower-paid
groups, whose economic distress was more acute, was extended to
cover the whole personnel—statutory and nonstatutory employees
and manual workers. These grants are also paid to temporary and
furloughed employees and to retired statutory employees and the
survivors of statutory employees.
The number of salaried Federal employees in active service at
present receiving family allowances is as follows: (a) General ad
ministrative service, 90,000 permanent employees, or 83 per cent;
(&) Federal railroad and postal services, 470,000 permanent em
ployees, or 84 per cent.
While the number of manual workers in the service of the Fed
eral Government in receipt of family allowances was not ascertain
able, the percentage of this class receiving such subsidies is probably
about the same as in the class of permanent salaried employees.
From June 1 to December 1, 1924, the following family allow
ances were granted:
(a) To permanent and temporary employees, for all dependent children
under 6 years of age, 16 gold marks monthly; for children <5 to 14 years of age,
18 gold marks; for children 14 to 20 years of age, 20 gold marks. In addition,
a statutory employee was granted an allowance of 10 gold marks for a wife.
(&)
To workers, 27 gold pfennigs48 per workday, or 6 marks 48 pfennigs
per month, for a wife and for each dependent child.

By a decree concerning the salaries and wages of persons in civilservice employment which became effective December 1, 1924, family
allowances were increased 2 marks per month per wife and per
child.49
In June, 1924, the general administrative service was paying to
employees in active-service allowances for approximately 110,000
children and 90,000 wives, disbursing approximately 24,000,000 gold
49 Except where otherwise specified the data in this section was furnished by the
German Ministry o f Finance, June 17, 1924.
47 Gold m a r k = 2 3 .8 2 cents. Because of the enormous depreciation of the paper mark
during and after the war no equivalent in American money will be here attempted.
48 Gold pfennig, at p a r = Q .4 cent.
49 W irtschaft und Statistek, Berlin, Dec. 11, 1924, p. 748.

G ERM AN Y

marks per annum for children’s allowances and 11,000,000 gold marks
per annum for allowances for wives. The railroad and postal ad
ministrations were paying allowances to 770,000 children and 470,000
wives, expending 167,000,000 gold marks per annum in children
allowances and 56,000,000 gold marks in allowances for wives. The
number of dependent children per employee was only 1.2 in the
general administrative service as compared with 1.6 in the railroad
and postal services.
The proportion which the family allowance bears to the total
salary varies in the different groups and grades of employees as
follows:
Ter cent

Married permanent employees with two children between
and 14 years of age:
Low-salary groups (I to Y )------------------------------------- 27-40
Intermediate-salary groups (VI to I X ) -----------------.— 12-28
High-salary groups (X to X I I I)-------------------------------- 5-14
Manual workers wTith two children:
6025
Unskilled__________________________________________
Semiskilled_________________________ _______________
6022
Skilled_____ ;______________________________ _________ 6018

The following regulations apply to both salaried employees and
manual workers in the Federal service, though, as noted before,
the amounts of the allowances to the latter are smaller.
Family allowances are granted for dependent legitimate, legiti
mated, and adopted children, and stepchildren who are members
of the household of the civil-service employee, and also for illegiti
mate children when the civil servant’s paternity a has been estab
lished by judgment or has been acknowledged in a publicly attested
affidavit,” and if he has taken the child into his household or can
prove that he fully supports it. Family allowances are not paid
for foster children and grandchildren.
Allowances for children between 16 and 21 years of age are paid
only w7hen they are attending school or receiving training for some
remunerative vocation, when they are permanently disabled, physi
cally or mentally, “ or if they have no income of their own or if
their own income does not exceed the children’s allowance inclusive
of the cost-of-living allowance.”
When both parents are in the Government service allowances are
granted for children only if the father, in view of his other obliga
tions, may not be able to support his family in a manner suitable
to his position.
Allowances are paid for a married child only when that child can
not support himself or herself and neither the consort nor the chil
dren of the married son or daughter can furnish such support.
Illegitimate children are entitled to maintenance until they are 21
years old, but if an illegitimate child is not a German citizen such
child shall be considered as having a right to maintenance only for
such period as the employee is required to pay for the maintenance
of such child. A woman employee is paid an allowance for an
illegitimate child under the same regulations as those governing
an allowance to a male employee for a legitimate child.
00 Approximately.

PRIVATE IN D U STRY

A widowed employee may be granted an allowance for a wife
if he has a household of his own and wholly supports the children
for whom he receives allowances.
An allowance will not be granted for a wife if she is a salaried
employee or wage worker in the Federal, State, communal, or other
public corporation service, but may be granted if she is only a
part-time employee or worker or does certain work without specified
hours, for a lump-sum payment.
An allowance is not granted for a Avife who is receiving a pension
from Federal, State, or communal funds, unless such pension, in
clusive of the cost-of-living bonus, amounts to less than the allow
ance for a wife, in which case the difference will be paid. When a
civil-service employee holds more than one position under the Fed
eral Government, he can draw only one allowance for a wife.
In case a civil-service employee, through no fault of his, has
had his marriage annulled, has been divorced, or has been legally
separated from his wife, he shall receive the same family allowance
as a widower, but if the marriage annulment, the divorce, or the
separation is because of his own misconduct he will not be granted
an allowance for his wife even if he is required to support her.
States, Provinces, and communes.—Family allowances in the State,
Provinces, communes, and other public services are regulated in the
same way as in the Federal service.
PRIVATE INDUSTRY

Even before the war the family responsibilities of the workers in
Germany were taken into consideration in the payment of wages.
Certain monopolistic enterprises, such as the Zeiss Optical Works,
followed this practice. In such undertakings the procedure was
more or less simple, as the question of reconciling the family or
social wage (Familienstandslohn, Familierilohn or Soziallohn) 51
with wages in the open market was not a vital one. No grave prob
lems on this score arose during the war in private industries which
were paying to their workers bonuses graded according to the size
of their families. The extra expenditures of business establish
ments for family allowances were shifted to the Government, as
each firm was allowed its actual expenses and 10 per cent profit, but
when the Government relinquished its war control of industry the
need for a collective system of family allowances was recognized.52
In 1920 the practice of granting children’s allowances apparently
was prevalent in the mining industry. In the Ruhr district during
the war 20 pfennigs per shift were granted for each child under 14
years of age who was incapable of earning wages. In the early part
of 1920 the allowance was raised to 1 mark and later in the same year
it was doubled. This represented an increase in remuneration of
from 10 to 15 per cent for a large number of miners, who as a class
have big families. It was reported at this time that even if the then
existing prosperity in coal-mining operation should diminish, family
allowances would still be continued in the Ruhr district, as “ the
a French discission of the social wage in Germany, see Mainguy, M aurice: Le
J* es Sa.laries en Allemagne depuis la Guerre. Paris [1 9 24 ?], pp. 2 1 1 -2 6 4 .
The Economic Journal, London, December, 192H, p. 5 0 9 : “ The family wage contro
versy in Germany, ’ by Edouard Heimann,
“ For

GERM ANY

whole pension system of the Bochum Miners’ Insurance Society is
dominated by the idea of children’s allowances.” 53
As illustrating the extent to which the family allowance or social
wage system had expanded by 1922, the following summary of family
allowance provisions in trade agreements in Germany is presented: 54
In connection with family allowances the industries of Germany
may be arranged in three groups—
Group 1, in which the family-wage system was seldom found.
Among these industries were the oils and fats and leather industries,
the clothing trades, shoemaking, hotel and restaurant operation,
woodworking, with the exception of sawmilling, and the art crafts.
In the collective agreements for the building trades, roofers were
almost the only workers for whom provision for family allowances
was made.
Group 2, in which the family-wage system and payment by per
formance had about equal representation. The stone, clay, and
pottery trades, trade, transportation, and the food and drink indus
tries were included in this classification.
Group 8, in which the payment of family allowances was almost
universal. Foremost in this group was the mining industry, which
not only paid money allowances but also granted coal to its married
workers. In the machinery, chemical, textile, paper, wood pulp,
and cardboard industries family allowances were commonly granted.
Nearly all State and municipal employees, both manual and nonmanual, received such grants, which were also frequently paid to
salaried employees in private industrial undertakings.
METHODS OF PAYMENT

Sometimes the family allowance took the form of a higher wage
rate and at other times the form of a supplement to the basic wage.
The first and somewhat cruder scheme provided a higher compensa
tion for married workers generally, without regard to the number o f
children they had. This plan was followed in the collective agree
ment for the German printing trade, in which there was a classi
fication of skilled workers according to their trade, local class, age,
and marital condition. In the agreement of December, 1922, the
weekly wage for married skilled workers in wage class C was ap
proximately 4-. per cent higher than that for single skilled workers
in the same class. In a Hamburg rubber factory single workers were
paid 0.2 mark less per hour than the married workers.
The so-called social wage was often paid in such a way that only
the younger married workers were better off than their coworkers o f
the same age because, according to this scheme, beginning with a cer
tain age married and single workers received the same compensation.
Several collective agreements provided the same basic wage for
both the single and married workers, while the cost-of-living bonus
varied. For example, the collective agreement of December 1, 1921,
for Berlin belt and suspender factories made provision for a bonus
of 25 per cent for single and 50 per cent for married workers. As a
rule, however, under the family-wage system married workers did
not receive higher wage rates but were given grants supplement
Ministry o f Labor. Labor Overseas, Ju1y~S eptember, 1920, p. 48.
Ueichsarbeitsministeriums. Reichsarbeitsblatt, Berlin, Jan. 1, 1923., pp.

53 Great Britain.
54 Germany.

4 * -8 * .

PRIVATE IN D U STRY

ing the wage based on performance. While these grants were some
times based on a fixed percentage of the wage of individual workers,
they were much more frequently granted in specific amounts, which
in some collective agreements varied with the local cost of living.
Such family allowances generally consisted of two parts—a house
hold allowance (Hausstandgeld) and an allowance for the children
(Kindergeld) . In some collective agreements only children’s allow
ances were provided.
A household allowance was granted a married worker on the
ground of additional expense. In cases where the wives were wage
earners the allowances were reduced or not paid at all.
In some collective agreements widowers and divorced men were
given household allowances under certain specified circumstances.
Some single workers who were the support of their families also re
ceived family allowances. It has become necessary, therefore, in
many collective agreements to define in detail the term “ family.”
To avoid any doubling of allowances, most collective agreements
granted family allowances to single workers only when they were
the sole or main supporters of their families.
As indicated'above, many establishments did not grant the house
hold allowance, but paid the allowance for children, including in
general adopted children, stepchildren, foster children, and illegiti
mate children. In most instances these allowances were granted only
for children up to 14 years of age, although some collective agree
ments provided that allowances be paid for children up to 17. 18,
and 19 years of age, and in a few cases up to 24 years of age when
such children were to receive a higher education.
For the prevention of fraud in claims for “ superwages ” a great
many collective agreements prescribed that the worker must prove
his statements regarding his family conditions, the form of proof
required in various provisions being the attestation of the commune.
In order to protect the family against thriftless and neglectful
fathers, a collective agreement for a foodstuff factory stipulated
that allowances should not be paid to a worker not living with his
family or who “ does not support his family, or does not manage his
earnings economically, or withholds from his family a proper share
of his earnings.” In such a case the employer shall, on the motion
of the works council, take proper steps to have the allowances paid
direct to the mother or the children.
Children’s allowances were granted according to the number and
ages of the children. In some cases the allowance for the individual
child decreased as the number of children increased on the ground
that the per capita expense is less for a large family. Other collec
tive agreements provided for an increase in the allowance rate with
the increase in the number of children. The following stipulations
showed respectively these two methods of payment: Under an agree
ment of August 1,1922, electrical workers in Dresden were to receive,
for the first legitimate child, 48 marks per week, and for subsequent
legitimate children, 34.7 marks per week. The family wage scale for
workers in the textile industry in Gladbach, Rheydt, and nearby;
towns under an agreement of June 19, 1922, was 6 marks per day for
the first child; 7 marks per day for the second child; 8 marks per
day for the third child; 9 marks per day for the fourth child; and 10
marks per day for the fifth and each succeeding child.

GERM AN Y

The period which the family allowance covered was usually the
same as that for which the wage for performance was paid. In the
greater number of instances, therefore, this supplemental compensa
tion was granted by the hour, shift, day, or week, and for salaried
employees by the month.
In the cost-of-living bonuses ( Wirtsehsiftsbeihilfen), which have
been so frequently granted, consideration was always given to the
worker's family condition. For example, in April, 1922, in the
cigar industry lump-sum allowances of 300 marks were paid to single
foremen, 400 marks to married foremen, and 500 marks to married
foremen with children.
Workers who live at a considerable distance from their places of
employment were, as a rule, paid a sustenance allowance to meet the
expense of room and board. As married men in cases of this kind
also had to keep up their homes, they usually received a larger sus
tenance allowance than the single workers. For example, the suste
nance allowance of married tinsmiths, under an agreement of July,
1922, was 25 per cent higher than that for unmarried tinsmiths.
The collective agreement provisions regarding the rights of
workers to family allowances in connection with the amount of work
performed are of special interest. For instance, it was explicitly
held in some of the agreements that these family grants were part
of the wage and as such were paid according to the hours worked.
Some agreements excepted overtime in estimating the family allow
ance due a worker, while other agreements took overtime into ac
count. It is not a difficult task to calculate the “ superwage55 on ail
hourly basis, but the matter becomes somewhat complicated when
allowances are fixed by the day or week and questions of broken
shifts or weeks have to be dealt with.
In cases in which it was agreed that the allowances were to be
paid by the day, such grants were usually made for each shift com
menced even if it was not worked in full. Under the collective agree
ment of July 13, 1922, for the Rhenish-Westphalian iron and metal
working industries, the number of computable shifts was arrived at
by dividing by 8 the aggregate hours worked during the wage pe
riod, a remainder of four or more hours being regarded as a full
shift. In accordance with a collective agreement of December 3,
1922, in the paper industry in Silesia, the per capita allowance was
not to be paid “ for those days on which a worker by his own fault
misses more than four hours.” When -allowances were granted by
the week and the full time had not been worked, workers were
u: i]ally paid for the actual hours worked, the allowances being
reduced one-sixth for each day not worked.
The hiring and firing of workers were frequently responsible for
in omplete weeks of service. The collective agreement of April 1,
1922, for the chemical industry in Hanover stipulated that a newdy
employed worker should receive one-sixth of the weekly allowance
for each workday begun. This provision prevented a man from getting a double allowance when he changed his job.
A worker forfeited his claim to an allowance for a given week-.if
through his own fault he remained away from his job two days
within the work w7eek.
There were various regulations in regard to the payment of the
family wage in cases in which the worker missed time through no

PRIVATE IN D U STRY

fault of his own. Full allowances were ordinarily paid for
holidays or for a reduction in working time, an agreement in the
textile industry of May 4, 1922, even providing that these grants
should be doubled if short time reduced the hours of labor per week
to less than 33.
There were only a few agreements under which the amount of
the family allowance was reduced for time lost, but there were
usually limitations to the continuation of these grants during loss
of time. In illustration, one agreement provided that in the case
of short-time employment family allowances should be paid in
full during the first two weeks after the beginning of short-time
work.
Family allowances were also commonly paid when workers were
on their “ annual contractual leave with pay.55 It was ordinarily
provided through collective bargaining that family allowances
should be paid in sickness for a certain limited time, which ranged
from 6 to 13 weeks.
Although there were few industries in Germany in 1922 that had
instituted family allowances in all establishments, there were no
industries that wholly ignored this system of payment.
EFFECT OF FAMILY ALLOWANCES ON WAGE RATES

The effect of family allowances on wages, as shown by a com
parison of the average weighted wage rates of married workers with
those of single workers in certain industries and occupations, in
April, 1923, may be seen in Table 11:
T a b le

l l . - P E R CE N T A V ER AG E W E IG H T E D W AG E R ATES OF M A R R IE D W O R K E R S *
*
W ER E OF THOSE OF U N M A R R IE D W O R K ER S, APR IL, 1923 *

Industry and class of workers

Coal mining:
Pick miners and loaders_______ . . . __
Other underground workers________
Surface workers____ _______________
Metal industry:
.Skilled workers____________________
Semiskilled workers_______ ________
Unskilled workers__________ _______
Chemical industry:
Artisans_________. . . ________ ______
Process men_______________________
Unskilled workers__________________

Per cent
rate for
married
was of
rate for
un
married
workers

141
112
113
107
108
108
103
105
105

Industry and class of workers

Per cent
rate for
married
was of
rate for
un
married
workers

Printing industry:
Hand compositors__________________
Helpers__________________ _ _
State railway workers:
Skilled— ................................................
Semiskilled_____________ ____ __
Unskilled_____________ . . . . ____
State salaried employees:
High grade.............................................
Intermediate grade_______________ _
Low grade___________________ _ _

104
104
122
123
130
116
122
136

1 Where the allowances paid vary with the size of the family, the rates here given for married workers
arc for those with wife and two children, generally under 14 years of age.
2 International Labor Office. Family allowances. Geneva, 1924, p. 109. Studies and reports, series D
(wages and hours), No. 13.

COLLECTIVE AGREEMENTS

The family-allowance system suffered a considerable setback in
Germany in 1923, the period of highest inflation of the currency,
and has not as yet been restored to its former important position.56
66 Data, furnished by Federation of German Employers’ Associations, Aug. 7, 1924.

G ERM AN Y

Individual employers are still granting family allowances under
collective contracts, but the number of agreements with such pro
visions is greatly reduced.57 Among the industries in which this
decline is noted are the potash industry; the paper, cardboard, cellu
loid, and pulp-wood industry in Silesia and Posen; the textile in
dustry at Munchen-Gladbach-Sheydt; the chemical industry in
Baden and the Rhenish Palatinate and Brandenburg; and coal
mining in Saxony. No allowances are being paid in the leather,
woodworking, boot and shoe, clothing, and cigar industries, nor in
the building trades.58
The elimination of the family allowance in a number of collective
agreements is attributed to the hostility of the trade-unions, accord
ing to the Federation of German Employers’ Associations. Collec
tive agreements in the metal industries, however, still contain pro
visions for allowances for wives and children, and in these indus
tries there are only a few insignificant districts in which family
wages are not being paid. This system of payment also prevails
extensively in the mining industry, and especially in the coal mining
sections. The allowances, which are still made by the shift, vary in
amount in different localities, but average, for a wife and child,
from 3 to 4 per cent of the wages.59
Table 12 gives the average wages of single and married workers
in coal mines in various districts, the wages of married workers,
including allowances for a wife and two children under 14 years,
but no allowance for household coal:
T a b le 1 2 .—AVER AG E W AGES PER SHIFT OY SINGLE A N D M A R R IE D W O R K E R S IN
COAL M IK ES, JUNE, 1924 i

All di!stricts

Occupation and marital
condition

West
Upper
Silesia

Lower
Silesia

Ruhr
dis
trict

Aix la
Chapelle

Saxony

Money wages
(weighted)3

Real wage
(weighted) *

Per
Per
cent of
cent of
Amount pre-war Amount prewar
wage
wage
Renten- Renten- Renten- Renten- Renteri- Rentenmarks3 marks marks marks marks
marks
Pick miners:
Single____ ___________
6.48
4.68
3.63
5.90
4.50
6.11
Married........................ 4.98
6.93
6.20
4.70
6.55
3.90
Other u n d e r g r o u n d
workers:
5.06
Single..............................
4.66
4.78
3.56
3.36
4.33
Married---------------------5.54
3.86
3.63
4.96
4.53
5.21
Surface workers:
5.02
Single..............................
3.76
4.17
4.74
3.53
4.53
5.50
Married..........................
4.06
4.83
4.37
5.17
3.80

97.4
104.5

Rentenmarks
5.38
5.76

85.8
91.9

107.7
117.3

4.21
4.58

94.8
103.2

114.5
124.9

4.17
4.55

100.7
109.9

* Germany Statistischen Reichsamt. Wirtschaft und Statistik, Berlin, July 26,1924, p. 441.
3 By number of workers.
3 Rentenmark=23.82 cents.
57 According to the Federation of German Employers’ Associations, August, 1924,
fam ily allowances were provided in agreements covering from 3,000,000 to 8,200,000
workers. The number of workpeople employed under collective agreements in January,
1924, was 18,135,384.
International Labor Office, Industrial and Labor Information,
Geneva, Feb. 23, 1925, p. 10.
58 Germany.
Reichsarbeitsministeriums.
Reichsarheitsblatt, Berlin, Oct. 1, 1924, p.
487 : “ Die Berta-eitung der 'Fnmilienlohn systems in A uslan d e," by Irmgard Feig.
68 Data furnshed by the Federation of German Employers’ Associations, Aug. 7, 1924.

PRIVATE IN D U ST R Y

FAMILY-ALLQWAKCE FUNDS

The number of family-allowanee funds in Germany has been very
restricted. The main reason given for this is that duitng most of
the time in which family wages have been granted there has been
but little unemployment in that country, and consequently the men
with family responsibilities ran small risk of being discriminated
against by employers.60 The mining industry, the heavy metal in
dustries, and most of the chemical industries have had no familyallowanee funds, and to the employers the necessity for such adminis
trative procedure did not seem great.61 Another possible explanation
is the insignificance of the allowances in certain industries and the
consequent unwillingness of employers to set up a costly fund in
this connection.62
It is next to impossible for the funds to prevent fraud. For ex
ample, in periods of labor shortage when employers’ organizations
pledged their membership not to pay wages in excess of those pro
vided in collective contracts “ it frequently happened that the em
ployees of a concern were given to understand that no strict exami
nation would be made by the management of the data submitted as
to the number of children, and in such cases unduly high allowances
were granted to many workers at the expense of the fund.63' Fur
thermore, the establishment of funds is fraught with various diffi
culties, which, of course, has impeded the rapid multiplication of
such funds.64
One of the pioneer German family-allowanee funds was established
in 1920 by the Federation of Employers in the Berlin Industries*
one of the most important industrial organizations of the country.
Various other industrial groups followed this example,65 and in 1922
the 11 funds of the following organizations were in existence: Fed
eration of Employers in the Berlin Metal Industries ; Federation of
Employers in the Industrial District of Elberfeld; Employers’ Asso
ciation o f the Chemical and Explosives Industry at Cologne; Em
ployers’ Association of the German Ceramic Industry; Thuringian
Textile Manufacturers; Employers’ Federation of the Saxon Textile
Industry; Federation of the Textile Industrialists of the Munster
District; Employers’ Federation of Anhalt at Dessau; Industrial
Employers’ Federation of the Free State of Oldenburg; Employers’
Federation of the Rhenish-Westphalian Cement Works, Bochum;
and the German Pharmacists.66
Most of these family-allowanee funds have ceased to operate. The
liquidation of some ol the funds was due to the expense of adminis
60 International Labor Office. Fam ily allowances. Geneva, 1924, p. 95.
Studies and
reports, series D (wages and hours), No. 13.
61 Data furnished by Federation of German Employers’ Associations, Aug. 7, 1924.
62 International Labor Office. Fam ily allowances. Geneva, 1924, p. 100. Studies and
reports, series D (wages and hours), No. 13.
03
U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Bui. No. 3 8 0 : Postwar labor conditions in Germany.
Washington, 1925, p . 145.
64 Soziale Praxis, Berlin, Nov. 9, 1922, cols. 1 2 3 4 -1 2 3 8 : “ Die Schwierigfeiten der
Durchflihrung des Soziallohns in der Praxis,” by Hans Brauer.
05
Economic Journal, London, Dec. 23, 1923, p. 5 1 0 : “ The fam ily wage controversy/’ by
Edouard Beimann.
66 Germany.
Reichsarbeitsmlnisteriums.
Reichsarbeitsblatt, Berlin, Oct. 1 , 1924, p.
4 8 7 : “ Die B erbm tung der Familienlofcn systems in Auslande,” by Irmgard Feig.

G ERM AN Y

tration.67 Among the few that were functioning in 1924 were the
funds of the Federation of Employers in the Industrial District of
Elberfeld, the National Employers’ Federation of Saxon Electrical
Works, and the Federation of Textile Industrialists of the Munster
District.66
The fund of the Federation of Employers in the Industrial Dis
trict of Elberfeld covers textile and metal workers and the salaried
employees of all the member establishments of the federation, includ
ing the chemical, woodworking, and paper industries. Family allow
ances for the manual workers in the chemical and paper industries in
this district are paid by individual employers without recourse to the
fund, while no family allowances are paid the manual workers in
the woodworking industry.66
The contributions to the fund by the employers in the metal and
textile industries are equivalent to 2V2 per cent of wages for male
workers, and IV2 Per cen^ of wages for female workers. I f the sum
disbursed by an individual establishment in family allowances is in
excess of the amount paid by it into the fund, the fund is obliged to
make up the difference. The members of this fund include 235 tex
tile establishments and 150 metal-work establishments, with about
40,000, workers.60
In the early part of 1924 the family allowance of a skilled male
worker in the textile and metal industries was 0.50 mark per week,
per child or per wife. The family wage of salaried male employees
30 years old in Class A was then 6 marks a month “ per wife and
per child.” 60
The fund of the National Employers’ Federation of the Saxon
Electrical Works computes its contributions on the number of work
ers employed by an establishment at the end of the calendar year.
All classes of workers are paid 3 pfennigs per hour for a wife, the
same amount for the first child, and 2 pfennigs an hour for each sub
sequent child, legitimate and illegitimate.66
The Federation of Textile Industrialists of the Munster District
has no central fund, but the family allowances for all the firms occu
pying a given locality are calculated and the costs divided among the
different establishments in accordance with the number of workers
employed. The family wage in these establishments includes an
allowance for each child under 14 years and an allowance for a wife
who is not gainfully employed. In 1924 such grants were being
made to 32,000 workers.66
The fund of the Federation of Employers in the Berlin Metal In
dustries was also operating in 1924.67
FAMILY ALLOWANCES IN AGRICULTURE68

There is little conflict over the question of whether or not the re
sponsibilities of married agricultural workers should be taken into
consideration by their employers, as the principle of family allow
m Germany. Beichsarbeitsministeriums. Reichsarbeitsblatt, Berlin, Oct., 1, 1924, p.
4 8 7 : “ Die Berbreitung der Familienlohn systems in Auslande,” by Irmgard Feig.
67 Data furnished by the Federation of German Employers’ Associations, Aug. 7, 1924.
68 Germany. Reichtfarbeitsministeriums. Reichsarbeitsblatt, Berlin, Feb. 1C, 1923, pp.
6 8 * -7 0 * : “ Der Familienlohn in den landwirtscbaftliehen Tarifwertragen.”
Summarized
in International Labor Office, Family allowances, Geneva, 1924, pp. 1 0 4 -1 0 7 , studies and
reports, series D (wages and hours), No. 13.

F A M IL Y ALLOW ANCES IN AGRICULTURE

ances is already quite generally the practice among this class of labor.
The procedure, however, varies in accordance with the conditions
prevailing in the different parts of the country. In regard to sys
tems of wage payment agricultural labor may, however, be divided
into two principal groups, permanent and independent workers.
The permanent workers are employed chiefly by the large land
owners in the north who, because their farms are frequently a long
distance from town, require a substantial number of permanent
workers. These permanent workers are provided by the employer
A^ith a house and a piece of land which they can cultivate for them
selves. By his supplementary work, and especially by his wife’s
labor, the permanent worker adds substantially to his basic income,
a considerable part, frequently the greater part, of which is in kind
(potatoes, cereals, milk, etc.) instead of in money. Only married
workers are included under this plan, and their wages in kind corre
spond, of course, to the needs of their families and do not constitute
a payment for performance alone.
Employers who do not lodge and board unmarried workers gen
erally pay them partly in kind and do not allow them tracts of land
to cultivate for themselves or the privilege of keeping livestock. A
much more substantial part of the independent workers’ wages than
of the wages of the permanent worker is in cash, and the cash wages
of married independent workers exceed those of the unmarried
workers. Family responsibilities are taken into account in the wages
of independent workers which are paid in kind.
The following variations in methods of wage payment for inde
pendent married workers may be found in collective contracts:
1. Married workers may receive no wages in kind and be paid
higher wages in cash than unmarried workers. This practice pre
vailed in the Danzig district and in a few districts in the eastern
section of Germany.
2. Married workers may be paid the same wages in kind as un
married workers and higher wages in cash. This method is pro
vided for in a “ model ” contract for East Prussia and Silesia.
3. Married workers may be paid higher wages in kind than un
married workers and lower wages in cash. Contracts of this char
acter have been made in some districts in Brandenburg.
4. Married workers may be paid higher wages in kind than un
married workers and the same amount of wages in cash. This sys
tem is in vogue mainly in southern and western Germany.
5. Married workers may be paid higher wages in kind and also
higher wages in cash than the unmarried workers. Such provision
is found, however, in only a few collective contracts.
The social side of the wage payment is given less consideration in
southern than in northern Germany. This is probably due to the
fact that many of the workers in southern Germany own small
tracts of land and can meet the increased cost of iiving out of the
produce of their own small land holdings.
Among some of the interesting provisions in certain collective
agricultural agreements are: Wages in kind are to be based on the
needs of a family of certain size, one of the contracts stating that
such wages are to be “ calculated for a family of five—husband, wife,
and three children under 14.”
61243°—26------7

GERM AN Y

Otlier contracts stipulate that the amount o f com to be allowed
depends upon the size of the family. There is considerable variation
in the regulations as to additional grants in kind for children. Some
of these supplementary allowances are made for the second child.
In other cases the extra grant begins only with the third, fourth,
fifth, or sixth child. Allowances in kind are not granted “ for chil
dren who are able to work, unless they are employed upon the
estate.”
Many workers who are not fathers of families but who have de
pendents to support are granted allowances in kind. Among the
dependents included under such allowances are infirm or disabled
adults, especially the parents of the workers.
Attention is called to the fact that the valuation of allowances
in kind in collective contracts is substantially below the market
price.
It is sometimes provided that if a worker is not regular in his
work he receives no wages in kind. In other instances the worker
is paid such wages only if he has worked a stipulated number of
hours (2,800 per annum, for instance).
VIEWPOINTS

There has been considerable discussion in Germany over the social
wage, many of the arguments advanced by different groups in other
parts of Europe on the same problem being set forth. Various
German attitudes on family allowances are given in some detail
below.
PUBLIC OFFICIALS

The German Ministry of Finance states (July 18, 1924) that
“ family allowances in themselves can not be well justified under a
salary or wage system governed strictly by performance.” It is
pointed out, however, that in Government employment the case is
somewhat different because of the prevalence of the theory that com
pensation paid according to public law u does not represent a pure
and simple working wage,” but a return to the employees “ for
putting their whole personality into the service of the State.” The
Ministry of Finance forecasts that family allowances will be con
tinued m the Federal civil service as long as the Federal Govern
ment is not in a financial position to pay to all its employees salaries
adequate to support their families in a manner corresponding to
their positions.
PRIVATE EMPLOYEES

The following employers’ views, taken from the Deutsche Bergwerkszeitung, are quoted in the Korrespondenzblatt of July 30,1921;
W. H. Knut, of Dillenburg, is of the opinion that the social wage
“ trains to lazinefs and is injurious to the workers’ interests and na
tional economics by increasing the population.” On the other hand,
H. Bangert, of Wetzlau, says that the “ general economic advantage
of the social wage lies in the fact that it lessens the purchasing power
of the single worker and thus decreases demand and promotes a gen
eral lowering of prices,” and concludes that “ this new system of a

V IE W PO IN TS

social wage, considered from all points of view, will play an im
portant part in the reconstruction of economic lire.”
Employers are said to favor family allowances so long as they do
not result in an increase of production costs. The more mature
workers are steadier, realize their responsibility to their firms, and
are ordinarily more desirable employees than irresponsible young
men, who are ready to change their jobs at any time. The older
workers also constitute “ a breakwater against the syndicalist and
revolutionary tendencies of many of the youthful wage earners.” 69
Among the objections of employers to the social wage are (1) that
it will add to the number of unproductive laborers, (2) that it will
have the same result as inflation, (3) that the pool system, if limited
to particular localities or particular branches of industries, would
cause an invasion of such localities and branches of industry by
family men and an exodus of bachelors.70
WORKERS

The employees and manual workers of the German Federal civil
service are not “ strictly hostile ” toward the system of family allow
ances. The majority would prefer to have their basic salaries or
wages increased.71
Theodore Leipart, the president of the General Federation of Ger
man Trade-Unions, the largest labor organization in the country,
takes up in the Korrespondenzblatt (Berlin) of April 30, 1921, the
cause of the single worker and catalogues the various expenses and
obligations of the unmarried man, such as the supplementing of his
inadequate education, dues to athletic clubs, the cost of pleasures
which youth craves, the expense of living in restaurants, and the
necessity for saving to establish a future household. Leipart believes
that the married man should be favored by more generous tax ex
emptions and that the children of workers “ should be granted all
possible facilities out of public funds, the cost of which should be
Borne by the whole nation,” Among the benefits which should be
furnished gratis to the children of the workers are education, text
books, meals in schools, transportation to school, physical culture,
and, to a certain extent, clothing and shoes. Milk for babies should
be supplied free or at reduced rates. As an alternative for such
grants fixed Government allowances to defray various family ex
penses are suggested. To burden individual employers with such
costs would, Leipart holds, result in higher prices for the finished
products.
“ The organized far-seeing workers ” regard with suspicion the in
stitution of the social wage, according to the June 23, 1923, issue of
the Metallarbeiter Zeitung (Stuttgart, p. 99). Reports that family
allowances are being used as strike preventives do not tend to allay
such suspicion. “ All allowances due for the period from the first of
a month up to the date of the calling of the strike are generally de
clared forfeited.” Trade-unionists “ demand a wage, collectively
agreed upon, sufficient to maintain a family and for the single worker
to save for the setting up of a household.”
69 The Economic Journal, London, December, 1923, pp. 512, 513.
70 The answers of Edouard Heimann to these objections are set forth on p. 96.
71 Data furnished by the German Minister of Finance, June 17, 1924.

