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 STEWART, Commissioner BULLETIN OF THE UNITED STATES ) BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS \ # * P R O D U C T I V I T Y OF LABOR • No. 441 SERIES PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY /v \ \ “ / JULY, 1927 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON 1927 ACKNOWLEDGMENT This bulletin was prepared by Boris Stern, of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. ii A D D ITIO N A L COPIES OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE PROCURED FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS U .S . GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON, D. C. AT 40 CENTS PER COPY CONTENTS Introduction and summary: Page Industrial revolution in the glass industry____________________ ____ 1-14 Early history of glass making_______________________________ 1-3 Regenerative furnace and continuous tank___________________ 3, 4 Development of machinery in the industry___________________ 4-7 4, 5 Bottles and jars_______________________________________ Pressed ware__________________________________________ 5 5, 6 Blown ware___________________________________________ Window glass__________________________________________ 6 Plate glass____________________________________________ 6, 7 Effects of machinery on labor productivity and labor cost_____ 7-14 Bottles and jars________________________________________ 7, 8 Pressed ware__________________________________________ 9, 10 Blown ware___________________________________________ 10-12 Window glass__________________________________________ 13 Plate glass_____________________________________________ 13, 14 Effects of the industrial revolution on the industry________________ 14-25 Establishments and wage earners____________________________ 15, 16 Output of establishments___________________________________ 16-18 Stabilization of the industry_________________________ _______ 18 Value of output____________________________________________ 18-20 Output of wage earners_____________________________________ 20, 21 Wage workers' earnings_____________________________________21, 22 Child labor________________________________________________ 22-25 Chapter I.— Bottles and jars: Annealing bottles_______________________________________________26, 27 Assorting bottles_______________________________________________ 27, 28 Blowing bottles by hand________________________________________ 28-31 Blowing bottles by machine______________________ ^_____________ 32 Semiautomatic machinery___________________________________32-35 One-man machine____________________ ________ _________ 34, 35 35 “ Feed and flow ” devices_______________________________ Automatic machinery______________________________________ 36-45 Owens machine________________________________________ 36-38 Conveyors____________________________________________ 38, 39 Feeders_______________________________________________ 39-41 Machines used with feeders___________________________ 41-45 Labor productivity and labor cost_____________________________ _ 45-54 Man-hour output---------- -------------------- --------------------------------- 46-50 Blowing labor cost_________________________________________ 50-54 Present situation in the bottle branch of the industry______________ 55 Statistics of production and labor cost___________________________ 55-87 T able A .— Production and labor cost in making bottles by hand and by machine__________________________________________59-87 Chapter II.— Pressed and blown ware: Pressed ware________________________________ - ______ ___________ 88 Making pressed ware by hand---------- ------------------------------------ 89-91 Semiautomatic machinery___________________________________91, 92 Automatic machinery______________________________________ 92-94 Labor productivity and labor cost___________________________ 95-99 Man-hour output______________________ _______________ 95-97 Direct labor cost_______________________________________ 97-99 Effects of the introduction of machinery____________________ 99, 100 Statistics of production and labor cost_____________________ 100-109 T able B .— Production and labor cost in making pressed ware by hand and by machine_____________ - ________ 101-109 in IV CONTENTS C hapter II.—Pressed and blown ware—Continued. Blown ware: Page Lamp chimneys__________________________________________ 110-116 Offhand process______________________________________ 110, 111 Paste-mold process_____________________________________ 111 Semiautomatic process_______________________________ 111, 112 Man-hour output and labor cost______________________ 112-114 Statistics of production and labor cost_________________ 114-116 T able C .— Production and labor cost in making lamp chimneys by hand and by machine________________ 116 Electric light bulbs_______________________________________ 117-131 Making bulbs by hand_________________________________ % 117 Semiautomatic process_______________________________ 117-119 Automatic machinery________________________________ 119-125 Man-hour output and labor cost______________________ 125-127 Statistics of production and labor cost_________________ 127-131 T able I ) .— Production and labor cost in making elec tric light bulbs by hand and by machine_________ 128-131 Punch tumblers__________________________________________ 132-136 Making tumblers by hand____________________________ 132-134 Automatic process___________________________________ 134, 135 Man-hour output and labor cost________________________ 135 Statistics of production and labor cost_________________ 135, 136 T able E .— Production and labor cost in making punch tumblers by hand and by machine_______ _________ 136 Glass tubing. _____________________________________________ 137-144 Making glass tubing by hand___________________________ 137 Making glass tubing by machine______________________ 137-142 Man-hour output and labor cost______________________ 142, 143 Statistics of production and labor cost_________________ 143, 144 T able F .— Production and labor cost in making glass tubing by hand and by machine__________________ 144 C hapter III.— Window glass: Making window glass by hand_________________________________ 145-148 Cylinder-machine process_____________________________________ 148-154 Hand and cylinder-machine processes compared___________________ 154 Flat glass____________________________________________________ 154HL58 Colburn process__________________________________________ 154, 155 Fourcault machine_______________________________________ 155-158 Man-hour output and labor cost_______________________________ 159, 160 Present situation in the window glass branch of the industry___ 161, 162 Statistics of production and labor cost_____________________ ____ 162-169 T able G .— Production and labor cost in making window glass by hand and by machine________________________________ 164-169 C hapter IV.— Plate glass: Discontinuous process________________________________________ 171-181 Melting the glass___________________________________________ 171 Casting the rough plate___________________________________ 171-174 Annealing the rough plate_________________________________ 174-177 Grinding and polishing plate glass------------------------------ --------177-180 Laying out a table__________________________________ - 177, 178 Grinding machine______________________________________ 178 Middle yard___________________________________________ 178 Polishing machine__________________________ _________ 178-180 Relaying or turnover gang_-------------------------------------------180 Stripping and washing the glass----------------------------------— 180 Examining and cutting department---------------------------------------180 Continuous process___________________________________________ 182-187 Casting department______________________________________ 182-184 Finishing department_____________________________________ 184—187 Cutting department_____________________ __________________ 187 Discontinuous and continuous processes compared---------------------- 187-189 Man-hour output and labor cost_______________________________ 189-196 Present situation in the plate-glass branch of the industry--------------197 Statistics of production and labor cost_________________________ 197-204 T able H .— Production and labor cost of making plate glass by hand and by machine__________________________________ 199-204 BULLETIN OF THE U. S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS WASHINGTON n o . 441 j u l y , 1927 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY EARLY HISTORY OF GLASS MAKING Very little is known of the early history of glass making and abso lutely nothing of the manner and date of its discovery. It is reason ably certain, however, that the art of blowing glass into bottles, making it into vases, coloring it to imitate precious stones, melting it into enormous masses to make pillars, and rolling and polishing it into mirrors was well known and practiced even in the most remote ages. The earliest evidences of the existence of the art of glass making are found in Egypt. Champollion discovered on the walls of the tomb of Beni-Hassan-el-Gadim drawings of workmen engaged in glass blowing, and the reproduction of these drawings shows that until recently glass has been blown in exactly the same way as it was during the eighteenth dynasty, about 15 centuries before the Christian era. A recent translation of the texts of a number of Assyrian tablets shows that during the reign of Assur-bani-pal (669626 B. C.) the Assyrians were not only adept in making glass but actually possessed numerous formulas for the making of various kinds and colors of glass, and on the basis of this discovery it is main tained that the Assyrians were far ahead of the Egyptians in the art of glass making. Samples of glass have been found in Syria, in the region of the Euphrates, which can be definitely dated as of 2500 B. C. In following up the history of glass making among the various nations, ancient and modern, one is impressed with the fact that the art of glass making becomes most pronounced when a nation reaches a high degree of civilization, and declines with the downward trend of the nation. In Greece the fourth century and in Rome the age of the emperors were the periods of the highest development of glass making. With the decline and fall of Rome, Byzantium, the capital of Constantine the Great; became the center of attraction for the glassmakers of the world. Then came the Dark Ages, and very little glass making was done from the fifth to the close of the eleventh century. But with the coming of the Renaissance the art received a new stimulus and was revived in the city of Venice. This revival proved permanent and soon Venetian glass and Venetian glassmakers spread all over Europe, the glassmakers carrying their art with them. In France glass making was reintroduced in the sixteenth century by the finance minister Colbert, and in England during the reign of Queen Elizabeth. X 2 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY Before the process became mechanical the making of glass was one of the most beautiful of arts and was so considered. To prove this one need but refer to the beautiful beads, vases, and mosaics made during the above-mentioned periods and to the social status enjoyed by glassmakers in all the countries. In the list of occupations which were proscribed in the Middle Ages as dishonorable for the nobility glass making was not mentioned. Early in the fourteenth centurv the French Government decreed not only that no derogation from nobility should follow the practice of glass making, but also that none save gentlemen or the sons of gentlemen should engage in any of its branches even as working artisans. .This was also true of Altare, a city near Venice, while in Venice and Murano each glassmaker, no matter of what origin, was entitled to be called “ gentle man glassmaker,” thus becoming a nobleman by virtue of his trade alone. During the Venetian period another important characteristic of the art of glass making became particularly noticeable. This is the mystery and secrecy of the trade which persisted throughout the ages and which clings to the glass industry to the present day. Upon the Assyrian tablets mentioned were found the following instructions as to the preparation of the glass furnace: 1 When thou settest out the ground plan of a furnace for “ minerals” thou shalt seek out a favorable day in a fortunate month. While they are making the furnace, thou shalt watch them and work thyself, in the house of the furnace; thou shalt bring in embryos [deities]— another, a stranger, shall not enter, nor shall one that is unclean tread before them; the day when thou puttest down the “ mineral” into the furnace, thou shalt make a sacrifice before the embryos. Thou shalt kindle a fire underneath the furnace and shalt put down the “ mineral” into the furnace. The men whom thou shalt bring to be over the furnace shall cleanse themselves and then thou shalt set them to be over the furnace. The Venetian glassmakers used every effort to keep secret the process of their art. Article 26 of the statutes passed by the In quisition of State in 1454 decreed that if any glass workman should transport his craft to a foreign country and refuse to return an emis sary should be commissioned to slay him. In Murano the follow ing law was passed in 1459:2 If any glass workman carries his art to a foreign country he will have first an order to return; if he obeys not, all his nearest relatives will be put in prison; if in spite of this he obstinately remains abroad, some emissary will be charged to slay him. It is recorded that two workmen whom the German Emperor Leopold (1658-1708) had induced to enter his States were so dealt with. Referring to the introduction of glass making into the United States, the Encyclopedia Britannica of 1861 carries the following paragraph: The mystery attached to the art of glass making followed it into America. The glass blower was considered a magician. His ability to transmute earthy and opaque matter into a transparent brilliancy was regarded as not less miracu lous than the imputed skill of the alchemist to transmute base metals into gold. 1 The Glass Industry, November, 1926, pp. 264, 265. 2 Wallace-Dunlop, M. A.: Glass in the Old World. New York [1882], p. 144. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 3 In the introduction to his book, American Glass Practice, published in 1920, Mr. Bastow, a practical glassman with more than 20 years of experience in the glass industry, says: 3 The lack of real knowledge of the forces at work in the process of making glass is still aggravated by the age-old custom of secrecy. Observation will bear out the fact that the most narrow-minded and bigoted demonstration of secrecy is encountered where there is the least of real knowledge. Oftentimes this con dition condemns a manufacturing plant to the wasteful use of an uneconomical formula, simply because that formula was acquired under conditions that tended to throw a sacredness over it. * The status of glass making as one of the fine arts and the mystery and secrecy with which it has been surrounded throughout its entire history are largely responsible for the fact that, in spite of its nearly prehistoric origin, until very recently, both in this country and in Europe, it has lagged behind all other-industries in its development, especially as regards the introduction of machinery and labor-saving devices. The industrial revolution in the glass industry is not yet a generation old, and some of its branches are only now passing through the phases characteristic of this tremendous change. REGENERATIVE FURNACE AND CONTINUOUS TANK The first really revolutionary change in the glass industry was the introduction of the Siemens regenerative furnace, invented in 1861. Prior to that the “ direct-fire ” furnaces had been used, with the fuel—wood or coal— charged directly into the firepot or hearth of the furnace. In the regenerative furnace, which is now almost universally used in this country, the heat is supplied by the combus tion of air and gas. The latter may be natural or supplied by a pro ducer, located at the plant. The gas and air employed are first heated separately by the waste heat from the flames by means of what are called “ regenerators,” placed either beneath or at the side of the furnace. These are four chambers filled with fire brick stacked loosely in checker work. Two of the chambers are used for the admission of the gas and air into the furnace, and the other two for the passage of the waste flames from the furnace to the smoke stack. In passing through the chambers the intensely hot flames leave a large proportion of their heat with the bricks in the chambers. After a short period of time, usually 20 to 30 minutes, the draft is reversed. The cool air and gas are now admitted into the furnace via the two regenerators which had been previously used for the waste flames, the latter now being released through the other pair of regenerators. In passing over the heated bricks, the cold air and the gas absorb the heat and upon reaching the common entrance to the furnace combustion takes place, supplying the necessary heat for the melting of the glass. The regenerative furnace is not only more economical, effecting a saving of nearly 50 per cent in fuel, but the heat produced by it is more intense and uniform, both of which conditions are absolutely necessary for the proper melting of the glass. More important, however, as regards the later development of machinery in the industry, was the introduction of the continuous melting tank to take the place of open or closed pots. The continu ous tank was invented in 1872, but was not adopted in this country a Bastow, Harry: American Glass Practice. Pittsburgh, 1920. p. 5. 4 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY until about 1888. One decade later, in the census year of 1900, 48.8 per cent of the total active melting capacity of this country was reported in tank furnaces. In 1925 open-pot furnaces were found only in the plate-glass branch of the industry. Closed pots are still used in the pressed and blown ware branch for the production of the better kind of glassware and also for colored glass. A few day tanks are used here and there, especially for the making of lamp chimneys by the offhand process. In all other branches of the industry the use of the continuous tank has become universal. The principal advantage of the continuous tank lies in the oppor tunity it offers for uninterrupted working of the glass. With the pot furnaces nearly half the time is consumed in filling the pot with the batch, melting it, and bringing the molten material to the stage necessary for the making of glassware. With the continuous tank the batch is supplied at regular intervals to the melting end of the tank while the molten glass is being continuously withdrawn from the other end of the tank. The supply of the batch and the process of melting and withdrawing the glass are so timed that the working end of the furnace always remains at about the same temperature and the same working level. The improved furnace and the con tinuous tank made the industry ripe for the introduction of machin ery, and it was not very long afterwards that the successful operation of the first semiautomatic machine for the production of wide-mouth jars was reported. DEVELOPMENT OF MACHINERY IN THE INDUSTRY The glass industry is composed of a number of branches whose only common characteristic is the molten glass from which the respective commodities are made. The nature of the ware made and the methods of production, whether by hand or by machine, are entirely different in the separate branches. The development of machinery also has not been uniform and simultaneous in all the branches. To all intent and purposes, therefore, the separate branches may be considered as independent industries and treated accordingly. In the present investigation the following four branches are studied: (1) Bottles and jars; (2) pressed and blown ware; (3) window glass; and (4) plate glass. BOTTLES AND JARS In his book on Machinery and Labor, Prof. G. E. Barnett of Johns Hopkins University distinguishes three periods in the development of machinery for the purpose of making jars and bottles:4 (1) 18981905—semiautomatic machinery for the making of wide-mouth ware exclusively; (2) 1905-1917—the Owens automatic machine for the making of all kinds of bottles, wide and narrow mouth, and semi automatic machinery for the narrow-mouth ware; (3) 1917 to date— semiautomatic machinery made automatic by the “ feed and flow devices.” The first more or less successful semiautomatic machine was invented in 1882 by Philip Arbogast, of Pittsburgh, Pa., and 11 years later this machine was successfully applied to the making of vaseline jars. In 1896 a similar machine was invented for the purpose of making Mason jars. The growth of the semiautomatic machine < Barnett, G. E.: Machinery and Labor. Cambridge, 1926. p. 67. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 5 from 1897 to 1905, as shown by the number of machines in use in each of those years, is given by Professor Barnett as follows:5 1897, 20; 1898, 50; 1899, 60; 1900, 80; 1901, 90; 1902, 100; 1903, 150; 1904, 200; 1905, 250. The first really revolutionary change, however, took place in 1904, with the successful introduction of the Owens automatic machine. It was invented by M. J. Owens, a glassworker, who later became the genius of the industry. The machine was automatic from the very start and where used, it at once displaced all the skilled blowers and most of their helpers in the shops. The output of the new machine was so much greater and the cost of production so much less than by the hand and semiautomatic processes that had it not been for the restrictive policies of the owners of the Owens machine these less economical processes would at once have been displaced by the automatic machine. As it happened, however, the period of the Owens automatic machine was also the period of the development of semiautomatic machinery. In 1917 there were 200 Owens machines in operation in this country, but there were also 428 wide and narrow mouth semiautomatic machines. At about this time the “ gob” feeder, which had been experimented with for some time, became a com mercial success. This appeared to have certain advantages over both the Owens automatic and the semiautomatic machines. In the course of the next eight years the majority of the semiauto matic machines were reconstructed and equipped with automatic feeders so as to become completely automatic. The Owens ma chine has also undergone a series of important changes, especially as regards the number of arms and the number of molds on each arm. The most modern type of Owens machine has 15 arms, each equipped with two molds, and each mold contains cavities for two or three bottles, depending on the size of the bottle. At present these automatic processes completely dominate the bottle-making indus try. The semiautomatic process has disappeared entirely, but a small number of plants are still using the hand process for the kind of bottles which can not be made more economically on the machine. PRESSED WARE Although the introduction of the side-lever press dates back to 1827, the general introduction of machinery in the pressed ware branch of the industry took place much later and is less significant than that in the bottle branch of the industry. The side-lever press is still used in a large number of plants. During the first part of this century the semiautomatic rotary press was introduced, but the real revolutionary change came with the introduction of the feeding devices. Modern machines equipped with these devices are made after the pattern of the bottle-blowing machines, but are less com plicated. They are used primarily for making pressed tumblers of all sizes, nappies, and sherbets. The largest proportion of pressed ware, especially the so-called “ novelties,” is still made on either the old-fashioned side-lever press or the rotary press. BLOWN WARE In the field of blown ware the development of machinery has been much more pronounced than in the case of pressed ware. The * Barnett, G. E.: Machinery and Labor; Cambridge, 1926, p. 69. 6 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY machines used are also more complicated and specialize in the pro duction of some particular article, such as lamp chimneys, electric lamp bulbs, punch tumblers, and glass tubing. The lamp-chimney semiautomatic machine dates back to 1894. Since then it has undergone a number of changes, but on the whole very little progress has been made in this branch of the glass indus try. Hand production, especially the offhand method, is still an important factor, but the industry as a whole is diminishing in im portance, as electricity is rapidly displacing the use of oil-burning lamps even in the most outlying and inaccessible districts. On the other hand, the most amazing progress has been recorded in the making of electric-light bulbs. Since 1917 hand production has been almost entirely displaced—first by the semiautomatic Em pire E machine and more recently by the completely automatic Westlake machine and the Empire F machine operated with an au tomatic feeder. At present more than 95 per cent of all the electric bulbs are made by the two automatic processes. The semiautomatic machine has been almost completely abandoned, while a few hand shops have been retained for experimental purposes or for the pur pose of making oddly shaped and colored electric bulbs. The Westlake machine, which revolutionized the bulb-making in dustry, has also recently invaded the field of punch tumblers. These are now made either on the Westlake machine or as a by-product on the lamp-chimney semiautomatic machine. Only the most expensive tumblers, those decorated with special designs, are still made by the hand shops. The year 1917, which brought with it so many revolutionary inno vations in the bottle and the pressed and blown ware branches of the industry, witnessed also the introduction of the Danner machine for the making of glass tubing. The new method was so superior that in the comparatively short period of less than eight years it displaced the old hand process, and not a single shop can now be found making glass tubing by hand. WINDOW GLASS The introduction of the Lubber cylinder machine in 1905 was the first successful attempt to replace the hand process of making window glass with machinery. The cylinder process may be called semiauto matic, as considerable handling of the glass is required in the various stages on its journey from the tank to the cutter's table. In 1917 the Colburn process of automatically drawing a continuous sheet of glass from the tank became a commercial success, while in 1921 the Fourcault automatic process, which was invented in Belgium, was successfully introduced into this country. As a result very little window glass is now being made by the hand process in this country. The cylinder machine is still the dominating factor in the industry, but the improved Colburn process and more recently the Four cault machine have been rapidly gaining on the cylinder process and are becoming very important factors in the industry. PLATE GLASS The story of plate glass is essentially different from that of any other branch in the glass industry. It has been from the very beginning a nonskill industry, and the many simple operations involved in the process of handling the large and heavy plates soon suggested the use of labor-saving devices. When the industrial INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 7 revolution finally reached the other branches of the glass industry plate-glass making had already become a progressive, well-integrated industry. Recently, however, the introduction of the continuous tank, the automatic process of casting rough plate, and the conveyor method of grinding and polishing the plates have tended to bring about changes in this branch almost as revolutionary as those in the other branches of the industry. The continuous process has not yet reached the stage of unquestioned superiority over the older so-called discontinuous process, and some time will probably elapse before the industry universally adopts the new process. EFFECTS OF MACHINERY ON LABOR PRODUCTIVITY AND LABOR COST The effects of the introduction of machinery on labor productivity and labor cost in the several branches of the glass industry are given in Table 1, where productivity and cost in hand production are compared with those in production by present-day machinery in terms of index numbers. The increase in man-hour output varies from 42.3 per cent (for lamp chimneys) to 4,009.8 per cent (for 4-ounce prescription oval bottles). The decrease in labor cost varies from 25.1 per cent (for rough plate glass) to 97.3 per cent (for 4-ounce prescription oval bottles). T a b l e 1. — Index numbers of labor productivity and labor cost in the glass industry, by article and process Labor productivity Article Bottles: 2-ounce prescription ovals................................... 4-ounce prescription ovals................................... 2-ounce extract panels_____________ ______ ___ i^-pint sodas________________________ _______ l-pint whisky dandies_______________________ 1-quart millr bottles_________________________ 5-gallon water carboys_______________________ Pressed ware: 8-9-ounce table tumblers.... ......... ............ - ........ 10-ounce table tumblers_____________________ 4J^-6-inch nappies__________ _____ __________ 6-7-inch nappies__________ __________________ 3%-o\mce sherbets............................................ . 4H~5 ounce sherbets........................................... Blown ware: Lamp chimneys............. .......................... ........... 25-watt electric bulbs............. ............................. 40-watt electric bulbs........................................... 9-10-ounce punch tumblers................................. Glass tubing, sizes 19-21..................................... Glass tubing, sizes 32-34..................... .............. . Window glass: Single strength................................................... Double strength____________________________ Plate glass: Rough plate.................................................... Polished plate______________________________ Labor cost Per cent Hand of in crease process Percent of de crease Hand process Ma chine 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 3906.4 4109.8 2511.6 1642.0 742.1 1449.3 994.0 3806.4 4009.8 2411.6 1542.0 642.1 1349.3 894.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 2.74 2.70 4.20 6.70 10.30 5.10 17.10 97.26 97.30 95.80 93.30 89.70 94.90 82.90 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 1228.1 1240.0 759.6 491.0 817.0 630.5 1128.1 1140.0 659.6 391.0 717.0 530.5 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 6.70 6.65 8.62 13.26 8.97 12.62 93.30 93.35 91.38 86.74 91.03 87.38 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 142.3 3126.2 3142.6 1419.1 591.9 746.7 42.3 3026.2 3042. 6 1319.1 491.9 646.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 62.50 3.39 3.39 7.00 18.55 14.70 37.50 96.61 96.61 93.00 81.45 85.30 100.0 100.0 261.1 228.4 161.1 128.4 100.0 100.0 31.30 32.80 68.70 67.20 100.0 145.0 100.0 - 160.5 45.0 60.5 100.0 100.0 74.90 66.70 25.10 33.30 Ma chine BOTTLES AND JARS A comparison of man-hour output on seven of the most commonly used bottles made by the three processes—hand, semiautomatic ma chine, and automatic machine—is shown in Table 2. The average out put per man-hour by the hand process ranges from 0.286 gross (quart milk bottles) to 0.643 gross (2-ounce prescription oval bottles); on the semiautomatic machines, it ranges from 0.711 gross (2-ounce extract panel bottles) to 1.043 gross (2-ounce prescription oval 8 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY bottles); and on the automatic machines it ranges from 2.649 gross (1-pint whisky dandies) to 25.118 gross (2-ounce prescription oval bottles). For the purpose of comparison, the data are also expressed in terms of index numbers. Taking the average man-hour output in hand production as the base, or 100, the semiautomatic machine shows indexes ranging from 142.2 (for 2-ounce extract panel bottles) to 270.9 (for quart milk bottles); and the automatic machine shows indexes ranging from 742.1 (for pint whisky flasks) to 4,109.8 (for 4-ounce prescription oval bottles). It would take more than 41 workers to produce in one hour by hand as many 4-ounce prescription oval bottles as the most up-to-date automatic machine produces in the same period of time. The table also shows a comparison of the labor cost of blowing the seven kinds of bottles by the three processes. This comparison is based on the rates of wages prevalent in the industry in 1925. The average labor cost of blowing a gross of bottles by hand ranges from $1,006 (for 2-ounce prescription oval bottles) to $25,308 (for 5-gallon water bottles); on the semiautomatic machine it ranges from 58.3 cents (for 2-ounce prescription oval bottles) to $1,027 (for 2-ounce extract panel bottles); and on the automatic machine it ranges from 2.8 cents (for 2-ounce prescription oval bottles) to $1,881 (for 5-gallon water carboys). Taking the average labor cost in the hand process as the base, or 100, the semiautomatic machine shows indexes varying from 30.4 (for quart milk bottles) to 74.6 (for 2-ounce extract panel bottles), the average saving in labor cost thus ranging from 69.6 to 25.4 per cent. The automatic machine shows indexes varying from 2.7 (for 4-ounce prescription oval bottles) to 10.3 (for pint whisky dandies), the saving in labor cost thus ranging from 97.3 to 82.9 per cent. For every dollar spent on producing 4-ounce prescription oval bot tles by hand it cost only 2.7 cents to make them on the most up-todate automatic machine. T a b l e 2 .— Comparison of average output and labor cost of bottles made by hand and by machine Output (per man-hour) Average output per man-hour of bottles made by— Hand Kind of bottle Semiautomatic machine Automatic machine Index Amount Index Index Amount number number Amount number 2-ounce prescription ovals.......... .............................. 4-ounce prescription ovals.............................. .......... 2-ounce extract panels................................................ H-pint sodas............................................................... 1-pint whisky dandies................................................ 1-quart milk bottles.................................................... 6-gallon water carboys................................................ Gross 0.643 .536 .500 .393 .357 .286 .026 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Gross 1.043 .797 .711 .778 .774 .775 162.2 148.7 142.2 198.0 216.8 270.9 Gross 25.118 22.028 12.568 6.453 2.649* 4.145 .260 3906.4 4109.8 2511.6 1642.0 742.1 1449.3 1000.0 $0,583 .72% 1.027 .888 .860 .907 58.0 61.2 74.6 54.7 48.0 30.4 $0,028 .032 .057 .108 .185 .152 1.880 2.74 2.70 4.2 6.7 10.3 5.1 7.43 labor cost (per gross) 2-ounce prescription ovals............................._........... 4-ounce prescription ovals........._............................... 2-ounce extract panels........................ ....................... ^-pint sodas........ .......................................... ......... 1-pint whisky dandies...................................... ......... 1-quart milk bottles.................................................... 6-gallon water carboys____ ___ ___ _ . .............. $1,006 1.177 1.377 1.622 1.790 2.980 25.308 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 9 PRESSED WARE A comparison of man-hour output of the most commonly used tumblers, nappies, and sherbets made by the hand side-lever press, by the semiautomatic rotary press, and by the automatic machines is presented in Table 3. The average man-hour output on 10 and 8-9 ounce tumblers of a hand shop is 28.86 and 31 pieces, respect ively; on the semiautomatic rotary press on 8-9 ounce tumblers it is 64.93 pieces; and on the automatic machine on 10 and 8-9 ounce tumblers it is 357.86 and 380.71 pieces, respectively. On 6-7 and 43^-5 inch nappies the average man-hour output is 27.37 and 39.61 pieces, respectively, by the hand process; 45.69 and 58.71 pieces, respectively, on the semiautomatic machine; and 134.39 and 300.87 pieces, respectively, on the automatic machine. On 43^-5 and ounce sherbets, the average man-hour output is 30.45 and 33.55 pieces, respectively, by the hand process; 48.79 and 58.21 pieces, respectively, on the semiautomatic rotary press; and 192 and 274.1 pieces, respectively, on the automatic machine. Expressed in terms of index numbers, taking the man-hour output by the hand process as the base, or 100, the semiautomatic press shows a maximum index of 209.5 (for common 8-9 ounce tumblers) and a minimum of 148.2 (for 4 ^ -5 inch nappies), and the auto matic machine shows a maximum of 1,240 (for 10-ounce tumblers), and a minimum of 491 (for 6-7 inch nappies). A comparison of the labor cost of production in pressing glass ware by the three processes is also shown in Table 3. The average labor cost of making one hundred 8-9 and 10 ounce tumblers by the hand side-lever press is $1.95 and $2,075, respectively; of making one hundred 8-9 ounce tumblers on the semiautomatic rotary press, $1,073; and of making one hundred 8-9 and 10 ounce tumblers on the automatic machine, 13 and 13.8 cents, respectively. In making one hundred 43^-5 and 6-7 inch nappies the average labor cost is $1,718 and $2,549 respectively, by the hand process; $1,053 and $1,418, respectively, on the semiautomatic rotary press; and 14.8 and 33.8 cents, respectively, on the automatic machine. In making one hundred 43^-5 and 3 ounce sherbets the labor cost by the hand process is $1,806 and $1,917, respectively; on the semiauto matic machine, $1,147 and $1,295, respectively; and on the auto matic machine, 16.2 and 24.2 cents, respectively. Expressed in terms of index numbers, taking the labor cost in the hand process as the base, or 100, the index numbers for the semi automatic machine show a maximum of 67.55 (for 43^-5 ounce sherbets) and a minimum of 55 (for 8-9 ounce common table tum blers). The decrease in the labor cost of production thus effected by the semiautomatic machine from that of the hand process ranges from 32.45 to 45 per cent. On the same basis the automatic machine shows a maximum index of 13.26 (for 6-7 inch nappies) and a mini mum index of 6.65 (for 10-ounce tumblers). For every dollar spent on making pressed glassware by hand the automatic machine effects a saving ranging from 86.74 to 93.35 cents. 10 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN TH E GLASS INDUSTRY T a b l e 3*— Comparison of average output and labor cost of tumblers, nappiesf and sherbets made by hand and by machine Output (per man-hour) Average output per man-hour of specified article made by— Hand Article Semiautomatic machine Automatic machine Index Index Index Amount number Amount number Amount number 8-9 ounce common tumblers...................................... 10-ounce tumblers___ ____ _____________________ 43^-5 inch nappies.-------- -------------------- ------ ------6-7 inch nappies_____ _____ _____________________ 3M-ounce sherbets........ .............................................. 4>|-5 ounce sherbets________ _______ _____ _______ j 31.00 28.86 39.61 27.37 33.55 30.45 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 64.93 209.5 58.71 45.69 58.21 48.79 148.2 166.9 173.5 160.2 $1,073 55.00 1.053 1.418 1.147 1.295 61.29 55.63 63.51 67.55 380.71 357.86 300.87 134.39 274.10 192.00 1228.1 1240.0 759.6 491.0 817.0 630.5 $0.130 .138 .148 .338 .162 .242 6.70 6.65 8.62 13.26 8.97 12.62 labor cost (per 100) 8-9 ounce common tumblers...................................... $1.951 2.075 10-ounce tumblers....................................................... 1.718 4H-5 inch nappies....................................................... 2.549 6-7-inch nappies......................................... ............... 33^-ounce sherbets....................................................... ! 1.806 1.917 4^-5 ounce sherbets................................................... i 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 BLOWN WARE Lamp chimneys.—A comparison of man-hour output in making No. 2 sun-crimped lamp chimneys by the offhand process, by the paste-mold process, and by the semiautomatic machine is set forth in Table 4. The average man-hour output by the offhand process is 26.27 chimneys, by the paste-mold process 36.45, and by the semi automatic machine 37.39. Taking the output by the offhand process as the base, or 100, the paste-mold process shows an index of 138.8, or an increase of 38.8 per cent, and the semiautomatic machine an index of 142.3, or an increase of 42.3 per cent. The labor cost of production by the three processes is also shown in the table. It cost $2,710 to make 100 No. 2 sun-crimped lamp chimneys by the offhand process, $2,128 by the paste-mold process, and $1,712 on the semiautomatic machine. The decrease in labor cost from that of the offhand process is 21.5 per cent for the pastemold process and 37.5 per cent for the semiautomatic machine. T a b l e 4 . — Comparison of average output and labor cost o f No. 2 sun-crimped lamp chimneys made by hand and by machine Average output per man-hour Average labor cost per 100 pieces Method of production Index Quantity number Hand: Offhand process........................................................................ Paste-mold process............................................. .................. Semiautomatic machine................................................................. 1 Pieces 26.265 36.450 i 37.387 100.0 138.8 142.3 Amount $2.710 2.128 21.712 Index number 100.0 78.5 62.5 1In addition there was approximately an equal number of tumblers produced as a by-product requiring only grinding and glazing to finish them. 2 Less the value of the tumblers produced as a by-produet. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 11 Eleetric-light bulbs.—A comparison of man-hour output in making 25 and 40 watt electric-light bulbs by hand, on the semiautomatic ma chine, and on the automatic machine is shown in Table 5. The average man-hour output of 25 and 40 watt bulbs of a hand shop is 54.36 and 54.21 bulbs, respectively; on the semiautomatic machine, 116.06 and 116.55 bulbs, respectively; and on the automatic machine, 1,699.22 and 1,703.59 bulbs, respectively. Expressed in index numbers, taking the man-hour output of the hand process as the base, or 100, the semiautomatic machine shows indexes for 25 and 40 watt bulbs of 213.52 and 215.00, respectively, and the automatic machine, 3,126.17 and 3,142.57, respectively. The semiautomatic machine doubled the man-hour output of the hand shop, while the man-hour output of the automatic machine is more than thirty-one times that of the hand process. The labor cost of producing 25 and 40 watt electric bulbs by the three processes is also shown in the table. Ijb costs $13,897 and $13,882, respectively, to make one thousand 25 and 40 watt bulbs by hand; $4,197 and $4,180, respectively, on the semiautomatic machine; and 47.1 and 47.0 cents, respectively, on the automatic machine. Taking the labor cost of the hand process as the base, or 100, the semiautomatic machine shows indexes for 25 and 40 watt bulbs of 30.20 and 30.11, respectively, or a decrease in labor cost of nearly 70 per cent. For the automatic machine the index is 3.39 for both kinds of bulbs. For every dollar spent on making electric lamp bulbs by hand it cost only 3.39 cents to make them on the automatic machine, a saving of 96.41 cents per dollar. T a b l e 5 . — Comparison of average output and labor cost of electric light bulbs made by hand and by machine Average output per man-hour Average labor cost per 1,000 pieces Kind of bulbs and method of production Index Quantity number Pieces 25-watt bulbs made b y 54.36 Hand_________________________________________________ Semiautomatic machine..................... ...... ........................... 116.06 Automatic machine................................................................ 1,699.22 40-watt bulbs made by— 54.21 Hand__________________________ ____ ______________ ___ 116.55 Semiautomatic machine.......................... .............................. Automatic machine................... ........... ................................. 1,703.59 Amount Index number 100.00 213.52 3,126.17 $13,897 4.197 ,471 100.00 30.20 3.39 100.00 215.00 3,142.57 13.882 4.180 .470 100.00 30.11 3.39 Punch tumblers.—In Table 6 is shown a comparison of man-hour output of 9-10 ounce punch tumblers made by hand and on the automatic machine. In the hand process the average output is 25.69 tumblers per man-hour, while on the automatic machine it is 364.57 tumblers per man-hour. Taking the output of the hand process as the base, or 100, the automatic machine shows an index of 1,419.1, or more than fourteen times the man-hour output by the hand process. The labor cost of making a 9-10 ounce punch tumbler by the two processes is also shown in the table. The average labor cost of making 100 tumblers by hand is $1.90; on the automatic machine it is 13.3 cents 12 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY per hundred. Taking the labor cost of the hand process as the base, or 100, the automatic machine shows an index of 7.0; that is, for every dollar spent on making punch tumblers by hand it costs only 7 cents to make them by the automatic machine, a saving of 93 cents per dollar. T a b l e 6.— Comparison of man-hour output and labor cost of 9 -1 0 ounce punch tumblers blown by hand and by machine Man-hour output Process Index Quantity number Pieces 25.69 364.57 Hand production_____________________________ ____________ Automatic machine........................... ............................................ 100.0 1,419.1 Labor cost Amount per 100 $1,900 .133 Index number 100.0 7.0 Glass tvMng.—A comparison of man-hour output of glass tubing made by hand and by the Danner tubing machine is made in Table 7. The average output per man-hour of glass tubing made by the hand process is 9.957 pounds for sizes 19 to 21 and 10.067 pounds for sizes 32 to 34. On the Danner tubing machine the average man-hour output is 58.932 pounds of sizes 19 to 21 and 75.169 pounds of sizes 32 to 34. Expressed in terms of index numbers, with the man-hour output of the hand process taken as the base, or 100, the Danner machine shows an index of 591.9 for the smaller sizes and 746.7 for the larger sizes. It would take nearly eight workers to produce the same quantity of tubing as the Danner machine produces in an equal period of time. A comparison of the labor cost of making glass tubing by the two processes is also given in the table. It cost $6,905 and $6,830, respectively, to draw 100 pounds of glass tubing of sizes 19 to 21 and 32 to 34. The labor cost of making the same sizes of glass tubing on the Danner tubing machine is $1,281 and $1,004, respectively, per 100 pounds. Expressed in terms of index numbers, taking the labor cost of the hand process as the base, or 100, the Danner machine shows indexes of 18.55 and 14.70, respectively, or a decrease in labor, cost of 81.45 and 85.30 per cent of the labor cost of making glass tubing by hand. T a b l e 7 . — Comparison o f average output and labor cost of glass tubing made by hand and by machine Average output per man-hour Average labor cost per 100 pounds Size of glass tubing and method of production Index Quantity number Sizes 19 to 21 glass tubing made b y Hand........................................................................................ Machine....... .............. ............................................................ Sizes 32 to 34 glass tubing made b y Hand........................................................................................ Machine................................................................................... Amount Index number Pounds 9.957 58.932 100.0 591.9 $6,905 1.281 100.0 18.55 10.067 75.169 100.0 746.7 6.830 1.004 100.0 14.70 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 13 WINDOW GLASS Table 8 contains a comparison of man-hour output of single and double-strength window glass made by the hand shop,‘on the cylinder machine, and by the Fourcault automatic process. On single-strength window glass the average output of the hand process is 0.709 boxes (50 square feet each) per man-hour; on the cylin der machine, 1.654 boxes per man-hour; and on the Fourcault machine, 1.851 boxes per man-hour. On double-strength window glass the aver age man-hour output is 0.561 boxes by the hand process, 0.972 boxes on the cylinder machine, and 1.280 boxes by the Fourcault automatic process. Expressed in terms of index numbers, with the man-hour output of the hand process taken as the base, or 100, the cylinder machine shows an index of 233.3 for single-strength and 173.4 for double-strength window glass. The Fourcault process shows an index of 261.1 for single-strength and 228.4 for double-strength glass, or an increase in man-hour output of 161.1 and 128.4 per cent, respectively, over the hand process. The labor cost of making window glass by the three processes is also given in the table. In the hand process the labor cost of making a 50-square-foot box of window glass is 95.5 cents and $1.32, respec tively, for single and double-strength glass; on the cylinder machine the corresponding costs are 40.7 and 69.9 cents per box; and on the Fourcault machine, 29.9 and 43.3 cents per box. Taking the labor cost of the hand process as the base, or 100, the cylinder machine shows an index of 42.6 for single-strength and 53.0 for double-strength glass, and the Fourcault process, 31.3 for single-strength and 32.8 for double-strength window glass. The savings in labor cost thus effected by the automatic is 68.7 and 67.2 cents on every dollar spent in making window glass by the hand process. T a b l e 8 .— Comparison of average output and labor cost of making window glass by hand and by machine Average output per man-hour Average labor cost per box Kind of window glass and method of production Index Quantity number Single-strength window glass made b y Hand............... ............................ ............... ......................... Cylinder machine___________________ ____ _____________ Fourcault automatic machine____ ________________ ______ Double-strength window glass made b y Hand................................................................................... Cylinder machine........ ........... ............................................... Fourcault automatic machine.......... .... ......... ...................... Amount Index number Boxes i 0.709 1.664 1.851 100.0 233.3 261.1 $0,955 .407 .299 100.0 42.6 31.3 .561 .972 1.280 100.0 173.4 228.4 1.320 .699 .433 100.0 53.0 32.8 i 50 square feet. PLATE GLASS A comparison of man-hour output of rough and polished plate glass made by the discontinuous and by the continuous processes is given in Table 9. When cast by the discontinuous process the average output of rough plate glass is 43.887 square feet per man-hour; by the continuous automatic process it is 63.630 square feet per man-hour. 40780°—27------ 2 14 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY Taking the man-hour output of the discontinuous process as the base, or 100, the automatic process shows an index of 145, or an increase in man-hour output of 45 per cent over the discontinuous process. In the case of polished plate glass the average output by the dis continuous process is 7.664 square feet per man-hour, as compared with 12.300 square feet per man-hour by the continuous process. The man-hour output of polished plate glass made by the continuous process is 60.5 per cent larger than the man-hour output by the dis continuous process. A comparison of the labor cost of making rough and polished plate glass by the two processes is also given in the table. It cost $1,812 to cast 100 square feet of rough plate glass by the pot process and $1,357 per 100 square feet by the automatic process. Taking the labor cost of the pot process as the base, or 100, the automatic process shows an index of 74.9, or a decrease in labor cost of 25.1 per cent. In the case of polished glass the labor cost of making it by the dis continuous process is $10,397 per 100 square feet, while by the con tinuous process it is $6,939. The decrease in labor cost effected by the continuous process is 33.3 per cent. 9.— Comparison of average output and labor cost of casting rough plate glass and o f making polished plate glass by the discontinuous and the continuous processes T a b le Average output per man-hour Average labor cost per 100 square feet Index Quantity number Amount Kind of plate glass and method of production Rough plate glass cast by— Discontinuous process............................................................. Continuous process................................................................. Polished plate glass made by— Discontinuous process.................. ............ ............................. Continuous process......... ........................................ .............. Index number Sq. feet 43.887 63.630 100.0 145.0 $1.812 1.357 100.0 74.9 7.664 12.300 100.0 160.5 10.397 6.939 100.0 66.7 EFFECTS OF THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION ON THE INDUSTRY In view of the tremendous changes in man-hour output and labor cost due to automatic machinery, it may be worth while to examine more or less in detail the effects of the introduction of machinery on the industry as a whole. Table 10, compiled from Census Bureau reports, presents statistics which represent the growth of the industry from 1899 to 1925, the period during which the change from hand production to semiautomatic and automatic machinery took place. The data given are the number of establishments, the wage earners employed, the total wages paid, and the quantity and value of out put for the industry as a whole, and also, when available, for the four principal branches thereof, which combined constitute more than 90 per cent of the industry. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 15 T a b l e 10.— Statistics o f the glass industry, 1899 to 1986, by specified years [Data from United States Bureau of the Census] Item 1899 1904 1909 1914 1919 1921 1923 1925 355 147 84 100 16 399 158 103 103 17 363 166 114 0) 0) 348 150 107 64 19 371 145 130 79 17 329 0) 0) (*) 0) 333 117 127 65 17 310 120 123 42 19 Wage earners.............................. 52,818 Bottles and jars...................... 28,370 Pressed and blown ware........ 12,546 Window glass......................... 8,682 Plate glass............................... 3,220 63,969 74,502 0) 0) 0) 0) 77,520 0) 0) 0) (0 54,748 8 8 68,911 0) 0) 0 0) <*> 73,335 24,010 27,196 8,826 9 961 69,371 21,704 21,507 8,346 11,124 12,005 12,316 19,290 22,295 (9 28,393 26,044 428 532 701 1,080 C1) 0) 4,852 27,293 6,922 47,370 8,020 60,384 7,380 56,823 5,201 56,239 10,204 94,470 Establishm ents.......................... Bottles and jars...................... Pressed and blown ware........ Window glass......................... Plate glass............................... O u tp u t: Bottles and jars................. . ................. thousand gross.. 7,780 Pressed and blown ware_____ ................... million pieces.. 360 Window glass......................... .................thousand boxes.. 4,341 Plate glass..thousand sq. ft.. 16,884 Value o f o u tp u t (000 om itted). Bottles and jars...................... Pressed and blown ware........ Window glass......................... Plate glass............................... (0 Q 0) 1,963 11,343 117,369 $56,540 $79,608 $92,095 $123,085 $261,884 $213,471 $309,353 $295,959 21,677 33,631 36,018 51,959 94,670 100,301 0) 107,231 17,076 21,956 27,398 77,279 72,085 30,279 70,749 0) 10,879 11,611 11,743 42,623 17,495 41,101 24,026 37,525 5,159 7,978 12,205 14,774 66,163 57,207 33,348 37,261 Wages (000 om itted).................. 27,084 37,388 39,300 48,656 87,527 68,224 89,898 86,736 1 Not reported. ESTABLISHMENTS AND WAGE EARNERS In 1899 the glass industry comprised 355 establishments, employing 52,818 wage earners, an average of 149 wage earners per establish ment; in 1925 there were only 310 establishments, employing 69,371 wage earners, an average of 224 wage earners per establishment. In the course of the 25 years the number of establishments decreased 12.7 per cent, while the number of wage earners increased 31.3 per cent, and the average number of wage earners per establishment increased 50.3 per cent. The figures for the industry as a whole, however, do not tell the story of what happened in the separate branches. In 1899 there were 147 establishments making bottles and jars and employing 28,370 wage earners, an average of 193 wage earners per establish ment; in 1925 there were 120 establishments, employing 21,704 wage earners—an average of 181 wage earners per establishment. The number of establishments in the bottle and jar branch therefore decreased 18.3 per cent, the number of wage earners 23.5 per cent, and the average number of wage earners per establishment 5.8 per cent. For pressed and blown ware there were, in 1899, 84 establishments, employing 12,546 wage earners— an average of 149 wage earners per establishment; in 1925 there were 123 establishments employing 21,507 wage earners— an average of 175 wage earners per establish ment. The number of establishments thus increased 46.4 per cent, the number of wage earners 71.4 per cent, and the average number of Wage earners per establishment 17.5 per cent. In the window-glass branch in 1899 there were 100 establishments, employing 8,682 wage earners— an average of 87 wage earners per 16 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY establishment; in 1925 there were only 42 establishments, employing 8,346 wage earners—an average of 199 wage earners per establish ment. The number of establishments decreased 58 per cent and the number of wage earners 3.9 per cent, but the average number of wage earners per establishment increased 128.7 per cent. In the plate-glass branch in 1899 there were 16 establishments, employing 3,220 wage earners— an average of 201 wage earners per establishment; in 1925 there were 19 establishments, employing 11,124 wage earners— an average of 585 wage earners per establish ment. The number of establishments increased 18.8 per cent, the number of wage earners, 245.3 per cent, and the average number of wage earners per establishment 191.0 per cent. The effects of the introduction of machinery in the glass industry have thus been considerably different in its four principal branches, at least so far as total number of establishments and wage earners and average number of wage earners per establishment is concerned. In the bottle and jar branch the general adoption of the automatic machines resulted not only in a diminution of the number of plants and wage earners in the industry but also in a decrease of the average number of wage earners per establishment. Fewer workers are seen in a large up-to-date machine bottle plant than in a small hand plant. In the pressed and blown ware branch the automatic machines have so far invaded only a small part of the industry, and the growth in this branch has therefore resulted in an increase in the number of plants and wage earners as well as in the average number of workers per establishment. In the window-glass branch the predominance of the cylinder-machine process cut the number of establishments over half, somewhat diminished the total number of wage earners, and increased the average number of wage earners per plant nearly one and one-third times. As to plate glass, which until very recently witnessed no revolutionary changes, the growth in this branch more than tripled the number of wage earners and nearly tripled the aver age number of workers per establishment. OUTPUT OF ESTABLISHMENTS The number of workers employed and the average number per establishment can not, however, be used as an indication of the change in the size of the establishment, for the reason that the primary object of the introduction of machinery has been to decrease the number of wage earners employed. This is especially true of the bottle and jar branch. A better means of measuring the size of an establishment may be found either in the quantity or the value of output. For a period of years the quantity output is more effective, as it remains more or less untouched by a change in prices, which exerts a disturbing influence on the value of the output. In 1899 the average output per establishment in the four branches was: Bottles and jars, 52,925 gross; pressed and blown ware, about 4.286.000 pieces; window glass, 43,410 boxes; and plate glass, 1,055,200 square feet. In 1925 it was: Bottles and jars, about 217.000 gross; pressed and blown ware, 15,959,000 pieces; window, glass, 270,100 boxes; and plate glass, 6,177,000 square feet. Thus in 1925 the average output per establishment was four and onetenth times as much as in 1899 in the case of bottles and jars; three INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 17 and seven-tenths times as much in the case of pressed and blown ware; six and two-tenths times as much in window glass; and five and nine-tenths times as much in plate glass. The distribution of total number of establishments and the value of their output on the basis of the value of output in each estab lishment is even more significant of the changes in the size of estabments than the actual output per establishment. Table 11 shows the total number of establishments in 19046 and 1925 with a yearly output of under $100,000, with an output of $100,000 and under $1,000,000, and with an output of $1,000,000 and over. T a b l e 11.— Number of establishments in the glass industry and total value o f their 'productj 1904 and 1925, classified by value of product per establishment Number and total value Number of estab lishments Total value of product Value of product per establishment 1904 1925 1904 1925 Under $100,000........................................................................ $100,000 and under $1,000,000................................................... $1,000,000 and over......................................................... ......... 164 230 5 49 178 83 $8,341,000 62,274,000 8,993,000 $2,652,000 78,754,000 214,553,000 Total............................................................................... 399 310 79,608,000 295,959,000 Under $100,000.......................................................................... $100,000 and under $1,000,000.................................................. $1,000,000 and over............................. ........... .......................... 41.1 57.6 1.3 15.8 57.4 26.8 10.5 78.2 11.3 0.9 26.6 72.5 Total.............................................................................. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Per cent In 1904, out of a total of 399 establishments in the industry, 164 establishments, or 41.1 per cent, were in the lowest group; 230, or 57.6 per cent, in the middle group; and only 5 establishments, or 1.3 per cent, in the highest group. In 1925, out of a total of 310 estab lishments in the industry, 49 establishments, or 15.8 per cent, were in the lowest group; 178, or 57.4 per cent, in the middle group; and 83, or 26.8 per cent, in the highest group. Even more striking than the number of establishments is the dis tribution of the total value of output in these groups. In 1904 the 164 establishments in the lowest group reported a combined output of $8,341,000, or 10.5 per cent of the $79,608,000 which was the value of the output for the entire industry. The value of the output of the middle group was $62,274,000, or 78.2 per cent of the total, and that of the 5 establishments in the upper group was $8,993,000, or 11.3 per cent of the total. In 1925 the 49 establishments of the lowest group reported an output of $2,652,000, or less than 1 per cent of the $295,959,000, the value of the output of the entire industry. The value of the output of the middle group was $78,754,000, or 26.6 per cent of the total, while that of the 83 establishments in the upper 6The distribution for 1899 is not available. 18 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY group was $214,553,000, or 72.5 per cent of the total. Although the variation in prices from 1904 to 1925 no doubt had some effect on the value of output in those two years, the differences in the distri bution of the three groups are so enormous as hardly to be affected by any such variation in prices. STABILIZATION OF THE INDUSTRY Prior to the introduction of machinery the glass industry was pre dominantly a small-unit industry. The amount of capital needed for a plant was comparatively negligible, and the principal item of expen diture, outside of labor, was fuel. A cheaper rate on coal or natural gas was enough of an inducement for the removal of a glass plant from one locality to another and from State to State. The history of the discoveries of natural gas in Pennsylvania, Indiana, West Vir ginia, and Oklahoma also tells the story of the migrations of the glass industry to and from these States. But with the advent of machinery the situation changed completely. Fuel is still a big item in the cost of production of glass and is still considered as the factor determining the site of a new glass estab lishment. But once the plant is built, the capital outlays on the building, the furnaces, and the machines prevent the moving of the establishment irrespective of the cost of fuel. Thus, as migration was eliminated, the advantages of large-scale production were brought into play, with the result that in the short span of 25 years the glass industry has been converted from a small and loosely connected into a large and well-integrated industry. VALUE OF OUTPUT In 1899 the 7,780,000 gross of bottles and jars produced were valued at $21,677,000, an average of $2.79 per gross; in 1925 the value of the 26,044,000 gross produced was $100,301,000, an average of $3.86 per gross, an increase of 38.4 per cent over the average value in 1899. In the pressed and blown ware branch of the industry the 360,000,000 pieces produced in 1899 were valued at $17,076,000, an average of $4.74 per hundred pieces; in 1925 the 1,963,000,000 pieces produced were worth $72,085,000, an average of $3.67 per hundred pieces, or 22.6 per cent lower than in 1899. In the window-glass branch the 4,341,000 boxes produced in 1899 were valued at $10,879,000, an average of $2.50 per box; in 1925 the 11,343,000 boxes were worth $37,525,000, an average of $3.31 per box, or 32.4 per cent higher than in 1899. In the plate-glass branch the 16,884,000 square feet of polished glass produced in 1899 were worth $5,159,000, making the average $30.56 per hundred square feet; in 1925 the 117,369,000 square feet produced were worth $57,207,000, an average of $48.74 per hundred square feet, which is 59.5 per cent higher than the average for 1899. Table 12 and Chart 1 show a comparison of the trend of these aver age values in the four branches and of wholesale prices of manufac turing commodities from 1899 to 1925. INTRODUOTI ON AND SUMMARY 19 T a b l e 12* — Average unit values o f bottles and jars, pressed and blown ware, window glass, and plate glass, and index numbers thereof and of wholesale prices of manu factured commodities in specified years, 1899 to 1925 Index numbers Year 1899.......................... 1904......................... 1909.................... . 1914_................... . 1919.......................... 1921.......................... 1923______________ 1925______________ Bottles and jars (per gross) Pressed and blown ware (per 100 pieces) $2.79 2.80 2.93 2.70 4.25 (2) 3.78 3.86 $4.74 5.13 5.15 4.33 6.54 (2) (2) 3.67 Win dow glass (per box) $2.50 2.40 1.70 2.18 5.57 4.61 4.18 3.31 Plate glass (per 100 Bottles square and feet) jars Pressed and blown ware 100.0 100.0 105.0 96.8 152.3 100.0 108.2 108.6 91.4 138.0 135.5 138.4 77.4 $30.56 29.23 25.78 24.47 58.68 66.25 69.96 48.74 Win dow glass 100.0 96.0 68.0 87.2 222.8 184.4 167.2 132.4 Plate glass 100.0 95.6 84.4 80.1 192.0 216.8 228.9 159.5 Whole sale prices of manu factured com modi ties i 100.0 109.8 124.6 128.7 273.4 188.2 188.7 203.3 1 Recomputed from indexes given in U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Bui. No. 415, p. 31: Wholesale prices, 1890 to 1925. 2 Not reported. C h a r t 1.— T r e n d o f A v e r a g e U n i t V a l u e s o f B o t t l e s a n d J a r s , P r e s s e d a n d B l o w n W a r e , W i n d o w G l a s s , a n d P l a t e G l a s s a s C o m p a r e d w i t h T r e n d o f W h o l e s a l e P r ic e s o f M a n u f a c t u r e d C o m m o d i t i e s , 1899 t o 1925 300 280 160 240 220 200 ISO 160 140 <20 100 80 60 40 ♦ 3 20 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY In average unit values each branch of the industry seems to have a trend entirely different from any other branch, due to conditions inherent in that branch. For instance, window glass and plate glass as building materials are largely affected by the general conditions in the building industry. This accounts for the slump in their values in 1909 and the steep rise in 1919 as compared with the value of bottles and jars or of pressed and blown ware. Again, for a num ber of years plate glass has been in great demand for the automobile industry, and in 1921, in spite of the slump in the other branches of the glass industry and in the wholesale price index of manufac tured commodities, the value of plate glass continued to rise through 1923, when the introduction of the continuous process began to exert its influence and values began to drop. On the whole, however, the general trend of the four branches of the industry is unmistakably downward and, with the exception of plate glass, none of the indexes of average unit values rose during the period above the wholesale price index of manufactured com modities. In 1925 the index for bottles and jars was 64.9 points below the wholesale price index of manufactured commodities; for pressed and blown ware it was 125.9 points lower, and actually 22.6 per cent lower than it was in 1899. The index for window glass was 70.9 points lower and for plate glass 43.8 points lower than the index for wholesale prices of manufactured commodities. OUTPUT OF WAGE EARNERS From the labor standpoint the most important change directly connected with the introduction of machinery in the glass industry is the increase in output per wage earner employed. Table 13 shows a comparison of output per man in the four principal branches of the industry in 1899 and 1925. T a b le 13.— Yearly output per man in specified branches of the glass industry, 1899 and 1925 1925 Branch of industry 1899 Quantity Bottles and jars................ ........... . ......................... .......... ........gross.. Pressed and blown ware................. .................... . _________ pieces.. Window glass......................... ............................... ................boxes.. Plate glass............... ^ .......................................... - .........square feet_„ 274 28,694 500 5,240 1,200 91,272 1,359 10,551 Index numbers (1899=100) 438.0 318.1 271.8 201.3 In 1899 the 28,370 wage earners engaged in making bottles and jars produced by hand alone, 7,780,000 gross, an average of 274 gross per man; in 1925 the 21,704 wage earners produced, partly by hand and partly on the semiautomatic machine, but chiefly on the auto matic machines, 26,044,000 gross, an average of 1,200 gross per man, or four and four-tenths times as much as in 1899. In the pressed and blown ware branch of the industry the 12,546 wage earners employed in 1899 produced by hand 360,000,000 pieces of ware, an average of 28,694 pieces per man; in 1925 the 21,507 wage earners employed produced, partly by hand and partly by INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 21 machine, 1,963,000,000 pieces, an average of 91,972 pieces per man, or three and two-tenths times as much as in 1899. In the window-glass branch the 8,682 workers engaged in 1899 pro duced by the cylinder hand process 4,341,000 boxes of 50 square feet each, an average of 500 boxes per man; in 1925 the 8,346 wage earners produced, partly by hand and partly by the Colburn and Fourcault automatic processes, but chiefly by the cylinder machine process, 11,343,000 boxes, an average of 1,359 boxes per man, or two and seven-tenths times as much as in 1899. In the plate-glass branch the 3,220 wage earners employed in 1899 produced 16,884,000 square feet of polished plate glass, an average of 5,243 square feet per man; in 1925 the 11,124 wage earners engaged in making plate glass by the improved discontinuous and continuous processes produced 117,369,000 square feet of polished plate glass, an average of 10,551 square feet per man, or a little more than twice as much as in 1899. In the figures for the separate branches of the industry there exists a slight error due to the fact that the hours worked per day in 1899 and 1925 are not strictly comparable. For instance, in the bottle industry the regular hours of work were eight and one-half in 1899 and only eight in 1925. On the other hand, in 1899 nearly all the plants, following a long-established custom, suspended production for a period of two months, while in 1925 only a few plants stopped producing for a month or more because of repairs or the usual recon struction of tanks, which must be done every 12 to 18 months. Similar or somewhat different discrepancies in the hours worked also exist in the other branches of the industry, but their general effect on the output was so slight as to exert very little, if any, influence on the validity of the figures of productivity given. WAGE WORKERS’ EARNINGS A comparison of rates of wages in the glass industry in 1899 and 1925 is of no significance, for the reason that the nature of the work done and the kind of labor used in 1925 were entirely different from the work done and the labor used in 1899. Twenty-five years ago the majority of workers employed in the industry consisted of highly skilled blowers, pressers, finishers, gatherers, flatteners, and cutters, and unskilled mold boys, snapping-up boys, warming-in boys, carry-in boys, carry-over boys, and the like. In 1925 only a small percent age of such labor had been retained, even in the hand plants. The new class of glassworkers is made up of tank men, machinists, machine foremen, machine operators, and helpers, with little if any prelim inary training in handling machines. Again, in 1899 all skilled workers were paid on a piecework basis, while in 1925 the over whelming majority of workers were paid on a time basis—by the hour, by the week, or by the month. It is possible, however, to compare the yearly earnings of the wage earners in 1899 and in 1925. In 1899 the 52,818 wage earners in the industry received a total wage of $27,084,000, an average of $512.78 per wage earner per year. In 1925 the 69,371 wage earners received a total wage of $86,736,000, an average of $1,250.32 per wage earner per year, or nearly two and one-half times as much as in 1899. 22 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY But in making these comparisons of the wage workers’ earnings of 1899 and 1925 it must be remembered that the group of wage earners in 1899 contained a large percentage of minors under 16 years of age, with extremely low wages, whereas in 1925 the number of minors under 16 years was practically nil. This difference would tend con siderably to depress the average earnings per man in 1899 as com pared with 1925. On the other hand, many of the skilled workers in 1899 working on a piece-rate basis were earning exceptionally high wages. Fifty to seventy-five dollars a week was not an excep tionally high wage for a skilled bottle or window-glass blower in those days. In 1925 this extreme had also been eliminated. How far the high earnings of the skilled workers in 1899 were neutralized by the very low earnings of the minors can only be guessed, but the existence of the two extremes can not be overlooked when comparing the average earnings of the two periods. More important, however, than the money wages are the real earnings of the workers. Table 14 contains a comparison of the average yearly earnings of the wage earners in the industry from 1899 to 1925, with the cost of living during the same period. T a b l e 14.— Average yearly earnings of wage earners in the glass industry compared with cost of living, 1899 to 1925, by specified years [1914=100] Average yearly earnings Year Amount l._................. .................................. 1........... .............. ............................... 1......... .............................................. $512.78 582.91 570.30 653.08 1,129.09 1,246.15 1,225.85 1,250.32 Index number 78.5 89.3 87.3 100.0 172.9 190.8 187.7 191.4 Index number of cost of living 65.7 73.8 86.1 100.0 182.8 172.1 166.0 168.4 Purchasing power of earn ings (measured by cost of living) Index number 119.5 121.0 101.4 100.0 94.6 110.9 113.1 113.7 Per cent of change com pared with 1914 +19.5 +21.0 +1.4 0.0 —5.4 +10.9 +13.1 +13.7 The trend of real earnings, as expressed in the purchasing power of the money earnings (measured by the cost of living), has been down ward from 1904, when real earnings were at their peak, 21 per cent above that of 1914, to 1919 when they were at their lowest, 5.4 per cent below that of 1914. Since then the trend has been steadily upward, the 1925 index being 13.7 per cent above that of 1914, but not so high as that of 1904 or 1899. CHILD LABOR Prior to the introduction of machinery the glass industry was one of the greatest exploiters of child labor. This was particularly true of the bottle and the pressed and blown ware branches, for very few children had been employed in the making of window glass and none in plate glass. In 1899, of the total of 40,916 wage earners em ployed in making bottles and pressed and blown ware, 7,035, or 17.2 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 23 per cent, were children under the age of 16 years. These were em ployed chiefly as mold boys, cleaning-off boys, and snapping-up boys in the furnace room, and partly as burning-off girls, glazing girls, and selectors in the finishing department. The general nature of their work is explained in the sections describing hand production in the separate branches of the industry. The conditions under which the children were employed are fully discussed in the Commissioner of Labor's Report on Condition of Woman and Child Wage Earners in the Glass Industry in the United States made at the request of the United States Senate, which was published in 1910. The following quotations are from this report. Referring to the work of the mold boy, it says:7 The mold rests upon or very close to the floor. As a result the mold boy must either squat upon the ground in an awkward, cramped position * * * or, standing, must stoop constantly to his work. When the mold boy must thus sit with his legs doubled under him, or sitting on a crude chair or box, stoop over almost to the floor to operate the molds, the occupation becomes one which, continued for any great length of time, undoubtedly tends to dwarf and deform the child. * * * He must necessarily be close to the mold, and for speed of working the mold is placed near the furnace, directly in front of the working hole and some 3 feet below the level of the hole. As the mold tender works he faces the furnace, and his face and shoulders at least are in direct line with the radiated heat from the working hole. In addition to the furnace there are other sources of heat adding to the boy’s discomfort. The blower in lowering the hot lump of glass into the mold necessarily swings it close to the boy’s face; the mold itself after a short using becomes very hot and gives off considerable heat; in some factories the “ glory holes,” at which the finishing work is done, are crowded close to the furnace, and little space left between them and the mold boys. The general conditions in the furnace room are thus described: 8 In some factories at times the air is so full of floating glass from the “ blowover” 9that the hair is whitened by merely passing through the room. It sticks to the perspiration on the face and arms of the boys and men and becomes a source of considerable irritation. Getting into the eyes, it becomes especially troublesome. In other factories visited it was found that when the wind blew from the gas producers toward the furnace room the air of the whole room became filled with gas and smoke almost to the point of suffocation. The heat conditions in the furnace room are set forth as follows:10 The generally accepted figures of the heat within a furnace during the “ fusing” is 2,507° F. between the pots and 2,390° F. in the metal itself. These tem peratures are reduced when the holes are opened for working to a standard of 1,913° F., although glass is commonly worked at a temperature of a hundred degrees less than these figures. * * * Factory No. 2 was examined June 18, at 12.25 p. m. with the outside tem perature at 90°. The temperature taken at a point 2 feet from but directly in front of a working hole showed 142°; two others taken the same distance from but slightly to the side of the holes showed 135° and 137°. Temperature near cleaning-off boy, 105°; near the mold boy, 113°; in front of the “ glory hole,” 116°; at finisher’s bench, 104°; where snap-up boy stands to rub excess glass off neck of bottle, 103°; where carry-in boy picks up ware, 98°; in front of leer, where carry-in boy stands to deposit ware, 125°. * * * In warmer weather the ill effects of the heat show themselves directly in the form of prostration or affections directly due to the high temperature. * * * In the winter the immediate danger to health arises from sudden changes in ? U. S. Bureau of Labor. Report on Condition of Woman and Child Wage Earners in the United States. Vol. Ill, Glass industry. Washington, 1910, p. 48. 8 Idem, pp. 66-92. 8 For explanation of “ blow-over,” see p. 29. *0 U. S. Bureau of Labor. Report on Condition of Woman and Child Wage Earners in the United States. Vol. Ill, Glass industry. Washington, 1910, pp. 69-80. 24 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY temperature. The boys, as a rule, have little or no extra clothing to protect them from the outside weather and rarely take the trouble to wait in the factory until their bodies are sufficiently cooled to bear the change. The danger is particularly acute when night work is being done. On accidents and causes of death and diseases it is said: Conditions in nearly all furnace rooms are favorable to minor accidental injury. * * * 11 Many of the boys bear the scars of severe burns. In the crowded factories where so many of them are constantly moving to and fro carrying the hot bottles, occasional collisions are inevitable, and some of the boys show the marks of these terrible burnings in the form of scars which they will bear all through their lives. * * * It is indeed a hard and trying life they lead, these boys of 9, 10, 11 years and upward, for many such are in the factories. * * * 12 With the introduction of machinery the child-labor situation changed. The mold boys, the cleaning-off boys, and the snapping-up boys were at once dispensed with, even in the case of the cruder semiautomatic machines. The job of the carry-in boys was retained for some time, but the introduction of the Owens automatic machine, with its automatic conveyor, eliminated all the work formerly done by child labor. Even where no conveyors have been installed and the job of the carry-in boys has been retained, the output of the machines has proved to be too large to be handled by minors, and the job, though retaining the name of “ carry-in boy,” is actually performed by an adult unskilled man or woman. Table 15 gives the total number of wage earners and of children under 16 years employed in the industry from 1880 to 1919, the last year for which figures are available from the census reports. T a b l e 15*— Number of wage earners and of minors under 16 years employed in the glass industry, 1880 to 1919, by specified years [Data from the U. S. Census Bureau] Minors under 16 years Year 1880 ........................ 1890................. ........ 1899......................... 1904......................... Number of wage earners 24,177 44,892 52,818 63,969 Number Per cent of total wage earners 15,658 i 6,943 7,116 6,435 23.4 15.5 13.5 10.1 Minors under 16 years Year 1909......................... 1914......................... 1919......................... Number of wage earners 68,911 74,502 77,520 Number 3,561 1,992 1,413 Per cent of total wage earners 5.2 2.7 1.8 1 Males under 16 years and females under 15 years. ^ From 1880 to 1899 the number of minors under 16 years increased from 5,658 to 7,116, but this increase was not as large as that of the total number of wage earners in the industry. The percentage that minors formed of the total number of wage earners decreased, there fore, from 23.4 to 13.5, though the actual number increased 25.7 per cent. Beginning with 1904, both the actual numbers and the per centages minors formed of the total decreased, while the total num ber of wage earners continued to rise rapidly. In 1899, with prac 11 U. S. Bureau of Labor. Report on Condition of Woman and Child j Wage Earners in the United States. Vol. Ill, Glass industry, Washington, 1910. 12 Idem, p. 254. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 25 tically no machinery used in the industry, the 7,116 minor boys and girls under 16 years constituted 13.5 per cent of the total number of 52,818 wage earners in the industry. In 1919, the last year for which official figures are available, there were 1,413 minors—only 1.8 per cent of the 77,520 wage earners in the industry. In 1926 a repre sentative of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, who visited about 60 plants engaged in the manufacture of bottles, pressed and blown ware, window glass, and plate glass, reported that he found few minors under the age of 15. Child labor in the glass industry has now become almost a thing of the past, and credit for this is due in no small measure to Michael J. Owens, the inventor of the Owens machine. In 1869, as a boy of 10 years, he joined the ranks of the thousands of children employed in the glass factories. He died in 1923, the genius of the glass industry, whose inventions contributed more than all other factors combined to the complete elimination of child labor from the industry. CHAPTER I.—BOTTLES AND JARS The process of making bottles, whether by hand or by machine, may be divided into three distinct operations: (1) Blowing, (2) annealing, and (3) assorting and classifying. Blowing is by far the most important of the three operations. It is in the field of bottle blowing that the most striking changes from the hand process to semiautomatic machinery, and finally to auto matic machinery have taken place in the last quarter of a century. These are the changes which have completely revolutionized the bottle industry. In general, therefore, whatever is characteristic of the operation of bottle blowing may well be considered as repre sentative of the bottle industry as a whole. Physically the bottle is actually completed at the end of the first operation. Due, however, to the special effects which the contact of the hot bottle with the iron mold has on the glass, all bottles, and for that matter all glassware made in molds, must undergo a process of annealing before they can be applied to the purposes for which they are to be used. In describing the various methods used in the operation of blowing bottles numerous references have been made to the methods of annealing and assorting bottles, and it is deemed worth while, before entering into a detailed analysis of blowing, to explain briefly the other two operations of bottle making— annealing and assorting. ANNEALING BOTTLES The process of annealing consists in reheating the bottles to a temperature just below the melting point of glass, in order to retain the shape of the bottles, and then gradually cooling them off to the normal temperature. This is accomplished in specially built ovens, formerly termed “ kilns,” and now more generally known as “ leers.” During the last 20 or 25 years a number of very important changes have taken place in the methods of constructing leers and in the process of annealing glassware. The old kilns have become rare. Their place was first taken by the open-fire hand-pan leers, in which the pans were pulled through the leer by hand and then returned over an iron railing to the front of the leer. Next, the automatic muffled leer was invented, with the pans moving automatically on an endless chain, and the fire muffled and not in direct contact with the ware. More recently the fireless leer was put in operation and still more recently an electric leer. All these changes were chiefly concerned with the problem of more perfectly controlling and regulating the process of annealing. An other factor was the saving in the amount of fuel needed in the process. Although some labor saving has been accomplished, especially in the change from the hand leer to the automatic and then to the fireless leer, this was not an important factor in the development of the anneal ing process. The man-hour output in the operation of annealing 26 CHAPTER I.— BOTTLES AND JARS 27 bottles can not be determined either separately or in connection with the operation of blowing, for the following reasons: (a) There is no distinct labor occupation which may be ascribed to the process of annealing as separate from either blowing or assort ing bottles. At the hot end of the leer the carrv-in boys who bring the ware to the leer are usually included either with the “ shop” if the bottle is blown by hand or with the machine unit if blown by machine. At the cold end of the leer the laborers who take the ware off the leer also as a rule classify, inspect, and very often pack the ware in boxes or cartons, and these men are therefore included under the operation of assorting rather than that of annealing the bottles. The only labor which can be attributed to annealing proper is that of tending and controlling the fire in the leer, but this kind of labor is necessary for all leers alike and has no direct relationship to the quantity or kind of ware in the leer. Its output can not, therefore, be measured in terms of bottles annealed. (b) The operations of blowing and annealing are separate processes, entirely independent of each other. With the exception, perhaps, of the Owens leers, which are used exclusively with the Owens machines, any kind of leer may be used with any method of blowing bottles, by hand or machine. Besides, any leer may at the same time be anneal ing various bottles made on more than one machine or made on a machine and by the hand process. Finally, there is no definite relationship between the machine or shop hours spent in blowing bottles and the leer hours needed for annealing purposes. It is therefore impossible to gauge quantitatively the effects of the various leers on the man-hour output of the blowing unit. It is, however, generally admitted in the industry that these effects are comparatively slight and may be classified with such other indeterminate factors as the condition of the molten glass in the tank, the weather, etc. ASSORTING BOTTLES No significant changes have taken place in the methods of assorting and classifying, which is the third operation in the process of making bottles. The job is purely a hand process, consisting in examining the bottles while taking them off the cold end of the leer and throwing out such of the bottles as do not come up to the required standard. The process is not very complicated, and any laborer may learn to assort bottles after a week or two of training. Nowadays this opera tion is performed almost exclusively by women. There is no distinct relationship between the operation of assorting bottles and the method used in the process of blowing. The condi tion of the bottles produced by the blowers has, indeed, a definite effect on the output of the selectors, for the better the run of the bottles blown the smaller is the quantity of ware discarded and the higher the output of the assorters. It can not be proved, however, that any one process of blowing or any one machine continuously produces a larger percentage of good ware than any other process or any other machine. Although it is admitted that the introduction of machinery has somewhat increased the output of the bottle assorters, this slight increase can easily be offset by such other factors as the skill of the assorters, the process of annealing, and the variations in the methods of assorting bottles used in the separate plants, 28 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY Thus, neither the operation of annealing nor that of assorting bottles lends itself to a quantitative analysis of changes in man-hour output. It was therefore necessary to limit this study to the process of blowing, and in the following pages wherever bottle making is men tioned it refers to this operation only. BLOWING BOTTLES BY HAND Since time immemorial the operation of blowing bottles by hand has been performed by a group of workers, constituting a unit termed the “ shop.” The composition of a shop has varied from time to time, depending entirely upon the nature and the size of the bottles blown. For an average size bottle, ranging in contents from less than an ounce to a quart, a normal shop in this country has since 1870 con sisted of three skilled workers and four helpers. Of the three skilled workers, two blowers usually gather the molten glass and blow the bottles independently of each other, while the third worker finishes the necks of the bottles made by the two blowers. In most cases the three workers are equally skilled in all three operations of gather ing, blowing, and finishing, and when working in this order inter change occupations every 20 minutes. The helpers to the blowers derive their names from the nature of their work, being termed mold boy, cleaning-off boy, snapping-up boy, and carry-in boy. The mold boy sits on a low stool at the foot of the blower’s bench and opens and closes the molds as required by the two blowers. The cleaning-off or knocking-off boy stands near by and receives the pipe after it is disconnected from the bottle in the mold, and with a small iron tool resembling a file cleans the pipe of the bit of glass which solidifies around the blowing end. The snapping-up boy puts the bottle which has just been taken from the mold into “ the snap” and places it into the “ glory hole.” 1 The carry-in boy carries the bottles from the finisher to the leer to be annealed. The process of blowing bottles by hand may be briefly described as follows: Standing in front of the working hole of the furnace, the blower dips his pipe into the white mass of molten glass and by skillful movements of his hand gathers on the end of the pipe the exact quantity of glass necessary for the size of the bottle to be made. This he quickly removes from the furnace and rolls and smooths it on a flat piece of iron called the “ marver.V While thus marvering the glass the blower also gently blows into the free end of his pipe and by introducing a few puffs of air into the solid mass of glass forms the initial cavity in the prospective bottle. When the glass is marvered sufficiently the worker, while continuing to blow into the pipe, swings it forward and backward a few times. As a result of these operations the bit of glass suspended at the end of the pipe assumes a pear-shaped form, with a small central air cavity inside. The mold boy now opens one of his two iron molds, the blower lowers the partially formed portion of glass into it, and the mold boy then closes the two halves of the mold. Continuing to blow into the pipe, the blower blows with sufficient force to distend the glass to the exact shape patterned in the mold, after which the pressure of the blowing on the small amount of glass remaining above the mold causes it to distend to a mere film, which breaks readily and 1 For explanation of these terms see p. 31. CHAPTER I .— BOTTLES AND JARS 29 thus disconnects the pipe from the bottle in the mold. The film of glass above the mold, which is so thin and light that it actually floats in the air, is known as the “ blow-over. ” F ig . 1 — BLOWING BOTTLES BY HAND While the bottle remains a short time in the mold until it solidifies sufficiently to be handled, the mold tender prepares the other mold for the second blower. Then he opens the first mold, takes out the 40780°— 27------ 3 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY F ig . 2.— VIEW OF A HAND BOTTLE AND BLOWN-WARE PLANT CHAPTER I .— BOTTLES AND JARS 31 bottle with a pair of pincers, and places it on a stand at his side. Frequently he also weighs the bottle on a small scale standing near by. At this stage of the process the bottle still needs to have its neck finished and the “ lip” on the top formed. The snapping-up boy picks it up with a pair of pincers and puts it in a heavy can-like receptacle with a long handle, known as the “ snap.” He then places the snap with the bottle in the reheating furnace, termed the yglory hole,” in order to reheat the neck of the bottle and thus make it ready for the finisher. The latter usually sits on a bench near the “ glory hole,” so that he may easily reach the snap and place it back in the fire when the bottle is finished. The work of the finisher consists of shaping the lip on the neck of the bottle, which he does very skillfully with a special wooden tool usually improvised by himself. Next the snapping-up boy releases the finished bottle from the snap and places it on a stand for the carry-in boy, who picks up two or more bottles with a special iron fork and places them in the leer to be annealed. While the normal shop is thus made up of seven workers, there are variations, in which the number of skilled workers as a rule remains the same while the number of helpers varies, depending upon the kind and size of bottles made. Quite often the eleaning-up boy is dispensed with. When an automatic mold is used which, operated by means of a treadle at the blower’s foot, shuts and opens up by itself, the mold boy, too, is eliminated and the snapping-up boy adds to his duties the work of a take-out boy. Again, sometimes only one or two carry-in boys are used for as many as 10 shops or more. In such cases the snapping-up boys place the finished bottle in a large pan kept in a small iron oven termed the “ peanut-roaster.” The carry-in boy takes a full pan of bottles to the leer at one time and is thus enabled to serve all his shops in rotation. The average daily productivity of the hand shop varies consider ably with the size of the bottle, the condition of the glass, the skill of the workers, and the weather. In the case of small ware, ranging in contents up to 3 or 4 ounces, 30 to 35 gross constitutes a fair output for a shop of seven men during an eight-hour shift. As the weight of the bottle increases the output becomes smaller and smaller, so that in the case of quart jars 15 to 16 gross represents a very good output for an eight-hour day. In the production of very large ware of a gallon and over, such as packer jugs, water bottles, carboys, etc., the total number of workers constituting a shop is considerably increased, although the number of skilled workers generally remains the same. Thus in the case of 5-gallon water bottles, which are still being made in large quantities by the hand process, a shop is made up of 13 workers, namely, 3 skilled blowers, 2 gatherers (who are as a rule apprentices to the blowers and are paid at a rate higher than the other helpers), 1 mold boy, 1 cleaning-off boy, 3 snapping-up boys, and 3 carry-in boys. The daily production of 5-gallon bottles by such a shop ranges from 250 to 350 bottles, depending on the skill of the blowers, the condi tion of the molten glass in the tank, and the weather. 32 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY BLOWING BOTTLES BY MACHINE The successful introduction of the Owens automatic machine in 1904 was the first and most important revolutionary change in the production of bottles. The machine was automatic from the very start. It at once displaced the three skilled blowers and two of their helpers, the knocking-off boy, and the snapping-up boy. The mold boy (who became a take-out boy) and the carry-in boys also soon gave way to the automatic conveyors. One semiskilled machine operator, whose duty it is to supervise the machine and see that everything runs smoothly, has now taken the place of the seven workers in the hand shop. In addition to the very large saving of human labor accomplished by the machine its output was so much larger than that of a hand shop and the cost of production so much less that the manufacturing of bottles by hand was doomed. The manufacturers were at once confronted with the dilemma of either acquiring the new machine or seeking such changes in the old process of manufacturing as would lessen their disadvantages in competition with the automatic machine. But not all the bottle manufacturers could install the automatic machine, as the owners of the patent refused to sell the machine on the open market. Instead they granted licenses to a number of manufacturers 'to use their machines on a royalty basis, and part of the agreement was that the licensees specialize in particular lines of ware, the owner of the machine guaranteeing that no other manufacturer would be granted the right to produce this same kind of ware on the automatic. What such a policy really meant was a monopoly not only in the owner ship of the machine but also in the kinds of ware produced on the automatic. This policy, together with the great expense involved in the installation of an Owens machine, is chiefly responsible for the comparatively slow and very gradual spread of this machine in the industry. At the same time this policy was the chief stimulus to the introduction of semiautomatic machines, which soon devel oped into an automatic process entirely different from the Owens, but almost as successful. SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINERY Shortly after the introduction and installation of the first Owens machine in 1904 there appeared on the market a hand machine which became known as the United, or English, or “ Johnny Bull” machine. This machine was built on the pattern of the Ashley, a hand machine invented in England as early as 1887. This was soon followed by another semiautomatic, more widely used and generally known as the “ Jersey Devil” machine. In its crudest form the machine was made up of two round tables, each equipped with spaces for from two to four molds. The first table, the one nearest the furnace, was equipped with blank molds and was surmounted by a plunger operated by compressed air. The second table was equipped with an equal number of form molds and was surmounted by the blowing valve, also operated by compressed air. The first two hand operations eliminated by the introduction of the semiautomatic machine were the blowing and the finishing of the bottle. It is interesting to note here that the process of making the neck of the bottle, which is usually the last operation in hand blow CHAPTER I .— BOTTLES AND JARS 33 ing, became the first operation of the machine after the glass was fed to it by the gatherer. This is also true of the Owens automatic machine. The three skilled workers were retained, but the demands on their skill were considerably reduced. The gatherer no longer F ig . 3 — JERSEY DEVIL OR TWO-MAN SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE collected the glass on the end of a pipe, but used a plain solid iron rod, called a “ punty.” He was no longer required to be exact as to the quantity of glass he gathered each time. The quantity of glass needed was now determined by the presser, who sheared it off the 34 PBODTJCTIVITY OF IiABOR IN TH E GLASS INDUSTRY punty as the gatherer held it over the opening of the blank mold, thus allowing the bit of glass to drop into the mold of its own weight. The presser would then turn the table one notch by operating his foot treadle and cause the plunger to penetrate the molten mass of glass in the mold, shaping the lip of the bottle and at the same time introducing the initial small cavity into the solid glass. After the next turn of the table the partly formed bottle would be transferred from the blank mold into a form mold by the man operating the sec ond table. He would turn his table one notch and thus bring the mold under the blowing valve. The compressed air, released by the operator of the second table, would blow into the already formed cavity of the “ parison” or partly formed bottle and distend it into the exact shape of the pattern in the mold. The bottle was then complete. At the next turn of the table a take-out boy opened the mold, and after examining and frequently weighing the bottle, he placed it either on a little stand for the carry-in boys to take to the leer, or into a paddle in the “ peanut roaster,” where the bottles were collected and heated until enough of them were accumulated to be taken to the leer. The total number of workers needed on a three-man semiautomatic machine was five, three skilled blowers and two helpers—a take-out and a carry-in boy. This represented a reduction of two helpers, as compared with the hand process. The principal difference, however, between the hand machine and hand blowing was not so much the reduction of the number of helpers needed as the elimination of the greater part of the skill required from the skilled blowers in the hand process. This was especially true in the case of the presser and the transfer man. It was riot, therefore, very long before the machine was so changed as to eliminate first one and then the other of these workers, completely dispensing with both or replacing them by one unskilled laborer. The machine thus became first a two-man and then a one-man machine in the sense that at first two skilled workers were needed for its operation, and finally only one skilled worker—a gatherer. The above technical changes were made either by the manu facturers of the machines or by the glass manufacturers, who them selves introduced improvements. Some of these improvements went so far as to change completely the old machine into a new machine; hence the various types and names of the semiautomatic machines used in the industry, such as the “ Johnny Bull,” “ Jersey Devil,” Teeple-Johnson, the South Millville machine, the Turner machine, etc. On the whole, however, these machines were very much alike and may be classified in one group, that of two-man machines. The average attendants on such a machine consisted of one gatherer and one presser (both skilled workers), one transfer boy, one take-out boy, and one carry-in boy. If a “ peanut roaster” was used one carry-in boy usually took care of two machines, making the total average attendants on one machine four and one-half workers. ONE-MAN MACHINE Through further improvements of the machine more and more labor was dispensed with. With the use of electric power the two tables of the machine were made to rotate automatically, synchroniz CHAPTER I .— BOTTLES AND JARS 35 ing with the other operations of the machine. At the same time a cutting-off device was added, which completely eliminated the presser and turned the two-man machine into a one-man machine. The transfer boy soon gave way to an automatic transfer and the take-out boy to an automatic take-out device, both operated in unison with other movements of the machine. The last change actually turned the semiautomatic into an automatic machine, at least so far as the blowing of the bottle was concerned. In this group belong the O’Neill machines, the Miller, and the Lynch (which was put on the market as the “ No-boy” machine). In all cases the difference between these machines and the Owens automatic was in the use of a gatherer to feed the glass to the machines. As in the case of the Owens, the carry-in boys were retained in some plants, while in other plants they were replaced by automatic conveyors to the leer. The usual attendants on a one-man machine would therefore consist of one gatherer2 and one or more carry-in boys, depending on the size of the bottles. To these old workers, survivors of the “ shop,” was added one machine operator, whose duty it was to watch the operation of the machine, regulate its speed, change the.molds, etc., and a machine foreman or “ upkeep ” man usually in charge of three or more machines in the plant. “ FEED AND FLOW” DEVICES Simultaneously with the other changes in the development of the semiautomatic machine attempts have been made to devise means by which the gatherer could be replaced and the machine fed auto matically, by a process different from the suction method patented by the Owens machine. As early as 1903 a device was invented which enabled the molten glass to flow in a continuous stream from the furnace into the mold, and this device is still being used in a number of plants for the manufacture of cheap pressed ware. Since then various experiments have been made in utilizing feeding devices in the manufacture of bottles and jars, and by 1917 this new method of getting the molten glass into the machine became a marked success. Rapid success in the application of these feeding devices may be shown by referring to the rapidly diminishing numbers of semi automatic machines in use without the feeder. Prof. George E. Barnett, in an article on “ Machinery and labor,” published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics for August, 1925, gives the number of semiautomatic machines used in the bottle and jar sections of the glass industry, 1916 to 1924, as follows: 1916_______________ ______________ 459 1917_______________ ______________ 428 1918_____ ___________________ _ 417 1919_______________ ; _____________ 417 1920_______________ ______________ 315 1921_______________ 1922_______________ 1923_______________ 1924_______________ ______________ 288 ______________ 164 ______________ 130 ______________ 72 In 1926, out of 25 bottle plants inspected only one plant was found using the semiautomatic to a large extent. In another plant the semiautomatic was found standing by the furnace but dismantled and ready to be displaced by an automatic. In still another plant a semiautomatic machine had recently been consigned to the scrap heap. 2 Later on three gatherers were used for two machines, as it became impossible for one man alone to keep up with the speed of the machines. 36 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY AUTOMATIC MACHINERY The difference between the two automatics, the Owens and the “ feeder,” lies chiefly in the method of delivering the molten glass to the machine. The Owens machine uses the suction method, whereby the arms of the machine pass over the open part of a revolving pot and come in contact with the glass for a period long enough to suck the necessary quantity of glass into the blank mold located at the end of the arm. This process is the principal characteristic of the Owens machine and is peculiar to this machine. In the feeder process the glass, regulated by a special device, is delivered automatically into the blank molds of the machine. The feeding thus regulated completely synchronizes with the other move ments of the machine. The same device also regulates the size of the “ gob” ; that is, the quantity of glass necessary for the production of the given size of bottle. The feeding devices are entirely independ ent of the machines, and may therefore be used with any standard bottle-making machine on the market. OWENS MACHINE The Owens machine consists of a number of working units, each one complete in itself, mounted on a circular and continuously rotat ing framework. Each unit completes a bottle during each revolu tion. Each unit or arm carries a vertical mold called a “ blank mold” placed directly under and accurately fitted to another mold called a “ neck mold.” These two molds are bored to.hold the exact amount of glass required to make the desired bottle. The neck mold is exactly the shape of the neck of the bottle, while the blank mold is nearly cylindrical in shape and is designed to hold all the glass which makes up the part of the bottle below the neck. As the machine rotates each unit carries its neck mold and the attached blank mold over a revolving pot of molten glass. The revolving pot is built into a combustion chamber adjacent to the refining tank, with which it is connected by means of a trough, the glass constantly flowing from the tank into the revolving pot. Although part of the glass in the revolving pot is exposed, the rota tion of the pot and the special heating devices make it possible to keep the temperature of the glass in the revolving pot at the precise degree needed for the weight and the size of the bottle. As the arms of the machine pass over the revolving pot they are lowered for an instant, so that the bottom of the blank mold is slightly immersed in the molten glass. At this moment a vacuum valve is opened and all air is exhausted from the bored opening in the neck and blank molds, resulting in immediately filling the molds with hot glass— the lower part cylindrical and solid, the upper part a perfect neck of a bottle. As the molds rise from contact with the surface of the molten glass in the revolving pot, a chisel-shaped knife sweeps across under the bottom of the blank mold and cuts off the string of glass that clings to the mold. Next, air is admitted into the top of the neck mold for the purpose of solidifying somewhat the imprisoned glass and enlarging the opening in the top of the neck of the partly formed bottle. Soon the two halves of the blank mold open and the glass “ parison” (or partly formed bottle), now partly solidified, is seen hanging sus pended by the neck portion inclosed in the neck mold. CHAPTER I .---- BOTTLES AND JARS 37 From below now arises the finishing mold. It remains wide open until it has taken its proper position, when it closes around the suspended parison. Another valve opens and compressed air is 5 Eh o i—i P O > w « C G H E h O ft Eh P A O ft w H w g 3 u <1 o <1 § o E h P £ £ O I forced through the opening in the neck mold and distends the blank glass until it fills completely the pattern in the finishing mold. The bottle is then completed, and as the mold opeijs it falls out either 38 PR0DTTCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY* on a rotating table near by, if no conveyor is used, or into the receptacle of the Owens conveyor. The bottle as it leaves the machine is still red hot in parts, but is sufficiently solidified to keep its shape while being carried or con veyed to the leer to be annealed. The Owens machines were first made with but six arms; that is, six complete sets of molds each. Later 10 arms were used, and still later 15 arms. Originally each arm carried only one complete set of molds, but now some of the 10-arm machines carry two sets of molds; and each mold contained a cavity for but one bottle, while now the molds are made with two cavities each for large ware (4 to 13 ounces) and three cavities each for small ware (less than 4 ounces). One of these machines blows 6 bottles at one time and thus throws out 60 bottles with each revolution. At the rate of four revolutions per minute, this machine throws out 240 bottles per minute, or almost as many bottles as a hand shop of 7 workmen could make in 20 minutes. The attendants on the Owens machines vary with the plant— whether a conveyor or carry-in boys are used— and with the number of arms on the machine. The average Owens machine requires one operator, whose duty it is to watch the operations of the machine and to see that everything runs smoothly. Either a machinist or a foreman is needed to adjust the speed of the machine, to change molds, and otherwise to take care of the machine; if a machinist, he usually takes care of at least two machines. This is the total direct labor needed in attending an Owens machine. In addition one or more carry-in boys are needed if no conveyor is used. CONVEYORS By means of a conveyor the last member of the hand shop, the carry-in boy, is eliminated from the field of bottle making. The process thus becomes truly automatic in the sense that from the tank through the machine and through the leer no worker needs to handle the bottle. There are numerous devices used in tjie industry to transfer the red-hot bottles from the machine to the leer. In this study, however, only two kinds need be mentioned— the Owens conveyor, used in connection with the Owens machine and the Owens leers only, and the regular belt conveyor, used in one form or another for all other machines. The Owens conveyor consists of a series of narrow steel pans, with suspended cups placed at regular intervals. The pans constantly move over an elevated path fitted with iron rails, and are so arranged that there is a continuous circuit from the machine through the leer and back again to the machine over a similar path constructed out side the leer. The machine, the conveyor, and the leer are exactly timed and run as a unit. As each pan passes longitudinally under the receptacle into which the bottles are thrown from the machine, each one of the cups of the >an is filled by a bottle. At the same time the pan is entering the eer through a side opening and by the time the last cup of the pan is filled the pan will have completely entered the leer and have joined the other pans to make up the floor of the leer. Propelled by a special device, properly timed, it now begins its journey through the leer. ! CHAPTER I .— BOTTLES AND JARS 39 The latter has no floor other than the one made by the pans, and the bottles pass through it completely suspended in mid-air, thus being thoroughly annealed from all sides. At the cold end of the leer the bottles are taken out of the cups by the selectors, and each pan, when emptied, is sent along the external path on its journey back to the machine. FEEDERS Since 1917 a large number of various kinds of feeders have been introduced in the industry. The differences among the various patents are very minute and are of a technical nature only. For the purpose of this study, therefore, it will be necessary to distinguish but two kinds of feeders: (1) The multiple feeder, used for more than one machine; and (2) the single feeder, used for only one machine. Multiple feeder.—The multiple feeder, or the P. N. (paddle needle), as it is known in the industry, may be described as follows: The device consists of a small chamber built in front of the furnace, usually called the forehearth or the boot. The extension is made out of clay blocks and is connected with the tank by a trough or a channel about 2 feet wide through which the glass flows from the refining chamber of the tank into the forehearth. The portion of the forehearth above the surface of the glass forms two combustion chambers, one next to the furnace and the other adjoining the nose of the chamber, where the glass passes down through the orifice to the machine. Oil or gas burners in these two chambers can be so regu lated as to supply the glass to the machine in the particular tempera ture required for any special kind of bottle, irrespective of fluctuations in the temperature of the tank proper. In the very nose of the forehearth there is a small bowl with a round opening at the bottom. Into this opening is fitted a clay ring of such size as to give the glass flowing through it the diameter which will allow it to fit well into the blank mold of the machine. A clay paddle working in the channel with a motion exactly the reverse to that of a canoe paddle—down, forward, up, and back—keeps the bowl supplied with glass. By gravity it runs down through the orifice ring, assisted by the downward thrust of a clay plunger, which works directly over the orifice. Each time the plunger pulls up sharply it holds the glass sufficiently long to allow the shears which close in from each side below the ring to make a clean cut. The stream of glass thus cut off is known as the “ gob” and the process is often referred to as the “ gob” feeder. The operations of the paddle, the plunger, and the shears are so timed as to make the “ gob ” of precisely the length needed for the bottle desired. The “ gob” then slides down an iron trough on a fine film of water into the mold of the machine. When two or three or four machines are fed from one feeder two or three or four troughs are used. These move forward and backward and come alternately under the orifice of the feeder to receive the “ gob.” The movement of the troughs are synchronized with the operations of the machines, so that the upper end of the trough comes under the orifice of the feeder at the precise moment when the lower end gets in contact with a blank mold ready to receive the “ gob.” When one machine is not working the trough for that ma chine is stopped. Adjustments can then be made to feed the remain 40 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY ing machines. When a machine is stopped temporarily only the feeder keeps on working at the previous rate, dropping the unused “ g ob ” down to the floor, where a receptacle is usually placed to receive the superfluous glass which is to be returned to the tank as cullet. Fig. 5 —HARTFORD-EMPIRE PADDLE NEEDLE FEEDER (FRONT) Single feeder.— The single feeder does not require a paddle, as the orifice is a few inches below the surface of the glass which flows out by force of gravity through a somewhat different type of bowl or spout. A hollow clay tube somewhat larger than the orifice hangs above the orifice and the plunger operates inside this tube. The CHAPTER I .---- BOTTLES AND JARS 41 latter can be raised and lowered to regulate the supply of glass for the orifice. This adjustment, together with the plunger and the shears below the ring, enables the operator to control the size and the weight of the glass desired. The tube revolves continuously and thus assists in keeping the glass about the orifice at a uniform temperature. Although the multiple feeder implies a considerable saving in labor and equipment, there are a number of technical and economic Fig. 6 —HARTFORD-EMPIRE PADDLE NEEDLE FEEDER (BACK) reasons which make the use of the single feeder more advantageous. The result is that a number of plants which have been using the P. N. feeder for two or three machines are gradually going over to the single-feeder system. MACHINES USED WITH FEEDERS As already stated, the feeder is an entirely independent unit and can be used with any machine in the plant. Even the old “ Johnny PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY fcO F ig . 7.—O’NEILL AUTOMATIC BOTTLE-MAKING MACHINE CHAPTER I .— BOTTLES AND JARS 44 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY Bull” hand machines could be used with a feeder. Nevertheless, the expensive installation outlays and the possible maximum speed of the feeders resulted in improving and almost standardizing the machines used with the feeder. The latest models of the O’Neill machines, the Miller, the Lynch, and the Hartford-Empire, have been built to fit the speed of the feeders. Most of these machines now carry eight blank and eight blow molds and are capable of producing daily a definite quantity of bottles, depending entirely upon the size and weight of the bottle. There is usually only one operator on any Fig. 9.—HARTFORD-EMPIRE MILK BOTTLE DOUBLE MACHINE one of these machines, whose duty it is to see that the machine runs smoothly. The work of changing molds and the initial adjustment of the machine and the feeder to the particular kind of bottle desired, as well as the small repair work, is done either by a machine foreman or a machinist, who is as a rule in charge of more than one machine. As in the case of the Owens machine, a carry-in boy is used in a number of plants to take the bottles from the machine to the leers. In other plants, however, the belt conveyor is used for this purpose, in which case the bottles are transferred from the machine to the CHAPTER I .— BOTTLES AND JARS 45 conveyor either by an automatic device or with the help of a take-out boy. Some of the belts are provided with special cups, in which the bottles stand up while journeying to the leer. The conveyor enters the leer through a side opening and the bottles are pushed into the leer by means of a pushing device. The floor of the leer is made up of a series of pans moving on an endless chain. The floor moves just fast enough to make room for the incoming bottles, which fill up every pan at successive regular intervals. Thus, as in the case of the Owens machines, the feeder process of blowing bottles has become completely automatic from the tank until the bottle reaches the cold end of the leer. LABOR PRODUCTIVITY AND LABOR COST Before analyzing the statistics of labor productivity and blowing labor cost in the production of bottles the following points must be made clear: 1. The data representing output of a hand unit of three skilled workers and four helpers, which has been used as the basis for com paring the output of all other units, do not represent actual presentday production, for the simple reason that with the exception of a small quantity of prescription ware and the 5-gallon carboys none of the bottles included in this study are made nowadays by the hand process. The small quantity of prescription ware still made by hand is produced under conditions which do warrant its use as a fair representation of the hand process. The mere fact that, because of the very small orders usually given to hand plants, the workers of a “ shop” are compelled to change molds several times in the course of one day is sufficient to curtail seriously the average output of the shop. The figures used represent the concerted opinions of experienced bottle blowers, foremen, and employers of a number of bottle plants. In the case of prescription ware they are considerably higher than the actual figures of output secured in one plant. They are even somewhat larger than the corresponding figures of output given in the Eleventh Special Report of the Commissioner of Labor Sta tistics, published in 1904 (pp. 630, 631). The figures given are termed “ ideal,” because they really show what a “ shop” of three experi enced blowers and four helpers could produce when working on any one kind of bottles for a complete eight-hour day without changing molds and under conditions at least as favorable as those under which the machines are working to-day. In the case of the 5-gallon water bottle the actual output of a shop of 13 workers has been used as the basis of comparison with the machine output. 