G ERM AN Y

In the Free State of Saxony the social wage has been generally
instituted only for municipal and State employees and in the mining
industry, the labor organizations as a rule being opposed to the
system for fear it will lead to the dismissal of married workers in
times of industrial depression.72
The official attitude of the General Federation of German TradeUnions on the social wage73 is that “ it has been always a recognized
principle that the wage should correspond to the work performed.
* * '* It is always suspicious when the employers in some man
ner want to play themselves up as friends of the workers. * * *
It seems an established fact that the social wage is only a means of
depressing wages.” Employers claim that they are obliged to keep
production costs at a minimum and that the economic situation in
Germany makes it imperative to fix wages according to individual
needs. Industrialists conceal under “ oratorical flourishes” their
view that in periods of industrial depression “ the workers alone
should bear all the burdens.”
The justice of the workers’ demands for higher wages can pot be
denied by employers, who, however, desire to make the single man
foot the expense of family allowances for the married man. In this
way employers establish a minimum-of-existence wage standard for
the single worker. When this standard prevails the principle of a
wage based on performance will be reintroduced, and the social wage
“ will work as a perpetual screw in the same manner as piecework.”
The social wage will also split the ranks of the workers and facilitate
the domination of employers.
The trade-unions realize, however, the interest of the common
wealth “ in a healthy increase of the population,” and it is suggested
that the married workers be granted special assistance by the Gov
ernment. This, of course, would mean added taxation, which would
fall on the classes of society which are best fitted to bear it. Conse
quently employers u think it much cheaper ” to put the burden of
the social wage upon the shoulders of the single worker.
To reduce the hostility of single men to the social wage it has been
suggested that they should bear in mind that when the time comes
for them to establish a family they will benefit by the system. It has
also been suggested that if wages were generally increased for both
married and single workers it would be easier for bachelors to sacri
fice themselves in favor of family men.74
The family-allowance system is looked upon with favor by most of
the leaders of the Christian trade-unions in Germany, which are
closely allied with the Center Party.75 It has been frequently
stressed in the Christian trade-union press that 64the Christian
worker sets greater ethical value upon the family than the members
of the Social Democratic unions.” The latter are reported as favor72 Germany. Statisches Reichsamt.
Jahresberichte der Gewerbeaufsicht&beamten und
BergbehSrden. fur das Jahr 1922. Berlin, 1923, vol. 2, sec. 3, p. 124.
73 Korrespondenzblatt der Allgemeinen Deutschen Gewertsehaftsbundes, Berlin, June 3,
1922, pp. 3 0 9 -3 1 1 .
74 The Economic Journal, London, December, 1923, p. 5 1 5 : “ Tlie fam ily wage contro
versy in Germany,” by Edouard Hcimaim.

76 Idem, p. 513.

V IE W PO IN TS

ing a restriction of the number of children. On the other hand,
Christian families regard many children as “ a special blessing.” 79
The Tenth Congress of the Federation of Christian Metal Workers
of Germany which met at Fulda in August, 1922, recommended
“ that wages be based on workers’ output and that supplementary
family allowances be granted for the relief of large families so long
as the cost of living remains high.” 77
The development of a system of family allowances was advocated
in a resolution of the national conference of the Christian Miners’
Union, which met at Cologne in the latter part of April, 1924.78
The following is an extract from a resolution passed by the Tenth
Congress of the German Christian Trade-Unions, held at Essen in
the latter part of November, 1920:79
In view of the fact that wages represent not only a part of the costs of
production but also the income of the worker on which the latter and his family
must live, wages sufficiently high to make possible the existence of a whole
family should be paid. To this end the conjugal condition and number of chil
dren of the worker should be considered by the granting of sufficient bonuses
out of the adjustment fund (Ausgleichskasse) to be created for this purpose.
Such measures should, however, not lead to wage rates being based on the
minimum of existence. Single workers must be paid wages sufficiently high to
enable them to found a household of their own.

In connection with this resolution Louis Wimmer made the fol
lowing statement in the Zentralblatt der Christlichen Gewerkschaften Deutschlands: 80
The capitalistic conception which evaluates the worker merely as a part of
the costs of production can no more be accepted by us than the current social
istic conception that each worker is entitled to the full value of his labor. As
labor, in addition to nature, is the creator of all values, labor must produce
the means of existence for all people; i. e., also for those who for various
reasons are not able to exercise a gainful occupation. The solidarity so much
vaunted by the trade-unions must therefore begin with the distribution of the
product of labor. In the collective agreements hitherto concluded the tradeunions have followed the principles of the liberal-capitalistic economic system
and have tacitly accepted a wage system in which the actual performance of
labor is the sole measure for determining the compensation as the only suit
able wage system. The wage no longer adjusted itself to the worker but the
worker had to adjust his personal and family conditions to the wage.
New ways must be found to come as near as possible to the ideal of a fair
wage, i. e., the assuring of an existence to the workman’s family. To assure
to all a wage representing the minimum of existence of a normal family, i. e.,
to all without consideration of age, conjugal condition, and size of family,
seems to be precluded. It would not even be suitable to grant to all such an
income. * * *
Is it possible, in view of the present economic depression in Germany, to
allow to all workers annual earnings of 24,000 marks, which sum represents
the minimum of existence of a family not unnaturally limited in size? This
question must be answered flatly in the negative. Two proposals have been
made to assure to workers a fair wage, making it possible to support a family:
Mothers’ pensions and family bonuses. Mothers’ pensions are not practical
for several reasons. Among other things, they could not be adjusted to the
fluctations in the value of German currency. Family bonuses are to be pre
ferred because the workers are, through their organizations, in a position to
regulate in accordance with the cost of living the basis upon which family or
children’s bonuses are to be granted.
,0 Korrespondenzbl att der Allegemeinen Deutscliea Gewerkschaftsbundes, Berlin, June
3, 1922, p. 309.
77 International Labor Office. Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Sept. 15,
1922, p 8
™ Idem, Sept. 29, 1924, p. 22.
7aSoziale Praxis und Archiv fur Volkswohlfahrt, Berlin, May 18, 1921, cols. 532, 533.
80 Idem, cols. 533, 534.

GERM ANY

ECONOMISTS

Amid the pros and cons in re family allowances, Edouard Heimann claims he finds widespread agreement on one point, namely,
that “ the subsidizing of the father of a family must not be carried
to such lengths as to offer him an inducement to parenthood.” 81
To the objection of the employers that the social wage will add to
the number of unproductive laborers, Heimann points out that “ so
long as the family wage represents merely a lessening of the burden
of parenthood and not a positive reward for the production of chil
dren,” family men will continue to work.
In regard to the objection that the family wage will have the same
result as inflation, he declares that as long as the total-wage bill is
merely redistributed among married men and bachelors there will
be no basis for 44a rise in the general level of prices,” although some
changes would probably take place within certain groups of com
modities. For example, there would be a decline in the demand for
luxuries which appeal to the popular taste and an increase in the de
mand for necessary food and clothing. In the course of time pro
duction would adjust itself to these shifts in demand. Heimann
holds that “ the consumption of solid food and clothing is clearly
more beneficial to future production than the consumption of alcohol
and the latest fashions.”
The rush of family men into certain industries or localities, which
is feared by some employers, could be obviated, Heimann suggests,
by a universal pool system.
Among those who have advocated the social wage is W. Kulemann,
a leading economist, who some years ago acted as chairman of a
board of arbitration in a dispute in the metal industry of Bruns
wick. In this case the workers held that wages should be deter
mined by performance and not by the size of the family. The
majority of the board decided in favor of family allowances. The
reasons given by Kulemann for the adoption of the proposal of the
board were in part as follows: 82
There is no doubt that the father of a family is a more valuable member of
the State and of the economic community than a single man. * * * Mar
riages are being made more difficult because the incomes of most men are not
sufficient to support a family. It seems therefore only proper to place the
married man in a more favorable economic position. Not only consideration
as to increasing the population but also equity calls for the procedure. The
minimum of existence, whether measured from a physiological or a social
viewpoint, is manifestly much higher in the case of a family man than that of
a single person. The same income which makes a favorable existence possible
to the latter will mean starvation or at least great deprivation to the former.

Kulemann also arraigned the extravagant, highly remunerated
single male workman, with his self-indulgence, as being responsible
with the capitalistic spenders in helping to keep up the high prices
of necessities by a demand for the production of luxuries, and affect
ing detrimentally the country’s debit balance and foreign exchange
rate. Kulemann criticized as individualistic and indefensible the
81 The Economic Journal, London, December, 1923, p. 5 1 1 : “ The fam ily wage contro
versy in Germany,” by Edouard Heimann.
82 Soziale Praxis, Berlin, Apr. 20, 1921, pp. 4 1 4 -4 1 6 .

VIEW PO IN TS

reasoning that the economic value of work is entirely independent of
the conjugal condition of the worker.
Compensation for the activity of the worker does not, Kulemann holds, “ consist in handing him a certain quantity of paper the
value of which becomes more and more problematical from day to
day, but in giving him the means to procure a proper standard of
living. This view is conditioned upon the concrete circumstances
of the worker.”
Kulemann acknowledged the weight of the objection to family
allowances on the ground of possible discrimination by the employer
against the married man. He, however, regarded as a makeshift
and as an undesirable interference with management the suggested
plan of stipulating in collective agreements that a certain percentage
of married men shall be employed. While viewing favorably the
system of paying family allowances which was inaugurated by the
Federation of Employers in the Berlin Metal Industry in January,
1920, Kulemann thought the scheme should be improved in certain
respects. This federation paid to its male and female workers
allowances in accordance with the size of their families, the amounts
thus disbursed being assessed upon the federation members in pro
portion to the number of their employees. The average amount that
each member should pay in allowances was calculated, and if an
individual fund fell below this amount it was required to pay into
the general fund an additional sum to make up this discrepancy.
I f an individual firm’s personnel assessment was above the average
to be paid by each establishment, such firm received a reimbursement
from the aggregate fund. While the plan was adapted to this par
ticular employers’ federation, another local organization, Kulemann
felt, might not be strong enough to effect such a reform, or if its
example were not extensively imitated in other places its members
would suffer so seriously from competition that they would not be
able long to sustain their assumed burden. This danger might be
obviated if all establishments in the country in a specified industrial
group would form a joint equalization fund. Kulemann doubted
whether this could be accomplished by voluntary combination and
suggested the possibility of legislation.
It was also proposed that the existing compulsory organizations of
industrial accident associations could be used in connection with the
administration of the family-allowance joint funds.
To surmount the difficulties arising from the different living con
ditions in various localities, the following scheme was submitted by
Kulemann:
An ideal or a normal wage shall be determined by each industrial
group. * * * This ideal wage is the constant quantity which in order to
obtain the actual wage is influenced by a number of factors such as local
bonuses, which presuppose the division of the localities into classes according
to their cost-of-living conditions and other circumstances coming into con
sideration, and per capita bonuses depending upon the size of the family and
possibly the age of the children. These per capita bonuses should not be
borne by the individual employer but as a joint burden by the industry group
as such. * * ♦ It might be recommended that these bonuses be separated
from other receipts of the workers and paid out of the central fund, not by
the individual employer.

G ERM AN Y

In the above plan each worker would, as hitherto, receive his
wage from the employer, the amount to be determined in the cus
tomary manner.
A part of the voiced trade-union objection to family allowances
was attributed to the fact that labor leadership was in the hands
of young men. The workers specifically objected to these super
wages on the ground that the proposal for such allowances was
made by employers when demands for wage increases were made,
and the offering of these allowances to the married men alone and
the failure to advance the wages of single men struck a blow at the
solidarity of the workers.

NETHERLANDS83
In discussing the beginnings of family allowances in the Nether
lands, A. M. Joekes, of the Department of Labor, Commerce, and
Industry of that country, declares that one will search in vain
for any reference to such grants in the standard work on economics
of the liberal school at the close of the last century, at which time
the influence of the liberal school was predominant. Nor does one
find in the wage systems previous to that period any inclusion of
methods of payment which took into account the number of the
worker’s dependents. Within the last decade, however, the con
sideration of this aspect of the wage problem has played an in
creasingly important part.
Leaving out of account socialist propaganda, Catholic sociologists,
notably Professor Van Aken, Professor Aengenent, and Doctor
Aalberse, were the first to advocate openly in the Netherlands that
family responsibilities must be regarded in the matter of wage pay
ments. They held that a worker’s wage should primarily be propor
tioned to the value of the labor he performs, but that at the same
time he should receive a minimum wage adequate for the support of
himself and an average-sized family. “ The generally prevailing
wage must, therefore, be a ‘ family wage.’ In addition provision
must be made for the needs of large families by the payment of
children’s allowances for the benefit of families with more than the
average number of children.” a
STATE, PROVINCIAL, AND COMMUNAL SERVICES

The system of family allowances was first established in the State
civil service in 1912 for post-office employees. From 1916 to 1919
temporary cost-of-living bonuses were instituted to mitigate the
hardships resulting from high prices, and in these bonuses family
responsibilities were taken into account. At present each State
civil-service employee is granted for each child under 18 years of
age an amount equivalent to 2y2 per cent of such employee’s salary,
the minimum allowance per annum for each child being 50 guilders84
and the maximum 200 guilders. Manual wrorkers in the State civil
service are granted 1 guilder a week for each child. According
to a recent estimate, approximately “ 30,000 civil-service employees
come into consideration for children’s allowances.” This number
83 Except where otherwise specified the data in this section are from International
Labor Office, Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Aug. 3, 1923, pp. 1 3 - 2 0 :
“ Famiiy allowances in the Netherlands,” by A. M. Joekes; and data furnished by the
Minister of Finance and Secretary General of Labor, Commerce, and Industry of the
Netherlands, May 10 and May 26, 1924, respectively.
** Guilder at p a r = 4 0 .2 c e n ts; exchange rate varies.
° International Labor Office. Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Aug 3, 1923,
p. 14. Report by Dr. A . M. Jrekes.

100

N ETH E R L A N D S

constitutes about 83 per cent of all the civilians paid either directly
or indirectly from the State treasury. The number of children for
whom such allowances were granted in May, 1924, is estimated at
between 65,000 and 75,000. The amount paid out in such allowances
per annum in 1921, 1922, and 1923 was approximately 3,800,000
guilders. It is authoritatively stated that if these allowances had
not been made it would have been necessary to increase the salaries
in the State civil service.
Under a Government order railway employees are paid family
allowances under the same regulations as those in the civil service,
except that the first two children do not benefit. The establishment
of the system for the railway employees was fought, however, by
the Social Democratic and Democratic Parties in the second cham
ber and was also opposed by the railway workers’ representatives
serving on the central committee for the consideration of certain
personnel problems and on the railway wages board.
Approximately 26,000 workers in the Limburg mines, which are
for the most part controlled by the State, were in 1921 granted 5
guilders per month for each child under 14 years of age.85
By November, 1921, children’s allowances had been inaugurated
for the employees and officials of the majority of the Provinces and
municipalities. There 1vere some variations in the manner of grant
ing these allowances in the different Provinces. In North Brabant,
for example, the grants in 1920 were made as follows:
(a) To civil-service employees, including messengers and those
in somewhat similar grades of work, an addition of 5 per cent of
their respective annual salaries for each legitimate or illegitimate
child below 18 years of age, exclusive of the first two, the minimum
allowance being 100 guilders and the maximum 250 guilders per
annum for each child.
(b) To road workers and bridge tenders with more than two
legitimate or illegitimate children under 16 years of age 1 guilder
per week for each child exclusive of the first two.
Children’s allowances were not considered a part of the basic wage
or salary.
In Gelderland in 1921 the allowance for each legitimate or ille
gitimate child under 18 years of age of a statutory or nonstatutory
civil servant was equivalent to 2y2 per cent of the gross salary of such
civil servant, the minimum allowance being 50 guilders and the maxi
mum 200 guilders per annum.
There is also a considerable variety in the matter of regulations,
some communes making a grant equivalent to a certain percentage
of the salary (from 3 to 5 per cent in the different communes) for
each child below a stated age, ordinarily 16 or 18 years. Other
municipalities do not pay allowances for all children, excluding the
first two, three, or four. In some communes only those workers
below a certain salary grade receive allowances. The majority of
the communes for which data are available make these grants to both
salaried employees and wage earners. The prevailing allowance for
85
International Labor Office. Fam ily allowances.
reports, series D (wages and hours), No. 13.

Geneva, 1924, p. 88 .

Studies a&d

PRIVATE IN D U STRY

101

wage earners is 1 guilder a week for each child, although the pro
visions vary as to whether or not all dependent children shall
benefit.86
The municipal government of Arnhem has instituted a children’s
allowance fund for municipal employees and for private employees
in so far as private enterprises may be able to arrange with this
fund for such grants. Amsterdam and Rotterdam do not pay chil
dren’s allowances.
PRIVATE INDUSTRY

The payment of family allowances in private industry in the Neth
erlands has been established on a “ fairly large scale,” especially
during the last 10 years.® The greater expense, however, to employers
who make these grants and the possibility of discrimination against
applicants for work who are married are two obstacles to be reckoned
with in considering the prospect of further development of the sys
tem. These problems have been partially solved by regulating chil
dren’s allowances in collective agreements. Table 13 gives data as to
such collective contracts as were in effect on June 1, 1923:
T able 1 3.—N U M B E R OF CO LLECTIVE A G R E E M E N T S C O N T A IN IN G PROVISIONS AS
TO F A M IL Y AL LO W AN C ES, JUNE 1, 1923, AN D OF E STABLISH M EN TS A N D E M P L O Y
EES COVERED

Collec
tive
agree
ments

Industry group

Pottery, glass, etc____________________________________________
Woodworking, etc___ _______ ________________________________
Clothing, etc_______ -________________________ _____ _____ ____
Leather working_______________________________________ _____
Coal mines, peat_____________________________________________
Metal works________ ________ _______ __ .__________................._
Preparation of food and beverages_______________________________
Baking_________________________________________________
Cigar industry______ -_________ _____________ ______ _____
Agriculture_________________________ _____________________ _
Bulb industry_____ ______________________________________
Trade.......— z ___ -__-______________________ ________________
Transport__— —______________________ _____ _______________
Insurance________—— _____________________________________
Total__ ________ -__-

____

_______ _

3
3
1
2
1
1
30
17
g

Estab Employ-.
lish
ees
ments
covered covered
1
3
1
130
5
1
920

686
22$

314

100
130
66
6,650
27,736
a
25,352
20,000

2,490

2 ,8 0 0

1 67

81,380

8 62,624

8
1
1

64
10
20

110 per cent of the total number of collective agreements on June 1, 1923.
* About 8 per cent of the total number of establishments bound by collective agreement. (The total is
given as reported. The actual sum of items is 1,385.)
* 26 per cent of the total number of workers employed under the regulations of collective agreements on
June 1, 1923.

As the total number of nongovernmental workers in 1923 was
approximately 1,500,000, onlj 4 per cent, therefore, were covered by
collective agreements providing for family allowances.
Table 14 gives data with reference to the payment of family
allowances in the chief industries of the Netherlands. It will be
noted that in three out of the five industries the allowances are dis
bursed through funds established by the employers.
68 International Labor Office. Family allowances. Geneva, 1924, pp. 87, 88.
and reports, series D (wages and hours), No. IB.
• Idem, Aug. 3, 1923, p. 17. Report by Dr. A. M. Jrekes.

Studies

102

N ETH E R L A N D S

T a b le 14.— F A M IL Y AL LO W AN CES G R A N TE D IN TH E P R IN CIPAL IN D U STR IES
TH E N E T H E R L A N D S, JUNE 1, 1923

Industry

Age
Child
limit of Allow
with
child
for perance
child
whom
per
allowance allow
ance
week
begins
(years)

Boots and shoes:
Workers______ -____
Foremen.....................
Mining_______________
Baking._______________
Cigars_____ —____ ____

Third
—.do........
First........
Third___
Fourth__

14
14
14
14
14

Bulb................................

First..........

How allowance paid

Guilders *
2 75 \From

fund established by employers*
1 / ganization.
34
1 From fund established by employers.
1

or-

From fund established by employers* or
ganization. *

(«)

* Guilder at par=40.2 cents; exchange rate varies.
2 Dutch cents. Cent at par=0.402 cent.
3 Per month.
* There are two funds in the cigar industry, one in Amsterdam and one in Eindhoven.
* The worker is granted the use of fertilized land of a maximum of 40 square meters for the second growth.

The Netherlands Koman Catholic Leather Workers’ Union re
ported in April, 1924, that the shoe manufacturers contribute to a
family-allowance fund an amount equivalent to 3 per cent of their
wages bill; if the amount thus contributed is found to be too large
for the expense which it is designed to meet, the percentage may be
reduced. There must, however, be sufficient money in the fund to
cover the amounts disbursed in family allowances.
The general regulations in regard to the payment of children’s
allowances do not apply in unemployment, accidents, or strikes.
As a rule, the contributions of employers to family-allowance funds
are based on the total pay roll, being, on the average, equivalent to
about 1 per cent of such pay roll.
In general, the family-allowance funds in the Netherlands do not
pay maternity benefits and nursing bonuses nor carry on socialservice work, nor have these funds organized any central committee
or federation, as has been done in France and in Belgium.
MOVEMENT FOR STATE CONTROL FOR FAMILY ALLOWANCES

The problems arising from industrial competition in connection
with the introduction of family allowances have led to the proposal
to establish for the whole country, by law, a common fund for such
allowances, to which fund employers would be obliged to contribute,
and out of which all workers having more than a specified number
of children would be paid a supplement to their wages. The creation
of a fund of this character has been earnestly advocated again and
again before the States General by the Minister of Labor, Commerce,
and Industrjr. His introduction of a bill for this purpose was post
poned at first because other and more important social matters
claimed attention. The question, however, came up in the Second
Chamber in the discussion relative to the Department of Labor’s
estimates for 1921, after a motion had been made by the Catholic
members urging the enactment of a law for the creation of a
“ national children’s fund and inviting the Government to intro
duce in the States General a proposal with that object based on the
principles of compulsory insurance.” The vote was 58 to 21 in
favor of that part of the motion which advocated a national chil

V IE W PO IN TS

103

dren-allowance fund, but that part relating to compulsory insur
ance was defeated by a vote of 45 to 38.
In May, 1923? the matter was again discussed in the First Cham
ber, and the Minister of Labor, Commerce, and Industry reported
that a bill for children’s allowances had been drafted, but that he
intended to postpone its introduction until the industrial situation
was more promising. The proposed bill was favored by the Na
tional Federation of Christian Trade-Unions, which, on October
15, 1923, in a communication to the Minister of Labor, Commerce,
and Industry, expressed regret that the bill had not been enacted
and urged its enactment at the earliest possible moment.87
VIEWPOINTS

In the conclusions of the Stork Commission, appointed some years
ago by the Netherlands Government to investigate whether the wage
should be related to the size of the family, the wage is considered
simply as the purchasing price for work performed without taking
into account at all the needs of the workers.88
The present Government holds that the needs of its civil-service
employees must be regarded in the matter of their remuneration
and looks upon children’s allowances as a just institution. In the
judgment of the Secretary General of Labor, Commerce, and In
dustry, the system of family allowances, as a rule, is in the interest
of society and “ equitable for the workers with large families.”
A very large majority of the public-service employees, especially
those who are members of unions affiliated with the central inde
pendent and neutral trade-union federations, of whom there are
38,000, are not in favor of children’s allowances. The central sec
tarian trade-union federations, with an affiliation of 17,000 civilservice employees, defend the institution.
The following resolution, adopted unanimously at the joint con
gress in Amsterdam in January, 1921, of the Netherlands Federa
tion of Trade-Unions, the largest of the trade-union federations in
the Netherlands (independent) and the Netherlands General TradeUnion Federation (neutral) expresses the stand of those federations
at that time.89
This congress, having regard to the fact that the system of family and
children’s allowances is being introduced not only in State undertakings but
also in privately owned industries, considers—
(1) That experience has shown that the system tends to keep wages low
and is therefore acceptable to employers.
(2) That the Government introduced it for State employees in order to
maintain a low basic-wage level.
(3) That it is an attempt, under the pretext of “ payment according to need,”
to avoid the introduction of an adequate standard or minimum wage, “ pay
ment according to need ” being impossible under present social conditions.
(4) That the system hinders good relations between workers with large
families and those with small families (or none) who perform the same work.
(5) That it tends to destroy the unity of organized workers in their
struggle for an adequate wage, undermines the activities of trade-unions, and
perpetuates existing inadequate wages.
87 Data furnished by the National Federation of Christian Trade-Unions of the Nether
lands. July 17, 1924.
88 Engels, JFrans : Naar aanleiding van ’t Genzinsloon. Antwerp, 1922, p. 847.
88 Labor Overseas, London, January-March. 1921, p. 58; Van de Walle, F .: Het
Kinderbijslagstelsel, reprint from, de Vakbeweging, May-June, 1921, p. 20.

104

NETHERLAiNDS

The congress therefore demands both from the Government and from private
employers that they shall, after consulting the trade-unions as the existing
representatives of the workers, draw up and introduce wage regulations based
on the principle of equal pay for equal work, with a fixed minimum which
shall insure to all workers an adequate existence for themselves and their
families; and calls upon all who, by remaining outside the trade-unions, hinder
the struggle for better wages to join their trade-union, in order that the
strongest possible action may be begun in opposition to family allowances and
all other systems which tend to keep wages low.

A third nonsectarian trade-union federation proposed to forbid
affiliated trade-unions from signing any agreement providing for
family allowances.90
On December 29, 1919, the Protestant Christian Federation of
Railroad and Street Car Employees declared itself in favor of chil
dren’s allowances.87 Both the Catholic and the Protestant Christian
federations of trade-unions are in favor of the creation by law of a
national fund for children’s allowances, holding that family allow
ances will bring about the better nourishment of children, tend to
relieve the heads of large families who are overwhelmed with re
sponsibilities, and benefit society in general. The proposal of the
two federations is for an allowance, supplementary to wages, for
each child under a given age, ordinarily 14 years, beginning with
the third or fourth child. The National Federation of Christian
Trade-Unions of the Netherlands, in its communication to the Min
ister of Labor, Commerce, and Industry urging the enactment of
the bill for a children’s allowance fund (see p. 103) called attention
to the fact that workers with families experience the greatest hard
ship in an industrial crisis and that the assessment for a children’s
allowance fund would not be a great burden, it being estimated that
the contributions from employers would be 1 per cent of their wage
In addition to the trade-union organizations various other bodies
have expressed themselves as for or against the family-allowance
system. Among the important nontrade-union meetings at which
such allowances have been discussed were the sessions of the Asso
ciation of Political Economy and Statistics in 1918, the Second
Christian Social Congress at Amsterdam in 1919, and the Congress
on Social Insurance at Utrecht in 1921.
The hostility of the Social Democrats to the system is the outcome
of a viewpoint somewhat similar to that of the non-Christian tradeunions. Some persons in the Social Democratic party, however, ad
vocate an allowance from public funds to everjr mother whose income
is inadequate, such allowance to be compensation for her services as
a mother, in other words, a “ motherhood wage.” 91
Although the Social Democrats are for the most part obstruc
tionists in the movement for children’s allowances, one of the lead
ers of this party in the Netherlands more than a decade ago stated
before the Association for Political Economy that the payment of
such allowances “ was quite compatible with socialist doctrines and
w Data furnished by the National Federation of Christian Trade-Unions of the Nether
lands, July 17, 1924.
90 Labor Overseas, London, January-M arch, 1921, p. 13.
01
For various articles bearing on the subject o f children’s allowances, see De GMs
(organ of the National Federation of Christian T radeU nions in the Netherlands),
Rotterdam, vol. 11, Nos. 5, 6, 8, 1 0 ; vol. 12, Nos. 4, 8 ; vol. 13, Nos. 4, 5 ; vol. 14, No. 7.
See also Roomsch-Katholieken Centralen Raad van Bedrijven.
Comissie tot het ontwerpen van een modeL-kindertoeslag-regeling. R apport: Kindertoeslag. Utrecht [1 9 2 0 ? ] ,

105

VIEW PO IN TS

aims,” and in his opinion could be backed by Social Democrats,
“ provided that such allowances were not abused and made a means
of forcing down the general level of wages, and that the amount of
the allowances themselves was sufficient to meet the additional ex
pense of large families.”
As a matter of fact, in the discussions on children’s allowances
before the Second Chamber in 1921, the Social Democrats did sup
port the proposal for payment of such allowances; but took the
stand that there should be a public fund out of which these bene
fits should be accorded to all tamilies with inadequate incomes and
not merely to the families of wage earners.
Some feminists disapprove family allowances because of the con
viction that these allowances tend to make women more dependent.
A committee was created by the Union of Women’s Interests for the
special purpose of opposing the institution of these grants.
Savornin Lahman, the leader of the Christian Historical Union
(Protestant) in 1921 is among those who object to children’s allow
ances for fear they will lessen the sense of responsibility which the
fathers of families should have.
In his brochure on The Family Wage and Large Families, J. B.
Bosmans, declaring that the question of family allowance is one
of equity and love of one’s neighbor, suggests that the matter should
not be made a party issue.92
It is thought by some that children’s allowances will reduce indus
trial friction, as the needs of large families have figured so promi
nently in wage controversies.
m Engels, Frans; Naar aaaleiding van ’t Gezinsloon.

Antwerp, 1922, p. 341.

AUSTRIA
PUBLIC SERVICE**

Federal Government.—Family allowances were first granted to
employees in the Federal service in 1016, and the practice has con
tinued ever since, although the form in which these grants have
been made has been somewhat modified.
A few years later, under a provision which was effective for
about 12 months, State employees were granted what was termed a
shopping allowance, computed on rationed articles, the amount
varying according to the number of persons in the family. The
absolute increase “ in the cost of one ration of controlled articles
during the month was ascertained, and each State employee received
as his cost-of-living bonus as many times this amount as there were
persons in his family.” 04
In July, 1924, all salaried employees in the civil service of the
Federal Government were covered by the family-allowanee system,
as were also a small percentage of manual workers whose compen
sation is “ similar to that of the salaried employees.” Manual
workers in the Federal service whose remuneration is fixed by col
lective agreement are not granted family allowances.
Of the 107,000 salaried employees, 58 per cent, having 150,000
dependents (wives and children), are entitled to family allowances.
The allowance for a wife is 600,000 kronen05 per annum, and a
grant of the same amount is made for each dependent child up
to completion of the twenty-first year, regardless of the number
of children. The amounts disbursed in such grants from 1921 to
1923 were as follows: In 1921, 1,100,000,000 kronen; in 1922, 11,000,000,000 kronen; in 1923, 63,000,000,000 kronen.
Among the provisions in the salary act of July 18, 1924, are the
following: A Federal salaried employee may be granted an allow
ance for his legitimate child over 21 years of age, if such child,
through mental or physical disabilities or serious disease, is pre
vented from earning a living, or is pursuing a course of studies
or receiving technical training and so not yet able to support him
self. In the latter case, however, the age limit is 24 years. Under
certain circumstances an employee may receive an allowance for a
stepchild of legitimate birth or an adopted child or an illegitimate
child of his own under 21 years of age who is dependent on him for
support.
Married men and widowers in the Federal service who are en
titled to allowances for children also receive a household allowance
of 600,000 kronen per annum. A permanent salaried employee who
98
When not otherwise specified the information in this section was furnished by the
Austrian Ministry of Finance, July 2 3 , 1924.
94 International Labor Office. International Labor Review, Geneva, July, 1924, p. 3 7 :
“ Sliding scale of wages in Austria,” by Carl Forehheimer.
86 Krone is now worth about 0.01415 cent.

106

PRIVATE IN D U ST R Y

107

is divorced and obliged to support his divorced wife receives the
same grants under the family allowance system as a married or
widowed salaried employee.
Family allowances are not included in the salary upon which the
Federal employees’ pension is computed.
A lump-sum donation is generally made to an employee in case
of accident or sickness in his family. Furthermore, the Federal
employee and his family are insured against sickness.
/States and communes,—The various Austrian States and com
munes and the city of Vienna grant allowances under systems similar
to that established for Federal employees.
PRIVATE INDUSTRY
INSTITUTION OE FAMILY ALLOWANCES BY LAW

Allowances for wives and children of industrial employees were
provided for in the law of December 21, 1921,96 abolishing after
January 8, 1922, the existing State subsidies “ to reduce the selling
prices of flours and fats,” which, though not representing a very
great expense to the Government when first inaugurated, aggregated
at this time more than 200,000,000 kronen. As salaries and wages at
this period were not sufficient to meet the enormous cost of living,98
the act provided that every salaried employee and manual worker
(apprentices being included), regardless of sex, who is employed all
or the greater part of the working time by the same employer should,
in addition to wages or salary, be paid a bonus by the employer,
the amount of such bonus to be fixed by a joint committee composed
of representatives of employers and employees. An additional
bonus of equal amount was to be granted for a wife unless she was
industrially employed. A man could receive an allowance for a
common-law wife if she had “ been living with him in a common
household ” for over six months or for a woman who had kept house
for him for at least half a year.
The law provided that these allowances should be paid with the
wage or salary, but in advance of the period for which the employer
paid such wage or salary.
Employers who granted their workers rations of bread, flour, and
fat in the amount stipulated in the law, or who allowed their work
ers land or the right to keep livestock, etc., which enabled them to
secure such foodstuffs, were not required to pay money allowances
unless the rations, grants in kind, agricultural privileges, etc., were
less than the stipulated amount, in which case the deficiency was to
be offset by money allowances. These regulations also governed
the allowances for wives, common-law wives, and housekeepers.
Under this law, male employees (as defined in the act), manual
and nonmanual, were entitled to allowances for each of their chil
dren (including stepchildren and foster children) until such children
reached the age of 14 years, but this age limit could be extended to
Bundcsgesetzblatt fur die Repub] ik Osterreich.
[V ienna], Dec. 27, 1921, pp. 2 1 6 7 2174.
88 International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Mar. 10,

1022, p. 573.

61243°— 26------- 8

108

AUSTRIA

enable the children to complete the elementary and grammar-school
grades. Home workers were also, under certain regulations, to be
granted allowances for their dependent children. Money allowances
were not to be paid for children when allowances in kind were
received for them.
Female employees were entitled to allowances for their children
if there was no other person legally responsible for their support
or the person legally responsible for their maintenance did not sup
port them.
The law also provided that cost-of-living bonuses and bonuses for
wives and dependent children should be granted to persons in receipt
of pensions and unemployment, sickness, pregnancy, and certain
other benefits.99
The act made provision for family-allowance funds to equalize the
expenses of employers for family allowances and to protect married
men from being discriminated against in the matter of employment.
Industrial district commissioners were to administer the funds and
act as accounting officers, except in the case of employers of agri
cultural and forestry workers and workers insured in sick funds,
in which cases they were to utilize the commune in which the agri
cultural undertakings were carried on and the accounting officers
of the sick-insurance funds, respectively. The creation of arbitra
tion commissions to adjust differences of opinion between employers
and the accounting officers in regard to equalization was provided
for by the law.
In June, 1922, the procedure for pooling the cost of allowances
for agricultural and certain other workers was abolished.1 During
the first half of 1922 it was made “ permissible through collective
agreements to include allowances for wives in wages,” and so the
allowances for wives provided for by the original act are no longer
paid.2
Children’s allowances are still being paid, the time limit of the law
having been extended again and again. Because of the continued
depreciation of the currency, which produced a steady rise in the
prices of the necessaries of life, however, the value of the children’s
allowances has become correspondingly less.3 The amount granted
per week per child is now only 1,155 paper kronen, which, because
of the depreciation of the currency, are equivalent to from onefourth to one-third of 1 per cent of the weekly wage. Indeed, the
“ cumbersome ” fund machinery is reported as being out of all pro
portion to the inadequate relief offered by the present insignificant
allowances for children.2 The General Confederation of Austrian
Trade-Unions states, however, that there is a demand that these
legal allowances be granted until “ the problem of children’s insur
ance has been solved in some other legal manner.” 6
99
International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Mar. 10,
1922, p. 573.
1 International Labor Office. Family allowances. Geneva, 1924, p. 116. Studies and
reports, series D (wages and hours). No. 13.
2 Data furnished by the president of the Central Federation of German-Austrian
Industry, Apr. 24, 1924.
3 International Labor Office. International Labor Review, Geneva, July, 1924, pp. 38,
8 9 : “ Sliding wage scales in Austria,” by Carl Forchbeimer.
• Data furnished by the General Confederation of Austrian Trade-Unions, July 2 3, 1924.

PRIVATE IN D U STRY

109

A renewed attempt has recently been made to secure the passage
of a bill granting to each worker whose wages are fixed by collec
tive agreement a bonus for each dependent child under 14 years
of age, the amount of the allowance to be determined by the col
lective agreement, and, in cases in which an employers’ organization
is a party to the agreement, provision to be made in the agreement
for a family-allowance fund;6 but from the attitude of capital
and of labor (see pp. 110 and 111) such a measure, it would seem,
stands little chance of enactment into law.
COLLECTIVE CONTRACTS

In 1914 certain employers decided to grant, in particular instances
or regularly, family allowances to the dependents of their salaried
employees and workers who had to leave their homes for mili
tary service in the war. No special importance was attached to this
innovation. In 1915, however, such grants to their employees were
being made by bankers, mine operators, and employers in the iron
and steel industries and in other industrial groups. In some cases
the allowances were for children, in other cases for wives.6 Not
withstanding the substantial decline in wages after the war, the
practice of granting such allowances through collective agreements
has not made great progress in Austria.
The amounts of these allowances vary considerably in different
agreements, and until recently have been subject to continual modi
fication on account of the rapid changes in the currency. As a rule,
however, the amounts are so small as to be of very little assistance
to the family.6
Banks (except the private banks) pay married employees in the
higher and lower grades about 6 per cent more than single em
ployees and an allowance for each child of 10 per cent o f the
bonuses granted for clothes and certain household expenses other
than food and 10 per cent of the vacation bonus. When there
is a large number of children in the family, the allowance for them
is limited to an amount equivalent to one-third of the employee’s
claim for bonuses. Insurance companies grant 100,000 kronen a
month for one child, 175,000 kronen for two children, 225,000 kronen
for three children, and 250,000 kronen for four or more children.7
The allowance for the wife or commouu-law wife of an industrial
employee is approximately 12y2 per cent of his basic salary, and that
for each of his children under 14 years of age, not exceeding three,
is 2y2 per cent of such salary.6 According to the International
Labor Year Book for 1923, such allowances were being granted to
approximately 125,000 workers and salaried employees in about 16
to 18 per cent of all private industrial establishments. These com
paratively high allowances are being granted without recourse to
funds, experience having shown that such adjustment of costs is
not necessary.
Provisions in collective agreements for family allowances for
manual workers apply mainly to industries outside of Vienna. In
6 Data furnished by the Ministry of Social Welfare of Austria, Oct. 6, 1924.

T Data furnished by the General Confederation of Austrian Trade-Unions, Apr. 23, 1924.

110

AU STRIA

such industries the grants are at fixed hourly rates and not as per
centages of the wage.8 Mine workers receive an average of 1,000
kronen per child per shift.9 In the metal industry so-called house
hold allowances are paid in all industrial centers of Lower Austria,
being about 20 per cent of the hourly wage rate of the workers
receiving such allowances, regardless of the number of children.8
In Vienna the collective agreements in the metal industry pro
vide, instead of definite family allowances, fixed hourly allowances
regardless of productivity, the amounts of such grants being based
on age groups, namely, whether the worker is under 17, between 17
and 22, or over 22 years of age. This method has been adopted for
accounting purposes, it being assumed that workers over 22 years of
age are married. There is no clearing fund in connection with
this system, such a fund being reported as apparently unnecessary.8
In the steel industry, the Styrian Steel Trust, employing 14,000
workers, pays a family allowance of 65,000 kronen a week, irrespec
tive of the number of children, while in the Alpinen Montan Steel
Works, which has a force of 7,000 workers, the family allowance is
60,000 kronen per week, regardless of the number of children.10
VIEWPOINTS

The Austrian Ministry of Finance states that the family-allowance system would be abolished altogether if salaries could be re
stored to their pre-war level, while the Ministry of Social Welfare
declares that at present no decisive judgment can be passed upon
the family wage.
Generally speaking, the Federal Government employees wish to
have family allowances continued. Some however, contend, “ that
salaries should be governed solely by the work performed.” 11
Before the Federal salary law of July 18, 1924, was passed, the
Government, in view of the proposed salary increases, had intended
to abolish the existing system of family allowances and substitute
for it some scheme of family insurance, to be subsidized by the State
in the amount then being disbursed in family allowances. It was
planned to meet the remaining costs of the insurance scheme by con
tributions from the Government employees themselves. The latter,
however, demanded that the existing system of family allowances
be continued, declaring that the present economic conditions of
employees in the Government service “ would not permit any further
deductions.” 11
The president of the Central Federation of German-Austrian
Industry holds that when adverse economic conditions force a
country to pay low real wages, family allowances are more or less
necessary as palliatives in order that the workers with heavy family
responsibilities may be assured a minimum of existence. Austrian
industrialists have, therefore, had recourse to this system although
clearly recognizing its unfavorable influence upon production, but
employers as a class are aligned against the family wage.
8 Data furnished by the president of the Central* Federation of German -Austrian
Industry, Apr. 24, 1924.
• Data furnished by the Ministry of Social W elfare of Austria, Oct. 6, 1924.
10 Data furnished by the General Confederation of Austrian Trade-Unions, Apr. 23, 1924.
11 Data furnished by the Austrian Ministry of Finance, July 23, 1924.

VIEW PO IN TS

111

In genera], the members of the General Confederation of Austrian
Trade-Unions 44oppose the social wage for trade-union reasons,”
and especially because of the fear that employers will not employ
married workers.12
A minority of the workers are reported to desire that children’s
allowances under the law of December 21, 1921, be abolished.13 The
Social Democratic Party, however, has demanded that children’s al
lowances be raised to 10 times what they are now, the payment of
these grants to begin with the second child, also asking the retention
of the procedure for pooling the costs of these grants. Later it made
a compromise proposal, to increase allowances to about five times the
present amount and to abolish the complicated fund machinery, ex
perience having shown that workers with large families did not find
it difficult to get jobs.
The Christian trade-unions of Austria are in favor of a wage
principle by which remuneration is based on work performed, with
a grant in the form of a family allowance. The amount paid for
the work performed should be fixed by collective agreement, the
bonus for family responsibilities should be regulated by law, and
provision should be made for family-allowance funds.
The Christian trade-unions make the following objections to the
proposal to regulate family allowances through collective contracts: 14
(1) Such regulation would increase the difficulties of wage negotia
tions; the workers would have to give up many just demands in order
to secure family allowances; (2) These grants would represent in
dividual gratuities of the employer to family men, who would be
exposed to the danger of being discriminated against in periods of
economic strain.
33 Data furnished by the General Confederation of Austrian Trade-Unions.
13 Data furnished by the president of the Central Federation o f German-Austrian

Industry, Apr. 24, 1924.

M Data furnished by the Central Committee o f Christian Trade-Unions of Austria,

July 23, 1924.

BRITISH EMPIRE
AUSTRALIA
PUBLIC SERVICE

Commonwealth.—While in 1918 it was suggested by Justice
Powers, of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitra
tion, that the Federal Government of Australia should pay allow
ances of £5 a year to its public-serviee employees for all children be
yond the third,16 it was not until 1920, after the findings of the
Royal Basic Wage Commission (see p. 113) had been presented, that
children’s allowances were paid in the Federal service. The present
allowance of 5s. per week for every child under 14 years of age is
paid to employees whose salaries are under £500 per annum.17
The Commonwealth system of family allowances is self-support
ing, “as the arbitrator in fixing the minimum and maximum salaries
for the service adopts a scale £10 lower than the basic wage18 indi
cated by the Statistician’s figures. For example, the arbitrator
(Arlee Hunt), in delivering judgment, found that the basic wage for
the 12 months ending June, 1923, was £205 8s. according to the Statis
tician’s index numbers. From this amount he deducted 0.84 of £13
to cover the child-endowment payments, as it had been pointed out
that child-endowment statistics showed that the average payment
was 0.84 of adult employees’. This deduction amounted to £10 18s.,
which being deducted from £205 8s. gave £194 10s., and he (the
arbitrator) then fixed £195 as the basic wage for the Commonwealth
public service.” 19 In effect therefore, a given total amount of wages
and salaries is distributed according to family needs.20
The experience of the Federal public service has indicated that
even children’s allowances which have been acknowledged as in
adequate have alleviated substantially the heavy financial burden of
the family man.21
States.—There is no family-allowance system in the civil service
of the States of the Commonwealth.
PRIVATE INDUSTRY

Family allowances are not paid in nongovernmental industries in
Australia.22
10 Piddington, A. B . : The Next Step— A Family Basic Income.

Second impression.

London, 1922, p. 66 ,

17 Data furnished by the Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics of Australia,
May 29, 1924.
18For discussion of the “ basic w a g e ” see pp. 113 to 116.
19 Data furnished by the secretary of the Australian Letter Carriers’ Association.
20 Queensland. Department of Labor.
The Queensland Industrial Gazette, Brisbane,
March, 1925, p. 211.
21 Piddington, A. B . : The Next Step— A Family Basic Income.
London, 1922, p. 30.
Second impression.
82 Data furnished by the Commonwealth Statistician of Australia, May 29, 1924.

112

AU STRALIA

113

FAMILY ALLOWANCES AND THE “ BASIC WAGE ”

While in actual practice family allowances in Australia are con
fined entirely to the Commonwealth public service* the whole history
of wage regulation in that country, m which the Government plays
such an unusual part, seems to form, as it were, a genealogical back
ground for the important and repeated proposals that have been
made in recent years for family allowances in Australia.
A brief resume o f certain of these proposals and the resultant
attitudes throws some significant lights on the question at issue.
In determining “ fair and reasonable wages” in what is known
as the “ Harvester case” Hon. Henry Bournes Higgins, justice of
the High Court of Australia and president of the Commonwealth
Court of Conciliation and Arbitration for 14 years, adopted in 1907
as & “ standard of 6fair and reasonable conditions of remuneration ’
* * * the normal needs of the average employee regarded as a
human being living in a civilized community.”
The daily wage fixed by him as necessary to enable the worker at
that time to maintain such standard of living was Ts. This wage
was afterwards termed the “ basic wage” and was increased from
time to time in accordance with the fluctuations in the cost of living
as calculated by the Commonwealth Statistician. Criticisms of the
manner in which the basic wage was arrived at and subsequently
adjusted can not be here taken up, but it may be said in passing that
the wage was originally fixed without adequate evidence on the cost
o f living, and an analysis of the changes made in the basic wage by
the application of price index numbers also discloses painful dis
crepancies.23
The increasing dissatisfaction in regard to wage decisions led in
1919 to the appointment of a Royal Commission on the Basic Wage,
which found that the actual weekly cost of living at that time ranged
from £5 6s. 2d. in Brisbane to £5 17s. in Sydney.24
As soon as the report of the commission was submitted the Prime
Minister secured from the Commonwealth Statistician a statement as
to the practicability of paying to every adult male a wage of £5 16s.
a week. In this statement the following declaration was made *25
Sneli a wage can not be paid to all adult employees because the whole pro
duced wealth of the country, including all that portion of produced wealth
which now goes in the shape of profit to employers would not, if divided up
equally amongst employees, yield the necessary weekly amount.

The Prime Minister then requested the chairman of the commis
sion, A. B. Piddington, to discuss the matter with him. As a result
of this, conference Piddington immediately prepared a memorandum
suggesting a way out of the economic dilemma. This memoran
dum 26 stated that the basic wage at that time was supposed to pro
vide: “ (a) In New South Wales awards the actual cost of living of
a man, wife, and two dependent children; (6) elsewhere in the Com
28 Australia. Royal Commission oa the Basic W age. R eport Melbourne, 1920, pp. 8, 9.
* Idem, pp. 13, 58.
25 Piddington, A . B . : The Next Step— A Family Basic Income.
London, 1922, p. 22.
Second impression.
^ Australia.
Royal Commission on the Basic W age,
Report.
Melbourne. 1920,
pp. 8 9 -9 3 .

114

BR IT ISH E M P IR E

monwealth the same, but with three children (henceforth called the
typical family).”
As such a large number of the workers in New South Wales were
under the wage awards of the Commonwealth, Piddington took as a
basis of his discussion the family with three children. He declared
that while the present wage system is founded on the theory that
the wage minimum “ is that which will enable employees to live in
comfort ” it does not bring about the supposed result, for if the basic
wage does meet the cost of living of the typical family of five—
(1) All families with more than three dependent children suffer privation.
(2) All families with less than three children receive more than is necessary
for the living wage.
(3) All unmarried men receive what would support a wife and also three
children.

In this connection he quoted the following figures from the 1911
census:
T a b le 15.—CONJUGAL CONDITION OF MALE WAGE EARNERS IN 1911
Children under
Conjugal condition

Unmarried_________ ___________ ______ ________ ________ _________ _____
Families with grown-up children_____________________________ ______ ____
Married, but no children__________ !__________________ _________ __
Married, with one child__ _______ ____ ____ _______________ _____ _______
Married, with two children______________________________________________

Other husbands with children_________________________ ________

Total
male
wage
earners

Average
Number per male
wage,
earner

438,735
90,617
69,174
78,288
77,752
220,400

78,288
155,504
645,626

974,966

879,418

0.90

Taking these 1911 census figures as a basis, Piddington assumed
the number of male employees in 1920 to be 1,000,000, and the num
ber of children 900,000, instead of 3,000,000 as would be the case if
the average number of children for each male wage earner was three.
According to his calculations, therefore, Australian industries in
1920 were paying for “ 450,000 nonexistent wives and 2,100,000 non
existent children.
The conclusion is reached that “ from the produced wealth of the
country, its children have less than enough in order that the un
married childless may have more than enough.” Piddington ex
plains how the Royal Commission’s finding of £5 ICs. as the actual
cost of living for a man, wife, and three children can be made effec
tive so that each employee may have “ the actual cost of living
according to its true incidence,” as follows:
(a)
To secure the actual cost of living for each employee according to its
true incidence, it is desirable that every employee should receive enough to
keep a man and wife—
(1) Because during bachelorhood, which ends, on the average for the whole
Commonwealth, at the age of 29, ample opportunity should be provided to save
up for equipping the home.
(2) Because a man should be able to marry and support a wife at an early
age.
The figures as to 450,000 nonexistent wives may therefore be disregarded.

115

AUSTRALIA

(ft) Every.employee must be paid the same amount of wages; otherwise
married men with children will be at a disadvantage. There is, indeed, 110
conceivable reason, either on economic or humane grounds, why an employer’s
obligation to each individual employee should vary with the number of that
employee’s children.
(c) There is, however, every reason why employers as a whole throughout
the Commonwealth should pay for the living needs of their employees as a
whole. Indeed, that they should do so is the basis of the whole theory of the
living wage. The proposal below for a tax upon employers as a whole is based
upon this consideration.
(d) The desired result can be secured by a basic wage of £4 per week paid
by the employer to the employee, and the payment of an endowment for all
dependent children, whether three, or less, or more, in the family at the
rate of 12s. per week.
Thus the employee would receive as follows:
Per week

s. d.

If a bachelor_________________ 4 0 O'
«.
Married but with no dependent
of £4
0
children____________________ 4 0 0 perComposed
week
plus
Married, with 1 child_________ 4 12 0 child endowment 12
Married, with 2 children______ 5 4 0 by Commonwealth 24
Married, with 3 children____ _ 5 16 0
36
Married, with 4 children______ 6 8 0 Government of— 48
60
Married, with 5 children______ 7 0 0
And so on adding 12s. per week for each child.
The above table shows that every basic wage earner’s family in the Com
monwealth with even one dependent child is now receiving less than a reason
able standard of comfort. When it comes to three dependent children, the
shortage is formidable and justifies the evidence given on August 25th by the
president of the Hobart Chamber of Commerce (Mr. Malcolm Kennedy) that
with prices as they are, a man with a wife and three children* on a wage of
£3 ITs. Od. “ is having a rotten bad time of it.”

Piddington also estimated that if the supposition continues to be
held that each male employee has a wife and three children to main
tain, 386,000 (1920 estimate) or 38.6 per cent of all the male em
ployees (married or unmarried) in Australia or approximately TO
per cent of all married male employees would be debarred from the
“ reasonable standard” of comfort determined by the Basic Wage
Commission.
It was estimated that industry could save somewhere around
£65,000,000 annually by paying a basic wage of £4 a week to the
1,000,000 adult males and 12s. a week to their children instead of
paying all adult males a basic wage of £5 16s. per week. All com
putations in the memorandum were based on the assumption that the
increment in the basic wage would be added also to the wage of em
ployees then being paid more than the basic wage. It was sug
gested in the memorandum as an alternative scheme that the fund
for children’s allowances could be raised by a tax upon employers.27
The work of the Royal Commission on the Basic Wage in ascer
taining the actual cost of living of a family of five vividly demon
strated, according to Piddington, “ the impossibility of providing
by means of the male worker’s wages alone for the enjoyment by all
employees and their families of a real standard of comfort. * * *
The doctrine of a living income has now reached a new point of de
parture.” The Australian people, he holds, will persist in be27 Australia.

02, 93<

Royal Commission

the Basic W age.

Report.

Melbourne,

1920, pp.

116

BR IT ISH E M P IR E

lieving this doctrine in the face of the present attempts to oppose it,
yet such doctrine can not be put into practice under the existing
system. Despite the setbacks and the hostility to “ a new departure,
that new departure must be made.” 28
In his book entitled “ The Next Step—A Family Basic Income,”
Piddington arraigns the present wage system, “ which in the name
of family support penalizes parenthood while simultaneously offer
ing money prizes to the childless,” and forecasts that if the prin
ciple of children’s allowances were established on a “ sensible scale ”
it would counteract “ the impelling force of what Mr. Knibbs [now
Sir George H. Knibbs] has called the 4Malthusian drift,’ which
can be discerned in all the western races, and would make every
home a welfare center.” While the influence of this proposed
scheme on the birth rate is logically secondary to the immediate
aim of such scheme, the question of population, as a matter of fact,
Piddington holds, may be more important.29
Mr. Piddington recently declared that Australia had adopted the
living-wage doctrine but had never taken the requisite steps to
“ carve it u p ” and “ make it good, sound practice.” A doctrine
without practice is a hypocrisy. The hypocrisy of the present “ mini
mum-wage lie ” is the greatest obstacle to the progress of industrial
arbitration.80
Hon. Henry Bournes Higgins, president of the Commonwealth
Court of Conciliation and Arbitration from 1907 to 1921, suggested
the possibility of children’s allowances for Australia as a measure
for reducing the basic wage to an amount sufficient to cover the
normal expenses of a man or of a man and wife, and that the cost
of such allowances should be borne by the country as a whole.31
Mr. Justice Powers, who succeeded Mr. Justice Higgins in the
above-mentioned court, refused in a test case to adopt the Australian
standard wage for five persons, mainly because it was not practi
cable at that time “ as a flat rate.” The decision was considered
inimical to the unions, but the justice held that they might later
be grateful for such decision, as, in connection with the refusal
of their demand, the justice declared that the present system was
“ smashing family life in Australia,” and the sure way to secure the
Australian standard for every worker was to endeavor to establish
through legislation a basic wage which would be adequate for a
man and wife and an allowance for each dependent child.82
In a recent article James T. Sutcliffe, of the Commonwealth sta
tistical bureau, speaks of “ the folly of endeavoring to fix wages
upon the requirements of a fictitious family and without regard to
the total quantity production which is available for distribution
among the breadwinners.” It seems urgent to him that a compre
hensive survey should be made of the resources of Australia to ascer
tain whether some improvement can not be made in the organization
of industry in order to eliminate the enormous waste and the pro
28 Piddington, A. B .: The Next Step—A Family Basic Income.

Second impression.

London, 1922, p. 21.

20 Idem, pp. 30, 56.
80 Queensland. Department of Labor. The Queensland Industrial Gazette, Brisbane,
March, 1925, p. 217.
31 Higgins, Henry Bourne®: A New Province of Law and Labor. London, 1922, pp.
137, 138.
83
Piddington, A. B .: The Next Step—A Family Basic Income. London, 1922, p. 67.
Second impression.

AUSTRALIA

117

duction of innumerable luxuries “ until a better standard of the nec
essaries of life is available for all.” Sutcliffe admits that single men
would object to family allowances, but calls attention to the fact
that in due process of time 90 per cent of these bachelors will marry
and receive benefits under the new system.33
VIEWPOINTS
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

Shortly after the establishment of children’s allowances in the
Federal service numbers of Government employees expressed them
selves as favorable to the new scheme.84 The Australian Public
Service Federation, which includes employees of the various State
governments, recommended in a resolution at its annual meeting in
December, 1923—
That the Federal and State Governments be requested to institute through
out the Commonwealth a uniform system of—
Basic wage determined on the cost of living for a married man and
applicable to all workers.
( ) Child endowment by the State from funds created by contributions from
employers.35

(a)
b

Various unions of public service employees of the Commonwealth
have voiced more or less qualified approval of the present children5sallowance system. The following statements are submitted as
typical: 35
Generally speaking the system of child endowment operating in the Com
monwealth service is supported by the bulk of the employees and nearly every
union within the service as being more equitable in its effects than the system
of fixing wages irrespective of the number of dependent children.— Secretary
of the New South Wales Branch, Postal Sorters' Unions of Australia.
As an organization we would like to see the salaries of all the same, and
the system abolished. That is an impossibility at present and we are glad
to find that it has been included in the latest determination of the court
It has proved a great boon to married men with large families.— Secretary
of the Australian Postal Linesmen's Union.
Taking the service as a whole, the child endowment has been a great boon
to the married men. We are not in accord with the action of the public service
arbitrator in making the charge a call on the pocket of the employees by a
reduction of the basic wage. The endowment was a policy of the Federal
Government and should not have been made a charge on wages.— Secretary
of the Australian Letter Carriers' Association.

In the summer of 1924, however, a lively controversy was being
waged among the employees with reference to the operation in the
public service of the Commonwealth of the principle of children’s
allowances.36
LAB OB UNIONS

The principle of child endowment has for a long time been ap
proved in the platforms of the Labor Party.87
8a Queensland. Department of Labor. The Queensland Industrial Gazette, Brisbane,
December, 1924, p. 821.
84 Piddington, A. B .: The Next Step—A Family Basic Income. London, 1922, p. 30.
Second impression.
*
Data furnished by the acting secretary of the Labor Research and Information
Bureau of New South Wales, Sept 19, 1924.
86 Queensland. Department of Labor. The Queensland Industrial Gazette, Brisbane,
August, 1924, p. 499.
37 Queensland. Department of Labor. The Queensland Industrial Gazette, Brisbane,
August, 1924, p, 510. Statement of Hon. Thomas W. McCawley, president of the Court
of Arbitration of Queensland.

118

B R IT ISH EM PIRE

The All-Australian Congress of Trade-TJnions at Melbourne in
June, 1921, unanimously resolved “ To indorse the principle of the
endowment of motherhood and childhood * * * such payment
to be a charge on the whole community and to be recognized as an
individual right and not associated in any way with the economic
circumstances of the husband or father.” 38
An industrial conference in Sydney on June 22, 1924, at which
40 unions with 106,000 members were represented, unanimously
decided to make children’s maintenance and motherhood endowment
a part of its immediate program.39
The following extract is taken from a report forwarded Septem
ber 19, 1924, by the acting secretary of the Labor Research and
Information Bureau, Sydney, New South Wales:
With regard to plans with reference to the movement for family wages, the
position is not clear. The labor movement as a whole is pledged to the prin
ciple, but existing labor governments have not yet taken steps in this direction.
There are, however, increasing signs that the attempts to secure an increase
in the individual basic wrage are taking the line of insisting on some form of
family allowance.

In the Australian Worker of April 4, 1923, it is declared that .pay
ment should be made according to the results of a man’s labor and
not according to the number of children he has.
The Interstate Labor Conference at Melbourne in October, 1924,
defeated a motion to “ indorse the principle of universal mother
hood and childhood endowment,” which included “ as a preliminary
to the full maintenance of children by the State ” the payment of
5s. per week to every child up to school-leaving age, and complete
maintenance of the children of deserted wives, widows, and of unmar
ried mothers. The motion also suggested a levy on wealth to carry
out the proposal. While it was stated in the discussions that the
general opinion was that “ some effective system of family endow
ment would be enacted,” a large majority voted against tne resolu
tion. Among the objections to it were the following:40
To indorse any plan to link up a child-endowment system with capital levy
would be folly.
The impossibility of a capital levy in cash or in kind. The very attempt
to make such a levy would result in chaos.
A capital levy for family endowment would upset “ the whole incidence of
the basic wage.”
To institute family endowTment at the present time would, without doubt,
bring about 44economic distress.”

Those who advocate a large increase of wages, according to James
T. Sutcliffe, of the Commonwealth statistical bureau, are against
the system of children’s allowance, holding that it would provide
no general increase but only a shifting of current rates.41
88 Piddinglon, A. B .: The Next Step— A Family Basic Income. London, 1922, p. 06.
Second impression.
:<yData furnished by the acting secretary of New South Wales Labor Research and
Information Bureau, Sept. 10, 1924. He also stated that “ the literature of the Aus
tralian trade-union movement on the question of family allowance or family wages is
very meager, for the reason that the proposal has been taken up publicly by a largo
number of influential politicians and statisticians and also for the reason that it is only
at the present moment that attention is being diverted from the direct attempt to raise
the individual basic wage.”
40 The Australian Worker, Sydney, Nov. 5. 1924. p. 15.
Queensland. Department of Labor. The Queensland Industrial Gazette, Brisbane,
August, 1924, p. 511.

AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH W ALES4*

In 1914 Judge Hey don, of New South Wales, refused to fix a
minimum basic wage for a man, wife, and three children, as the
Federal arbitration courts had been doing. In determining his
wage standard he took a family of four instead of five, holding that
the average family of married employees has a little less than two
children. The family of four was afterwards used as a basis of cal
culation under the law regulating the New South Wales Board of
Trade.43
As early as 1916 family allowances were being discussed as an
outcome of “ the hardship imposed on large families by the flat-rate
minimum wage.” 44 In 1919 the State government presented to Par
liament a bill for the “ maintenance of children,” in which a pro
posal was made to set up a system of family allowances. The meas
ure also provided “ that the board of trade should declare as a living
wage for men the amount sufficient to maintain a man and his
wife,” and that a separate declaration should be made by the board
as to the supplementary expense of “ maintaining a single child
and each additional child in the same household.” The fund for
the maintenance of the children of the workers was to be made up
from contributions by employers.
In this connection the State Statistician was to secure during each
year data concerning the number of employers having on their pay
rolls workers of each sex and the number of these employees classi
fied “ according to the amount by which their wages exceeded the
declared living wage and the number of children dependent on
them—that is, boys under 14 and girls under 15.” This information
was to be used in determining the monthly cost per male employee
of maintaining all children included under the proposal and the
monthly cost per female employee of maintaining “ the children of
female employees who were not also the children of male employees.”
The contribution of an employer to the maintenance of the chil
dren’s fund was to be based on the number of his employees of each
sex; that is, the cost of child maintenance per employee was to be
multiplied by the average daily number of his employees. The
amounts of the allowances were to be decreased by one-twelfth for
each 5s. or part thereof by which the wage of the father or mother
exceeded the declared living wage, so as to disappear in the case of
employees who were paid £3 above the living wage.
Employees on strike were not to receive allowances for their
children. The bill was not applicable to employees whose earnings
were above £8 per week or £400 per year.
This measure passed the legislative assembly and was amended in
the upper house in regard to one of its important principles, after
which further consideration of the bill was indefinitely postponed.
^U n le ss otherwise specified the data in this section was furnished by the director of
finance of the New South Wales Treasury, May 19, 1924.
u Piddington, A. B .: The Next Step— A Family Basic Income.
London, 1922, p. 40.
Second impression.
4,1
Rathbone, Eleanor F .: The Disinherited Family. London and New York. 1924.

p. 185.

120

B R IT ISH EM PIRE

In April, 1921, the New South Wales State Conference of the
Australian Labor P a rty submitted to the Federal Labor Party for
its consideration a motion which included among other matters a
recommendation that the latter party adopt a “ national comprehen
sive scheme * * * for the maintenance of all children of the
nation by a direct charge on the whole community by means of a
graduated tax on incomes.” 45
In the same year the New South Wales labor government, which
in 1920 had succeeded the nationalist government, introduced a
bill for child maintenance providing that the allowance should be
gin with the third child instead of the first, as was stipulated in the
1919 measure. The amount of the allowance per child in the new
bill was 6s, a week. Another important difference in the two bills
was in connection with the source from which the children’s mainte
nance fund was to be derived. In the 1919 proposal, as already
noted, the contributions were to be made by employers; in the 1921
measure they were to be made by the general public. This bill,
after passing the lower house, was rejected by the legislative
council.45
The Public Service Federation of New South Wales has given its
indorsement to the 1923 resolution of the Australian Public Service
Federation recommending children’s allowances. No resolution on
the subject, however, has been passed by the labor council of the
State.47
The Employers’ Federation of New South Wales has never ex
pressed itself in resolutions on the living wage, as opinion is greatly
divided on the matter, “ and nothing concrete and acceptable to a
great majority has ever been prepared.” The secretary of the or
ganization states that the wage a prescribed ” by the Royal Basic
Wage Commission “ was a ridiculous one and the country could not
have paid it.” 48
QUEENSLAND

The Queensland Government in 1921 made an offer to 44pay their
public service on the footing of a recognition of child endowment.”
The public-service employees’ union, however, refused to accept the
proposal. The fact that the unions of workers in private industry
were asking for a standard-family-of-five basic wage is said to have
had weight in the rejection of the Government’s plan.49
The need for family allowances is voiced in the opinion of the
industrial court of arbitration of Queensland on February 15, 1921,
in re the basic wage, such opinion being in part as follows: 50
The court is compelled to fix the wages for all adult males on the basis
that they are married and have three children. Assuming that there is a
given fund available for wages, it is obvious that a legislative direction to pre
45 Piddington, A. B . : The Next Step—A Family Basic Income. London, 1922, p. 11.
Second impression.
49 International Labor Office.
Family allowances. Geneva, 1924, p. 163. Studies and
reports, series l> (wages and hours), No. 13.
47 Data furnished by the acting secretary of the Labor Research and Information
Bureau of New South Wales, Sept. 19, 1924.
48 Data furnished by the secretary of the Employers’ Federation of New South Wales,
July 1, 1924.
49 Piddington, A. B .: The Next Step— A Family Basic Income. London, 1922, p. 65.
Second impression.
™ Queensland.
Department of Labor. The Queensland Industrial Gazette, Brisbane,
Mar. 10, 1921, p. 138.

AUSTRALIA

121

scribe the same minimum for all male workers involves the consequence that
the wage prescribed will be less than that which would be prescribed for mar
ried men and more than would be prescribed for single men had the legisla
ture directed the court to fix the basic remuneration of married and single
men according to these respective needs. Put in another way, the effect of
prescribing an equal basic wage for married or single is that the single men
are enabled to maintain a higher standard of life than are the married men,
their wives and children, and that the inequality of the standard is widened
as the responsibility of the married men for the care and upkeep of children
increases as the family grows in number. In announcing the intention to
appoint the [Royal Basic Wage] Commission, the Prime Minister said: “ If
we are to have industrial peace, we must be prepared to pay the price, and
that price is justice to the worker.” I f justice to the worker requires that re
gard should be had to the greater social needs of the average married man,
so that his standard of living may be approximately equal to that of the
average single man, and if justice is the price of industrial peace, it is obvious
we are not paying the price, and also obvious that in this respect this court
has not the power to do such justice.

Hon. Thomas W. McCawley, president of the court of arbitration
in Queensland and chief justice of the supreme court of that State,
is of the opinion that the next move should be the establishment of
children’s allowances on a national scale as he “ can see no other
way of substantially raising the standard of living of those who
are at present the most unfairly treated—married men with young
dependent children, who now receive the basic wage or a little
more.” 51
In the report of the Economic Commission on the Queensland
Basic Wage, appointed December 30, 1924, by the court of industrial
arbitration of that State,52 children’s allowances were discussed at
considerable length, the following aspects of the subject being
covered: Advantages of discrimination in wage payments accord
ing to family needs; machinery for its practical application; example
of Commonwealth public service; practical limitations on applica
tion of scheme to Queensland; peculiar advantages in Queensland
for application of the scheme; how far in range of earnings should
scheme be applied; general scheme outlined; variation of payments
in years differing in “ prosperity ” : some difficult practical questions;
economic effects of discrimination in wage payments according to
family needs; material facts for consideration of a practical scheme.
The chief advantage in family allowances, the commission declared,
was the possibility such grants offer of assuring to every family with
more than one dependent child a higher standard of comfort with
out placing further burdens on industry or without infringement
upon the 44Harvester equivalent ” 53 for single or childless men.
The commission called attention, however, to the important fact
that if a family-allowance scheme should be financed by the State
government the general taxpayer would have to contribute, and
that additional taxation tends to reduce the capacity to pay wages.
The single man, the commission held, lias no right to complain of
family allowances since the sums set aside for the children are
virtually to meet the industrial cost of replacement. Moreover, the
single man may look forward to benefiting later on.
51 Queensland. Department of Labor. The Queensland Industrial Gazette. Brisbane,
August, 1924, p. 510.
» Idem, March 1925, pp. 187, 211-213.
53The term “ Harvester equivalent” was used to express the nominal wage at any
given time, which represented 7s. per day in 1907— the “ basic wage ” fixed in the Har
vester case (see p. 11 8).