2. The 15 kinds of bottles covered in this investigation represent but a very small fraction of the thousands of varieties of bottles which are made. The principal factors, however, affecting the aver age output of any one unit of production are the weight and the contents of the bottles made. Since the 15 kinds of bottles studied cover a range of from half an ounce to 5 gallons in contents and from less than 1 ounce to 12 pounds in weight, they may therefore be con sidered as a representative cross section of the bottle branch of the glass industry. 40780°—27------ £ 46 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY MAN-HOUR OUTPUT The most outstanding factor in the recent development of bottle blowing is the tremendous increase in man-hour output effected by the automatic machines. Table 16 shows the man-hour output on 15 kinds of bottles made by hand and by the various semiautomatic and automatic machines. The bottles shown are: One-half ounce and 2-ounce prescription ovals; 4 and 8 ounce prescription ovals; three-fourths and 2 ounce extract panels; 8 and 16 ounce whisky dandies; 8-ounce sodas and 16-ounce beers; pint and quart milk bottles; one-half gallon and 1gallon packer jugs; and 5-gallon water carboys. The table gives the man-hour output in terms of gross of bottles actually produced and also in terms of index numbers based on the man-hour output by the hand process. T able 16.— Average output per man-hour of specified kinds of bottles made by hand and by machine Prescription ovals ^-ounce Method of production and kind of machine Hand production: Ideal.......................................................................................... Actual.............. ........................................................................ Semiautomatic machine: 2-man machine......................................................................... 1-man machine_____________ _________ __. ____ _ 1-man machine and feeder................................................... ... Automatic machine: O’Neill single and feeder............ ............................................ O’Neill triple and P. N. feeder. .............................. Lynch and feeder...................................._............................... Owens A. N. double.............. ................... ............................. Owens A. N. double, with conveyor. ________ _ Owens A. V. single, with conveyor......................................... Owens A. V. double, with conveyor..................................... . Owens C. A. double triplex, with conveyor_______________ 2-ounce Index Index Quantity number Quantity number Gross 0.714 .498 2.582 5.463 8.870 15.238 9.959 20.022 25.120 100.0 69.7 361.6 763.7 1242.3 2134.2 1394.5 2804.2 3518.2 4-ounce Gross 0.643 .408 100.0 63.5 .850 1.043 1.824 132.2 162.2 283.7 2.476 385.1 4.799 7.970 746.3 1239.5 9.645 18.341 25.118 1500.1 2852.4 3906.4 8-ounce Index Quantity Index Quantity number number Hand production: ............................. .................................. Ideal Actual. ______________________________________________ Semiautomatic machine: 2-man machine_________________________________ _______ 1-man machine________________________________________ Automatic machine: O’Neill and feeder. _______________ ____ ___ ______ _____ Lynch and feeder..................................................................... Owens A. E __ _ ____ _ ________ _________ i O w a t i s A N sinorlA ___ Owens A N. double . . . . _______________________i Owens A. N. single, with conveyor __________________ Owens A. V. single, with conveyor.......................................Owens A. R. double___ _________________ _____ _________ Owens A. R. double, with conveyor...... .................. ........... Owens A. Q. single, with conveyor _____________________ Owens A. Q. double, with conveyor................................... . Owens A. V. double, with conveyor_____________________ Owens C. A. double duplex, with conveyor..................... ..... Owens C A double triplex, with conveyor. _ _______ _ . Gross 0.536 .285 100.0 53.2 Gross 0.446 .227 100.0 50.1 .797 148.7 .644 .714 144.4 160.1 2.464 3.782 459.7 705.6 1.796 3.290 2.178 3.024 402.7 737.7 488.3 678.0 6.254 7.135 9.908 1166.8 1331.2 1848.5 1087.9 2243.5 2019.3 2640.8 16.212 4.852 10.006 9.006 11.778 3024.7 12.117 2716.8 22.028 4109.8 CHAPTER I .— BOTTLES AND JARS 47 T a b l e 1 6 . — Average output per man-hour of specified kinds o f bottles made by hand and by machine— Continued Extract panels 6-dram 2-ounce Method of production and kind of machine Index Index Quantity number Quantity number Gross 0.571 Hand production........... .................................... .......... ............ . Semiautomatic machine: . Jersev Dftvil __ _ ___ _ O’Neill with feeder___ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ ! Automatic machine: O’Neill single and feeder. ............... ........................... .......... O’Neill triple and feeder............................. ........................... Owens A. N. single____________________________________ Owens A. N. double__ ________ _____________ ________. . . Owens A. N. double, with conveyor........ ................... ......... Owens A. R. single, with conveyor............... ........................ Owens A. R. double, with conveyor___. _________________ Owens A. V. single, with conveyor......................................... Owens A. V. double, with conveyor................................... . Owens C. A. double duplex, with conveyor. ........................ Owens 0, A, double triplex, with conveyor.......................... 100.0 6.222 10.679 6.783 10.480 8.817 16.430 1089.7 1870.2 1187.9 1835.4 1544.1 2877.4 16.292 2853.3 Gross 0.500 100.0 .711 1.500 142.2 300.0 2.854 2.872 3.452 4.402 570.8 574.4 690.4 880.4 5.779" 8.067 9.048 12.558 12.072 1155.8 1613.4 1809.6 2511.6 2414.4 Sodas and beers Method of production and kind of machine H-pint sodas 1-pint beers Index Quantity number Index Quantity number Hand production............................................................................ Semiautomatic machine: Jersey Devil. ........................................................................... Teeple-Johnson, with gatherer.............................................. O’Neill, with gatherer............. ............................................. : Lynch, with gatherer. ............................................................ Automatic machine: O’Neill and feeder................................................................... Hartford-Empire triple unit and P. N. feeder....................... Owens A. E. single, with conveyor........................... ............ Owens A. R. single, with conveyor..... .......................... ........ Owens A. Q. single, with conveyor........................................ Gross 0.393 100.0 .505 .778 1.141 1. 351 128.5 198.0 290.3 343.8 2.814 1.815 4.842 6.453 6.188 716.0 461.8 1232.0 1642.0 1574.5 Gross 0.393 100.0 .464 .776 118.1 197.5 1.675 4.931 7.342 7.661 426.2 1254.7 1868.2 1949.3 Whisky dandies K-pint Method of production and kind of machine Hand production............................................................................ Semiautomatic machine: Jersey Devil............................. ............................................... Teeple-Johnson, with gatherer.... ............................ ............ O’Neill, with gatherer_________________ ______ __________ Lynch, with gatherer_______________________ __________ O’Neill, with feeder................................................................ Automatic machine: O’Neill and feeder................................................................... Lynch and feeder______________________________________ Owens A. E. single.................................................................. Owens A. R. single............................................. ................... 1-pint Index Index Quantity number Quantity number Gross 0.446 100.0 .658 147.5 1.428 320.2 2.725 3.444 611.0 772.2 2.321 520.4 Gross 0.357 100.0 .508 .774 .904 1.549 142.3 216.8 253.2 433.9 2.368 2.649 1.819 1.940 663.3 742.1 509.5 54a 4 48 PRODUCTIVITY OP LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY T a b l e 16 . — Average output per man-hour of specified kinds o f bottles made by hand and by machine— Continued Milk bottles 1-pint Method of production and kind of machine Hand production _______________________________ _____ Semiautomatic machine: Teeple-Johnson with gatherer....... .............................. ......... Miller with gatherers....................... ................................ ...... Automatic machine: Miller with single feeder and with conveyor......................... Hartford-Empire, with double feeder____________________ Hartford-Empire, with double feeder and with conveyor. Owens A. E _____________ __________ _____ ___________ Owens A. R ...... ................................................. .................... 1-quart Index Index Quantity number Quantity number Gross 0.357 100.0 Gross 0.286 100.0 .924 .976 258.8 273.4 .775 .856 270.9 299.3 1.876 1.487 5.265 1.156 1.139 525.5 416.5 1474.8 323.8 319.0 1.457 1.242 4.145 1.064 .961 509.4 434.3 1449.3 372.0 336.0 Packer jugs ^-gallon 1-gallon Method of production and kind of machine Index Quantity Index Quantity number number Hand production...... ..................................................................... Semiautomatic machine: Jersey Devil........................................ Automatic machine: O’ Neill and feeder_____________________________________ Owens A. L. single_____________________________________ Owens A. R. single____________________________________ Owens A. Q. single____________i________________________ Gross 0.179 .263 100.0 146.9 Gross 0.143 .202 100.0 141.3 1.192 .606 .614 1.477 665.9 338.5 343.0 825.1 .620 433.6 1.165 814.7 5-gallon water carboys Method of production Hand production __________________________ _____________ ____________ _____ Automatic machine___________________________________________________________ Index Quantity number Gross 0.026 .260 100.0 1000.0 The following analysis of man-hour output of the 2-ounce pre scription ovals, the 8-ounce soda, and the quart milk bottle is given to illustrate the contents of Table 16. In the case of the 2-ounce pre scription ovals the “ ideal” output of a hand shop is 0.643 gross per man-hour. The actual output of the single plant for which data could be secured is much less, namely, 0.408 gross per man-hour, for reasons previously explained (see p. 45). On the semiautomatic machine the output ranges from a minimum of 0.850 gross per manhour on the “ Jersey Devil,” or two-man machine, to a maximum of 1.824 gross per man-hour on a semiautomatic O’Neill machine operated with the help of a feeder. On the automatic machines the output of 2-ounce prescription ovals varies from 2.476 gross per man-hour on an automatic machine operated with a single feeder to 25.118 gross per man-hour on the Owens 10-arm double triplex CHAPTER I .— BOTTLES AND JABS 49 machine (each arm has 2 blow heads and each head has 3 cavities, thus blowing 6 bottles per arm or 60 bottles per revolution). In the case of the half-pint soda bottle the average output of a hand shop is 0.393 gross per man-hour. By the semiautomatic process the average output varies from 0.505 gross per man-hour on the Jersey Devil machine to 1.351 gross per man-hour on the Lynch machine operated with the help of gatherers. The automatic machine aver age output of the half-pint sodas varies from 1.815 to 6.453 gross per man-hour. In the case of the quart milk bottle the average output of an ideal hand shop is 0.286 gross per man-hour. On the semiautomatic machine the output varies from 0.775 to 0.856 gross per man-hour, while on the automatic machines it varies from 0.961 gross per man-hour on an Owens 10-arm single machine to 4.145 gross per man-hour on the Hartford-Empire milk-bottle machine operated with the help of a Hartford-Empire P. N. double feeder. Expressed in terms of index numbers, taking the man-hour output of the ideal hand shop as the base, or 100, the semiautomatic process shows indexes varying from 132.2 to 283.7 for the 2-ounce prescrip tion oval, from 128.5 to 343.8 for the half-pint soda, and from 270.9 to 299.3 for the quart milk bottle. On the same basis, the automatic process shows indexes varying from 385.1 to 3,906.4 for the 2-ounce prescription oval, from 461.8 to 1,642 for the half-pint soda, and from 336 to 1,449.3 for the quart milk bottle. Table 17 shows the percentage increases in man-hour output on 15 kinds of bottles made by the most efficient semiautomatic and auto matic machines as compared with the hand process. T a b l e 17.— Per cent of increase in man-hour output on specified kinds of bottles made by the most efficient semiautomatic and automatic machines as compared with hand production Kind of bottles Auto Semi automatic matic machines machines Prescription ovals: §-ounce. . _ w ............... . 2-ounce__ ______________ ' 4-ounce...... ...................... ! 8-ounce. . . .. __ Extract panels: 6-dram__________ ____ 2-ounce. _ . 1 Sodas and beers: fcpint beers— ................. 183.7 48.7 60.1 3,418.2 3,806.4 4,009 8 2,616.8 200.0 2,777.4 2,411.6 243.8 97.5 1,542.0 1,849.3 Kind of bottles Whisky dandies: %-pint—....................... .. 1-pint................................. Milk bottles: l-pint................................ 1-quart......... ..................... Packer jugs: ^-gallon............ ..... 1-gallon__________ ______ Water carboys: 5-gallon.......... Auto Semi automatic matic machines machines 220.2 333.9 672.2 642.1 173.4 199.3 1,374 8 1,349.3 46.9 41.3 725.1 714.7 900.0 The maximum increase in man-hour output took place in prescrip tion ware—3,806.4 per cent in the 2-ounce oval and 4,009.8 per cent in the 4-ounce oval. These are the most commonly used stock bottles and show clearly the effects of mass production of standard ized commodities on productivity in the industry. Translated in terms of labor, the percentage of increase of manhour output on the machine really signifies the percentage of labor displaced by the machine. The number of workers displaced by the most up-to-date automatic machine ranges from a minimum of 6.4 in the case of the pint whisky dandy to a maximum of 40 in the case of the 4-ounce prescription oval. In the latter case it would require 50 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY 41 workers to produce by the hand process as many bottles as the machine operated by a single worker could produce in an equal period of time. The great variations in the man-hour output by the automatic process are due chiefly to the fact that different machines are used for the various bottles shown and that not all machines are capable of producing the satae quantity of bottles per hour. Another impor tant factor causing considerable variation in man-hour output is the presence or absence of an automatic conveyer between the machine and the leer to take the place of the carry-in boys. In the machines covered in Table 17 conveyors were used for all bottles except the whisky dandies, the packer jugs, and the 5-gallon water carboys, and it is in these bottles that the increase in man-hour output on the automatic machine is the lowest. The effects of the automatic conveyor on man-hour output is further illustrated by Table 18 presenting a comparison of man-hour output of the same kind of bottle made on the same machine, but in one case with carry-in boys and in the other with a conveyor.3 T a b le 1 8 .— M an-hou r output o f machines without and with autom atic conveyors Machine A Kind of bottle With 2Yz carry-in boys Machine B With conveyor With 6 carry-in boys With conveyor Index Quantity Index Quantity Index Quantity Index Quantity number number number number Gross bou n ce prescription ovals___ 8.870 8-ounce prescription ovals___ 4 852 6-dram extract panels............ 6.222 2-ounce extract panels........... • 4.402 l-pint milk bottles _ ___ i 1-quart milk bottles________ j_________ 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Gross 15.238 10.006 10.679 8.067 171.8 207.3 171.6 183.3 Gross Gross 1.487 1.242 100.0 100.0 5.265 4.145 354.1 341.5 The increase in man-hour output caused by the automatic con veyor ranges from 71.6 to 107.3 per cent when replacing two and onethird carry-in boys and from 241.5 to 254.1 per cent when replacing six carry-in boys. It is self-evident that the more carry-in boys a conveyor replaces the higher will be the increase in man-hour output, and this is fully shown by the above figures. BLOWING LABOR COST The tremendous decrease in blowing labor cost effected by the automatic machines is no less striking than the increase in man-hour output caused by the same machine. Table 19 shows a comparison of labor cost of blowing the 15 kinds of bottles by the hand process and by semiautomatic and automatic machinery. The table gives the actual labor cost expressed in dollars per gross, and also in terms of index numbers, based on the blowing labor cost of the hand process. 3 Unfortunately, not in same plant, and therefore affected by such additional factors as variation in management and number of workers on the machine. CHAPTEK I .— BOTTLES AND JARS T a b le . 19 — A verage 51 blowing labor cost per gross o f specified kinds o f bottles made by hand and by machine Prescription ovals %-ounce Method of production and kind of machine Amount 2-ounce Index number Amount 100.0 90.53 $1,006 .974 Hand production: Ideal...................................................................... ....... $0,940 Actual...,________ ______ ____, .851 Semiautomatic machine: 2-man machine.......... ... . ....... .............. 1-man machine________ _ O’Neill, with feeder............................ . . . . . . Automatic machine: i_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ O’Neill and single feeder O’Neill and triple feed nr . 176 Lynch and single feeder....................................................... .090 .058 Owens A. N. double............................................................... Owens A. N. double, with conveyor___________________ .050 Owens A. V. single, with conveyor..-................................... . .077 Owens A. V. double, with conveyor____________________ _ .038 Owens 0 . A. double triplex,with conveyor............................ .028 100.0 96.82 86.9 58.0 30.9 .874 .583 .311 18.7 9.5 6.2 5.3 8.1 4.1 2.9 4-ounce Hand production: Ideal.......................................................................................... Actual____________________________________ _______ ____ Semiautomatic machine: 2-man machine............ ...... ................... ................................. 1-man machine............................................................. .......... Automatic machine: 0 ’Neill and feeder_______________ ____ ____________ ____ Lynch and feeder..................................................................... Owens A. E. machine......................... .................................. Owens A. N. single__ _____________ ___________ ________ Owens A. N. single, with conveyor........... ......................... . Owens A. N. double___________________________________ Owens A. V. single, with conveyor______________________ Owens A. R. double___________________________________ Owens A. R. double, with conveyor_____________________ Owens A. Q. single, with conveyor______________________ Owens A. Q. double, with conveyor_____________________ Owens A. V. double, with conveyor_____________________ Owens C. A. double duplex, with conveyor ___________ Owens C. A. double triplex, with conveyor______________ Index number .195 19.4 .102 .064 10.1 6.4 .079 .042 .028 7.8 4.1 2.7 8-ounce Amount Index number Amount $1.177 1.212 100.0 103.0 $1.472 1.528 100.0 103.8 .720 61.2 1.052 .774 71.5 52.6 .196 .129 16.7 11.0 . 107 .082 .077 9.1 7.0 6.5 .269 .149 .218 .169 18.3 10.1 14.8 11.5 .047 . 105 .075 .085 .065 7.1 5.0 5.8 4.4 4.0 .032 2.7 .057 3.9 Index number Extract panels 6-dram Method of production and kind of machine Hand production............................... .............. ............................. Semiautomatic machine: Jersey Devil________________________ _______ _______ ___ O’Neill, with feeder._________________ ____ _____ ________ Automatic machine: O’Neill single and feeder____ ; ____ _____________________ O’Neil triple and feeder________________________________ Owens A. N. Single ____________________________________ Owens A. N. double..... .................................................. ........ Owens A. N. double, with conveyor___________________ _ Owens A. R. single, with conveyor................... .................. Owens A. R. double, with conveyor.......... .................... ..... Owens A. V. single, with conveyor______________________ Owens A. V. double, with conveyor___________ __________ Owens C. A. double duplex, with conveyor _________ Owens O. A. double triplex, with conveyor _______ 2-ounce Amount Index number Amount $1.170 100.0 $1.377 100.0 1.027 .384 74.6 27.9 .167 .155 .135 .115 12.1 11.3 9.8 8.4 .135 .096 .084 .061 .057 9.8 7.0 6.1 4.4 4.2 .082 .071 .108 .074 .086 .046 7.0 6.1 9.2 6.3 7.4 3.9 .043 3.7 Index number 52 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY T a b l e 1 9 . — Average blowing labor coat per grow of specified kinds of bottles made by hand and by machine— Continued Sodas and beers H-pint sodas Method of production and kind of machine Hand production................ .......................................................... Semiautomatic machine: Two-man machine......... ....................................................... Teeple-Johnson, with gatherer............................................... O’Neill, with gatherer......................................................... Lynch, with gatherer............................................................. Automatic machine: O’Neill and single feeder........................................................ Hartford-Empire and triple feeder......................................... Owens A. E. single, with convevor....................................... Owens A. R. single, with convevor........ ..................... ........ Owens A. Q. single, with conveyor........................................ 1-pint beers Index number A mount Index number Amount $1.622 100.0 $1. 622 100.0 1.299 .888 .841 .607 80.1 54.7 51.8 37.4 1.354 .889 83.5 54.8 .229 .272 .144 .108 .123 14.1 16.8 8.9 6.7 7.6 .294 .141 .095 .102 18.1 8.7 5.9 6.3 Whisky dandies J^-pint Method of production and kind of machine Hand production.............. .................... .................................... Semiautomatic machine: Jersey Devil........................................................................... Teeple-Johnson_______ ___________ _______ ________ _____ O’Neill, with gatherer.......................... ................................. Lynch, with gatherer................ ................. ............................ O’Neill, with feeder................................................................. Automatic machine: O’ Neill and feeder........... ............ .......................................... Lynch and feeder............ ............ .......................................... Owens A. E. single.............................................. .................. Owens A. R. single............................. ......................... ......... 1-pint Amount Index number Amount $1.382 100.0 $1,790 100.0 1.042 75.5 .403 29.2 1.295 .860 .717 .552 72.3 48.0 40.1 30.8 .231 .142 16.8 10.3 .194 14.0 .266 .185 .278 .252 14.9 10.3 15.5 14.1 Index number Milk bottles 1-pint, 1-quart Method of production and kind of machine Hand production............................................................................ Semiautomatic machine: Teeple-Johnson, with gatherer............................................... Miller, with gatherers.............................................................. Automatic machine: Miller, with single feeder and with conveyor....................... Hartford-Empire, with double feeder.................................... Hartford-Empire, double feeder, with conveyor__________ Owens A. E. single. ............................................................... Owens A. R. single. ............................................................... Index number Amount Index number Amount $2,390 100.0 $2.980 100.0 .796 .647 33.3 27.0 1.096 .907 36.8 30.4 .269 .354 .120 .382 .455 11.3 14.8 5.0 16.0 19.0 .346 .424 .152 .415 .539 11.7 14.2 5.1 13.9 18.1 53 CHAPTER I .---- BOTTLES AND JARS T a b le 19.— Average blowing labor cost per grow of specified kinds of bottles made by hand and by machine— Continued Packer jugs H-gallon Method of production and kind of machine Hand production._______ ______________ ______________ _____ Semiautomatic machine: Jersey Devil____________ _________ Automatic machine: O’Neill and feeder. . Owens A. L. single.................. .............. ............................... Owens A. R. single_____________________________ ___ Owens A. Q. single______ ______________ _______________ 1-gallon Amount Index number Amount $3.710 2.018 100.0 54.4 $5,150 2.784 100.0 54.0 . 501 .816 .805 .340 22.1 21.6 9.2 .769 14.6 .431 8.3 Index number 5-gallon water carboys Method of production Amount Hand production______________________ ______________________________________ Automatic machine___________________________________________________________ $25.308 1.880 Index number 100.0 7.43 An analysis of the blowing labor cost of the 2-ounce prescription oval, the half-pint soda, and the quart milk bottle is given as an illustration of the contents of Table 19. The “ ideal” labor cost of blowing by hand one gross of 2-ounce prescription ovals is $1,006; the actual labor cost in the one plant where prescription ware is still being made by hand is 97.4 cents per gross. On the semiautomatic machines the blowing labor cost of the 2-ounce prescription ovals varies from a minimum of 31.1 cents to a maximum of 87.4 cents per gross, while on the automatic machines it varies from a minimum of 2.8 cents to a maximum of 19.5 cents per gross. The blowing labor cost of making a gross of half-pint soda bottles by hand is $1,622. On the semiautomatic machines the cost varies from 60.7 cents to $1,299 per gross, while on the automatic machines it ranges from 10.8 to 27.2 cents per gross. The blowing labor cost of making quart milk bottles by the hand process is $2,980 per gross. By the semiautomatic process the blow ing labor cost varies from 90.7 cents to $1,096 per gross, while by the automatic process it ranges from 15.2 to 53.9 cents per gross. Expressed in terms of index numbers, taking the blowing labor cost of the hand process as the base, or 100, the semiautomatic process shows the following indexes: 30.9 to 86.9 for 2-ounce pre scription ovals; 37.4 to 80.1 for half-pint soda bottles; and 30.4 to 36.8 for quart milk bottles. On the same base, the automatic ma chines show the following minimum and maximum indexes: 2.7 and 19.4 for 2-ounce prescription ovals; 6.7 and 16.8 for hall-pint sodas; and 5.1 and 18.1 for quart milk bottles. Table 20 shows the per cent of decrease in the labor cost of the 15 bottles made by the most efficient semiautomatic and automatic machines as compared with the cost of hand production. 54 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN TH E GLASS INDUSTRY T a b l e 2 0 .— P er cent o f decrease i n labor cost o f m aking specified kinds o f bottles on the most efficient sem iautom atic and autom atic m achines as com pared with hand production Kind of bottles Prescription ovals: J/2-ounce _______________ 2-ounce_ _ _ ____________ 4-ounce ............ .............. . _____________ 8-ounce. Extract panels: 6-dram........ .............. ........ 2-ounce_________________ Sodas and beers: 34-pint sodas____________ 1-pint beers_____________ Semi Auto automatic matic machines machines 69.1 38.8 47.4 97.1 97.3 97.3 96.1 72.1 96.3 95.8 62.6 45.2 93.3 94.1 Semi Auto automatic matic machines machines Band of bottles Whisky dandies: 3^-pint_________________ 1-pint_______ ____ ______ Milk bottles: 1-pint................................. 1-quart............................... Packer jugs: ^gallon............................. 1-gallon_________________ Water carboys: 5-gallon_____ 70.8 69.2 89.7 89.7 73.0 69.6 95.0 94.9 45.6 46.0 90.8 91.7 92.57 For every dollar spent on blowing bottles by hand the maximum cost of bottles blown by the most efficient automatic machine was 10.3 cents (for pint whisky dandies and the minimum 2.7 cents (for 4-ounce prescription ovals). The saving in labor cost effected by the automatic-machine process over the hand process thus ranges from 89.7 to 97.3 cents on every dollar. As in the case of the man-hour output, the maximum amount of saving was accomplished in prescription bottles, a standardized commodity subject to mass production. The smallest amount of saving was registered in whisky flasks, which were made without the help of a conveyor. The effects of an automatic conveyor on the blowing labor cost of bottles may best be illustrated by Table 21, presenting the cost of the same kind of bottles made on similar machines, but in one case with the help of carry-in boys and in the other with the help of an automatic conveyor.4 T a b l e 2 1 . — Blow ing labor cost o f bottles made on same m achine with and without an autom atic conveyor Machine A Kind of bottle With 2M carryin boys Machine B With conveyor With 6 carryin boys With conveyor Index Index Index Index Amount num Amount num Amount num Amount num ber ber ber ber H-ounce prescription ovals_________ 8-ounce prescription ovals__________ 6-dram panel extracts______________ 2-ounce panel extracts______________ 1-pint milk- bottles ________________ 1-quart milt; bottles________________ $0,058 .105 .082 .115 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 $0,050 .075 .071 .096 86.2 71.4 86.6 83.5 $0,269 .346 100.0 100.0 $0,120 .152 44.6 43.9 The saving in blowing labor cost which may be attributed to the automatic conveyor thus varies from 13.4 to 28.6 per cent when replacing two and one-third carry-in boys and from 55.4 to 56.1 per cent when replacing six carry-in boys. 4 Unfortunately, not in the same plant, and therefore affected by such additional factors as variations in management, in the number of workers on the machine, and in their wages. CHAPTER I .— BOTTLES AND JARS 55 PRESENT SITUATION IN THE BOTTLE BRANCH OF THE INDUSTRY The successful introduction of the various kinds of feeders was almost entirely in the field of semiautomatic machinery. The hand process, relegated to a place where the utilization of machinery proved uneconomical, was but little affected by the new method. Nor was the Owens machine seriously affected by this process. As a result bottle making as at present organized can be divided into three parts: (a) Hand process, limited to very small orders and oddly shaped bottles; (6) the Owens automatic machines, used for mass pro duction of stock bottles and principally for very large orders; (c) the “ feed and flow” automatics, also used for mass production of stock bottles, but at the same time capable of producing compara tively smaller orders than the Owens, and therefore in position to compete with the Owens automatic. The statistics of man-hour output and blowing labor cost of bottles presented above make it absolutely clear why production of bottles by hand has become almost a thing of the past. The few plants in the country where bottles are being made by hand are making the kinds of bottles which can not be made economically on the machine. The principal advantage of the machine lies in mass production. The high cost of making the necessary number of molds and the time required in adjusting the machine and changing molds make it uneconomical for the large machines to work on orders less than 1,000 gross of bottles. Even for the smaller six-arm machines the order has to be at least 250 gross to make the production econom ical. Hence the smaller orders, especially those below 100 gross, necessarily go to the hand plants. Among bottles of this kind the principal place is occupied by perfumery and toilet ware, individu ally shaped bottles being used as a means of identifying and adver tising their contents. As a competitive factor in the bottle branch of the glass industry hand production is absolutely nonexistent. At best it fills the gaps left by the machine and must therefore be considered as supplemen tary to the machine rather than competitive. The semiautomatic machine is in about the same situation as hand blowing as regards competition with automatic machinery. It will be remembered that the principal difference between the semiautomatic and the automatic process is in the way in which the glass is delivered to the machine. In the semiautomatic process the molten glass is delivered to the machine by hand; in the auto matic process the glass is delivered automatically. At least five or six molds are needed for any semiautomatic machine, and once the order is large enough to justify the making of so many molds it is much more advantageous to produce the bottles on a smaller automatic machine than on the semiautomatic. There are, there fore, no opportunities left for the semiautomatic process similar to those in the case of hand production. STATISTICS OF PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST Table A contains data on the production of 15 representative bottles ranging from half-ounce prescription ovals to 5-gallon water carboys, made by hand and by the various semiautomatic and automatic machines. In securing these statistics an attempt was 56 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY made to choose one or two representative plants and then follow up the changes of output and labor cost of making bottles as the plants passed from hand production to the semiautomatic and finally to the automatic process. Such analysis would give to the study a historical perspective and at the same time eliminate the effects of management on production and cost, management sup posedly remaining more or less constant throughout the history of the plant. This plan, however, had to be abandoned for the fol lowing reasons: 1. No single bottle plant in the country is known to have gone through all stages of bottle making from the hand process to the most up-to-date machinery. Some plants have gone directly from the hand process to the Owens automatic machines or to the smaller machines made automatic by the “ feed-and-flow” devices; other plants have been using simultaneously semiautomatic and automatic machinery for the purpose of producing the same kind of ware; still others, especially the most modern plants—those using the most up-to-date machines—have experienced no transition stages whatever, having been equipped from the very start with the ma chines now in use. 2. The number of types of bottle-making machines, especially in the automatic field, is so large and the kind and size of bottles made on the separate machines so variable that it is well-nigh impossible to choose any one machine as better fitted for the production of any one kind of bottle than any other machine. Some machines— such as the Owens machine especially designed for the purpose of making 5-gallon carboys and the Hartford-Empire and Miller ma chines for the purpose of making milk bottles—have, indeed, been built for making one kind of bottles; but on the whole most of the machines are used to make a large variety of bottles and must be taken into consideration in a study dealing with the effects of ma chinery on output. 3. There is probably not a bottle plant in the country where the data of output prior to 1917 for the separate kinds of bottles and the time spent on their production, either by hand or machine, can be found. Most of the data available go back to 1920 and are only for the more up-to-date plants, which are using automatic machines exclusively. In the smaller plants either no statistics whatever are kept or the data available are not sufficiently in detail to enable one to separate the statistics needed. Instead of a historical study of the development of any one or two representative bottle plants, the problem resolved itself into a study of the various types of machines, semiautomatic and auto matic, which have been used in this country to replace the hand process. Fortunately, the change from hand production to the machine and especially from the semiautomatic process to the automatic has been so recent that occasional plants can be found in the country which are still using the older methods of production or which are just now passing through the transition stage. But these plants are very scarce and are disappearing so rapidly that it became necessary to visit more than 25 separate establishments before the data secured could be considered as representative, if not of all at least of the majority, of the types of machines, semiau tomatic and automatic, in use in this country since 1900. CHAPTER I .---- BOTTLES AND JARS 57 Wherever a machine is still in operation the data given are for the year 1925. If the machine has been completely abandoned or is no longer used for the production of any one of the 15 kinds of bottles covered in this study the statistics of output given are for the last period obtainable and in the form available. The labor cost of production, however, is based in all cases on the actual rates of wages which prevailed in the separate plants during 1925, the object being to eliminate the effects of the changing wage rates in a comparison involving different time periods. Each section of the table covers a single kind of bottle made by a single labor unit—hand or machine— and is divided into two parts: Labor unit, and output and labor cost. The number and the kind of workers constituting the particular labor unit and their rates of wages, whether by the piece or by the hour, are shown in the first part of each section. When fractions are shown for the number of workers, it merely implies that the particular kind of worker is in charge of more than one machine and that only that part of his labor is shown which can be attributed to any one unit. The unit consists of the total number of workers shown, irrespective of their skill or occupation. The total labor cost per hour is that of the entire unit, exclusive of those workers who are paid on a piecework basis, whose rates are shown in a separate column. The second part of each section presents statistics of the output of the unit. The period for which the data are given is usually by the month or by the year when monthly figures are not available. The data shown for output are the actual number of gross of good bottles produced by the one or the several exactly similar shops or machines in operation. The actual number of unit hours, shop or machine, spent in the production of the quantity of bottles given is also shown. If only one unit was in operation the hours given are the actual hours which the unit put in during the month or the year in making the particular kind of bottle. If there were several similar shops or machines used simultaneously for the production of any one kind of bottle the hours worked by the several units have been added. In that case the unit-hours given represent the total number of hours the average machine would have to be in operation to produce the quan tity of bottles produced by all the machines in a correspondingly shorter period of time. This precludes the possible errors inherent in choosing any one shop or any one machine as representative of similar shops or similar machines. For, in spite of the similarity in the com position of the labor unit, no two shops or two machines are actually working alike. For one reason or another some shops or some machines will always produce more or less than others working under exactly similar conditions. But by combining the good, the bad, and the indifferent units one can reasonably expect that their effects on output will neutralize each other, and for this reason the aggre gate output and the aggregate hours of all the similar units in the plant have been taken rather than any one unit as representative of similar units. The average output per unit-hour is derived by dividing the output by the unit-hours. By dividing the output per unit-hour by the total number of workers constituting the unit one gets the man-hour out>put of the unit. The labor cost per gross of bottles which is shown is 58 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY the result of dividing the unit labor cost per hour by the number representing the output per unit-hour. If some of the workers con stituting the unit are paid on a piecework basis their total wages per gross must be added to the labor cost per gross of the time workers, and the sum will be the total labor cost of blowing a gross of the particular kind of bottle by the particular process. In examining the month-by-month statistics of output of any one machine one is at once confronted with the big variations in output shown by the machine-hour figures given. This is true of the simplest Jersey Devil semiautomatic machine as well as of the largest Owens 10-arm double triplex automatic machine. In making 2-ounce prescription ovals by the Jersey Devil semiautomatic machine the output varies from a minimum of 4.015 to a maximum of 5.638 gross per hour, the minimum being 28.8 per cent less than the maximum. In making the same kind of bottle by the Owens 10-arm double triplex automatic machine (10 arms X 2 heads X 3 molds = 60 bottles per revolution), the output varies from 74.849 to 86.556 gross per hour, with the minimum 13.5 per cent less than the maximum. But in making the one-half ounce prescription ovals on the same machine the output varies from 70.659 to 88.717 gross per hour, the minimum being 20.4 per cent less than the maximum. It is universally accepted in bottle making that these variations in output are due to causes which are more or less outside of the control of the workers in charge of the machine. The principal cause mentioned is the condition of the molten glass in the con tinuous tank. In spite of all the precautions taken to have the glass melted in accordance with the chemical formulas and the other requirements of the process, the results do not always prove satis factory. The run of glass may be good for a long time and then suddenly, for no apparent cause, turn bad and keep on running bad, notwithstanding all attempts to improve it. Whether or not means can be found by which the condition of the glass in the tank will be completely controlled to fit the requirements of the machines in operation, the variations in output due to the lack of control of the glass must at present be accepted as inherent in the industry. In the same class must be considered the variations due to larger or smaller orders and to the weather. It is estimated, however, that during the period of a year the favorable and adverse factors will more or less neutralize their respective effects on output, and that the average for the year will come pretty close to representing the true average for the machine. The yearly averages have therefore been taken as the basis of comparison for the various machines and pro cesses in use. The monthly averages are also given to show the degree of variation in output from month to month, while the maximum and minimum are italicized to emphasize the extreme limits of these variations. What is true of the machine-hour output applies also to the man-hour output and to the blowing labor cost. CHAPTEB I .— BOTTLES AND JABS 59 T a b l e A . — PRO DUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G BOTTLES B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E ONE-HALF OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—HAND (IDEAL) lln this table all wage rates are for 1925 and labor cost is based on 1925 wage rates regardless of year of output data. Italicized figures represent minimum and maximum] Labor unit Num ber of work ers 2 1 1 1 1 1 7 Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per gross hour hour Blowers..................... }$0.62 Finishm* J Mold b o y ................ Cleaning-off boy____ Snapping-up boy Carry-in boy............. Total............... $0.40 .40 .40 .40 .62 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 Quantity or amount Item Average output per 8 hours........... gross ATrAroorD Aiitniit n o r nnit.hniir Ha Average man-hour output.............. do___ Average blowing labor cost....... per gross _ 40 K O .714 $0.94 1.60 ONE-HALF OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS-HAND (ACTUAL) Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and month per per per gross hour hour Total output 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar___ Apr....... June___ July----Aug....... Sept___ Oct____ Dec....... Oross 154*3 239.5 105.7 104.3 27.7 18.2 51.1 191.3 182.6 93.8 45.75 61.50 26.75 28.00 12.00 6.50 16.00 59.75 57.25 22.00 Total. 1,168.5 335.50 2 1 1 1 1 1 Blowers. ................... f< l$n Finisher.................... pU» Ol Mold boy__.............. Cleaning-off boy____ Snapping-up boy Carry-in boy.... ........ 7 Total................ $0.21 .21 .21 .21 $0.21 .21 .21 .21 .84 .61 Unithours Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour Gross Oross 3.373 0.482 3.894 .556 .565 3.952 3.725 .532 2. 808 .880 2.800 .400 3.194 .456 3.202 .458 3.189 .456 4.264 .609 3.483 .498 $0,859 .826 .823 .836 .992 .910 .873 .872 .873 .807 .851 ONE-HALF OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: O’NEILL AND TRIPLE FEEDER % 1 1 4 1 m Machine foreman___ Feeder operator____ Machine operator Peanut roaster boys. Carry-in boy_______ Total............... $0.78 .70 .70 .30 .45 $0.31 .70 .70 1.20 .45 1925 Mar___ Apr____ Sept___ 367.0 2.219.0 2.695.0 23.40 15.685 117.50 18.885 135.50 19.889 2.120 2.552 2.688 $0.214 .178 .169 3.36 Total. 5,281.0 276.40 19.107 2.582 .176 ONE-HALF OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: LTNCH AND SINGLE FEEDER X Chief operator.......... 1 Machine operator 1 Carry-in boy............. m Total............... $0.90 $0,150 .600 .60 .31 .310 1.06 1925 Sept___ Oct....... N ov----Dec....... 1.009.0 1.487.0 1.351.0 335.0 90.00 116.00 116.00 32.00 11.211 12,819 11.647 10.469 5.174 5.916 5.375 4.882 $0,095 .088 .091 .101 Total. _ 4,182.0 354.00 11.814 5.453 .090 60 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY T able A .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING BOTTLES BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued ONE-HALF OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: DOUBLE Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Wage rates per gross Output and labor cost rates per hour Machine foreman... 1 Machine operator. _ >/• Hot-ware inspector. 2M Carry-in boys_____ .60 .55 .43 Labor cost 1 Year and month per hour $0.267 .600 .061 1.003 1925 J a n ___ Feb....... Mar___ Apr-----May___ Aug....... Oct........ N ov___ Dec Total output Unithours Gross 5,145.0 1.400.0 5,305. 0 1,830.0 2. 912.8 7,029. 0 648. 6 7,490. 0 2, 256. 0 T otal. 34,016.4 Total. 2H $1.20 .90 . 55 $0.20 .90 .55 1. 65 Total. Out put per unithour Out put Labor cost per per manhour gross Gross 31. 937 26. 316 34. 719 33.152 34. 068 32. 892 29. 752 36.483 33. 925 Gross 8. 454 6.966 9.190 8.775 9.018 8.707 7.875 9.657 8.980 $0.061 .074 .056 .059 .057 .059 .065 .054 .058 1,015.10 33, 510 8.870 .058 161.10 53.20 152.80 55.20 85. 50 213. 70 21.80 205.30 66.50 ONE-HALF OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: DOUBLE, WITH CONVEYOR Chief foreman____ 1% Machine foreman.. 1 Machine operator.. OWENS A. N. (10 ARMS) OWENS A. N. (10 ARMS) 1925 J a n ___ Sept.___ Oct____ N ov___ Dec....... 1,480.0 645.0 3,941.0 2,308.0 1, 602.0 43.50 21. 00 118. 20 72.00 47. 50 15. 70S 14.176 15.389 14.795 15. 566 $0,048 .064 .050 .051 .049 Total 9, 976.0 302.20 33.011 15.238 .050 34. 023 30. 714 33.342 32.056 33. 726 ONE-HALF OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. V. (15 ARMS) SINGLE, WITH CONVEYOR Chief foreman....... Machine foreman.. Machine operator. $1.20 .90 . 55 Total. $0.20 .90 .55 1918....... 8,720.0 38.844.0 1919. 22.225.0 1920 1. 65 T otal. 69,789. 0 430.40 20.260 9.351 1,906.60 20.373 9.403 897.40 24. 766 10.969 3,234.40 21. 577 9.959 $0,081 .081 .067 .077 ONE-HALF OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. V. (15 ARMS) DOUBLE, WITH CONVEYOR Chief foreman....... Machine foreman.. Machine operator. 2H $1.20 .90 .55 $0.20 .90 .55 1. 65 Total.. 1925 Feb M ay___ June___ July Aug------ 3,071.00 3,560.00 1,870.00 4,624.00 3,053.00 T otal. 16,178. 00 18.056 22.820 20.071 18.853 21.253 $0,042 .033 .038 .040 .036 373.00 43. 373 20.022 .038 78.50 72.00 43.00 113.20 66.30 39.121 49.444 43.488 40.848 46.048 ONE-HALF OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS C. A. (10 ARMS) DOUBLE TRIPLEX, WITH CONVEYOR H Chief foreman______ 1 Machine foreman___ 2 Machine operators BH Total............... $1.20 .90 .55 $0.20 .90 1.10 2.20 1925 Feb____ M ay___ Aug....... Sept___ Oct....... N ov...... Dec 8,490.0 9,970.0 2,675.0 4,270. 0 7,800.0 5,480. 0 6,361.0 T otal. 45,046.0 101.90 141.10 34.90 58.40 95.10 63.20 71.70 83. 316 70.659 76.648 73.116 82.019 86. 709 88.717 26.310 $0.0265 .0312 22.313 .0288 24.205 23. 089 .0301 25. 901 .0269 .0254 27. 382 28.016 .0248 5,663.00 79.545 25.120 .0276 CHAPTER I .---- BOTTLES AND JARS 61 T a b l e A . — PRODUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G BOTTLES B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued 2-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—HAND (IDEAL) Labor unit Num ber of work ers 2 1 1 1 1 1 7 Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per gross hour hour Blowers.... ................ Finisher.................... }$0.65 Mold boy__.............. Cleaning-off boy___ Snapping-up boy----Carry-in boy............. $0.40 .40 .40 .40 .65 Total............... $0.40 .40 .40 .40 Quantity or amount Item Average output per 8 hours........ . .gross.. Average output per unit-hour_____do___ Average man-hour output________do___ Average blowing labor cost-----per gross.. 36 4.5 .643 $1,006 1.60 2-OTJNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS AND ROUNDS—HAND (ACTUAL) Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers 2 1 1 1 1 1 7 Occupation Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and month per per per gross hour hour Total output 1925 Jan. Feb Mar Apr . May___ June___ July Aug----Sept___ Oct-----Nov Dec------ Gross 139.8 101.3 162.9 1G8.0 50.4 71.7 9.1 7.3 113.4 24.6 48.7 119.6 Total. 1,026.2 Blowers........... ......... l^A £Q Finisher _________ >$U. Do Mold boy__________ $0.21 .21 Cleaning-off boy____ Snapping-up boy .21 Carry-in boy.... ........ .21 Total............... .68 --------- $0.21 .21 .21 .21 .84 Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour 47.75 42.25 55.25 55.75 18.25 25.00 6.00 3.00 46.50 7.75 18.50 33.25 Gross 2.928 2.398 2.948 3.013 2. 762 2.844 1.517 2.433 2,439 3.175 2.632 8.594 Gross 0.418 .343 .421 .430 .395 .406 . 219 .348 .348 .454 .376 .518 $0.977 1.030 .965 .959 .984 .975 1.284 1.025 1.024 .945 .999 .914 359. 25 2.856 .408 .974 Unithours 2-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—SEMIAUTOMATIC TWO-MAN MACHINE (JERSEY DEVIL) X 1 1 1 1 X 1 Machine foreman Gatherer _________ Presser. --------------- j$0.50 Transfer b o y .......... Take-out boy______ Carry-in boy_______ Peanut-roaster b o y .. 5H T ota l.............. $1.00 $0.17 .50 .50 .50 .38 .50 .50 .50 .25 .38 1923 J a n ----Feb Mar Apr-----May___ June___ July Aug------ 611.4 219.5 465.1 255.0 652.4 461.8 397.0 408.0 120.00 45.00 82.50 60.00 162.50 87.50 90.00 72.50 5.095 4.878 5.688 4.250 4.015 5.278 4.411 5.628 0.899 .861 .995 .750 .708 .931 .778 .993 $0,853 .869 .819 .923 .948 .841 .908 .832 1.80 Total.. 3,470.2 720.00 4.820 .850 .874 2-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS-SEMIAUTOMATIC ONE-MAN MACHINE 1 1 1 1 X Gatherer. ________ $0.30 Transfer boy ______ Take-out boy............ Peanut-roaster boy Carry-in b o y ........... 4X Total....... ........ 40780°— 27------- 5 .30 $0.38 .38 .38 .38 $0.38 .38 .38 .19 1.33 3.819.0 3, 570.0 6.632.0 6.893.0 6.038.0 884.00 736.00 1.248.00 1.578.00 1.296.00 4.820 4.851 5.814 4.368 4. 659 0.960 1.078 1.181 .971 1.035 $0.608 .574 .550 .604 .586 Total.. 26,952.0 5,742.00 4.694 1.043 .583 1923 . 1922....... 1921 1920 1919 62 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY T a b l e A . — PRODUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G BOTTLES B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued 2-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION 0 VAIS-SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: O’NEILL, WITH FEEDER Labor unit Occupation M achinist.............. Machine operator... Transfer boy. _....... Carry-in boy___ Peanut-roaster bcy. Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and per per per month hour hour $1,000 $0,170 .700 .475 .500 .475 TotaL. 3H .700 .475 .250 .475 2.070 Total output 1925 Jan____ Feb....... Mar___ Apr____ May___ June___ July...... Aug----Sept___ Oct-----Nov...... Gross 577.0 637.0 344.0 582.0 269.0 177.0 290.0 176.0 224.0 129.0 441.0 T otal- 3, 746.0 Unithours 88.00 84.00 50.00 66.00 47.00 26.00 38.00 33.00 35.00 21.00 72.00 Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour Gross 6.557 7.584 6.880 8. *19 5. 724 6.810 7. 632 5.884 6,400 6.143 6.125 Gross 1.788 2.068 1.876 560.00 1.561 1.857 2.081 1.4H 1.745 1.675 1.670 $0,317 .274 .302 .285 .363 .305 .272 .890 .325 .338 .339 1.824 .311 2.405 2-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: O’NEILL AND SINGLE FEEDER 1 Machine operator__ boys _ 1H Peanut-roaster H Carry-in boys___ $0,104 .700 .400 .150 1925 M ay__ Sept___ Nov___ Dec___ 60.0 535.0 234.0 720.0 9.30 79.00 29.30 105.80 6.773 7.987 6.806 2.804 2.419 2.858 2.431 $0,209 Total. 1.354 Total. 1,549.0 223.40 6.934 2.476 .195 Machine foreman. 2H .200 .170 .199 2-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: LYNCH AND SINGLE FEEDER 1 1 H Chief operator.......... Machine operator Carry-in boy............ $0.90 $0.15 .60 .60 .31 .31 1925 July Aug____ Sept___ Oct____ Nov....... Dec....... 239.0 456.0 1.442.0 1.348.0 1.378.0 2.519.0 26.00 9.198 48.00 9.500 144.00 10.014 144.00 9.361 144.00 9.569 241.00 10.452 4.248 4.385 4.622 4.320 4.416 4.824 $0.115 .112 .106 .113 .111 .101 1.06 Total. 7,382.0 710.00 10.397 4.799 .102 Total________ 2H 2-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. N. (10 ARMS) DOUBLE Machine foreman... Machine operator... Hot-ware inspector . Carry-in boys......... 37/9 $0.80 $0,267 .60 .600 .55 .061 1.003 1925 Jan....... 7,113.0 Feb 9,308.9 Mar 9,075.6 Apr....... 7,095.9 M ay___ 2,204.5 June___ 7,207.0 July 4, 865. 3 Aug....... 2,088. 7 Sept___ 7,183.9 Oct....... 4, 832.1 Nov...... 2,934. 6 Dec....... 10,137. 5 T otal. 74,047.0 Total. 28.682 29.006 31.027 30.286 28. 705 28.010 29.523 29. 670 30.428 82.214 31. 555 32.172 7.592 7.678 8.213 8.017 7.598 7.4U 7.815 7.854 8.054 8.527 8.353 8.516 $0,067 .067 .062 .064 .067 .069 .035 .065 .064 .060 .061 .060 2,459. 20 30.110 7.970 .064 248.00 320.90 292.50 234.30 76.80 257.30 164.80 70.40 236.10 150.00 93.00 315.10 2-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. V. (15 ARMS) SINGLE, WITH CONVEYOR 1 1 Chief foreman____ Machine foreman.. Machine operator.. Total............ $1.20 .90 .55 $0.20 .90 .55 1.65 1918.. 13,680.0 654.50 20.901 9.645 $0,079 CHAPTER I .---- BOTTLES AND JARS T able 63 A . — PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING BOTTLES BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued 2-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. T. (15 ASMS) DOUBLE, WITH CONVEYOR Labor unit Num ber of work ers Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and month per per per hour hour Occupation Chief foreman____ Machine foreman.. Machine operator.. 2H $1.20 .90 .55 Total.. $0.20 1.65 Out Labor put cost per per manhour Unithours Qross 3.715.0 4.870.0 1.115.0 5.835.0 725.0 910.0 3.300.0 345.0 560.0 3.140.0 1.246.0 3.042.0 Gross Gross 96.00 38.698 17.861 120.00 40.583 18.731 47.60 23.m 10.811 144.00 40.521 18.702 22.20 32.658 15.073 24.00 37.917 17.500 81.20 40.640 18.757 5.90 58.475 26.988 13.80 40.580 18.729 71.00 44.225 20.412 30.80 40.455 18.672 68.30 44.540 20.557 $0,043 .041 .070 .041 .051 .044 .041 .028 .041 .037 .041 .037 Total.. 28,803.0 724.80 39.739 18.341 .042 1925 Jan........ Feb____ Mar____ Apr____ M ay___ June___ July___ Aug___ Sept___ Oct____ Nov___ Dec....... .90 .55 Out put per unithour Total output 2-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS C. A. (10 ARMS) DOUBLE TRIPLEX, WITH CONVEYOR H Chief foreman______ l Machine foreman Machine operators 2 3H $1.20 .90 .55 Total................ ........... --------- 1925 $0.20 .90 1 Mar...... 1.10 ; Apr____ May___ June___ July Aug___ 1 Sept___ Oct Nov Dec 2.20 11,520.0 10,885.0 7,235.0 1,784.0 1,867.0 8,719.0 10,666.0 6,232.0 2,836.0 12,108.0 Total.. 73,852.0 144.00 139.30 88.90 23.40 24.00 116.10 142.50 72.00 34.40 143.90 80.000 78.141 81.384 76.239 77. 792 75.099 74.849 86. 556 82.442 84.142 25.263 24.676 25.700 24.075 24.566 23.715 23.637 27.SSS 26.034 26.571 $0,028 .028 .027 .029 .028 .029 .029 .025 .027 .026 928.50 79. 539 25.118 .028 i 4-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—HAND (IDEAL) Labor unit Num ber of work ers 2 1 1 1 1 1 7 Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per gross hour hour Blowers................... Finisher..................... j$0.75 Mold boy........... ...... Cleaning-off boy Snapping-up boy Carrv-in boy......... __ Total............... .75 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 1.60 Item Quantity or amount Average output per 8 hours............gross.. 30 Average output per unit-hour.........do___ 3.75 Average man-hour output.............. do___ .536 Average blowing labor cost___ per gross.. $1.177 64 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY T a b l e A . — PRODUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G BOTTLES B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued 4-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—HAND (ACTUAL) ....................... ...... "■ • Num ber of work ers 2 1 1 1 1 1 Occupation Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and per per per month gross hour hour Blowers..................... lj|A 7Q Finisher..,......... Mold b o y ................ $0.21 Cleaning-off boy____ .21 Snapping-up boy .21 Carry-in boy_______ .21 7 Total................ . ...- Output and labor cost Labor unit .78 ........... $0.21 .21 .21 .21 .84 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar___ Apr____ M ay___ June___ July___ Aug-----Sept___ O c t...... N ov...... Dec....... T otal. Total output Gross Unithours Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour Gross Gross 531.4 136.0 254.4 271.0 97.5 47.2 22.8 99.3 139.2 124.4 178.5 277.3 290.50 67.50 133.75 134.00 38.25 17.75 9.00 52.75 68.00 64.50 92.50 122.50 1.829 2.015 1.902 2.022 2.549 2.533 1.882 2.047 1.929 1.930 2.264 0.261 .288 .272 .289 .364 .380 .362 .269 .292 .276 .276 .323 $1,239 1.197 1.222 1.195 1.110 1.096 1.112 1.226 1.190 1.216 1.215 1.151 2,179.0 1,091.00 1.997 .285 1.212 2.659 4-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—SEMIAUTOMATIC ONE-MAN MACHINE Gatherer.................... $0.33 Transfer boy............. Take-out boy............ Peanut-roaster boy Carry-in boy............. Total................ $0.38 .38 .38 .38 .33 ........... $0.38 .38 .38 .19 1.33 1919. 1920. 1921 1922 192 3 3.196 0.710 $0,746 5.993.0 6.095.0 7.395.0 3.679.0 4.630.0 1.876.00 1.628.00 2,068.00 892.00 1,284.00 3,744 3.576 .832 .795 3.606 .801 .699 Total. 27,792.0 7,748.00 3.587 .797 .720 4.124 .916 .685 .702 .663 4-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: O’NEILL AND FEEDER TT Machine foreman Machine operator. 1H Peanut-roaster boy Carry-in boy............. $0.78 $0,104 .70 .700 .400 .30 .45 .150 1925 Jan........ June___ Oct........ 95.0 218.0 370.0 14.30 29.70 55.00 6.644 7.340 6.727 2.372 2.621 2.402 $0,204 .185 .201 Total................ 1.354 Total. _ 683.0 99.00 6.899 2.464 .196 2X 4-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: LYNCH AND FEEDER H Chief operator........... Machine operator ., 1 1 Carry-in boy............. $0.90 .60 .31 1.06 Total............... 2H $0.15 .60 .31 1925 Aug-----Sept___ Oct........ N ov., . Dec 783.0 488.0 1.123.0 1.028.0 2,666.0 96.00 68.00 144.00 120.00 315.00 Total. _ 6,088.0 743.00 8.156 3.764 $0,130 7.799 3.600 .136 8.463 3.906 .125 a 194 3.782 .129 7.176 3.312 8.567 3.954 .148 .124 4-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. N. (10 ARMS) SINGLE, WITH CONVEYOR 1 Chief foreman........... Machine foreman Machine operator .. 2H Total................ $1.20 .90 .55 $0.20 .90 .55 1.65 1917 1918 7.918.0 3.408.0 506.70 15.627 225.70 15.100 7.212 6.969 $0,106 .109 T ota l.. 11,326.0 732.40 15.460 7.135 .107 CHAPTER I.— BOTTLES AND JARS 65 T a b l e A . — P R O DU CTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G BOTTLES B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued 4-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. N. (10 ARMS) DOUBLE Labor unit Num ber of work ers 37® Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and per month per per gross hour hour Total output Machine foreman__ $0.80 $0,267 Machine operator .600 .60 Hot-ware inspector. .55 .061 Carry-in boys______ ........... .43 1.003 1925 Gross Jan........ 4.223.8 Feb 9.224.3 Mar___ 10,350.1 Apr ___ 3.860.5 M ay___ 8.408.9 June___ 3.321.9 July...... 6.248.5 3.172.4 Sept___ 5,445.8 Oct........ 7.487.2 5.219.3 Dec....... 2,012. 5 1.931 T otal. 68,975.2 Total................ Unithours 185.50 382.40 421.10 164.20 368.00 154.50 270.90 141.70 233.30 293.20 199.20 104.80 Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour Gross Gross 22.770 6.027 24.122 6.385 24.579 6.506 23. 511 6.223 22.850 6.048 21.500 5.691 23.065 6.105 22.390 5.927 23.340 6.178 25.536 6.759 26. m 6.936 19.206 6.084 2,918.30 23.627 6.254 $0,085 .080 .079 .082 .085 .090 .084 .086 .086 .076 .074 .106 .082 4-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. V. (15 ARMS) SINGLE, WITH CONVEYOR Chief foreman........... H Machine foreman. .. 1 1 2H Machine operator . $1.20 .90 .55 Total................ $0.20 .90 .55 1.65 191 8 1919 1920 29.996.0 22.716.0 65.214.0 T otal. 117,926.0 1,411.20 21.256 9.810 1,197.30 18.973 8.757 2,885.00 22.605 10.433 5,493.50 21.467 9.908 $0,078 .087 .073 .077 4-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. V. (15 ARMS) DOUBLE, WITH CONVEYOR 1* 1 Chief foreman........... Machine foreman .. Machine operator.. $1.20 .90 .55 $0.20 .90 .55 1.65 Total................ 1925 Jan........ Feb Mar M ay___ June___ Aug....... Sept___ Nov....... Dec....... 2,061.0 2.996.0 252.0 3.738.0 1.740.0 845.0 1.724.0 1.134.0 326.0 Total. 14,816.0 16.543 16.422 16.615 16.431 16. 731 14. 662 18.084 13.773 13.084 $0,046 .046 .046 .046 .046 .052 421.80 35.126 16.212 .047 57.50 84.20 7.00 105.00 48.00 26.60 44.00 38.00 11.50 35.843 35.582 36.000 35.600 36.250 31. 767 39.182 29.842 28.348 .042 .055 .068 4-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS C. A. (10 ARMS) DOUBLE TRIPLEX, WITH CONVEYOR H Chief foreman........... l Machine foreman. 2 3H Machine operators... Total................ $1.20 .90 .55 $0.20 .90 1.10 2.20 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar Apr....... M ay___ Aug... . Oct 8,108.0 10.014.0 7.950.0 10.314.0 5.943.0 10.442.0 11.383.0 11.494.0 Total.. 