122

BR IT ISH EM PIRE

Family allowances, according to the commission, are not only
likely to increase efficiency but to add to the general welfare in
other ways. One incidental effect concerns the kind of commodities
and services produced, which necessarily depends upon the demand.
For example, an effective demand in the hands of the married
would, on the whole, be “ more likely to increase the production
of the necessities and of goods and services leading to the welfare
of the community ” than if such demand were to a greater extent
in the hands of men without children.
The commission had no serious misgivings regarding the possible
antagonism of the single man to family endowment if the average
allowances received by family men are not large and if the money
wage paid to the single man is about the same as he has been receiv
ing or that is being paid elsewhere. Among the principal recom
mendations of the commission were suggestions for the “ establish
ment of a modified scheme of discrimination between wage earners
according to family needs, with a greater equalization of receipts
by men in different industries as an incidental effect.”
In Queensland the frequent argument against the payment of
wages to support “ fictitious families” has been advanced. For
example, the “ Queensland Producer” (the official organ of the
Council of Agriculture), of February 23,1924,54 calls attention to the
fact that the State court of conciliation and arbitration in fixing the
basic wage can make no discrimination between bachelors and mar
ried men with families, To pay each of the 175,040 males from
21 to 64 years of age in Queensland enough to support a wife and
three children would mean contributing to the maintenance o f
825,100 more children and 82,240 more wives than are to be found in
the State.
VICTORIA

The Victorian section of the Labor Party at its Easter conference
in 1924 indorsed a proposal approving the principle of universal
endowment for mothers and children.50 A special committee had
considered the problem and recommended, as a preliminary to full
maintenance by the State, that a labor government upon assuming
office should “ pay from State funds 5s. per week for each child
until it reaches the school-leaving age.” The question of the manner
in which financial provision should be made for family allowances
was to be referred to the Federal Labor Party.57
The Melbourne Trades Hall Council has adopted the statement of
the committee appointed to promote the principle of equal pay for
men and women, that “ the dual standard, if allowed to remain, is
bound to become an evil of the first magnitude ” and “ that the only
measures that deal effectively with the situation are the uniform
basic wage for sexes, and child and motherhood endowment by the
State,” 58
54 Queensland. Department of Labor. The Queensland Industrial Gazette, Brisbanes
April, 1924, p. 191.
66 Data furnished by the acting secretary of the Labor Research and Information
Bureau of New South Wales, Sept. 19, 1924.
67 Labor Magazine, London, May, 1924, p. 44.
Queensland. Department of Labor. The Queensland Industrial Gazette, Brisbane,
April, 1924, p. 190.

GREAT BRITAIN

123

WESTERN AUSTRALIA

The secretary of the Western Australian branch of the Australian
Labor Party states that, so far as he is aware, no resolutions have
been passed by his organization or any of the unions of his State
on the matter of family allowances. The subject, however, has teen
discussed quietly and will probably be brought for consideration
at the triennial congress of the labor movement in Western Australia,
which is to be convened in 1925.
GREAT BRITAIN
PUBLIC SERVICE

During the war the family-allowanee principle was applied in
various kinds of State and local government employment.59 Such
grants took the form of advances to meet the rising cost of living,
“ householders” being paid higher bonuses than single men. In
other instances men in the Government service received certain sup
plements to their salaries for each of their dependents, but woman
employees did not receive these additions to their pay.
In 1920 the committee appointed by the British Home Secretary to
consider the grant of a nonpensionable pay increase to police in
England and Wales recommended that the agreed-upon bonus “ at
the fuH rate should, for all ranks, be applicable only to married men,
the bonus for single men being calculated at half rates, subject to the
consideration of special cases by the police authorities.” 60
Allowances for dependents were paid during the war to munic
ipal street-railway employees, as for example, of Newcastle-on-Tyne
and Neath. This policy was objected to by the Amalgamated As
sociation of Tramway and Vehicle Workers which demanded in lieu
of these grants a “ flat advance.” The workers’ representative em
phasized the necessity of getting rid of what “we regard as a nasty
stigma on the single men, especially in an arbitration award. * * *
[We] do not want to distinguish between the single and married
men. They are giving up their labor energy, and we say that it is
not the function of the employer to say what a mail's responsibilities
are. ” 61
A lively and interesting three-cornered conflict arose in the latter
part of 1924 from the demand of male teachers for salaries adequate
to provide a “reasonable standard of living” for themselves and their
families, the insistence of female teachers upon “ equal pay for
equal work” or at least that there should be no further discrepancies
between their salaries and those of their male colleagues, and the
contention of the local authorities that salaries must not be so high
as to lead to undue economy in personnel, in building, or in the im
provement in educational facilities, or to exorbitant taxes. This
89 Great Britain. War Cabinet Committee. Report on women in industry. London,
1919, p. 264. [Cmd. 135.]
60 Labor Gazette, London, October, 1920, p. 541.
61 Great Britain. War Cabinet Committee. Report on women in industry. London.
1919, p. 263. [Cmd. 135.]
*

61243°—26----- 9

124

Br i t i s h E m p i r e

conflict precipitated fresh public discussion of family endowment.
In this connection Eleanor F. Rathbone proposed a system of sub
stantial allowances for children and possibly for wives, “as-the only
way of meeting the warring claims of the parties to the controversy.”
To back her recommendation she submitted the following figures for
England and Wales from the 1921 census returns:
65, 689
Number of male teachers__________________________________
Number of female teachers------------------------------------------------- 182,190
Number of male teachers having wives_______ ____________
46,655
Number of children under 16 of male teachers____________ 46,481
Number of children under 16 of female teachers_________
3,147
Average number of children of male teachers_____________
0.70
Average number of children of female teachers___________
. 01
Average number of children of male and female teachers.
.20

From these figures she concluded that the cost of children’s allow
ances and even the cost of allowances for wives, dependent widowed
mothers, and orphan brothers and sisters would be substantially less
than the raising of the salaries of all teachers or even of the men
alone to a scale sufficient to meet the requirements of a family.03
Family allowances are not now being paid either in the civil serv
ice of Great Britain or by the county or municipal services of that
country.63
p r iv a t e in d u s tr y

No case of the adoption of the family-allowance system in private
commercial, industrial, and agricultural undertakings in Great Brit
ain has come to the attention of the present Ministry of Labor of
that country. While a few individual employers may have insti
tuted such a system, “ there is certainly no substantial section of
industry or commerce in which the system has been applied collec
tively to a group of undertakings.” 64
Even during the war family allowances were seldom paid in pri
vate industry. Among the few instances cited is that of three firms
who made the following grants to the Swansea copper workers: C5
1. Married men or householders (with dependents) earning below 30s. a
week, 3s. a week.
2. Single men (without dej*Hidents) earning below 80s. a week, Is. 6d, a
week.
3. Married men or householders (with dependents) earning 30s. a week and
upward, 2s. a week.
4. Single men (without dependents) earning 30s. a week and upward, Is. a
week.
5. Youths and boys, Is. a week.
The bonus was supplementary to the rates of wages of all those earning
below 60s. a week.
82 The Times Educational Supplement, London, Nov. 8, 1924: “ Family allowances for
teachers,” by Eleanor F. Rathbone.
63 Data furnished by the British ambassador to the United States, May 24, 1924.
64 Data furnished by the director of statistics of the Ministry of Labor (statistics
branch), Apr. 17, 1924.
Indeed, the problem of whether in existing social insurance schemes consideration
should be given to family responsibilities “ has not yet been fully faced ” in Great Britain.
For example, it has not been decided whether the additional provision for dependents in
unemployment insurance is to be a permanent measure. Apart from the inadequate
maternity benefit, no difference is made, under the present health insurance act, between
single and married men,, and the recent workmen’s compensation law grants no extra
benefits for dependents except in the case of victims of fatal accidents.—Cohen, Joseph L .:
Social Insurance Unified. London 1924, p. i;>(».
05 Great Britain. War Cabinet Committee. Report on women in industry. London,
1919, p. 263. [Cmd. 135.]

GREAT BRITAIN

125

In January, 1916, however, the differences in the bonuses of mar
ried and of single men were abolished.
In the mining industry, provision was made in clause 5 of the
national settlement of July 1, 1921, for allowances where the district
rates for low-paid workers were below a subsistence wage.66 In an
award in October, 1922, for the mining industry in South Wales and
Monmouthshire, Lord Buxton, the independent chairman of the
South Wales conciliation board, declared that it was not possible to
interpret equitably the “ subsistence wage ” unless the workers’ fam
ily needs were considered* While he looked upon methods of pay
ment which take into account the needs of individual workers as
“ neither practicable nor desirable,” he found that a distinction was
already made between the man who was the support of a family
and one who was not in the grant of allowances of coal and so
adopted the distinction by fixing the subsistence wage of workers
over 21 years of age of the first class at 7s. 2d. per day and of those
of the second class at 6s. 8d. per day.67 On December 15, 1923, the
rates for these two classes of workers were 7s. 6d. and 6s. 8d.,
respectively.68
The principle of family allowances has also been recognized for
clerks in some banks and for certain groups of the clergy. In the
case of the latter family-allowance funds have sometimes been
formed.67 In the latter part of 1924 it was reported that an unsuc
cessful attempt had been made to include in the agricultural-wages
bill a provision which would have enabled “ county committees to
establish a fund from which payments in respect of children of
workers, over and above wages, would have been paid.” 70
VIEWPOINTS
LABOR

At the National Conference of Labor Women, held at York early
in May, 1923, the advisory committee on motherhood and child
endowment of the joint research and information department of the
Labor Party and the Trades-Union Congress, in its second interim
report, stated that it considered none of the schemes for family
allowances proposed or in force in other countries satisfactory, and
that the labor views in those countries which it had gathered during
the year confirmed its opinion. It was making direct inquiries of
the labor movement in other countries and expected to get further
light from discussion of the subject at the congress of the Interna
tional Federation of Working Women in the following August.
The committee is “ not abandoning the possibility of finding some
sound solution of the problem,” stating that it is convinced of one
thing—namely, that any allowances should be from national funds
and not from employers.71
66 Redmayne, Sir R. H. S .: The British Coal-Mining Industry During the War. London
and New York, 1923, p. 310.
67 International Labor Office. Family allowances. Geneva, 1924, p. 152. Studies
and reports, series D (wages and hours), No. 13.
68 Great Britain. Board of Trade Journal and Commercial Gazette, London, Feb. 14,
1924, p. 217.
70 The Times Educational Supplement, London, Nov. 15, 1924, p. 457.
71 The Labor Woman, London, June 1, 1923, p. 93.

126

B R IT ISH EM PIRE

The following comment on the plea for family allowances made
by Eleanor F. Kathbone in her book on The Disinherited Family
appears in the May 1, 1924, issue of the Labor Woman (p. 70), pub
lished by the Labor Party:
Where some of us would part company from her [Eleanor F. Rathbone] is in
her assumption that the limit has been reached of the share which the work
ing-class family can expect to draw from the national revenue. Socialists
assume no such thing, and they therefore look askance at a scheme which
starts from such a belief. In a reorganized society they look for something
much more than a mere redistribution (according to family needs) of the
money received in wages. And we are suspicious too of the argument put
forward that if Great Britian continues to pay wages on the present system
she can not compete successfully with other countries, as, for example, the
textile regions of France, where the system of family allowances has been
adopted and the cost of production is presumably less. We do not wish
to lay much stress on the hostility shown by French trade-unions to the sys
tem adopted in France, because it is there (as acknowledged by Miss Rath
bone) a sort of welfare work on the part of employers and she herself would
prefer a State scheme free from this kind of patronage.
ORGANIZATIONS, CONFERENCES, ETC.

The Family Endowment Committee sets forth its position as to
family allowances as follows:72
Soldiers’ separation allowances paid to wives during the war have
resulted in better furnished homes and better fed and better clothed
children. The allowance paid for each child made the family income
vary according to need. “A new and just system of providing for
the rearing of the next generation has been unwittingly established
by the State.” The maintenance and wider adoption of this plan
will be a protection of the next generation from the more acute
injustice which menaces it through the rise in the cost of living and
industrial disorganization. The scheme is also, the committee
claims, a solution of the otherwise hopeless problem arising from
claims on the ground of family responsibilities and the demand of
“ equal pay for equal work.”
Holding that wages can not be regulated to meet the needs of the
family, the committee proposed a weekly allowance, to cover ade
quately the “ primary cost of subsistence,” paid by the State to the
mother herself and for each of her children during the years in
which they necessarily require her entire services. The allowances
to mothers and children would not have to be sufficient for their
separate maintenance. It was suggested that the ideal grant would
be equivalent to the difference between the cost of living for a hus
band, wife, and children and the cost of maintenance of a man who
had no children.
The committee unanimously urged that every family, regardless
of income, which had children under 5 years of age should be entitled
to allowances.73 The majority of the committee was of the opinion
that the rates of allowance should be the same for all families and
that a flat rate of 12s. 6d. a week be paid to all mothers 8 weeks pre
ceding confinement and as long as they have any children under 5
w The Family Endowment Committee. Equal pay and the family. London, 1918.
73 It was felt b y some of the committee members that the children entitled to allowances
in any one family should he limited to, say, four.

GREAT BRITAIN

127

years of age. The suggested allowance for children until they
reached 5 years of age (to be afterwards extended to school-leaving
age) was 5s. per week for the first child under 5 years of age and
3s. 6d. per week for each subsequent child under that age.
Allowances under certain circumstances for unmarried mothers
was favored by a majority of the committee.
A heavy increase in taxation, combined possibly with a contribu
tory insurance scheme, is suggested for the practical working out of
family allowances. Some of the committee members objected to the
flat rate for all classes, as it would, in effect, penalize families with
incomes of intermediate levels, such incomes being absorbed by the
increases in taxation necessitated by the family-allowance scheme
if the funds therefor were met by taxes. Aside from the heavy
burden of taxes on families having intermediate incomes, the minor
ity of the committee pointed out that unless the allow ance was h’gher
as the income rose the scheme would have an almost negligible in
fluence on the birth rate and on women’s status and employment in
the classes having intermediate incomes. The cost of the scheme,
limiting the allowance to children under 5 years of age, wras estimated
at £144,000,000, and at £240,000,000 if the age limit of the child
beneficiaries was extended to 15 years. It was suggested, however,
that great savings could be made in the appropriations for poor re
lief, insurance, hospitals, prisons, and police service.
At a conference on international legislation at the British Empire
Exposition at Wembley on July 21, 1924, it was suggested that “ the
time was ripe for the consideration of an international system of
family allowances, whether under State control or under the control
of the industries concerned.” 74
At the meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of
Science, held at Toronto, Canada, in August, 1924,75 family allow
ances for workers in intellectual occupations “ as a necessary safe
guard against racial deterioration were advocated by Sir W. H.
Beveridge and Prof. William McDougal, of Harvard University.76
ECONOMISTS

Any differentiation in wages because of exceptionally heavy family
responsibilities would be “ in flat contradiction of the principle of
collective bargaining and the occupational rate,” according to Mrs.
Sydney Webb in the minority report on women in industry by the
British War Cabinet Committee in 1919.77 She also declares that
such differentiation would not correspond with the results of hig
gling the market any more than with the variations among indi
viduals in industrial efficiency or advantageousness to the employer.
She can see no basis for adapting wages to family responsibilities,
and calls attention to the estimate that not more than 50 per cent of
74 International Labor Office. Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Sept. 1,
1924, p. 9.
.
75 The Times Educational Supplement, London, Nov. 8, 1924, p. 453.
76 Family allowances have also been recently discussed at a Liberal summer school at
Oxford and at an Independent Labor Party school in Yorkshire.
77 Great Britain. War Cabinet Committee. Report on Women in Industry. London,
1919, pp 254-341. [Cmd. 135.]

128

B RITISH E M P IR E

the males over 18 years of age in industry in the United Kingdom
have any children at all and that probably 25 per cent of the adult
women are supporting one or more children.
The “ average” family is, of course, merely a convenient figment of the
statisticians and does not exist in fact. * * * The nation can not be satis
fied any more than the children can with a family or household “ average”
of rations for the rising generation. Each individual baby has got to be ade
quately and satisfactorily provided for. This can not be done under any system
of wages; nor can the adoption of any conceivable principle as to the relation
between men’s and women’s wages achieve this end.

Mrs. Webb holds that in the interests of both race preservation and
national production a national legal minimum of rest time, education,
sanitation, and subsistence with no sex discrimination is absolutely
imperative. I f Great Britain desires to maintain its population
without heavy foreign immigration, the Government must provide
endowment for children while they are economically dependent.
Children’s allowances for all mothers in the United Kingdom on the
1919 scale of the separation allowances for soldiers would approxi
mate £250,000,000 a year. Mrs. Webb recommends also that the
“ children’s fund—the 4bairn’s part ’ in the national income ”—should
be provided from the exchequer, i. e., by taxation, like any other
community obligation.
“ It is obviously impracticable to differentiate wages in accordance
with the number in the family,” B. Seebohm Rowntree declares in
The Human Needs of Labor (London and New York, 1918), and
claims that if such distinction was made employers in periods of
industrial depression would dismiss men with large families. Wage
boards should endeavor to raise the minimum wage in order to meet
the needs of large families, but even to establish a general minimum
which will cover the requirements of a family with three depend
ent children would be a great strain on industrial resources, and
the outlook for fixing a minimum which would be adequate for
families with more than three children is anything but encouraging.
Rowntree therefore suggests as a solution, which he admits abounds
with difficulties and which he thinks may seem “ revolutionary,”
minimum wages large enough “ to secure physical efficiency for, say,
three dependent children ” and that “ the State make a grant to
the mother in such cases and for such a time as there are more than
three dependent children.”
According to ttie 1911 census there were in York, England, 1,641
families having more than 3 dependent children. The composition
of these families was as follows: 878 families had 4 dependent
children; 464 families had 5 dependent children; 197 families had 6
dependent children; 75 families had 7 dependent children; 22 fami
lies had 8 dependent children; 5 families had 9 dependent children.
Assuming that these figures for York were typical for the whole
country, Rowntree estimates the number of children in excess of
three in all the families of Great Britain at 1,418,500. To grant
each of these children an allowance of 3s. per week would cost the
Government yearly somewhere around £11,000,000. It is pointed
out, however, that probably many families in the higher income
groups would not claim such benefits and that the actual cost would
be approximately £8,000,000. Rowntree holds that it is “ one of

N E W ZEALAND

129

the nation’s first duties to see that its citizens are adequately pro
vided for during their youth; and when it is impossible to meet; the
case through ordinary channels, the State itself may reasonably be
expected to intervene, if only because no civilization can.be sound
or stable which has at its base a mass of stunted human life.” 78
Arguments against family allowances are found in Prof. F. Y.
Edgeworth’s article on “ Equal pay to men and women for equal
work,” in the Economic Journal (London) of December, 1922 (pp.
431-457). He contends that family allowances would not elimi
nate all the difficulties accompanying competition between men and
women. “ The transitory and episodical character of female labor
would still threaten male wages. * * * The demand for goods
in the production of which men’s labor plays a great part greatly
exceeds and will continue to exceed the corresponding demand for
women’s work.”
The administration of huge sums would necessarily multiply the
number o f government officials and augment “ bureaucratic rou
tine ” so detrimental s individual initiative. The imposition of an
immense additional burden on the income tax-paying classes would
certainly have a tendency to halt savings.
The effect on contributors to such a fund would be “ depressing ”
and that on beneficiaries u seriously deleterious.”
The family-allowance scheme, Professor Edgeworth also points*
out, involves an “ enormous risk ” of increasing the birth rate among
“ the least desirable ” groups of the population.79
NEW ZEALAND

No system for supplementing the salaries of State and municipal
employees by family allowances has been established in New Zea
land.80 The New Zealand Department of Labor reports that it is
not aware of any instance in which the family-wage system has been
adopted in that country, and that there is no legislation dealing
with the matter, though the department has recently been making
an inquiry in regard to the movement for family allowances in
other countries.
In 1922 Hon. George Mitchell, a member of the New Zealand
Parliament, introduced a bill for children’s allowances, wto insure
that the wages paid on account of family responsibility shall go to
those rearing families in due proportion,” but the measure did not
pass. Some of the most important sections of the proposed “ child
sustenance act ” are as follows: 81
5.
All payments for wages or salaries for adult male workers by way of a
basic wage shall in future be based on a family of two (man and wife).
0. Every employer of adult workers shall pay into the child sustenance
fund such amount as shall be assessed for each day or part day worked by
each employee, and shall furnish a return on a prescribed form of all workers
78 The minimum income proposal made by Dennis Milner in Higher Production by a
Bonus on National Output, London (1919?), (p. 46 ), contains some interesting discus
sions bearing on family allowances and a chart illustrating the changing income required
to maintain varying family responsibilities.
79 See also Journal of Social Forces, Chapel Hill, N. C., November, 1924, pp. 118-124:
“ The British discussion of family endowment,” by Paul H. Douglas.
80 Data furnished by the Secretary to the Treasury of New Zealand, May 9, 1924.
81 Data furnished by the secretary of the New Zealand Employers’ Association, May

130

B RITISH EM PIRE

employed, showing status and pay of each employee, at least once in each
calendar month, such payments and return to be made within the first seven
days in the succeeding month.
9. All Government departments, local bodies, or anyone whatsoever employing
labor, other than domestic labor * * * , shall be classed as employers
under this act.
10. Each employee shall furnish a certificate showing his or her status
and dependents (if any). Such certificate shall be endorsed by the employer
on each pay day and shall show the number of days worked by each employee.
Such certificate shall be presented by the claimant on claiming the child
allowance.
12. The wife of every employee, the female appointee of a widower or
single employee, or a widow shall be entitled to draw 6 shillings per week
or such other sum as is assessed by the arbitration court, for each child under
14 years of age who are solely supported by them so long as such children
are kept and provided for solely by the employee, and providing they are not
excluded from benefit under this act.
13. Any person or persons other than the wife of the employee being a
near relative, as described in the destitute persons act, 1910, who through
age or infirmity are unable to provide their own living and are not in
receipt of any income shall be classed as a child under this act, and any
employee solely providing for them shall be entitled to claim the allowance
under this act, providing the employee comes within the provisions of the act.
15. Any person who, through sickness, disability, or any other legitimate
cause, is unemployed shall be entitled to the allowance under this act for all
children or dependents within the meaning of the act solely dependent on
them, subject always to the discretionary powers in section 14 hereof. In
all cases the payments shall be made to the wife or female head of the
liouse, unless otherwise directed by the magistrate.
18. No employee in receipt of more than 300 pounds per annum where there
is one child in the family and 50 pounds per year each additional child
shall be eligible for the child allowance. In calculating such income, the
income of the wife (if any) shall be added to that of the husband.
22. The arbitration court shall, on the request of the commissioner, assess
the minimum wage of any class of employee, below which no wage shall
be reduced for the payments into the child sustenance fund.

Judge L. V. Frazer, of the New Zealand Court of Arbitration, de
clares “ that justice to all can not be attained by working on the basis
of an average family.” He argues that in New Zealand the standard
family has been reckoned as having two children under 14 years
of age, while as a matter of fact it has 1.57 children and the average
number of children under 14 years of age per male adult is only
0.94. The demand of the trade-unions for full wages for all adult
males without regard to the number of their dependents can not be
reconciled with the demand for an adequate wage for a man with a
wife and three or more children. I f all adult males are paid the same
basic wage, some of them will have more than a fair living wage,
others will have the proper amount to meet their needs, and the
remaining men will not have sufficient. In this connection the fol
lowing statistics on the adult male population of New Zealand are
given by Judge Frazer: 82

(a)

Unmarried-------------------------------------------------------------------- 150,000
70,000
(&) Married, without children under 14__________________
(c) Married, with one child under 14____________________ 53,500
Married, with two children under 14_________________
42,000
(e) Married, with three or more children under 14_______ 59,500

(d)

Total________________________________________________ 375,000
82 New Zealand. Department of Labor.
Wellington, 1922, p. 23.

Pronouncements of the Court re Cost ot Living.

N EW ZEALAND

131

It is obvious from the preceding figures that if an adequate basic
wage for a family of four persons is paid every adult male, groups
(&), (&), and (e), aggregating 273,500 adult males, would get more
than they are entitled to on the ground of actual needs, and group
(^), comprising 59,500 adult males, would not receive enough to
maintain the standard of living agreed upon for the standard family.
The attitude of some employers is reflected in the November 10,
1924, issue of the New Zealand Industrial Bulletin84 (p. 119), in
which some of the obstacles to a system of children’s allowances are
stressed, first and foremost being the matter of additional expendi
ture and its bearing on international industrial competition. No
such a system should “ be established without the most accurate ac
tuarial computations to ascertain the additional costs of the sug
gested scheme.”
The calculations of A. B. Piddington, the Australian economist, as
to mythical children are characterized as sweeping, as he ignored
the fact that thousands, possibly tens of thousands, unmarried male
and female wage earners are helping to maintain their parents and
sisters. While it is widely conceded that the present wage-payment
system results in injustice to the man wrho is attempting to educate
a young family, the question is fraught with difficulties and New
Zealand statistics supply no adequate basis “ upon which to make
such a plunge.” It is agreed, however, that the problem is “ .worthy
of discussion ” and “ can not be brushed aside lightly.”
At the annual meeting of the New Zealand Associated Chambers
of Commerce which was held at Wanganui, November 19-21*, 1924,
it was urged in a unanimous recommendation that Parliament insist
upon the establishment of a “ more equitable standard ” for the legal
minimum wage, as such wage is now “ based upon the estimated re
quirements of a married man with two children or equivalent de
pendents,” while the responsibilities of 75 per cent of the wage
earners are acknowledged to be less.85
The New Zealand Labor Party has twice introduced bills for
motherhood endowment, providing 10 shillings per week for each
child after the second until such child completes his or her 14th year,
according to the New Zealand Worker (Wellington), June 17, 1925.
It is stated in the same source that u a labor majority in Parliament
means endowment of motherhood.”
** Official organ of the New Zealand Employers’ Federation and the Dominion Federated
Sawmillers Association.
85 International Labor Office. Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Feb. 10,
1925, p. 22.

BULGARIA
PUBLIC SERVICE *•

The State.—Family allowances have been paid in State employ
ment in Bulgaria since July 1, 1916. From the beginning of April,
1922, the following monthly allowances, varying with marital con
dition and family responsibilities, have been granted :
T able

16.—AM O U N TS OF F A M IL Y ALLO W AN CES PAID IN BU LG ARIA TO STATE
EM PLO Y EES IN VARIOUS SALAR Y GRADES

Amounts of allowances to married per
Single
sons having—
persons
or widows
without
lor 2
3 or 4 5 or more
No
children children
children children children

Basic salary grade

Grade I ________ __ _____________ ___________
Grade II.......... ............................ .......................
Grade III..............................................................
Grade IV...............................................................
Grade V............. ......... ................ .......................
Grade VI___ ____ _______ ______________ ___

L eva 1

300
250
200
150
100
50

L ev a

350
300
250
200
150
100

L ev a

400
350
300
250
200
150

L ev a

450
400
350
300
250
200

L ev a

500
450
400
350
300
250

*Lev at par—19.3 cents; exchange rate varies.

Men and women in State employment receive the same allowances
except when a man and his wife are both Government employees,
in which case they each receive a smaller grant. For example, if a
husband and wife were in the fourth salary grade of the civil service
and had two children, instead of each being paid allowances for two
children, they would each receive the allowance provided for married
persons who have no children, namely, 200 leva.
Besides the allowances for children’s maintenance a monthly
allowance of 50 leva is granted toward the support of other depend
ent members of the family (father, mother, minor brothers and sis
ters), whatever be their number.
The granting of family allowances has to a certain extent retarded
the increase of basic salaries.
Urban and rural communes.—Family allowances are also granted
in the urban and rural commune services, the amounts of such allow
ances being the same as in State employment.
VIEWPOINTS

The Bulgarian Office of the Director of the Public Debt states
that, in its opinion, the pre-war system of paying salaries should
be reestablished, but on a gold basis.
86 Data furnished by the Office of the Director of the Public Debt of Bulgaria, Dec.
12, 1924.

132

V IE W PO IN TS

133

The State employees do not regard family allowances as altogether
satisfactory, as these supplements are quite insufficient in view of
the high prices and family needs. That the skilled and professional
classes, however, are not averse to family allowances might be de
duced from the fact that a request for supplementary grants for
every member of a civil servant’s family who is not in a position
to earn a living was made in a petition to Parliament by the Bul
garian Federation of Trade-Unions, whose affiliated unions include
public employees, postal, telegraph, and telephone employees,
railway men, compositors, stenographers, draftsmen, bank em
ployees, schoolmasters, teachers, technicians, chemists, artists, archi
tects, doctors, judges, and clergymen.87
87 International Labor Office.
1924, pp. 24, 25.

Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Apr. 14,

CZECHOSLOVAKIA
PUBLIC SERVICE88

State.—In 1916, family allowances were introduced in the State
civil service of Czechoslovakia (then a part of Austria), as a
war emergency measure, to mitigate the economic burdens of those
who were staggering under their family responsibilities because of
the exorbitant prices. Both manual and nonmanual workers re
ceived these grants, which were continued and increased by the
Czechoslovak Government after the war. Under a law enacted
December 20, 1922, however, employees coming into the service of
the State after December 31 of that year are not entitled to family
allowances. Moreover, those persons in the service prior to Janu
ary 1, 1923, now receive smaller allowances. Grants are not made
to them for children born after December 31, 1923, and employees
who were in the service previous to 1922 but were married after 1922
do not receive allowances for their wives. Similar regulations apply
to State employees who are not in active service.
Of the 352,000 State employees in active service, 236,000, or 67
per cent, are covered by the family-allowance system. It is esti
mated that the total number of dependents of the civil employees
receiving family allowances is approximately 600,000.
Family allowances are granted in two ways: The cost-of-living
bonus is graduated according to the size of the family, and special
allowances are granted for children.
For the purposes of the cost-of-living bonuses State civil-service
employees are divided into the following eight family classes: Class
1, unmarried employees and widowers without children; class 2,
married employees without children and widowed employees with
one child; class 3, married employees with one child and widowed
employees with two children; class 4, married employees with two
children and widowed employees with three children; class 5, mar
ried employees with three children and widowed employees with
four children; class 6, married employees with four children and
widowed employees with five children; class 7, married employees
with five children and widowed employees with six children; class
8, married employees with six children and widowed employees with
seven children. Married employees with more than six children and
widowed employees with more than seven children receive the same
bonus as employees in class 8.
The amount of the cost-of-living bonus varies according to the
family class, the basic salary, and the rank of the employee. For
example, the annual basic salaries of the higher grade civil and
military employees of the State and police sergeant majors in com88 Unless otherwise specified the data in this section were furnished by the Ministry
of Finance of Czechoslovakia.

134

135

PU B LIC SERVICE

mand of stations range from 4,908 to 35,880 kronen,89 while the
minimum and maximum cost-of-living bonuses for the different
family classes are as follows :
T a b l e 1 7 . — M A X IM U M

A N D M IN IM U M C 0 S T -0 F-LIVING BONUSES FOR HIG HER PAID
STATE EM P LO Y E E S, B Y F A M IL Y CLASS A N D S AL AR Y G R A D E i
Cost-of-living bonus for—
Family class

Class l ._ ______ ___________________
Class 2____________________________
Class 3____ ________________________
Class 4. ___________________________
Class 5...... ............................................
Class 0__________ ____ - ................... .
Class 7........................ 1.........................
Class 8 - ......................... ......................
* Czechoslovakia.

Code of Laws and Government Orders.

Lowest
salary
grade

Highest
salary
grade

Kronen
4,320
6,600
7,968
7,164
8,520
7,728
9,084
8,280

Kronen
0
4,908
6,552
5,556
7,188
6,192
7,836
6,828

[Prague, 1923?], p. 158.

For lower grade civil and military employees, police sergeants,
and probationary policemen the annual basic salaries range from
3,852 to 8,580 kronen, while the cost-of-living allowances run as
follows:
1 8 . — M A X IM U M A N D M IN IM U M C 0 S T -0 F-LIVING BONUSES FOR C E R T A IN
L O W E R PAID STATE EM P LO Y E E S, B Y F A M IL Y CLASS AN D SA L A R Y G R AD E *

T a b le

Cost-of-living bonus for—
Family class

Class 1____________________________
Class 2____ _____ ________ ________
Class 3____________ ___ ___________
Class 4___ _____________ __ ___ . . . .
Class 5____________________________
Class 6____________________________
Class 7____________________________
Class 8____________________________
*Czechoslovakia.

Lowest
salary
grade

Highest
salary
grade

Kronen
4,776
. 6,252
6.852
6.252
6.852
6.252
6.852
6.252

Kronen
3,048
4.608
5.208
4.608
5.208
4.608
5.208
4.608

Code of Laws and Government Orders.

[Prague, 1923?], p. 159.

At first glance it seems incongruous that in the cost-of-living
allowances the amounts are lower in some of the family classes in
which there are more children but additional grants are made for
children which range from 900 to 1,500 kronen per annum per child,
and these grants, which vary according to the salary grade of the
employees, are larger for the higher paid employees, while the
cost-of-living allowances diminish as the salary increases.
No allowances are granted for children over 18 years of age, except
where they are pursuing their studies “ with sufficient progress,”
or have some physical or mental disability which prevents them
from earning their living, in which circumstances allowances may
be granted until they are 24 years of age.
* Krone at par= 20.3 cents; exchange rate varies.