75,648.0 144.00 142.70 142.30 144.00 82.00 142.50 144.00 143.00 17.782 22.161 17.643 22.618 22.887 23.140 24.963 26.378 $0,039 .031 .039 .031 .030 .030 .028 .027 1,084.50 69.754 22.028 .032 56.306 70.175 66.868 71.625 72.476 73.277 79.049 80.378 66 PRODUCTIVITY OP LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY T a b l e A . — PRODU CTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G BOTTLES B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued 8-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS HAND (IDEAL) Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers 2 1 1 1 1 1 7 Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per gross hour hour Occupation Blowers.................... j$0.96 Finisher..................... $0.40 Mold boy__________ .40 Cleaning-off boy____ .40 Snapping-up boy___ --------Carry-in boy__ .40 T o t a l-............ .96 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 Quantity or amount Item Average output per 8 hours......... gross.. Average output per unit-hour.........do___ Average man-hour output.............. do___ Average blowing labor cost___ per gross.. 25 3.125 .446 $1,472 1.60 8-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—HAND (ACTUAL) Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and month per per per gross hour hour 2 1 1 ] 1 1 Blowers___________ }$1.00 Finisher___________ Mold boy__________ Cleaning-off boy____ Snapping-up boy Carry-in boy_______ 7 T ota l........... — $0.21 .21 .21 .21 1.00 ........... $0.21 .21 .21 .21 .84 1925 Jan........ Feb Mar Apr....... M ay___ June___ July Aug....... Sept___ Oct........ Nov. Dec____ T o ta l- Unithours Total output Gross 78.3 93.8 31.2 66.3 a4 9.0 13.3 36.2 63.3 40.6 109.5 | 25.0 : 34.75 56.50 19.50 39.00 5.00 6.75 7.00 23.25 41.25 37.50 80.00 10.75 574.9 S | 361.25 i Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per manhour gross Gross Gross 2.253 0.322 1.660 .237 1.600 .229 1.700 .243 1.680 .240 1.333 .190 1.900 ‘ .271 1.557 .222 1.535 .219 1.088 .155 1.369 .196 2.826 .882 1.591 .227 $1.373 1.506 1.525 1.494 1.500 1.630 1.442 1.540 1.547 1.776 1.614 1.861 1.528 8-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—SEMIAUTOMATIC TWO-MAN MACHINE (JERSEY DEVIL) $1.00 $0.17 Machinist. iH Gatherer. . 1 1 Transfer boy........... 1 Take-out boy.......... 1 Peanut-roaster boy. H Carry-in boy........... Total—. 5H 1.56 .50 .50 .50 .56 .50 .50 .38 .25 1.80 1923 J a n ... Feb.__ Sept.. O c t... Nov__ D e c... T otal. 249.8 250.7 37.2 127.0 95.5 69.50 75.00 30.00 10.50 30.00 26.00 3.594 8.84$ 4.000 3.543 4.288 3.673 0.634 .590 .706 .625 .747 .648 $1,061 1.098 1.010 1.068 .985 1.050 880.2 241.00 3.652 .644 1.052 120.0 8-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS-SEMIAUTOMATIC ONE-MAN MACHINE 1 1 1 1 X Vi Gatherer.................. Transfer boy........... Take-out boy.......... Peanut-roaster boy_ Carry-in boy........... Total— $0.36 $0.38 $0 1.33 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923....... 2,096.0 1,168.0 2,643.0 2,030.0 2,217.0 2,981.0 652.00 440.00 864.00 716.00 600.00 812.00 3.214 2.654 3.059 2.835 8.695 3.671 0.714 .590 .680 .630 .821 .815 $0,774 .861 .795 .829 .720 .722 T otal. 13,135.0 4,084.00 3.216 .714 .774 CHAPTER I.---- BOTTLES AND JARS T able 67 A . — PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN M AKING BOTTLES BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued 8-OTJNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: O’NEILL AND FEEDER Labor unit Num ber of work ers If Occupation Machine foreman. Machine operator. Peanut-roaster boys _ Carry-in boy........ per gross Output and labor cost Wage Labor rates cost Year and per month per hour hour Total output 0.104 .700 .40 .15 1925 July.. O ct... Nov----- Oross 818.0 586.0 609.0 1.354 T otal. 2,013.0 $0.78 .70 .30 .45 Total.. Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour 145.80 124.60 129.80 Oross 5.611 4.703 4.692 Oross 2.004 1.680 1.676 $0,241 .288 .289 400.20 5.030 1.796 .269 Unithours 8-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: LYNCH AND FEEDER Chief operator____ Machine operator.. Carry-in boy......... 2H Total. $0.90 .60 .31 !0.15 .60 1925 Jan---F eb.... .31 1.06 Total _ 293.0 377.0 42.00 52.00 6. 976 7.250 3.220 3.346 $0,152 .146 670.0 94.00 7.128 3.290 .149 8-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. E. (6 ARMS) SINGLE Machine foreman___ l Machine operator__ V» Hot-ware inspector __ 1H Carry-in boys______ Total............... 2V» 1925 Sept___ Oct N ov___ $0.80 $0,267 .60 .600 .55 .061 .43 . 573 1.501 Total _ 97.1 84.3 138.1 17.80 13.50 21.50 5.455 6.244 6.423 1.964 2.248 2.312 $0,242 .216 .206 319.5 52.80 6.051 2.178 .218 8-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. N. (10 ARMS) SINGLE H 1 V# 2M Machine foreman Machine operator Hot-ware inspector Carry-in boys______ $0.80 $0,267 .60 .600 .55 .061 .43 1.003 3V« Total............... 1.931 1925 J a n ___ Feb Mar...... Apr____ M a y ... June-.-.. July----Aug----Sept----Oct Nov....... Dec 1,001.2 952.6 1,150.2 2,102. 8 2,011.7 3,324. 7 2, 790. 7 1,550. 8 2,355.0 3,002.8 3,380.6 1,600.0 Total . 25,223.1 91.40 84.50 98.70 183.80 180.80 302.50 248.70 133.30 205.60 276.50 271. 30 131.10 10.954 11.273 11.654 11.441 11.127 10. 991 11. 221 11.634 11.454 10.860 12.461 12.204 2.899 2.984 3.085 3.029 2.946 2.910 2.970 3.080 3.032 2.875 S. 299 3.231 $0.176 .171 .166 .169 .173 .176 .172 .166 .168 .178 .156 .158 2,208. 20 11.424 3.024 .169 8-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. R. (10 ARMS) DOUBLE i H 1 v» m Machine foreman Machine operator Hot-ware inspector Carry-in boys______ $0.80 $0,267 .60 .600 .55 .061 .43 1.003 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar...... Apr....... M ay___ June___ Oct Nov Dec 3V« Total................ 1.931 T ota l.. i 747.1 472.4 1.060.0 326.4 1,020.4 691.2 154.6 460.0 437.5 914.2 6,283.8 41.70 25.20 54.80 17.00 60.80 38.00 7.70 26.20 24.70 46.70 17.916 18.746 19.343 19.200 16.788 18.189 20.078 17.557 17.713 19.572 4.743 4.962 5.120 5.082 4-44S 4.815 5.815 4.647 4.689 5.181 $0,108 .103 .100 .101 .115 .106 .096 .110 .109 .099 342. 80 18.331 4.852 .105 68 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY T a b l e A . — PRODU CTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G BOTTLES B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued 8-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. R. (10 ARMS) DOUBLE, WITH CONVEYOR Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation X Chief foreman........... Machine foreman.. 1 Machine operator__ 1 2X Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and month per per per gross hour hour $1.20 .90 .55 Total................ $0.20 .90 .55 1.65 1925 Apr....... July Sept___ Oct........ Nov___ Dec. Total output Gross 1.375.0 790.0 613.0 3.297.0 2.651.0 1.767.0 Total. . 10,493.0 Unithours Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour Gross Gross 19.097 8.814 20.256 9.349 18.186 8.870 23.104 10.663 23.092 10.658 u . 817 u . m $0,086 .082 .091 .071 .072 .067 473.50 22.161 10.006 .075 72.00 39.00 33.80 142.70 114.80 71.20 8-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. Q. (15 ARMS) SINGLE, WITH CONVEYOR X Chief foreman........... Machine foreman... 1 Machine operator__ 1 2X $1.20 .90 .55 $0.20 .90 .55 1.65 Total................ 1925 Feb Sept___ Oct ..... Nov___ Dec. . 1.426.0 861.0 619.0 404.0 1.431.0 1.386.0 T ota l.. 6,227.0 19,806 20. m i7. m 18.281 19,004 19.521 9.141 9.806 7.986 8.437 8.771 9.010 $0,083 .081 .096 .090 .087 .085 319.10 19.514 9.006 .085 72.00 42.70 36.00 22.10 75.30 71.00 8-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVAIS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. Q. (15 ARMS) DOUBLE, WITH CONVEYOR X Chief foreman........... Machine foreman.. 1 Machine operator___ 1 2X $1.20 .90 .55 $0.20 .90 .55 ll 65 Total................ 1925 Jan____ Feb....... M ay___ Sept___ Oct........ Dec....... 1.005.0 3.755.0 4.206.0 284.0 643.0 4.193.0 Total __ 14,086.0 9.663 12.513 18.528 9.868 11.547 10.615 $0,079 .061 .056 .081 .066 .072 552.00 25.518 11.778 .065 48.00 138.50 143.50 14.00 25.70 182.30 20.937 27.112 29.810 20.286 25.019 23.000 8-OUNCE PRESCRIPTION OVALS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS C. A. (10 ARMS) DOUBLE DUPLEX, WITH CONVEYOR X Chief foreman.......... Machine foreman___ 1 Machine operators__ 2 3X Total............... $1.20 .90 .55 $0.20 .90 1.10 2.20 1925 Feb Mar___ Apr....... M ay___ June___ J u ly .... Aug....... O ct___ N ov___ Dec. . 5.569.0 4.808.0 4.220.0 5.740.0 2.518.0 3.544.0 5.916.0 6.056.0 6.229.0 4.544.0 Total— 49,144.0 144.00 133.00 108.60 134.60 91.70 106.20 144.00 143.50 142.00 117.90 38.674 36.150 38.858 42.645 m. m 33.371 41.083 42.202 A8.866 38.541 12.213 11.416 12.271 13.467 8.671 10.538 12.974 13.327 18.862 12.171 $0,057 .061 .057 .052 .080 .066 .054 .052 .050 .057 1,265.50 38,337 12.117 .057 CHAPTER I .— BOTTLES AND JARS 69 T a b l e A . — PRODUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G BOTTLES B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued 6-DRAM EXTRACT PANELS—HAND Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers 2 1 1 1 1 1 7 Occupation Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per gross hour hour Blowers___________ |$0.77 Finisher___________ Mold boy__________ Cleaning-off boy____ Snapping-up boy Carry-in boy............. Total.......... . $0.40 .40 .40 .40 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 Quantity or amount Item Average output per 8 hours______ gross.. Average output per unit-hour.____ do___ Average output per man-hour____ do___ Average blowing labor cost___ per gross.. 32 4 .571 $1.170 #1.60 .77 8-DRAM EXTRACT PANELS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. N. (10 ARMS) DOUBLE Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and per month per per gross hour hour Total output H 1 Vo m Machine foreman __ Machine operator Hot-ware inspector Carry-in boys........... $0.80 $0,267 .60 .600 .55 .061 .43 1.003 1925 Oross Jan........ 5.081.5 Feb 2.259.0 Mar 4.807.1 Apr.. .. 543.0 M ay___ 11,853.0 June___ 543.8 July___ 2.244.0 Aug....... 2.121.5 Sept___ 3.582.0 Oct........ 2.735.0 Nov, 840.0 Dec....... 2.496.0 37o Total................ 1.931 Total.. 39,105.9 Unithours Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour Oross 23.203 20.170 22.729 21.984 23.645 22.658 23.182 23. 313 24.910 24. 376 25. 846 26. S29 Oross 6.142 5.839 6.017 5.819 6.259 5.998 6.136 6.171 6.594 6.452 6.842 6.969 $0,083 .095 .085 .088 .082 .085 .083 .083 .078 .079 .075 .078 1,663.60 23.507 6.222 .082 219.00 112.00 211.50 24.70 501.30 24.00 96.80 91.00 143.80 112.20 32.50 94.80 6-DRAM EXTRACT PANELS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. N. (10 ARMS) DOUBLE, WITH CONVEYOR 1 2H Chief foreman........... Machine foreman__ Machine operator. _. $1.20 .90 .55 $0.20 .90 .55 1.65 Total............... 1924 1925 Total.. 1,164.0 606.0 45.30 25.695 11.859 31.20 19.423 8.964 $0,064 .085 1,770.0 76.50 23.138 10.679 .071 6-DRAM EXTRACT PANELS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. R. (10 ARMS) SINGLE, WITH CONVEYOR M Chief foreman........... 1 Machine foreman .. 1 Machine operator.. M Total............... $1.20 .90 .55 $0.30 .90 .55 1.75 1917 1918 1919 1920 16.190.0 4.917.0 12.044.0 8.718.0 Total.. 41,869.0 14.555 14.556 15.059 17.666 6.469 6.469 6.693 7.852 $0,120 .120 .116 .099 2,743.50 15.261 6.783 .108 1,112.40 337.80 799.80 493.50 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY 70 T able A . — PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING BOTTLES BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued 6-DRAM EXTRACT PANELS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. R. (10 ARMS) DOUBLE, WITH CONVEYOR Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work- 1 1 Occupation Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and per per per month gross hour hour $1.20 Chief foreman....... Machine foreman.. Machine operator. .90 .55 Total.. Total output Unithours $0.30 .90 .55 Gross 1920....... 25.653.0 192 2 22.816.0 192 3 21,476.0 192 4 6,264.0 1.75 Total- 76,209.0 Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour Gross Gross 25.538 11.350 22.908 10.181 22.095 9.820 24.167 10.741 $0,067 .076 .079 .072 3,231.70 23.582 10.480 .074 1,004.50 996.00 972.00 259.20 6-DRAM EXTRACT PANELS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. V. ^15 ARMS) SINGLE, WITH CONVEYOR $1.20 $0.20 Chief foreman....... i* Machine foreman.. 1 Machine operator. Total............ 2H .90 .55 .90 .55 1919. 1920. 1921. 62,174.0 6,264.0 6,108.0 Total— 74,546.0 3,400.70 18.283 8.438 263.70 23.754 10.963 237.60 25.707 11.865 3,902.00 19.104 8.817 $0,090 .069 .064 .086 6-DRAM EXTRACT PANELS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. V. (15 ARMS) DOUBLE, WITH CONVEYOR foreman....... H Chief Machine foreman.. $1.20 $0.20 .90 .55 Machine operator.. 2X .90 .55 1.65 Total.. 1925 Jan-----Mar . Apr . M a y .... June___ Aug....... Sept___ 6,915.0 7,041.0 747.0 3,054.0 2, 277.0 4,575.0 8,517.0 2,811.0 Total.. 35,937.0 15.847 15.829 15.323 18.669 15.009 15.202 17.471 18.299 $0,048 .048 .050 Ml .051 .050 .044 .042 1,009.50 35.599 16.430 .046 201.40 205.30 22.50 75.50 70.00 138.90 225.00 70.90 34.335 34.296 33.200 40.450 3%. 529 32.937 37.853 39.647 6-DRAM EXTRACT PANELS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS C. A. (10 ARMS) DOUBLE TRIPLEX, WITH CONVEYOR X Chief foreman______ 1 Machine foreman 2 Machine operators 3H j $1.20 .90 . 55 Total............... $0.20 .90 1.10 2.20 1925 Mar...... Apr Aug....... 9.039.0 5.360.0 6.186.0 144.00 62. 771 19.822 111.00 48.289 15.249 144.00 42.958 13.566 $0,035 .046 .051 Total-. 20,585.0 399.00 51.592 16.292 .043 2-OUNCE EXTRACT PANELS—HAND Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per gross hour hour 2 1 1 1 1 1 Blowers..................... Finisher..................... }$0.92 Mold boy................ Cleaning-off boy....... Snapping-up boy Carry-in boy............. 7 Total............... .92 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 1.60 Item Average output per 8 hours......... gross.. Average output per unit-hour....... do___ Average output per man-hour____ do___ Average blowing labor cost___ per gross.. Quantity and amount 28 3.50 .50 $1.377 CHAPTER I.— BOTTLES AND JARS T able A . 71 PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING BOTTLES BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued 2-OUNCE EXTRACT PANELS—SEMIAUTOMATIC TWO-MAN MACHINE (JERSEY DEVIL) Labor unit Num ber of work ers 1 1 1 1 1 lA Occupation Machinist................ Gatherer.................. Presser..................... Transfer boy........... Take-out boy.......... Peanut-roaster boy. Carry-in boy........... Wage rates per Output and labor cost Wage Labor rates cost Year and month per per hour hour $1.00 $0.17 $0.58 .60 .50 .38 .50 .50 .50 .25 5H Total output Unithours Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour 1923 Jan____ June___ July___ Sept___ Oct N ov___ Dec....... Gross 438.0 78.6 267.3 80.6 126.4 350.5 511.0 120.00 20.00 72.50 22.50 30.00 75.00 120.00 Gross 3.650 3.930 3.687 3.663 4.213 4.673 4.258 Gross 0.644 .694 .651 .629 .743 .825 .751 $1,073 1.038 1.068 1.085 1.007 .965 1.003 T otal- 1,852.4 460.00 4.030 .711 1.027 2-OUNCE EXTRACT PANELS—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: O’NEILL, WITH FEEDER Machinist............... Operator.................. Transfer boy______ Peanut-roaster boy. Carry-in boy........... 1 1 1 3H $1.00 $0.17 .70 .50 .50 .25 1925 Jan... June___ Sept___ Oct 175.0 53.0 209.0 135.0 30.00 9.00 39.00 26.00 5. 833 5. 888 5. 360 5. 231 1.591 1.606 1.462 1.427 $0,362 .358 .394 .403 2.12 Total. 572.0 104.00 5. 500 1.500 .384 .70 .50 .50 .50 Total.. 2-OUNCE EXTRACT PANELS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: O'NEILL AND SINGLE FEEDER 2/l5 Chief operator......... 1 Operator.................. boys......... IX Turn-out 2/l5 Peanut-roaster boy. H Carry-in boy........... 2H $0.78 $0,104 .70 .700 .30 .400 .040 .30 .45 .090 Total.. 1.334 1925 Jan___ Feb.— Mar___ Apr___ M ay__ S e p t.... O ct.. N ov.. Dec.Total . i 356.0 1.190.0 206.0 634.0 $0,187 155 236 150 8.078 7.051 7.051 8.400 2.543 3.080 2.016 S. 167 3.098 2.885 2.518 2.518 3.000 7.992 2.854 .167 7.120 8.623 5.644 8.867 1.156.0 416.0 502.0 1.176.0 412.0 50.00 138.00 36.50 71.50 47.50 143.10 59.00 71.20 140.00 6,048.0 756.80 8.674 154 165 189 189 159 2-OUNCE EXTRACT PANELS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: O'NEILL TRIPLE, WITH P. N. FEEDER H Chief operator.......... 1 1 4 Machine operator Feeder operator...... . Turn-out boys_____ H Peanut-roaster boy % Carry-in boy............ ~7H Total............... $0.31 ! 1925 . 70 Feb .70 Mar___ 1.20 Apr____ . 12 M ay___ .27 June___ July----Aug....... Sept___ Oct....... N ov...... Dec $0.78 . 70 .70 .30 .30 .45 i 3,122.0 3,042.0 1,052.0 2,044.0 3,110.0 2,740.0 3,186.0 2,440.0 2,540.0 2,690.0 1,422.0 3.30 ■ Total. 27,388.0 21.771 21.377 22.147 21.403 21.703 20,711 22.280 20.678 21.255 19.721 21.129 2.942 2.889 2.993 2.892 2.933 2.799 3.011 2.794 2.872 2.665 2.855 $0.152 . 154 . 149 . 154 .152 .159 .148 .160 .155 .167 .156 1,288.50 21.256 2.872 .155 143.40 142.30 47.50 95.50 143.30 132.30 143.00 118.00 119.50 136.40 67.30 2-OUNCE EXTRACT PANELS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. N. (10 ARMS)~SINGLE H Machine foreman... l Machine operator. _ lh Hot-ware inspector. 2% Carry-in boys......... VI Total.. I.75 i$0.150 . 55 ! . 550 . 52 j . 074 . 40 . 933 1.708 1925 O ct.. N ov„ D ec.. T otal. 1,021.1 : 1.207.8 4.758.9 79.30 12.876 98.00 12.324 373.30 12.748 3.503 3.352 $0,133 .139 .134 6,987.8 550.60 12.691 3.452 .135 72 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY T able A . — PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING BOTTLES BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued 2-OtTHCE EXTRACT PANELS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OVENS A. N. (10 ASMS) DOUBLE Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Machine foreman.._ Machine operator.. X Hot-ware inspector. 2X Carry-in boys_____ lX 3*i Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and month per per per hour hour $0.80 $0,267 .600 .60 .112 .56 .42 1.959 Total. Total output Unithours Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour 1925 Jan... June___ July.. 774.8 1,210.8 Gross 9.00 13.511 42.80 18 103 72.00 16.817 Gross 3.494 4.682 4.349 L145 .108 .116 Total 2,107.2 123.80 17.021 4.402 .115 Gross 121.6 2-OUNCE EXTRACT PANELS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. R. (10 ARMS) SINGLE, WITH CONVEYOR X Chief foreman____ 1 Machine foreman.. 1 Machine operator.. Total............ 2H $1.20 $0.30 .90 .55 .90 .55 1.75 1917.. 1918.. Total 3,733.0 466.0 287.00 13.007 35.90 12.981 5.780 5.769 $0,135 .135 4,199.0 322.90 13.004 5.779 .135 2-OUNCE EXTRACT PANELS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. R. (10 ARMS) DOUBLE, WITH CONVEYOR X Chief foreman____ Machine foreman.. 1 1 2X M a ch in e o p e r a to r . $1.20 $0.30 .90 .55 1922.. 15,227.0 14,758.0 828.00 18.390 824.00 17.910 8.173 7.960 $0,095 .098 Total _ 29,985.0 1,652.00 18.151 8.067 .096 .90 .55 1. 75 T o t a l . .............. 2-OUNCE EXTRACT PANELS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. V. (15 ARMS) SINGLE, WITH CONVEYOR Chief foreman....... Machine foreman.. Machine operator _ 2X $1.20 |$0.20 .90 .55 Total............ .90 .55 -j ! 1.65 1919.. 1920.. 1921.. 13,460.0 24,468.0 21,414.0 760.00 17.711 1,257.30 19.461 1,009.70 21.208 8. 174 8. 982 9. 788 $0,093 .085 .078 Total. 59,342.0 3,027.00 19.604 9. 048 .084 2-OUNCE EXTRACT PANELS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. V. (15 ARMS) DOUBLE, WITH CONVEYOR Chief foreman....... Machine foreman.. Machine operator . 2X $1.20 .90 .55 Total.. $0.20 .90 .55 1.65 1925 Jan___ F eb .... Mar___ Apr. M ay___ 202.0 1,072.0 2,890.0 4,286.0 4,384.0 Total. 12,834.0 10. 00 57. 50 122. 20 144. 00 144 00 20.200 9.828 20.816 9.607 23.650 10.915 29.764 13.787 80.444 U. 051 $0,082 .079 .070 .055 .054 471. 70 27.208 12.558 .061 2-OUNCE EXTRACT PANELS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS C. A. (10 ARMS) DOUBLE DUPLEX. WITH CONVEYOR X Chief foreman_____ Machine foreman. Machine operators.. 3X Total.. $1.20 .90 .55 $0.20 .90 1.10 2.20 1925 Apr....... M ay___ Sept___ Oct........ 4.502.0 1.386.0 3.474.0 5.169.0 T otal.. 14,531.0 111.40 40.00 90.50 138.20 12.762 10.942 12.122 11.811 $0,054 .063 .057 .059 380.10 38.229 12.072 .057 40.413 34.650 38.387 37.402 CHAPTER I .---- BOTTLES AND JARS T able A .— 73 PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING BOTTLES BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued ONE-HALF PINT SODAS—HAND Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per gross hour hour Blowers................ Finisher................ Mold boy............. Cleaning-off b o y .. Snapping-up boy_ Carry-in boy........ ►$1.04 Total. 1.04 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 Quantity or amount Item Average output per 8 hours----_ Average output per unit-hour .........do_ Average output per man-hour..........do__ Average blowing labor cost___ per gross. 22 2.75 .393 $1,622 1.€ ONE-HALF PINT SODAS—SEMIAUTOMATIC TWO-MAN MACHINE (JERSEY DEVIL) Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work- X Occupation Machinist................ Gatherer.................. Presser..................... Transfer boy........... Take-out boy.......... Peanut roaster boy. Carry-in boy______ Total.. Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and per month per per hour hour $1.00 0.167 .50 .50 .500 .500 .50 .250 1.67 .67 1.797 Total output Unithours Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per manhour 1923 Jan____ Feb....... Mar___ Apr....... M ay----June----July___ Aug....... Oross 200.0 317.1 426.3 567.4 694.8 411.4 609.3 408.5 60.00 120.00 162.00 225.00 245.50 142.50 180.00 135.00 Oross 3.333 2.643 2.631 2.522 2.830 2.887 8.385 3.026 Gross 0.588 .466 .464 Total __ 3,634.8 1,270.00 2.861 .505 .499 .509 .697 .534 $1.210 1.351 1.354 1.881 1.306 1.290 1.202 1.265 1.2 ONE-HALF PINT SODAS—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: TEEPLE-JOHNSON, WITH GATHERER H 1 1 1 1 4K Machine foreman. $0.95 $0,080 Machinist_________ 1.15 .287 Gatherer. ................. $0.44 Transfer boy_______ ” .38’ ”.380’ Take-out boy_______ .38 .380 Carry-in boy_______ .38 .380 Total................ .44 ........... 1.507 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar___ Apr____ M ay----June___ Aug-----Sept___ Oct____ Dec....... . 1.272.0 1.112.0 1.696.0 1.069.0 1.191.0 895.0 1,705.0 216.0 273.0 819.0 343.00 327.00 468.00 301.00 370.00 271.00 566.00 72.00 77.00 245.00 8.709 3.401 3.624 3.552 3.219 3.303 3.011 8.000 3.546 3.343 0.860 .785 .836 .820 .743 .762 .695 .692 .818 .771 $0,847 .884 .857 .865 .909 .894 .941 .948 .866 .892 T otal. 10,248.0 3,040.00 3.371 .778 .888 ONE-HALF PINT SODAS-SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: O’NEILL, WITH GATHERER H 1 1 A l lH Machine foreman Gatherer................... 1 Transfer man____ >$0.67 Swing man________ Carry-in boys______ 3tye Total................ .67 $1.00 $0,167 .50 .583 .750 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar___ Apr____ M ay----June___ Ju ly.— Aug....... 3.213.0 2.957.0 2.170.0 3.641.0 5.991.0 3.759.0 3.468.0 622.0 752.00 728.00 512.00 904.00 1,272.00 872.00 736.00 128.00 4.273 4.062 4.238 4.028 4.710 4,311 4.712 4.859 1.115 1.060 1.106 1.051 1.229 1.125 1.229 1.268 $0,845 .855 .847 .856 .829 .844 .829 .824 Total. 25,821.0 5,904.00 4.373 1.141 .841 74 PRODUCTIVITY OP LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY T a b l e A . — P R O D U C TIO N A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G BOTTLES B Y H A N D A N D B Y M AC H IN E— Continued ONE-HALF PINT SODAS—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: LYNCH, WITH GATHERER Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Machine foreman.. Machinist............. Gatherers............ . Carry-in boy......... 3H Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates cost Year and per per per month hour hour $0.44 $0.95 $0,080 1.15 .287 .38 .380 Total...................... 44 ................ 747 Total output Unithours 1925 Jan........ Feb....... Mar----Apr....... Gross 413.0 667.0 1,329.0 531.0 93.00 157.00 292.00 Total. 2,940.0 653.00 111.00 Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per manhour Gross 4.409 1784 Gross 1.323 $0,610 i.m .616 1.365 .605 1.486 .697 4.503 1.351 4. *49 4.551 .607 ONE-HALF PINT SODAS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: O’NEILL AND FEEDER Machine foreman.. lH Machine operator.. iH Carry-in boys........ 2H Total.. $1.00 $0,167 .75 .50 .750 .582 1.499 1925 Feb....... Mar....... Apr....... M ay___ June___ July....... Aug....... Nov....... Dec....... 1.902.0 840.0 4.291.0 7.721.0 5.364.0 6.173.0 4.353.0 2.927.0 6.741.0 288.00 134.00 726.00 [, 143.50 809.00 959.00 662.00 427.00 992.00 T otal. 40,312.0 6,140.50 6.604 6.269 6.910 6.752 6.630 6.437 6.576 50.227 .239 .*64 6.795 2.830 2.687 2.5SS 2.894 2.841 2.759 2.818 2.988 2.912 6.565 2.814 .229 6.866 .222 .226 .233 .228 . 219 .221 ONE-HALF PINT SODAS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: HARTFORD-EMPIRE TRIPLE UNIT AND P. N. FEEDER A l Machine foreman 3 $0.80 $0,400 .60 1.800 .56 .336 Carry-in boys........... .42 "2.520 Swing (extra) man__ ........... .42 .420 Machine operators... H Hot-ware inspector.. ______ 6 1 11* Total................ 5.476 1925 Jan____ 5,303.7 Feb 5,710.9 Mar___ 8,911.6 Apr....... 10,283.7 M ay___ 8,484.6 June___ 10,765.1 July . .. . 8,125.1 Aug....... 1,511.5 Sept___ 819.2 Oct........ 6,889.2 Dec....... 5,098.0 Total. 71,902.6 ONE-HALF PINT SODAS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS CONVEYOR Machine foreman.. Machinist.............. Machine operator.. Helper.................... i«/« Total.. $0.90 $0,075 .75 .375 .70 .700 .50 .125 1.275 287.20 326.80 421.40 516.60 402.60 524.50 383.70 72.10 39.70 338.40 255.90 18.467 17.475 21.148 19.907 21.075 20.524 21.176 20.964 21.168 20.358 19.922 1.664 1.674 1.905 1.793 1.899 1.849 1.908 1.889 1.907 1.834 1.795 $0,296 .818 .259 .275 .260 .267 .259 .261 .259 .269 .275 3,568.90 20.147 1.815 .272 A. R. (10 ARMS) SINGLE, WITH 24,269.0 43,597.0 253.0 2,074.00 11.702 3,663.00 11.902 21.00 12.048 6.382 6.492 6.572 $0,109 .107 .106 Total. _ 68,119.0 5,758.00 11.830 6.453 .108 1923. 1924. 1925. ONE-HALF PINT SODAS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. E. (6 ARMS) SINGLE, WITH CONVEYOR Ji IVe Machine foreman.. Machinist..... ........ Machine operator.. Helper................... $0,075 .375 .700 .125 Total. 1.275 1923 1924 1925. 198.730.0 21.685.00 9.164 115.358.0 13.481.00 8.557 167.738.0 19.015.00 ! 8.821 Total.. 481,726.0 54,181.00 & 878 4.999 4.667 4.811 $0,136 .149 .145 4.842 .144 CHAPTER X.---- BOTTLES AND JARS 75 T a b l e A . — PRODUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G BOTTLES B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued ONE-HALF PINT SODAS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. Q. (15 ARMS) SINGLE, WITH CONVEYOR Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and month per per per gross hour hour $0.90 $0,113 .80 1.600 .125 .50 .063 .50 Machine foreman— Machine operators . Helper................. . . . Hot-ware inspector., y» 2 H A L 2>2 1.900 Total............... Total output Unithours Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour Gross 41,150.0 9.965.0 1.062.0 Gross 2,724.00 15.106 580.00 17.181 69.00 15.391 Gross 6.042 6.872 6.156 $0,126 .111 .124 Total __ 52,177.0 3,373.00 15.469 6.188 .123 1923 1924 1925 1-PINT BEERS—HAND Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers 2 1 1 1 1 1 Occupation Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per gross hour hour ....... ..... }$1.04 Blowers Finisher ___ Mold boy__________ $0.40 $0.40 1 Cleaning-off boy____ .40 .40 Snapping-up boy___ ........... .40 i .40 Carry-in boy......... . , 4 « ; .40 7 1.04 Total________ i Quantity or amount Item Average output per 8 hours______ gross.. Average output per unit-hour........ do___ Average output per man-hour____ do___ Average blowing labor cost___per gross.. 22 2.75 .393 $1.622 1.60 1-PINT BEERS-SEMIAUTOMATIC TWO-MAN MACHINE (JERSEY DEVIL) Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and month per per per gross hour hour H Machinist_________ 1 1 1 1 1 V* Gatherer................ Presser...................... |$0.67 Transfer b o y ........... Take-out boy............ Peanut-roaster boy . Carry-in boy ............ Total............... 5% .67 $1.00 $0,167 .50 .50 .38 .50 .500 .500 .380 .250 1.797 Total output Unithours 1923 M ay___ June___ Nov Dec....... Gross 148.4 43.5 49.0 95.0 60.00 15.00 16.50 35.00 Total.. 332.9 126.50 Out put per unithour Out put Labor cost per per man- gross hour Gross Gross 2.428 0.428 2.900 .512 2.970 .524 2.714 .479 2.632 .464 $1.418 1.291 1.276 1.333 1.354 1-PINT BEERS-SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: TEEPLE-JOHNSON, WITH GATHERER a i i i i 4^ ! Machine foreman... $0.95 1$0,080 1.15 i .287 Machinist..... ........... 1 Gatherer................... $6.44~ .38 Transfer boy............. .380 .38 .380 Take-out boy............ .38 .380 Carry-in boy ............ 1925 Sept___ Oct____ Nov Dec....... 319.0 * 338.0 527.0 208.0 96.00 98.00 153.00 67.00 3.323 8.449 3.445 8.105 0.767 .796 .795 .717 $0,876 .878 .878 .926 .44 ...........| 1.507 Total. . 1,392.0 414.00 3.362 .776 '.889 Total............... PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN TH E GLASS INDUSTRY 76 T able A .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING BOTTLES BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued 1-PINT BEERS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: HARTFORD-EMPIRE TRIPLE UNIT, WITH P. N. FEEDER Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and per month per per hour hour Machine foreman.._ Machine operators.. Hot-ware inspector. Carry-in b o y s_____ Swing (extra) man.. llrs $0,400 1.800 .66 .336 .42 2.520 .42 .420 1925 Mar___ Apr___ M a y ... June — July.. Aug.. Sept___ Oct_. Nov— D ec.. Total output Unithours Gross 802.5 3.143.0 889.1 734.5 1,775.3 2.227.0 784.4 559.3 953.3 1,847.9 T otal. 13,716.3 Total.. 48.80 170.30 49.20 44.50 95.40 118.10 39.90 30.30 46.80 94.30 Out put per unithour Gross 16. U5 18.456 18.071 16.506 18. 610 18.857 19.659 18.460 Out Labor put cost per per mangross hour Gross 1.482 19. 596 1.663 1.628 1.487 1.677 1.699 1.771 1.663 1.835 1.765 $0.333 .296 .303 .332 .294 .290 .278 .297 .269 .279 737.60 18.595 1.675 .294 1364 1-PINT BEERS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. E. (6 ARMS) SINGLE, WITH CONVEYOR Machine foreman.. Machinist....... ....... Machine operator.. Helper.................... X l J/e $0.90 $0,075 .75 .375 .70 .700 .50 .125 Total.. 1.275 212,283.0 22,377. 00 96,961.0 11,330. 00 270,055.0 30,377. 00 9.487 8.558 8.890 5.175 4.668 4.849 $0,134 .149 .143 Total. 579,299.0 64,084. 00 9.040 4.931 .141 1923. 1924. 1925. 1-PINT BEERS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. R. (10 ARMS) SINGLE, WITH CONVEYOR X i«/« Machine foreman. _ Machinist_______ Machine operator.. Helper.................... $0.90 $0,075 .75 .375 .70 .700 .50 .125 Total.. 1.275 1923 1924 1925 31,171.0 2,466.00 12.640 60,343.0 4,471.00 13.497 155,894.0 11,437.00 13.631 6.895 7.362 7.435 $0,101 .095 .094 T otal. 247,308.0 18,374.00 13.460 7.342 .095 1-PINT BEERS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. Q. (15 ARMS) SINGLE, WITH CONVEYOR X Machine foreman... $0.90 $0,113 I 1923.. .80 1.600 ! 1924.. .50 .125 ! 1925. .50 .063 | Machine operators.. X Helper...................... X Hot-ware inspector. 2 2X Total.............. 1.900 109,820.0 6,652.00 16.509 250,557. 0 13,508.00 18.549 381,301.0 19,613.00 19.441 6.604 7.420 7.776 $0,115 .102 .098 Total. 741,678.0 39,763.00 18.652 7.661 .102 ONE-HALF PINT WHISKY DANDIES—HAND Labor unit Num ber of work ers 2 1 1 1 1 1 7 Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per gross hour hour Blowers.................... |$0.87 Finisher. _____ J____ Mold boy ................. Cleaning-off boy....... Snapping-up boy Carry-in boy__......... Total............... .87 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 1.60 Item Average Average Average Average output per 8 hours.......... gross._ output per unit-hour....... do___ output per man-hour....... do___ blowing labor cost—per gross.. Quantity or amount 25 3.125 .446 $1,382 CHAPTER I.— BOTTLES AND JARS 77 T a b l e A . — P R O D U C TIO N A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G BOTTLES B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued ONE-HALF PINT WHISKY DANDIES—SEMIAUTOMATIC TWO-MAN MACHINE (JERSEY DEVIL; Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Output and labor cost Wage rates per }$0. 56 .60 .60 .500 .500 .50 .250 .56 Total............ 5% Labor cost Year and month per hour $1.00 $0,167 Machine foreman. __ i* Gatherer................. 1 Presser....... ............ 1 Transfer b o y ......... 1 Take-out boy.......... 1 Peanut-roaster boy. v* Carry-in boy........... rates per hour 1.797 Total output Unithours Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per manhour Gross 0.541 1923 Jan____ Feb___ Mar___ M ay__ July.... Aug----Oct____ Nov___ Dec___ Gross 46.0 141.8 266.3 198.0 133.5 151.5 266.0 197.7 293.1 15.00 40.00 67.50 55.00 37.50 45.00 67.50 52.00 75.00 Gross 3.067 3.545 3.950 3.600 3.660 3.367 3.960 3.790 3.908 Total.. 1,693.9 454.00 3.731 $1.147 1.068 1.016 1.060 1.066 1.095 1.016 1.035 1.021 1.042 ONE-HALF PINT WHISKY DANDIES—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: O’NEILL, WITH FEEDER i* 1 1 X A Machinist................. Machine operator__ Transfer boy_______ Peanut-roaster b o y .. Carry-in b oy............. $1.00 .70 .50 .50 .50 Total.. 3% 0.167 .700 .500 .500 .250 1925 Jan____ Feb July___ Aug....... Sept___ Oct N ov___ Dec....... 728.0 52.0 224.0 638.0 729.0 276.0 1,242.0 1,227.0 131.00 11.00 53.00 118.00 142.00 58.00 229.00 235.00 5.558 4.727 4.227 5.407 5.134 4.759 5.424 5.221 1.516 1.289 1.153 1.475 1.401 1.298 1.479 1.424 $0,380 .446 .500 .390 .411 .443 .389 .404 2.117 T otal. 5,116.0 977.00 5.237 1.428 .403 ONE-HALF PINT WHISKY DANDIES—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: O’NEILL AND FEEDER Machine foreman.. Machine operator.. Carry-in boy......... 2H I $1.00 $0,167 1925 Jan____ Aug....... Sept___ Oct____ Nov___ Dec....... 357.0 382.0 99.0 2,164.0 1,334.0 1,890.0 69.00 64.50 20.00 360.00 224.00 317.00 5.174 5.922 4.950 6.011 5.955 5.962 2.388 2.733 2.285 2.774 2.748 2.752 $0,264 .231 .276 .227 .229 .229 1.367 T ota l- 6,226.0 1,054.50 5.904 2.725 .231 .70 .50 Total. .700 .500 ONE-HALF PINT WHISKY DANDIES—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: LYNCH AND FEEDER Chief operator....... Machine operator.. Carry-in boy......... 2H Total- $0.90 .60 .31 $0.15 .60 .31 1925 M ay___ June___ July...... Aug....... Sept__„ Oct........ N ov...... Dec....... 718.0 1,124.0 200.0 443.0 413.0 356.0 543.0 956.0 96.00 144.00 26.00 57.00 58.00 48.00 76.00 132.00 7.479 7.806 7.692 7.772 7.121 7.417 7.145 7.243 3.452 3.603 3.550 3.587 3.287 3.423 3.298 3.343 $0,142 .136 .138 .136 .149 .143 .148 .146 1.06 T ota l- 4.753.0 637.00 7.462 3.444 .142 ONE-HALF PINT WHISKY DANDIES^—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. R. (10 ARMS), SINGLE Machine foreman... 1* Machine operator... inspector. H Hot-ware Carry-in boys_____ 4H Total.. 40780°— 27------- 6 $0.80 $0,267 .60 .600 .112 .56 .42 1.400 2.379 1925 Sept----Oct....... Nov___ Dec....... 531.4 336.4 953.8 674.4 41.10 12.929 27.70 12.144 73.90 12.907 T otal- 2,496.0 10.184 11.184 2.657 2.495 2.652 2.298 203.00 12.296 2.321 .194 .196 .184 .213 78 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY T able A .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING BOTTLES BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued l-PINT WHISKY DANDIES—HAND Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation | Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per gross hour hour 2 1 1 1 1 1 Blowers.................... Finisher_____•........... }$1.15 Mold boy.................. Cleaning-off boy____ Snapping-up boy Carry-in boy............. 7 Total................ $0.40 .40 .40 .40 1.15 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 Quantity or amount Item Average output per 8 hours______ gross.. Average output per unit-hour____ do___ Average output per man-hour........do___ Average blowing labor cost___per gross. _ 20 2.50 .357 $1.790 1.60 1-PINT WHISKY DANDIES—SEMIAUTOMATIC TWO-MAN MACHINE (JERSEY DEVIL) Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and month per per per gross hour hour $1.00 $0.167 .50 .50 .38 .50 .500 .500 .380 .250 1923 July----Aug....... Sept___ Oct Nov Dec .67 .......... 1.797 Total. i* 1 1 1 1 H Machine foreman.. Gatherer.................. j$0 . 67 Presser...................... Transfer boy............. Take-out boy______ Peanut-roaster boy .. Carry-in boy__......... 5H Total................ Total output Unithours Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour Gross 121.1 178.4 322.3 337.4 289.4 131.0 48.00 65.50 115.00 116.00 90.00 45.00 Gross 2.528 2.724 2.803 2.909 8. 216 2.911 Gross 0.JU5 .481 .495 .513 .568 .514 $1,888 1.331 1.312 1.289 1.280 1.283 1,379.6 479.50 2.878' .508 1.295 1-PINT WHISKY DANDIES—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: TEEPLE-JOHNSON, WITH GATHERER * H 1 1 1 1 4H Machine foreman M ach in ist _ ______ Gatherer _________ $0.41 Transfer boy_ ........... Take-out boy............ ______ Carry-in boy_______ Total................ $0.95 $0,080 1.15 .287 .38 .38 .38 .380 .380 .380 .41 ........... 1.507 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar___ Apr....... M ay___ Aug....... Sept___ Oct........ N ov___ Dec....... 1,006.0 588.0 422.0 731.0 646.0 163.0 871.0 700.0 19.0 664.0 279.00 160.00 122.00 218.00 194.00 56.00 298.00 199.00 5.00 202.00 3.606 3.675 3.459 3.353 3.330 2.911 2.923 3.518 8.800 3.287 0.832 .848 .798 .774 .768 .672 .676 .766 .877 .759 $0,829 .821 .847 .860 .863 .929 .927 .839 .807 .869 Total. 5,810.0 1,733.00 3.353 .774 .860 1-PINT WHISKY DANDIES—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: O’NEILL, WITH GATHERER A * 1 1 Machine foreman.. Machinist............. Gatherer............... Transfer boy......... Carry-in boys....... 3* TotaL. $0.75 $0,068 ! 1917-. .75 .136 | 1918.. $0.39 . .40 .35 11,531.0 722.0 3,783.00 241.00 3.048 2.996 0.906 .891 $0,716 .722 T o ta l.. 12,253.0 4,024.00 3.042 .904 .717 .400 .382 .986 ! CHAPTER I.---- BOTTLES AND JARS 79 T a b l e A . — PRODUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G BOTTLES B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued l-PINT WHISKY DANDIES—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: LYNCH, WITH GATHERER Labor unit Total............... Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per mangross hour 2.485.00 1.012.00 Gross 3.713 3.536 Gross 1.571 1.496 $0,550 .558 Total.! 12,806.0 1 3,497.00 3.662 1.549 .552 Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and month per per per gross hour hour .39 ........... .586 Total output Gross 1919 1920 m $0.75 $0,068 ft Machine foreman * Machinist............... .75 .136 1 Gatherer. ................. $0.39 Carry-in boys........... " ’ .'35' ” .’ 382’ 2tt Unithours 00 Occupation wo Num ber of work ers Output and labor cost 1-PINT WHISKY DANDIES-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: O’NEILL AND FEEDER X Machine foreman 1 Machine operator 1 Carry-in boy_______ $1.00 $0,167 .70 .700 .50 .500 1925 Jan____ Feb Apr M ay___ June___ July___ Aug....... Sept___ Oct . N ov...... Dec....... 1,250.0 117.0 340.0 297.0 205.0 404.0 594.0 931.0 1,020.0 1,237.0 254.0 244.00 25.00 69.00 67.00 42.00 86.00 122.00 181.00 185.00 227.00 48.00 5.123 4.680 4.920 1488 4.881 4.698 4.869 5.144 6.514 5.449 5.292 2.364 2.160 2.274 2.046 2.253 2.168 2.247 2.374 2.545 2.515 2.442 $0,267 .292 .277 .808 .280 .291 .281 .266 .248 .251 .258 Total............... 1.367 Total - 6,649.0 1,296.00 5.130 2.368 .266 2X 1-PINT WHISKY DANDIES-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: LYNCH AND FEEDER X Chief operator........... 1 1 2X Machine operator Carry-in boy............. Total............... $0.90 .60 .31 $0.15 .60 .31 1925 Aug....... Sept----Oct........ Nov----D e c___ 381.0 232.0 684.0 750.0 817.0 72.00 49.00 112.00 122.00 144.00 5.292 4.785 6.108 6.148 5. 674 2.442 2.186 2. 819 2.888 2.619 $0,200 .224 .174 .172 .187 1.06 Total. 2,864.0 499.00 5.740 2.649 .185 1-PINT WHISKY DANDIES—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. E. (6 ARMS) SINGLE X Machine foreman ... $0.80 $0,267 .60 .600 .112 .56 .42 .980 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar___ June___ 247.2 464.4 499.8 990.0 32.30 65.80 71.00 143.80 7.658 7.058 7.039 6.885 1.979 1.825 1.820 1.781 $0,256 .277 .278 .284 Total............... 1.959 Total. 2,201.4 312.90 7.035 1.819 .278 Machine operator,... ........... X Hot-ware inspector. 2X Carry-in boys........... 1 m l-PINT WHISKY DANDIES-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. R. (10 ARMS) SINGLE X Machine foreman .. Machine operator__ X Hot-ware inspector SX Carry-in boys........... 1 4*3 Total............... $0.80 $0,267 .60 .600 .112 .56 .42 1.400 2.379 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar___ Apr....... M ay___ July----Sept----Dec____ 1,442.3 1,010.2 483.3 248.0 585.5 413.3 773.2 771. 5 1,110.2 143.20 10.080 106.20 9.603 52.70 9.171 30.50 8.131 63.50 9.221 53.70 7.690 82.20 9.406 79.00 9.760 113.20 9.807 2.071 1.973 1.884 1.671 1.895 1.580 1.933 2.005 2.015 $0,286 .248 .259 .293 .258 .809 .253 .244 .242 Total. 6,837.5 724.20 j 9.441 1.940 .252 80 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN TH E GLASS INDUSTRY T a b l e A . — PRODUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G BOTTLES B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued l-PINT MILK BOTTLES—HAND Labor unit Num ber of work ers 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per gross hour hour Blower____________ ) Gatherer.................... f$l. 75 Finisher....... ............ Mold boy................. Knocking-off boy Snapping-up boy Carry-in b oy_______ Total________ $0.40 .40 .40 .40 1.75 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 Quantity or amount Item Average output per 8 hours ... gross Average output per unit-hour.........do___ Average output per man-hour........do___ Average blowing labor cost per gross____ 20 2.5 .357 $2,390 1.60 1-PINT MILK BOTTLES—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: TEEPLE-JOHNSON, WITH GATHERER Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and per per per month gross hour hour $0.95 $0,080 Machine foreman— 1.15 .287 t\ Machinist................. Gatherer................... $0.43 1 Turn-out boy............ 1 '"'."38" "’ .’ 380’ 1 3H Carry-in boy............. Total................ .38 .43 .380 1.127 Total output Unithours Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour Gross 1.597.0 2.328.0 1.648.0 1, 750.0 1.860.0 1.252.0 1.713.0 1, 511.0 1.726.0 2.479.0 1.205.0 506.00 764.00 529.00 543.00 648.00 404.00 625.00 500.00 544.00 752.00 379.00 Gross 3.156 3.047 3.115 3.223 2.870 3.099 2.741 3.022 3.173 3.297 3.179 Gross 0.947 .914 .935 .967 .861 .930 .822 .907 .952 .989 .954 $0,787 .800 .792 .780 .823 .794 .841 .803 .785 .772 .784 Total. 19,069.0 6,194.00 3.079 .924 .796 1925 Jan........ Feb Mar....... Apr....... M ay___ June___ Aug....... Sept Oct........ N ov...... Dec....... 1-PINT MILK BOTTLES—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: MILLER, WITH GATHERER Machine foreman.. H Machinist................. 3 Gatherers.................. $0.43 1 Transfer boy (ma chine tender)......... Carry-in boy............. 1 5H Total................ $0.95 $0,080 1.15 .287 .38 .38 .380 .380 .43 ........... 1.127 1925 Jan........ Feb M ar..,, Apr....... M ay___ June___ Aug....... Sept...... Oct........ N ov...... Dec....... 599.0 1.176.0 1.192.0 1.678.0 1.226.0 1,142. 0 136.0 929.0 1.056.0 2.134.0 963.0 125.00 224.00 237.00 340.00 266.00 247.00 24.00 166.00 178.00 375.00 176.00 Total. 12,271.0 2,358.00 4.792 $0,899 .984 5.250 .943 5.030 4.935 .925 4.759 .892 4.623 .867 5.667 1.063 5.596 1.049 5.933 1.112 5.691 1.067 5.472 1.026 5.204 .976 $0,665 .645 .654 .658 .667 .674 .629 .631 .620 .628 .636 .647 CHAPTER I .— BOTTLES AND JARS T able 81 A . — PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING BOTTLES BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued 1-PINT MILK BOTTLES—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: MILLER, WITH SINGLE FEEDER AND CONVEYOR Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work- 1X 1 Occupation Machine foreman.. Machine operator.. Take-out boy......... Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and month per per per hour hour $0.70 .65 .28 .65 .28 Total.., Total output Gross 1925 Jan........ 3,202.0 2,251.0 Feb Mar....... 3,526.0 Apr....... 3,249.0 M ay___ 4,073.0 June___ 2.641.0 4.481.0 July Aug....... 4,335.0 Sept___ 4,437.0 Oct........ 3,465.0 Nov...... 3,605.0 Dec....... 3,351.0 T otal. 42,616. 0 Unithours 735.00 612.00 723.00 783.00 856.00 712.00 1,071.00 1,015.00 912.00 688.00 712.00 648.00 9,467.00 Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour Gross Gross 4.356 1.815 3.678 1.533 4.877 2.032 4.149 1.729 4.758 1.983 3.709 1.545 4184 1.743 4.271 1.780 4.865 2.027 5.036 2.098 5.063 2.110 5.171 2.155 4.502 1.876 $0,278 .329 .248 .292 .254 .326 .289 .283 .249 .240 .239 .234 .269 1-PINT MILK BOTTLES—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: HARTFORD-EMPIRE, WITH DOUBLE FEEDER Machine foreman... Machine operators. Carry-in boys_____ $0.90 .66 .42 Total.. $0.90 1.32 2.52 4.74 1925 Jan___ F e b .... Mar___ Apr___ M ay— June__ July— . Aug----Sept___ O ct.— N ov___ Dec___ Total 3.981.0 554.0 2.558.0 3.215.0 1.703.0 8.277.0 2.688.0 5.530.0 4.447.0 4.494.0 3.877.0 4.176.0 45,500.0 314.00 42.00 184.50 239.00 123.00 603.50 199.00 415.00 331.00 340.00 300.00 309.00 3,400.00 12.678 13.190 IS. 864 13.452 13.846 13.715 13.508 13.325 13.435 13. 218 12.923 13. 515 13.382 1.409 1.466 1.540 1.495 1.538 1.524 1.501 1.481 1.493 1.469 1.436 1.502 1.487 $0,374 .359 . 342 .352 .342 .346 .351 .356 .353 .359 .367 .351 .354 1-PINT MILK BOTTLES-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: HARTFORD-EMPIRE, WITH DOUBLE FEEDER AND CONVEYOR Vk Machine foreman 1 1 Machine operator Helper____________ TotaL.............. $1.00 .70 .50 $0.17 .70 .50 1.37 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar___ Apr....... M ay___ June___ July___ 1,481.0 868.0 565.0 1,975.0 1,692.0 2,270.0 3,417.0 2,092.0 Sept___ 2,201.0 1,777.0 Nov .. 1,400.0 Dec....... 1,388.0 Total. 21,126.0 141.50 90.00 61.00 176.00 147.00 196.00 289.50 179.00 188.00 152.00 117.00 115.00 1,852.00 10.466 9.644 9.262 11.222 11. 510 11. 582 11.803 11.687 11.707 11.691 11.966 12.070 11.407 4.830 4.451 4.275 5.179 5.312 5.346 5.448 5.394 5.403 5.396 5.523 5.571 5.265 $0,131 . 142 .148 .122 .119 .118 .116 .117 .117 .117 .114 .113 .120 1-PINT MILK BOTTLES-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. E. (6 ARMS) SINGLE M Machine foreman Machine operator__ Y2 Helper....................... Carry-in boys........... 3 $0.75 $0,188 .50 .500 .42 .210 .40 1.200 Total................ 2.098 l 1925 1,666.0 Jan____ 1,494.0 Feb 1.040.0 Mar___ Apr....... 1.840.0 M ay___ 2,557.0 June___ 2,470.0 July . 1,960.0 852.0 Aug....... Sept___ 1,423.0 Oct____ 5,121.0 N ov___ 1,676.0 875.0 Dec....... T ota l.. 22,983.0 273.50 254.00 180.00 316.00 414.00 411.00 351.00 161.00 250.00 1,118.00 311.00 146.00 4,185.50 6.091 5.882 5.778 5.823 6.176 6.032 5.584 5.292 5.692 4.581 5.389 5.993 5.491 1.282 1.238 1.216 1.226 1.300 1.270 1.176 1.114 1.198 .964 1.135 1.262 1.156 $0,344 .357 .363 .360 .340 .348 .376 .396 .369 .458 .389 .350 .382 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY 82 T able A . — PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING BOTTLES BY HAND AND BY MACHINE—Continued 1-PINT M UK BOTTLES—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. R. (10 ARMS) SINGLE Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work- Occupation Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and month per per per hour hour X Machine foreman . Machine operator. Helper.................... Carry-in boys........ $0.70 .60 .48 .48 Total. $0.35 .60 .24 1.92 3.11 Unithours Total output Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour Gross 2. 795.0 3,345.0 5.518.0 4,011.0 4,427.0 3,968.0 4,667.0 4,063.0 4,065.0 432.00 576.00 740.00 600.00 648.00 576.00 648.00 600.00 576.00 Gross 6.470 5.807 7.^57 6.685 6.832 6.889 7.202 6.772 7.057 Gross 1.078 .968 1 . 24$ 1.114 1.139 1.148 1,200 1.129 1.176 $0,481 .686 .417 .465 .455 .451 .432 .459 .441 T otal. 36,859.0 5,396.00 6.831 1.139 .455 1923 Mar___ Apr-----June___ July...... Aug . . . . Sept___ Oct........ N o v ___ Dec 1-QUART MILK BOTTLES—HAND Labor unit Num ber of work ers 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 7 Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per gross hour hour B low er___________ 1 Finisher................... . >$2.18 Gatherer. _ .............. Mold boy.................. Knocking-off boy Snapping-up boy___ Carry-in boy............. $0.40 .40 .40 .40 2.18 Total___ $0.40 .40 .40 .40 Quantity or amount Item Average output per 8 hours ____gross.. Average output per unit-hour........do___ Average output per man-hour____ do___ Average blowing labor cost— per gross.. 16 2 .286 $2.980 1.60 1-QUART MILK BOTTLES—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: TEEPLE-JOHNSON, AND GATHERER Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Machine foreman.. Machinist............. Gatherer- ............ . Turn-out boy........ Carry-in boy......... 3X Total............... Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and per per per month hour hour $0.66 .66 $0.95 $0,080 .287 1.15 .38 .38 .380 .380 1925 Jan____ Feb....... Mar___ Apr....... M ay___ June___ Aug....... Sept___ Oct N ov___ Dec....... Total output Unithours Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per mangross hour Gross 1,302.0 1,368.0 1,434.0 1,470.0 1,247.0 766.0 1,188.0 1,248.0 1,446.0 1,389.0 754.0 506.00 519.00 529.00 543.00 497.00 298.00 500.00 471.00 572.00 542.00 294.00 Gross 2.573 2.636 2.711 2.707 2.509 2.570 2.376 2,650 2.528 2.563 2.565 Gross 0.772 .791 .818 .812 .753 .771 .713 .795 .758 .769 .770 $1.098 1.087 1.076 1.076 1.109 1.098 1.134 1.085 1.106 1.100 1.099 T otal. 13,612.0 5,271.00 2.582 .775 1.096 83 CHAPTER I .— BOTTLES AND JARS T able A .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN M AK ING BOTTLES BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued l-QUART MILK BOTTLES—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: MILLER, WITH GATHERER Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Machine foreman.. Machinst............... . Gatherers. ............. Machine tender___ Carry-in boy......... . Total___ 5H Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and month per per per gross hour hour $0.66 $0.95 $0,080 .288 L 15 .380 .380 ........... 1.128 Total output Unithours Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per manhour Gross 4.423 4.368 4.352 4.163 Gross 0.829 .819 .816 .781 .824 .789 .762 .903 .963 .842 Gross 1.849.0 1.092.0 1.275.0 841.0 1.027.0 1.170.0 £91.0 1.676.0 1.926.0 422.0 1.835.0 418.00 250.00 293.00 202.00 245.00 278.00 247.00 348.00 375.00 94.00 351.00 4.816 5.136 4.489 5.228 T otal. 14,154.0 3,101.00 4.564 1925 Jan__ Feb... Mar___ Apr....... M ay___ June___ Aug....... Sept----O c t... N ov._ Dec— 4.209 4.012 .856 $0,915 .918 .919 .931 .916 .928 .941 .894 .879 .911 .876 .907 1-QUART MILK BOTTLES—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: MILLER, WITH FEEDER AND WITH CONVEYOR Machine foreman.. Machine operator. Take-out boy......... 2% . $0.70 .65 . .28 $0.28 .65 .28 Total.. 1925 7,136.0 4,429.0 7,099.0 5,983.0 M ay___ 6,235.0 June___ 4,408.0 9,258.0 July___ Aug....... 8,778.0 Sept----- 8,810.0 Oct........ 10,038.0 N ov___ 7,478.0 Dec....... 8,313.0 1,985.00 1,532.00 1,983.00 2,008.00 1,816.00 1,679. 00 2,927.00 2,432.00 2,144.00 2,376.00 2,088.00 2,184.00 3.595 2.891 3.580 2.980 3.433 2.625 3.163 3.609 4.109 4.225 3.581 3.806 1.498 1.205 1.492 1.242 1.430 1.094 1.318 1.504 1.712 1.760 1.492 1.586 $0,337 .418 .338 .406 .352 .461 .382 .335 .294 .286 .338 .318 T otal. 87,965.0 25,154.00 3.497 1.457 .346 Feb . Mar___ 1-QUART MILK BOTTLES—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: HARTFORD-EMPIRE, WITH DOUBLE FEEDER 1 2 6 Machine foreman Machine operators Carry-in boys______ 9 Total............... 1-QUART MILK $0.90 1.32 2.52 1925 Jan____ 6,409.0 Feb 640.0 Mar...... 8,481.0 Apr....... 11,453.0 M ay----- 11,830.0 June----- 6,760.0 July___ 10,703.0 Aug....... 7,974.0 Sept----- 8,671.0 Oct 9,028.0 Nov . .. 8,688.0 D e c ... 3,501.0 4.74 Total. 94,138.0 583.00 56.00 809.00 987.00 1,032.50 612.00 980.50 736.00 775.00 767.50 771.00 315.00 10.993 11.429 10.483 11.604 11.458 11.046 10.916 10.834 11.188 11.763 11.268 11.114 1.222 1.270 1.165 1.289 1.273 1.227 1.213 1.204 1.243 1.307 1.252 1.235 $0,431 .415 .462 .408 .414 .429 .434 .437 .424 .403 .421 .426 8,424.50 11.174 1.242 .424 BOTTLES-AUTOMATTC MACHINE: HARTFORD-EMPIRE, FEEDER AND WITH CONVEYOR lH Machine operator.. l Helper.................... Machine foreman.. 2% $0.90 .66 .42 $1.00 $0.17 .70 .50 Total........................................ .70 .50 1.37 WITH DOUBLE 1925 Jan____ Feb___ Mar___ Apr___ M ay— . June— July..... Aug----Sept— Oct___ Nov___ Dec___ 3.374.0 1.881.0 73.0 2.699.0 2.548.0 3.309.0 2.352.0 2.873.0 3.307.0 3.578.0 3.712.0 3.918.0 383.50 229.00 13.00 332.00 287.00 368.50 259.00 317.00 365.00 388.00 388.00 414.00 8.798 8.214 5.615 8.130 8.878 8.980 9.081 9.063 9.060 9.222 9.567 9.464 4.061 3.791 2.592 3.752 4.098 4.145 4.191 4.183 4.182 4.256 4.368 .168 .154 .152 .151 .151 .151 .148 .143 .144 Total 33,624.0 3,744.00 8.981 4.145 .152 1416 $0,155 .166 .248 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY 84 T able A . — PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING BOTTLES BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued 1-QUART MILK BOTTLES—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. R. (10 ARMS) SINGLE Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Output and labor cost Total output Unithours Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour Gross 7,107.0 5,345.0 3,454.0 1,584.0 3,124.0 3,490.0 3,196.0 3,841.0 3,624.0 3,290.0 1,152.00 864.00 648.00 288.00 600.00 648.00 576.00 648.00 600.00 576.00 Gross 6.169 6.186 5.330 5.500 6. mo 5.386 5.549 5.927 6.040 5.712 Gross 1.028 $0,504 1.0S1 .60S .583 .888 .917 .565 .697 .868 .898 .577 .925 .560 .525 .988 1.007 .515 .952 .544 Total . 38,055.0 6,600.00 5.766 Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and per per per month hour hour $0.70 .60 .48 .48 Machine foreman.. Machine operator.. Helper.................... Carry-in boys........ $0.35 .60 .24 1.92 3.11 Total.. 1923 Jan........ Feb M a r ..... June___ July Aug....... Sept----Oct....... Nov...... Dec....... .961 .539 1-QUART MILK BOTTLES—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. E. (6 ARMS) SINGLE $0.75 $0,188 .50 .50 .21 .42 .40 1.20 Machine foreman.. Machine operator.. H e lp e r................. Carry-in boys......... 2.098 Total.. 1925 Jan____ Feb___ Mar___ Apr___ M ay___ June.. July... A ug... Sept___ Oct___ N o v ... Dec___ 3,649.0 3,861.0 3,318.0 3,214.0 1,700.0 941.0 3,954.0 2,959.0 2,900.0 822.0 2,544.0 3,270.0 638.00 708.00 617.00 617.00 329.00 190.00 836.00 609.00 589.00 175.00 626.00 615.00 6.719 5.453 5.378 5.209 5.167 4.953 4.730 4.859 4.924 4.697 4.064 5.317 1.204 1.148 1.132 1.097 1.088 1.043 .996 1.023 1.037 .989 .866 1.119 $0. S67 .385 .390 .403 .406 .423 .443 .432 .426 .447 .616 .394 T ota l.. 35,790.0 7,082.00 5.054 1.064 .415 ONE-HALF GALLON PACKER JUGS—HAND Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Blowers.--........... Finisher................ Mold boy__......... Cleaning-off b o y .. Snapping-up boy.. Carry-in boy........ Total.. Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates cost per per per hour hour ►$2.43 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 1.60 Item Average output in 8 hours.............. gross. Average output per unit-hour____ d o ... Average output per man-hour____ d o ... Average blowing labor cost per gross___ Quantity or amount 10 1.25 .179 $3,710 CHAPTER I . — BOTTLES AND JARS T able 85 A . — PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING BOTTLES BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued ONE-HALF GALLON PACKER JUGS—SEMIAUTOMATIC TWO-MAN MACHINE (JERSEY DEVIL) Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation 1 1 1 1 m Machinist....... Gatherer_____ Presser............ Transfer boy. _ Take-out boy.. Carry-in boys.. Total................ Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and per per month per hour hour $1.00 $1.29 .50 .50 .50 1.29 .......... $0.17 .50 .50 .75 1.92 1923 Apr___ June... July___ Aug___ Sept___ Oct____ N ov___ Total. Total output Gross 70.4 71.6 140.8 171.3 117.0 Unithours 50.00 50.00 94.50 Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per manhour Gross Gross 0.249 $2.059 .253 2.046 2.017 .263 1.986 .275 .258 2.031 2.037 .256 .271 1.995 1.408 87.6 80.00 47.50 57.00 1.432 1.490 1.557 1.462 1.449 1.536 727.5 489.00 1.488 68.8 110.00 . 263 2.018 ONE-HALF GALLON PACKER JUGS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: O’NEILL AND FEEDER X Machinist.............. Machine operator.. Carry-in boys........ $1.00 $0.17 .70 .50 Total. .70 1.00 1.87 1925 June___ July...... Aug-----Sept....... Oct........ Nov___ 55.0 95.0 37.0 60.0 85.0 185.0 18.00 21.00 10.00 19.00 22.00 47.00 S. 056 4.524 3.700 3.158 3.864 3.936 0.965 $0.618 1.429 418 511 1.168 .997 Total. 517.0 137.00 3.774 1.192 1.220 1.243 .501 ONE-HALF GALLON PACKER JUGS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. L. (6 ARMS) SINGLE Chief foreman....... Machine foreman.. Machine operator.. Carry-in boys........ 6H $1.20 $0.20 .90 .55 .35 Total.. .90 .55 1.40 3.05 1919.. 1920- Total. 640.0 96.0 172.70 24.30 3.706 3.951 0.601 .640 $0,823 .772 736.0 197.00 3.736 .606 .816 ONE-HALF GALLON PACKER JUGS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. R. (10 ARMS) SINGLE X Chief foreman........ Machine foreman. _ Machine operator.. Carry-in boys........ $1.20 $0.20 .90 .55 .35 Total.. .90 .55 1.40 3.05 1921. 1922. 1923. Total. 973.0 1.787.0 2.003.0 239.40 484.80 532.80 4.064 3.686 3.759 0.659 .598 .610 $0,750 .828 .811 4,763.0 1,257.00 3.789 .614 .805 ONE-HALF GALLON PACKER JUGS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. Q. (15 ARMS) SINGLE X Chief foreman......... 1 Machine foreman... 2 Machine operators.. 4 7X Carry-in boys____ _ Total. . $1.20 .90 .55 .35 $0.20 .90 1.10 1.40 3.60 1925 Jan___ F e b .... Mar___ Aug.— Sept___ Oct___ Nov___ Dec___ 790.0 180.0 1.400.0 487.0 488.0 462.0 855.0 408.0 71.70 18.70 116.30 46.80 50.50 42.70 91.70 40.60 10.406 9.663 10.820 9.824 10.049 1.537 1.343 1.680 1.452 1.348 1.510 1.301 1.402 Total. 5.070.0 479.00 10.585 1.477 11.018 9.626 12.0S8 327 374 299 346 373 333 886 358 .340 86 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY T able A . — PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING BOTTLES BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued 1-GALLON PACKER JUGS—HAND Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per gross hour hour Blowers..................... |$3.55 Finisher................. Mold boy.................. Cleaning-off boy Snapping-up boy . Carry-in boy............. 2 1 1 1 1 1 Total............... 7 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 $0.40 .40 .40 .40 3.55 Quantity or amount Item Average output in 8 hours.............. gross.. A verage output per unit-hour........ do___ Average output per man-hour........do___ Average blowing labor cost. per gross.. 8 1 .143 $5.150 1.60 1-GALLON PACKER JUGS-SEMIAUTOMATIC TWO-MAN MACHINE (JERSEY DEVIL) Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and per month per per gross hour hour .50 .50 .75 Gross 207.7 112.7 141.8 107.8 60.1 247.9 266.9 163.8 180.00 105.00 124.00 98.00 54.00 215.00 231.00 133.50 1.92 T otal. 1,308.7 1,140.50 $0.17 .50 .50 .50 1.84 .......... Machinist................. Gatherer.................... Presser..................... }$1.84 Transfer boy............. Take-out boy............ Carry-in boys........... 5H Total............... Unithours 1923 Apr....... M ay___ June___ July Aug----Sept Oct....... N o v ..... $1.00 %i 1 1 1 1 1H Total output 1 Out'! put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour Gross 1.154 1.073 1.053 1.100 1.113 1.153 1.156 1.227 Gross 0.204 .189 .186 .194 .196 .204 .204 .217 $2.779 2.849 2.868 2.825 2.813 2.879 2.877 2.721 1.147 .202 2.784 1-GALLON PACKER JUGS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. L. (6 ARMS) SINGLE H Machine foreman 1 Machine operator H Hot-ware inspector Carry-in boys______ $0.80 $0,267 .60 .600 .56 .112 .42 1.820 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar___ Apr....... M ay___ J u n e ... July Aug....... ! Oct____ |Dec 2.799 | Total Total............... 5IS 2,400.2 623.0 515.3 1,337.4 1,276.7 963.5 1,599.4 1,064.6 1,811.9 229.8 1,947.7 651.70 157.90 143.50 367.20 430.50 311.90 511.30 256.60 442.10 52.00 459.50 13,769.5 3,784.20 3.683 1i 0.628 3.946 .673 3.591 .612 3.642 .621 2.966 .606 3.089 .527 .533 3.128 4.149 .707 4.098 .699 .758 4.419 4.239 .723 3.639 .620 $0,760 .709 .779 .769 .944 .906 .895 .675 .682 .688 .660 .769 1 i 1-GALLON PACKER JUGS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. Q. (15 ARMS) SINGLE % 1 2 4 Chief foreman........... Machine foreman Machine operators Carry-in boys______ 7H Total............... $1.20 .90 .55 .35 $0.20 .90 1.10 1.40 3.60 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar....... Apr....... M ay___ July Aug-----Sept___ Oct Nov Dec....... 1,676.0 657.0 4,414.0 493.0 3,744.0 2,313.0 3,113.0 2,960.0 2,981.0 3,834.0 1,849.0 T otal.. 28,034.0 210.80 7.951 86.20 7.622 512.60 8.611 54.30 9.079 447.50 8.366 282.00 8.202 357.40 8.710 344.60 18.590 364.00 8.190 484.70 7.910 213.70 8.652 1.109 1.068 1.201 1.267 1.167 1.144 1.215 1.199 1.143 1.104 1.207 $0,423 .472 .418 .897 .430 .439 .413 .419 .440 .455 .416 8.349 1.165 .431 3,357.80 87 CHAPTER I.— BOTTLES AND JARS T a b le A . — PRODUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G BOTTLES B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued 5-GALLON WATER CARBOYS-HAND Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per hour hour Blowers................. Gatherers.............. Mold-boy_............ Cleaning-off boy—. Snapping-up boys. Carry-in boys........ $9.72 Total............ 9.72 Year and month 1925 $0.65 .50 .50 .50 .50 $1.30 .50 .50 1.50 1.50 5.30 Total output Unithours Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- gross hour Gross 0.080 $23.138 .028 24.321 .029 23.594 .029 23.558 .022 27.933 .023 27.565 .027 24.692 .020 29. 645 .025 25.928 .025 26.129 .028 24.442 .027 24.692 Feb Mar----Apr....... M ay---June----July___ Aug-----Sept----Oct___ N ov___ Dec....... Gross 159.1 110.3 125.4 184.0 81.3 121.9 129.4 120.9 208.6 210.4 128.0 242.8 403.00 30100 328.00 480.00 279.00 410.00 366.00 454.00 638.00 652.00 356.00 685.00 Gross 0.897 .363 .382 .383 .291 .297 .354 .266 .327 .323 .360 .354 Total. 1,822.1 5,355.00 .340 .026 25.308 5-GALLON WATER CARBOYS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: OWENS A. T. (6 ARMS) SINGLE Machine foreman— 1 Machine operator - inspector. H Hot-ware Carry-in b oy s........ 3H Total.. $0.80 50.267 .600 .60 . 112 .56 .42 1*400 1925 June___ July___ Aug....... Sept___ Oct....... N ov___ 786.9 760.2 957.9 648.7 535.9 102.9 605.80 593.80 617.00 532.30 506.80 141.10 1.299 1.280 1.553 1.219 1.057 .729 0.270 .266 .323 .253 .220 .151 $1.831 1.859 1.532 1.952 2.251 8.263 2.379 Total - 3,792.5 2,996.80 1.265 .263 1.880 CHAPTER II.