136

CZECHOSLOVAKIA

As a rule, no allowances are paid for dependents who are not
residing in Czechoslovakia.
Women in the State civil service do not receive allowances for
family responsibilities, but exceptions may be made under extraor
dinary circumstances. A married man employed by the State is
not granted an allowance for his wife if she is a public employee
or if she is earning more than 10,000 kronen per annum outside the
Government.
Widowed employees who maintain a household for their children
are classed as married until the youngest of their children is 12
years of age.
I f an employee is obliged to contribute to the support of a
divorced wife, he may be granted an allowance for her, but such
allowance must not exceed the amount of the compulsory contribu
tion to her support. I f the children of divorced or separated parents
are not living in their father’s household, the allowance for them
must not exceed the amount he is legally obliged to pay for their
support.
When ill or injured as a result of accident State employees receive
their salaries and family allowances during the period of disability,
provided such disability does not extend beyond a year from the
beginning of the illness or the date of the accident. Temporary
employees are entitled to family allowances on the basis of the num
ber of days worked.
The tendency in Czechoslovakia is to cut down family allowances
in the State civil service and raise the basic salary, the latter being
increased 75 per cent under a recent law.
Provinces and mrniicijyalities.—Both provincial and municipal
governments in Czechoslovakia pay family allowances to the em
ployees in their service, but these grants must not exceed in amount
the allowances paid to State employees. Prior to the passage of the
law of December 20, 1922, referred to above, the methods of regu
lating provincial and municipal family allowances were, as a rule,
like those of the State government but the amounts of such allow
ances were not the same as the State provided.
PRIVATE INDUSTRY M

During the World War the practice of granting family allow
ances to the families of mobilized men was extended to munition
workers and as the war progressed was adopted in private indus
trial, commercial, and agricultural enterprises. During 1919 and
1920 the system was embodied in various collective agreements.
The earliest form of family allowance in private industry was
an allowance by the hour to all married workers. Another form
was a weekly grant for a wife, not to exceed a certain amount, and
a grant for each child up to his or her fourteenth year. Later on,
the number of children for whom a worker was entitled to allow
ances was limited to three. Although these weekly grants for wives
90 Data in this section furnished by Social Institute of the Czechoslovak Republic,
May 24r 1924; the Minister of Social Affair# of Czechoslovakia, .Tuly 11, 1924; and the
president of the Czechoslovak Manufacturers’ National Association, May 23, 1924, and
rronfxJnternational Labor Office, Family allowances, Geneva, 1924, Studies and reports*
series D (wages and hours), No. 13.

PRIVATE IN D U STRY

and children were more common, they were of little importance
socially as they represented such small percentages of the wage or
salary.
In the beginning the weekly supplement for a wife was 3 per cent
of the worker’s wage and that for a child 2 per cent. In 1920 such
allowances were reduced to 2 and iy 2 per cent, respectively. Under
certain provisions of law these grants are also paid in case of un
employment.
The hourly allowances, which were paid to both male and female
workers, were far more substantial, increasing with the years, to
which were added the above-mentioned grants for wives and
children.
In clothing allowances consideration was given to the family
conditions of those to whom they were granted. The family-allowance principle was also embodied in 64purchasing allowances,”
which, although paid to both unmarried and married, were much
higher for the married.
In 1921 the family-allowance system was to a great extent aban
doned in private industry, although these grants are still being paid,
in greatly reduced degree, in agriculture, metal and machine in
dustries, sugar mills, chemical industry, and banking.
Permanent married workers who are provided with dwellings
and plots of ground free or at a low rent for cultivation for their
own benefit, who may keep a limited amount of livestock, and who
are paid largely in kind, are as a rule the only agricultural workers
paid family allowances. These allowances are ordinarily in kind
and for a family of four, but the amount may be increased if the
family exceeds this number. I f the family consists of less than four
members and does not need the full amount allowed, the extra
quantity may be sold by the worker but only to his employer.
Family allowances for miners have varied from time to time and
from district to district. They have generally been granted in three
forms: (1) Children’s allowances; (2) clothing allowances; and
(3) cheap or free coal. Children’s allowances per shift worked
have been paid for each child under 14 years of age, and for chil
dren between 14 and 18 years satisfactorily pursuing their studies.
Such allowances might also be granted for children over 14 years
of age having physical or mental defects which prevented them from
earning a living.
Workers disabled by accidents in the course of their employ
ment were entitled to allowances for a period of not more than
28 days.
The collective agreement of March 20, 1919, provided for higher
sickness allowances to married than to single workers, no consider
ation being given to the size of the family. In the clothing allow
ances, based on each 5^ift actually worked, the amount was propor
tioned according to Hie size of the family.
Widows and widowers also received allowances varying with the
number of their children.
In the metal industry in 1919 weekly allowances were paid the
workers for wives and children under 14 years of age (in some cases
16 years), but in 1921 the allowances for wives were abolished and

138

CZECHOSLOVAKIA

in the following year the allowance for one child was eliminated,
married workers being granted 2 kronen per week for two children,
4 kronen for three children, and a maximum of 6 kronen for four or
more children.
In the chemical industry allowances were paid in 1920 for the
wife and each child under 14 years of age. In 1921 and 1922 such
allowances were shifted from a weekly to an hourly basis, and the
number of children for whom allowances were granted was limited
to five.
By agreement of January 10,1923, family allowances for bank em
ployees, which had been paid for several years, were continued. In
some of the food industries clerical employees with family respon
sibilities receive percentage supplements to their salaries. The lat
est agreements in the sugar industry and in alcohol distilleries con
tain provisions decreasing the amounts of family allowances.
VIEWPOINTS

The family-allowance system is a suitable and necessary institu
tion under abnormal economic conditions, according to the Ministry
of Finance of Czechoslovakia. Under ordinary circumstances pay
ment for work should be based on quality and quantity. The prin
cipal economic rule for the State, u Work and save,” demands that
good workers should be given an incentive, and this can be provided
only by payment for performance and special industry. On the other
hand, the worker must earn enough to live on. Separate bonuses
should be paid for special diligence. The continuation of the familyallowance system is reported as complicating the wTage problem.
The report of the National Association of Czechoslovak Manufac
turers for 1922 pointed out that w7hen it became necessary to reduce
wages in their country following the fall of world prices various
social allowances were discontinued as a preliminary to a more
economic and “ rational organization of production.” These allow
ances had resulted in a leveling of wages. It was important to have
capable and skilled workers. Such workers should be able to earn
wages corresponding to their abilities, and this had been next to
impossible under the social-allowance system.91
Private employers are unfavorable to family allowances, accord
ing to the president of the above-mentioned manufacturers’ federa
tion. These grants are a war-time survival which it is the present
policy of employers to eliminate, as such allowances “ are not justi
fied from the standpoint of the national production.”
The State employees are divided in opinion as regards the desir
ability of family allowances.92
International Labor Office. Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Aug. 3,
1023, p. 10.
1,2 Data furnished by the Ministry of Finance of Czechoslovakia, May IT, 1924.

ESTHONIA94
Family allowances were inaugurated for workers emplo3^ed in
State undertakings in Esthonia by Government order of May 16,
1919, and for State civil-service employees by act of April 12, 1920.
The law now in effect covering these grants was passed December
19, 1922.
According to the 1924 budget there are 16,665 civil-service em
ployees, 15,632 of whom are entitled to family allowances.
Allowances are paid to both male and female civil-service em
ployees for children under 18 years of age and for disabled children
without age limitation. The allowances vary according to locality,
being 800 marks95 per month where the cost of living is highest
and 600 and 400 marks per month in other parts of the country.
These supplemental payments are made for children only, the same
amount being paid for each child.
Only employees whose earnings do not exceed 12,000 marks per
month are paid family allowances, and the total wages combined
with the family allowances must not amount to more than 13,500
marks per month.
A manual worker employed by the State receives 25 marks per day
for his wife and 15 marks per day for each child.
** Data furnished by the Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare of Esthonia, June
6, 1024.
•* Mark at p ar= 19.3 cen ts; exchange rate varies.
61243°-;26-------10

139

GREECE
PUBLIC SERVICE"

The practice of granting allowances for dependents of persons in
State civil employment was instituted at the beginning of the World
War. The amounts of these grants, however, have been increased
since that period.
Married State employees receive family allowances for their wives
and children, the rate for each of these dependents being 10 per cent
of the monthly salaries of such employees. These grants are made
until the boys are 17 years of age and until the girls are married.
No allowances are paid for minors in State employment or living
on their own resources.
Unmarried employees receive a supplement of 10 per cent of their
monthly salaries for their widowed mothers and for each of their
unmarried sisters.
The above-mentioned allowances, however, taken together, may not
in any case amount to more than 50 per cent of the monthly salary.
The communes of Greece do not pay family allowances.
PRIVATE INDUSTRY w

Family allowances in private industry in Greece are of very little
importance, existing only in the following three enterprises: (1)
Manufacture and distribution of gas, (2) supplying of electricity,
and (3) a street railway system. The combined personnel of these
undertakings numbers approximately 3,220, or only about one-sixtieth of the total number of nongovernmental industrial workers.
Family allowances in these undertakings were inaugurated at the
instigation of the labor unions and have been paid since 1918.
The allowances are paid for each child up to the fifth, except in one
undertaking, in which the number of children entitled to allowances
is limited to four. These grants are made until the children reach
16 or 18 years of age, or 20 years of age if their education is being
continued. The workers also receive allowances for their wives and
unmarried employees are entitled to allowances for dependent
mothers. The allowances for all members of the family who benefit
under the system are usually the same.
Of the 67,380,000 drachmas98 paid to the workers in these three
enterprises in the year 1923, 2,328,000 drachmas were for family
allowances.
There are no family-allowance funds in private industries in
Greece.
96 Data furnished by the Minister of Finance of Greece, May 20, 1924.
07 Data furnished by the Office of the Director of Labor and Social Welfare, Ministry
of National Economy of Greece, Oct. 8, 1924.
98 Drachma at p ar= 19.3 cen ts; exchange rate varies,
140

VIEW PO IN TS

141

In calculating compensation for accidents family allowances are
included in the total sum upon which such accident indemnities are
based.
VIEWPOINTS

In the judgment of the Minister of Finance of Greece the payment
of family allowances is a “ right and just” measure, resulting in
the relief of Government employees with dependents.
While the State Government employees appreciate family allow
ances as a partial palliation of their economic situation, they com
plain that these allowances are insufficient in view of the high cost
of living.

HUNGARY99
PUBLIC SERVICE

State.—The family-allowance system for the civilian State em
ployees in active service in Hungary dates back to January 1, 1912,
and for the pensioned civilian State employees to January 1, 1921.
The introduction of the system was due to the economic difficulties
experienced even before the war by the Federal personnel as the re
sult of the high cost of living. As these hardships pressed most
heavily on married employees, the Government desired to help them
first. To increase the compensation of the single employees to a
similar level “ would have put unbearable burdens upon the State
treasury.”
All active and retired civilian State and railroad employees are
included under the family-allowance system. Skilled workers em
ployed in State undertakings (for example, on Federal railroads, in
steel plants, and in the postal service) are not granted family allow
ances, but are entitled to children's allowances. Unskilled day
laborers receive no allowances for their wives, children, or other de
pendents. It is estimated that the employees receiving such grants
constitute 70 per cent of the total employees under the system.
On July 1, 1924, the following monthly allowances were inaugu
rated in the four groups into which the employees entitled to such
grants are divided: Group 1, 10 gold kronen;1 group 2, 9 gold
kronen; group 3, 8 gold kronen; group 4, 7 gold kronen. The annual
allowances prior to July 1, 1924, for employees in the four groups
were 1,600, 960, 800, and 640 paper kronen, respectively, which
amounted to only a few cents in gold kronen but which were made up
by payments in kind with an average value of 7 gold kronen. Single
employees are not granted allowances unless they are maintaining
from their earnings dependent parents or adopted children.
As a rule, no distinction is made between male and female em
ployees in the matter of granting family allowances, but a woman
employee is entitled to allowances for a child only if its father is
dead or wholly incapacitated and without means, or if she is not
living with her husband and is supporting the child.
A male employee living with his wife may be paid an allowance
even if she has an income or is receiving a salary. He is entitled to
an allowance for only one other member of his family besides his
wife and children.
Allowances are made for dependent children only, but a child
whose monthly earnings are less than 10 gold kronen is considered
as dependent. The age limits of children for whom allowances are
paid are as follows: For children of certain employees in Group 1,
90 Except where otherwise specified, the data in this section were furnished by the
Ministry of Foreign Affair®, July 29, 1924.
1 Gold krone at p a r = 2 0 .2 6 cents.

142

VIEW PO IN TS

143

24 and of others 20 years; for children of employees in Groups 2, 3,
and 4, 16 years. An extension of the age limit is permitted for
children of employees in the last two classes when such children are
pursuing their studies satisfactorily.
There are no special provisions for the payment of allowances in
the case of accidents or illness.
Basic wages are not being affected by family allowances. Housing
allowances, however, have been fixed at from 10 to 20 per cent higher
for those entitled to family allowances for three or more dependents
than for those receiving allowances for not more than two.
The budget estimates of appropriations for family allowances for
the fiscal year 1921-22 to 1923-24 were: 1921-22, 40,471,040 paper
kronen; 1922-23, 94,208,200 paper kronen; 1923-24, 167,754,880
paper kronen. Because of the enormous depreciation of the cur
rency, however, the amounts disbursed were much greater.
Counties and municipalities.—Family allowances are also granted
in all counties and municipalities, under conditions and regulations
similar to those for the payment of such allowances by the State.
PRIVATE INDUSTRY

Family allowances are not paid in Hungary in private industry.2
VIEWPOINTS

The Hungarian Ministry of Foreign Affairs states that, as the
economic conditions which led to the establishment of the family al
lowances in 1912 still obtain and are even worse, these grants are
“ practical, necessary, and just.55
State employees express great satisfaction at the institution of
the system.
The secretary of the Hungarian Labor Council states that in his
opinion employees are entitled to such wages as will not only enable
them to maintain their physical strength but also to maintain their
families and meet their social obligations. He also pointed out that
it is important for industrial establishments to pay their workers
for labor performed a remuneration sufficient to enable them to pro
vide for their families, as such a remuneration tends to develop ef
ficiency in the workers. While this Hungarian trade-unionist holds
that similar wages should be paid for identical work, he believes that,
apart from wages, married employees should be enabled to maintain
their families through family allowances, as this would have the
effect of encouraging those with small incomes to establish families.
* Data furnished by the secretary of the Hungarian Trade-TJnion Council, June 4, 1924.

ITALY
PUBLIC SERVICE*

State.—Family allowances for State government workers were
inaugurated in Italy in 1917 by a royal decree, as an outcome of the
high cost of living. Successive decrees have modified the regula
tions concerning such family allowances. On January 1, 1924, all
the employees of the State civil service, both manual and nonmanual,
were covered by this system of payment. The numbers of these
employees are as follows:
Permanent employees:
Civil nonmanual__________________________________
School teachers----------------------------------------------------Manual workers__________________________________

89, 723
10,932
30, 391

Temporary employees:

Nonmanual workers---------------------------------------------- 17,438
Manual workers---------------------------------------------------- 26, 226
State railways:
Permanent employees-------------------------------------------- 143, 639
Temporary employees-------------------------------------------39, 450
Total__________________________________________ 357, 799

It is estimated that in the spring of 1924 family allowances were
being paid by the State to approximately 750,000 dependents of
civil-service employees proper and to 850,000 dependents of the
employees of the State railways.
The total amounts paid out in cost-of-living bonuses and family
allowances to those employed in the State civil service in 1922 were
1,069,225,433 lire4 and in 1923, 991,882,815 lire, the allowances for
dependents not being given separately.
In May, 1924, a monthly bonus oi 135 lire was being granted to
each civil-service employee who was married or had children under
18 years of age, while the single employee received only 100 lire.
The married employee also received a bonus of 0.85 lira per day, or
25.85 lire per month, for his wife (unless legally separated rrom
her) and for each dependent son not over 18 years of age.
Single women employed by the Government receive the same
bonus as single men. I f a married woman who is legally separated
from her husband has children to support, she is granted 135 lire
per month and also 0.85 lira per day for every son under 18 years.
I f a woman’s husband has no means and because of permanent
physical disability is not able to work, she is granted the same al
lowances as a married man. A married woman whose husband is
able to work and provide for the support of his family, gets only
the allowance for a single woman.
8 Data furnished by the General Director of the Royal Italian Treasury, May 5, 1924.
* Lira at p a r = 1 9 .3 c e n ts; exchange rate varies.

144

V IE W PO IN TS

145

A permanent employee of the State civil service who has been
transferred to a special register because of long-continued illness,
where he is given one-third of his salary if he has been in the service
for less than 10 years and one-half of his salary if his service exceeds
10 years, receives also the full amount of family allowances. He
may be carried on this register for two years.
Family allowances were granted to those in the employment of
the State as a temporary adjustment to abnormal economic condi
tions, but “ what was thought abnormal is becoming normal.” The
reduction of the cost of living is peculiarly difficult in Italy because
of the unfavorable exchange and the increased pressure or popula
tion, but there has been some decrease in the cost of living in the last
few years. Family allowances have been reduced to some extent
and the basic salaries have been raised to what is regarded as a fairer
scale. This increase also means larger pensions, as they are calcu
lated on basic salaries. Because of a general reorganization of the
State Government departments, numbers of the personnel were
dismissed, and these changes have bettered the economic situation
of those at present in the service.
Provinces and municipalities.—Provincial and municipal govern
ments grant family allowances, generally according to the same
rules as the State civil service, but are empowered to raise or de
crease the rates of such allowances. In important industrial centers,
such as Milan, Turin, etc., where the cost of living is above that in
other sections of Italy, family allowances are reported to be “ very
substantial.” The municipality of Home has adopted the plan of
the State Government.
PRIVATE INDUSTRY

During the late war some collective agreements provided costof-living bonuses in which account was taken of the workers’ family
responsibilities, but since 1920 such contracts have contained no
stipulations for supplemental allowances for dependents.5
The International Labor Office in its report on family allowances6
refers to a few collective agreements of minor importance which
provided bonuses for dependents, among them an agreement in 1921
in the printing industry in Milan granting a supplement of 7 per
cent of the total wages to certain lower-paid married workers with
one or more children. Married agricultural workers in some dis
tricts in Italy have certain advantages over the single workers re
ceiving either higher money wages or allowances in kind.
VIEWPOINTS

Employers.—The General Director of the Eoyal Italian Treasury
is of the opinion that the system of family allowance will be abol
ished in Italy when conditions become normal, and that such allow
ances “ may be embodied partly or entirely in the basic salary if the
general level of salaries suggests an improvement of the basic salary
of the civil servants.”
5 Data furnished by the General Con federation of Italian Industry, July 25, 1924.
6 International Labor Office. Family allowances. Geneva, 1924, p. 151. Studies and
reports, series D (wages and hours), No. 13.

146

ITALY

The family-allowance system is u antieconomical ” for industry,
according to the general secretary of the General Confederation of
Italian Industry, and this disadvantage can be offset by only the
French and Belgian system of family-allowance funds. “ Special
demographic reasons” alone can justify the institution of these
grants.
Workers— State employees seem to be satisfied with the familyallowance system, according to the Director of the Eoyal Italian
Treasury.
The Italian General Confederation of Labor states that since the
war several attempts to institute family allowances in private in
dustry have met with opposition from both employers and workers,
the employers feeling that such a sj^stem would lead to dismissal
of those with family responsibilities and the workers holding that
such discriminations should not be made in wages.7
In the few instances in which the family-allowance principle has
been applied in private industry, such action has been prompted
by the ugenerous paternal impulses” of employers, according to
the Italian Confederation of (Catholic) Workers. While it is
acknowledged that the demand for a family wage is a just social
demand, the obstacles in the way of meeting it are regarded as
formidable. Among the difficulties arising from the system is the
competition of married workers with single workers and of em
ployers who have large numbers’ of married men in their personnel
with other employers. It is conceded, however, that the population
situation in some countries has strengthened the arguments for
family wages and that the Christian belief in such compensation
adds its weight in favor of these supplementary allowances.8
Attention is called to the necessity in certain nations of encourag
ing large families, and the confederation holds that if there are
moral and social reasons for establishing the family wage the whole
financial burden of it should not be left to employers* but that the
workers themselves should contribute to a joint fund for children’s
allowances, and in this connection organization of an insurance sys
tem for family allowances is recommended.8
7 Letter of May 1, 1024.
* Letter of May 3, 1024.

LATVIA12
PUBLIC SERVICE

State—A. system of family allowances was established in the
Latvian civil service in March, 1919, to relieve the economic hard
ships of married employees brought about by the high prices of the
necessaries of life. The allowances are paid for both wives and chil
dren. Table 19 shows the changes that have been made from April
11,1919, to July 1,1924, in the size of these allowances in connection
with the increase in salaries:
T able

1 9 .—A M O U N T OF F A M IL Y A L LO W A N C E S IN L A TV IA , A PRIL 11,1919, TO JULY 1,1924

Monthly salary
Allowance for each family member

Period
Minimum

Maximum

Rubles *
250

Rubles1
900

Jan. 1,1920, to Apr. 1,1920
Apr. 1,1920, to July 1,1920
July 1, 1920, to Apr. 1,1921
Apr. 1,1921, to July 1,1921

375
500
750
1,300

1,800
3.000
5.000
10,300

July 1,1921, to Nov. 1,1921
Nov. 1, 1921, to Apr. 1, 1922.......
Apr. 1, 1922, to July 1,1924

1,800
2,700
3,000

10,800
12,800
18,000

Apr. 11,1919, to Jan. 1, 1920___

For salaries up to 500 rubles, 10 per cent of full
salary; for salaries over 500 rubles, 5 per cent.
10 per cent of full salary.
Do.
20 per cent of full salary.
10 per cent of full salary, but not less than 300
rubles.
Do.
Do.
8 per cent of the salary, but not more than 800
rubles nor less than 400 rubles.

1 Ruble at par = 51.46 cents; exchange rate varies.

Basic salaries are not affected by family allowances.
In 1923 there were 26,125 persons in the Latvian Government civil
service who were under the family-allowanee system, and allow
ances were granted to 36,194 members of the families of persons in
the civil service. These allowances are paid for wives, unless they
themselves have salaried positions, and for each child up to the com
pletion of his or her sixteenth year and up to 18 years of age if the
child remains that long in school. I f the husband and wife are bsth
in the State civil service, only one is paid the allowance for the
children. A woman in the civil service may also receive an allow
ance for an invalid husband.
The total amounts paid by the State in family allowances to its
civil-service employees in 1921, 1922, and 1923 were as follows:
In 1921, 123,000,000 rubles; in 1922, 130,000,000 rubles; in 1923,
157,000,000 rubles.
Municipalities.—Municipal government employees whose salaries
are graded by law in the same salary grades as the State civil service
are granted family allowances equal to those paid to the State em
ployees. In the municipal service of Riga, the capital of the country,
an allowance of 630 rubles per month is paid for each family member
o f all employees.
12 Data furnished by the Ministry of Labor of Latvia, Aug. 9, 1924.

147

148

LATVIA

VIEWPOINTS

“ Family allowances are indispensable” in view of the present
high cost of living, according to the acting director of the depart
ment of labor and tariff of the Latvian Ministry of Labor.
The organizations of Federal employees, realizing that these grants
for wives and children help to make family life more secure and
comfortable, have from time to time expressed the following desires:
(a) That other dependents, for example, parents, brothers, and
sisters, should be included in the family-allowance system; (b) That
the amount of the family allowance should be larger; (c) That an
allowance should be granted for each member of the family regard
less of the employee’s salary grade.

LITHUANIA12
The Republic of Lithuania instituted family allowances for its
civil-service employees January 1, 1922. The allowances are granted
to both men and women in the State service for each child under
14 years. The amounts of these grants have been changed from time
to time as follows: January 1, 1922, 100 ost marks13 per child per
month; September 1, 1922, 5 litas14 per child per month; August
1, 1923, 10 litas per child per month; May 1, 1924, 20 litas per child
per month.
The basic wages of employees receiving children’s allowances
range from 150 to 1,000 litas per month but the allowance for
each child is the same for all, 20 litas. The number of children for
whom allowances are paid is 9,680.
The total amount of children’s allowances in 1922 prior to the
inauguration of the Lithuanian currency was 8,204,400 marks and
after such change, 204,360 litas. In 1923, children’s allowances
amounted to 836,400 litas.
The chief of the chancery of the Lithuanian Ministry of Finance
calls attention to the advantage family allowances afford in aiding
Government employees, particularly those in the lower salary
grades, to educate their children, which, he reports, satisfies such
employees.
“ Data furnished by the Lithuanian M inistry of Finance, July 3, 1924.
18 Ost mark at p a r = 2 3 .8 2 c e n ts; exchange rate varies.
u Litas at p a r = 1 0 c e n ts; exchange rate varies.

149

LUXEMBURG
PUBLIC SERVICE15

State.—Legal provision for the payment of family allowances in
State civil employment in the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg was made
in 1916 to ameliorate the financial conditions of Government em
ployees with family responsibilities. In 1918, 2,509 employees out
of a total of 4,921 employees were receiving such grants.
Under the law of August 7, 1921, State Government employees
and pensioners are paid, in addition to their salaries, 400 francs per
annum for each of their first two children under 18 years of age
and 500 francs for each subsequent child. Allowances are paid
only for legitimate children. The number of children benefiting by
these allowances varies from year to year, the number in 1918 be
ing 3,011.
Woman employees do not receive these grants.
In 1923 the total amount disbursed by the State Government
in family allowances to its civil-service employees was 1,216,345
francs.16
Municipalities.—The city-of Luxemburg has instituted the same
system of family allowances for its employees as that adopted by the
State Government.
PRIVATE INDUSTRY

Both manual and nonmanual workers are accorded family al
lowances in the large and average sized private industries of the
Grand Duchy, the majority of these industries having adopted the
practice in 1916.
There are about 20,000 workers employed by the iron mines and
iron works and about 6,000 in the other industries, not including
the railroads which have a working force of 6,500, and it is esti
mated that approximately 50 per cent of these workers receive
these allowances.
The amounts of the allowances vary in different undertakings.
The following are the provisions adopted by the more important
enterprises: To married salaried employees: 50 francs per month,
and for each child under 20 years of age, 25 to 40 francs per month;
for women in confinement, 80 francs; to married workers: 1 franc
per day, and for each child under 16 years, 25 to 40 francs per
month; for women in confinement, 80 francs.
Some employers do not pay allowances for the first two children.
I f a woman and her husband are employed by the same firm, the
husband only is entitled to the family allowance.
Workers continue to draw these allowances when they are ill
or disabled by accident. When they remain away from work, how
18 Data furnished by the M inistry of Finance of Luxemburg, June G, 1924.
16 Franc at par— 10.3 cents ; exchange rate varies.

150

V IEW PO IN TS

151

ever, without justifiable cause their allowances are reduced or dis
continued.
There are no family-allowance funds in the Grand Duchy of Lux
emburg. The allowances in private industry for the country as a
whole during the last few years have been equivalent to 10 per cent
of the total wage bill.
VIEWPOINTS

The Government is well satisfied with its system of family al
lowances, according to the Ministry of Finance of the Grand
Duchy. The Government employees in general are also satisfied
with these grants.17
The Director-General of the Ministry of Commerce, Industry, and
Labor states that the family-allowance system makes it possible to
take into consideration the individual responsibilities of each
worker, which would seem to be a justifiable procedure. The hope
of reducing labor turnover was a leading motive in the establish
ment of this system. In according these supplements to married
men, who constitute the more stable portion of the working force,
it was felt that such employees would have a stronger incentive to
remain with their employers. At the same time, he states, the most
successful method of stabilizing labor is to provide suitable and
cheap dwellings for married workers.
** Information furnished by the Ministry of Finance of Luxemburg, June 17, 1924.

POLAND
PUBLIC SERVICE
STATE 18

On September 19, 1918, a provisional law (Journal of Laws o f
the Polish Republic, No. 17, par. 45) instituted supplementary al
lowances for married men and women, widowers, and widows teach
ing in the primary schools who had children to support.
Cost-of-living bonuses granted under the law of July 28, 1919
(Journal of Laws of the Polish Republic, No. 63, par. 377), to State
employees included supplements for members of the family, unmar
ried employees, and employees who were widowers without children
receiving lower bonuses. These family supplements ranged from 20
to 100 marks per month according to the grade and class of the em
ployee, the number of dependents, and the section of the country
in which the employee lived. The supplements have since been
changed both as to form and application, the modifications being
due to the depreciation of the currency.
On January 1, 1923, 54.55 per cent of the State employees were
receiving family supplements.
In July, 1924, State employees were being granted under the law
of October 9, 1923 (Journal of Laws of the Polish Republic, No.116,
par. 924), 15.75 zlote19 per month for each member of the family,
not to exceed five persons, including the wife, the husband under
certain circumstances, legal or legitimated children, and stepchildren.
This allowance is designated an “ economic supplement.”
A husband receives an allowance for his wife “ if he is obliged to
support her.” A wife, however, is paid an allowance for a husband
only when he is an invalid and can not support himself. The al
lowances for children are granted without regard to their sex and
are paid until they are 18 years of age. I f a child is attending
public school, or is unable to support himself because of physical
or mental incapacity, the age limit is extended to 24 years, and under
exceptional circumstances—for example, in certain cases of incurable
illness or where because of military or mobilization service, the child’s
studies have not been completed—it may be extended beyond 24 years.
Table 20 shows the relation between the allowances granted at
three different periods to several grades of State employees with
varying numbers of dependents:
18 Data furnished by the Polish Ministry of Finance, July 22, 1924*,
10 Zloty at p a r = 1 9 .3 c e n ts; exchange rate varies.

152

153

PRIVATE IN D U STRY

T able 20.—IN D E X N U M BER S OF M O N T H L Y A L LO W A N C E S TO C E R T A IN CLASSES OP
STATE EM PLO Y EES A T T H R E E SPECIFIED D ATES *
[Smallest family groups 100]

Date Mid size of family

Low-grade Intermediate-grade High-grade
employees employees
employees

December, 1919:
Small family________________________ _____________ ___________
Average family_____________________________ ___ ______________
Large family________. . . . ________ . . . ______ . . . . . . _____________
June, 1920:
Unmarried____________________ ___ . . . . . . _____________________
Married, with 1 child or n o n e ......______ . . . ______ __________
Married, with 2 children_______________ . . . . . ________________ _
Married, with 3 children_______________________ ______________
Married, with 4 or more children__ . . . . . . . __. . . . . . . . ______ ____
December, 1920:
Unmarried.................................................. ................ ..................... .
Small family2_______ ______ . . . . . . _. . . . . . . . . . . . . . _. . . . . . . . . .
Average family3___ __________ __________„____________________
Large family4____________________—_____. . . . . . . ____ _____ . . . . .

100.0
102.7
105.5

100.0
103.1
106.2

100.0
107.6
115.3

100.0
109.2
115.6
125.3
131.9

100.0
109.5
113. 5
126.1
132.8

100.0
114.2
120.7
136.3
139.8

100.0
106.0
110.5
115.0

100.0
112.4
121.7
131.0

100.0
132.7
157.3
181.9

i International Labor Office. Family allowances. Geneva, 1924, p. 127. Studies and reports, series D
(wages and bours), No. 13.
* With 1 or 2 dependents.
.* With 3 or 4 dependents.
* With more than 4 dependents.

MUNICIPALITIES

The State system of granting allowances for family responsibili
ties to Government employees is accepted by almost all the towns of
Poland.20
On June 5,1924, the municipal council of Warsaw made the State
law of October D, 1923, applicable to municipal employees except
workers on municipal undertakings.20 Municipal workers in the
various occupations are paid the following supplementary grants
for dependents, based on the wages of single workers:
T able 3 1 .—SU P P L E M E N TA R Y

G R AN TS FOR F A M IL Y RESPONSIBILITIES
M U N IC IPAL W O R K ER S OF W AR SAW , B Y O CC U PATIO N i

PAID

Per cent of wages of single worker
paid—
Occupation
Workers
with one
dependent

Electrical engineers___________________ . . . _________________________
Locksmiths____________________________ ___. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ___ __
Skilled masons___________________ ____________. . . . . . . _____________
Helpers__________________ _____ ___________________ . _____________
Seamstresses________________________ __________ ___ . . . . . . . . . _____
Nurses, male and female____________________ ____________ _________

!
Workers • Workers
with two with three
depend
or more
dependents
ents

2.63
3.12
3.97
5.00
4.08
4.54

5.26
6.24
6.78
10.00
8.16
9.08

7.89
9.36
10.17
15.00
12.24
13.62

i Data furnished by the Polish Ministry of Labor and Social Assistance, July 15, 1924.

PRIVATE INDUSTRY21

Family allowances were introduced into private industry in Poland
in 1919 as an outcome of the low wages and economic pressure fol
80 Data furnished by the Polish Ministry of Finance, July 22, 1924.
21 Unless otherwise specified, the data in this section were furnished by the /Polish
Ministry of Labor and Social Assistance, July 15, 1924, and the National Polish Com
mittee of the International Chamber of Commerce, Nov. 10, 1924.

154

POLAND

lowing the war. At this period wages were based on the minimum
of existence for a worker’s family. Various collective contracts were
made containing provisions for supplements to wages in behalf of
workers’ dependents,22 among them an agreement between the Union
of Oil Producers of Poland and their employees, effective January
1, 1920, which provided for allowances for wives, mothers, brothers,
sisters, and children.23
When living conditions became more normal family allowances
were abandoned in many private industries. Such grants are, how
ever, still made for workers in the Dombrowa and Cracovia mining
districts and in the potash mines in Kalusz and Stebnik.
As, up to the beginning of 1924, wages in Poland advanced quickly
because of the rapid depreciation of the currency of the country,
family allowances were calculated as a percentage of the wage of
the single worker.
In the mining industry such allowances are combined with bonuses
for regular work, which are granted to workers who are not absent
more than two working-days a month without good reason. In
July, 1924, family allowances in the coal and potash mines were as
follows:
T

able

2 3 . — PER

C E N T OF W A G E G R A N TE D COAL A N D POTASH M IN ER S IN PO LAN D
AS F A M IL Y A LLO W AN CES IN JULY, 1924

Family status of worker

Coal
mines

Potash
mines

Per cent Per cent
Married workers wifchout children and with 1 child, widowers or widows with 1 child.
4.76
4. 35
Married workers, widowers, or widows with 2 or 3 children_____ _______________ . . .
11.43
8.69
Married workers, widowers,
________
or _
widows
____. . .with
___ 4 or more
13.04
19.04 children

In the iron works of the Dombrowa Basin monthly allowances
are granted as follows: Workers with a small family 3.05 zlote;
workers with an average family, 5 zlote; workers with a large
family, 7 zlote. Furthermore, all married workers receive an allow
ance of 150 per cent more coal than single workers.
In the sugar industry in Great Poland workers writh two children
receive a supplement of 1 grosz24 per hour of work. Widows with
dependent children receive higher salaries than other woman work
ers in the same establishment. In the sugar industry in other sec
tions of Poland family responsibilities of the workers are taken into
consideration by granting various allowances in kind.
There are no family-allowance funds in Poland.
VIEWPOINTS

The Polish Ministry of Finance states that in the face of the
high cost of living and the decrease in the possibilities of earning
larger salaries, especially in the Government, and the lack of op
portunities for remunerative work for members of families the
family-allowance system seems to be indispensable in Poland.
28 International Labor Office. Family allowances. Geneva, 1924, p. 128. Studies and
reports, series D (wages and hours), No. 13. *
a3 Great Britain. Ministry of Labor. Labor Overseas, London, April-June, 1920, p. 53.
24 Grosz at par—0.193 cen t; exchange rate varies.

V IE W PO IN TS

155

State Government employees are of the opinion that the practice
of granting them family allowances will be continued as long as
the present economic conditions exist.25
The family-allowance system under which employers pay from
their private funds certain supplements to the wages of workers
with family responsibilities can not exist in Poland except under
abnormal conditions, according to the Undersecretary of State of
the Polish Ministry of Labor and Social Assistance, who also holds
that “ wages are a remuneration for certain work and can depend
only on the individual skill and efficiency of the worker.” He
believes, however, that a more extensive system of family allowances
would prove a very useful form of social insurance.
The president of the National Polish Committee of the Inter
national Chamber of Commerce states that Polish employers “ are
of the opinion that the worker should be paid according to perform
ance.” He points out that although the workers who receive these
grants are more closely bound to the business upon which they are
engaged and employers who pay family allowance thus guarantee
themselves a specialized and capable labor supply, there are, never
theless, initial indications of a spirit of growing independence
among the workers themselves—a wish to procure their own little
homes and small holdings of land. Moreover, this tendency is
increased by the fact that allowances paid for dependents are very
low and do not cover the actual extra cost of supporting big families.
* Data furnished by the Ministry of Finance, July 22, 1024.

61243°—26------11

PORTUGAL * *
Early in 1924 the Portuguese Government decided to come to the
relief of its public employees whose economic situation had been
badly affected by high prices, and a legislative proposal was drafted
for the granting of family allowances to such public employees.
The Governor of Macao, a Portuguese colony in China, decided to
pay famity allowances to the military and civil employees in such
colony, It was also planned to adopt a similar scheme m Angola, a
Portuguese possession in Africa.
international Labor Office.

p. 2fi.

156

Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Apr. 14, 1924,

RUMANIA
PUBLIC SERVICE

Supplemental grants for family responsibilities are made to the
public employees of Rumania.27 At present a married employee
without children receives a 5 per cent addition to his basic salary
per month; the allowance for 1 child is 100 lei; 28 for 2 children, 150
lei; and for 3 or more children, 250 lei.27
In nine months of the fiscal year 1923 the Government expended
for its personnel 4,139,175,880 lei, divided as follows: 1,481,051,532
lei for salaries, 215,837,858 lei for rent, 1,736,808,575 lei for cost-ofliving bonuses, 205,477,915 lei for family allowances, and 500,000,000
lei for a fund to improve the financial situation of Federal em
ployees.30
PRIVATE INDUSTRY

There are no legislative regulations for family allowances in
private industry in Rumania, nor is there any proposal to embody
such regulations in the labor code. Among the collective agreements
concluded in 1923, those between the following employers and their
workers contained provisions for family allowances.3®
Metallurgical works of Resitza: 200 lei per annum for each mem
ber of the family for clothing and 25 lei per month for maintenance
expenses.
Association of the Iron Industry of Caras-Severin: 25 to 75 lei
per month for one or two children, and 100 lei per month for three or
more children.
Certain manufacturers of Bucharest: 12 lei per day for workers
with minor children.
Busteni Paper Factory: 30 lei per month for a wife and for each
child under 13 years of age.
VIEWPOINTS

The Rumanian Engineers’ Association submitted a memorandum
to the Government requesting it to increase the 1923 salaries of all
engineers in the public service and to continue family allowances.31
27 Data furnished by the Ministry of Public Health, Labor, and Social Welfare of
Rumania, May 22, 1924.
28 Leu at par*=10.3 cents; exchange rate varies.
30 Data furnished by the Ministry of Finance of Rumania, Mar. 26, 1925.
81 International Labor Office. Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, April 0,
1923, p. 25.

157

SCANDINAVIAN COUNTRIES
DENMARK *
PUBLIC SERVICE

State.—Before the World War the Danish Government did not
take into consideration family responsibilities in connection with
the salaries of its civil-service employees. From 1914 to 1919, how
ever, cost-of-living bonuses were granted which usually were higher
for married than for single employees. At first, a supplementary
bonus was also paid for each child under 15 years of age.
New wage regulations in the law of September 12, 1919,83 pro
vided for: (1) A basic wage varying for the different classes
of employees. (2) An age supplement varying for the different
classes of employees and within each class differing according to
length of service. (3) A locality allowance (to offset the variations
in prices in different communities) as follows: 450 kroner34 per
annum for employees living in Copenhagen, 330 kroner for those
residing in the larger provincial towns, and 240 kroner for those
living in the smaller towns, while for employees in rural sections
no locality bonus was provided. (4) A “ trade-cycle” allowance
for all employees, which did not vary according to family responsi
bilities but ranged from 750 kroner per annum for the lowest paid
employees to 1,590 kroner for the highest paid, never, however, ex
ceeding 50 per cent of the basic wage and the age bonus combined.
The purpose of the trade-cycle allowance was to adjust wages to
business conditions. It was reduced in 1922 and again in 1923, but
in the latter year the amounts granted varied according to family
responsibilities, the unmarried employees under 35 years of age
receiving only 66% per cent of the allowance granted to married
employees or unmarried employees over 35 years of age. (5) A
cost-of-living bonus to be fixed twice a year in accordance with vari
ations of the price index number. The cost-of-living bonus for
single employees is only 66% per cent of that for the married.
From October 1, 1924, to March 31, 1925, this bonus amounted for
married employees to 702 kroner per annum and for single em
ployees to 468 kroner per annum. From the above provisions it will
be seen that no distinction is made between single and married
civil-service employees in basic wages and age and locality supple
ments, but that unmarried employees under 35 years of age receive
only two-thirds of the trade-cycle allowance accorded employees
who are married or who are unmarried and over 35 years of age.
Furthermore, unmarried employees are granted only two-thirds of
the cost-of-living bonus received by the married.
88 Data furnished by the Danish Ministry o f Social Affairs, Aug. 6, 1924, and the Danish
Department of Statistics, Sept. 26, 1924.
^D enm ark. Finansministeriet. Bekendtg0relse af Lov Nr. 489 a f 12 September, 1919,
om Statens Tjenestemaend.
Copenhagen, i9 2 2 .
M Krone at par*=&6.8 cen ts; exchange rate varies.

15S

159

D E N M ARK

The following example shows how much a particular employee
would be paid under these seemingly complex provisions: From
October 1, 1924, to March 31, 1925, a State railroad employee, 34
years of age who is married, is living in Copenhagen, and has
been in the service since his twenty-second year would receive the
following:
Kroner
Per annum

Basic wage----------------------------------------------------------------1,920.00
450.00
Age supplement, including seniority bonus-------------------Locality bonus----------------------------------------------------------450. 00
Trade-cycle allowance------------------------------------------------- 421. 20
Cost-of-living bonus---------------------------------------------------702. 00
Total_________________________ ________________ 3,945.20

I f he were unmarried he would receive only 280.80 kroner as a
trade-cycle allowance and 468 kroner as a cost-of-living bonus, his
total wages amounting to 3,568.80 kroner yearly, or 374.40 less than
if he were married.
O f the annual expenditure by the Danish Government for the
wages of its civil-service employees proper, estimated at from 170,000,000 to 180,000,000 kroner, 18,800,000 kroner were for trade-cycle
allowances and 30,000,000 kroner for cost-of-living bonuses.
At present the trade-cycle allowance can not exceed 27 per cent
of the basic wage plus the age bonus for married employees or 18
per cent for unmarried employees under 35 years of age. In the
lowest-paid classes married employees receive 120 kroner per annum
more than unmarried employees under 35 years of age; in the highestpaid classes, 290 kroner.
Table 23 shows the amounts of monthly trade-cycle allowances
fixed from July, 1923, to March, 1925, for married employees and
single employees under 35 years of age in specified salary grades
in the State Government service:
T

2 3 .—T R A D E -C YC LE ALLO W ANCES PER M O N T H FOR M A R R IE D A N D FOR
SINGLE EM PLOYEES JULY 1, 1923, TO M AR C H 31, 1925, B Y SPECIFIED PERIODS

able

Amount per month beginning—
July 1,1923
Annual basic salary and age
supplement

Under 1,200 kroner.....................
1,200 to 1,499 kroner...................
1,500 to 1,799 kroner...................
1,800 to 2,399 kroner...................
2,400 to 2,899 kroner...................
2,900 to 3,899 kroner...................
3,900 to 4,899 kroner...................
4,900 to 6,399 kroner...................
6,400 to 8,399 kroner................
8,400 to 10,399 kroner........... . . .
10,400 kroner or over.................

Oct. 1,1923

Apr. 1,1924

July 1,1924

Oct. 1,1924

Mar Single Mar Single Mar Single Mar Single Mar Single
em
em
em
em
em
ried
ploy ried
ploy ried
ploy ried ploy ried ploy
em
em
em
em
em
ees
ees
ees
ees
ees
ploy under ploy under ploy
ploy
ploy
ees 1
ees * under ees 1 under ees 1 under
ees 1
35
35
35
35
35
Kroner
*33
36.00
39.00
42.00
45.00
48.00
51.00
54.00
60.00
69.00
87.00

Kroner
*22
24.00
26.00
28.00
30.00
32.00
34.00
36:00
40.00
46.00
58.00

Kroner Kroner
230
220
33.00 22.00
36.00 24.00
39.00 26.00
42.00 28.00
45.00 30.00
48.00 32.00
51.00 34.00
57.00 38.00
63.00 42.00
81.00 54.00

Kro'ner
*29
31.90
34.80
37.70
40.60
43.50
46.40
49.30
55.10
60.90
78.30

Kroner
219M
21.26
23.20
25.13
27.06
29.00
30.93
32.86
36.73
40.60
52.20

Kroner Kroner
nm
228
30.80 20.53
33.60 22.40
36.40 24.26
39.20 26.13
42.00 28.00
44.80 29.86
47.60 31.73
53.20 35.46
58.80 39.20
75.60 50.40

Kroner Kroner
227
2 18
29.70
19.80
32.40
21.60
35.10
23.40
37.80
25.20
40.50
27.00
43.20
28.80
45.90
30.60
51.30
34.20
56.70
37.80
72.90
48.60

* Also unmarried employees over 35 years of age to whom the State does not grant housing and full main
tenance.
* Per cent of total monthly amount of basic salary and age supplement.

160

SCAND INAVIAN COUNTRIES

Municipalities.—The great majority of the local governments pay
their employees cost-of-living bonuses in which a distinction is made
between married and single persons.
PEIYATE INDUSTRY

During the World War and the years immediately succeeding
family allowances were granted by employers in the printing, brew
ing, and textile industries in Denmark as a part of a cost-of-living
bonus. Previous to that cost-of-living bonuses had been paid, but
generally no difference between the married and the unmarried had
been made in them.
In December, 1916, an agreement was reached in the printing
industry in Copenhagen to establish a fund for the payment of costof-living bonuses, and this fund began to function the following
month. It was administered by four persons, two representing the
employers and two the workers. Each employer paid into the fund
3 kroner per week per worker. The weekly allowances paid the
workers, which varied according to wages and family responsibili
ties, were as follows: To every worker whose weekly wage did not
exceed 36 kroner, about 2.6 kroner; to every worker whose weekly
wage was from 37 to 40 kroner, about 1.3 kroner; for the wife of a
worker (a widow or a widower’s housekeeper) if she had no trade,
about 1.3 kroner; to every married worker, widower, widow, and
unmarried woman worker for each child under 15 years of age,
about 0.65 krone. The allowances for the wife and children were
irrespective of the wage of the worker.
The typographical union acknowledged that this plan was a
departure from the principle of its usual trade agreements providing
equal pay for equal work, but declared that the arrangement had
been made under unusual circumstances and had the approval of
the workers by a large majority vote.
These cost-of-living bonuses were increased in September, 1917,
February, 1918, and September, 1918. At the latter date while the
cost-of-living index had reached 182, the wages as increased by the
bonus were 88 per cent higher than those of 1914. In the fall of
1918 the regulations for the cost-of-living-bonus fund were con
siderably simplified, allowances being varied only for family
responsibilities and not according to wages.
In October, 1918, the cost-of-living bonus amounted to 21 kroner
per week. In the following March it was increased to 26.5 kroner
per week, but was granted only to those who had children to sup
port. The agreement of July, 1921, increased substantially both
piece and time rates and abolished the cost-of-living-bonus fund.
In the Provinces cost-of-living bonuses were paid directly by
employers to printers, the quarterly bonus in October, 1916, for
married workers being 25 kroner and for single workers 12% kroner.
In 1918 the employers proposed a scheme like that in effect in Copen
hagen, but the workers objected. Their opposition was based, how
ever, on practical grounds rather than on principle. Considerable
increases were made from time to time in the bonuses, and finally
under the agreement of July, 1919, no distinction was made between
married and single workers.

161

D EN M ARK

From 1917 to 1919 brewery workers received the following family
allowances: January 1, 1917, to January 1, 1918, 1 krone per week
per child; January 1, 1918, to April 1, 1918, 5 kroner per month per
child; April 1, 1918, to April 1, 1919, 6 kroner per month per child.
In the cost-of-living bonuses granted Copenhagen textile workers
from July, 1917, to February, 1918, a difference was made between
persons who had families to support and those who did not, as
indicated below:
T able 24.-00ST-0F-LIVING

BONUSES IN THE TEXTILE
AGREEMENT OF JULY, 1917

INDUSTRY

UNDER

Bonus to workers whose weekly

Kind of worker
Less than
20 kroner
Males over 18 years of age:
Supporting a family__ _____ _______________________ ______ ___
Living alone______________ ____________________________ __ ____
Females over 18 years of age:
Supporting a family_____ ........._____ _______________________ _
Living alone__ ___ _______ ___ ______________ ________________

20 to 30
kroner

More than
30 kroner

6.00
4.00

5.50
3.50

6.00
3.00

4.50
4.00

4.00
3.50

3.50
3.00

Under the agreement of February, 1918, the cost-of-living bonuses
were as follows:
0r e *
per hour

Males supporting a family------------------------------------------------- - 12
Males living alone (over 18 years of age)----------------------------- 10
Females supporting a family----------------------------------------------- 10
Females living alone (over 18 years of age)-------------------------- 8

After the expiration of the above agreement f a m i l y responsibili
ties were not taken into consideration in the remuneration of Copen
hagen textile workers.
Of 30 inquiries sent out by the Danish Department of Statistics
to various trade-unions for the purpose of securing information on
family allowances in private industry in Denmark, the replies were
received only from the printers, brewery workers, and textile
workers. This fact, together with certain other data in the matter,
has led the secretary of the Danish Department of Statistics to
conclude that the family-allowance system has not prevailed to any
great extent in other trades, at least in Copenhagen. From reports
received by that department from three different associations con
cerned with the working conditions of nonmanual employees in pri
vate and semiofficial enterprises it seems evident that “ the familyallowance system is now of no greater practical importance for nonmanual workers in private undertakings than for manual workers.”
VIEWPOINTS

The great majority of employees’ organizations opposed the pas
sage ox the law of March 28, 1923, providing for a trade-cycle
allowance in the Government service, in which bonus family respon
sibilities were taken into account. As an outcome of such opposition,
unmarried employees over 35 years of age were put on 44equal terms
with the married.”
•

0 re

at pap *=0.208 cen t; exchange rate varies.

162

SCAND INAVIAN COUNTRIES

The Department of Statistics states that future proposals for
family allowances in private industry would certainly arouse the
antagonism of the trade-unions, which have always insisted on
equal pay for equal work,
FINLAND
PUBLIC SERVICE5*

State.—As long ago as 1908 the family-allowance principle had
been put into effect in the payment of certain grades of teachers in
Finland.
In 1917 family allowances were being paid to certain classes of
State employees, and one of the duties assigned the Government
committee created in 1918 to study salaries paid by the State “ was
to propose a scale of family allowances.” The plan for such grants
formulated by this committee was put into effect March 18, 1919,
and covered all permanent State officials and employees. While in
general these allowances were made irrespective of salaries, in cer
tain municipalities and rural sections the salaries received by those
in State employment were taken into consideration. The monthly
allowances for each child under 18 years of age and for children
over that age who were unable to work were as follows:
T

able

2 5 .—M O N T H L Y

F A M IL Y ALLO W ANCES G R A N T E D
EM PLO YEES IN F IN L A N D IN 1919

Number of cbildren

One child__________________________ . . . . _________________________________
Two children_________ ___________________________ ____________ __________
Three children___________________________________ ______________________
Four children___________________________________________________________
Five cbildren or more____________________________________ ___ __________

CIVIL-SERVICE

Helsing
fors

Other
towns

Maries»
100
140
180
220
260

Marks
80
110
140
170
200

Rural
districts
Marks
CO
80
100
120
140

1 Mark at par—19.3 cents; exchange rate varies.

The Confederation of Civil Servants objected to this scheme and
made the following demands: (a) An allowance for the wife also;
(b) Equal allowance for each child; (c) Abolition of the maximum
of five children for which allowances are paid; (d) Increase of the
maximum age of children for whom allowances would be paid to
21 years. These demands were not granted. In 1920, however, the
system was simplified, equal allowances of 80 marks per month
being granted for each child, regardless of locality or of the number
of children.
In 1921 the allowance was increased to 150 marks per month per
child. The next year basic salaries were substantially increased and
certain modifications made in the provisions for family allowances,
no grant being made for the first child but an allowance of 150
marks per month being made for each subsequent child under 16
years of age. The law of December 29, 1923, provided 1,200 marks
per annum for each child under that age excepting the first.
88 When not otherwise specified, the information in this section is from International
Labor Office, Family allowances, Geneva, 1924, pp. 143-146, Studies and reports, series
D (wages and hours), No. 13.

163

F IN L A N D

On the average, family allowances have been equivalent to 10
per cent of the salary of civil servants.
Municipal.—Employees of the municipality of Helsingfors were
in 1915 receiving cost-of-living bonuses which took into account
variations in family responsibilities. At the same period the city
of Abo also considered the number of dependents in remunerating
employees in the municipal service.36
In 1922 the family-allowance rates for municipal employees per
child per month were:
Marks

Abo and Vasa___ ______________________________________ 150
Borga------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 125
Helsingfors and Sordavala______ ________ ._________ ______ 120
Viborg and Raumo________________________________________ 100
Kuopio___________ _______________________________________ 75
Tammerfors_____________________ „ _______________________ 60

Generally speaking, these allowances are granted irrespective of
basic salaries. In Abo and Borga an allowance is also given for
the wife.
In some towns 16 years is the age limit for children receiving
allowances, but usually the maximum age is 18 years. There is a
tendency toward the gradual abolition of these grants as basic
salaries become adjusted to prevailing price levels.
Family allowances for wage earners in the service of certain
Finnish municipalities are shown in Table 26 :
AL LO W AN CES G R A N TE D W A G E EAR N ER S
EIGH T M UN ICIPALITIE S OF F IN L AN D

Unit

1 No allowance for first child.

Age
limit
(years)

Marks
11
2

18
18

Month___________
____ d o _ ..................

120
75

........do......................
Hour.................... .
d o . . . . .............
\
K(Ta^+U
IMontn___________
Hour_____________
........d o _ ..................

100
.25
.20
40
3.15
.30

A b o .................................................................... Day_____ ________
Helsingfors...... ........... ........ ............................ . ........do____________
Jakobstad............................................................
Kuopio................................................................
St. Michael:
Electric and waterworks workers..........
Other w o r k e r s ......................................
Uleaborg..............................................................
Pieiarsaari........................................ .................
Tammerfors............. ......................................... .

Amount
per child

218 years if child is being educated.

EM PLOYED

Date when grant
paid

Since 1920.
Since December,
1920.

* 14
Since 1921.
juntil 1920.
QOOO!

City

1
1

T able 2 6 .—F A M IL Y

* Same amount for wife.

The Municipal Central Office of Finland reports that there were
no important modifications in the payment of family allowances to
the wage earners employed by municipalities in 1922 and 1923.
PRIVATE INDUSTRY37

The system of family allowances in private industry in Finland
originated during the World War to meet demands of the workers
for wage increases to keep pace with the high cost of living. Em
89 Sweden. [Soclaldepartementet.] Socialstyrelsen. Sociala Meddelanden, Stockholm,
No. 4, 1916, p. 485.
37 Data furnished by the Ministry for Social Affairs of Finland, July 17, 1924, and
by the Employers’ Central Association of Finland, Oct. 18, 1924,

164

SCAND INAVIAN COUNTRIES

ployers preferred to grant temporary cost-of-living bonuses and
family allowances rather than to raise permanently the basic wages.
The shortage of foodstuffs during the war, especially toward
the latter part of it, was sorely felt by industrial workers in
Finland. In order to ameliorate this situation, employers bought
or furnished from their own estates the most essential foodstuffs and
distributed them among their employees either gratis or at a com
paratively low price. Workers who had a large number of depend
ents benefited, of course, more from this arrangement than single
workers or those who had few family responsibilities. When food
stuffs became more plentiful prices were still high, and the em
ployers of Finland, in general, substituted money allowances for pay
ments in kind, such money allowances being fixed in accordance with
the workers’ family responsibilities. This practice was adopted by
individual establishments merely as a temporary measure, and no col
lective action was taken in the matter by the organizations with
which these employers were affiliated.
In general, these supplemental payments were made to the head
of the family for every child under 15 years of age. In many cases,
however, the allowances were paid to wives who remained in their
homes, and even to widows who supported their families.
As a result of a survey in the spring of 1920 the following estimate
was made of the proportion the cost-of-living bonuses and family al
lowances constituted of the total weekly remuneration of men and
women in the four industries in which these grants were made,
namely, the metal, textile, paper, and lumber industries:
T

2 7 .—PER C E N T COST-OF-LIVING BONUSES A N D F A M IL Y A L LO W A N C E S CO N
ST IT U TED OF TH E AVE R A G E W E E K L Y R E M U N E R A T IO N IN SPECIFIC IN D U S
T R IES, SPRING OF 1920

able

Metal industry

Textile indus
try

indus
Paper industry Lumber
try

Item
Men

Wages______ ________ ______ _______
Allowances in kind______ ___________
Additional payments___ - ____ ______

Women

Men

Per cent Per cent Per cent
95.82
94.79
69.66
1.01
29.33
4.18
5.21

i
Men jWomen Men Women
i
1
Per cent Per cent Per cent Per cent Per cent
61.97
93.90
94.84
96.83
97.55
.49
4.11
4.86
1.98
1.40
37.54
1.99
.30
1.19
1.05

Women

The above-listed additional payments in the metal, paper, and
lumber industries were chiefly, if not altogether, made as family al
lowances. In the textile industry the 46additional payment” took
the form of a cost-of-living bonus, as in such industry the workers
are principally young women. The above statistics were secured,
however, at a time when the system of family allowances was on the
wane in private industry in Finland and wages were being adjusted
to current prices.
In private nonindustrial undertakings the family-allowance
system was never largely adopted and where it was instituted it has
been discontinued.
VIEWPOINTS

The Ministry of Social Affairs of Finland reports that the present
methods of relief and welfare work in private industry in Finland,

NO RW A Y

165

which are being substantially extended in scope,38 are more satis
factory for providing for the workers’ family responsibilities than
family allowances and have led to the abolition of these money
grants. “ It is impossible to base wages on family conditions,” yet
such conditions must be regarded in order to stabilize employment.
Public-service employees for the most part have not been in
favor of permanently establishing family allowances but consider
such grants as temporary means for meeting unusual economic
exigencies.39
The president of the Employers’ Central Association of Finland
states that in his opinion and that of other employers family allow
ances can u be introduced only under exceptional circumstances.”
The workers have felt that family allowances would create dis
cord in their ranks.39
NORWAY
PUBLIC SERVICE

State.—At the present time in Norway no account is being taken
of family responsibilities in the salary regulations of its State civilservice employees. From 1918 to 1922, however, to relieve in some
degree the economic pressure resulting from war-inflated prices,
temporary cost-of-living bonuses were granted. Certain portions
of these bonuses were called family allowances, which were fixed
at 300 kroner40 for the first dependent, 200 kroner for the second
dependent, and 120 kroner for each additional dependent.41
A proposal by the Norwegian Government that after July, 1923,
the cost-of-living bonuses should be granted only to those who had
not had their wages adjusted since 1919 aroused much opposition,
resulting in a conference between the Minister of State and rep
resentatives of the Government employees’ high-cost-of-living com
mittee. The outcome was an appropriation in July, 1923, of 10,000,000 kroner for family allowances for all Government em
ployees.42 These grants were, however, abandoned at the end of
1923.41
Municipalities.—During the years when prices were exceptionally
high municipalities increased the wages of their employees largely
by means of bonuses, consisting of a fixed amount and an allowance
varying with the size of the family. The family allowances paid by
some municipalities were at first the same as those paid by the
State.43
While in 1922 the cost-of-living bonuses were no longer being
granted to commune workers by the majority of municipalities,
some of the cities retained for the fiscal year 1922-23 certain family
88 See also Finland, SosialiministeriS, Tyovaenhuolto Snomen Suurtollisuudessa, Sosialinen aikakauskirja, 1923 [Helsingfors, 1923?].
39 International Labor Office. Family allowances. Geneva, 1924, p. 143. Studies and
reports, series D (wages and tours), No. 13.
40Krone at par>*=26.8 cents; exchange rate varies.
41 Data furnished by the Norwegian Government through its Minister to the United
States, Oct 25, 1924.
42 Arbeidernes Faglige Landsorganisation i Norge. Meddelelsesblad, Christiania, JuneJuly, 1923, pp. 218, 219.
43 International Labor Office. Family allowances. Geneva, 1924, p. 137. Studies and
reports, series D (wages and hours), No. 13.

166

SCANDINAVIAN COUNTRIES

allowances.44 For example, in Sarpsborg, family allowances of
from 20 to 35 0re45 per hour were paid to permanent road workers.
In Konigsberg, commune workers were granted 300 kroner per year
for a wife, 200 kroner for the first child, and 120 kroner for each
succeeding child. In Fredriksstad a worker received 4 0re per hour
per child, beginning with the third.
PRIVATE INDUSTRY

From 1916 to 1922 collective agreements in several private indus
tries—chiefly export industries—provided for allowances for the
wives and children of the workers. This practice, however, has now
been abandoned.46
The president of the Norwegian Federation of Employers has no
knowledge of any payment of family allowances by any members of
that association.
VIEWPOINTS 46
Private industrial employers are reported as not being in favor
of family allowances and the majority of their workers are opposed
to these grants. The majority of the trade-union leaders object to
the family-allowance principle in private industry, as their expe
rience has shown that these grants do not help to forward tradeunion efforts to raise the standard of wages and living for all the
workers.
In the State and municipal services, however, the wrorkers and
their trade-unions desire to have the family-allowance system re
established and have passed numerous resolutions on the matter.
Their efforts have as yet been unavailing, except in a few of the
larger cities.
SWEDEN
PUBLIC SERVICE

State.—Family allowances were instituted in the Swedish State
service as a result of the high prices created by the recent war.48 In
1916 a war-time allowance was granted to certain State employees
who had families to support, and later cost-of-living bonuses, which
were higher for married employees, were also paid. These family
allowances and higher cost-of-living bonuses to married employees
were adopted largely for financial reasons. As bonuses correspond
ing to the depreciation of the currency could not be given to all
employees preference was given to those who suffered most from the
high cost of living. The allowances were continued after the war,49
but as prices have fallen the allowances have been greatly reduced.
44 Norway. Statistiske Centralbyra. L0nninger, 1922. Christiania, 192.3, pp. 5 *, 18.
** 0 re at par = 0.268 c en t; exchange rate varies.
46 Data furnished by the secretariat of the National Federation o f Trade-Union? of
Norway, Aug. 5, 1924.
48 Data furnished by the Ministry of Finance of Sweden, July 8, 1924.
49 International Labor Office.
Family allowances.
Geneva, 1924, pp. 140, 141.
Studies and reports, series D (wr.ges and hours), No. 13.

SW EDEN

167

In 1921 a committee appointed by the Swedish Government to
make an inquiry into wages and old age pensions for female em
ployees in the State civil service suggested the same wage system
for men and women, with provision for family allowances ranging
from 240 to 1,200 kronor 60 per year, according to the salary grade
and the number of dependent children. It was also suggested that
the age limit for the children benefiting by allowances should vary
with the salary grades of the family providers as follows: Grades 1
to 4, 16 years; grades 5 to 7, 17 years; grades 8 to 11, 18 years;
grades 12 to 16,19 years; grades 17 to 20, 20 years.51
The women on the committee declared that the plan for women’s
salaries was not altogether satisfactory, but they were willing to
accept it as a temporary measure in view of the State’s financial
condition and in order not to jeopardize the new law concerning the
eligibility of women for civil service.52 The proposal of the com
mittee has been strongly opposed.
At present in State departments and establishments where basic
wages have recently been adjusted the monthly allowance for each
dependent child under 16 years of age is 4 kronor; in offices and
institutions where such adjustment has not been effected, the monthly
allowance per child is 5 kronor. These monthly allowances are
granted to male and female manual and clerical workers and also
to employees in the higher grades. In 1923-24 4,060,000 kronor
were disbursed as family allowances.53
On unemployment relief work carried on by the State in the period
of industrial crisis resulting from the war, higher wages were paid
to workers having families to support. For instance, in 1918 the
family provider received 5 kronor per day, while the single worker
received only 4 kronor. From November 1 of the same year all
workers were paid the same wage, 5 kronor a day, but after due
investigation of the need, additional grants were made to the heads
of families, the maximum amount being 1 krona per day for a wife
and 0.25 krona for each child under 15 years of age. Grants could
also be made for parents who were not able to work, for brothers
and sisters who were dependent on the worker, and even for other
relatives in unusually distressing circumstances.64
Municipalities.—During the war the personnel of many of the
municipal governments of Sweden also received cost-of-living
bonuses graded according to family responsibilities. In some cities
the bonus was composed of a basic amount and an additional amount
for each member of the family beyond a specified minimum number,
as is shown in Table 28:
80 Krona at p a r = 2 6 .8 c e n ts; exchange rate varies.
81 Sweden.
Finansdepartementet.
1921 Ars L6nekommitt£.
Betankande angaende
©rdnandet av Kvinnliga Befattningshavares avlonings-och pensions forh&llanden M. M.
Stockholm, 1923, p. 166. Statens offentliga utredningar 1 9 2 3 : 62.
62 International Labor Office. Industrial and Labor Information. Geneva, Jan. 2 8,
1924, p. 80.
83 Data furnished by the Ministry of Finance of Sweden, July 8, 1924.
**Data furnished by the Ministry o f Social Affairs of Sweden, Aug. 22, 1924.

168
T

able

SCAND INAVIAN COUNTRIES
3 8 .-C 0 3 T -0 F -L I V I N G BONUSES PAID M U N IC IP A L E M P LO Y E E S IN SPECIFIED
CITIES IN SW E D E N , 1916 »

Cost-of-living bonus
Minimum
number of
members
of family

Cifcy

Stockholm:
Administrative personnel
Workers.
, ____________________ Nykoping
____ ___________________
Kalmar
. _____________________
Karlskrona
- --- ----- Visbv
.....................................................
1 Sweden.
p. 1389.

[Socialdepartementet.]

Supplement
for
each member of
family beyond
minimum

Basic allowance

Kronor
1 60 per year_________ _______
1 8 per month________________
1 60 per year_____ - _______- ___
2-3 5 per month________________
2 ____ d o_____ _______________
1 One-half monthly wage____

Socialstyreisen.

Kronor
24 per year.
2 per month,
24 per year
2 per month.
Do.
5 per year.

Sociala Meddelanden, Stockholm, No. 12, 1916,

In certain other cities the cost-of-living bonus was proportioned
directly to the number of members in the family, but could not
exceed a specified sum.55
In some cities the amount varied with the income and family
responsibilities, the amounts paid in three cities being shown in
Table 29:
T

able

3 9 .—VAR IATIO N S IN COST-OF-LIVING BONUSES A C C O R D IN G TO IN C O M E A N D
F A M IL Y RESPONSIBILITIES IN 3 SW EDISH CITIES, 19161
Sundsvall
Having
at least
2 de
pend
ents

Income

1,000 kronor................... .............. .......... ................
1,100 kronor_________________________________
1,200 kronor_________________________________
1,300 kronor___________ ________ ____________
1,400 kronor_________________________________
1,500 kronor_________________________________
1,600 kronor____________ ;____________________
1,700 kronor_________________________________
1,800 kronor_________________________________
1,900 kronor_________________________________
2,000 kronor_____ ____ - ......................................
2,100 kronor____________________________ ____
1Sweden.

p. 1391.

[Socialdepartementet.]

Eskilstuna

Un
mar
ried

Mar
ried

Vesteras

Each
child

Un
mar
ried

Mar
ried

Each
child

Kronor Kronor Kronor Kronor Kronor Kronor Kronor
50
50
80
15
80
50
15
49. 50
40
75
15
70
40
15
48
30
70
14
30
60
15
20
65
14
15
45.50
20
50
42
10
60
13
15
55
37.50
13
10
40
15
34
50
12
15
45
30.50
12
15
30
40
15
27
11
35
23. 50
11
15
20
30
20
10
15
«15
10

Socialstyreisen.