— PRESSED AND BLOWN WARE PRESSED WARE It was purely through accident that the pressed and blown ware branches of the glass industry grew up and developed under the same roof. With the exception of the common raw materials which are used in all branches of the glass industry, there is nothing, either in the methods of production or in the nature of the product, to justify the classification of the pressed and blown ware in the same group. Some products, such as tumblers or sherbets for instance, are produced by both methods, but the similarity of the products goes only as far as the name. In fact, there is much more in common between the blown ware and the bottle industry than between the pressed and the blown ware. A blown tumbler or any other blown product when taken from the leer looks more like a bottle than like the object it is intended to be, while in the case of pressed ware the object is usually complete when it is taken out of the leer. As this study concerns itself primarily with methods of production and out put, both of which are decidedly different in pressed and in blown ware, it is necessary to treat the two branches separately. The development of machinery for the making of pressed glass ware has been much slower and less striking than that for making bottles. One of the reasons for this rather slow development of machinery is the multiplicity of products classified in this branch of the glass industry. There are literally tens of thousands of indi vidually shaped articles which are pressed in molds either by hand or by machine. With the exception of tumblers, which are produced in very large quantities, pressed glassware is made in comparatively limited quantities, not justifying the use of expensive machinery for its production. Besides, the use of machinery was not as compelling as it was in the case of bottles. When any pressed article began to be made by machine the manufacturers were not forced either to install the machine or to withdraw entirely from business, as had been the case with the bottle manufacturers, because they had a third alternative, which was merely to stop producing the article in question and to divert their attention and labor force to some other product not yet affected by the machine. The field for such new products proved to be almost limitless, as shown by the countless items of pressed ware on the market under the general classification of “ novelties.” At present there seems to be no indication of the machine invading the novelty business. The modem machine is devised primarily for mass output of a uniform product, while novelties are generally made in very small quantities to appeal to individual whims and tastes. Nearly all staple products, of which the tumbler in its various forms and sizes is by far the leading item, are made on the automatic machine. Some few plants are still using the semiautomatic rotary press. The hand plants which refused to install the semiautomatic or automatic machinery have also survived, but instead of competing 88 CHAPTER II.---- PRESSED WARE 89 with the machines in producing staple articles they have taken up the making of novelties and developed an entirely new branch of the industry. The machine plants and the hand plants do not compete with each other; their relationship must therefore be considered as of a com plementary rather than a competitive nature. The situation is some what similar to the case of plants making toilet and perfume .bottles, but with this difference, that the toilet and perfume bottles represent but a very small fraction of the bottles made, while the novelties represent a very considerable part, if not fully a half, of the entire pressed-ware production. In spite of the ever-growing importance of novelties as a factor in pressed-ware production, the processes used in making these products will not be discussed in this study for the following reasons: (1) No two plants in the country specialize in the same kind of novelty. Many of the items are patented and are produced in a single plant only, thus offering no basis whatever of measuring the comparative productivity of the workers engaged in making the patented articles. (2) As implied m the name, novelties are extremely short lived and often disappear from the market before the shop engaged in their production has a chance to develop sufficient skill to stabilize its productivity, and this precludes the possibility of comparing present efficiency with that of previous years. (3) Very few, if any, of the novelties are made on the machine, and there is therefore no way of gauging the effects of machinery on man-hour output in this field, which is the principal aim of this study. In the following pages only such pressed ware will be discussed as can be and is being made both by hand and by machine processes, so that the effects of machinery on man-hour output can be meas ured in quantitative terms. Specifically, the study will deal with tumblers, nappies, and sherbets, as the three items constitute by far the major portion of the staple articles in the field of pressed ware. MAKING PRESSED GLASSWARE BY HAND The art of making pressed glassware by hand is neither so difficult nor so complicated as blowing bottles by hand. As in the case of bottles, the work is usually performed by a group of workers, consti tuting a unit called the “ shop.” A normal Shop usually consists of three skilled workers, the gatherer, the presser, and the finisher, and two or more helpers. In making very simple articles, such as packer tumblers, nappies, etc., a finisher is not needed. In more complicated products like pitchers and stemware two finishers are sometimes required. The helpers are termed “ carry-in boys,” “ carry-over boys,” “ bit boys,” and “ warming-in boys,” the designation depending en tirely on the nature of their services. Their number varies from two for the simplest articles to as many as seven for the more com plicated products. The work of making pressed glassware by hand proceeds as follows: The gatherer inserts his iron rod, the punty, into the opening of the pot,1and by skillful manipulation accumulates at the end of the punty the necessary quantity of molten glass. He then withdraws this glass i Most hand-pressed articles are still being made from covered pots. 90 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IX THE GLASS INDUSTRY from the pot and holds the punty over the mold in such a position as to allow the glass to flow into the mold, which is usually placed on a table in front of the presser. At the proper moment, determined by the weight of the article, the presser cuts off the flow with a pair of shears, and then pushes the mold toward the center of the table right under the plunger mounted over the table. By operating a hand lever, usually located at the side of the table (thus giving to the apparatus the name “ side lever press” )? with the necessary pressure, the presser causes the plunger to drop into the mold and to impart to the soft glass the shape of the mold on the outside and that of the plunger on the inside. The working of the lever is the most skillful part of the operation, as upon the pressure of the plunger depends the smooth and uniform F ig . 10.— SIDE LEVER PRESS FOR MAKING PRESSED GLASSWARE distribution of the glass in the article. The presser is therefore considered the most important member and the leader of the shop. His position corresponds to that of the blower in making bottles. His wage, whether on a time basis or by the piece, determines the wages of the other skilled workers of the shop, the gatherer’s wage being 80 per cent and that of the finisher 90 per cent of the presser’s earnings. When taken out of the mold by the presser the article is physically completed, at least so far as its shape is concerned. If of the cheaper ware, it is then taken by the carry-in boy to the leer to be annealed. The majority of the pressed glassware, however, must undergo a finishing process, due to the dullness of the glass as a result of the contact with the iron mold and to the ragged edge usually left by the plunger. In such case the carry-over boys take the articles, one at a time, from the side lever press to the “ warming-in” or “ snapping CHAPTER II.---- PRESSED WARE 91 up ” boy. He places each article in a snap somewhat different from the type used in making bottles, and inserts the snap with the article in the glory hole to reheat and fire-polish the glass. The glory hole is a more complicated affair than that used for bottles, and it requires a good deal of experience and skill on the part of the warming-in boy so to manipulate the snap as to give the article in it a thorough polish without completely remelting it. It is also the duty of the warming-in boys to flatten the nappies into plates while fire polishing them in the glory hole. Their work is therefore con sidered of a higher skill than that of the carry-in or carry-over boys and their rate of wages is also considerably higher. From the glory hole the article is delivered to the finisher, who smooths and bevels the edges and adds whatever additional touches may be necessary for the completion of the ware. The carry-in boy then takes it to the leer to be annealed. SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINERY The transition from hand production to the semiautomatic stage in making pressed ware did not constitute such a radical change as the corresponding transition in bottle making. In the case of bottles, the semiautomatic machine completely displaced the finisher and gradually replaced the blower by a semiskilled machine operator. No such changes took place in the making of pressed glassware. In fact, the transition was so gradual and the effects on the industry so small that were it not for the comparative increase in man-hour output effected by the semiautomatic rotary press, one could hardly draw a line of distinction between the two stages. The principal differences in the two processes were the number of molds and the kind of power used to operate the plunger. But even these two changes were not brought about simultaneously. Many a side lever press had already been worked with two and more molds when the rotary press was introduced. The rotary press consists merely of a rotating table equipped with four to six molds and surmounted by a plunger operated by com pressed air or by electric power. There were no direct perceptible changes brought about by the rotary press either in the composition of the shop or in the method of production. The work of the presser was lightened and the output of the shop considerably increased. The indirect result, however, of the introduction of the rotary press and the increased output was the gradual replacement of the warmingin boys and the hand finisher by a glazing machine. There are several types of glazing machines used in the glass indus try. Some are longitudinal, in the form of a belt conveyor, but the majority are of the circular type. The latter consists of a revolving table, rimmed with a series of spindles or cups. The average machine has about 24 such spindles, but some larger machines have as many as 60 or more. Each spindle is equipped with a receptacle to receive and hold the article to be glazed. The receptacles can be made smaller or larger to fit the article glazed. Part of the circular path of the machine is hooded and contains a series of gas jets, which throw their flame upon the ware in the spindles as they pass the hooded area. While moving around the common axis of the machine, each spindle also rotates very rapidly on its own axis, thus uniformly exposing to the flame every part of the article. The heat of the gas is sufficiently 92 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN TH E GLASS INDUSTRY strong to melt and polish the edge exposed to it, but is not sufficient to affect the entire article. It takes but one revolution of the machine to complete the process, and the glazing is done so rapidly that the machine requires the constant attendance of two boys, a “ sticking-up” boy to place the article in the receptacle of the spindle to be glazed and another boy to take out the glazed articles from the machine. The work of the carry-over boy, the warming-in boy, and Fig. 11—SEMIAUTOMATIC ROTARY PRESS FOR MAKING PRESSED GLASSWARE the finisher has thus been replaced by that of two unskilled glazing boys, who are now in a position to finish all the ware pressed on a semiautomatic or even an automatic machine. AUTOMATIC MACHINERY The really revolutionary change in the making of pressed glassware came with the successful introduction of the “ feed and flow ” devices in 1917. As in bottle making, the gatherer was completely eliminated. The work of the presser became so simplified as to amount merely to tending the machine, and accordingly the presser gave place to a semi CHAPTER II .— PRESSED WARE 93 skilled machine operator. As the speed of the machine was increased, and with it the output per hour, the work of taking out the pressed ware from the molds was relegated to a special boy, termed the “ take-out” boy. In the case of unfinished ware, the take-out boy merely transfers the ware from the machine to a tray, for the carry-in boy to take it to the leer to be annealed; in the case of finished ware, he places the ware on a small stand between the pressing machine and the glazing machine, which is sufficiently near both machines to allow the take-out boy and the glazing boy to reach it without moving. In some plants the glazing machine is located so close to the pressing machine that the take-out boy can transfer the article directly from the mold to a receptacle of the glazing machine, in which case the “ sticking-up” boy is eliminated. After the ware is glazed it is removed by the other glazing boy to the tray of the carry-in boy. In some plants the carry-in boy is replaced by an automatic conveyor, and in other plants the leers, especially the modem fireless leers, are located so close to the machines that the glazing boy can transfer the ware directly from the glazing machine to the leer, thus dispensing with the carry-in boy. Machines used.—There are several types of automatic machines used for making pressed glassware, none of which, however, is as large or as complicated as the automatic machines used in bottle making. Neither do they differ among themselves sufficiently to warrant separate descriptions of the types used. Whatever differ ences exist are purely of a mechanical nature and do not affect to any great extent the methods of production or the output. An automatic press consists of a round table, equipped with from six to eight molds, and surmounted by a plunger operated by electric power. The table rotates intermittently, and its motion is syn chronized with that of the feeder on the one hand and the plunger on the other. As a result, the feeder is ready to discharge the “ gob” of molten glass into the mold just at the moment the mold takes its position under the feeder. As the table moves a notch, the plunger descends into the mold, and the article is pressed, while another mold assumes its position under the feeder to receive its “ gob.” The feeding and pressing are thus entirely automatic, but in the majority of the machines now in use a take-out boy is needed to take the pressed article out of the mold. There are, however, a few machines where the taking-out process is performed by an automatic take-out device, and then the machine becomes completely automatic. Feeders.—The feeders used in pressing glassware are, as a rule, of the same type used in bottle making. It may perhaps be emphasized here that the first flow devices used were for the purpose of pressing glassware rather than blowing bottles. There is therefore a larger variety of feeders and more antiquated types used in pressing glass ware than in making bottles. In some plants the paddle needle feeders are used to feed two machines at the same time, but normally one feeder is used for each machine. Principal products.—The principal articles produced on the auto matic machines are tumblers of all kinds, shapes, and sizes. Large quantities of nappies, bowls, trays, and a considerable number of small stemware, such as sherbets and sundaes, are also produced by the automatic machines. 40780°—27----- 7 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY CO F i g . 12—HARTFORD-EMPIRE TWIN PRESS WITH AUTOMATIC CONVEYOR CHAPTER IT.----PRESSED WARE 95 LABOR PRODUCTIVITY AND LABOR COST MAN-HOUR OUTPUT As in the case of bottles, the most striking result of the introduction of machinery for the making of pressed glassware is the very large increase in man-hour output effected by the automatic machines. Table 22 presents a comparison of man-hour output of 8-9 and 10 ounce tumblers, 3 ^ and 4j^-5 ounce sherbets, and 4 ^ -5 and 6-7 inch nappies made by hand and by the semiautomatic and various automatic machines. T a b l e 2 2 . — Average output per man-hour of tumblers, sherbets, and nappies made by hand and by machine Common tumblers 8-9 ounce 10 ounce Method of production and kind of machine Index Quantity number Hand production: Side lever press_____________ _________ Semiautomatic machine: Rotary press__________________ Automatic machine: i Hartford-Empire, with double feeder____________________ Hartford-Empire, with double feeder and automatic take out. Hartford-Empire, with double feeder and automatic take out and conveyor_______ ______ ________________ __________; Ed. Miller, with single feeder______ ________________ ____ i W. .T. Miller, with single feeder and conveyor........................i Special machine, with Single feeder.............. ........................I Pieces 31.00 64.93 209.5 209.03 316.60 1021.3 268.65 930.9 380.71 226.15 249.30 324.42 1228.1 729.5 804.2 1046.5 357.86 189.22 232.35 320.85 1240.0 655. 7 805.1 1111.7 Pieces 100.0 675.2 100.0 Sherbets ! Method of production and kind of machine Hand production: Side lever press ....... .................................. Semiautomatic machine: Rotary press— Hand finish__________________________ _______________ i Machine finish.____________________ ____ ____ __________ Automatic machine: Hartford-Empire, with double feeder . _ _______ ________ Ed. Miller, with single feeder....... ......................... ............... W. J. Miller, with single feeder........................... ................... 3H ounce i Index : Quantity number j Pieces 33. 55 4J4-5 ounce Index Quantity number 100*0 Pieces 30.45 100.0 58.21 173.5 41.66 48.79 136.8 160.2 274.10 146.39 817.0 436.3 192.00 183.61 132.56 630.5 603.0 435.3 Nappies Method of production and kind of machine Hand production: Side lever press............................................... Semiautomatic machine: Rotary press__________ _______ ----Automatic machine: .............. Hartford-Empire, with double feeder............. Ed. Miller, with single feeder................................................ W. J. Miller, with single feeder............................................. Special machine, with single feeder....................................... 4^-5 inch 6-7 inch Index Quantity number Quantityj numter Pieces 39.61 58. 71 100.0 148.2 186.95 300.87 205.24 472.0 759.6 518.2 Pieces j 27.37 ! 45.69 = 77.18 108.45 134.39 100.0 166.9 282.0 396.3 491.0 96 PRODUCTIVTTY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY As will be seen from the foregoing table the average output of a hand shop is 31 eight to nine ounce tumblers and 28.86 ten-ounce tumblers per man-hour. On the semiautomatic rotary press the output is 64.93 eight to nine ounce tumblers per man-liour, while on the automatic machines the man-hour output varies from 209.03 eight to nine ounce tumblers made on a machine, which still requires the services of take-out and carry-in boys, to 380.71 tumblers made on the same kind of machine but equipped with an automatic take-out device and an automatic conveyor. Taking the man-hour output of the hand shop as the base, or 100, the semiautomatic machine shows an increase of 109.5 per cent, while the various automatic machines register increases which range from 575.2 to 1,128.1 per cent for the 8-9 ounce tumbler, and from 555.7 to 1,140 per cent for the 10-ounce tumbler. In the case of 33^-ounce sherbets, the average man-hour output of a hand shop operating with the help of a side lever press is 33.55 pieces; on the semiautomatic rotary press, 58.21 pieces; and on the automatic machines, from 146.39 pieces to 274.10 pieces. On 4 ^ -5 ounce sherbets the average man-hour output of a hand shop is 30.45 pieces; of the semiautomatic rotary press, 48.79 pieces; and of the automatic machine, from 132.56 to 192 pieces. Taking the average man-hour productivity of a hand shop as the base, or 100, the semiautomatic rotary press registers an increase of 36.8 per cent when the 4j^-5 ounce sherbet is finished by hand and 60.2 per cent when the finishing is done on a glazing machine. The automatic machines show increases varying from 336.3 to 717 per cent on 3j^-ounce sherbets and from 335.3 to 530.5 per cent on 4j^-5 ounce sherbets. In the case of 4j^-5 inch nappies the average output of a hand shop is 39.61 pieces per man-hour; on the semiautomatic rotary press it is 58.71 pieces; and on the automatic presses it ranges from 186.95 to 300.87 pieces. On 6-7 inch nappies the average output of a hand shop is 27.37 pieces per man-hour; of the semiautomatic rotary press, 45.69 pieces per man-hour; and on the automatic machines, from 77.18 to 134.39 pieces per man-hour. Taking the man-hour output of a hand shop operating with a side lever press as the base, or 100, the semiautomatic rotary press indicates an increase of 48.2 per cent for 6-7 inch nappies; and the various automatic machines show increases varying from 372 to 659.6 per cent for 43^-5 inch nappies, and from 182 to 391 per cent for 6-7 inch nappies. The particularly large increase in man-hour output in tumblers is due to the fact that tumblers are the principal item produced on automatic machinery, and also to the fact that they are made in exceedingly large quantities at a time. Another factor is the use of automatic take-out devices and an automatic conveyor, as yet used only in the making of tumblers. The effects of these two automatic devices on the man-hour out put can best be illustrated by Table 23, presenting man-hour output of the same kind of tumbler made on the same machine and in the same plant, but in one case with take-out and carry-in boys; in another case with an automatic take-out device and carry-in boys; and in the third case with an automatic take-out device and an automatic conveyor. CHAPTER II .---- PRESSED WARE 97 Comparison of man-hour output of tumblers made on the automatic machine with and without automatic take-out device and automatic conveyor T a b l e 2 3 .— Man-hour output Kind of machine Machine with 3 take-out boys and 2 carry-in boys....................................... Machine with automatic take out and 2 carry-in boys................................. Machine with automatic take out and automatic conveyor........................ Index Index Quantity number A number B Pieces 209.03 316.60 380.71 100.0 151.5 182.1 100 120.3 The application of the automatic take-out device resulted in an increase of 51.5 per cent in the man-hour output, when compared with the output on the same machine but using three take-out boys; the application of the automatic conveyer resulted in an additional increase of 30.6 per cent. The direct increase, however, attributable to the automatic conveyor is only 20.3 per cent, when compared with the output on the same machine but without a conveyor. This comparatively small increase in man-hour output effected by a conveyor, and the necessity to subject the tumblers, after their leaving the press, to glazing and sometimes also cupping, is probably the reason why so few plants have actually installed automatic conveyors. DIRECT LABOR COST Side by side with the increase in man-hour output due to the transition from hand production to machinery, there has also been registered a remarkable decrease in the direct labor cost of making glassware. Here, however, it must be emphasized that the figures of direct labor cost hereafter given do not represent the total labor cost of manufacturing the articles concerned. Such labor, for instance, as is needed in mixing the batch, tending the furnace, and examining and packing the ware, as well as the general supervision, is not included in the labor cost figures, partly because there is no way of even approximately measuring the output of these workers in terms of ware produced, but chiefly because this labor is of no direct value in this study. To gauge accurately the effects of ma chinery on man-hour output and labor cost, only such labor must be included as has been directly or indirectly affected by a change from one process to another. In the hand plants it was the shop and the shop alone which was affected by the introduction of semiautomatic and automatic machinery. The shop has therefore been selected as the basic unit with which to measure productivity in hand plants, and in the machine processes, both semiautomatic and automatic, care has been taken to include only the direct labor which super seded the “ shop,” as hand production gave way first to the semi automatic rotary press and later to the automatic machines. The sum total of direct labor omitted in this analysis constitutes but a small percentage of the total labor used—probably less than 10 per cent. While the statistics admittedly do not represent the total labor needed in a plant to carry on its productive activities, the figures given here are sufficient to show the general trend of the in dustry as affected by the change from hand to machine production. Table 24 shows a comparison of the direct labor cost of making tumblers, sherbets, and nappies by the side lever press, by the semi 98 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY automatic rotary press, and by automatic machinery. By the hand process, it costs $1,951 to make one hundred 8-9 ounce common tumblers. One hundred 10-ounce common tumblers when made by the same process cost $2,075. On the rotary press, the one hundred 8-9 ounce common tumblers cost only $1,073, representing a decrease in direct labor cost of 45 per cent. On the automatic ma chines, the labor cost of making 8-9 ounce common tumblers varies from 13 to 21.9 cents per hundred, showing decreases varying from 88.87 to 93.30 per cent. In the case of the 10-ounce tumblers, the corresponding costs are 13.8 to 25.6 cents per hundred, and the decreases vary from 87.66 to 93.35 per cent. In other words, for every dollar spent on direct labor in pressing 8-9 ounce common tumblers by hand, it cost 55 cents on the semiautomatic rotary press, and less than 7 cents on the most efficient automatic machine. By the same method it can be shown that for every dollar spent on direct labor in pressing 33^-ounce sherbets by hand, it cost 63.51 cents on the rotary press and only 8.97 cents on the most efficient automatic machine, and for every dollar spent on pressing 4 ^ -5 inch nappies by hand, it cost 61.29 cents on the semiautomatic rotary press and only 8.62 cents on the most efficient automatic machine. The largest saving in direct cost of pressing glassware was thus in tumblers, for the same reasons that the largest increase in manhour output was in this article— the very large quantity of tumblers produced as compared with other kinds of pressed glassware, and the automatic take-out devices and automatic conveyor used almost exclusively in the production of tumblers. T a b l e 2 4 . — Average labor cost of pressing 100 pieces of specified kinds of pressed ware by hand and by machine Common tumblers 8-9 ounce Method of production and kind of machine Amount Hand production: Side lever press............................................... Semiautomatic machine: Rotary press ................. ...................... Automatic machine: Hartford-Empire, with double feeder................................... Hartford-Empire, with double feeder and automatic takeout. Hartford-Empire, with double feeder and automatic take out and conveyor_________________________ Ed. Miller, with single feeder............ ...... ............................. W. J. Miller, with single feeder and conveyor............... ...... Special machine, with single feeder_____________ _________ $1.951 1.073 Index number 100.0 55.0 10 ounce Amount Index number $2.075 100.0 .219 .149 11.23 7.64 .176 8.48 .130 . 215 .217 .140 6.70 11.02 11.13 7.18 .138 .256 .233 .142 6.65 12.34 11.23 6.84 Sherbets 3H ounce Method of production and kind of machine Amount Hand production: Side lever press............................................... Semiautomatic machine: Rotary press— Hand finish..................................... ........................................ Machine finish. _•..................................................................... Automatic machine: Hartford-Empire, with double feeder.................................... Ed. Miller, with single feeder................................................ W . J. Miller, with single feeder........................................ $1.806 Index number 100.0 4Mr5 ounce Amount Index number $1.917 100.0 1.147 63.51 1.721 1.295 .162 .335 8.97 18.55 .246 .242 .370 89.78 67.55 12.81 12.62 19.30 CHAPTER II.---- PRESSED WARE 99 T a b l e 24. — Average labor cost o f pressing 100 pieces o f specified kinds o f pressed ware by hand and by machine— Continuea Nappies 4^-5 inch Method of production and kind of machine Hand production: Side lever press.............................................. Semiautomatic machine: Rotary press.... .................................... Automatic machine: Hartford-Empire, with double feeder____________________ Ed. Miller, with single feeder............................................... .. W. J. Miller, with single feeder....... .................................. . Special machine, with single feeder. ................................... 6-7 inch Index number Amount Index number Amount $1.718 1.063 100.0 61.29 $2,649 1.418 100.0 66.63 .263 .148 .219 14.73 8.62 12.76 .629 .414 .338 24.68 16.24 13.26 The effects of the automatic take-out device and the automatic conveyor on the labor cost can best be illustrated by Table 25 which gives a comparison of labor cost of the same kind of tumbler made on the same machine, but in one case with the help of three take-out boys and two carry-in boys; in another case with an automatic take-out device and two carry-in boys; and in the third case with an automatic take-out device and an automatic conveyor. T a b l e 25. — Comparison of direct labor cost o f pressing 100 tumblers on the auto matic machine with and without automatic take-out device and automatic conveyor Labor cost Kind of machine Amount Index number A Machine with 3 take-out boys and 2 carry-in boys.......................... .......... $0,219 100.0 Machine with automatic take out and 2 carry-in boys__________________ .149 68.0 ____automatic Machine with automatic_________ take out and 59.4 .130 conveyor Index number B 100.0 87.3 The saving in labor cost thus attributable to the automatic take-out device is 32 per cent of the labor cost of pressing without the device. Similarly a saving in labor cost amounting to 12.7 per cent is to be attributed to the automatic conveyor as compared with the same machine without a conveyor. EFFECTS OF THE INTRODUCTION OF MACHINERY The outstanding effect of the introduction of machinery in the pressed-glassware branch of the glass industry is the sharp division brought about in the making of staple products and the so-called “ novelties.” In the first group the automatic machine is supreme, “ Uniformity in kind, mass output in quantity,” being the slogan. The hand plants and even the semiautomatic machines can not com pete with the automatic machine in this field. In order to survive, the hand plants have turned their attention to a different field, with a slogan directly opposite to that for the automatic machine. “ Qual ity and variety” has become the new motto, giving stimulus to the making of novelties. This branch not only has survived the intro duction of the machine, but bids well to become in the future as important a factor as the staple commodities produced by machine. 100 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN TH E GLASS INDUSTRY As explained elsewhere, the two must not be considered as on a competitive basis, but rather as two separate and independent branches of a large industry. Another important effect of the introduction of machinery in this field is the elimination of the “ limited move” in the union hand plants. A “ move” represents the number of articles a shop is sup posed to make in a “ turn”— an uninterrupted period of work which was formerly but since the war has been 4 x/i hours. Two complete turns constitute a day’s work. Until a few years ago the “ move” was really the maximum number of articles the shop was permitted to make in a turn. If for reasons which could be attributed to the fault of the employers the shop did not produce the exact number of pieces in the move, the workers were to receive their pay for the entire move. With the rapid encroachment of the automatic machine on the hand plants, the union was compelled to abandon the “ limited move.” The move has been retained and is still the basis on which the piece rates of the skilled workers are determined, but the shop is no longer required to adhere to it as a maximum. The workers are paid pro rata for all the pieces made during the turn. In cases where the out put is less than the move and it can be attributed directly to the fault of the employer, the workers are paid a minimum wage per turn, decided upon in the yearly conferences between the employers1 association and the American Flint Glass Workers’ Union. The unlimited output ranges from 15 to 20 per cent above the move— an indirect but nevertheless a very important effect of the introduction of machinery in the glass industry. STATISTICS OF PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST Table B contains data on the production of tumblers, sherbets, and nappies made on the side-lever hand press, on the semiautomatic rotary press, and on the various automatic machines. The statistics were secured from a number of plants, as no single establishment could be found to have gone through all the stages of development or to use all the machines in the industry. The side lever press and the rotary press are more or less uniform in all the plants, but the auto matic machines in use are considerably different. No one of these machines can be selected as representing the automatic process better than any other machine, and hence the necessity to show the output, if not of all the types of machines used, at least of the majority in use for the production of the articles chosen as representative of pressed ware. Each section of the table covers a single kind of tumbler, sherbet, or nappy made by a single process—hand, semiautomatic machine, or automatic machine, and is divided into two parts: Labor unit, and output and labor cost. The number and kind of workers engaged in the process, their rates of wages, whether by the piece or the hour, and the total labor cost per hour of operating the entire unit, are shown in the first part of each section. If any one worker is performing services for more than one unit simultaneously, only that part of his labor is shown which is attributed to a single unit. This is the explanation of the fractions appearing in the column headed “ Number of workers.” CHAPTER n . ---- PRESSED WARE 101 In the second part of each section are given statistics of the output of the unit. The period to which the data refer is a specified month of the year 1925, that being the latest year for which complete data could be secured. The actual number of good tumblers, sherbets, and nappies produced during the period, and the actual number of hours spent in producing the articles, are shown. If two or more similar units have been engaged in the process simultaneously, the aggregate number of hours put in by all the units is given. The output of a single shop or a single machine per hour, and the output per hour of a single worker in the unit, irrespective of his occupation or skill, are also shown, and in addition the total labor cost of pressing by the particular process 100 articles of the particular kind. As in the case of bottles, the figures of output of any unit show con siderable variation from month to month. This is true of all articles and all methods of production, and is due to the same causes as in the case of bottles (see p. 58). During the course of a whole year, however, the favorable and adverse effects more or less neutralize each other, and the average of the year may therefore be taken as more or less representative of the process. The monthly figures are given to show the various degrees of variation, while the maximum and minimum are italicized to emphasize the extreme limits of these variations during any one year. T a b l e B .— PRODUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G PRESSED GLASSWARE B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E 8-9 OUNCE COMMON TUMBLERS—HAND: SIDE-LEVER PRESS [Italicized figures represent minimum and maximum] Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Output and labor cost | Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per 100 hour hour 1 1 1 3 2 1 Presser____________ $0.45 Finisher__________ .41 Gatherer__________ .36 Warming-in boys Carry-over boys____ Carry-in boy_______ 9 T o ta l.............. 1.22 $0.38 .30 .30 $1.14. .60 .30 2.04 Year and month Output 1925 Feb Mar____ Apr....... M ay___ June___ July . Aug___ Sept___ Oct....... Nov...... Dec..... Pieces 4,751 10,135 11,331 14,933 10,841 15,148 6,171 8,279 10,830 8,052 10,025 17.00 34.00 36.25 47.00 38.25 56.95 22.00 34.00 40.40 32.00 38.25 Total. 110,496 396.10 Unithours Output per unithour Out Labor put cost per man- per hour 100 Pieces Pieces 279.47 31.05 $1,950 298.09 33.12 1.904 312.58 34.73 1.873 817.72 85.80 1.862 283.42 31.68 1.940 265. 99 28.44 1.987 280.50 31.17 1.947 248.50 27.06 2.058 268.07 29.79 1.981 251.63 27.96 2.031 262.09 29.12 1.998 278.96 31.00 1.951 8-9 OUNCE COMMON TUMBLERS—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: 4-MOLD ROTARY PRESS Gatherer......... Take-out boy.. Glazing-boy... Carry-in b o y .. Total.. $0. 41 .33 .74 $0.39 .39 .30 $0.39 .39 .30 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar___ Apr M ay___ June___ J u ly .... Sept----Oct....... N ov___ Dec....... 8,872 13,689 14,104 10,180 6,437 4,335 6,521 10,597 11,100 8,022 12,389 25.50 42.50 42.50 29.75 21.25 17.00 21.25 34.00 29.75 25.50 38.25 347. 92 322. 09 331. 86 342. 18 302. 92 258. 00 306. 87 311. 68 878. 11 314. 59 323. 90 69.58 $1,050 64.42 1.075 66.37 1.065 68.44 1.056 60.58 1.096 51.00 . 1.168 61.37 1.092 60.34 1.086 74-62 1.029 62.92 1.083 64.78 1.073 Total. 106,246 327.25 324. 66 64.93 1.073 102 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY T able B .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING PRESSED GLASSWARE BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued 8-9 OUNCE COMMON TUMBLERS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: HARTFORD-EMPIRE, WITH DOUBLE FEEDER Labor unit Num ber of work ers g 1 3 3 2 m Occupation Machine foreman .. . Feeder operator......... Machine operator Glazing boys............. Take-out boys........... Carry-in boys............ Total................ Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per 100 hour hour $1.00 $0,333 .70 .233 .65 .650 .40 1.200 .40 1.200 .40 .800 4.417 Year and month Output 1925 Feb Mar. Apr____ M ay----June----July___ Aug....... Sept Oct Pieces 214,244 305,160 188,868 160,224 135,384 309,816 83,880 98,004 168,408 Total. 1,663,988 Unithours 108.00 140.25 86.08 78.90 65.16 156.42 46.00 55.08 87.60 Output per unithour Out Labor put cost per man- per hour 100 Pieces 1,983.74 2,175.83 2 , 194.10 2,030.70 2,077.72 1,980.67 1,823.48 1,779.96 1,922.47 Pieces 205.21 $0,223 225.09 .203 .201 m . 98 210.07 .217 214.94 .212 204.90 .223 188.64 .242 184.18 .248 823.49 2,020.66 209.03 .219 198.86 .230 8-9 OUNCE COMMON TUMBLERS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: HARTFORD-EMPIRE, WITH DOUBLE FEEDER AND AUTOMATIC TAKE OUT ft 1 3 2 6H Machine foreman Feeder operator_____ Machine operator Glazing boys_______ Carry-in boys_._....... $1.00 $0,250 .70 .175 .65 .650 .40 1.200 .40 .800 Total............... 3.075 1925 J a n ...... Feb Mar A p r _ __ M ay---July Aug-----Sept Oct....... Nov Dee____ 168,228 308,292 285,312 328,428 315,336 306,432 232,200 474,600 306,228 278,856 253,248 84.08 146.30 143.06 162. 59 149.99 138.25 114.00 235.08 146.33 136.32 116. 75 Total _ 3,257,160 1,582.75 2,000.8 2,107.3 1, 994. 4 2,020.0 2,102.4 2,216.5 2,036.8 2,018.9 2,092.7 2,045.6 2,169.2 307.82 $0,154 324.20 .146 .154 806.88 310.77 .152 323.45 .146 841.00 .189 313.35 .151 310.60 .152 321. 95 .147 314.71 .150 333.72 .142 2,057.9 316.60 .149 8-9 OUNCE COMMON TUMBLERS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: HARTFORD-EMPIRE, WITH DOUBLE FEEDER AND AUTOMATIC TAKE OUT AND CONVEYOR X Machine foreman X Feeder operator........ Machine operator__ Glazing boys......... . 3 y* Conveyor tender....... $1.00 1$0,250 .175 .70 .65 .650 .40 1.200 .200 .40 Total................ 2.475 1 5 1925 Jan........ Feb Mar....... M ay----July Aug.---Sept.. Oct........ Nov Dec....... 226,128 471,444 522,312 736,068 257,364 476,184 365,028 360,984 541,512 539.388 373,596 Total- 4,870,008 128.08 243.41 266.59 403.18 137.50 265.76 193.75 183.24 267.50 269.65 199.73 1,765.52 1,936.83 1,959.23 1,825.66 1,871.74 1,791.78 1,884.02 1,970.01 2,024.85 2,000.33 1,870.51 858.10 $0.140 387.37 .128 391.85 .126 365.13 .136 374.35 .132 358.36 .138 376.80 .131 394.00 .126 404.87 .122 400.07 .124 374.10 .132 2,558.39 1,903.54 380.71 .130 8-9 OUNCE COMMON TUMBLERS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: ED. MILLER, WITH SINGLE FEEDER y% Machine foreman A l Machine operator 1 X Take-out boys______ IX Glazing boys............. IX Carry-in boys........... 4H Total................ $0.85 $0,106 .65 .325 .52 .693 .42 .560 .42 .560 2.244 1925 Jan........ Feb Mar___ Apr____ M ay___ June___ July Aug....... Sept___ Oct........ N o v .... . Dec 154,720 27,940 365,716 90,112 305,920 251,872 271,516 599,332 384,752 291,394 84,798 297,264 Total J13,125,336 148.00 28.00 344.00 84.00 288.00 256.00 264.00 544.00 384.00 280.00 80.00 288.00 1,045.21 997.86 1,063.13 1,072.76 1,062.22 988.87 1,028.47 U 101.71 1,001.96 1,040.69 1,059.97 1,032.16 226.03 $0,215 215.75 .225 229.87 .211 231.95 .209 229.67 .211 212.78 .228 222.37 .218 288.21 .204 216.64 .224 225.01 .216 229.18 .212 223.17 .217 2,988.00 1,045.96 226.15 .215 CHAPTER II.---- PRESSED WARE 103 T able B .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING PRESSED GLASSWARE BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued 8-9 OUNCE COMMON TUMBLERS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: W. J. MILLER, WITH SINGLE FEEDER AND CONVEYOR Labor unit Num ber of work- Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates coat per per per 100 hour hour Machine foreman. _ H Machine operator.. $0.75 $0,187 .75 .750 .40 .400 .42 .420 Take-out boy......... Glazing boy........... 3H Total.. 1.757 Year and month Output Unithours Output per unithour Out Labor put cost per man- per hour 100 1925 Jan........ Feb Mar....... Apr....... M ay___ June___ July Aug....... Sept___ Oct .. Nov ... Dec____ Pieces 114,716 59,901 90,787 127,517 102,666 25,416 141,665 38,239 102,987 73,875 131,795 46,531 135.70 81.50 106.20 157.70 110.50 35.70 185.40 53.00 130.40 97.70 148.40 61.20 Pieces 845.37 734.99 854.87 808.60 929.10 711.94 764.10 721.49 789.78 756.14 888.11 760.31 Pieces 260.11 $0,208 226.15 .239 263.03 .206 .217 248.80 285.87 .189 219.06 .247 235.11 .230 222.00 .240 .222 243.01 .232 232.66 273.26 .198 233.94 .231 Total . 1,056,095 1,303.40 810.26 249.30 .217 8-9 OUNCE COMMON TUMBLERS—SPECIAL AUTOMATIC MACHINE, WITH FEEDER $1.00 $0,167 Machine foreman.. Machine operator.. Take-out boy........ Glazing boy........... Carry-in boy......... H .60 .40 .40 Total.. 3 .300 .400 .400 .400 1.667 1925 Jan___ Feb— Mar___ Apr___ M ay__ June___ July....... Aug-----Sept___ Oct____ Nov....... Dec____ 268,500 210,372 499,164 551,892 445,860 519,696 426,564 782,736 547,428 433,932 474,384 898,344 Total. 6,058,872 182.00 132.00 416.00 444.00 394.00 430.00 369.00 702.00 475.00 381.00 419.00 749.00 1,475.27 1,59S.7S 1,199.91 1,243.00 1,131.62 1,208.60 1,156.00 1,116.01 1,152.48 1,138.93 1,132.19 1,199.39 402.35 $0,113 484*61 .105 327.22 .139 338.97 .134 308.60 .147 329.59 .138 315.24 .144 804.07 .149 314.28 .145 310.59 .146 308.75 .147 327.08 .139 5,093.00 1,189.65 324.42 .140 10-0UNCE COMMON TUMBLERS—HAND: SIDE-LEVER PRESS Finisher............... . Gatherer.............. . Warming-in boys.. Carry-over boys... Carry-in boy....... . Total.. $0.38 $1.14 .30 .60 .30. .30 1.29 2.04 1925 Feb Mar...... Apr....... June___ Aug....... S e p t.... 3,372 4,323 4,556 6,477 4,045 5,926 12.75 17.00 17.00 25.50 17.00 21.25 264.47 254.29 268.00 254.00 287.94 278.87 29.36 $2,061 28.25 2.092 29.78 2.051 28.22 2.093 26.44 2.147 30.99 2.021 Total. 28,699 110.50 259.72 28.86 2.075 lO-OUNCE COMMON TUMBLERS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: HARTFORD-EMPIRE, WITH DOUBLE FEEDER AND AUTOMATIC TAKE OUT Machine foreman.. Feeder operator— Machine operator.. Glazing boys. _— Carry-in boys___ _ Total.. $1.00 50.250 .70 .175 .65 .650 .40 1.200 .40 .800 1925 F e b .:... Apr....... July___ Aug....... Sept___ Oct....... 81,660 115,056 125,568 97,236 223,392 167,064 50.25 66.67 70.67 59.60 125.16 91.50 3.075 ! Total. 809,976 463.85 1,746.20 268.65 1,625.08 1,725.75 1,776.83 1,631.48 1,784,85 1,825.84 250.01 $0.189 265.50 .178 273.36 .173 .188 251.00 .172 274.59 280.90 .168 .176 104 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN TH E GLASS INDUSTRY T able B .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING PRESSED GLASSWARE BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued 10-0UNCE COMMON TUMBLERS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: HARTFORD-EMPIRE, WITH DOUBLE FEEDER AND AUTOMATIC TAKE OUT AND CONVEYOR Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation X Machine foreman X Feeder operator........ 1 Machine operator 3 Glazing boys............ 5 Total............... X Conveyor tender___ Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per 100 hour hour Year and month Output $1.00 $0,250 .70 . 175 .65 .650 .40 1.200 .40 .200 1925 Mar....... A p r .__ M ay___ June___ Sept___ Oct....... Pieces 107,664 88,536 71,100 115,675 95,387 166,490 2.475 T o ta l... 644,852 tJnithours 59.75 48.67 39.16 63.82 54.67 94.32 Output per unithour Out Labor put cost per man- per hour 100 Pieces 1,801.81 1,819.11 1,815.63 1,812.52 1,744.78 1,765.17 Pieces 360.36 $0,137 868.82 .186 363.13 .136 362.50 .137 848.96 .142 353.13 .140 360.39 1,789.32 357.86 .138 lO-OUNCE COMMON TUMBLERS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: ED. MILLER, WITH SINGLE FEEDER Machine foreman.. Machine operator.. boys____ IVs Take-out Glazing boys......... ix Carry-in boys....... .65 .52 .42 .42 $0,106 .325 .560 .560 Total................................ I ... 2.244 1925 Jan... Feb... Mar.. Apr... M ay.. June. July.. Aug.. Sept.. O ct.. N ov.. T otal. 42,080 97,596 48,354 48,146 59,894 66,637 93,399 193,904 63,140 58,680 104,200 876,030 876.67 189.66 48.00 920.72 199.07 106.00 66.00 863.47 186.70 891.69 192.77 54.00 56.00 1,069.64 m.t6 952,34 205.91 70.00 100.00 933.99 201.94 825.12 178.40 235.00 809.49 176.02 78.00 838.29 181.25 70.00 814.07 176.01 128.00 , 1 001.00 875.16 189.22 0.256 .244 .260 .252 .216 .236 .240 .272 .271 .268 .276 .256 lO-OUNCE COMMON TUMBLERS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: W. J. MILLER, WITH SINGLE FEEDER AND CONVEYOR X Machine foreman 1 1 1 m Machine operator Take-out boy............ Glazing boy_______ $0.75 $0,187 .75 .750 .40 .400 .42 .420 1925 Jan........ Feb Mar___ Apr....... M ay___ June___ July...... Aug....... Sept___ Oct........ Nov. ... Dec....... 25,249 19,311 6,609 14,884 15,871 23,727 22.428 24,829 20,673 25,357 44,205 17,761 32.50 23.70 9.20 18.60 22.40 36.20 31.20 40.40 30.60 33.90 46.30 20.70 Total............... 1.757 T otal. 260,904 345.50 776.89 814.81 718.37 804.5^ 708.53 655.44 718.85 614.58 677.80 747.99 964.76 858.02 239.04 $0,226 250.71 .216 1221.04 .244 1247.55 .218 >218.01 .248 |201.67 .268 1221.18 .245 m u 60 .286 1208.55 .259 1230.15 .235 \298.77 .184 1264.01 .205 755.15 232.35 .233 lO-OUNCE COMMON TUMBLERS—SPECIAL AUTOMATIC MACHINE, WITH SINGLE FEEDER X Machine foreman.. X l l l 3X Machine operator.. Take-out boy........ Glazing boy........... Carry-in boy......... Total.. $1.00 $0,167 .60 .300 .40 .400 .40 .400 .40 .400 1.667 1925 Jan... F eb.. Mar.. A pr.. M ay___ June.. July— Aug— Sept___ Oct. Nov. Dec. 229,956 212,196 462.708 301,672 447,358 250,698 647,320 474,375 356,248 678*540 243,700 365,749 186.00 152.00 384.00 252.00 402.00 207.00 675.00 425.00 305.00 568.00 198.00 316.00 1,236.32 1,896.08 1,204.97 1,197.11 1, 112.88 1,211.10 1,125.77 1,116.17 1,168.03 1,194.61 1,230.81 1,157.43 337.18 $0,135 880.74 .119 328.63 .138 326.48 .139 SOS. 60 .160 330.30 .138 307.03 .148 304.41 .149 318.55 .143 325.80 .139 335.68 .135 315.66 .144 Total— 4,670,520 3,970.00 1,176.45 320.86 .142 CHAPTER II.— PRESSED WARE 105 T a b l e B .— PROD UCTIO N A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G PRESSED G LASSW ARE B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued 8K-OUNCE SHERBETS—HAND: SIDE-LEVBR PRESS Labor unit Num ber of work ers 1 1 1 2 1 Occupation Output and labor cost iwage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per 100 hour hour Presser. _____ ______ $0.47 Finisher.................... .42 ........... . . . . . . . Gatherer___________ .38 $0.38 $0.76 Snappers.................. .32 .32 Carry-in boy_______ Total................ 1.27 6 1.08 Year and month Output 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar___ Apr____ M ay___ June___ Aug....... Sept___ Pieces 2,589 1,936 3,747 2,002 2,950 1,758 7,013 9,975 12.75 8.50 17.00 8.50 12.75 8.50 34.00 56.75 Total . 31,970 158.75 Unithours Output per unithour Out Labor put cost per man- per hour 100 Pieces Pieces 203.06 33.84 $1,802 227.76 37.96 1.744 220.41 36.74 1.760 285.58 89.26 1.728 231.37 38.56 1.737 206.82 34.47 1.792 206.26 34.38 1.794 175.77 29.80 1.884 201.30 33.55 1.806 3H-OUNCE SHERBETS—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: 4-MOLD ROTARY PRESS 1 1 2 1 1 Presser____________ $0.41 Gatherer______ ____ .33 Glazing boys . . Carry-over boy......... Carry-in boy_______ $5.40 $0.80 .31 .31 .31 .31 6 Total............... .74 1.42 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar___ Apr____ May___ June___ A u g ___ Sept----Oct........ Nov___ Dec....... 10,743 8,471 8,943 8,928 9,231 7,227 5,462 4,329 3,996 8,829 8,453 29.75 21.25 25.50 25.50 25.50 21.25 17.00 12.75 12.75 25.50 25.50 361.11 898.64 350.71 350.12 362.00 340.09 321.29 339.53 818.41 346.24 331.49 60.19 $1.133 66.44 1.096 58.45 1.145 58.35 1.146 60.33 1.132 56.68 1.157 53.55 1.182 56.59 1.158 52.24 1.198 57.71 1.150 55.25 1.168 Total. 84,612 242.25 349.28 58.21 1.147 3M-OUNCE SHERBETS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: ED. MILLER, WITH SINGLE FEEDER H 1 1 1 Machine foreman.,. Machine operator___ Glazing boy.............. Carry-in boy............. $0.70 $0,233 .55 .550 .30 .300 .40 .400 3H Total................ 1.483 1925 Feb Mar....... Apr . , M ay___ July . Sept___ Oct 228,489 105,366 157,453 123,403 130,050 387,360 391,692 77.712 70,470 Total . 1,671,995 224.00 1,020.05 306.01 $0,145 774.75 282.48 136.00 .191 .186 144.00 U 098.48 828.08 136.00 907.38 272.21 .163 956.25 286.88 .155 136.00 480.00 807.00 242.10 .184 960.03 288.01 .155 408.00 903.63 271.09 .164 86.00 80.00 880.88 264.26 .168 1,830.00 913.66 274.10 .162 3H-OUNCE SHERBETS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: W. J. MILLER, WITH SINGLE FEEDER 1 1 2 1 5M Machine foreman.. . Machine operator__ Take-out boy............ Glazing boys............. Carry-in boy............. Total............... $0.75 .75 $0,187 .750 .40 .400 .42 .840 .40 .400 2.577 1925 Jan........ Sept----Dec....... 34,620 13,336 40,567 17,515 44,372 12,634 28,600 23,396 50.20 14.20 53.20 23.50 58.50 15.20 34.40 30.60 Total. 215,040 279.80 M ay___ June___ July....... 689.64 989.15 762.53 745.32 758.50 831.18 831.40 764.58 181.86 $0,874 178.89 .275 145.24 .338 141.97 .346 144.48 .340 158.32 .310 .310 158.36 145.63 .337 768.55 146.39 .335 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY 106 T able B .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING PRESSED GLASSWARE BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued 4^-5 OUNCE SHERBETS—HAND: SIDE LEVER PRESS Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost i Year and per per per month 100 hour hour 1 1 1 2 1 1 Presser....................... $0.47 Finisher..................... .42 Gatherer............ ...... .38 Snappers................... Carry-over boy......... Carry-in boy............. 7 Total............... 1.27 $0.37 $0.74 .32 .32 .32 .32 1.38 j Output Unithours Output per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- 100 hour 1925 Jan........ Feb Mar...... Apr__ _ Oct___ Nov Dec Pieces 26,249 14,502 8,015 10,511 6,893 8,909 5,544 127.50 59.50 38.25 51.00 34.00 42.50 25.50 Pieces Pieces 205.87 29.41 $1,940 243.78 84.82 1.886 209.54 29.93 1,929 206.10 29.44 1.940 202.74 28.96 1.951 209.62 29.95 1.928 217.41 31.06 1.905 Total. _ 80,623 378.25 213.15 30.45 1.917 4M-5 OUNCE SHERBETS—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: ROTARY PRESS (HAND FINISH) 1 1 1 3 1 Presser...................... $0.45 j 1925 Finisher.................... .41 ........... .......... June___ Gatherer............... . .36 Sept...... Warming-in boys $0.38 $1.14 Oct . Carry-in boy............. .32 .32 N ov___ Total............... 7 1.22 ........... 1.46 T ota l.. 1.218 3,674 4,948 7,510 4.25 12.75 17.00 25.50 286.59 288.16 291.06 294.51 40.94 $1. 729 41.17 1.727 41.58 1.722 42.07 1.716 17,350 59.50 291.60 41.66 1.721 4M-5 OUNCE SHERBETS—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: ROTARY PRESS (MACHINE FINISH) 1 1 2 1 1 Presser...................... $0.45 Gatherer___________ .36 Glazing boys......... Carry-over boy......... Carry-in boy............. $0.40 $0.80 .31 .31 .31 .31 1925 Jan........ Apr____ Aug....... Sept___ Oct....... Nov 3,592 5,274 8,585 4,958 3,674 7,510 12.75 17.00 29.75 17.00 12.75 25.50 281.78 810.24 288.57 291.65 288.16 294. 51 46.96 $t. 314 61.71 1.268 48.10 1.302 48.61 1.297 48.03 1.303 49.09 1.292 6 Total................ .81 1.42 Total . 33,593 114. 75 292.75 48.79 1.295 4H-5 OUNCE SHERBETS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: HARTFORD-EMPIRE, WITH DOUBLE FEEDER X Machine foreman.. 1X Feeder operator.... Machine operator.. Glazing boys_____ Carry-in boys........ 6X- Total. 3 2 $1.00 $0,250 .175 .70 .65 .650 .40 1.200 .40 .800 .1........... 3.075 j 1925 F e b ..... Mar___ Apr___ M ay__ June___ Sept___ N ov___ 66,996 120,048 303,000 109,428 86,736 233,172 151,164 T otal. 1,070,544 59. 25 81. 66 267. 73 83. 41 63. 21 176. 89 125. 67 1,180.74 1,470.10 1,131. 74 1,311.93 1,372.19 1,318.18 1,202.87 178.96 $0,272 226.17 .209 174.11 .272 201.84 .234 211.11 .224 202.80 .233 .256 185.06 857. 82 1,247.99 192.00 .246 4M-OUNCE SHERBETS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: ED. MILLER, WITH SINOLE FEEDER K! 1 1 ! 1 i m i Machine foreman Operator................... Glazing boy ............ Carry-in boy............ $0.70 $0,233 .55 .550 .30 .300 .40 .400 1925 Feb M ay___ June___ Sept___ N ov___ 55,798 6,918 47,560 31,098 54,475 84.00 16.00 80.00 44.00 96.00 Total............... 1.483 T ota l.. 195,849 320.00 664.27 482.38 594.50 706.77 567.45 199.28 $0,223 129.71 .843 .250 178.35 .210 212.08 170.24 .261 612.03 183.61 .242 CHAPTER II.— PRESSED WARE 107 .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING PRESSED GLASSWARE BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued T able B 4^-OUNCE SHERBETS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: W. J. MILLER, WITH SINGLE FEEDER Labor unit Num ber of work ers Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per 100 hour hour Occupation foreman.. H Machine Machine operator. $0.75 $0,187 .750 .75 .40 .400 .42 .840 .40 .400 Take-out boy........ Glazing boys.......... Carry-in boy......... 5H Total.. 2.577 Year and month Output 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar___ Apr_.__. M ay ___ June___ July----Aug....... Sept----- Pieces 45,246 57,537 71,393 56,446 113,299 54,614 41,788 63,401 44,707 Total 548,431 Output per unithour Out Labor put cost. per man- per hour 100 69.10 90.90 115.40 89.20 139.65 72.60 55.10 99.20 56.90 Pieces 654.79 632.97 618.66 632.80 811. SI 752.26 758.40 639.12 785.71 Pieces 124.72 $0,394 120.57 .407 117.84 .417 120.53 .407 151H .818 .343 143.29 .340 144.46 121.74 .403 149.47 .328 788.05 695.93 132.56 Unithours .370 41/2-5 OUNCE NAPPIES—HAND: SIDE-LEVER PRESS 1 1 1 2 1 1 Presser......... ............. $0.45 Finisher___________ .41 Gatherer_____ _____ .36 Snappers__________ Carry-over boy_____ Carry-in boy............. 7 Total............... 41/ 2-5 $0.38 $0.76 .31 .31 .31 .31 1.22 .......... 1.38 1925 Jan........ Feb Mar___ Apr....... July___ Sept___ 2,456 4,766 2,299 3,597 3,585 4,507 8.50 17.00 8.50 12.75 12.75 17.00 288.94 280.41 270.47 282.12 281.18 265.12 41.28 $1. 698 40.59 1.712 38.64 1.730 40.30 1.709 40.17 1.711 37.87 1.740 T otal. 21,210 76.50 277.25 39.61 1.718 INCH NAPPIES—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: 4-MOLD ROTARY PRESS 1 1 2 1 1 Presser...................... $0.36 Gatherer.................... .29 Snappers__________ Carry-over boy_____ Carry-in boy_______ 6 Total............... $0.40 $0.80 .31 .31 .3i .31 .65 ........... 1.42 1925 3,308 Feb 4,283 M ay___ 4,629 June___ Sept___ - 5,765 10,461 Oct____ 13,297 Nov...... 9,159 Dec....... T otal. 50,902 8.50 12.75 12.75 17.00 29.75 38.25 25.50 889.18 885.92 363.06 339.12 351.63 347.63 359.18 64.86 $1,015 55.99 1.078 60.51 1.041 56.52 1.069 58.61 1.054 57.94 1.059 59.86 1.045 144.50 352.26 58.71 1.053 4K-5 INCH NAPPIES—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: HARTFORD-EMPIRE, WITH DOUBLE FEEDER Machine foreman.. Feeder foreman___ Machine operator.. Glazing boys_____ Carry-in boys........ 6H Total.. $1.00 $0,250 .70 .175 .65 .650 .40 1.200 .40 .800 3.075 1925 Mar...... Apr....... M ay___ June___ July .... Aug....... Dec....... Total _ 17,484 55,860 39,780 75,300 342,504 85,944 162,275 13.25 47.18 36.50 73.25 270.65 64.75 135.60 1,319. 55 1,184.00 1,089.87 1,028.00 1,265.50 1,827.82 1,196.72 779,147 641.18 1,215.18 186.95 203.01 $0,233 182.15 .260 167.67 .282 158.15 .299 194.69 .243 204.20 .282 184.11 .257 .253 4H-5 INCH NAPPIES—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: ED. MILLER, WITH SINGLE FEEDER H 1 1 1 Machinist................. Machine operator Glazing boy.............. Carry-in b oy_______ $0.70 $0,233 ' .55 .550 .30 .300 .40 .400 H Total............... 1.483 1925 Feb Apr____ M ay___ June----A u g ..-.. Sept----Dec....... 99,983 72,370 151,320 83,290 132,311 141,202 203,918 591,872 T otal. 1,476,266 104.00 80.00 168.00 80.00 136.00 136.00 184.00 584.00 959.91 904.63 900.72 1,041.13 972.88 1,038.25 1,108.25 1,013.48 287.97 $0,154 271.39 .164 270.22 .165 312.34 .143 291.86 .153 311.48 .143 882.48 .I 84 304.04 .146 1,472.00 1,002.90 300.87 .148 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY 108 T able B .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING PRESSED GLASSWARE BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued 4M-5 INCH NAPPIES—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: W. J. MILLER, WITH SINGLE FEEDER Labor unit Num ber of work- 1 1 2 1 BX Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per 100 hour hour Occupation $0.65 $0,217 .50 .500 .42 .420 .42 .840 .42 .420 Machine foreman.. Machine operator.. Take-out boy......... Glazing boys......... Carry-in boy......... 2.397 Total.. Year and month Output 1925 Jan___ F e b .... Mar___ Apr___ June... Aug___ Sept___ Oct___ Nov___ Dec___ Pieces 72,612 67.549 24,743 47,084 27,993 26,439 17,479 24,892 53,179 69,311 Total.. 431,281 TJnithours 72.00 54.50 22.50 46.00 28.50 24.00 16.00 26.50 47.75 56.25 Output per unithour Out Labor put cost per man- per hour 100 Pieces 1,008.50 1.239.43 1.099.69 1,023.57 982.21 1,101.63 1.092.44 939.32 1.113.70 1,232.20 Pieces 189.09 $0,238 232.39 .193 206.19 .218 .234 191.92 184.16 .244 206.56 .218 204.82 .219 170. IB .255 .215 208.82 .195 231.04 394.00 1,094.62 205.24 .219 ft-7 INCH NAPPIES—HAND: SIDE-LEVER PRESS 1 1 1 2 m Finisher........... Gatherer......... Snappers......... Carry-in boys. Total.. $0.61 .55 .49 $0.50 $1.00 .60 .40 1.65 1925 Jan....... F e b ..... Mar...... Nov___ Dec___ 21,968 24,837 15,267 8,826 7,836 114.75 162.00 85.00 42.50 38.25 191.44 153.31 179.61 207.67 204.86 29.45 $2,486 23.59 2.694 27.63 2.541 31.95 2.421 31.52 2.431 Total. 78,734 442.50 177.93 27.37 2.549 6-7 INCH NAPPIES—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: 4-MOLD ROTART PRESS Gatherer............ Snappers............ Carry-over boy.. Carry-in boy___ $0.50 .40 $0.40 $0.80 .31 .31 .31 .31 Total.................... 90 ............ 1.42 1925 Jan___ F e b .... Mar___ Apr___ M a y ... June... July___ Aug___ S ep t... O c t .... N ov___ Dec___ 14,740 11,205 14,324 5,932 7,209 6,789 5,337 7,570 4,682 11,234 17,783 15,532 51.00 38.25 46.75 21.25 29.75 29.75 21.25 25.50 21.25 42.50 Total 122,337 51.00 289.02 292.94 306.40 279.15 242.32 228.13 251.15 296.86 220.33 264.33 261.51 304.55 48.17 $1.391 48.66 1.385 61.07 1.363 46.53 1.409 40.39 1.486 38.02 1.522 41.86 1.465 48.48 1.378 36.72 1.544 44.06 1.437 43.54 1.443 50.76 1.366 446.25 274.14 45.69 1.418 6-7 INCH NAPPIES—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: ED. MILLER, WITH SINGLE~FEEDER Machine foreman.. Machine operator.. Take-out boys....... Glazing boys......... Carry-m boys........ m Total.. $0.85 $0,106 .325 .65 .52 .693 .42 .560 .42 .560 1925 Feb....... Apr....... M ay___ June___ July___ O ct.. 16, 752 22,528 11,288 36,946 30,965 67,496 48.00 64.00 32.00 104.00 88.00 185.00 349.00 352.00 352.75 355.25 351.88 364.85 75.46 $0.643 76.11 .638 76.27 .636 76.81 .632 76.08 .638 78.89 .615 2.244 T o ta l- 185,975 521.00 356.96 77.18 CHAPTER II.— PRESSED WARE 109 T a b l e B ___ P R O D U C TIO N A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G PRESSED G LA SSW A R E B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued 9-7 INCH NAPPIES—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: V . J. MILLER, WITH SINGLE FEEDER Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per hour hour 100 foreman.. H Machine Operator................ Take-out boy........ Glazing boys......... Carry-in boy......... 6X Output and labor cost Total.. Year and month Output $0.65 $0,217 .50 .500 .42 .420 .42 .840 .42 .420 1925 Jan____ Feb___ Mar----Apr----M ay .... June__ Oct___ Pieces 12,862 13,986 7,007 16,666 17,725 18,213 15,630 21.00 21.75 13.25 30.75 33.00 32.75 24.00 2.397 Total 102,089 176.50 Unithours Output per unithour Out Labor put cost per man- per hour 100 Pieces 612.48 643.03 528.88 541.98 537.12 556.12 651.25 Pieces 114.84 $0,391 120.57 373 99.16 468 101.62 442 100.71 446 104.27 431 122.11 868 578.41 108.45 .414 6-7 INCH NAPPIES—SPECIAL AUTOMATIC MACHINE, WITH SINGLE FEEDER 18 l 1 Machine foreman.. Machine operator.. Take-out boy......... Glazing boy........... Carry-in boy......... Total.. 40780°— 27------8 $1.00 $0.167 1 1925 .60 .300 1 Jan........ .400 Feb .40 . .400 Mar___ .40 .40 .400 Apr....... M ay___ June___ July....... Aug....... Sept___ Oct....... Nov....... Dec....... 81,300 95,376 72,264 46.140 58,404 68,712 48,648 123,744 70,980 80,916 150,096 90,408 151.00 182.00 160.00 90.00 138.00 148.00 132.00 306.00 123.00 143.00 274.00 156.00 Total. 986,988 2,003.00 1.667 538.41 524.04 451.65 512.44 423.22 464.27 868.55 404.39 577.07 565.85 547.80 579.64 146.84 $0,310 142.92 .318 123.18 .369 139.76 .325 115.42 .394 126.62 .359 100.51 .462 110.29 .412 157.38 .289 154.32 .294 149.40 .304 .288 158.06 492.75 134.39 .338 BLOWN WARE The development of machinery in the field of blown ware has been more pronounced than in the case of pressed ware. The machines used in this branch of the glass industry are larger in size and more intricate than the automatic presses. They are also more limited as to the kind of ware they can produce. In fact some of the machines were devised for the purpose of producing one article exclusively, such as the electric-light bulb or glass tubing. To gauge the effects of these various machines on labor produc tivity and labor cost of manufacturing, it becomes necessary to study separately the individual articles in which the machines are specializing, the most important of which are lamp chimneys, electriclight bulbs, punch tumblers, and glass tubing. LAMP CHIMNEYS There are three methods still in use in this country in making lamp chimneys: (1) The offhand method of blowing lamp chimneys by hand without a mold; (2) the paste-mold method of blowing lamp chimneys by hand with the help of a paste mold; and (3) the semi automatic machine process. OFFHAND PROCESS In the offhand process the group constituting a shop is made up of 3 workers— the gatherer, the blower, and the crimper. The first two are skilled workers, and the third is an unskilled or semiskilled helper. The process of making a crimped lamp chimney is as follows: The gatherer collects a bit of molten glass on the end of his pipe, marvers it, and by gently blowing through the free end of the pipe produces the first air cavity in the glass, which at this stage looks like an elongated pear, partly hollowed inside. The blower then takes the pipe and by carefully blowing and skillfully swinging it to and fro distends the glass until the walls acquire the necessary thin ness, while the glass assumes the general shape of a lamp chimney, but closed on both ends. This operation the blower performs entirely without the aid of tools. The next step is to make the heel of the chimney. While the glass is still hot enough to be ductile, the blower pinches the lower end of the chimney into a small knob known as the “ horn.” The cold air which rushes in through the small aperture rapidly cools the glass, and the horn is easily broken off by a quick blow with a wooden tool, leaving an irregular opening at the bottom of the chimney. The blower then places the chimney, still on the pipe, in the glory hole to be reheated. He afterwards shapes the lower end of the chimney with the help of his forceps and a gauge to determine the exact height and diameter of the heel. This is the portion of the chimney which fits into the lamp holder. When the heel is formed, the blower easily cracks off the chimney from the blowing pipe and turns it over to the crimper. The latter inserts it in a special chimney snap and again places it in the glory 110 CHAPTER H .---- BLOWN WARE: LAMP CHIMNEYS 111 hole to be reheated. When the top of the chimney has been suffi ciently softened by the fire the crimper withdraws it from the glory hole and presses it against a rotating crimping machine, which leaves its impression on the top of the chimney. The crimping device is simply a circular crimped mold with a revolving cone inside which smooths out the top of the chimney and at the same time guides it toward the mold which crimps the glass at the top. The chimney is now complete, ready to be used. As at no time during the operation does the glass come in contact with iron, the chimneys made by the off-hand process do not need to be annealed and are, therefore, transferred directly from the furnace to the packing room, where they are assorted and packed ready to be shipped. PASTE-MOLD PROCESS In making lamp chimneys by the paste-mold process the shop is made up of 3 skilled workers, the blower, the blocker, and the ball gatherer, and 1 unskilled helper, the carry-in boy. The initial stages of gathering and marvering or blocking the glass are similar to those used in the offhand process. In the offhand process, however, the shop can make only one chimney at a time, while in the paste-mold process, two, three, and nowadays even four chimneys are blown at once. This implies the gathering of larger quantities of glass and also more marvering and blocking; hence two workers are needed for the separate operations of gathering and marvering, both of which are performed by the gatherer alone in the offhand process. When the glass has been sufficiently blocked and marvered, the blower takes the pipe and by swinging it to and fro gives to the glass a pear-shape form. He then lowers the glass into the dummy mold, which he operates with a foot treadle, and by continuous blowing, at the same time rapidly rotating the pipe, distends the glass to the shape of the mold. The paste mold and the rapid rotation are neces sary to save the glass from seams or other impressions which a dry mold might leave upon the glass. The carry-in boy then opens the mold and takes the long block of blown glass, consisting of four chimneys, to the leer to be annealed, while the mold falls of its own accord into a pool of water to be bathed for the next block of chimneys. From the cold end of the leer the blocks of chimneys are transferred to the cutting department, where the chimneys are separated. From the cutting machine they pass over to a glazing machine in the form of a conveyor, which remelts and glazes first the heel and then the top of the chimney. Finally the chimney passes under a crimping machine, after which operation it is complete and is taken to the packing room to be assorted. * SEMIAUTOMATIC PROCESS The lamp chimney semiautomatic machine was first put into operation in 1898, but since then it has undergone a number of important changes. At present the machine consists of a rotary table equipped with five paste molds, which open and close auto matically. The initial stages of gathering and blocking the glass are performed by hand and do not differ from the paste-mold process described above. When the glass is ready to be blown, the blower, now called the feeder (due to the change in the nature of his work) 112 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY swings the pipe forward and backward, allowing the glass to run down until it assumes the shape of a sausage. He then places the pipe in a socket of the machine. While the lower end of the pipe just reaches the paste mold, which automatically rises from the water and closes around the glass, the upper end of the pipe is con nected with a valve through which compressed air enters the pipe and distends the glass into the shape of the mold. During this process of blowing the pipe is also rapidly being rotated around its own axis, thus imparting to the chimney a perfectly smooth and seamless surface. At a definite point on its journey around the table the mold opens automatically and releases the pipe with the chimney. The cracking-off boy easily separates the chimney from the pipe and places it on a near-by stand for the carry-in boy to take to the leer to be annealed. As in the case of the paste-mold hand process, two or more chimneys can be blown at once on the semiautomatic machine. However, since the lower end of the chimney comes out of the mold completely closed, it has been found more practical to blow but one chimney at a time, but with its lower end lengthened and so shaped as to make from it a good salable tumbler when cut off from the chimney and properly finished. After having been annealed, the chimney is really only a “ blank” chimney, not a finished product. Its lower end, whether ending in a tumbler or not, is still closed, while the upper end has a very ragged and irregular opening made by the cracking-off boy in separating the chimney from the blowing pipe. Both ends must be cut and then glazed, and the top crimped before the chimney is completed. Cutting the tumbler from the lower end of the chimney and the cullet from the upper end is done on a special cracking-off machine. The chimneys are then placed in the bottomless cups of a conveyor, below and above which are located the glazing burners. While rotating rapidly in the cups on their axes, the chimneys move forward on the conveyor and pass first over a set of burning fires which glaze the heel and then under a stronger set of fires which glaze and partly remelt the tops of the chimney. As the chimney emerges from under these glazers, an operator causes a crimping device to descend upon the top of the chimney, which stamps it while the glass is still hot and plastic. The chimney is then transferred to the inspection and packing room. While the chimney completes its course through the cutting machine, the glazing machine, and the crimper, the tumbler which was separated from the chimney by the cutting machine proceeds on a somewhat similar path, but in the opposite direction. It passes first to the grinding machine, where the sharp edges left by the cutting machine are beveled and smoothed. The tumbler is then washed ana wiped to eliminate any residue left by the grinding machine, after which it is glazed, the glazing machine being of the same type used for pressed tumblers. (See pp. 91 and 92.) After glazing, the tumblers are removed to the inspection room to be assorted and packed. MAN-HOUR OUTPUT AND LABOR COST The increase in man-hour output caused by the lamp-chimney machine is rather small when compared with the effects of machinery in the other branches of the glass industry. Table 26 presents a CHAPTER I I .-----BLOWN WARE: LAMP CHIMNEYS 113 comparison of man-hour output of No. 2 sun-crimped lamp chimneys made by the three processes—offhand, paste mold, and semiautomatic machine. By the offhand process the average man-hour output of a union plant is 27.434 lamp chimneys and of a nonunion plant 25.095 lamp chimneys, making the average output of the two plants 26.265 lamp chimneys per man-hour. By the paste-mold process, the aver age man-hour output is 36.450 lamp chimneys, while on the semi automatic machine it is 37.387 lamp chimneys. For the purpose of comparison index numbers are also given. Taking the average man-hour output of a union and nonunion shop as the base, or 100, the increase in man-hour output by the pastemold process is 38.8 per cent. This increase is due wholly to the fact that in the paste-mold process more than one chimney (four chimneys in the plant concerned) is blown at a time. The man-hour output shown would have been considerably larger but a large num ber of chimneys are broken on their journey from the leer through the cutting off, glazing, and crimping machines. The man-hour output of the lamp-chimney machine is not much higher than that of the paste-mold process—only 2.5 per cent— and only 42.3 per cent higher than the man-hour output of the average for the offhand process. T a b le 26.— Comparison of man-hour output o f N o. 2 sun-crimped lamp chimneys made by hand and by machine Man-hour output Process Offhand process: Union shop__________________ _____________ ____ ____ ___________ __________ Nonunion shop______________________________________________ _____ _______ Average, union and nonunion shop_______________ ;_________________________ Paste-mold process, h a n d _____________________________________________________ Semiautomatic ma/>hrnft_______________________________________________________ Index Quantity number Pieces 27.434 25.095 26.265 36.450 137.387 104.4 95.5 100.0 138.8 142.3 i In addition there was approximately an equal number of tumblers produced as a by-product, requiring only grinding and glazing to finish them. Table 27 gives a comparison of labor cost in making lamp chimneys by the three processes. The labor cost of making 100 No. 2 suncrimped lamp chimneys by the offhand method is $2,740 in a union plant and $2,680 in a nonunion plant, the average cost in the two plants being $2,710. By the paste-mold process the corresponding cost per 100 lamp chimneys is $2,128 or 21.5 per cent less than the average cost by the offhand process. The same kind of lamp chimneys made on the semiautomatic machine cost only $1,712 per hundred pieces or 37.5 per cent less than those made by the offhand process. It must again be emphasized, however, that for every good lamp chimney turned out by the machine process there is at least one good tumbler turned out as a by-product. The additional labor and cost of handling the tumbler after it has been separated from the chimney by the cutting-off machine is comparatively negligible. Were it possible to translate these tumblers into terms of lamp chimneys, the man-hour output of the machine would have been considerably increased, probably doubled, and the labor cost decreased accordingly. 114 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY T a b l e 2 7 .— Comparison o f labor cost of 100 No. 2 sun-crimped lamp chimneys made by hand and by machine Process Offhand process: ................................................ ........................................ Union shop ...... Nonunion shop .................................................. .................................... Average, union and nonunion shop _____________________ __________________ Paste-mold process, hand _ . _______________ _____ ___________ Semiautomatic machine .................................................................... ..................... ...... Amount $2,740 2.680 2.710 2.128 11.712 Index number 101.1 98.9 100.0 78.5 62.5 1 Less the value of approximately an equal number of tumblers made as a by-product, which require but a slight additional expense for grinding and glazing. Considering the early introduction of the lamp-chimney machine, it being one of the first machines used in the glass industry, the influ ence of machinery on the making of lamp chimneys has not been very great. The principal cause of this peculiar situation is the declining tendency of the lamp-chimney market as a whole. In spite of the large quantities of lamp chimneys still produced in this country, the total output decreases steadily from year to year. The extensive use of electric power, which has penetrated even the most remote and inaccessible sections of the United States and of Canada, is the chief factor in this decline. The manufacturers of lamp chim neys, whether by hand or by machine, are fully aware of the situation, and refuse to make the large outlay necessary in the introduction of new machinery. As a result, the making of lamp chimneys is probably the only field in the glass industry where hand manufacturing not only has sur vived the introduction of machinery, but actually manages to subsist side by side with the machine. It is variously estimated that 40 to 50 per cent of all the lamp chimneys made in this country are still made by the offhand process. There is another reason why the hand manufacturers can compete with the machine in spite of lower man-hour output and higher direct labor cost. This is the claim of the hand manufacturers and their workers alike that the offhand made lamp chimney is a better chim ney and lasts longer than either the paste-mold or the machine-made chimney. One of the characteristics of a good chimney is the varia tion in the thickness of glass at the top, the heel, and the bulge of the chimney. The hand manufacturers claim that this variation can not be attained by blowing into a mold, whether by hand or machine; that only an expert offhand blower can make such a chimney, and there fore that the offhand product is the best of the three ana the demand for it is larger. Apparently the lamp chimney is doomed. It is only a matter of a short time until the oil-burning lamp will have flickered its last before the onslaught of the electric bulb. But the manufacturers are of the opinion that so long as there is any demand for lamp chimneys, just so long will the offhand process persist side by side with the machine. STATISTICS OF PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST The data on production here given cover four plants: Two plants where chimneys are made by the offhand process, one plant for. the paste-mold process, and one for the semiautomatic machine; The CHAPTER II.---- BLOWN WARE: LAMP CHIMNEYS 115 average of the first two plants, one union operated and the other nonunion, is taken as the standard by which the man-hour output and the labor cost in all plants have been measured. In the offhand process the chimneys are made complete by the blowing shop, and this shop has been taken as the labor unit of production. But in the paste-mold plants, as well as in those using the semiautomatic machine, the lamp chimneys, upon leaving the blowing shop or the machine, must be annealed, cut off, glazed, and crimped before they are completed. For the purpose of comparison with the offhand labor unit, such additional labor as is needed to finish the articles made by the blowing shop or the machine must be added to the blowing units in the paste-mold and machine processes. For example, it is estimated that two cutting boys can handle in nine hours all the lamp chimneys made by seven paste-mold shops in one turn of four hours. It would require, therefore, nine-fourteenths of the time of one cutting boy to handle in one hour the ware made by the blowing shop in one hour, and the equivalent of ninefourteenths of the labor of a cutting boy must therefore be added to the blowing shop. For similar reasons the equivalent of nine-fourteenths of the labor of a glazing girl and nine-fourteenths of the labor of a crimping girl are also added to the shop. In the plants using the automatic machine, the labor needed in tending a single machine has been taken as the labor unit of produc tion. If any worker tended more than one machine, only that part of his labor has been taken which is allotted to one machine. To this blowing unit must also be added that portion of the finishing labor which is needed to anneal, cut off, glaze, and crimp all the ware produced by a single machine in an equal period of time. These proportions have been determined on a basis similar to that used in the paste-mold process. Each section of Table C is divided into two parts—labor unit, and output and labor cost. In the first part are given the number and kind of workers engaged in the process of production, their rates of wages, and the total hourly labor cost of a single labor unit. The second part gives the total number of salable lamp chimneys made, the shop or machine hours spent on their production, the output per shop or machine hour, the output per man-hour, and the labor cost of 100 No. 2 sun-crimped lamp chimneys made by the three processes. 116 PRODUCTIVITY OP LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY C .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING NO. 2 SUNCRIMPED LAMP CHIMNEYS BY HAND AND BY MACHINE T able OFFHAND PROCESS (UNION SHOP) [In this table all wage rates are for 1925 and labor cost is based on 1925 wage rates regardless of year of output. Italicized figures represent minimum and maximuml Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost Year and per per per month hour hour 100 Total output 1 1 1 Blower...... ................ $1,240 Gatherer___________ 1.000 Crimper___________ .500 1925 Aug __ Sept___ Oct Nov Dec Pieces 34,636 32,151 30,738 35,259 52,788 3 Total................ 2.740 Total __ 185,572 Out put per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man100 hour Pieces 82.467 82.018 82.629 80.870 83.000 Pieces 27.489 $2.740 27.339 2.740 27.543 2.740 26.957 2.740 27.667 2.740 TJnithours 420.0 392.0 372.0 436.0 636.0 2,256.0 82.301 27.434 2.740 OFFHAND PROCESS (NONUNION SHOP) Blower.. Gatherer. Crimper. $1,250 .990 .440 Total.. 1925 M ay___ June___ July .... Aug-----Sept___ Oct........ Nov Dec....... 23,664 26,769 29,374 33,243 29,750 41,280 39,988 49,060 T ota l.. 273,128 293.0 376.0 459.0 459.0 378.0 522.0 520.0 621.0 80.769 26.922 71.194 23.731 24.142 26.233 26.360 25.633 26.334 $2.680 2.680 2.680 2.680 2.680 2.680 2.680 2.680 3,628.0 75.284 25.095 2.680 64.OOO 21. 333 72.425 78.700 79.080 76.900 79.002 PASTE-MOLD PROCESS—HAND BLOWN Blowing: Blower__________ $0,659 Blocker__________ .549 ~Rfl.il gatherer_____ .475 Carry-in boy_____ Finishing: Cutting girl______ -ft » Glazing girl______ Crimping girl____ $0.32 $0,320 1.683 .963 1 1 1 1 5H Total—........... .50 .25 .25 .321 .161 .161 1925 Apr____ May___ June___ July Aug....... Sept___ Nov___ 18,981 17,925 13,050 8,434 14,905 16,935 13,508 T otal-- 103,738 88.0 80.0 60.0 44.0 64.0 84.0 60.0 215.700 224.060 217.500 191. 690 232.890 201.610 225.130 36.380 37.790 36. 690 32.330 39.280 34.010 37.970 $2,129 2.112 2.125 2.185 2.096 2.160 2.110 480.0 216.120 36.450 2.128 SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE Blowing: Machine foreman Feeder ________ $0,370 Gatherers________ .810 Cracking-off boy Carry-in b oy_____ Leer tender______ •/• Finishing: Cutting-off girls Glazing g irl_____ 2p Crimping girl____ Transfer girl______ % 1 3 1 1 10 T o ta l.............. 1.180 $0.70 $0,117 ."47" "’ ."470 .47 .470 .241 .29 .23 .23 .23 .23 19261 1st week. 2d week. 3d week. 4th week 5th week 6th week 11,747 11,826 15,841 16,390 18,040 13,641 T otal-_ 37,485 34.5 30.0 41.0 45.0 49.0 34.5 340.500 394.200 386.370 364.220 368.160 395.390 34.050 39.420 38.640 36.420 36.820 39.540 $1.764 1.684 1.695 1.726 1.720 1.683 234.0 373.870 37.387 1.712 .276 .138 .138 .138 1.988 * The actual dates of the weekly periods for which data are given are not available. BLOWN W ARE: ELECTRIC-LIGHT BULBS MAKING BULBS BY HAND In the process of making electric-light bulbs by hand the shop consists of two skilled workers, the gatherer and the blower, and two unskilled helpers, a section boy and a cutting-off operator, both usually working for from six to eight shops simultaneously. The process of blowing electric-light bulbs may be described as follows: The gatherer inserts his iron pipe in the pot of molten glass and by skillful manipulation accumulates on the end of the pipe the necessary quantity of glass for the size of bulb desired. He then withdraws the pipe and by marvering the glass and slightly blowing into the pipe gives to the bit of glass a pear-shaped form, with a small cavity in the center. The pipe is then turned over to the blower, who by swinging it a few times to and fro and letting the glass run down elongates it into the shape of a sausage. With the help of a foot treadle he then raises the “ dummy” or automatic mold from its water bath and causes it to close around the glass. By continued blowing and at the same time constantly rotating the pipe with his hand the blower distends the glass to fill out the mold. A paste mold is used to prevent the glass from sticking to the iron and to keep the bulb free from any of the seams which are usually left by a dry iron mold. When the blowing is finished the blower releases the mold, which falls back into the water, and turns over the pipe with the bulb on it to the section boy. The latter rapidly disengages the formed article from the pipe, which he places within convenient reach of the gatherer. At this point of the process the bulb carries with it an extra quantity of glass, a “ moile,” which needs to be cut off before the bulb is finished. This operation is usually performed by a girl on a special cutting-off machine, and it is estimated that one cutting-off operator can take care of all the bulbs made by eight shops. It is therefore necessary to add the equivalent of one-eighth of the labor of a cutting-off operator to each shop engaged in the process of making electric-light bulbs by hand. SEMIAUTOMATIC PROCESS The semiautomatic machine consists of a long base filled with water, over which rise four or five operating units, all driven by a common shaft but with individual clutches, so that each unit functions independently. Each unit is equipped with an arm to hold and operate the blowing pipe, a paste mold, and a piston through which compressed air is introduced through the blowing pipe to the glass. In the process of blowing electric-light bulbs by the semiautomatic machine the gatherer, or the chief operator, as he is often termed, withdraws an iron blowing pipe from the “ blow-iron trap” and pro ceeds to gather the necessary quantity of glass exactly as in the case of the hand shop. Upon withdrawing the glass from the pot he 117 118 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY does not stop to marver it, as in the case of hand production, but places it at once in an arm of the machine, which is at rest in a position slightly above the horizontal. He then pulls a lever which locks the F ig. 13—SEMIAUTOMATIC EMPIRE E MACHINE FOR MAKING ELECTRICLIGHT BULBS blowing pipe into the “ blowhead” of the arm, and at the same time trips the clutch and sets the unit in operation. , As the blowing pipe rotates rapidly on its axis, the arm rises slowly and brings the glass on the end of the pipe into contact with a metallic CHAPTER XI.---- BLOWN WARE: ELECTRIC-LIGHT BULBS 119 marver. The latter also revolves, but much more slowly, and is so adjusted that the marvering is completed at a single revolution of the marver. A small quantity of air is then admitted into the blowing pipe by means of a cylinder located at the blowhead, and the first air cavity is formed in the matvered glass. Immediately afterwards the arm starts swinging downward, admitting more air into the glass, which finally assumes a pear-shaped form, hollowed in the center. The downward swing continues until the blowing pipe reaches a vertical position, at which point the arm is automatically disengaged from the clutch, which stops the operation of the entire unit. Until the beginning of the downward, swing of the arm the paste mold has been hanging downward in an open position immersed in the base of the machine. As the arm swings down, the mold, still open, swings upward out of the water until it reaches a vertical position slightly ahead of the blowpipe. The unit remains unoper ated for a certain length of time, during which the glass continues to elongate of its own weight until it assumes a position between the two halves of the mold. When the glass reaches the desired length the take-out boy or the “ spiffer” pushes a lever, which again starts the unit in operation. The mold immediately closes around the glass, and sufficient air is admitted to the pipe to distend the glass to fill out the mold. When this is completed the mold opens auto matically, the arm begins to swing upward, and upon reaching a definite position releases the blowpipe into the hands of the take-out boy, who turns it over to the cracking-off boy. The latter cracks off the glass article from the pipe and returns the pipe to the “ blowiron trap.” This is simply a rack designed to hold several blowpipes, keeping them in their order as used and in a convenient position for the gatherer to grasp as he returns from the machine to the pot. When cut off by the spiffer the electric bulbs are completely finished and are removed by the section boy to the inspection room to be examined and packed. The use of the semiautomatic machine thus dispenses with the services of a blower. The work of the gatherer is also considerably reduced and simplified, being limited to the mere operation of gather ing the glass, while the initial blowing and marvering are performed by the machine. In addition to the gatherer, the machine requires the services of a take-out boy, a cracking-off boy, and a section boy. The total number of workers needed to tend the semiautomatic machine is thus somewhat larger than the number of workers in a hand shop. But the average output of the machine is more than three times that of a hand shop, and the man-hour output of the machine is also appreciably larger than in hand production. AUTOMATIC MACHINERY Empire F machine.— The Empire F machine, when operated in connection with an automatic feeding device, constitutes a complete automatic unit. This machine, though capable of producing any paste-mold ware of limited size, is used almost exclusively for the purpose of making electric-light bulbs. The machine consists of two intermittently rotating tables, each supplied with six blowing units. Each unit is made up of a blankforming press, a blowing spindle, and a blow mold. Gobs of glass 120 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY are fed alternately to each blank-forming press down an inclined trough, which oscillates between the two tables, loading them alter nately. The blank is pressed in the spindle, reheated, inverted into the blow mold, and blown to shape. When finished it is ejected automatically from the machine. All movements are entirely me chanical and completely synchronized. The driving force is supplied by an electric motor, which operates the feeding device and the machine simultaneously. All the blowing units of the machine operate exactly alike, so that a description of the process of a single unit will be representa tive of the whole machine. Just before the operation begins the spindle swings into an upward vertical position, ready to receive the gob of glass from the feeder down the chute, which has also swung into the proper position. The receiving end of the spindle is in the form of a cup of a size just sufficient to contain the quantity of glass needed for the bulb blown. It is made up of two lock jaws, which automatically close around the glass and force the superfluous glass to run down into a sleeve in the spindle specially provided for this purpose. The excess glass in the sleeve cools rapidly and serves to hold the gob in place on the spindle. This glass is called the “ collar.” The jaws then open up, and the collar forms the only contact of the glass with the machine. The spindle automatically starts rotating, at the same time passing under a hot flame which serves to reheat and soften the glass chilled by exposure to the air. A small quantity of air is then admitted into the blank to form the initial air bubble, and the spindle, without ceasing to rotate, swings down# 180°, so that the glass is sus pended downward from the spindle, which then stops rotating. While in this position, and because of its weight, the glass changes from an egg shape into a pear shape, rapidly becoming longer and longer. In the meantime the paste mold, which has all the time been traveling immersed in a basin of water at the foot of the machine, swings upward, and while still open assumes its position around the glass, which can be seen suspended between the two halves of the mold. When the glass has reached its proper length the mold closes, the spindle again starts revolving, and air is blown into the glass, dis tending it into the shape of the mold. At the end of this operation the mold opens, the spindle swings upward about 30°, automatically releasing the collar of the bulb, and the completed article slides down a chute out of the machine. The mold swings downward into the water pan, while the empty spindle swings up 150° farther to its zero position ready for another operation. The blown bulb, sliding down a chute, is picked up by an auto*matic conveyor and is carried to the burning-off machine. This machine consists of a series of receptacles or chucks rotating around a common axis. The chucks are equipped with narrow gas fires, which first cut off the superfluous collar or the “ moile” of the bulb and then fire-polish the rough edges. The bulbs are then auto matically released from the burning-off machine and are forwarded to the packing room. WestlaTce machine.—The Westlake machine consists essentially of a large rotating drum from which are suspended 12 bulb-blowing units. Each of these units carries two spindles or blowing pipes, a ram with two pipes for the purpose of gathering the glass, a mech- CHAPTER IT.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 122 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY anism for admitting air into the blowpipes, two paste molds, and a series of cams and wheels to synchronize the operations of the various parts mentioned. When the machine is rotating, normally about two revolutions per minute, the rams, operating on a slide on top of the machine, are automatically projected into the furnace opening to gather the glass. There are two arms or gathering pipes to each ram, and two “ gathers” of glass are made at one time. By a vacuum Fig. 15—AUTOMATIC EMPIRE F MACHINE process the “ gathers” are sucked up into copper or cast-iron blank molds of the size and shape required for the particular bulb wanted. As the ram is automatically withdrawn from the tank a knife sweeps under the arms and automatically cuts off the string of glass from the “ gathers” just made. When the arms are out of the tank the suction in the molds is released and the two “ gathers” of glass drop into the jaws of the two spindles, which at this moment assume a vertical position just under the arms of the gathering ram. The transfer of the glass from one mold to another comparatively cooler CHAPTER I I .-----BLOWN WAKE: ELECTRIC-LIGHT BULBS 123 124 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY mold chills the outer surface of the “ gather,” which is equivalent to marvering the glass. After the jaws of the spindle close on the “ gather” a plunger automatically makes a small indentation in the center of the gather and immediately afterwards compressed air is admitted in short puffs into the spindle by means of a valve system. The spindle then starts rotating on its axis, at the same time swinging around first to a horizontal and then to a vertical position, with the glass hanging downward. Simultaneously with the downward swing of the spindles the open molds emerge from the water pool and begin to swing up ward, reaching the vertical position just ahead of the spindles, so that the glass is suspended between the two halves of the mold. The weight of the glass and the puffs of air which it receives intermittently elongate the “ gather,” and just when it reaches the proper length CHAPTER TI.— BLOWN WARE: ELECTRIC-LIGHT BULBS 125 and shape, usually in the form of a sausage, the molds close around it and a steady pressure of air is introduced which fills out the molds. The latter then open up and the spindles, after releasing the fully blown and rigid bulb, swing upward into their original position while the molds swing downward and sink into the water tank. When thrown out of the machine the bulb is complete, except for the superficial glass shoulder which connected it to the blowing spindle. This extra glass, or “ moile” as it is called, must be cut off, and this operation is also done automatically. As the bulb falls out from the machine it is picked up by an automatic conveyor which takes it via an automatic loading device to the burning-off machine. The latter consists of a rotating drum with 24 receptacles or chucks in which the bulbs are rotated. The receptacles are equipped with a set of sharp flat gas fires, which first cut off the moile and then fire polish the edges of the bulb. At a certain point of the operation, after the moile is off and the fire polishing finished, the gas is automatically shut off from the particular burner and the bulb is allowed to cool before it is pushed out automatically from the machine upon another conveyor. This conveyor carries the bulb automatically through a short leer, and from there another automatic conveyor carries it to the inspection station, where it is examined and packed or stood up in a rack, to be sent to the spraying room to be frosted. This is the first time in the whole process that the bulb is handled. The only labor needed is a machine operator to see that all the separate parts of the machine are running smoothly. Some times an additional attendant is needed on the burning-off machine. Both workers need no preparatory skill and learn their work in a comparatively short time. The latest type of the Westlake machine marks a considerable improvement upon the type described above. Instead of having a ram with two arms for each operating unit this type carries but one stationary ram with two arms to feed the 12 pairs of spindles of the machine. This change appreciably reduces the weight and bulk of the machine. The older type Westlake machine weighed on the average 45 to 50 tons. The 12 rams, weighing about 15 tons, have now been replaced by a single ram weighing about a ton, thus reducing the entire weight of the machine nearly one-third. The direct results of this change have been an improvement in the quality of the product, especially so far as uniformity is concerned, and an increase in output due to higher speed in the rotation of the simplified and less bulky machine. MAN-HOUR OUTPUT AND LABOR COST The most outstanding characteristic in the production of electriclight bulbs has been the phenomenal increase in man-hour output caused by the automatic machines. Table 28 contains a comparison of man-hour output of 25 and 40 watt electric-light bulbs made by the three processes—hand, semiautomatic machinery, and automatic machinery. In hand production the average man-hour output on 25-watt bulbs ranges from 52.52 pieces in Plant A to 56.19 pieces in Plant B, making the average output of the two plants 54.355 bulbs per man-hour. The average man-hour output on 40-watt bulbs is 54.21 pieces. On the semiautomatic Empire E machine the average 40780°—27----- 9 126 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY man-hour output is 116.06 twenty-five-watt bulbs and 116.55 fortywatt bulbs. On the automatic machines the average man-hour output on 25-watt bulbs is 801.82 pieces on the Empire F machine operated with a feeder, 1,283.63 pieces on the older type Westlake machine, and 1,699.22 pieces per man-hour on the newer type. The corresponding figures for a 40-watt electric bulb are 787.50 pieces for the Empire F machine, 1,319.15 pieces for the older type Westlake machine, and 1,703.59 pieces per man-hour for the newer type Westlake machine. Taking the average man-hour output of the two hand plants as the base, or 100, the semiautomatic machine shows an index of 213.52 for a 25-watt bulb and 215 for a 40-watt bulb, an increase of more than 100 per cent over the average man-hour output in hand produc tion. On the same basis, the indexes of man-hour output of a 25watt bulb made by the automatic process are 1476.16 for the Empire F machine, 2361.60 for the older type Westlake machine, and 3126.17 for the newer type Westlake machines. The corresponding indexes for a 40-watt electric bulb are 1452.70 for the Empire F, 2433.41 for the older type Westlake machine, and 3142.57 for the newer type Westlake machine. The man-hour output on the most up-to-date automatic process is thus more than thirty-one times the man-hour output of the same kind of bulbs made by hand. This increase is exceeded only by tnat caused by the Owens double triplex machine in the production of 2 and 4 ounce prescription bottles. (See pp. 49.) Not less remarkable is the reduction in the direct labor cost by the automatic process. The average labor cost of 1,000 electriclight bulbs made by hand is $13,882 for 40-watt bulbs and $13,897 for 25-watt bulbs. When made on the semiautomatic machine the labor cost is $4,180 and $4,197 for 40 and 25 watt bulbs, respectively. When made by the newer type Westlake machine the labor cost of 1,000 bulbs is reduced to 47.0 and 47.1 cents for 40 and 25 watt bulbs, respectively. In other words, for every dollar spent on the labor of making 40 and 25 watt electric-light bulbs by hand it cost only 30.11 and 30.22 cents, respectively, to make them on the semiautomatic machine and only 3.39 cents on the automatic. The saving in labor cost thus brought about by the automatic machine is 96.61 cents for every dollar spent on hand production. (See Table 28.) The effects of such changes in output and costs on the electric-light bulb industry are obvious. They are best expressed in the following statement of conditions in the plants by one of the most important electric-light bulb producers in the country: Per cent of bulbs produced by— H a n d .._____ ______________________________ Semiautomatic machine___________________ Automatic machine________________________ Total............................... ..............................- 1920 3 9.2 60. 7 .1 100.0 1926 (6 mos.) 11.3 5. 4 83. 3 100.0 Within the short span of five years production by the automatic process has increased from one-tenth of 1 per cent to 83.3 per cent of the total output. At the same time hand production has declined from 39.2 per cent to 11.3 per cent, while production on the semi automatic has declined from 60.7 per cent to 5.4 per cent. Another important concern reports more than 98 per cent of its total produc CHAPTER II.— BLOWN W ARE: ELECTRIC-LIGHT BULBS 127 tion of bulbs made on the automatic machine and less than 2 per cent by hand, there being no production on the semiautomatic machine. The semiautomatic process of making electric-light bulbs has thus suffered the most from the introduction of the automatic machine. The situation is exactly parallel to that in the case of bottles. Hand production has been retained to make such of the large sizes and oddly shaped and colored bulbs as can not be economically produced on the machine, partly because the molds are too expensive, but chiefly because such bulbs are produced in very small quantities. For this purpose and for the purpose of experimentation, which can be better controlled when the bulbs are made by hand, hand production, even if only a small fraction of the whole industry, will survive no matter what strides are made by the automatic machines. The semiauto matic process, however, is doomed to disappear and it is only a matter of a few years before the last semiautomatic will be consigned to the scrap heap and replaced by the automatic. T a b le 28.— Comparison of man-hour output and labor cost of electric-light bulbs made by hand and by machine Man-hour output 26-watt bulb Process and machine 40-watt bulb Quantity Index Quantity Index or amount number or amount number Pieces Hand production: 52.52 Plant A ..................................................................................... 56.19 Plant B .................................................................................... 54.355 Average___________________________ ____ __ ____ _______ Semiautomatic machine: Empire E_________________________ 116.06 Automatic machine: 801.82 Empire F, with feeder -__ - ______________ Westlake, old ty p e ................................................................ 1,283.63 Westlake, new type____________________________________ 1,699.22 96.62 103.38 100.00 213.52 Pieces 52.64 55.78 54.21 116.55 97.10 102.90 100.00 215.00 1476.16 2361.60 3126.17 787.50 1,319.15 1,703.59 1452.70 2433.41 3142.57 $14,750 13.044 13.897 4.197 106.13 93.86 100.00 30.20 $14.716 13.048 13.882 4.180 106.01 93.99 100.00 30.11 .570 .584 .471 4.10 4.22 3.39 .580 .568 .470 4.17 4.09 3.39 Labor cost (per 1,000) Hand production: Plant A ..................................................................................... Plant B _____________ !_________________________________ Average_______________________________________________ Semiautomatic machine: Empire E _________________________ Automatic machine: Empire F, with feeder_________________________________ Westlake, old type_____________________________________ Westlake, new type_________ __________________________ STATISTICS OF PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST The data given in Table D are actual figures of output of 25 and 40 watt electric-light bulbs made by hand, by the semiautomatic Empire E machine, by the automatic Empire F machine operated with an automatic feeder, and by the older and newer types of the Westlake machine. Hand production is represented by two plants, Plant A and Plant B. The average of these two plants has been taken as the standard by which to measure the output and labor cost in the other plants. 128 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY The statistics of hand production refer to periods different from the period for the machine plants, for the reason that no standard 25 or 40 watt bulbs were made by hand in 1925, so completely did the machine displace the hand process in the production of these two staple articles. The rates of wages used are in all cases those which prevailed in the respective plants during 1925. There is a separate section in the table for each of the processes for the two kinds of bulbs studied. Each section is divided into two parts—labor unit, and output and labor cost. The first part gives the number and the kind of workers composing a single shop or attending a single machine; the rates of wages paid, per 100 bulbs or per hour, and the total labor cost of an hour’s operation either by a single shop or a single machine. The second part gives the actual number of bulbs made, by months; the number of shop or machine hours in operation; the output per shop-hour in hand plants and per machine-hour in machine plants; the output per man-hour and the labor cost per 1,000 bulbs in all plants. T a b l e D . — PRODUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G E LEC TRIC- L IG H T BULBS B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E 25-WATT BULBS—HAND: PLANT A [In this table all wage rates are for 1925 and labor cost is based on 1925 wage rates regardless of year of out put. Italicized figures represent minimum amd maximum] Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers 1 1 y% H 2H Occupation Wage rates per 100 Wage rates per hour Labor cost per hour Year and month Output Unithours Output Output Labor per per cost unitmanper hour hour 1,000 1916 Pieces Pieces Pieces $0,882 $0,882 .741 .741 Jan.-June. 737,906 6,238.40 118.28 52.57 $14.736 960,500 8,092.20 118.69 52.75 14.685 .450 .056 July-Dee..500 .063 1917 Jan.-June. 1,015,035 8,559. 50 118.59 52.71 14.698 51.84 14.945 July-Dee— 1,385,937 11,883.00 116.63 Blower __________ Gatherer.................. Carry-in boy______ Cutting-off boy....... 1.742 Total.............. 1918 Jan.-June. 1,718,849 14,551.60 July-Dee.. 923,939 7,749.90 118.12 119.22 52.50 14.756 52.99 14.744 1919 Jan.-June. July-Dee. . 6,023.90 847.90 118.65 117.43 52.73 14.690 52.19 14.843 Total.— 7,556,500 63,946.40 118.17 52.52 14.750 714,761 99,573 25-WATT BULBS—HAND: PLANT B 1 1 k 2H 1923 Jan...... 0.28 $0,035 Feb— . .035 Mar__ .27 Apr___ Aug— Nov___ Dec___ Blower.............. Gatherer........... Section boy....... Cutting-off girl. Total.. 1.25 .070 Total__ 4,942 6,576 6,589 11,530 9,902 53,140 106,262 38.00 49.50 50.50 88.50 75.00 424.00 848.00 130.05 132.85 130.48 130.28 132.03 125.33 125.31 57.80 $13,029 59M 13.018 57.99 13.027 57.90 13.028 58.68 13.021 55.70 13.049 55.69 13.049 198,941 1,573.50 126.43 56.19 13.044 CHAPTER II.---- BLOWN WARE: ELECTRIC-LIGHT BULBS 129 T a b l e D . — PRO DUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G E L E C T R IC - L IG H T BULBS B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued 25-WATT BULBS—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: EMPIRE E Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Gatherer.-............ . Take-out boy.......... Spiffer (crack - off boy)------- ---------Section boy............. Total.. Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per 100 hour hour Year and month Output Unithours 1925 $0.65 $0,650 .44 .440 Jan........ Feb....... .44 .440 Sept___ .35 .175 Dec....... Pieces 130,267 103,576 26,691 109,958 320.00 254.00 64.00 274.00 Total. 370,492 912.00 1.705 Output Output Labor per per cost manunitper hour hour 1,000 Pieces Pieces 407.08 116.31 $4,188 407.78 116.51 4.181 417.05 119.16 4.088 401. SI 114.66 4.U9 406.24 116.06 4.197 25-WATT BULBS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: EMPIRE F, WITH FEEDER Machine foreman— Feeder operator...... Machine operator__ Crack-off machine operator............... 2H Total.. $1.00 0.167 1925 .60 .100 Jan___ .40 .400 Mar___ July.... .40 .400 Aug---Sept___ Oct___ Nov,.... 1.067 973,830 289,438 235,348 481,062 344,589 358,817 867.343 495.20 1,966.54 151.90 1,905.45 140.10 1,679.86 275.30 1,747.10 209.30 1,646 .89 205.40 1, 746.92 420.50 2,062. “ T otal.... 3,550,427 1,897. 70 1,870.91 842. 80 $0,542 816. .560 719. .635 748, .611 706. .648 748. .611 .617 801.82 .570 25-WATT BULBS-AUTOMATIC MACHINE: 24-SPINDLE WESTLAKE, OLD TYPE Machine foreman.. Mechanic............. IK Machine operators. g m Total- 1925 $1.25 1.208 .85 .283 Jan.......... 1,030,609 .65 .758 Feb_____ 1,042,652 Mar...... . 1,243,121 Apr______ 861,775 M ay_____ 1,118,365 June......... 1,310,885 July . 1,327,935 Aug........ . 1,268,730 Sept_____ 1,184,130 Oct______ 1,406,472 N ov ..____ 1,286,920 Dec.......... 1,432,908 Total. _. 14,514, 503 467. 75 2, 203.33 1,322.00 $0,567 493. 75 2, 111. 70 1,267.02 .592 552. 33 2, 250.69 1,850.41 .565 404. 25 2, 131.79 1,279.07 .586 582. 66 1,919.41 1,151.66 .650 609. 75 2, 149.87 1,289.92 .581 614. 50 2, 161.00 1,296. 60 .578 579. 90 2, 187.84 1,312.70 .571 588. 10 2, 013.49 1,208.09 .620 642. 55 2, 188.89 1,313.33 .570 592. 45 2, 172.20 1,303. 32 .575 656. 55 2, 182.48 1,309.49 .572 6,784. 44 2, 139.38 1,283.63 .584 25-WATT BULBS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: 24-SPINDLE WESTLAKE, NEW TYPE Machine foreman.. M echanic-........... H Machine operator.. 1925 $1.00 $0,125 .90 .225 Jan.......... 1,334,016 425,088 .75 .750 Feb.......... Mar.......... 86,650 Apr.......... 614,016 M ay......... 380,712 June. 329,972 July.......... 844,416 Aug.......... 796,086 Sept.......... 345,024 Oct........... 664,128 245,376 Dec.......... Total— 6,066,484 565.62 2,358. 50 1,715.27 $0,466 165.84 2,568. 24 1,864.17 .4*9 38.68 2,240. 18 1,629.22 .491 268.65 2,285. 56 1,662.23 .481 177.61 2,143. 53 1,558.93 .513 144.50 2,283. 51 1,660.73 .482 357.60 2,361. 34 1,717.34 .466 332.46 2,394. 53 1,741.48 .459 138.55 2,490. 25 1,811.09 .442 286.00 2,322. 13 1,688.82 .474 120.97 2,028. 40 1,475.20 .54* 2,596.48 2,336.43 1,699.22 .471 130 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY T a b l e D . — PRODUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G E LE C TR IC - L IG H T BULBS B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued. 40-WATT BULBS—HAND: PLANT A Labor unit Num ber of work ers 1 1 B 2X Occupation Output and labor cost Wage rates per 100 Blower..................... Gatherer__________ Carry-in boy______ Cutting-off boy....... Wage Labor rates cost per per hour hour Year and month 1916 Pieces $0,882 $0,882 .741 .741 Jan.-June. 1,768,793 .450 .056 July-Dec - 4,722,574 .500 .063 1917 Jan.-June. 4,164,385 July-Dec _ 3,683,929 Total.............. 1.742 Unithours Output Output Labor per per cost unitmanper hour 1,000 hour 14.914.10 39.686.10 Pieces Pieces 118.60 52.71 $14,696 119.00 52.89 14.647 Output 35,096.10 31,042.40 115.87 118.67 61.28 15*108 52.74 14.688 1918 Jan.-June_ 6,931,770 58,873.80 July-Dee - 3,089,901 26,073.50 117.74 118.51 52.33 14.804 52.67 14.708 Total. _. 24,361,352 205,686.00 118.44 52.64 14.716 40-WATT BULBS—HAND: PLANT B 1 1 X 2X Blower.............. Gatherer........... Section boy___ Cutting-off girl. Total. 0.71 .54 1923 Jan___ $0.28 $0,035 Feb___ .27 Apr___ M a y ... Nov___ Dec----- 11,814 8,184 22,332 34,431 105,024 127,358 91.50 64.50 179.00 273.00 823.00 1,032.00 129.11 126.88 124.76 126.12 127.61 128.41 57.88 $18,082 56.39 13.042 55.44 13.051 56.05 13.045 56.72 13.039 54.85 18.057 1.25 .070 Total 309,143 2,463.00 125.51 55.78 13.048 40-WATT BULBS—SEMIAUTOMATIC MACHINE: EMPIRE E 1 1 1 Gatherer......... Take-out boy.. Spiffer............. X Section boy.— *X ). 65 $0,650 1925 .44 .440 Jan........... .44 .440 Feb........... .35 .175 Mar........ June......... Aug.......... Nov.......... Total.. 1.705 20,169 321,463 520,160 14,405 106,562 341,735 48.00 753.00 1,295.00 39.00 312.00 800.00 420.19 426.91 401.67 369. 36 841.55 427.17 120.05 $4,058 121.97 3.994 114. 76 4.245 105. 53 4.616 97.68 4.992 122.06 8.991 T otal___ 1,324,494 3,247.00 407.91 116.55 4.180 40-WATT BULBS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: EMPIRE F, WITH FEEDER Machine foreman_ Feeder operator___ Machine operator.. Crack-off machine operator. 2X $1.00 $0,167 .60 .40 .40 1925 .100 Jan____ .400 Feb___ .400 Mar___ Aug----Oct___ Nov___ Total................................... 1.067 Total___ 1,139,317 1,756,933 1,304,281 438,305 533,099 358,744 620.001,837.61 969.70 1,811.88 703.30 1,854.52 241.90 1,811.93 282.60 1,886.41 192.40 1,864.58 5,530,679 3,009.901,837.50 787.55 $0,580 776.50 .589 794.79 .575 776.54 .589 808.46 .565 799.11 .572 787.50 40-WATT BULBS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: 24-SPINDLE WESTLAKE, OLD TYPE X Machine foreman X Mechanic_________ I X Machine operators m Total.............. $1.25 $0,208 1925 .85 .283 Jan____ _ .65 .758 Feb........... Mar.......... Apr........... M ay......... June......... July.......... Aug.......... Sept......... Oct........... N o v ____ Dec.......... 1.249 1,091,082 643,840 1,956,362 1,448,148 1,679,208 2,163,784 1,959,355 1,873,860 2,047 874 1,661,736 1,293,515 2,096,286 Total___ 19,915,140 476.10 2,291. 71 1,375.03 $0,545 278.25 2,313.85 1,388.31 .540 900.66 2,172.14 1,303.28 .575 617.16 2,846.47 1,407.88 .582 754.75 2,224.85 1,334.91 .561 1,019.90 2,121. 56 1,272.94 .588 954.25 2,058.29 1,281.97 .608 .551 826.90 2,266.13 1,359.68 896.16 2,285.17 1,371.10 .547 716.60 2,318.92 1,391.35 .539 620.90 2,083.29 1,249.97 .601 996.50 2,103.65 1,262.19 .593 9,058.13 2,148.59 1,319.15 .568 C H A P T E R I I .— BLOWN WAKE: ELECTBIC-LIGHT BULBS 131 T a b l e D .— PR O D U C TIO N A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G E LE C TR IC - L IG H T BULBS B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued 40-WATT BULBS—AUTOMATIC MACHINE: 24-SPINDLE WESTLAKE, NEV TYPE Labor unit Num ber of work ers l Occupation Vs Machine foreman Mechanic................. Operator.................. Wage rates per 100 Output and labor cost Wage Labor rates cost per per hour hour Year and month 1925 $1.00 $0,125 .90 .225 Jan........... .75 .750 Feb.......... Mar.......... M ay......... July.......... Aug.......... Sept.......... Oct........... Nov.......... m Total.............. 1.100 Output Pieces 986,460 855,640 178,596 1,104,540 1,193,100 1 091,264 1,242,300 824,100 1,613,268 1,485,112 119,064 1,590,516 T ota l--. 12,283,960 Unithours Output Output Labor per per cost manunitper hour hour 1,000 Pieces Pieces 407.40 2,421.35 1,760.98 $0,454 357.29 2,394.81 1.741.68 .459 79.96 2,233. 57 1,624.41 .493 505.33 2,185. 78 1,589.66 .503 545.69 2,186.41 1,590.12 .503 450.81 2,420.67 1.760.48 .454 .506 571.58 2,178.15 1.580.69 330.86 2,490-78 1.811.48 •442 682.63 2.363.31 1,718.77 .465 600.38 2,473.62 1,799.00 .445 47.88 2,486.72 1,808.52 .442 664.29 2.394.31 1,741.32 .459 5,244.10 2,342.44 1,703.59 .470 BLOWN W ARE: PUNCH TUMBLERS MAKING TUMBLERS BY HAND In the process of blowing tumblers by hand the shop is commonly made up of two skilled workers, the blower and the gatherer, and two helpers, the cracking-off boy and the carry-in boy. The process of blowing is much the same as in the case of electric-light bulbs. The gatherer picks up a bit of molten glass on the end of his pipe and by blowing and marvering it prepares it for the blower. The latter then lowers it into the automatic or dummy paste mold, which he operates by the help of a foot treadle, and while constantly rotating the pipe with his hands blows into it with sufficient force to distend the glass to the shape of the mold. The cracking-off boy then separates the blown article from the pipe and the carry-in boy takes it to the leer to be annealed. As the tumbler emerges at the cold end of the leer, it looks more like a bottle with a broken neck than a tumbler. The blank tumbler, as it is called, must therefore undergo a series of operations before it finally assumes the shape of a tumbler. The first operation is to remove the neck or shoulder left by the mold. This is usually done on a cutting-off machine by the flameexpansion method. The operator first marks the blank tumbler at the point where the shoulder is to be removed. The marking, a slight scratch on the surface of the glass, is done by a diamond point, which can be so adjusted as to mark exactly the size of the tumbler wanted. The marked blank is then transferred to the cutting-off machine. The latter consists of a revolving holder in which the glass article is clasped, with an adjustable narrow gas flame above it. The gas flame is so fixed as to strike the blank at the line scratched by the diamond point. As the tumbler rapidly rotates on its axis, a fracture is formed in the glass along the line of the scratch by the expansion caused by the flame. The work of cutting off is performed almost exclusively by women. One operator usually marks the blank tumbler and takes care of one machine with two spindles or burners. The output of such a machine varies widely, according to the experience of the operator and the size and shape of the tumbler cut. It is estimated, however, that an average operator in charge of a two-spindle cutting-off machine could cut all the ware produced by five blowing shops. The equiva lent of one-fifth the labor of a cutting operator must therefore be added to each shop engaged in the process of blowing tumblers by hand. The next operation is to smooth and even off the rough edges left by the cutting-off machine. This is usually done by grinding the tumbler either by hand or by machine,, nowadays predominantly the latter. There are several types of grinding machines used in this branch of the glass industry, but the principle of grinding is the same in all machines. The tumbler is inserted in a chuck at the end of a revolving spindle operated either by a system of counterweights and a 132 CHAPTER I I .---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 134 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY foot treadle or by electric power. The rapidly rotating tumbler is pressed against a grinding stone which smooths and evens off the edges of the tumbler. Some grinding machines carry only 3 to 4 chucks, but there are machines with 20 or more. The work of the operator consists in inserting the tumbler in the chuck and then taking it out of the machine when the edge has been smoothed. This is also done almost exclusively by women. It is estimated that an average operator could grind all of the ware blown by four shops, and the equivalent of one-fourth of the labor of a grinding operator must therefore be added to each shop. The next step is to clean from the tumblers the glass particles and the sand left by the grinding machine. The wiping off is done by hand, either with dry rags or some cleansing powder. It is esti mated that one girl is able to take care of two grinding machines, and the equivalent of one-eighth of the labor of a wiping-off girl must therefore also be added to each shop blowing tumblers by hand. The final operation is to fire polish the edges of the tumblers. This work is done by a glazing machine similar to those used and described in the case of pressed tumblers (see p. 91). The machine is tended by two girls, one of whom places the tumblers in the revolving spindles of the machine, while the other takes them out of the machine when the glazing is finished. The two operators, working together, can thus take care of approximately four grinding machines, and the equiva lent of one-eighth of the labor of a glazing operator must be added to each shop. The total finishing labor thus to be added to each shop consists of the equivalent of one-fifth of a cutting-off operator, one-fourth of a grinding operator, one-eighth of a wiping-off girl, and one-eighth of a glazing operator. After the tumblers are finished, they are ready to be assorted and packed. AUTOMATIC PROCESS The Westlake machine, devised chiefly for the purpose of making electric-light bulbs, is also used to a large extent in making punch tumblers. With the exception of the difference in molds, the process of blowing is exactly the same as in the case of electric-light bulbs (see pp. 121-125). The tumbler blown by the automatic process looks very much the same as the blank tumbler blown by hand. This blank must also undergo a finishing process before the tumbler is complete, but the finishing method used with the Westlake machine 1 is decidedly different from the process described above. From the blowing machine the blank tumblers are delivered by an automatic conveyor to the so-called burning machine. By this device 2 the process of cutting off, grinding, wiping off, and glazing are combined into one operation and the tumbler emerges from the machine completely finished but for the annealing process. One of the operators in charge of this device feeds it and the other takes the finished tumblers out of the machine and transfers them to the small leer located within reach. The amount of annealing required in this process is con 1 It may also be used with any other blown article, whether by hand or machine. 2 Unfortunately the company refused to permit its description here, on account of pending patent. C H A P T E R I I . — BLOWN WARE: PUNCH TUMBLEKS 135 siderably less than that in the hand-blown tumbler. It takes but 16 minutes to transform the bit of molten glass automatically gathered by the machine into a completely finished tumbler, ready to be assorted and packed. It takes more than two hours to accomplish the same thing in the case of a hand-blown tumbler. MAN-HOUR OUTPUT AND LABOR COST Table 29 contains a comparison of man-hour output of a 9-10 ounce punch tumbler made by hand and by the Westlake automatic machine. The average output of a hand shop is 25.69 tumblers per man-hour, as compared witji the machine output of 364.57 tumblers. Expressed in terms of index numbers, taking the man-hour output of a hand plant as the base, or 100, the index for the Westlake automatic machine is 1419.1, or more than 14 times that for the hand process. The table also shows a comparison of the direct labor cost of making a 9-10 ounce punch tumbler by the two processes. While the direct labor cost of blowing one hundred 9-10 ounce tumblers by hand amounts to SI.90, the corresponding cost on the Westlake machine is only 13.3 cents. For every dollar spent on production of punch tumblers by hand, it cost only 7 cents to make them by machine, a saving in labor cost of 93 cents on every dollar. There are very few common punch tumblers still made by the hand process, those that are so made being chiefly of odd shapes and sizes. Most of the common punch tumblers are being made either on the Westlake automatic machine, or on the lamp chimney semiautomatic machine as a by-product of lamp chimneys. Not being able to com pete with the machine in terms of quantity, the hand plants are specializing on a better quality tumbler, with particular emphasis on etchings and decorations to appeal to individual tastes. The situation here is similar to the novelty field in the pressed-ware branch of the glass industry. T a b l e 29.— Comparison of man-hour output and labor cost o f 9 -1 0 ounce punch tumblers blown by hand and by machine Man-hour output Process Hand production............................................................................ Westlake machine...... ............................................... ................... Index Quantity number Pieces 25.69 364.57 Labor cost Amount per 100 100.0 1419.1 $1,900 .133 Index number 100.0 7.0 STATISTICS OP PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST The data given in Table E cover two plants, one where the punch tumblers are produced by hand, and the other where the older type of Westlake machine is used. In the case of hand production the labor unit chosen consists of the blowing shop, to which is added such labor of the finishing department as is needed to cut off, grind, polish, and glaze the tumblers before they are complete. The proportions of this labor have.been determined by estimating the number of finishing workers needed to take care of all ware produced by all the 136 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY blowing shops. The number of the different kinds of workers, such as cutters, glazers, grinders, etc., varies from plant to plant, depending largely on the sizes of the ware produced and the skill of the individual employees, but the total percentage of finishing labor needed in addition to each blowing shop, is comparatively small and varies but little from plant to plant. The figures given in the table may therefore be taken as more or less representative of all hand plants. In the case of the automatic machine, the workers on a single machine have been taken as the production unit. Where a worker tended more than one machine, only that part of his labor has been taken which was allotted to a single machine. As each machine is provided with a single finishing device, there was no need of esti mating the proportions of finishing labor needed for each blowing unit. Each section of the table is divided into two parts—labor unit, and output and labor cost. The first part gives the number and kind of workers engaged in the process, their rates of wages per 100 pieces and per hour, and the total labor cost of operating one unit per hour. The second part gives the total number of tumblers made, the shop or machine hours used in the production of the quantity of tumblers given, the output per shop or machine hour, the man-hour output, and the labor cost of making one hundred 9-10 ounce punch tumblers. T a b le E .— PRODUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G PUNCH TUM BLERS B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E 9-10 OUNCE PUNCH TUMBLERS-HAND [Italicized figures represent minimum and maximum] Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per hour hour 100 Blowing: 1 Blower. . $0,660 Gatherer 1 1 Cracking-off boy. 1 Carry-in boy Finishing: H H H Vs Total.. $0,326 $0,325 .325 .325 .300 .300 .300 .300 1.188 .060 .075 .038 .038 .860 Year and Output month Out put Labor Unit- Output cost unit- per hours per per hour man100 hour 1926 Jan........ Feb Mar Apr....... M ay___ Aug...... Sept___ Oct........ Nov Dec Pieces 22,004 176.00 3,876 30.00 11,964 97.63 7,552 68.50 5,705 49.75 2,020 19.25 1,468 12.25 11,568 98.25 8,946 76.25 13,905 109.25 Total _ 88,998 737.13 Pieces Pieces 125.02 26.60 $1.876 129.20 27.49 1.854 122.44 26.05 1.891 110.25 23.46 1.968 114.67 24.40 1.938 105.00 22.34 2.007 119.84 25.50 1.906 117.74 25.05 1.918 117.32 24.96 1.921 127.28 27.08 1.864 120.73 26.69 1.900 *-10 OUNCE PUNCH TUMBLERS-AUTOMATIC WESTLAKE MACHINE H 1 1 1 Chief operator........... Machine operator Burn-off operator Leer man................... ~W L Total................ $0.80 1$0.20 .56 1 .56 .45 1 .45 .37 .37 .......... 1.57 1925 Sept___ Oct. N ov___ Dec 86,064 78.17 296,238 254.50 154,728 128.13 149,648 118.75 1,100.99 1,164.00 1,207.59 1,260.20 Total- 686,678 579. 55 1,184.85 364.57 338.76 $0. 14 s 358.15 .135 371.56 .130 887.75 ! .125 .133 BLOWN WARE: GLASS TUBING MAKING GLASS TUBING BY HAND In the process of making glass tubing by hand the work is done by a unit o f workers, the shop, consisting of eight men—four skilled workers and four unskilled or semiskilled helpers. The skilled workers, arranged in the order of their importance, are: The gaffer (blower), the marverer, the ball maker, and the gatherer. The four helpers are the carry-over boy, the punty boy, the drawing boy, and the cutting boy. The process of drawing glass tubing by hand may briefly be de scribed as follows: Standing in front of the pot of molten glass, the gatherer inserts his long and heavy pipe into the molten mass, and by skillful manipulation accumulates at the end of the pipe the first bit of glass. He then withdraws the pipe and shapes the glass into a round ball by first marvering it on a flat and smooth surface and then blocking it in a wooden receptacle filled with water to cool the outer surface of the ball. He then returns it to the pot and makes a second gathering of glass over the formed ball, again marvers and blocks it, and then turns it over to the ball maker. The latter makes a third and final gathering of glass, at which time the ball on the end of the pipe weighs on the average from 30 to 40 pounds. After swinging the pipe several times forward and backward, at the same time blowing lightly into the pipe, the ball maker hands it over to the marverer, who, by repeated blowing, marvering, and blocking the glass, puts it into shape to be drawn. In the meantime the punty boy has heated his punty, consisting of a large iron disk attached to an iron rod. The gaffer, to whom the carry-over boy has brought the pipe with the ball of glass ready to be drawn, lifts it over the punty, allowing the outer surface of the glass ball to become attached to the disk of the punty. The drawing boy then lifts the punty from the floor and begins to move away from the gaffer, pulling with him the glass, which has become firmly fastened to the p u n t y . The gaffer, while continuously blowing into his pipe to keep the inside of the tube hollow, walks slowly in the opposite direction from the drawing boy, thus drawing out the glass to the required thinness. When the drawing is finished, the cutting boy, with the help of a file, cuts the usable part of the tubing into required sizes and throws the waste into a cullet receptacle. It is estimated that only 25 to 30 per cent of the tubing thus drawn by hand is good tubing, the rest going back into the melting pot as cullet. MAKING GLASS TUBING BY MACHINE The Danner apparatus for the making of glass tubing may best be described as a process rather than as a single piece of machinery. As in the case of hand-made tubing the raw materials are first melted in regular furnace pots, except that the molten glass is heated to a 137 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY F ig . 19—DRAWING GLASS TUBING BY HAND CHAPTER I I .---- BLOWN WARES GLASS TtJBlKG 139 higher temperature than that needed for hand production. When the glass has been sufficiently heated it is transferred by means of a large ladle from the. melting pot to the drawing furnace. The lame, which is about 13 feet long, holds from 40 to 45 pounds of molten glass. It takes a special man, a ladler, and a helper to ladle the glass From the pot into the furnace. The drawing furnace constitutes the principal element of the Danner tube-drawing machine. It consists of two separate chambers so arranged that the glass flows from the first chamber into the second by gravity. A system of gas burners keeps the glass in the two chambers at the required temperature. Within the second chamber is located a mandrel, or iron blow pipe, one end being con nected by means of valves with an air tank outside the furnace, and the other end protruding from the front opening of the furnace where the glass is drawn. The portion of the mandrel within the chamber is protected by a shell of fire clay or other suitable heat-resisting material. The clay shell is usually of a conical form, tapering gradually toward the drawing opening of the furnace. The mandrel, which inclines forward in a fixed position, is kept in constant rotation by an intricate system of cams and wheels. As the glass flows into the second chamber from the first, some of it is caught up by the rotation of the mandrel and winds itself around the mandrel, at the same time slowly moving of its own weight down toward the tapering end of the mandrel. This double motion of the glass causes it to acquire a cylindrical form by the time it reaches the drawing opening of the furnace. By this time also it has cooled sufficiently and become sufficiently ductile to make it possible to draw it from the mandrel without breaking. The continuous and regular passing of air from the air tank through the pipe into the soft glass perforates the interior of the cylinder of glass drawn and gives it a tubular shape. The size of the tubing thus drawn depends on the amount of air passing through the mandrel, on the temperature of the glass at the point at which it leaves the mandrel, and on the speed of drawing. The drawing apparatus is usually located some distance away from the furnace, this distance varying from 100 to 150 feet. On its route from the drawing furnace to the drawing machine, the glass tubing is supported by a trough containing a series of pulleys (see Fig. 20). The drawing machine consists of two endless chains one above and one below the tube, running on sprocket wheels. The chains are equipped with gripping pads and rollers, which serve to hold the tubing and to exert the pulling force. The space between the two chains can be easily adjusted to the diameter of the tubing to be drawn. Upon leaving the drawing machine the tubing passes over a short table, the end of which is pressed upward by a spring. This pressure serves to hold the glass tubing against a cutting wheel, which descends periodically and cuts the glass. The movements of the wheel are synchronized with the forward movement of the glass tubing, so that the pieces cut by the wheel are uniform in length. From the cutting machine the pieces slide off automatically to a platform attached to the table, from which they are easily removed by an attendant or by the drawing operator (see Fig. 21). 140 PRODUCTIVITY OP LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY Fid. 20—DA N N E R D R A W IN G M ACH IN E: DRAW ING FURNACE CHAPTER IT.---- BLOWN W ARE: GLASS TUBING 141 142 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY With the exception of the ladling of the glass from the pot to the drawing furnace, this process of drawing tubing by machine requires absolutely no skill or physical labor of any kind. The actual work of drawing and cutting the tubes is entirely automatic, the only labor required being in the nature of supervision—to see that the machine is working properly and that the drawing is resumed when a breakage occurs in the glass. The tubing produced by the machine is far superior to and more uniform than any produced by the hand process. In spite of the in creased uniformity, however, the pieces must still be gauged as to their exact sizes. This is done by a special gauging machine, which auto matically grades the tubing into from six to eight sizes. The machine contains a special compartment for each size, the entrance to which is barred by two levers which are extremely sensitive as to weight. As the piece of tubing rolls along the platform on the surface of the machine it strikes the levers of the first compartment. If the piece is of the proper weight the levers give way and it enters the compart ment; if it is of a different weight it is automatically propelled from compartment to compartment until it reaches its correct destination. The gauging operator periodically removes the graded tubes from their compartments to the warehouse, where they are either packed ready for shipment or subjected to any additional handling that may be needed for the special use for which they are destined. MAN-HOUR OUTPUT AND LABOR COST Table 30 shows a comparison of man-hour output of glass tubing made by hand and by machine. The average man-hour output of glass tubing drawn by hand is 9.967 pounds of sizes 19 to 21, ranging from 0.1371 to 0.1688 inch in diameter and 10.067 pounds of sizes 32 to 34, ranging from 0.3368 to 0.4156 inch in diameter. The man-hour output of the Danner machine is 58.932 pounds for sizes 19 to 21 and 75.169 pounds for sizes 32 to 34. Taking hand produc tion as the base, or 100, the increase in man-hour output caused by the Danner machine ranges from 491.9 per cent in tubing of sizes 19 to 21 to 646.7 per cent in sizes 32 to 34. The big difference in increase of output in the two types of tubing is due to the fact that within definite limits the larger the diameter of the tubing, the larger the quantity of glass drawn by the machine per hour. The table also contains a comparison of the direct labor costs of making the two types of tubing by hand and by machine. On the smaller sizes, 19 to 21, the direct labor cost of blowing tubing by hand amounts to $6,905 per 100 pounds, while by the machine process it is only $1,281 per 100 pounds. Similarly, on sizes 32 to 34, the direct labor cost of blowing the tubing by hand amounts to $6,830 per 100 pounds, as contrasted with the machine cost of $1,004 per 100 pounds. In other words, for every dollar spent on production of tubing by hand it costs only 18.55 cents on sizes 19 to 21 and 14.70 cents on sizes 32 to 34. The saving in direct labor cost thus effected by the Danner machine ranges from 81.45 to 85.30 cents for every dollar spent on blowing glass tubing by hand. The Danner machine described above is still in a semiautomatic stage in the sense that the glass needs to be ladled by hand from the melting pot to the drawing furnace. Nevertheless, the large increase in man-hour output, coupled with a correspondingly large decrease CHAPTER II.— BLOWN WAKE: GLASS TUBING 143 in direct labor cost of production on the one hand, and the very great improvement in the quality of tubing effected by the machine on the other hand, have resulted in the almost complete elimination of hand production in favor of the machine. It is probably the only branch in the glass industry where, in addition to larger output and lower labor cost, the machine product is so much superior to that made by hand that no reason whatever remained for the continued existence of hand production. The Danner apparatus was patented in 1917. In 1926 production of glass tubing by hand was a thing of the past, a mere memory to the surviving tube blowers, who had been compelled either to abandon their trade or to adjust themselves to the new process. T a b l e 30. — Comparison of man-hour output and labor cost in glass tubing made by hand and by machine Man-hour output Process Hand production__________________________________________ Machine production_______________________________________ Sizes 19 to 21 Sizes 32 to 34 Quantity Index or amount number Quantity Index or amount number Pounds 9.957 58.932 100.0 591.9 Pounds 10.067 75.169 100.0 746.7 100.00 18.55 $6,830 1.004 100.00 14.70 Labor cost (per 100 pounds) Hand production__ ________________ _____ _________________ Machine production________________ ____ __________________ $6,905 1.281 STATISTICS OF PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST Two groups of glass tubing have been used to compare the pro ductivity of labor in making tubing by hand and by machine. The first group contains the commercial sizes 19 to 21, which are extremely thin, ranging in diameter from 0.1371 to 0.1688 inch, and averaging from 1,100 to 890 inches per pound of glass drawn. The second group contains the commercial sizes 32 to 34, which range from 0.3368 to 0.4156 inch in diameter and average from 270 to 216 inches per pound of glass drawn. Table F shows data for each group of tubing separately. The data on machine production are given by months for the year 1925. As by that time the machine had completely displaced hand production in making glass tubing, the statistics of hand production refer to earlier periods. In all cases, however, the rates of wages shown are those prevailing in the plants during 1925. Each section of the table is divided into two parts—labor unit, and output and labor cost. The first part contains the number and kind of workers constituting a production unit, such as a shop or a machine, the rates of wages paid, and the labor cost per hour of operating a shop or a machine. The second part gives the actual quantities of tubing made, the number of shop or machine hours worked, the output per shop or machine hour, the output per manhour, and the labor cost per 100 pounds of glass tubing produced. PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN TH E GLASS INDUSTRY 144 T able F - -PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING GLASS TUBING BY HAND AND BY MACHINE SIZES 19 TO 21 (1,100 TO 890 INCHES PER POUND)—HAND [In this table all wage rates are for 1925 and labor cost is based on 1925 wage rates regardless of year of out put data. Italicized figures represent minimum and maximum] Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Gaffer (blower). Marverer__....... Ball maker......... Gatherer............ Carry-over b oy.. Punty boy......... Drawing boy___ Cutting-up boy. Total- Year and month Output Unithours Labor Output Out put cost per per per unit- man100 hour hour lbs. $1.00 $1.00 .90 .90 .85 .85 .75 .75 .50 .50 .50 .50 .50 .50 .50 .50 1917 Jan.-June. July-Dee - Lbs. 240,176 326,536 2,977.55 4,112.30 Lbs. U s. 80.662 10.083 $6.819 79.404 9.926 6.927 1918 Jan.-June. July-Dee. 137,506 116,958 1,744.52 1,474.33 78.822 79.330 9.653 9.916 6.978 5.50 T ota l... 821,176 10,308.70 79.658 9.957 6.905 Wage Labor rates cost per per hour hour SIZES 19 TO 21 (1,100 TO 890 INCHES PER POUND)—DANNER MACHINE Machine foreman. Ladler................... Assistant ladler.,. Furnace operator. Drawing operator. Gauging operator. Total. $1.25 $0.50 .70 .70 .70 .14 .70 .56 .70 .70 .70 .42 3.02 1925 Jan_........ Feb......... Mar........ Apr......... M ay....... Aug......... Sept____ Oct......... N ov____ T otal-_ 72,670 93,160 130, 470 228,190 151,280 19,875 88,200 76,300 82,823 942,968 314.75 456.50 579.00 1,036.50 711.25 73.50 302.25 262.00 264.50 230.880 204.074 225.337 220.154 212.696 270,409 291.820 291.230 318.131 57.720 $1,308 61.018 1.A71 56.334 1.340 55.038 1.372 53.074 1.420 67.602 1.117 72.955 1.035 72.807 1.037 78.283 .965 4,000.25 235.727 58.932 1.281 SIZES 32 TO 34 (270 TO 216 INCHES PER POUND)—HAND 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Gaffer (blower)___________ $1.00 $1.00 Marverer__ ____ __________ .90 .90 Ball maker.......................... . .85 .85 Gatherer................................ .75 .75 Carry-over boy____________ .50 .50 Punty boy.................... ........ .50 .50 Drawing boy........................ .50 .50 Cutting-up boy___________ .50 .50 8 Total........................... 5.50 1917 Jan.-June. July-D ec. 364,064 443,565 4,558.13 5,574. 30 79.871 79.573 1918 Jan.-June. July-Dee. 1919 Jan.-June. 409,981 212,580 4,938.92 2,559.99 83.010 10.376 83.089 10.880 91,962 1,268.84 T otal. . . 1,522,152 18,900.18 72.480 9.984 $6,886 9.947 6.912 6.626 6.624 9.060 7.588 80.536 10.067 Q« OOU SIZES 32 TO 34 (270 TO 216 INCHES PER POUND)—DANNER MACHINE Machine foreman. Ladler................. . Assistant ladler... Furnace operator. Drawing operator Gauging operator. Total. $1.25 $0.50 .70 .70 .70 .14 .70 .56 .70 .70 .70 .42 3.02 1925 Jan____ F e b ..... Mar___ Apr___ M a y ... June__ July___ Aug----S ep t... Oct___ Nov___ Dec___ 155,290 240,988 163,020 161,450 208,745 152,175 151,369 127,280 72,865 179,840 147,239 218,020 602.25 784.75 520.75 538.50 741.75 471.00 512. 50 405. 25 217.00 548.25 457. 50 779. 50 1,978,281 6,579.00 257.850 307.089 313,050 299.805 281.422 323.089 295.355 314.080 885.784 328.026 321.834 279.692 64.462 $1.171 76.772 .983 78.262 .965 74.951 1.001 70.355 1.073 80.772 .935 73.839 1.023 78.520 .962 88.946 .894 82.006 .921 80.458 .938 69,923 1.080 300.696 75.169 1.004 CHAPTER HI.— WINDOW GLASS The advent of the twentieth century found the window-glass branch of the glass industry in the United States and elsewhere still in the most primitive stage of hand production. True, the old method of making “ crown glass,” by first blowing the glass into a large hollow sphere and then flattening it into a disk from which the window panes were cut, had been completely abandoned, and the cylinder process had been introduced, which made it possible to produce considerably larger panes of window glass than could be accomplished by the “ crown-glass” method. But this change was simply a change in the technique of blowing glass, the process itself remaining, as it had been for centuries, essentially a hand process. M AKING W IN D O W GLASS BY HAND The process of making window glass by hand consists of three distinct operations: (1) Blowing the cylinder, (2) flattening it into sheet glass, and (3) cutting the sheet into the proper window-glass sizes. The group of workers, or the shop, engaged m the first opera tion of blowing the cylinder is made up of two skilled workers, the blower and the gatherer, and one unskilled or semiskilled helper, termed the “ snapper.” The actual process of blowing the cylinder may be described as follows: The gatherer first puts his pipe into a small furnace and heats the nose of the pipe to the temperature neces sary for the molten glass to stick to it. The pipe is a heavy iron tube about 5 feet long, with a wooden sleeve and a mouthpiece at one end, while the other end is shaped like a cone with a round end and is called the nose of the pipe. Standing in front of the opening of the tank or the pot, the gatherer inserts the nose of the pipe in the molten glass and makes the first gathering, usually termed the “ punny.” This he carries to an iron tub with running water which stands near by, and, for the purpose of cooling the pipe, places it in the notches provided. After the pipe is sufficiently cooled he gathers another batch of glass and proceeds again to cool the pipe in the same manner as before. The second batch of glass is called the “ first glass.” Two or three more gatherings are necessary before the exact quantity of glass, or the “ lump,” is accumulated on the nose of the pipe. During these alternate gatherings of the glass and cooling of the pipe the gatherer continuously blows into the pipe while constantly rotating it with his hands, thus giving to the adhering mass of glass a shape as nearly spherical as possible. The quantity of glass gathered depends upon the strength of the window glass and the size of the cylinder wanted, and its weight varies from 25 to 40 pounds. When to this weight is added that of the iron pipe, 10 to 15 pounds, the strenuous nature of the work of making window glass by hand becomes evident. When the lump is sufficiently cooled the gatherer takes it to the “ blow block,” a rounded wooden or iron block about 14 inches in diameter, hollowed to a depth of about 6 inches. The block is set in 145 146 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY water and is lined with charcoal to prevent the surface of the glass ball from becoming marred by direct contact with the iron. Here, without ceasing to rotate the ball in the block, the gatherer turns the pipe over to the blower. The latter continues to rotate the pipe and at the same time blows enough air into the glass to distend it to the size required for the cylinder to be blown. When this is done the blower turns the pipe with the ball of glass over to the snapper, who carries it to the “ blow furnace.” The blow furnace is a small furnace heated to a very high tempera ture. It is provided with a wide opening or door to permit the entrance of the enlarged ball of glass, while the pipe rests on a short iron bar extended from a swing door in front of the furnace. The blower again takes charge of the ball, and, keeping it in constant rotation, exposes it uniformly to the high temperature in the furnace. He then withdraws it from the furnace and lowers it into the pit, or “ swing hole,” which is about 2 feet wide, 8 feet long, and 6 to 8 feet deep. Continuing to rotate the pipe and at the same time blowing air into the glass, the blower permits the softened mass to run down from the end of the pipe so that it gradually assumes an elongated shape like a pear. When the glass is cooled to the proper tempera ture the blower swings the pipe several times back and forth in the swing hole, allowing the glass to stretch until it is thoroughly chilled. After that he swings the cylinder out of the hole, and, resting the pipe on the crane of the swing door in front of the furnace, puts the glass back into the blow furnace to be reheated. He then again stretches the glass, swinging it back and forth in the swing hole until it is too cool to stretch, and repeats the operations of reheating and stretching the glass until it finally assumes the proper dimen sions for the cylinder wanted. The cylinder is again turned over to the snapper, who returns it to the blow furnace in such a position as to expose the center of the closed end of the cylinder to the most violent heat. After blowing a few puffs of air into the glass he swings the entire cylinder into the furnace and puts his finger over the “ beebe,” or mouthpiece of the pipe so as to allow no air to escape. The air confined in the cylinder expands and finally bursts the cylinder at the point where the glass is most exposed to the heat—the center of the closed end of the cylinder. Then, for the last time, the blower takes charge of the pipe. When the glass cylinder in the furnace is sufficiently reheated he withdraws it from the furnace and by swinging it forward and backward in the swing hole and at the same time dexterously manipulating the pipe he widens the small hole caused by the escaped air to the exact size of the cylinder proper. This marks the end of the extremely skillful and at the same time very strenuous operation of blowing a cylinder of glass by hand. The work is performed absolutely without the aid of tools or gauging devices, and it is remarkable how u n i f o r m the circumference of the cylinder and the thickness of the glass are when the work is completed. The snapper then lifts the cylinder from the swing hole and places it in a horizontal position upon wooden supports, termed the “ horse.” He touches the neck of the cylinder, or that portion of it next to the nose of the pipe, with a wet iron, which starts a crack in the glass, and by gently tapping the pipe he breaks it loose from the cylinder. With a small rod the snapper then gathers a bit of glass, draws it out CHAPTER III.— WINDOW GLASS F ig . 22—H AN D PROCESS: R EH EATIN G B L O W N C Y L IN D E R A N D SW IN G IN G IT OVER PIT 148 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY with a pair of pincers into a thin, long thread and wraps it around the blowing end of the cylinder where the cylinder proper begins. The hot thread of gl&ss creates a narrow zone of a temperature con siderably hotter than the rest of the cylinder. By applying a cold iron to this zone the snapper easily separates the main body of the cylinder from the superfluous glass, known as the “ cap.” This operation is termed “ capping off,” and the worker performing it is sometimes called the “ capper.” The next operation, also performed by the snapper, is to split the cylinder open. He sprinkles some saw dust into the inside of the cylinder, and by passing a heated iron rod up and down through the sawdust he breaks the cylinder open along the course of the hot iron. This operation is called splitting, and the worker is termed the splitter. The cylinder is now ready to be flattened, and the roller boy takes it to the flattening house and places it in a position accessible to the flattening crew. The group of workers engaged in the operation of flattening a cylinder into a sheet of glass is made up of one skilled worker, the flattener, and two unskilled helpers, the shove-in boy and the leer tender. Briefly, the operation is performed as follows: The shove-in boy places the split cylinder on an elevated rail track and shoves it into the flattening oven, which is usually heated to a degree just sufficient to soften the glass but not to melt it. Standing in front of the opening of the oven, the flattener lifts the glass upon the heated flattening stone in the oven, and by means of a long iron rod first flattens the cylinder of soft glass into a sheet and then rubs it smooth with a “ flattening block,” which is a wooden block attached to a long bar. From the flattening oven the sheet is transferred to the annealing oven, which is merely a continuation of the flattening furnace. As the sheet emerges from the cold end of the leer the leer tender gives it an acid bath to clean it from the adhering alkali and then transfers it to the cutting room. There it is examined and cut into the required sizes, and then packed into wooden boxes ready for shipment. CYLINDER-MACHINE PROCESS Attempts to replace by a machine process the strenuous work of blowing glass cylinders by hand date back as far as 1885, but it was not until the Lubbers machine was patented in 1905 that the process became a marked success. Since then, in spite of the big inroads made by the more recent introduction of completely automatic processes of drawing flat glass directly from the tank, the cylinder machine has been the dominating factor in the window-glass branch of the glass industry of this country. The process of making window glass by the cylinder machine can be divided into several distinct operations: (1) Ladling the molten glass from the tank into the pots; (2) blowing the cylinder; (3) cap ping and splitting the cylinders; (4) flattening the cylinder into sheet glass; and (5) cutting the sheets into window-glass sizes. The number of operations and of workers in the machine process is con siderably larger than in the hand process. The principal advantages of this machine lie in the fact that it dispenses entirely with the highly skilled services of the gatherer and the blower and is capable CHAPTER AN D C Y L IN D E R M A CH IN E PROCESS: F L A T T E N IN G TH E C Y L IN D E R INTO SHEET GLASS III.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- F i g . 2 3 —H A N D ^ 150 PKODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN TH E GLASS INDUSTRY of producing cylinders more than twice as large in diameter and nearly five times as long as the cylinders made by the handworkers. The process may briefly be described as follows: Ladling out the glass.—The ladling crew, which cares for from four to six machines, consists of three workers— the “ ladler,” the “ skim mer,” and the “ back ladler,” a “ pot scraper” being sometimes added to this crew. Their work is to transfer the molten glass from the refining chamber of the tank to the pot from which the glass is drawn. This is accomplished with the help of a large iron ladle, which holds from 700 to 800 pounds of molten glass. The handle of the ladle is suspended from a pulley running on a monorail, thus making it easier to handle the large quantity of glass. The ladler, with the assistance of the skimmer and the back ladler, inserts the ladle in the working opening of the furnace, dips it into the molten glass, and rapidly withdraws it from the tank. As the ladle emerges from the furnace it has strings and sheets of glass clinging to the edges and the outside of the bowl. These cool very rapidly and must be removed by the “ skimmer” before the glass is delivered to the pot. After the strings have been removed with the help of a sharp tool, the glass is dumped into the drawing pot. A certain per centage of the glass adheres to the inside of the ladle, and this is transferred to a smaller ladle and delivered back to the melting end of the furnace by the “ back ladler.” In the meantime the other two men plunge the hot ladle into a large water container to cool and wash it off and thus prepare for another operation. The drawing pot into which the glass is dumped is made of clay or other heat-resisting material. The pot is really a double pot, made in the form of two washbasins with their bottoms placed together. It rests over an insulated kiln and is supported on two axles, so that it can easily be reversed when the blowing is completed. The kiln is provided with a set of blast fires which keep the pot at approxi mately the same temperature as the glass in the tank. When the cylinder has been blown and removed from the pot, a certain amount of glass adheres to the bottom of the pot. The latter is then turned over, and the fires in the kiln which heat the pot also drain this residue of glass through a hole at the bottom of the kiln to the cellar, from which it is removed back to the melting end of the furnace by a worker known as the “ cellarman.” The fires in the kiln thus serve the double purpose of keeping the glass in the drawing pot at the temperature required for blowing, and at the same time of cleansing and reheating the other side of the pot for another ladleful of glass. Blowing the cylinder.—The “ bait” used in the blowing operation consists of a hollowed cast-iron cylindrical head about 12 inches in diameter and equipped with an inner annular ring or flange which, when the operation begins, fills up with glass and forms the support of the cylinder blown. The hollow head of the bait is screwed onto a hollow pipe supported in a vertical position by means of a fork resting on a cage or elevator. This elevator is raised and lowered by means of a cable fastened to a taper drum driven by an electric motor. The speed of the motor is controlled by an operator called the blower, who is the only worker directly engaged in the process of blowing the cylinder. The blowing pipe is connected to a long flexible hose, the upper end of which is in turn connected to a small CHAPTER III.— WINDOW CLASS 151 fan driven by a motor also controlled by the blower. The speed of the two motors determines the diameter of the cylinder and the rate of its rising out of the drawing pot. The actual process of blowing the cylinder is as follows: The pot having been filled with glass, the cage with the blowpipe and the bait is lowered until the cylindrical head of the bait is partially immersed in the glass. The molten material at once fills up the inner ring of the bait, and the cage is raised until the bottom of the bait is about 1 inch or so above the surface of the glass in the pot. The cage re mains in this position for a few seconds, sufficient to cool off the glass inside the bait, which forms the support of the cylinder to be drawn. Upon the resumption of the upward movement of the cage the blower starts the fan, and air is blown through the flexible hose, through the pipe, and through the head of the bait into the soft mass of glass. Under the increasing pressure of air the cylinder, while slowly rising out of the pot, is gradually distended until it reaches the diameter desired. The blower then decreases the air pressure to a degree just sufficient to maintain that diameter. At this moment the speed of the cage, which has continued its upward movement, is accelerated gradually until the blowing is complete. This acceleration is effected automatically by the taper drum over which the cable of the cage travels, and is necessitated by the gradual cooling of the glass in the pot. When the cylinder has reached the length required, the speed of the machine is suddenly increased in order to thin out the walls of the lower end of the cylinder, just above the level of the glass in the pot. Then the draw is stopped and the blowing operation is finished. A worker known as the snapper or the hooker approaches the sus pended cylinder, and with a cold light iron hook touches its thinned portion. The contact of the cold iron with the hot glass produces a crack in the glass, and an upward movement of the cage easily lifts the cylinder above the crack, thus severing it from the glass remain ing in the pot. The pot is then turned over on its axles, and the other side of it is ready for another operation. Capping and splitting.—With the help of a hoop, which is fastened to a cable and passed over the lower end of the suspended cylinder, and an intricate system of pulleys, the cylinder, which averages from 35 to 40 feet in length, is brought down to a horizontal position and laid on a wooden “ horse,” similar to the one used in the hand process but correspondingly longer. The capper then proceeds, by means of an electrically heated wire, to cap off the narrower portion of the cylinder close to the bait, which is thus released from the cylinder and returned to the cage. In the same way he proceeds to cut the cylinder into several smaller cylinders, which are then transferred to the splitting room. These smaller cylinders are split into seg ments or “ shawls,” usually three to a cylinder. The process of splitting varies in different plants, but on the whole it is not much different from that employed in the hand process. Flattening and cutting.—The shawls are removed to the flattening house, and from then on the procedure is exactly the same as em ployed in the hand-made cylinders. The shove-in boys place the shawl in the flattening oven to soften the glass. The flattener then flattens it out on a hot flat stone and pushes it over to the annealing oven, or leer. At the cold end of the leer the leer tender lifts the 152 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY F ig. 24-C Y L IN D E R MACHINE PROCESS: ROW OF DRAWING MACHINES IN OPERATION CHAPTER III.— WINDOW GLASS F ig . 25—C Y L IN D E R M AC H IN E PROCESS: CAPPING A LARGE C Y L IN D E R INTO SM A LLER SECTIONS Or CO 154 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN TH E GLASS INDUSTRY flat sheet, gives it the usual acid bath, and delivers it to the cutting department. There the sheet is examined for defects, cut into window-glass sizes, and packed in wooden boxes ready for shipment. HAND AND CYLINDER MACHINE PROCESSES COMPARED The essential difference between the hand and the cylinder machine processes is confined almost exclusively to the operation of blowing. The machine does away completely with the highly skilled serv ices of the gatherer and the blower. The work of the gatherer is taken over by the ladle crew, while the blower, though the name is retained, is in reality merely a machine operator whose work and training have absolutely nothing in common with those of the hand blower. The cylinder produced by the machine is at least twice as large in diameter and more than five times as long as the hand-produced cylinder. To handle such a large cylinder requires a greater number of unskilled or semiskilled workers than is needed in hand production. For this reason the total number of workers on the cylinder machine is considerably larger than that needed in a hand shop. Where, in the hand plants, a single snapper does all the work preparatory to sending the cylinder to the flattening house, such as placing it on the “ horse,” capping, and splitting, in the cylinder-machine process separate workers are used for the vari ous operations. Hence the presence of hookers, pipe hangers and cappers, splitters, and helpers in a cylinder-machine plant. How ever, the machines are usually arranged four or six in a row and the same group of- workers has charge of all the machines, constituting a unit. The effect of the cylinder machines has thus been not only to dispense with the skill of the gatherer and the blower but also to integrate and even to a certain extent to specialize the other work involved in the process. FLAT GLASS Although a considerable advance over the hand process, the cylinder machine repeats essentially the same operations which are used in hand production. In both cases the glass has to be gathered and then a cylinder drawn, which must be split, flattened, and cut, before the glass can be applied to its proper uses. The process of first making a cylinder and then flattening it has always appeared roundabout, and experiments of drawing flat sheet glass directly from the furnace date back as far as 1857. It is only recently, however, that two processes have been successfully developed to make flat window glass by auto matically drawing it from the tank. These two processes are the Colburn process, by which the flat glass is drawn continuously in a horizontal direction from the tank and through the leer, and the Fourcault process, by which a continuous sheet of glass is drawn in a vertically upward direction. COLBURN PROCESS The Colburn machine was invented in 1905, but it was not until 1917 that it became a commercial success in the production of window glass. The glass is drawn automatically from a continuous tank, which is divided into three parts— the melting tank proper, the cool ing-off chamber, and the forehearth or drawing chamber. By a CHAPTER H I.---- WINDOW GliASS 155 system of water-cooled channels the glass in the forehearth is kept at the constant temperature needed to draw the glass. A bait is lowered into the forehearth and the viscous glass adhering to it is first raised some distance in a vertically upward position, then bent at a right angle over a pair of water-cooled rollers, and pulled in the form of a continuous horizontal sheet between two endless belts into and through a long annealing leer. Just above the surface of the glass in the forehearth are located two sets of knurled water-cooled rollers, which engage the edges of the sheet of glass as soon as it emerges from the forehearth. The object of the rollers is to prevent the sheet from tapering to a point, as is characteristic of any viscous mass subject to a pulling force. During its upward movement the glass is sufficiently cooled and solidified not to be seriously affected by the subsequent bending over the rollers. The drawing force is supplied by the two endless belts, one above the other, which move in the same direction with the sheet of glass. The upper belt is pro vided with caterpillar feet to engage the glass surface and thus supply the tractive force. At the cool end of the leer the continuous sheet is cut into the required lengths, which are then subjected to the usual treatment of acid bathing, examining, and cutting into sizes. Since 1917 an increasingly large quantity of window glass has been produced by this process. Unfortunately, however, the present owners of this patent declined to supply the Bureau of Labor Statististics with the data on number of workers and the output of the machine which were needed to gauge the labor productivity of this process in comparison either with hand production or the cylinder machine. In the subsequent analysis, therefore, this process has not been taken into consideration, and the Fourcault machine alone has been used to represent the automatic process of making flat glass. FOURCAULT MACHINE The process of automatically drawing upward a continuous wide sheet of window glass directly from the tank was invented by a Belgian engineer, Emile Fourcault. The simplicity of this process is so striking that it is surprising that it is such a recent invention. The machine consists of two parts, the clay drawing block—the “ debiteuse,” as it is called in Belgium— and the drawing apparatus. The drawing block, or “ floater,” is made of refractory material of lesser density than the glass. It is shaped like a flat-bottomed boat, with a slit in the bottom extending its entire length, the edges of the slit being turned up to a height somewhat lower than the outer walls of the drawing block. When this floater is placed in position and sufficient pressure from above applied to it, so that it is immersed in the glass until the edges of the slit lie below the surface of the glass, the pressure on the block causes some of the glass to flow upward through the slit. If left alone the glass would merely fill up the two troughs of the block to a level with the glass in the tank, but this is pre vented by seizing the glass as it emerges from the slit by means of a bait and drawing it off in sheet form. The block under its pressure is constantly forcing a sheet of molten glass through the slit, which retains the uniform size of the aperture of the block through which it is drawn. Two water-cooled tubes placed against the sides of the slit serve to cool the glass and to give it the resistance necessary in the upward pull, 156 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY F ig. 2 6 — FOURCAULT AUTOMATIC MACHINE FOR MAKING WINDOW GLASS CH APTEK I I I .— W IN D O W GLASS 157 The drawing apparatus of the Fourcault machine consists of a vertical series of asbestos-covered steel rollers placed in pairs, a certain distance apart, over the tank and directly above the drawing block, the sheet of glass drawn from the tank passing between each pair of rollers in turn. Each pair of rollers is geared together. The rollers on one side of the glass revolve in fixed bearings, but the rollers on the other side are provided with special adjust ments to take care of the different thicknesses of the glass. Each of the rollers has a counterweight exerting just enough pressure on the glass to prevent it from slipping and to keep it moving up ward without interruption. The rollers are kept in motion by a system of gears driven by a motor. The control of the speed is the most impor tant factor in the process, as upon the latter and the tem perature of the glass in the draw in g b lo c k depend the thickness and the uniform d is tr ib u tio n of the glass drawn. Most of the rollers are in cased in a chimneylike box made of. steel plates with an asbestos lining. The shaft is divided into sections by par titions of sheet iron arranged in a slanting position. Each section is built to retain a constant heat temperature, which is gradually lowered as the sections rise higher and higher above the tank. As the sheet of glass in its con tact with the rollers passes from one compartment into another it is thus subjected to a complete annealing proc u s t r a t in g t h e F o u r c a u lt ess. In the event of a break F i g . 2 7 — D ia g r a m I lPlroc ess age in the glass the slanting position of the iron partitions, or deflectors as they are termed, serves to keep the pieces of glass from falling back into the drawing block. The process of operating the Fourcault machine is as follows: First, the drawing block is placed in position under the drawing apparatus 40780°— 27-------U 158 PR O D U CTIVITY OF LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U ST R Y with the slit in parallel alignment with the rollers. The block is kept in position, or lowered and raised when needed, by four heavy steel bars pressing on the four corners of the block and controlled by means of a handwheel outside the machine. With the floater in position, the machine is first started in the reverse direction, and a bait, consisting of a thin steel framework, is gradually lowered through the rollers into the sht. By exerting the necessary pressure upon the drawing block the molten glass in the tank is forced to rise in the slit to meet the bait. The portion of the glass in direct contact with the cold bait cools rapidly and forms the principal support for the first drawn sheet. The machine is then set to operate in the right direction and the bait followed by a perfectly smooth sheet of glass begins to rise gradually from the slit of the drawing block. Immediately upon rising from the tank the glass passes between the water-cooled tubes located at the sides of the slit and is sufficiently solidified not to be affected by the contact and pressure of the rollers. At the top of the machine the bait is broken off and from then on, barring unforeseen accidents, the sheet of glass continues to rise uninterruptedly until the machine is stopped. As stated elsewhere, the chambers within which the rollers are incased are heated to various temperatures, and by the time the sheet has passed through the whole shaft, which is about 15 feet high, it is also perfectly annealed. On the top of the machine is a wooden platform provided with a slit for the rising sheet of glass. When it reaches the desired height it is cut off by the cutters and breakers and is forwarded directly to the dipping department for the necessary acid treatment. It is then taken to the cutting department, where it is examined for defects and cut into the regular window-glass sizes. The process described above is entirely automatic. The only indispensable labor in this process is that of cutting the sheet of glass as it rises over the elevated platform on top of the machine. This is the job of the cutters and breakers. In addition there are needed special watchers or peepers, as they are called, to see that the machine works in order. Their job is merely to look through special openings in the steel case provided for that purpose to see that the glass is not misshapen by the presence of stones or blisters and that the continu ous upward rise is not interrupted by breakage of glass. There are, of course, also machine operators and skilled mechanics, but their work is limited entirely to starting the machine and putting it in order when a breakage or any other interference occurs. As the glass emerges from the machine perfectly flat the services of the flattener, the last skilled worker of the hand shop, are completely dispensed with in this process. An analysis of the three processes described above, the hand process, the cylinder machine, and the Fourcault machine, reveals clearly the effects of the development of machinery on the labor in the window-glass branch of the glass industry. While the cylinder process replaces the work of the highly skilled gatherer and blower by the semiskilled ladle crew and a machine operator, retaining intact the work of the flattener, the Fourcault machine does away with all the skilled and even semi skilled glass workers, using instead unskilled laborers, supervised by one skilled mechanic or machinist. 159 CH APTER I H .— W IN D O W GLASS MAN-HOUR OUTPUT AND LABOR COST Table 31 presents a comparison of man-hour output and labor cost of making single and double strength window glass by the hand process and by the cylinder and the Fourcault machines. But before any conclusions are drawn from this comparison it must be empha sized that the labor unit used with the figures of production does not represent all the labor engaged in all the stages of making window glass. Since the object of this study is primarily to measure labor productivity as affected by the introduction of machinery and by changes in methods of production, only such labor has been included as was directly or indirectly affected by these changes. In the case of window glass this would exclude the workers engaged in mixing and melting the raw materials, whose output can not be measured in terms of cases of window glass produced. It excludes also the work of the cutters and packers, which has but a very slight, if any, relationship to the process used in making the glass.1 The sum total of the labor excluded is, however, very small, being in no case higher than 10 per cent of the total labor used. For this reason 4he figures given in the table, while accurately gauging the effects of machinery on the labor directly affected by the change, may also be used as fairly representative of the industry as a whole. T a b le 31*— Man-hour output and labor cost of window glass, single and double strength, made by hand and by machine Man-hour output Single strength Process and unit of production Quan tity or amount Hand production: Plant A _________________________________________ _____ Plant B_______________________________________________ Average _ _ __ ____________________________ Cylinder machine: 6-machine unit__ _______ ___ _____ ____________________ 8-machine unit__________ ________ _ _ ___________ _____ 12-machine unit__ _____________________________________ Average__________________________ ___________________ Fourcault process: 4-machine unit____________________________________ ____ 6-machine unit_______________ _____ ____________________ 8-machine unit________________________________________ Average__________ ________________ ____ ____ _________ Boxes ° 0.705 .713 .709 1.330 1.743 1.889 1.654 1.8^0 1.939 1.793 1.851 Double strength Index number Quan tity or amount 100.0 Boxes a 0.554 .567 .561 100.0 233.3 .771 .926 1.220 .972 173.4 261.1 1.249 1.462 1.129 1.280 228.4 100.0 $1.278 1.362 1.320 100.0 42.6 .819 .696 .583 .699 53.0 31.3 .434 .380 .485 .433 32.8 Index number Labor cost (per box) Hand production: Plant A ..................................................................................... Plant B..................................................................................... Average,........ ................. , ................................................... Cylinder machine: 6-machine unit_______________ _____ _______ ______ ____ 8-machine unit__________________________ ____________ _ 12-machine unit________________________________ _____ _ Average_____ _______________ _____ _____________ ____ Fourcault process: 4-machine unit....... ............................................. ...... ......... . 6-machine unit........................... ........... .................................. 8-machine unit......... ........................................ ....................... Average______________________________ ________ ______ $0,935 .975 .955 .475 .370 .377 .407 .298 .287 .306 .299 •60 square feet. 1 The packers are not at all affected by a change from one process to another, while the cutters disagree among themselves as to the effects of such a change on their output. 160 P R O D U C T IV ITY O F LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U S T R Y The preceding table contains a comparison of man-hour ouput of single and double strength window glass made by the three processes— hand, cylinder machine, and Fourcault. Two plants are shown to represent hand production. The average man-hour output of these plants is 0.709 box of 50 square feet of single and 0.561 box of double strength glass. To represent the cylinder-machine process, data for three plants are shown, because the variation in man-hour output by this process is larger than that in hand production. The principal cause of this variation is the number of machines used in the plant to constitute a unit, some plants using 6, others 8, and still others 12 machines in each unit. The average man-hour output of the three plants is 1.654 boxes of single and 0.972 box of double strength glass. In the Fourcault process the average man-hour output of the three plants is 1.851 boxes of single and 1.280 boxes of double strength glass. For comparative purposes the average man-hour output by the three processes is expressed in terms of index numbers. Taking hand production as the base, or 100, the cylinder machine shows an index of 233.3 for single strength, or an average man-hour output two and one-third times as large as that by hand production; and the Fourcault machine shows an index of 261.1, or a man-hour output more than two and one-half times as large as that by the hand process. For double-strength window glass the index of the cylinder machine is 173.4 or nearly one and three-fourths times that of the hand process, and that oi the Fourcault machine is 228.4, or more than two and one-fourth times that of hand production. The effects of the introduction of machinery on man-hour output of window glass, though very great, are not as phenomenal as in some of the other branches of the glass industry. However, the figures are more favorable to the machines when labor cost is considered. In single-strength window glass the direct labor cost of making a box of 50 square feet of window glass is 95.5 cents. On the cylinder machine the corresponding labor cost is only 40.7 cents, representing a reduction of 57.4 per cent, while on the Fourcault machine it is 29.9 cents, representing a reduction of 68.7 per cent. In the case of double-strength glass the direct labor cost per box of 50 square feet is $1.32 when made by the hand process. On the cylinder machine the corresponding labor cost is 69.9 cents, representing a reduction of 47 per cent, while on the Fourcault machine it is only 43.3 cents, representing a reduction of 67.2 per cent. There is thus a decided discrepancy noticeable between the increase in man-hour output effected by the machine processes and the decrease in the direct labor cost due to the same processes. This may be explained by the fact that the introduction of machinery in this branch of the glass industry resulted not so much in decreasing the number of workers involved as in displacing highly paid skilled workers by unskilled laborers. The cylinder-machine process actually requires a larger crew per unit than is needed in hand production. (See p. 154.) Even the Fourcault machine requires almost as many attendants as the number of workers in a hand shop. On the other hand, the cylinder machine eliminates the services of the skilled gatherer and blower, while the Fourcault machine, in addition, dis penses with the skilled flattener. It is this situation which causes the discrepancy between the increase in man-hour output and the decrease in labor costs effected by the introduction of machinery. 161 CH APTER I I I .---- W IN D O W GLASS PRESENT SITUATION IN WINDOW-GLASS BRANCH OF THE INDUSTRY The figures of man-hour output and labor cost of making window glass by hand and by machine are sufficient to tell the story of what has been happening in this branch of the glass industry in recent years. Hand production, which less than 25 years ago constituted 100 per cent of the window glass made in this country, had by 1925 been reduced to a nominal quantity of less than 1 per cent of the glass produced. And signs are not missing which point to the complete elimination of hand production within the short period of two or three years. As a factor in the window-glass branch of the glass industry hand production is now entirely a thing of the past. With the disappearance of the hand plants there disappears also a class of workers, gatherers and blowers by trade, who for centuries had been known as the most highly skilled and highly paid artisans. Not hampered by any progress in the industry and conscious of their skill and power, the window-glass workers had successfully developed the policy of confining their trade to a small group of workers and their families. No one but the nearest kin of a blower or gatherer could ever become an apprentice to either, and the number of appren tices in the trade had been strictly limited. With this policy also went the rigid policy of strict limitation of output on the part of workers. It was this situation, as much as the natural trend of progress, which probably hastened the advance of machinery in this branch of the industry, resulting in the almost complete elimination of hand production. As among the several machine processes which have taken the place of hand production, the problem of survival is more difficult. Technically the Fourcault machine represents a considerable step in advance over the cylinder machine. Not only does it dispense with all the skilled labor needed in hand production but it actually reduces to a minimum the total number of workers around the machine. It is essentially an automatic process. This can not be said of the cylinder machine. In addition to retaining the services of a skilled flattener and actually increasing the number of operations needed as compared with hand production, the process itself is rather round about and requires much handling of the glass before the sheet finally reaches the cutting department. The statistics of man-hour output and direct labor cost, shown in Table 32, also point to an advantage in the Fourcault process over the cylinder machine. T a b le 32.— Comparison of direct man-hour output and direct labor cost of making window glass by the cylinder and the Fourcault machines Man-hour output Process Single strength Direct labor cost Double strength Single strength Double strength Index Boxes Index Cents Index Cents Index Boxes number number per box number per box number Cylinder machine process................... Fourcault process................................ 1.654 1.851 100.0 111.9 0.972 1.280 100.0 131.7 40.7 29.9 100.0 73.5 69.9 43.3 100.0 61.9 162 PR O D U CTIVITY OF LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U ST R Y Taking the man-hour output and the direct labor cost of the cylinder process as the base, or 100, the indexes for the Fourcault process are: 111.9 for man-hour output of single-strength glass, and 131.7 for double-strength glass; 73.5 for direct labor cost of single strength glass and 61.9 for direct labor cost for double-strength glass. Nevertheless, the largest quantity of glass in this country, especially of the better grades, is still being produced by the cylinder process. One of the reasons is, of course, the comparatively recent introduc tion of the Fourcault machine in the United States. The first ma chine was installed in this country in 1920, and the American manu facturers using this process openly admit that they do not as yet know how to work the machine to the best advantage. As a result the glass produced by this process, though absolutely flat and beautifully fire polished on both sides, is, on the average, of a some what lower grade than the glass produced by the cylinder machine. Its principal defects are faint lines appearing in the flat-drawn glass. Thus both processes, the cylinder and the Fourcault, and for that matter also the Colburn machine, have their advantages and dis advantages, with no clear indication as to which of the three machines will finally prevail in the industry. One thing, however, is certain, the industry is keenly aware of this situation and expresses it in sharp competition as to both price and quality. At present more stress is laid on the quality of the glass, but the tendency is also to lower the cost of production as well as constantly to improve the quality of the product. STATISTICS OF PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST Table G shows statistics of production of single and double strength window glass made in separate plants by the hand process and by the cylinder and the Fourcault machines. Each section of the table is divided into two distinct parts—labor unit, and output and labor cost. The first part contains the operations involved, the number and occupations of the workers engaged in the process, and the rates of wages paid. The total number of workers constituting a labor unit is shown and also the total wages paid per hour to all the workers in the unit. Plant A and Plant B are hand plants. The labor unit given con sists of the blowing unit, the shop, which is made up of one blower, one gatherer, and one snapper, and that portion of the time of a flatten ing crew which is needed to flatten all the glass made by a single shop in a given period of time. A normal flattening crew consists of one flattener, one shove-in boy, and one leer tender. But it has long been the practice in all hand plants to work the flatteners and the shove-in boys on the basis of three 8-hour shifts a day, while the leer tenders are required to work two 12-hour shifts. On this basis there are only two leer tenders for every three flattening crews. The number of flattening crews needed in a plant bears a definite relationship to the number of blowing shops operating in the plant. But this relationship is somewhat different in the separate plants. In Plant A there are three flattening crews used for every 11 blow ing shops, while in Plant B two flattening crews are used for every 7 shops. On the whole, however, the total labor constituting a production unit is not much different in the two plants, and this is generally true of all hand plants. CH APTER H I .