Sociala Meddelanden, Stockholm, No. 12, 1916,

2 Paid on income up to 2,300 kronor.

The Swedish Ministry of Finance states that most of
and middle-sized. cities have recently adopted a “ new
rational system of payment ” than that followed during
of inflated prices, and in many cases family allowances
abolished.

the larger
and more
the period
have been

PRIVATE nrDXTSTRY

In Sweden prior to the World War family allowances were paid
only in the mining, iron, and textile industries.56 From 1915 to 1920
85 Sweden.
[Socialdepartementet.]
No. 12, i9i6, p. moo.

Soeiaistyreisen.

Sociala Meddelanden, Stockholm,

86 Data furnished by the president of the Swedish Employers’ Association, Oct. 30, lt»24.

169

SWEDEN

the family-allowance principle was applied in connection with the
so-called “ dearth" or cost-of-living bonuses, numerous employers
making additional grants to their married workers, There are no
complete reports regarding the application of this system,57 but Table
30 shows the number of employers in different industries granting
various forms of family allowances as reported by the Swedish
Social Board in 1916.
T

able

3 0 .—N U M BER OF EM P LO Y E R S IN' SPECIFIED IND U STR IES G R A N T IN G COSTOF-LIVING BONUSES, 1915 TO JULY, 1916 *

Number of employers granting eost-of-living
bonuses—
Regard
less of
number
of de
pendents

Industry

28
2
7
10
53
14
5
1
4

Metal............... ............. .....................................................
Earth and stone
____ ___ _______________________
Wood, products__________________ ____________ __
Paper and printing_______ _____________________ ___
Food
____________________________________
Textiles and clothing_______________________ - __ ___
Leather, hair, and rubber___________________________
Chemical-technical______________________ __ _______
Building trades
____ ______ __ _________________
Light, cleaning, etc - ___________ - _________________
Trade and storage__________________________________
Land and sea transportation________________________
Banking and insurance__ _________ ________ ___ ___
Miscellaneous
- - _______ ____ ______ _________
Public works,___ ___________ _______ . . . . ___ _____

56
4
15:
2
9

Total__ . . . . . . . . . . _______ __________ . . . . . . . . . .

210

1 Sweden.
[Socialdepartementet.]
No. 7, 1916, p. 733.

Socialstyrelsen.

Accord
In larger
ing to
amounts To heads
systems
to heads of families
only
not
re
of families
ported
55
7
18
11
75
12
9
13
2
2
8
37
5
2

Total

26.
9
13
10
5
2
9

4
2
4
3
2

3
2

262

6
2

109
9
38
36
142
34
16
23
8
2
71
44
24
5
26
587

Sociala Meddelanden, Stockholm,

During the peak period of the high cost of living the majority
of collective agreements provided cost-of-living bonuses in addition
to the basic wage. In a number of these agreements a portion of
the cost-of-living bonus was designated as a family allowance. Out
of 1,250 agreements in force in 1921, affecting 219,984 workers, which
provided cost-of-living bonuses, 443 agreements, affecting 109,009
workers, granted family allowances.58
From 1921 on, the cost-of-living bonuses, together with family
allowances, were successively discontinued and at present they have
nearly disappeared in private industry. Of the collective agree
ments in effect August, 1924, only one of the more important—that
in the textile industry—provides for family allowances. This agree
ment covers 25,000 workers and grants, in addition to the regular
hourly wages, to each worker with children under 14 years of age,
or with an infirm mother or father the following amounts per
month: 5 kronor for 1 dependent; 8 kronor for 2 dependents; 11
kronor for 3 dependents; 14 kronor for 4 dependents; 17 kronor for
5 dependents; 20 kronor for 6 or more dependents.57
57 Data furnished by the M inistry of Social Affairs of Sweden, Aug. 22, 1924.
_ 58 Sweden.
[Socialdepartementet.]
Socialstyrelsen.
KoAlektivavtal i s-verige
Arsskiftet 1 9 2 0 -1 9 2 1 , Part 1. Stockholm, 1922, p. 33.

vid

•170

SCANDINAVIAN COUNTRIES

AGRICULTURE

The annual wages in 1923-24 in Sweden of male farm servants
on the smaller or medium sized farms who were boarded by their
employers were equivalent to 1,155 kronor, 566 being in cash and
the remainder in kind. On the large estates a worker who had his
own household received in 1923 an average of 615 kronor in cash
and a u stat ” estimated at 660 kronor.60 He was also provided with
a dwelling, an allowance of fuel, and a share in his employer’s potato
harvest.01
VIEWPOINTS

The president of the Swedish Employers’ Association states that
the family-allowance system in Swedish industry was a phenomenon
of the recent period of inflation and there is no likelihood of its
being reestablished under normal economic conditions. The associa
tion has taken no particular interest in such system, being of the
opinion that under normal conditions the pay for married and
unmarried workers doing similar work ought to be the same.
A civil-service employee of high rank* who was a member of the
Government committee of 1921 to investigate the wages of woman
State civil-service employees, objected to the proposal of the com
mittee to pay the same family allowances to women as to men, and
proposed that such grants should be made to married women only
in case their husbands were wholly or partially incapacitated for
work and practically unable to assist in the support of their families.
The representative of the lower salary grades on the committee
declared that the employees themselves are not in favor of the
family-allowance principle.62
The president of the Federation of Swedish Trade-Unions re
ports that the trade-union movement of his country is antagonistic
to the family-allowance system and he and his fellow unionists
hope to see it wholly abolished, u as here it is considered natural
that wages shall be compensation for work performed ” and not a
contribution toward the maintenance of a family or a prize “ bonus ”
for numerous children. The trade-unions “ have by common consent
in their daily activities opposed the so-called social-wage principles.”
The Swedish textile workers, whose collective agreement provides
for family allowances, is not affiliated with the Swedish Federa
tion of Labor.63
It is of interest to note, however, that the Swedish ironworkers
vigorously opposed an attempt of the employers on January 15,
1923, to eliminate family allowances. The discontinuance of these
grants would have meant an average reduction of approximately
10 per cent for the industry as a whole. A prolonged controversy
resulted, terminating June 30, 1923, in favor of the workers.64
60 In Central Sweden the “ stat” is regulated by collective contract and consists of
1,280 liters of milk, GOO kilos of rye, 300 kilos of wheat, 300 kilos of mixed corn and
oats, 100 kilos of barley, and 50 kilos of peas per nnum.
[L ite r = 1 .0 5 6 7 q u a rts; k il o =
2 .2046 pounds.]
61 International Labor Office.
Industrial and la b o r Information, Geneva, Mar. 10,
1925, p. 55.
«a Idem, Jan. 28, 1924, p. 30.
83 Data furnished by the Swedish Employers’ Association, Oct. 24, 1924.
International Labor Office.
International Labor Review, Geneva, January,
1924,
p. 114.

SPAIN
PUBLIC SERVICE65

Family allowances are not granted in the State civil service of
Spain and so far as the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury of that
country is informed the Spanish municipalities have not instituted
such practice. It has been many years, however, since a general re
port on municipal budgets has been made.
PRIVATE INDUSTRY

The following proposals were approved at the third congress of
the Spanish Association of Emplovers, which met in Vigo, June
22-26, 1921:66
(1) That there be established in Spain a compensation for workers’ families
in order that those workers with families may not be under a disadvantage
as compared to those without dependents.
(2) That in order to inaugurate this system there be established a fund by
the employers. From this fund a certain daily amount to be agreed upon
shall be paid to the worker for each of his children under the age of 13 who
is dependent upon him.
(3) That the employers contribute to this fund a certain percentage of their
total turnover, according to the importance of their business, taking into con
sideration the living conditions in the locality. The number of laborers em
ployed in a given establishment who have dependent children is not to be
taken into consideration in assessing the employer for his contribution to the
fund for family compensation.
(4) That any funds so set aside for family compensation shall be admin
istered only by the employers creating them, intervention by outside authori
ties to be limited to that prescribed by law.

Apparently these proposals were never carried out by the Spanish
Association of Employers. In fact, only a very small number of
companies have ever adopted the family-allowanee system.67 A few
employers in the textile industry of Catalonia grant family allow
ances in the form of bonuses for regular attendance and attention
to work.68
Employers in the timber industry in Madrid in January, 1924,
decided to pay to their workers an allowance of 25 centimes per day
for each of their children, with the idea of promoting harmonious
industrial relations.69
During the session of the Spanish Institute of Social Keform,70
January 8-22, 1924, the draft of a bill on labor contracts was ap66 Data furnished by the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury of Spain, Apr. 28, 1924.
^R ep o rt from the American consul at Vigo, Spain, June 30, 1921.
67 Data furnished by the assistant secretary o f the national committee of the General
Federation of Spanish Workers, May 26, 1924.
International Labor Office. Fam ily allowances. Geneva, 1924, p. 26.
Studies and
reports, series D (wages and hours), No. 13.
™ International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Feb. 11,
1924, p. 14.
70
The institute, which is the supreme authority for the administration of Spanish
labor laws, was established in 1903.
This body is made up of industrial, labor, and
Government representatives, and is now attached to the Ministry of Labor, Commerce,
and Industry, which was organized in 1920.— International Labor Office, International
Labor Review, Geneva, January, 1923, p. 99.

61243°— 26------- 12

171

172

SPAIN

proved.71 Among the provisions of this proposed law are the fol
lowing : 72
This law shall apply to industrial and commercial work with the exception
of work in which only members of the same family are employed, under the
supervision of one of its members. It shall also apply to agriculture, mari
time transport, services directly connected with railway traffic, home work,
and domestic service. Public employees shall be subject to special legisla
tion. * • *
The remuneration of labor shall be made on the principle of equal pay for
<equal work irrespective of sex. In order that the wages of married workers
may be sufficient to satisfy the needs of their families, there shall be organ
ized benefit funds which shall fix the rates of family allowances and shall
determine the method by which the cost shall be apportioned among the em
ployers, proportionately to the number of their workers.
The Government, through the Institute of Social Reform, shall by special
order determine the grant to be paid by the State to the benefit fund and the
form and conditions under which the said grant shall be applied.
71 International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Mar. 31,
1924, pp. 15, 16.
72 Instituto de Reformas Socialee.
Seeretaria General. Proyecto de Ley de Contra to
de Tratoajo.
Madrid, Feb. 19, 1924.

SWITZERLAND
PUBLIC SERVICE7*

State.—Children’s allowances were first granted in the civil serv
ice of the State, including its railways, in January, 1916. Since that
time these allowances have been subject to a number of modifications,
which are shown in Table 31:
T

able

3 1 .—CH ILD REN 'S ALLO W AN CES PER A N N U M PAID EM P LO Y E E S
SWISS F E D E R A L SERVICE, 1916 TO 19221

Year

Allowance
per child »

Age
limit
of child

IN TH E

Pre-war
Salary up
salary
to which
limiting
right to full allowances
are
granted
allowance

Francs a
Francs3
Francs*
18.75
3.999
16
..........................................................................................
4.000
50.00
3.999
16
1917..............................................................................................
6.001
150.00
18
4.500
6.401
1918 ..........................................................................................
1919 ................................................................... ......................
180.00
18
4.500
6.401
180.00
18
5.000
1920
........................................................................................
6.701
180.00
18
5.000
1921
..........................................................................................
6.701
150.00
16
5.000
1922—first 6 months___________________ _________ _______
6,401
150.00
18
5.000
1922—from July 1______ __ ______________________________
6,201
1916

1 Switzerland. Conseil federal. M essage a l’Assemblee fSderale concernant le paiement d’allocations
de rencMrissement au personnel federal pour le deuxieme semestre de 1923. Berne, 1923, pp. 26, 27.
2 Children under 18 years of age who work for wages or are beneficiaries of an insurance fund subsidized
by the State are not entitled to an allowance if the wage or the benefit, or the two combined, is 50 francs or
inore.
3 Franc at par=19.3 cents; exchange rate varies.

The amounts paid out in such children’s allowances, 1921 to 1923,
were as follows: In 1921, 18,714,000 francs; in 1922, 12,315,000
francs; in 1923, 12,600,000 francs. The disbursements for 1921 were
higher than for the two subsequent years, as the allowance per child
was higher, being 180 francs, as compared with 150 francs in 1922
and 1923.
The proportion of the 67,400 persons in the Swiss civil service hav
ing dependents is as follows:
T able

32.—PER C EN T OF SWISS F E D E R A L E M PLOYEES H A V IN G SPECIFIED N U M B E R
OF D EPE N D E N T S, JULY, 1923 *

Marital conditions and number of dependents

General
adminis
tration

Federal
railways

Total

Per cent
25.6

Per cent
15.2

Per cent
20.1

28.1
18.1
14.0
7.2
3.7
1.7
.8
.4
.2
.1

18.3
23.8
19.8
11.3
5.8
3.0
1.6
.7
.3
.1

22.9
21.1
17.1
9.3
4.8
2.4
1.2
.6
.3
.1

-1

Single_______ ______ ____________________________________________________
Married, widowed, or divorced:
Without children under 18 years_______ _______________ ____________ _
With 1 child under 18 years_________________________________________
With 2 children under 18 years__________________ _____ _____________
With 3 children under 18 years______________________________________
With 4 children under 18 years___________________________ __________
With 8 children under 18 years______________________________________
With 8 children under 18 years.......................... ...........................................
With 7 children under 18 years______________________________________
With 8 children under 18 years______________________________________
With 9 children under 18 years_______________ ____ _________________
With 10 children under 18 years_____________________________________ I
With 11 children under 18 years__________________ ___________ ______ \
With 12 children under 18 years________ _____ ______________________ |

100.0

m o

100.0

1 Switzerland. Conseil federal. Message & 1’Assemble fSdSrale a Tappui d’tin projet de loi sur le
statut, des fonctionnaires fSdSraux du 18 juillet, 1924. [Berne, 1924?!, p. 164.
73
Unless otherwise specified the data in this section was furnished by the Swiss
Federal Department of Finance, Dec. 4, 1924.

173

174

SWITZERLAND

It will be noted that only 14.2 per cent of those in the general
administration and 22.9 per cent of those in the Federal railroad
service had more than 2 children, the percentage of those in this
combined services who had more than 2 children being 18.8 per cent.
The average number of children per married employee was 1.6,
and the average number per married employee having children was
2.3.
On July 18, 1924, a bill providing for a reduction of children’s
allowances to 120 francs per dependent child per annum, with a
maximum of 600 francs annually for all children,74 was tabled by
the Swiss Federal Council.
At present manual and nonmanual workers of both sexes in the
civil service who are receiving less than 10,000 francs per annum are
entitled to an allowance of 150 francs per year for each dependent
child, including stepchildren, grandchildren, foster children, and
illegitimate children. Adult dependents are not taken into con
sideration.
The number of State employees covered by this system of chil
dren’s allowances is 38,345, or 57 per cent of the total civilian per
sonnel.
There is no limitation as to the number of children for whom civil
servants may receive allowances. A man or woman with 10 chil
dren is entitled to 1,500 francs per annum. In periods of illness or
disability from accident children’s allowances are usually paid with
out deductions.
The chief of the Swiss Federal Department of Finance states
that his Government will continue to pay children’s allowances,
hoping to reduce slightly the total amount of basic salaries.
Provinces and municipalities.—Except in a few cantons and
towns, children’s allowances are not paid at present by provincial
and municipal governments in Switzerland. *
PRIVATE INDUSTRY 7‘

From about the middle of 1916 most of the industries in Switzer
land were obliged to supplement wages by bonuses as a result of
the high prices, and in these bonuses family responsibilities were
taken into consideration. The grants were not usually provided
for in collective agreements, being arranged for either by the
employees themselves or through verbal conferences with the tradeunions.
In the machine and metallurgical industry in 1916 workers under
18 years of age received a bonus of 4 francs per month and those
over 18 years, 5 francs, and an allowance of 2.5 francs per month
was paid to both men and women for each child under 15 years of
age. In the fall of 1918 these grants had been increased to the
following amounts per fortnight (12 days) which were about the
maximum paid in the industry at any time: Married workers, 22
francs; for each child under 15, 6 francs; single workers over 18, 16
francs; workers under 18, 10 francs. In 1922 such bonuses were
eliminated.
74 International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Sept.
1924, p. 41.
78 Data furnished by the assistant director of the Swiss Labor Office, June 19, 1924.

VIEWPOINTS

175

Among the few industries in which allowances were granted in
collective contracts were clockmaking, the locksmith trade, and print
ing. In 1921 such grants were practically abolished in the clock
industry. In June, 1924, there were only two national agreements
in effect in Switzerland, namely, those in the brewing and printing
industries, and only in the latter was there any stipulation in regard
to family allowances.
No family-allowance funds have been created in Switzerland.
In 1923 77 it was reported that the Geneva Social Federation of
Catholic Employers had some years ago established a familyallowance fund, but according to the International Labor Office78
this organization had not actually created a fund but had formulated
rules and regulations for a project of this character modeled on the
French plan. Some individual establishments are granting allow
ances similar in amount to those provided in the regulations for the
proposed fund.
The exigencies of world competition are given as the motive for
the elimination of children’s allowances in Swiss industry, many
employers thinking that these grants could not be continued without
penalizing young and competent single workers who would be
tempted to emigrate just as they completed their trade courses or
apprenticeship period.79
VIEWPOINTS
EMPLOYERS

The chief of the Swiss Federal Department of Finance is in favor
of the payment of family allowances, regarding it as a very good
measure both for the Government and its personnel.
The Swiss Federal Council states that the granting of children’s
allowances to the Federal personnel has established a closer bond
between the Government and its employees. As a rule such em
ployees value these grants, which naturally tend “ to stimulate the
sense of duty and the taste for work and thus to exercise a happy
influence on the service in general.” 80
In general, private employers are opposed to keeping up the
family-allowance system, some fearing that it will adversely affect
production81 and also that these extra bonuses to men with family
responsibilities will lead, as suggested above, to an exodus of youth
ful and capable single workers to other countries.
The subject of family allowances has repeatedly been brought
before the Central Federation of Swiss Employers’ Associations,
and in the annual report of that body for the year 1922 it is stated
that the organs of the federation had during that year “ assumed
no definite attitude on the social wage.”
77 Journal de Statistique et Revue Sconomique Suisse No. 3, Berne, 1923, pp. 2 7 2 - 2 7 5 :
MZur frage der familienlohne.”
w International Labor Office. Fam ily allowances. Geneva, 1924, p. 148. Studies and
reports, series D (wages and hours), No. 13.
Switzerland. Conseil f6d€ral. Message 31 l ’Assemblge f6d6rale h l ’appui d’un projet de
lo! sur le statut des fonctionnaires f<§d6raux du 18 juillet, 1924. Berne, 1924, p. 158.
80 Idem, p. 159.
81 Journal de Statistique et Revue Sconomique Suisse, No. 3, Berne, 1923, pp. 272—2 7 5 :
“ Zur frage der familienli>hne.” and data furnished by the Swiss Federation of Trade
Unions, April 27, 1924.

176

SWITZERLAND

At a general meeting of the federation on July 5,1922, Professor
Weyermann made a report on the subject. He said in part:®2
One of the means to which private enterprise owes its economic superiority?
as compared with State or guild-like socialized production, is its wage system.
The State assigns a certain salary to a position in accordance with the social
importance of that position. The private employer, on the other hand, pays
the man according to his performance.
The influence which the social standing of a public employee exercises upon
his salary leads necessarily to a salary adjusted to his requirements and to
a consideration of his family conditions. Such a fixing of wages has, however,
no place in an economic system, is uneconomic in its effects and can not,
therefore, be introduced in a private enterprise operated for economic gain.
This, however, does not mean that a private establishment can not carry on
welfare activities for its workers and their families and that such welfare
work can not bear rich economic fruits.
WORKERS

The chief of the Swiss Federal Department of Finance reports
that the majority of the civil-service employees wish to have the
family-allowanee system discontinued and their basic compensation
increased so that unmarried employees will be in a position to estab
lish a family. This statement is quite at variance with that made
by the Swiss Federal Council, which is referred to above. As a
matter of fact, the organizations of members of the Swiss Federal
service are not all in agreement upon the matter of children’s allow
ances. For example, the federal union objects to this form of
family assistance, one of the union’s arguments being that the
“ State should interest itself not only in the children of its own
employees but in the well-being of youth in general.” On the other
hand, the Christian federation of the transportation personnel
favors, on moral and social grounds, unreduced allowances for
children, declaring in a memorandum of 1921 that the demand for
such allowances was one which the personnel favored most
strongly.83
The industrial workers, especially the most radical, disapprove
of family allowances. The general secretary of the Swiss Federa
tion of Trade-Unions, while acknowledging that the so-called social
wage is in accordance with socialistic tenets, holds u that it will have
no beneficent influence upon industrial relations.” He looks upon
the institution as “ nothing but a cunning tactical move of the
employers.” Notwithstanding the need in Switzerland of measures
for the adjustment of the economic situation important groups of
workers subconsciously cling to the axiom of equal pay for equal
work. Moreover, the militant attitude of single workers toward the
social wage complicates the problem.84
The fear of the workers that under the family-allowanee system
men with heavy domestic responsibilities will be more likely to lose
their jobs and less likely to secure new ones is pointed out by the
secretary of the Swiss Federation of Trade-Unions. He adds that
82 Zentralverbaiid Sehweizerischer Ai'beitgeber-Organisationen. Be rich t des Zenta-alvorstandes an die Mitglieder iiber das jakr, 1922. Zurich, 1923. p. 2f>.
88 Switzerland.
Conseil f6d£ral.
Message & l’Assemblee federate & l'appui d ’tm
project de loi sur le statut des fonctionnaires federaux du 18 juillet, 1924. Berne, 1924.
pp. 1 6 0 -1 6 2 .
84
Journal de Statistique et Keyue €conomique Suisse, No. 3, Berne, pp. 2 7 2 - 2 7 5 : “ Zur
frage der familienlohne.”

VIEWPOINTS

177

the practice during the war of granting more substantial cost-ofliving bonuses to workers with large families demonstrated the dis
advantages of such a system. While he believes that large families
should be given special help, he does not wish such help to come
from employers but from the State or commune in the form of tax
reductions, cheap housing, free education, and possibly, free school
lunches, shoes, and clothing for the children for the low-paid
workers.
A congress of Catholic trade-unions held in Zurich, March 26,
1922, showed its interest in the problem of family allowances by
calling for an investigation on the -subject.*5
ECONOMISTS AND RELIGIOUS BODIES *

Dr. L. Schnelles, in a report made to the Swiss Society in Freiburg
at its annual meeting on June 29,1928, called special attention to the
advocacy of family allowances by national economists of Switzer
land who emphasize ethical and religious motives and hold that
such motives should be the guiding forces o f “ sound economic life.”
Not only have important Roman Catholic influences been behind
the movement for family allowances, but also other Christian social
welfare groups and their spiritual leaders are said to be in favor of
it. Swiss Protestant interest in the matter dates back to 1917 when
a motion on the subject was introduced in the Reformed Church
Synod of the Canton of Zurich.
85
p.

20.

International Labor Office.

Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, M ay 5, 1922,

m Journal de Statistique et Revue eeonomique Suisse, No. 3, Berne, 1923, pp. 2 7 2 - 2 7 5 :
“ Zur frage der familienlohne.”

YUGOSLAVIA
PUBLIC SERVICE

The economic problems of civilian employees of the Serb, Croat,
and Slovene Kingdom, numbering almost 200,000 persons in differ
ent grades of the service, whose compensation in many cases was
hardly adequate to provide bare necessities, caused the Government
grave concern for a long period, and became the subject of wide
discussion in the press and at various congresses and conferences.
It was not until 1923, however, that an act was passed to ameliorate
the situation. The act, which did not go into effect until May 1,
1924, provided for State civil servants family allowances of 360
dinars6 per annum per child up to 6 years of age, 600 dinars per
child up to 12 years of age, and 960 dinars per child above that age.
Housing allowances were also provided under this law.a
A supplementary decree, effective May 1, 1924, granted a monthly
cost-of-living bonus consisting of a personal allowance and a family
allowance. The personal allowance ranges from 480 to 1,800 dinars,
according to the grade of the employee and the locality of his resi
dence, but the family allowance is granted regardless of grade or
residence district, and amounts to 150 dinars for a wife and 150
dinars per child. The latter allowance covers the family allowance
granted in the principal act.®
A 1923 agreement between the Government and the miners in the
State mines of Bosnia-Herzegovina provided an allowance to a mar
ried man working at least 22 days in the month of 1.50 dinars per
day for a wife and for each child under 15. Married workers with
out children received 70 dinars per month for clothing; those with
one child, 75 dinars; those with two children, 80 dinars; and those
with three or more children, 85 dinars. The single worker’s clothing
allowance was only 50 dinars.0
At least some of the municipalities pay family allowances.87
PRIVATE INDUSTRY

A large number of industrial establishments in Yugoslavia pay
family allowances, but the practice was adopted merely for tempo
rary relief following the depreciation of the national currency.87
• International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, M av 19.
1924, pp. 1 6 -1 9 .
6 Dinar at par— 19.3 cents; exchange rate varies.
* International Labor Office.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, Jan. 28.
1924, p. 18.
w Data furnished by the president of the Yugoslavia Federation of Employers’ Associa
tions. May 24, 1924.

178

INTERNATIONAL ACTION
The subject of family allowances and mother and child endowment
has been taken up recently at a number of important international
congresses. Some of the resulting resolutions are given below:
WOMEN’S CONVENTIONS

At the quinquennial congress of the International Council of Wo
men held in Christiania, Norway, September 8-18,1920, it was urged
in a “ leading resolution” that the national councils “study the ques
tion of motherhood endowment.” It was also resolved “ That the
International Council of Women support the principle of the en
dowment of mothers in necessitous circumstances. Mothers who
have their children with them ought to be secured a fixed minimum
income in proportion to the number of their children. The differ
ence between the minimum income and that of their household should
be paid out of government or municipal funds, or out .of both con
jointly. Effective control should secure that this endowment should
be expended exclusively for the benefit of mothers and children.” 88
A resolution noting with interest the development of the familyallowance system in various countries was adopted by a committee
of the International Women Suffrage Alliance at the meeting of that
organization in Rome, May 12-19.1923, at which delegates represent
ing 40 nations were present. It was also decided to appoint a com
mittee to study such system.89
A conference of women socialists, held at Hamburg in the latter
part of May, 1923, attended by 93 delegates from 21 foreign coun
tries, demanded the insurance of children and a statutory system of
family allowances.90
The following resolution was passed by the International Federa
tion of Working Women at its Vienna congress in August, 1923:91
1. That the family allowances in addition to wages for industrial workers
should not be regarded as more than a temporary expedient to meet the
economic difficulties developed in capitalist society.
2. That the workers should rather aim, first, at the provision of grants of
public money to meet the special emergencies of child birth, unemployment, ill
ness, or death of the family wage earner; and that these grants should be
available to all.
3. That every service needed for the health, education, or welfare of mothers
and children should be provided by the community and free to all.
4. That commodities, such as milk, food, or school clothes which are needed
in similar quantities or qualities for all children, should be provided for all
by the community.
5. That an inquiry should be made into the possibility of a scheme of
pensions for all children in the period during which they are normally de
pendent upon their parents.
88 International Council of Women. Combined first and second annual reports of the
seventh quinquennial period, 1 9 2 0 -1 9 2 5 .
[The H ague?], pp. 285, 28G.
80 International Labor Ofiiee.
Industrial and Labor Information, Geneva, June 29,
1923, p. 11.
90 Idem, June 8, 1923, p. 4.
81 International Federation of W orking Women.
Working women in many countries,
fteport of Congress held at Vienna, August, 1923. Amsterdam [1 9 2 3 ? ], International
F e d e r a t e of Trade-Unions, p. 11.

179

180

INTERNATIONAL ACTION

INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF CHRISTIAN TRADE-UNIONS

The International Federation of Christian Trade-Unions adopted
at its second congress, Innsbruck, Austria, June 21-28, 1922, an
economic world program which stated that wages should be fixed by
collective agreements in accordance with the following principles: 92
(a) Every adult worker has a right to a minimum wage sufficient
for his maintenance in conformity with human dignity and the
bringing up of a family. In fixing such wage, account should be
taken of the cost of living. Special funds should be established for
the payment of family grants to large families.
(&) In addition to this minimum wage the worker’s share in pro
duction should correspond to the value his work gives to the product.
Wages, therefore, should compensate for the worker’s application,
his special qualities, and the dangers and risks of his trade.
In reporting on the program the secretary general of the Interna
tional Federation declared that “ the worker has an inalienable
right to parry. In marrying he fulfills a duty of mankind. The
wages he gets for his work must on this account be sufficient for the
upkeep of his family.” 93
The majority of the leaders of the Christian trade-union move
ment are in favor of allowances for large families only. In general,
the payment of such allowances by individual employers is disap
proved for fear of discrimination against workers with many
children.
The following extracts from a resolution of the second congress
of the International Federation of Christian Unions of the Textile
Industry, held at Strassburg, September 17 and 18, 1924, embody
definite provisions for extending the system of family allowances: 94
The minimum personal wage of a worker must be sufficient to support an
average sized family, and an allowance must be accorded to workers with
large families to procure them an honest and decent living.
In order to safeguard the dignity and independence of the workers, it is
essential that family allowances be assured through national or regional
equalization funds, established so far as possible on a trade basis, adminis
tered by an equal number of representatives of employers and of workers, and
under the direction of a president appointed by the contracting parties or by
the Government.
The national organizations affiliated with the International Federation of
Christian Unions of the Textile Industry pledge themselves :
(a) To do their utmost in order that the principle of family allowances be
included in collective contracts;
(b) To urge their national federations to approve the resolutions adopted
at the present congress;
(c) To urge their Governments to introduce legal family allowances.85
92 Compte rendu du Deuxifeme Congr&s de la Confederation Internationale des Syndicats
Chretiens, Innsbruck, June, 1922, p. 130,
98 Data furnished by the general secretary o f the International Federation o f Chris
tian Trade-Unions, Mar. 2, 1925.
94 Bulletin de la Confederation Internationale des Syndicat Chretiens.
Utrecht,
October, 1924, pp. 150, 151.
05 The attitude of the International Federation o f Christian Wood Workers on fam ily
allowances is expressed in a resolution published in Bulletin de la Confederation Interna
tionale des Syndicats Chretiens, February, 192*5, pp. 22, 23.

APPENDIXES

APPENDIX A.—INFORMATION SOUGHT IN THIS SURVEY

In collecting the data on which this bulletin is based the following
inquiries as to family allowances paid to public employees were sub
mitted to the ministers of finance of the different countries:
1. Are family allowances paid by your State government to civil-service em
ployees, both manual and other workers?
2. If so, when and why was the system inaugurated?
3. How many of these employees are covered by the system, and what per
centage is this number of the total number in State civil-service employment?
4. What are the amounts of family allowances paid to a person in State
government civil service for each of his dependents; that is, liow much is he
granted for the first child, second child, subsequent children, and other de
pendents?
5. What is the total number of dependents of civil-service employees for
whom family allowances are granted by the State government?
(». What was the total amount paid out by the State government in family
allowances to persons in civil-service employment in 1921, 1922, and 1923?
7. What are the regulations for the payment of allowances, for example, (a)
in regard to sex of employees; ( if)j in regard to the number, age, and relation
of dependents; and (c) in case of sickness, accident, etc.?
S. What is the effect of the family-allowance system on the basic wage?
What is the attitude of State government employees toward this method
of payment?
10. What is your personal opinion of the system?
11. To what extent does the system prevail in provincial and municipal gov
ernments in your country?
12. What practice is followed in granting family allowances in the most im
portant municipality in your country?

Similar inquiries as to family allowances paid to workers in non
governmental, industrial, commercial, and agricultural undertakings
were made of the ministers of labor or of social affairs of the various
countries and in addition the following inquiries:
What are the titles, locations, character, and scope (number of adherent
establishments) of the compensation or clearing funds for the payment of
family allowances now in operation in your country?
How are these funds organized?
How are they administered?
Upon what basis are the amounts paid into compensation funds by member
firms calculated— (a) total personnel; (6) total pay roU; (c) total hours
worked; (d) or other basis?
How do the amounts paid out in allowances by firms belonging to compensa
tion funds compare with the total pay rolls of such firms? (Give average
percentage.)
Do compensation funds in your country also pay maternity benefits and
nursing bounties, and carry on social service? If so, give typical examples.
To what extent, if any, have these compensation or clearing funds been
brought together through a central committee or federation?

181

182

APPENDIX B

APPENDIX B.— CONSTITUTION OF THE FAMILY ALLOWANCE
FUND OF THE REGION OF PARIS
[Adopted March 1, 1020]
T itle

I.— P u r p o s e

a n d C o m p o s itio n o f t h e O r g a n i z a t i o n

A r t i c l e I. Tlie association designated “ The Compensation Fund of the Re
gion of Paris (Allowances for Family Responsibilities) ” (Caisse de la Region
Parlslcnne (Allocations pour charges de famille)), established in 1920, has for
it s purpose the creation of a fund for the payment of family allowances for
the benefit of the workers and employees of the region of Paris and the
guaranty of the division of the responsibility for this service among the
members in proportion to the wages and salaries paid in the region of Paris
by the members of the organization.
By the region of Paris is understood Paris, its suburbs, and the neighboring
Departments, to a maximum of 60 kilometers from the fortifications of that
city. Those employers carrying on construction and public works under the
law of December 19, 1922, and the decree of July 13, 1923, whose headquarters
are in the region of Paris may continue as members of the regional fund of
Paris for such of their work shops and lumber and stone yards as are located
in that region.1
The life of the organization, which has been fixed at 30 years, can be pro
longed by the general meeting of its members.
The fiscal year, begins January 1 and terminates December 31 of each year.
The first fiscal period will begin the day of the organization of the association
and terminate December 31, 1920.
The association has its headquarters in Paris. These headquarters are pro
visionally located at 59 Hoche Avenue. They may be transferred to any other
place by the decision of the administrative committee of the association.
A r t . 2. The association is empowered to act jointly with individual indus
trial and commercial establishments or groups of such establishments, to issue
publications and memoranda, and to organize conferences and meetings as
shall seem to it advisable.
A r t . 3. The association is composed of members, paying a fixed annual
assessment of 5 francs, whose factories, workshops, stores, or lumber and stone
yards are located in the region of Paris.
This assessment shall be paid quarterly and shall be included in the settle
ment of account of the variable assessment provided for under article 16.
Trade associations, federations, or groups may be members of the association.
Applications for membership must be approved by the administrative com
mittee of the association. In case of rejection of an application the committee
is not obliged to make known its reasons.
Honorary membership can be conferred by the administrative committee on
any person, trade association, federation, or group desiring by means of dona
tions or subscriptions to assist families, or capable of rendering or which has
rendered services to the association. This membership confers on its holders
the right to take part in the general meeting without the payment of the annual
assessment.
Art. 4. Membership may be lost (1) by resignation of (2) by cancellation
of the membership by the administrative committee for nonpayment of dues,
for nonobservance of the constitution or the regulations of the association,
or for grave reasons (the member in question having been previously called
to give explanations) and subject to appeal to the general meeting.
T itle

II.— A d m i n i s t r a t i o n

a n d O p e r a t io n

A r t i c l e 5. The association is directed by the general meeting of its members
and operates through an administrative committee in accordance with the
regulations adopted by the constitutional assembly.
These regulations, subject to modifications by the general meeting, define
the conditions under which the members pledge themselves to pay to their
personnel allowances for family responsibilities, as well as the conditions of
payment of such allowances, and the distribution among the members of the
corresponding expenses.
1 Voted by the General Assembly Sept. 26, 1923.

APPENDIX B

183

A r t . 6. The administrative committee is composed of from 12 to 20 members,
elected for three years by the general meeting from among the regular or
honorary members of the association.
Trade associations, federations, or groups may serve on the administrative
committee, being represented by a delegate of their choice who need not neces
sarily be a member of the association.
One-third of the committee is elected each year by the general meeting, the
retiring members being eligible for reelection.
In case of a vacancy on the administrative committee the committee may
fill it subject to confirmation by the next general meeting. Members thus
appointed remain in office only during the unexpired term of their predecessors.
The services of the members of the administrative committee are gratuitous,
except that in the case of honorary members it may be otherwise decided by
the general meeting.
Art. 7. The committee chooses from among its members an executive board,
to serve for one year, composed of a president, three vice presidents, and a
treasurer.
In case of the resignation or the decease of a member of this board his
successor is chosen at the next meeting of the administrative committee.
The president, or in his absence one of the vice presidents, presides at the
meetings of the administrative committee.
Art. 8. The executive board may appoint one or more paid or unpaid secre
taries, not members of the association.
Art. 9. The administrative committee meets at the call of its president when
ever necessary, but at least once every quarter, in the fourth week of that
quarter. An official report is to be made of the meetings.
The committee fixes the compensation of the secretaries, if they are paid.
It approves the settlement of the accounts for the preceding quarter and
decides on changes in the variable assessment rates relative to the cost of
allowances, Conformably to the regulations of the fund.
It decides questions involving the application of principles laid down in
the regulations, especially in connection with the investigations provided for
ih the said regulations.
It regulates the investment of the reserve funds and fixes the amounts of
the expenses of administration.
It decides on inquiries or studies, paid or unpaid, to be made by experts
with a view to the progress of the association, and decides, if necessary, on
proposals for changes in the constitution and regulations to be submitted to
the general meeting.
It has the widest powers in the management both of the funds and the
material and moral interests of the association, in view of the realization of
its purpose.

Art. 10. The decisions of the administrative committee are not valid unless
at least eight of its members are present. A majority vote is necessary for
a decision, and in case the votes are equally divided the president of the
meeting has the deciding voice.
Art. 11. The executive board directs the operations and carries out the
decisions made by the administrative committee.
Art. 12. The treasurer is responsible for the handling and investment of all

funds, under the direction of the administrative committee.
Art. 13. The duty of the secretary, under the control of the executive
board, is to assure current service to the association, especially along the
following lines:
He collects quarterly from the members information upon which the
calculations of the variable assessment rates and the account of each of the
members are based.
He secures the collection and the payment of the sums due from this source.
He makes inquiries in regard to the family condition of those who are
paid family allowances in accordance with the regulations of the fund, and
proposes, when necessary, changes in regard to those receiving family allow
ances, as provided for in the regulations.
He collects information relative to difficulties and disputes arising in the
payment of family allowances and presents such information for investigation
by the administrative committee.

184

APPENDIX O

He distributes printed matter to the members.
Art. 14. In law and in all civil transactions the association is represented
by the president of the executive board, he being delegated by the board for
such duty. The representative of the association should be in full possession
of his civil rights. He is given full powers to comply with all the formalities
prescribed by law.
Art. 15. The general meeting of the association is held at least .once a
year and may also be called by the administrative committee or by one-fourth
or more of its members. The order of business for such meeting is fixed by
that committee. The executive board of said committee acts as the executive
board of the meeting.
The meeting provides for the election or reelection of the administrative
committee. It hears reports on the work of the committee and on the moral
and financial situation of the association. The meeting also approves the
accounts for the fiscal period then ended, votes the budget for the following
fiscal period, determines the percentage to be allocated to the reserve funds
as provided for in the regulations of the fund, discusses the question on
the agenda, and decides, when necessary, on amendments to the regulations.
Copies of the annual report and the accounts submitted by the administrative
committee are transmitted each year by the committee to all the members of
the association.
T itle

III.—

A n n u a l R eso u rces and R eserve F u n d s

16. The receipts of the association comprise:
1. The fixed dues;
2. The surplus of the variable assessments necessary to cover the expenses
of the family allowances in conformity to the regulations of the fund and to
constitute the reserve funds fixed by the general meeting;
3. Donations or subscriptions which the association may collect.
Since the association will itself judge in what measure to seek recognition
as a public utility, it will take the necessary steps in this connection in order
to be able to benefit by gifts and legacies.
A r t . 17. The reserve funds are invested by the administrative committee.
A r tic le

it l e

I V .— C h a n g e

C o n s t it u t io n — D is s o l u t io n

A r t i c l e 18. The constitution can not be changed except by proposal o f the ad
ministrative committee or of a tenth of the members composing the general
meeting, submitted to the executive board at least a month before the meeting.
The meeting should include at least a quarter plus one of the members of the
association.
A general meeting called to decide on the dissolution of the association
should include at least one-half plus one of the members of the association.
If the above proportion of one-quarter and of one-half plus one, respectively,
are not reached, another meeting must be called but not before an interval of
at least 15 days, and the decisions of this meeting will be valid irrespective
of the number of members present.
In any case the constitution can mot be amended or the association dissolved
except by a two-thirds vote of the members present.
In case of dissolution the general meeting designates one or several com
missioners to be charged with the liquidation of the property of the associa
tion. The disposition of the net assets is determined by the general meeting.

APPENDIX C.—REGULATIONS OF THE MUTUAL AGRICULTURAL
FAMILY ALLOWANCE FUND OF THE REGION OF SOISSONS
P a r t I .-—D e f i n i t i o n

A l l o w a n c e s — G e n e r a l P r in c ip l e s

A r t ic l e 1. The allowances consist of monthly bonuses paid to heads of
families for all legitimate or acknowledged children who are dependent upon
such heads of families.

185

APPENDIX C

’Children under 13 years of age residing in France with their parents for at
least six months are considered as such dependents.
A r t . 2. The bonuses or allowances for the benefit of the children of workers
or salaried employees who have been in the employ of a member of the fund for
at least six consecutive months are granted directly by the fund on the appli
cation of such member. The allowances are sent to the member by .post-office
money order or cheek together with two copies of a detailed statement, one
copy to be forwarded to the head of the family interested, or, if there is no
head, to the person in charge of the children, and another copy to be receipted
and returned to the accounting officer.
Art. 3. The monthly allowances are calculated to the last day of the month
and are paid by the fund. They become payable to the worker or employee
when lie has been employed for at least six months. They cease at the date of
the last pay period preceding the worker’s separation should this occur in the
course of a month, except as provided in articles 9 and 10.
I f the separation is due to a legitimate cause outside of the worker’s control
(in case of “ force majeure,” sickness, or temporary incapacity for work not
exceeding six months) the allowances shall be paid in full.
A r t . 4. Bonuses and allowances are paid to workers or employees entitled to
them only when the child beneficiaries are actually in their charge.
P art

II.—

A p p l ic a t io n

llow ances

Article 5. The amounts of the monthly allowances to workers with dependent
children are fixed a t: 15 francs for one child; 35 francs for two children; 65
francs for three children; 100 francs for four children; 140 francs for five chil
dren ; 185 francs for six children: 235 francs for seven children. Beyond seven
children the allowances are increased according to the same progression.
Children are considered as dependents until the month following that in
which they attain the age of 13.
Art. 6. The allowances provided in the above article are paid to a working
man or woman employed by an establishment affiliated with the fund who has
actual charge of children because of the death of the father or mother or the
abandonment of such children.
Art. 7. The allowances may be suspended or discontinued by the decision of

the committee of management when the conduct or morals of the parents or

those who fill their places are not satisfactory.
Art. 8. In case of the death of a child benefiting by an allowance, such
allowance will be paid during the month in which the death occurred.
Art. 9. If a father employed by an affiliated member of the fund and re
ceiving allowances dies or is incapacitated for work by accident or illness, the
monthly allowances are paid to the mother of the family, if the latter survives
him, on condition that she be employed by a member of the fund, except as
provided in the following article.

If the father was a widower at the time of his decease, or if a mother em
ployed by a member is a widow or her husband is unable to work and she dies
or is totally incapacitated for work by accident or sickness, the monthly allow
ance is paid to the person who assumes charge of the children, on condition
that such person remains in the locality for five years or longer, according to
the decision of the committee of management.
Art. 10. If the death or disability of the father or mother occurs under
circumstances to which workmen’s compensation legislation is applicable, the
allowances will continue to be paid without taking into account the com
pensation received under such legislation, in order to provide for the children
until they have reached the age limit.
If the death or disability is due to an occurrence for which a third party
is financially responsible, the allowances are reduced by the amount of the
judgment against such third party, if such judgment provides for a special
annuity for the maintenance of the children.
Art. 11. The family condition of workers and salaried employees Of each
establishment is established by data furnished quarterly by the members of
the fund.
A r t . 12. All investigations for the purpose of verifying the family condi
tion of those receiving allowances and the use made of such allowances should

186

APPENDIX O

be made by the committee of management. It may take any practical measure
to assure the judicious use of such allowances.
Art. 13. The workers and salaried employees receiving allowances should
prove their family condition by submitting their family records (livret de
•famille), including abstracts of papers concerning civil status, and identifica
tion certificate, birth notices, medical certificates, etc.
Art. 14. In case grandparents, brothers, or sisters claim family allowances

under the provisions of article 6, they should make a written
plaining the circumstances. Their request shall be investigated
ciation, with the aid of the establishment employing them, for
of determining whether the circumstances are those mentioned

request, ex
by the asso
the purpose
in article 6.

Art. 15. The circumstances provided for by articles 9 and 10 relating to
inability of the head of the family to work should be proved by a medical
certificate.
Art. 10. The amounts due for allowances, with the necessary documents,
are sent by the fund to the head of the establishment, who makes the pay
ments to the beneficiaries. The head of the establishment may always re
quest that the allowance be sent at the close of the quarter directly to the
father or mother of the family or, if there are no parents, to the person who
assumes charge of the children.
Art. 17. In ease both father and mother work for members of the fund,

the monthly allowances, which can not be doubled, are sent either to the
father or to the mother, according to the decision of the committee of man
agement.
The acceptance of two similar bonuses, even when they are paid by sepa
rate funds, is prohibited.
The payment of allowances may be suspended or stopped by the committee
of management if it is proved that a family is receiving allowances through
both parents or if allowances have been secured through false declarations
or failure to report deaths occurring among the children of the grantee.
Art. 18. Allowances are not a part of the wage, nor can they be attached
or withheld for the worker’s debts.
A r t . 19. The decisions of the committee of management are binding and
final in all questions arising in connection with the operation o f the fund.
P art

III.—R e g u l a t i o n s

fo r

A ccounts

A r t ic l e 20. Each member must forward a statement to the fund during the
first fortnight of each quarter showing—
1. The total extent of his farming, making a distinction between meadows
and other lands.
2. A list of all his workers and salaried employees and of their families
without exception, such list giving the names of all families with dependent
children.
3. The amount of wages paid in the course of the preceding year.
4. A sum on account, fixed by the committee of management, which is pro
portioned to his assessment and amounts to a percentage of the wages paid
during the year preceding the current fiscal period.
The members agree to assist the representatives of the fund in the verifi
cation of the information furnished.
Art. 21. The information submitted by a member serves as the basis for
determining the amount of his assessment; if the assessment is too small
to meet the expenses of the fund during a given quarter, each member is liable
for his share of the deficit even if he should leave the organization.
Art. 22. The employers’ contributions are apportioned on the basis of the
salaries paid by each member in the current fiscal year and of the sums
paid out by the fund in allowances, plus administrative expenses and a per
centage to be fixed by the general assembly for the purpose of establishing,
together with other resources of the society, provisional and reserve funds.
These reserve funds may be used to prevent excessive variations in assess
ment rates from one fiscal period to another.
Art. 23. A member who has tendered his resignation must pay his assess
ment up to the end of the current quarter.

APPENDIX D

187

APPENDIX D.— STATEMENT OF LYON REGIONAL FAMILY
ALLOWANCE FUND ON PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION
PURPOSE
The family-allowanee fund is an association having for its object:
To assure financial and material advantages to wage earners with family
responsibilities who are employed in the establishments of the members of
the fund.
To divide the burden of these benefits among the establishments supporting
the fund, so that those establishments shall pay a contribution based on their
importance regardless of the actual family responsibilities of their respective
personnel.
In this connection two questions arise: Why is it necessary to give allow
ances? and Why is it necessary to do so through the medium of a fund?
I. Why is it necessary to give allowances?
Among the many reasons which make allowances necessary, the two prin
cipal ones are:
1. The difference in the responsibilities of single persons and of heads of
families. It is not necessary to show that a father of a family necessarily
has larger expenses than an unmarried person. Everyone knows that this
inequality is of such a character as to injure the development of family life*
It is, then, unjust and antisocial that the resources of workers with family
responsibilities should be the same as those of the unmarried.
Wages being a return for work, it is proper to pay the supplementary amount
necessitated by family responsibilities entirely apart from such wages. It
is a duty which imposes itself without waiting for the compulsion of law. The
employer, being the leader in economic life, has the honor and the respon
sibility of himself taking the measures indispensable to social life.
2. The general birth-rate situation in France. The French birth-rate situa
tion is well known. *In the course of the last century the German population
increased from 24,000,000 to 64,000,000, while the French population increased
only from 27,000,000 to 29,000,000. The situation immediately after the war
had not improved, but rather the contrary. * * *
It is estimated that among the manual workers in Lyon 72 per cent are
single or married without dependents under 14 years of age, and among the
remaining 28 per cent which have families 52 per cent have but one child.
The consequences of this situation are perilous to the country itself and
to the prosperity of its business. One can not produce without laborers, one
can not sell without buyers. There can be neither industry nor commerce
without population, and this is so true that in the second half of the nineteenth
century our general commerce had but doubled, while in Germany commerce
had almost quadrupled.
II. Why is it necessary to pay allowances through the medium of a fund?
At first glance it seems that it would be sufficient for each employer himself
to distribute allowances to his wage earners. This has been tried, but the
results are far from being as satisfactory as those obtained by membership
in a compensation fund.
A compensation fund alone can—
1. Destroy all objection on the part of workers’ organizations. The isolated
employer can promise allowances but to avoid paying them he can hire single
persons or married persons without dependents. When he joins a fund, how
ever, his contribution is identically the same regardless of the family respon
sibilities of his personnel.
2. Prevent variations of costs in the same industry. Great differences are
found in the number of heads of families in different establishments, such dif
ferences arising from the location of the plants, the length of time established,
and various other factors. With a system of direct and individual payment
some establishments would be at an advantage and others handicapped, while
under the fund system each establishment pays a contribution according to
its importance. Payments for family responsibilities, being thus equalized*
are placed beyond the conflict of production costs.
3. Establish uniform rules and prevent bidding of employer against employer
in recruiting manual labor. It is evident that there is advantage in having
uniform scales of rates and methods of administration and operation among
the employers of the same city and of the same trade.
61243°— 26------- 13

188

APPENDIX D

4. Prevent frauds and duplications. An organization is necessary in order
to make sure that the beneficiaries are actually living and that both husband
and wife are not paid for the same children.
5. Create additional services. Medical and technical services can be pro
vided by a fund because of the importance of the salaried personnel covered
by it. Each factory acting separately would find such expenses very heavy,
but divided among a number of participating establishments these expenses
are reduced to a minimum. * * *
6. Establish organizations solid enough and powerful enough to prevent dan
gerous legislative intervention. The isolated establishment has no influence
with public authorities, but funds, on the contrary, having constitutions and
regulations, present an organization which must be reckoned with. The cen
tral committee of these funds represents them in an effective manner before the
public authorities. It is certain that without compensation funds allowances
would now be compulsory, with rules fixed by laws and decrees. The proposals
submitted to Parliament for this purpose show that the obligations, the expense
imposed on employers, would be much heavier and that there would be new
public officials, new annoyances, new investigations.
In view of the advantages, one seeks vainly for an objection to the organiza
tion o f a fund. It is certain that to-day one can not remain isolated and that
collective restraints are necessary.
Moreover, the proof is based on statistics. * * * At present [early in
1924] there are more than *150 funds in France and each of these funds is
growing and prospering.
What contribution is required of employers belonging to the funds? This
contribution varies among the different groups, from 1.00 to 2.40 per cent o f
the wages paid—the lowest possible proportion in view of the results obtained.
The c-osts of management of the fund are insignificant compared to the sums
disbursed (less than 2.5 per cent of the total). The smallness of these
charges is due to the fact that the necessary expenses are divided among a
large number of members, thereby reducing expenses to a' minimum, and that
the fund is administered gratuitously by employers who are members.
PRESENT ORGANIZATION
A d m in is tr a tio n

The fund is divided into groups for the purpose of assessing employers
according to their personnel.
Each group has its own regulations and administrative procedure, which are
the most convenient according to its professional or trade customs.
Each group lias a certain number of representatives on the council of
administration. * * *
The present groups are as follows: Various industries, Lyon; metallurgical
and allied industries; various industries outside of Lyon; silk manufacturers;
construction and public works ; factories of Neuville-sur-Saone; iron and metal
industries.
The services of a technical character (birth bonuses and infant hygiene)
are administered by a joint committee formed from the various groups dis
tributing allowances or benefits. It has thus been possible to reduce the gen
eral expenses to a minimum and to obtain the most valuable cooperation. An
advisory medical council has been created which has given advice as to methods
of operation.
A dvantages A

ssured

Membership in the family-allowance fund assures to the personnel of the
establishment the following advantages:
1. Family allowances on the following scale: 40 francs per month for 2 chil
dren under 13 years of age, 75 francs per month for 3 children under 13 years
of age, 120 francs per month for 4 children under 13 years of age, 17o francs
per month for 5 children under 13 years of age, 240 francs per month for 6
children under 13 years of age, 315 francs per month for 7 children under 13
years of age, and 400 franes per month for 8 children under 13 years of age.

189

APPENMX 0

Each group regulation Indicates in a precise manner the persons to he paid
and the beneficiaries.
At present this scale of rates is in use in the following groups: Iron and
metals; various industries, Lyon; and silks.
The group of silk manufacturers pays in addition an allowance of 15 francs
to families with one child.
The rates of the construction and public works groups are as follows: 20
francs per ntonth for 1 child under 13 years of age, 45 francs per month for
2 children under 13 years of age, 75 francs per month for 3 children under 13
years of age, and 30 francs per month for each additional child under 13 years
of age.
The group of industries outside of Lyon and the group of factories of Neuville-sur-Saone2 pay allowances according to the following scale: 15 francs
per month for 1 dependent, 4© francs per month for 2 dependents, TO francs per
month for 3 dependents, 100 francs per month for 4 dependents, 130 francs
per month for 5 dependents, and 30 francs per month for each additional
dependent beyond 5.
*

O p e r a t io n

Printed matter containing a resume of the advantages afforded by the fund
is sent to employees entitled to allowances by the employer. * * *
Such an employee makes application to the office or factory on a regular
form, to which are attached documentary proofs, such as the civil marriage
certificate, birth certificate, etc. The employer verifies the statements as far
as he is able, fills out a form, which is signed by himself and the applicant,
and forwards it to the fund. The documentary proofs are returned to the
employee.
In case of changes in responsibilities (births or deaths) a special certificate
is filled out. If a person receiving an allowance leaves an establishment notice
is given to the fund.
Certain groups have adopted a regulation by which all changes in the per
sonnel, whether or not receiving allowances, are reported to the fund. This
practice has numerous advantages, notably in connection with those who may
in future be entitled to birth bonuses, and its adoption is becoming general
in the different groups.
Each month the employer reports on a special printed form the total num
ber, by sections (men, women, workers, employees, etc., according to groups),
of his present personnel, whether os not receiving allowances.3
F i n a n c i a l O p e r a t io n

From the verified applications received the office of the fund knows by group
and by section what the disbursement for allowances, bonuses, and general
expenses should be, while from the monthly reports it ascertains the number
of wage earners in each group and each section at that time. The total num
ber of wage earners in each section is divided by the total sums to be paid
and each employer is assessed an amount equal to this quotient multiplied by
the number of his employees in the group or section considered.4
2 This fund also pays birth and nursing bonuses and maintains a child-hygiene service.
8 I h the construction group this declaration is replaced by one giving the wages
paid, the basis of compensation being wages and not the present personnel.
4
For example, an employer of the group of metallurgical industries reports that he
employs 250 men and 10 women. The total personnel reported for his group is 22,500
men and 4,300 women. The total of the sums required to distribute allowances to the
group is 170,000 francs for the men and 15,000 francs for the women. The quotients
will, therefore, be 7.55 francs for the men and 3.48 francs for the women. The em
ployer in question owes, therefore, for the month considered— 7.55 X 250 — 1,887.50
francs for the m en ; 3.48 X 10 ~ 3 4 .80 francs for the women.
In the construction group the method is the same but the quotient is based on the
total wages paid instead of on the total personnel. The contribution of a member in
this case is a percentage of his pay roll*

190

APPENDIX D

This sum is sent by check to the fund, the persons receiving allowances being
paid either in cash at the factory by the disbursing clerk of the fund or by
postal money order.®
The expenses for birth bonuses and child-hygiene services are met by
the joint committee, which is reimbursed by the fund.
The whole system, which has been improved several times, aims to impose
upon the member the least possible formality and red tape. He is responsible
only for the verification of the individual declarations, the sending in of the
monthly detailed report, and the contribution check. Everything else is done
by the fund.
5
For the factories outside o f Lyon another system is used. The employer himself pays
the allowances and remits to or receives from the fund only the difference between
his payments to the employees receiving allowances and the result of the fund’s computa
tions. This system, full o f inconveniences, is maintained only because o f the di&culties
in applying the general system of Lyon.

APPENDIX E.—BIRTH AND DEATH BATES IN VARIOUS COUNTRIES, 1912 TO 1923
BIRTHS A N D DEATH S i PER A N N U M IN SP E C IFIE D CO U N TR IES, 1912 TO 19232

NUMBER (IN THOUSANDS)
1912

1913

1914

1915

Country

1916
CO

1
3s
m

1
$
Q

I
«

I
A

I
PQ

1
&

*-i

m
g

1917

1918
tn

Is
s

1919
ja

1920

5U
5

1
ft

1
£
«

1
$

1921
WJ

6
«
Ut

1922

1
«

1923
a
+3
U

133
Australia______________
52
136
52
138
135
52
53
131
54
130
48
126
50
122
66
136
56
136
54
137
51
135
Austria3........................... 904
592
864
152
117
119
590
94
133
126
88
136
88
154
112
125
138
117
142
142
105
146
107
Belgium 4......................... 171
112
171
156
109
124
111
101
99
87
101
125
85
157
123
164
114
103
163
153
104
103
155
Bulgaria *......................... 184
108
92
193
120
88
174
86
99
95
79
98
99
142
157
192
95
103
Denmark proper •..........
75
36
72
35
73
70
37
36
72
39
70
39
73
39
69
40
78
40
79
36
74
39
*75
873
487
England and Wales___
882
879
505
517
815
562
786
508
668
499
692
612
504
958
663
849
466
459
780
487
758
Finland................ ..................
92
87
52
52
88
51
83
52
80
55
81
59
79
95
64
63
85
53
82
80
47
49
82
France7............... .................. 751
693
746
704
594
648
388
655
315
608
343
613
399
789
404
621
834
675
813
760
689
696
762
Germany8_____________ 1,870 1,030 1,839 1,005 1,819 1,053 1,383 1,020 1,029
912 1,055
961
927 1,227 1,261
964 1,599
933 1,560
860 1,400
882 1,291
Hungary *........................
766
736
501
747
492
512
506
553
314
392
297
385
168
246
223
154
237
167
230
72
100
Ireland................... .................. 101
75
71
96
99
76
91
71
86
73
87
79
89
79
100
67
91
64
88
92
65
Italy *..................... .................. 1,134
664 1,114
636 1,122
643 1,109
741
882
722
714
703
649 1,168
771
684 1,123
663 1,086
625 1,125
661 1,101
Japan.......................................... 1,738 1,037 1,757 1,027 1,808 1,102 1,800 1,094 1,805 1,188 1,812 1,200 1, 792 1,493 1,779 1,282 2,026 1,422 1,991 1,289 1,969 1,287
Netherlands....................... 170
75
174
76
177
78
167
84
80
173
173
87
167
115
164
90
193
82
190
77
182
80 "~186~
Norway_______________
61
32
32
61
62
33
59
33
34
34
66
65
64
59
43
36
69
34
64
65
31
32
63
Portugal________ _________ 208
120
200
125
194
118
123
196
193
129
134
190
181
253
168
154
206
144
199
126
Rumania4_____________ 314
166
192
310
327
183
194
320
103
297
286
262
539
620
417
614
372
376
Scotland........ .................. 123
72
121
73
124
114
82
74
71
97
69
99
110
78
106
137
68
123
75
115
66
112
73
Spain_________ _____
638
426
618
449
608
450
615
452
599
442
602
466
613
696
585
622
482
494
649
656
455
441
658
Sweden............................. 133
77
79
130
129
78
83
122
78
123
77
120
118
104
115
84
139
78
127
73
117
76
113
92
54
90
55
Switzerland.....................
87
54
76
52
74
51
53
72
73
75
72
55
81
56
81
50
76
50
76

1
56
100
100
38
444
48
667
858
156
61
623
--

31
63

449

68
46

1Exclusive of stillbirths.
* France, Minister© du Travail, Bureau de la Statistique G£n6rale, Annuaire Statistique, 1924, Paris, 1925, pp. 201, 202.
* For 1912 and 1913 figures are for pre-war territory; for succeeding years they are for present territory.
* For 1912 and 1919 to 1923 figures are for pre-war territory; for 1913 to 1918 they are exclusive of about 50 communes of Western Flanders.
8Figures are for pre-war territory.
* For 1912 to 1919 figures are for pre-war territory; for succeeding years they are for present territory.
7For 1912 and 1913 figures are for pre-war territory; for 1914 to 1919 they are for 77 uninvaded Departments; for succeeding years they are for present territory.
8For 1912 to 1916 figures are for pre-war territory; for 1917 to 1923 for new territory; 1917 to 1920, exclusive of Mecklenburg, and 1921 to 1923, exclusive of Mecklenburg, Saare, and
Wurtemberg.

B IR T H S A N D D E A T H S PER A N N U M IN SPECIFIED C O U N TR IES, 1912 TO 1923— Continued
RATES PER 100 IN H ABITAN TS

1912
Country

2.79
2.30
2.02
4.62
2.56
2.38
2.69
1.79
2.68
3.47
2.26
3.11
3.38
2.82
2.52
3.19
4. 21
2.61
2.98

1.05 2.71
1.77 1.82
1.42 1.61
2.11 4.14
1.25 2.42
1.40 2.19
1.56 2.54
1.88 1.16
1.55 2.04
2.35 2.38
1.63 2.20
1.79 3.05
2*06 3.30
1.24 2.62
1.35 2.38
1.94 3.19
2.35 4.05
1.55 2.39
2.20 2.98

2.29
2.25

1.38
1.38

2.86
3.14
2.27
4.17
2.66
2.39
2.91
1.90
2.82
3.63
2.30
3.24
3,34
2.81
2.56
3.46
4.34
2.59
3.16
2.38

1.12
2.05
1.49
2.07
1.30
1.33
1.63
1.75
1.65
2.33
1.65
1.82
2.00
1.23
1.35
1.99
2.29
1.53
2.12
1.42

2.82
2.96
2.16
2.60
2.56
2.41
2.71
1.88
2.75
3.45
2.28
3.17
3.33
2.81
2.54
3.30
4.21
2.55
3.04
2.32

1.07
! 2.03
' 1.39
2.30
1.25
1.38
1.61
1.77
1.50
2.35
1.71
1.87
I 1.95
! 1.23
1.32
: 2.06
2.61
1.55
2.21
1.37

2.41

1.41

2.31

1.43

i
A

2.16
1.95

1
£

1
§

1917
m

£
m

1918

£4

!
Q

3u
s

3
$
a

1.00
2.49
2.10
2.99
1.30
1.76
2.85
2.20
1.89
2.59
1.80
3.30
2.68
1.71
1.63
4.02
4.57
1.60
3.31

2.35
1.79
1.62
3.28
2.26
1.85
1.92
1.26
2.00
2.74
2.00
2.14
3.16
2.42
2.19
2.64
3.95
2.20
2.83

1.27
2.03
1.50
1.99
1.30
1.37
1.89
1.93
1.53
1.96
1.76
1.90
2.28
1.32
1.33
2.42
3.61
1.54
2.33

1.06
2.03
1.39
2,05
1.28
1.57
1.59
1.85
1.51
2.57
1.76
2.04
2.02
1.25
1.34
1.99
2.45
1.71
2.21

2.66
1.46
1.28
2.11
2.43
2.09
2.40
,95
1.53
1.68
2.09
2.40
3.27
2.65
2.61
3.11

1.10
1.95
1.32
2.04
1.34
1.44
1.65
1.75
1.43
2.09
1.65
1.97
2.15
1.20
1.36
2.08

2.63
1.38
1.13
1.69
2.37
1.78
2.43
1.05
1.39
1.60
1.97
1.95
3.23
2.60
2.51
3.05

0.97
2.14
1.64
2.08
1.32
1.44
1.76
1.79
1.61
2.07
1.66
1.92
2.14
1.31
1.32
2.15

2.29
2.89

1.46
2.13

2.03
2.88

1.43
2.23

2.50
1.40
1.14
2.08
2.41
1.77
2.38
1.22
1.43
1.64
1.99
1.81
3.22
2.48
2.42
2.88
1.58
2.05
2.94

1.47
1.33

2.11
1.87

1.36
1.29

2.08
1.82

1.34
1.32

2.03
1.84

1.79
1.90

m
xi

1.96
1.84

1.44
1.40

3
$
G

2.55 1.05
2.24 1.91
2.21 1.39
3.97 2.12
2.54 1.29
2.55 1.24
2.53 1.59
2.13 1.72
2.69 1.51
3.12 2.12
2.22 1.48
a 19 1.88
3.62 2.54
2.81 1.19
2.63 1.24
3.21 2.25
3.37 2.59
2.81 1.40
3.00 2.38
2.35
2.09

1.33
1.44

ia
12

1923

1922

1921

1920

1919
03

£3
Sh

+3
03
o

1
ft

2.50
2.29
2.19

0.99
1.69
1.37

2.47
2.27
2.04

0.92
1.72
1.39

2.38
2.23
2.04

0.99
L 53
1.30

2.40
2.24
2.43
2.07
2.53
2.79
2.02
3.04
3. 51
2.74
2.44
3.10
3.87
2.52
3.04

1.10
1.21
1.40
1.77
1.40
1.93
1.42
1. 75
2.27
1.11
1.13
1.96
2.30
1.36
2.14

2.23
2.04
2.34
1.94
2.28
2.94
1.99
3.00
3.42
2.59
2.42

1.19 2.25
1.28 1.97
1.44 2.37
1.76 1.94
1.43 2.09
2.08 2.84
1.45 2.06
1.76 2.91
2.23 i___
1.14 I 2.60
1.19 j 2.30

1.13
1.16
1.38
1.70
1.39
1.92
1.37
1.65

3.72
2.35
3.05

2.28
1.49 ! 2.28
2.05 3.04

2.14
2.03

1.24
1.27

1.29
2.12

1.96
1.96

1.28 •1.88
1.29 1.94

1.14
1.18

___

.99
1.15

s For 1912 and 1613 figures are for pre-war territory; for succeeding years they are for present territory.
* For 1912 and 1919 to 1923 figures are for pre-war territory; for 1913 to 1918 they are exclusive of about 60 communes of Western Flanders.
«Figures are for pre-war territory.
•For 1912 to 1919 figures are for pre-war territory; for succeeding years they are for present territory.
f For 1912 and 1913 figures are for pre-war territory; for 1914 to 1919 they are for 77 tmihvaded departments; for succeeding years they are for present territory,
s For 1912 to 1916 figures are for pre-war territory; f5r 1917 to 1923 for new territory; 1917 to 1920, exclusive of Mecklenburg, and 1921 to 1923, exclusive of Mecklenburg, Saare,
and Wurtemberg.
•Inclusion of Wales in 1923, figures not specified,
Figures for 1922 and 1923 are for the Irish Free State.

flJ

ta
xi
i
Q

APPENDIX

Austria3________ _____
Belgium « .........................
Bulgaria4.........................
Denmark proper 6___ _
England and Wales 9„ .
Fimand............................
France 7_,.........................
Germany8........ ..............
Hungary •........................
Ireland10..........................
Italy *...............................
Japan................................
Netherlands....................
Norway.......................... *
Portugal...........................
Rumania ®
Scotland............ - ............
Spain-.*_____ _________
Sweden____ ___________
Sw itzerland................

CO
s08

t5
s

1916

1915

1914

1913
co

Full text of Family Allowances in Foreign Countries : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 401

FRASER