— W IN D O W GLASS 163 The wage policy of the hand plants is to pay the blower, the gatherer, the snapper, and the flattener on a piece rate and the other workers on a time basis. The blower is usually considered the leader of the shop. His wage is, therefore, taken as the basis upon which the rates of the gatherer and snapper are determined, the gatherer usually getting 80 per cent and the snapper 60 per cent of the blower’s rate. The rate of the flattener is fixed separately, but it, too, has a definite relationship to the blower’s wage. In the statistics of output, shown in the second part of each section, the data given are: (1) Total quantity of salable window glass produced month by month either for a whole year or for a period of not less than six months, classified as to strength and expressed in the unit prevailing on the market—namely, boxes of 50 square feet of glass. This classification does not take into consideration the variation in brackets or sizes used to make up a single box. (2) Total number of hours actually put in by all the labor units to produce the quantity of glass given. It is clear that these hours do not mean the total number of hours the plant was in operation, but the number of hours an average labor unit would have to work to produce the same quantity of glass produced by the whole plant in a correspondingly shorter time. The aggregate output and the aggre gate time put in by all the shops in the plant—good, bad, and indif ferent—enables one to escape the difficulties and the errors which are inextricably bound up with the choosing of any one shop as an average. (3) The average hourly output of a single unit. This figure is the result of dividing the total production by the total number of unithours. (4) The man-hour output, derived by dividing the unit-hour production by the total number of workers constituting the unit. This man-hour output of the plant is the standard of measurement used to compare the labor productivity in the separate plants using the various processes, hand or machine. (5) The labor cost per unit of output—in this case, per box of 50 square feet of window glass—derived by dividing the total labor cost per hour by the hourly output of the labor unit. These figures are used to compare the labor cost of window glass made by the three processes—hand, cylinder, and Fourcault machines. Three plants are shown using the cylinder-machine process. In these plants the labor unit is made up of three groups of workers performing the operations of ladling, blowing, and flattening the glass. Since these workers normally tend more than one machine, the entire unit is shown, the total workers, however, being shown per machine as well. The number of machines operated in each of the three plants given is different, and the average number of attendants per machine is also different. Hence, there is a larger discrepancy in the number of workers per machine in the cylinder-machine plants than per shop in the hand plants; in the hand plants the number per shop varies from 3 ^ to 3-^-fJ-, a difference of a little over 0.04 of the labor of one man, while the variations in the cylinder machine process range from 5 to per machine, a difference of the entire labor of a single worker. Three plants are given using the Fourcault machine. Here, too, the labor unit is that of a group of machines. Since the glass produced by this process is drawn flat directly from the tank, there is no sub- 164 PRO D U CTIVITY O F LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U ST R Y division of the workers, such as in hand production and on the cylinder machine. On the other hand, the workers in these plants are also required to tend more than one machine, and so the labor unit for the group of machines is given in the table, the total per machine also being shown. Here, too, as in the cylinder-machine plants, the vari ation in the total number of workers constituting the machine unit is larger than that in the shop in the hand process. The wages paid in plants using either the cylinder or Fourcault machines are predominantly on a time basis, the sole exception being the flatteners in the cylinder-machine plants, who are paid on a piecerate basis. There is no uniformity in the rates of wages paid in the different plants using the same machine process. The majority of workers are unskilled and the wages are determined by the general conditions prevailing in the local labor markets. The statistics of output in the plants using the machine process are computed on the same principles as those for the hand plants. The table shows the total quantity of salable window glass produced; the total machine-hours taken by all machines in operation to produce this quantity of glass; the machine-hour output— that is, the quan tity of glass produced by the average machine in an hour; the average man-hour output of the plant; and the labor cost per box of 50 square feet of window glass. T a b le G .— PRODUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G W IN D O W GLASS B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E SINGLE-STRENGTH GLASS—HAND: PLANT A [In this table all wage rates are for 1925 and labor cost is based on 1925 wage rates regardless of year of out put data. Italicized figures represent minimum and maximum] Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per boxi hour hour Blowing: Blower............ . $0,320 Gatherer_______ .256 Snapper_______ .192 Flattening: Flattener............ .087 A Roller boy_____ s Shove-in boy £ Leer tender_____ Total________ .855 Output Shophours 1925 1 1 1 3ttt Year and month .215 Out Labor put cost per per man- box* hour Boxes i Boxes J 2.610 0.684 $0,938 2.875 .753 .930 2.650 .694 .937 2.501 .655 .941 2.784 .729 .933 2.940 .770 .928 Boxes 1 6,264 7,360 8,490 6,804 M a y ........... 7,572 June............ 4,234 2,400 2,560 3,200 3,720 2,720 1,440 1926 F e b ............ Mar............. A p r............. M ay............ June............ 8,302 8,564 8,120 7,452 1,284 3,040 3,200 3,040 2,880 440 2.731 2.673 2.671 2. 588 2.918 .715 .700 .700 .678 .764 .934 .936 .936 .938 .929 74,446 27,640 2.693 .705 .935 Feb.............. Mar............. $0.45 $0,041 .38 .104 .38 .070 Out put per shophour Total SINGLE-STRENGTH GLASS—HAND: PLANT B 1 1 1 * Blowing: Blower... Gatherer. Snapper. Flattening: Flattener....... Roller boy___ Shove-in boy. Leer boy ........ Total.. 1 50 square feet. L325 .260 .195 .087 1.060 .143 .095 .867 1925 Nov___ Dec___ 9,884 10,818 3,560 3,880 2.776 2.788 0.719 .722 $0,974 .974 1926 Jan____ Feb___ Mar___ Apr___ M ay__ 11,420 7,550 14,504 10,498 6,230 4,160 2,840 5,280 3,760 2,280 2.745 2.658 2.747 2.792 2.732 .711 .688 .711 .728 .707 .976 .979 .976 .974 .976 70,904 j 25,760 2.752 .713 .975 Total. CHAPTER I I I .---- W IN D O W GLASS T able 165 G . — PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN M AKING WINDOW GLASS BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued SINGLE-STRENGTH GLASS—CYLINDER MACHINE: 6-MACHINE UNIT Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Ladling: Machine foreman. Ladler................... Skimmer............... Pot turner............. Pot scraper............ Back ladler ........... Cellarman__......... Blowing: Blowers................. Snappers............... Cappers. Splitters_____ ~plitt Helpers........... Inspector_____ Roller boys___ Flattening: Flatteners____ Shove-in boys., Leer tenders. Total per unit____ Total per machine. Output and labor cost Wage Labor rates cost per per hour hour $0.85 $0.85 .80 .80 .65 .65 .60 .60 .60 .60 .50 .50 .50 .50 .80 .60 .63 .50 .50 .50 .50 1.60 3.00 1.89 .95 .45 .50 5.70 1.80 1.00 1.00 .50 1.00 Year and month Out Out put Ma put Labor per cost Output chine per ma manper hours chinebox hour hour 1925 Aug-----Sept___ Oct____ Nov___ Dec____ Boxes 22,502 21,368 21,635 22,258 25,472 2,808 2,546 2,530 2,712 3,076 Boxes Boxes 8.014 1.265 8.393 1.325 8.551 1.350 8.207 1.296 8.281 1.308 $0,499 .476 .468 .487 .483 1926 Jan____ Feb____ Mar...... Apr____ M ay___ June___ July....... 27,312 20,514 32,222 27,868 25,471 25,038 22,657 3,256 2,336 3,800 3,211 3.040 3.040 2,584 8.388 8.782 8.479 8.679 8.379 8.237 8.768 1.324 1.S87 1.339 1.370 1.323 1.301 1.384 .477 .456 .472 .461 .477 .485 .456 Total- 294,317 34,939 8.424 1.330 .475 2.00 23.99 SINGLE-STRENGTH GLASS—CYLINDER MACHINE: 8-MACHINE UNIT Ladling: Shift foreman_______ Machinist.................. Ladlers _ ..................... Skimmers................... . Back ladlers..... .............. Cellarman................ Blowing: Blowers...................... Snappers....... ......... Cappers.................. __ Splitters_______ ____ H elpers................. . Roller boys _ .............. Flattening: Flatteners.................. Shove-in bo y s.._____ Leer tenders .............. Total per unit........ 43H Total per machine. .94 .50 .40 .40 .600 1.880 1.000 .800 .400 .94 .50 .70 .45 .40 .45 1.880 3.000 2.800 .900 .800 .900 1.20 .40 .40 8.400 1.867 1.867 27.974 3.496 1925 Sept......... . O ct.......... . N ov.......... . Dec______ 17,899 27,323 25,145 25,971 2,040 3,000 2,760 2,760 8.774 9.108 9.111 9.410 1.620 1.681 1.682 1.737 $0,898 .384 .383 .371 1926 Jan______ Feb______ Mar_____ Apr______ M ay.......... June_____ July______ Aug........... 31,015 25,982 34,783 37,175 30,362 26,336 23,205 27,728 3,200 9.692 2,560 10.149 3,456 10.065 4,160 8.936 3,168 9.584 2,760 9.542 2,520 9.208 2,880 9.628 1.789 1.874 1.858 1.650 1.769 1.762 1.700 1.777 .360 ^44 .347 .391 .364 .366 .379 .363 Total___ 332,924 1.743 .370 3,822 10.370 3,864 9.767 3,976 9.498 3,808 9.637 1.944 1.831 1.781 1.816 $0,366 .388 .399 .392 3,992 3,408 3,916 4,544 4,368 4,368 4,544 9.285 10.332 9.690 10.078 9.753 11.076 11.161 1.782 1.937 1.817 1.890 1.829 2.077 2.098 .411 .367 .392 .376 .389 .343 .840 44,610 10.077 1.889 .377 35,264 9.441 SINGLE-STRENGTH GLASS—CYLINDER MACHINE: 12-MACHINE UNIT 1925 Ladling: Shift foreman................. $0,900 $0,900 Sept............ 39,635 Machinist........ .............. .700 .700 Oct.............. 37,741 Ladlers.............. .......... .975 1.950 •Nov............. 37,763 Skimmers....... ............... .580 1.160 Dec.............. 36,889 Pot turners........... .......... .580 1.160 1926 Cellarman...................... .500 .500 Feb.............. 36,867 Blowing: Blowers..... ................... . .920 3.680 M ai___- ___ 35,210 4 Hookers.......................... .580 2.320 Apr_______ 37,946 4 Pipe hangers.................. .580 1.160 M a y ........... 45,796 2 Cappers...... ................ .840 5.040 June............ 42,599 6 Splitters......................... .670 2.680 July............. 48,380 4 Roller boys..................... .500 3.000 Aug.............. 50,714 6 Flattening: Flatteners............. ....... 1.150 13.800 12 Shove-in boys................. .440 3.520 8 Leer tenders................... .440 3.520 8 Trucker........................... .440 .440 1 Total........ 449,540 64 Total per unit_______ 45.530 3.794 Total per machine___ 5H 1 1 2 2 2 1 166 PR O D U C T IV ITY O F LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U S T R Y T able G .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING WINDOW GLASS BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued SIKOIiE-STRENOTH GLASS—FOURCAULT AUTOMATIC MACHINE: 4-MACHINE UNIT Labor unit Num ber of work ers 17 4M Output and labor cost Occupation Wage Labor rates cost per per hour hour Chief foreman....... . Shift foreman_____ Assistant foreman-. Mechanic.............. . Platform men....... . Peepers................... Cutters................... Breakers................. Checker................. Truckers................. $1.45 $0,483 1.15 1.150 .50 .500 .85 .570 .47 .940 .45 1.350 .47 .940 .47 1.880 .50 .500 .45 .900 1926 Jan____ Feb___ Mar___ Apr___ M ay.... June... J u ly ... Aug___ Sept___ Boxes 3,685 11,346 7,915 10,845 8,671 11,241 5, 659 8,451 6,813 9.213 2.304 Total 74,626 Total per unit____ Total per machine. Year and month Ma Output chine hours Out Out Labor put put cost per per ma mper anchine- hour- DOX hour Boxes Boxes 7,312 1.720 7.419 1.746 1,000 7.915 1.862 1,336 8.118 1.910 1,112 7.798 1.835 1,384 8. m 1.911 712 7.948 1.870 1,112 7.600 1.788 7.097 1.670 504 1,528 9,648 7.735 $0,315 .311 .291 .284 .296 .28A .290 .303 •.325 .298 1.820 SINGLE-STRENGTH GLASS—FOURCAULT AUTOMATIC MACHINE: 6-MACHINE UNIT Chief foreman......... Chief mechanic___ Shift foreman......... Shift machinist___ Machine operators. Machine tenders. . . Watchers. .............. Utility men............ Relief man.............. C u t t e r s .......................... H 26H 4tV Boss breaker........... Breakers................. Dipmen.................. Inspector- .............. Total per unit____ Total per machine . $1.40 $0,467 1.05 .700 .85 .850 .630 1.180 .55 1.650 .50 1.500 .47 .940 .50 .500 .50 1.500 .560 .56 .50 3.000 .44 .85 1926 Aug___ Sept___ Oct____ N ov___ 10,090 14,870 12,630 15,745 1,231 1,724 1,506 1,807 8.197 8.625 8.378 8.712 14.640 2.440 Total. 53,335 6,268 8.509 1.868 1.965 1.909 1.985 $0.298 .283 .291 .m .287 SINGLE-STRENGTH GLASS-FOURCAULT AUTOMATIC MACHINE: 8-MACHINE UNIT Chief foreman......... % Mechanic................ l Shift foreman......... l Shift machinist....... 2 3 4 2 1 4 1 8 2 H 30M 3 f! Machine operators. Machine tenders. . . Watchers................ Utility men............ Relief man.............. Cutters................... Boss breaker........... Breakers................. Dipmen.................. Inspector................ Total per unit........ Total per machine. $1.40 50.467 .700 1.05 .850 .85 .630 1.180 .55 1.650 .50 2.000 .47 .940 .500 .50 .50 2.000 .56 .560 .50 4.000 .44 .880 .85 .283 16.640 2.080 1926 Jan........ Feb....... Mar....... Apr....... . M ay___ Total. . 24,800 10,865 24,080 18,742 . 18,560 3,813 1,655 3,622 2,637 2,545 6.504 6.565 6.648 7.107 7.293 1.715 1.731 1.753 1.874 1.923 $0,320 .317 .313 .293 .285 97,047 14,272 6.800 1.793 .306 167 CH APTER I I I .— W IN D O W GLASS T a b l e G . — PRODUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G W IN D O W GLASS B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E R Y — Continued DOUBLE-STRENGTH GLASS—HAND: PLANT A Labor unit Num ber of work ers Output and labor cost Wage Wage Labor rates rates cost per per per hour hour box Occupation Blowing: Blower________ $0,440 Gatherer_______ .352 .264 Snapper_______ Flattening: T»T Flattener_______ .120 •jSjRoller boy ____ Shove-in boy___ ■rr Leer tender_____ A $0.45 $0,041 .104 .38 .38 .070 1.176 .215 1 1 1 3t t Total............... Year and month Output Shophours Out put per shophour Out Labor put cost per per man- box hour 1925 Jan________ Feb.............. Mar............. Apr_______ M ay............ June_______ Boxes 2,434 3,208 3,734 4,496 3,758 1,052 1,440 1,640 2, 200. 1,760 480 Boxes Boxes 2.173 0.569 2.228 .584 2.277 .596 2.044 .535 2.135 .559 .584 2.192 1926 Feb.............. Mar_______ Apr....... ...... M ay_______ June_______ 1,824 1,960 2,008 3,570 822 960 960 960 1,760 360 1.900 2.042 2.092 2.028 2.288 .498 .535 .558 .531 .598 1.290 1.282 1.279 1.283 1.271 T otal. 28,866 13,640 2.116 .554 1.278 1,120 $1.275 1.273 1.271 1.282 1.277 1.275 DOUBLE-STRENGTH GLASS-HAND: PLANT B Blowing: Blower 1 1 1 2/7 A Vi TX 3tti _______ $0,460 .368 Snapper _______ .276 Flattening: Flattener_______ .123 Roller boy ___ Shove-in boy___ Leer tender ___ $0.60 $0,060 .143 .50 .095 .50 Total _______ 1.227 .298 1925 N ov_______ Dec....... 2,640 3,044 1,280 1,400 2.06S 2.174 0.534 .563 $1,370 1.363 1926 Jan.............. Feb.............. Mar_______ Apr_______ M ay......... . 2,362 2,326 3,810 3,452 2,170 1,080 1,080 1,720 1,560 920 2.187 2.154 2.215 2.213 2.S59 .566 .558 .574 .573 .611 1.362 1.364 1.361 1.361 1.352 19,804 9,040 2.191 .567 1.362 Total. DOUBLE-STRENGTH GLASS—CYLINDER MACHINE: 6-MACHINE UNIT Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 3 2 2 1 2 6 4 4 38 Occupation Wage Labor rates cost per per hour hour Ladling: Machine foreman $0.85 T^adlftr .80 Skimmer_____________ .65 Pot turner__________ _ .60 Pot scraper..................... .60 Back ladler.................... .50 Cellarman.......... ........... .50 Blowing: Blowers______________ .80 Snappers......................... .60 .63 Cappers ...................... Splitters.... ..................... .50 Helpers.... ................... . .50 Inspector ____________ .50 Roller boys____________ .50 Flattening: Flatteners....................... .95 Shove-in boys_________ .45 Leer tenders _ ____ .50 Total Derunit Total dot machine $0.85 .80 .65 .60 .60 .50 .50 1.60 3.00 1.89 1.00 1.00 .50 1.00 Year and month Output Ma chine hours Out Out put put Labor per cost per ma manper chine- hour box hour 1925 Aug............. Sept_______ Oct________ Nov............. Dec.............. Boxes 3,477 5,476 5,836 4,197 1,639 760 1,102 1,140 836 362 Boxes Boxes 4.575 0.722 $0,874 4.960 .783 .806 5.119 .808 .781 5.020 .793 .797 4.528 .725 .883 1926 Jan ........... Feb ........... Mar ____ Apr ____ May ......... June__......... July............. 935 1,977 3,692 2,102 2,832 4,539 4,867 190 399 760 418 608 874 1,064 4.921 4.955 4.858 5.029 4.658 5.19S 4.574 .777 .782 .767 .794 .735 .820 .722 .813 .807 .823 .795 .859 .770 .874 Total____ 41,569 8,513 4.883 .771 .819 5.70 1.80 2.00 23.99 3.999 PR O D U CTIVITY O F LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U ST R Y 168 T able G .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING WINDOW GLASS BY HAND AND BY MACHINE— Continued DOUBLE-STRENGTH GLASS—CYLINDER MACHINE: 8-MACHINE UNIT Labor unit Occupation Ladling: Shift foreman.. Machinist........ Ladlers______ Skimmers....... . Back ladlers.... Cellar man___ Blowing: Blowers.......... . Snappers.......... Cappers.......... . Splitters......... . Helpers............ Roller boys___ Flattening: Flatteners........ Shove-in boys.. Leer tenders... Output and labor cost Wage Labor rates per per hour hour $0.88 .60 .94 .50 .40 .40 1.000 .94 .50 .70 .45 .40 .45 1.880 3.000 2.800 .900 .800 .900 1.20 8.400 1.867 1.867 .40 .40 .600 1.880 .800 .400 27.974 3.496 Total per unit......... Total per machine.. Year and month 1925 Sept___ Oct....... Nov...... Dec....... Output Boxes 5,833 7,874 8,290 Out Out put Ma put per chine per ma hours chine- manhour hour 1,700 1,656 1,608 Boxes Boxes 4.861 0.897 4.632 .855 .947 5.132 5.155 .952 1,200 1926 Jan____ Feb___ Mar___ Apr___ M ay___ June___ July___ Aug___ 10,168 7,547 5,658 5,163 6,147 7,560 6,942 1,920 1,536 1,080 960 1,152 1,608 1,464 1,728 5.296 4.913 5.239 5.897 5.336 4.701 4.742 5.032 985 Total. 88,376 17,612 5.018 .926 DOUBLE-STRENGTH GLASS—CYLINDER MACHINE: 12-MACHINE UNIT 1 1 2 2 2 1 4 4 2 6 4 6 12 8 8 1 64 5H Ladling: Shift foreman.................. $0.90 Machinist........................ .70 Ladlers............................ .975 Skimmers........................ .58 Pot turners..................... .58 Cellar man....................... .50 Blowing: Blowers........................... .92 Hookers........................... .58 Pipe hangers................... .58 Cappers........................... .84 Splitters.......................... .67 Roller boys..................... .50 Flattening: Flatteners........................ 1.15 Shove-in boys................. .44 Leer tenders.................... .44 Trucker........................... .44 Total per unit.............. Total per machine___ $0.90 .70 1.95 1.16 1.16 .50 3.68 2.32 1.16 5.04 2.68 3.00 1925 Sept____ Oct____ Nov........ Dec....... 16,911 17,934 17,552 17,000 2,730 2,760 2,840 2,720 6.195 6.498 6.180 6.250 1.162 1.218 1.159 1.172 $0,612 .584 .614 .607 1926 Feb....... Mar....... Apr____ M ay----June___ July....... Aug....... 17,294 22,509 18,671 15,188 14,456 15,489 16,318 2,824 3,408 2,900 2,272 2,184 2,184 2,272 6.124 6.605 6.438 6.685 6.619 7.092 7 .m 1.148 1.238 1.207 1.253 1.241 1,330 1.847 .620 .574 .589 .568 .573 .535 .528 Total . 189,322 29,094 6.507 1.220 .583 13.80 3.52 3.52 .44 45.53 3.794 DOUBLE-STRENGTH GLASS—FOURCAULT AUTOMATIC MACHINE: 4-MACHINE UNIT Chief foreman....... . Shift foreman......... Assistant foreman.. Mechanic............... Platform men........ Peepers................. . Cutters................... Breakers................. Checker.................. Truckers................. Total per unit......... Total per machine. $1.45 $0,483 1.15 1.150 .50 .500 .570 .85 .47 .940 .45 1.350 .47 .940 .47 1.880 .50 .500 .45 .900 1926 Jan...... . Feb___ Mar___ Apr....... M ay___ June___ July___ Aug...... Sept----- 519 1,826 3,205 3,910 5,355 5,388 3,426 4,909 4,440 9.213 2.304 Total. 32,978 96 5.406 344 5.308 608 5.271 672 5.818 1,000 5.355 1,016 5.303 640 5.353 936 5.245 900 4.988 1.272 1.249 1.240 1.869 1.260 1.248 1.260 1.234 1.161 $0,426 .434 .437 896 .430 .435 .431 .439 .467 6,212 L249 .434 5.309 169 CH APTER H I .— W IN D O W GLASS T a b l e G . — PR O DUCTION A N D LABOR COST IN M A K IN G W IN D O W GLASS B Y H A N D A N D B Y M A C H IN E — Continued DOUBLE-STRENGTH GLASS—FOUBCAULT AUTOMATIC MACHINE: 8-MACHINE UNIT Labor unit Num ber of work- Output and labor cost Out Out put put Labor per cost per per ma manchine- hour hour Occupation Wage Labor rates cost per per hour hour Chief foreman....... Chief mechanic___ Shift foreman........ 1 Shift machinist....... 2 Machine operators. Machine tenders. 3 Watchers................ Utility men............ Relief man.............. Cutters................... 1 Boss breaker.......... Breakers................. 6 2 Dipmen.................. X Inspector................. $1.40 $0,467 1.05 .700 .85 .850 .63 .630 .59 1.180 .55 1.650 .50 1.500 .47 .940 .50 .500 .50 1.500 .56 .560 .50 3.000 .44 .880 .85 .283 1926 Aug----Sept___ Oct____ N tv___ Boxes 4,420 10,720 13,670 9,850 726 1,653 2,137 1,509 Boxes Boxes 6.088 1.S87 6.485 1.478 6.397 1.458 6.526 1.487 14. 640 2.440 Total- 38,660 6,025 6.417 18 26M 4* Total per unit........ Total per machine- Year and month Ma Output chine hours $0.401 .376 .381 .374 1.462 DOUBLE-STRENGTH GLASS—FOURCAULT AUTOMATIC MACHINE: 8-MACHINE UNIT 8 1 1 2 3 4 2 1 4 1 8 2 X 30M 3H Chief foreman......... Chief mechanic___ Shift foreman......... Shift machinist___ Machine operators. Machine tenders.. . W atchers.............. Utility men............ Relief man.............. Cutters................... Boss breaker........... Breakers................. Dipmen.................. Inspector............... Total per unit........ Total per machine. $1.40 $0,467 1.05 .700 .85 .850 .630 .63 .59 1.180 .55 1.650 .50 .940 .47 .50 .500 .50 2.000 .56 .560 .50 4.000 .44 .880 .85 .283 1926 Jan____ Feb....... Mar___ Apr....... May___ 3,400 1,620 5,116 8,720 3,735 759 390 1,273 2,034 4.480 4.154 4.019 4.287 4.555 181 095 060 131 201 16.640 2.080 Total- 22,591 5,276 4.282 1.129 2.000 $0,464 .500 .517 .485 .456 .48 CHAPTER IV.—PLATE GLASS The development of the plate-glass branch of the glass industry has followed a path decidedly different from any other branch, due chiefly to the nature of the work involved in producing plate glass. Plate glass is made by first casting the rough or rolled plate and then grinding and polishing it on both sides. The number of inde pendent operations and of workers engaged in the process of making plate glass is considerably larger than that for any other glass prod uct. In no case, however, does the skill of the plate-glass workers even approximate the skill of other glassworkers, such as bottle or window glass blowers, for instance. The plate-glass branch was, therefore, from the very beginning essentially a nonskill industry. The simple and repetitive nature of the work, on the one hand, and the heavy and large sizes of the indi vidual plates handled, on the other, early suggested the development of machinery and other labor-saving devices. In Europe a grinding machine, though very crude, was invented in 1768. During the nineteenth century this machine was perfected, and smoothing and polishing machines were also invented and perfected. In the early nineties in this country the plate-glass industry had already univer sally adopted the grinding and polishing machines. Somewhat later, with the development of electric power, overhead cranes were installed to transfer the pot of molten glass from the furnace to the casting table, as well as tc lift and handle the large heavy plates. Thus, at a time when bottles and blown ware in general were still being made by the old hand process, harking back to the Middle Ages and even earlier, plate glass had reached a degree of develop ment unique in the glass industry. The steps by which this development of machinery in the making of plate glass had been accomplished were very slow and gradual. This, too, marks the difference between plate glass and other glass products. Recently, however—in fact since 1921— a change has taken place in the process of making plate glass which in its revolu tionary effects can well be compared with the remarkable changes in the other branches of the glass industry. The old process, which is still prevalent in the majority of plateglass plants, may be described as a “ discontinuous” process. The various operations which constitute this process are independent of one another and the departments or branches embracing these op erations are scattered over the plant. Much handling and rehan dling of the glass is necessary before the completed plate reaches the warehouse where it is packed and stored ready for shipment. The new process represents an attempt to combine the various inde pendent departments into one continuous unit, thus eliminating all the intermediate steps between the departments. In contrast with the old, the new process is termed the “ continuous” process. The differences between the two processes may best be explained by describing in detail the operations involved in each. 170 CH APTER IV .— PLATE GLASS 171 DISCONTINUOUS PROCESS MELTING THE GLASS The glass used in the production of plate glass is melted in open round pots. Each pot contains just enough of the molten glass to cast one plate table, the average weight of the glass in the pot being about 2,000 pounds. The pots are set 8 or 10 in a row on each side of a rectangular regenerative furnace, the furnace unit consisting, therefore, of 16 or 20 pots. These are made of refractive material, to withstand not only the high temperature in the furnace but also the rapid changes in temperature caused by the withdrawal of the pot from the furnace for the purpose of casting. Besides being composed of the best materials available and being built as solidly as possible, the pot is carefully annealed in a special arch kiln before it is placed in the furnace. In the kiln the temperature is gradually raised to a degree not much lower than that in the furnace, so that the pot will not suffer from a too rapid exposure to a very high temperature. In spite of these precautions the life of a pot is very short—only three to four weeks—and the cost of the pots constitutes quite a considerable item in the production cost of plate glass by the “ discontinuous” process. The batch is delivered to the pot after it has been placed in the furnace, either by hand with the help of a large iron ladle or by a special traveling batch car, equipped with an arm which is projected into the furnace in order to “ charge” the pots. The latter must be charged three times during the 24-hour period needed, on the average, completely to melt the glass ready to be cast. The workers performing all the necessary operations in the melting or furnace room are termed fillers, melters, metal tenders, and finishers, the names corresponding to the nature of the work per formed. When a pot is withdrawn from the furnace it leaves a residue of molten material, the overflow of the boiling glass. This slag must be removed from the furnace before the emptied pot is returned to its position, and this is usually done by hand with the help of long hooks or bars. To protect their faces from the excessive heat emanating from the open furnace the cleaners, as these workers are termed, are furnished with leather masks. The total number of workers engaged in the furnace room varies from plant to plant, depending on the number of pots in a single furnace and the number of furnaces operated. CASTING THE ROUGH PLATE When a pot is ready to be cast a wagoner, or hookman as he is sometimes called, guides his heavy iron fork, suspended from an overhead traveling crane, to the furnace in which the pot is located, the overhead crane being operated by a crane motorman. The clay projection which serves as a door to the furnace is first removed. Then the iron fork i§ guided into the furnace in a position which permits its two movable jaws to clasp the pot just below the outer projection on the pot, this projection being provided to keep the prong from slipping off when the pot is first lifted and then with drawn from the furnace. The pot with the molten glass is then carried to the casting table. There it is set on a platform and the surface of the glass carefully PRODUCTIVITY OP LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY F ig . 28— DISCONTINUOUS PROCESS: T A K IN G POT OUT OF FU RN AC E 40780°— 27 CHAPTER IV.— PLATE GLASS P ig . 29—DISCONTINUOUS PROCESS: SK IM M IN G TH E POT co 174 PRO D U CTIVITY OF LABOR IN TH E GLASS IN D U ST R Y skimmed to eliminate the impure and chilled glass. The pot is then lifted by another heavy hook and the bottom carefully scraped to prevent any pieces of stone or foreign matter from falling into the glass during the process of casting. Finally the pot is tilted over the table and the glass rapidly poured out of the pot onto the table in one continuous stream. Simultaneously the roller on the table is set in motion, pushing the mass of glass ahead of it and at the same time pressing the glass under it into a flat sheet. It takes but a few seconds for the roller to reach the other end of the table, when the casting operation is complete. The empty pot is returned to the furnace. The rolling or casting table is made of heavy cast-iron bars closely bolted together to form a flat surface. The tables in use vary from 12 to 14 feet in width and from 20 to 28 feet in length. Before each operation the table is carefully cleaned and cooled with com pressed air. Sand is then scattered over the surface of the table to prevent the glass from sticking to the hot iron surface. The roller, also made of cast iron, is about 18 inches in diameter. It extends over the entire width and rolls the entire length of the table. The adjustable strips or iron tracks, on both sides of the table, on which the roller travels determine the thickness of the glass and keep it uniform the whole length of the table. The motion of the roller is controlled by chains driven by an electric motor. When it reaches the other end of the table the roller strikes a lever which raises the roller up on an inclined surface and automatically stops it. There is just enough space between the inclined surface and the table to permit the rolled plate to pass between them when pushed from the casting table into the leer. The workers engaged in the operation of casting constitute a gang, normally consisting of 11 workers: One wagoner and one overhead crane operator to transfer the pot from the furnace to the casting table and back; one teemer who is usually in charge of the table, and one teeming crane operator to pour the glass on the table and to run the roller; one skimmer, one skim cutter, and one skim catcher to clean the pot, when it is taken out of the furnace, of the impure glass on the surface and also to clean it of the chilled glass and other foreign materials just before the glass is poured on the table; three table men, or gunners as they are called, to do all the additional chores around the table, such as the cooling and cleaning of the table after each operation, and to be of general help to the other workers; and one leer controller to shove the rolled plate from the table into the several leer compartments before it reaches the leer proper. The output of such a casting gang of 11 workers averages from 60 to 70 pots per shift of 8 hours. ANNEALING THE ROUGH PLATE When the casting or rolling is completed the red-hot plate is left on the table until it is sufficiently cooled and solidified to be moved into the leer. This is accomplished with the aid of the “ stowing tool,” composed of special iron rods electrically controlled, which without lifting the plate pushes it from the casting table into the first com partment of the leer. There the sheet remains until another plate is ready to go into the leer. It is then pushed into the second compart- CHAPTER IV ,— PLATE GLASS F ig . 30—DISCONTINUOUS PROCESS: CASTIN G ROUGH PLATE GLASS Oi 176 PR O D U CTIVITY OF LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U ST R Y ment of the leer, where the temperature is somewhat lower than in the first. There are four or five such annealing compartments through which the plate must pass before it reaches the leer proper. The principle of annealing plate glass is exactly the same as that used in the other branches of the glass industry. As the glass passes through the leer the temperature is gradually lowered untfl, when the cold end of the leer is reached, the temperature is not much higher than normal. The construction of a leer for plate glass, however, is different from that of any other leer used. First, it is four or five times as long as the average leer used for any other glass product, its average length being about 300 feet. Second, the floor of the leer is not continuous and does not move automatically, but is made up of separate sections, each somewhat larger than the largest sheet rolled. Each section consists of a series of rails and rollers, which together constitute a flat surface supporting the sheet when at rest. Each time a new sheet is pushed into the first annealing compart ment the leer controller sounds a gong or uses some other device to notify the leer man operating at the cold end of the leer. He then starts an electric motor, which lifts all the rollers in the leer above the floor and sets them in motion, gradually sliding the sheets of plate from one section of the leer to another. The motor is timed to stop automatically when the transfer has been completed, the rollers being then lowered to their rest position. The plate thus travels intermit tently from one section of the leer to another until it reaches the cold end of the leer. From the last section of the leer the sheet is transferred by a similar process, but independently of the leer, to a large table with a surface similar to that of a leer section. The glass is first carefully examined and chalk marked for the more obvious defects, such as stones or large blisters. From the leer the table is moved on a rail track to the rough-cutting department. There the uneven and super fluous glass on the ends of the plate is cut off, and the sheet is cut into smaller sizes, the latter being necessary because of the defects in the glass marked by the examiner. The rough cutters cut out all the de fects and at the same time endeavor to get as many large-size plates as possible. When cut the plates are removed, either by hand or with the help of an overhead crane, to the storage section, where they are placed in racks according to their sizes. The table is then returned to the leer for another sheet. The number of workers engaged in annealing and cutting the rough plate varies from plant to plant. There are also variations in the exact nature of the work performed by each member of the gang, as well as in the terms used to designate the individual workers. In an aver age plant there are usually two workers directly in charge of the leer— the leer man and the leer motorman. There is one inspector to examine and mark the glass as it comes out of the leer. There are two more or less skilled cutters to cut the plate into smaller sizes, and two square men, each assisted by a helper or two, to cut off the superfluous glass at the ends of the plate. In addition there are about four helpers who remove the discarded glass into special cullet re ceivers and then join the gang in carrying the smaller plates from the table to the proper racks. In the majority of plants overhead cranes are used to lift and carry the larger plates. To this gang should also be added the “ rackman,” who marks the sizes of the sheets before CH APTER IV .---- PLATE GLASS 177 they are taken to the racks, and a “ booker,” who keeps record of the number of plates produced and their sizes. Melting, casting, annealing, and rough cutting represent the sum total of operations involved in the process of making rough plate glass. These operations are dependent upon one another and have a sufficiently close connection to form a single unit known as the casting department. On the other hand, the subsequent operations of grinding and polishing the plate glass have but very little in com mon with the casting department and are therefore combined to form a separate “ finishing” department. GRINDING AND POLISHING PLATE GLASS The finishing department is composed of two groups of machines— one for grinding down the rough surface of the plate glass and the other for giving it the polish which renders the glass transparent. Both operations are performed with the glass laid out on a special round table fitting the size of the machines used. The table, averag ing in size from 24 to 36 feet in diameter, is made of cast iron and has an even and polished surface. It is mounted on car wheels running on a depressed wide track, usually extending the entire length of the finishing department. From the main track the tables are easily switched over to any machine or anywhere in the department where tables have to be used. LAYING OUT A TABLE There are several distinct operations which rough plate glass must undergo on its way from the racks, where the rough plates are stored, through the grinding and polishing processes to the warehouse, where the polished plate glass is cut into sizes and stored ready for shipment. The first operation is to lay out the grinding table, which is a rather tedious and extremely messy performance. To insure the minimum amount of breakage during the grinding or polishing, the glass has to be firmly cemented to the table, and for this purpose plaster of Paris is spread thickly over the clean fiat surface of the table. When a plate is laid on the table half a dozen workers step on it and proceed to walk or rather dance on it in unison until a maximum contact of the plate with the surface of the table is secured, and the glass adheres firmly to the table. Plate after plate is thus laid on the table, the larger sizes in the center, then smaller sizes around the larger, and then still smaller and smaller sizes until the maximum area of the table is laid out with rough plate glass.1 The spaces between the plates and the notches in the rim of the table are filled in with scraps of glass or cullet. With the glass firmly fastened to its surface and all the crevices between plates filled in with plaster to prevent the slightest lateral movement of the plates, the table is conveyed by a small motor car to the grinding machine. There are no set regulations determining the number of workers in a laying-out gang. The size of a single gang and the number of such gangs operating in the plant during one shift are determined by the size of the tables used, the number of grinding and polishing machines in operation, and the particular practices followed in each plant. A minimum laying-out gang, however, consists of one boss t Each plant has a definite rotation of sizes, which enables the laying-out gang to proceed with the work without losing any time on measuring and calculations. 178 PR O D U CTIVITY OF LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U ST R Y layer, one first layer, one second layer, one third layer, one fourth layer, one cullet layer, two plaster mixers, and one cleaner. To these must be added one “ matcher,” and in most plants also a craneman, both of whom perform services for two or more gangs. An average laying-out gang can lay out from 8 to 10 tables per shift of eight hours. GRINDING MACHINE The grinding machine consists of a large circular frame capable of rotating in a horizontal plane. The table, switched from the main track into the grinding machine, is caught into this frame and has imparted to it the same rotary motion as that of the machine. Over the table/are suspended two grinding “ rubbers,” large circular disks shod with many small iron blocks. The “ rubbers” also revolve and are set so as to sweep over the whole surface of the glass on the revolv ing table. The running bars are kept rigidly in position but are capable of being lowered as the grinding proceeds. By this method the more uneven parts of the glass are rubbed off before the general grinding begins. A uniform speed of the machine is absolutely necessary for a uniform distribution of the grinding process over the entire surface of the glass on the table. The glass is ground with sand, at first of a very coarse grade, but as the process goes on finer and still finer grades of sand are used. The sand and water are fed to the machine automatically. Auto matic devices are also used to regrade the sand which leaves the table and to send back to the table only the required grade. The sand is finally replaced with emery, which is less abrasive. It takes about 90 minutes for the machine to grind the glass on the table to an acceptable degree of smoothness. The direct labor involved in the process of grinding consists of an operator and a helper on a single machine. One sandman and one emery man per shift must also be included in the grinding crew, but these are capable of tending all the grinding machines in the plant. MIDDLE YARD When the grinding is finished the table is released from the grinding frame and switched over to the so-called “ middle yard” before send ing it to the polishing machine. There the g;lass is examined, and if any breakage has occurred during the grinding process the broken glass is either completely replaced or so patched up with plaster as to prevent any further breakage by the polishing machine. The work in the middle yard is essentially of the same nature as that performed by the laying-out gang. The workers operating in the middle yard are therefore also termed examiners, layers, matchers, plaster mixers, and cleaners. The total number of workers constituting a middleyard gang varies from plant to plant, depending on the size of tables used and the total number of tables in operation. In an average plant 13 to 14 workers are sufficient, while in the larger plants as many as 20 workers are used. POLISHING MACHINE From the middle yard the table is moved over to the polishing machine. This machine consists of a circular frame similar to that in the grinding machine, and the table is locked into it exactly as is done in the grinding process. The polishing apparatus, however, CHAPTER IV.— PLATE GLASS F ig . 3 1 —D ISC O NTIN UOU S PROCESS: LAYIN G OUT TABLE P R E P AR AT O R Y TO SW IT CH IN G IT TO G R IN D IN G M ACH IN E O 180 P R O D U CTIVITY OP LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U ST R Y consists of four revolving frames, each equipped with a number of disks or rubbers which rotate freely over the entire surface of the glass as the rotating frames sweep over the revolving table. The disks are padded with a thick layer of felt, which with the help of the “ rouge” and water used, smooths the surface of the glass of all scratches and imparts to it the required luster. It takes about 75 minutes for the polishing machine to complete this operation. The direct labor engaged in polishing plate glass consists of one operator or “ bench boy ” in charge of each machine. In addition one machinist, one or two finishing inspectors, and one or two block felters per shift are needed to tend 8 to 10 polishing machines in operation. RELAYING OB TURNOVER GANG After the glass has been ground and polished on one side it must be turned over or relaid for similar treatment on the other side. The work of relaying the glass is sometimes performed by a special “ turnover” gang, but in the majority of plants this work is also per formed by the laying-out gangs. The two operations are essentially alike, except that in the turning-over process the glass is first taken off the table and the table stripped of the hardened plaster and cleaned before the glass is laid on the other side. The table then proceeds again on its journey through the grinding machine, the “ middle yard,” and the polishing machine, exactly as for the first side of the glass. STRIPPING AND WASHING THE GLASS After both sides of the plates have been ground and polished the table is switched over to the stripping department, where the plates are removed from the table by the stripping gang. This work also is sometimes performed by the laying-out gang. Immediately upon removal from the table the sheets are washed with a diluted acid solution and when dried are marked as to sizes and placed in the racks leading to the cutting room, also known as the warehouse department. EXAMINING AND CUTTING DEPARTMENT Before cutting the plate glass into sizes it is again thoroughly cleaned and carefully examined, not only for the purpose of discover ing and eliminating defects but also for the purpose of grading the quality of the glass. The uses of plate glass and the grades and sizes required are so numerous that it is well-nigh impossible to gauge the output of the workers in the cutting department in terms of square feet of plate glass cut. Moreover, a comparison of the work in the cutting departments of the separate plants would be entirely mis leading unless the plants happen to specialize in the same sizes and grades of plate glass—such as is used in automobiles, for instance. Finally the number of workers and the hours worked in the cutting department are in no way dependent upon or related to those in the casting or finishing departments. For this reason, in the statistics of production given hereafter the cutting department is treated as an independent unit. This separation of the cutting department was also made necessary by the fact that the change from a discontinuous to a continuous process did not in any way affect the examining, cut ting, or packing of the glass. CHAPTER 32—DISCONTINUOUS PROCESS: POLISHING M A C H IN E IN OPERATION IV.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ F ig . 00 182 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U STR Y CONTINUOUS PROCESS The new process of making plate glass, like the discontinuous proc ess, may also be divided into three distinctly separate departments— casting, finishing, and cutting. This division is the more expedient since the physical continuity in the new process is actually interrupted as the glass is transferred from one department to another. Strictly, the continuity of the process applies only to the various operations constituting the casting and finishing. Literally, therefore, the new process of making plate glass may best be described as consisting of the separate but continuous processes of casting and finishing the glass, while the cutting department is in no way different from that in plants using the discontinuous process. CASTING DEPARTMENT In the continuous process the glass is melted in large continuous tanks similar to those used in the bottle industry. The tank is divided into three parts— the “ dog house,” an extension where the raw materials, or the “ batch,” are delivered to the furnace either on wheelbarrows or through a batch bin hanging directly over the “ dog house” ; the melting chamber proper, where the glass ingredients are diffused to form a uniform mass of molten glass; and the refining or working chamber from which the glass is drawn for the necessary operations. The refining chamber is usually separated from the melting section by a wall, with an opening near the bottom of the tank to permit only the heavier and therefore the better quality glass to flow from the melting section into the working chamber. In front of the refining chamber, somewhat lower than the level of the glass in the tank, is located the discharge spout, an opening through which the glass is permitted to flow out of the tank in a continuous stream. The spout is equipped with a special refractory gate, intended to regulate the flow of the glass. From the spout the molten metal passes downward along an inclined plane to a moving table and under a roller, from whence it emerges in the form of a flat continuous sheet of the required width and thickness. It then enters a very long annealing leer, at the other end of which it is cut into plates of the required length, which are then transferred to the finishing department. The table upon which the molten glass falls as it leaves the dis charge spout is made up of several connected sections traveling on an endless chain. The motion of the table is so timed that the portion of it passing between the spout and the leer, a distance of 6 feet, presents to the glass which travels over it a continuous smooth sur face. The roller is suspended over the table, at a distance of about 15 inches from the spout. It is made of cast iron, is about 13 inches in diameter, and is constantly revolving on its axis at a speed syn chronized with the forward motion of the table. The elevation of the roller above the surface of the table forms a pass and determines the thickness of the sheet emerging on the other side of the roller. The discharge spout is situated midway of the length of the roller and the width of the table. The ribbon of glass, which is only about 8 inches wide as it leaves the spout, spreads over the table and widens on both sides symmetrically while being carried to the pass. The speed of the table and the roller can be controlled so that the glass may CHAPTEK IV.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- F ig. 33—CON TIN UOU S PROCESS: GLASS A U T O M A T IC A L L Y FLOWS FRO M T A N K U N D E R R O LLE R A N D IN T O LEER 184 PK O DU CTIVITY OF LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U ST R Y acquire the right width just before it reaches the pass between the roller and the table. The same control serves to keep the edges of the sheet from becoming thinner than the elevation of the pass. Both the table and the roller are kept constantly cool by an intricate system of water sprinklers. This serves to keep the glass from stick ing to the metal and also to cool it sufficiently to enable the emerging sheet to retain its shape on its subsequent journey from the pass over the table and through the leer. Within the leer the continuous sheet of rolled plate glass is sup ported on a series of rollers. These have a uniform speed and are so spaced throughout the length of the leer as to preclude the piling up or stretching of the glass in the sheet. The leer is 450 feet long, and it takes nearly two and a half hours for the glass to flow from the discharge spout of the tank to the exit of the leer. There the glass is carefully examined and the sheet is cut into plates of the required lengths. These are then transferred to the finishing depart ment to be ground and polished. The entire operation, from the back end of the melting tank where the batch is automatically fed into the “ dog house” to the cold end of the leer where the endless sheet emerges to be cut into plates, is absolutely continuous and automatic. The labor engaged in a casting unit consists, of two batch mixers, to prepare and weigh the batch and deliver it to the automatic mixing apparatus; one furnace man for each furnace and one glass skimmer for two furnaces, to supervise the proper melting of the glass in the continuous tank; one roller operator to control the speed of the casting table and the roller; and one oiler to keep all the machinery involved in proper working trim. At the end of the leer there is a cutter who examines the glass for defects and cuts the continuous sheet into sizes of required length. Two transfer men then deliver the separate plates to the finishing department. The total number of workers thus involved in the continuous process of casting plate glass is somewhat less than 10, including the portion of the labor of the chief foreman and his assistants which is allotted to the casting unit, as compared with the fifty-odd workers constituting a casting shift in the dis continuous process. Although the total output of a shift in the discontinuous process is considerably larger than that of a casting unit in the continuous process, the productivity of the workers, expressed in terms of man-hour output, is much higher in the continuous process. FINISHING DEPARTMENT The principles and the actual operations of grinding and polishing plate glass by the continuous process are exactly the same as in the discontinuous process. But while in the discontinuous process the plates are laid out on individual round tables, which are then moved around from one section of the finishing department to another, in the continuous process the tables on which the plates are laid travel continuously on a very long and narrow conveyor, and the various operations involved are performed with the glass “ on the go.” The laying-out operation is very much simpler than in the discon tinuous process. The tables used are rectangular and comparatively small, so that only one plate is laid out on each table. As in the discontinuous process, plaster of Paris *is used to fasten the glass CH APTER I V .— PLATE GLASS 185 firmly to the surface of the table. The latter is then locked into the conveyor and started on its journey toward the grinding section or zone. The actual grinding is performed by a series of separate “ rubbers” or grinding disks made exactly like the grinders in the discontinuous process. Each disk revolves independently of the others, is operated by a separate motor, and is supported by a separate iron frame built over the conveyor. The diameter of the disk is equal to the width of the glass on the conveyor, so that the grinding iron bars of the rotating disk cover the entire surface of the plate as it slowly passes under the rubber. There are 43 such rubbers under which the rough plate has to pass before the grinding opera tion is complete. The rubbers are divided into several groups in accordance with the grade of sand used for the grinding. Rough sand is used first, then finer and still finer grades. Each time a new grade of sand is used the previous grade is automatically washed off, automatically regraded, and the finer grade automatically delivered to the table. After the glass emerges from under the last grinder it has to pass a short distance before it enters into the polishing zone. During this interval the glass is automatically cleansed of any sand or other par ticles left over from the grinding process. Also, if any breakage has occurred during the last operation, the plate is either completely replaced or the glass patched up with plaster to avoid further breakage in the polishing zone. This short interval corresponds to the “ middle yard” of the discontinuous process. The polishing zone is built exactly like the grinding zone, each polishing machine constituting an independent unit and rotating about its central axis with an independent speed controlled by a separate motor. Each machine is equipped with four revolving smaller disks covered with a thick layer of felt. The iron rust or rouge and the water used for polishing are supplied automatically as the glass passes from under one polishing unit to another. Thirty-six of these polishing machines are used to give to the plate glass the required smoothness and transparency. After emerging from under the last polishing machine thie table travels but a short distance before the end of the long conveyor is reached, during which time it is stripped of the plate which has been ground and polished on one side and then switched over a semicircular track pivot to another con veyor similar to and as long as the first conveyor. The table is washed and the plate is reversed on it and proceeds on a similar journey to be ground and polished on its other side. At the end of the second conveyor the plate, now ground and polished on both sides, is stripped from the table, washed in a dilute acid solution, and trans ferred to the cutting department. By means of another semicircular track pivot the table is moved to the beginning of the first conveyor where another plate is waiting to repeat the journey. The two con veyors and the two pivotal tracks form a circuit which every rough and opaque plate must travel to be converted into polished trans parent plate glass. The total number of workers in a grinding and polishing unit con sists of 9 layers and relayers, 2 sandmen, 2 pump and tank men, 1 garnet man,2 2 polishers, 4 strippers, 1 block felter, and 1 utility and repair man. In the washing room 2 carriers, 1 brush man, 1 2 Garnet instead of emery is used as the last abrasive in the grinding process. PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR IN THE GLASS INDUSTRY F ig . 3 4 — CONTIN UOU S PROCESS: END VIE W OF G R IN D IN G AN D POLISHING C O N V E Y O R C H A PT E R IV .— PLATE GLASS 187 washing-machine man, and 2 stackers take care of all the glass pro duced by 4 units. To these must be added 1 grinding and 1 polishing foreman and 2 assistant foremen in charge of 4 units. It takes, therefore, an average of 24 workers to man a single complete finishing unit. CUTTING DEPARTMENT As already mentioned, the cutting department has not been directly affected by the change from the discontinuous to the con tinuous process of making plate glass. As in the discontinuous process, the glass on reaching the cutting department is first exam ined for defects and then cut into standard smaller sizes. But because the plates made by the continuous process are absolutely uniform in size the labor efficiency of the cutting department is higher than that in plants using the discontinuous process. Another cause of the increased efficiency in the cutting department of the plant used to represent the continuous process is the fact that this plant specializes in automobile glass, and the rough plates are cut into smaller sizes in such a way as to require the minimum amount of labor and a minimum quantity of waste in the cutting depart ment. DISCONTINUOUS AND CONTINUOUS PROCESSES COMPARED The most striking difference between the continuous and the dis continuous processes of making plate glass is the great reduction in the number of workers and of operations effected by the continuous process. This reduction occurs in both the casting and the finishing departments. Before proceeding with an analysis of this change in quantity and kind of labor used it must be clearly understood that a reduction in the number of workers engaged in the process does not per se mean an actual saving in labor used. The latter can be determined only by the figures representing man-hour output, and this will be discussed later. (See p. 189.) There is nothing in the discontinuous process to correspond to what is known as a “ production unit” in the continuous process. This unit is made up of a single furnace, a continuous tank, and a continuous leer in the casting department and a double line of long conveyors in the finishing department. A plant may consist of only one unit. It may have two or more units, but the inherent structure of any one unit is not at all affected by the number of units in the plant. To all intents and purposes, therefore, a number of units in one plant merely represents so many smaller plants built side by side, parallel to one another, and confined in one large structure. The unit remains the same and is more or less constant, except for such inherent differences as the size of the tank or the width of the glass drawn. With the discontinuous process the situation is entirely different. There the whole plant, no matter how large or small, represents a single production unit in the sense given above. The individual operations are more emphasized and the division is vertical rather than horizontal—the melting room, the laying-out section, the grind ing machines, the polishing machines, etc. No matter how large the plant, all the pots are located in the one melting room, which is large 188 PR O D U CTIVITY OF LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U ST R Y or small according to the size of the plant. The same holds true with the other sections. A large plant merely means a combination of large sections or departments, a small plant a combination of small sections or departments. In neither plant is there any definite con nection between any one section of one department and another section in another department. No one set of pots melt the glass to be used on any one grinding machine or any one polishing machine. Even the two sides of a plate laid on a table are not necessarily ground or polished on the same machines. There is, therefore, no way of gauging the output of the plant except by taking the whole plant as a production unit, and even then care must be taken to correlate the number of shifts and hours of work prevailing in the different departments.3 Besides, the size of such a unit varies directly with the size Qf the plant, and it can not be compared with the uniform size of a production unit in the con tinuous process. For a strict comparison of the two processes a plant must be found which in a given time produces by the discontinuous process exactly the same quantity of plate glass produced by a unit of the con tinuous process in the same time. The same end can be accomplished by determining how many productive units of the continuous process it would take to equal the output of a given plant using the discon tinuous process. Such a comparison really amounts to a comparison of output which is exactly what has been done in the statistics of production given hereafter. (See pp. 189 to 204.) What is intended here is merely to show the number and kind of workers that have been entirely eliminated or replaced by other workers through the change from the discontinuous to the continuous process. In the melting of the glass in the discontinuous process the pots in which the glass is melted must first be gradually annealed in the pot arch kiln before they can be placed in the furnace. This work is done by the pot leer tenders. Then the batch has to be delivered to the pot by the fillers. The melters, the metal tenders, the finishers, and the helpers are needed to watch the pot during the 24 hours it takes the glass to reach the casting stage. After the pot has been removed to the casting table the cleaners clear the furnace of the slag left by the pot. All these operations and with them the workers performing them are eliminated in the continuous tanks. The batch is auto matically delivered to the “ dog house” ; it is melted in the tank, flows in a continuous stream into the refining chamber, and from there through the discharge spout onto the casting table. The place of the pot leer tenders, the fillers, the melters, the metal tenders, the finish ers, and the cleaners is taken by one furnace man, assisted by a skim mer, whose duty it is to watch the temperature and the melting of the glass in the tank, and also to regulate the flow of the glass through and out of the tank. In casting plate glass by the discontinuous process the pot must be transferred from the furnace to the casting table. This work is done by the wagoner, assisted by a craneman. At the table the skimmer, the skim cutter, and the skim catcher skim the surface of the pot of the impure and chilled glass; the teemer and the teem crane 3 In one plant, for instance, the melting department works two 10-hour shifts; the casting department, two or three 8-hour shifts; the finishing department, two 12-hour shifts; and the cutting department, one 10-hour shift. CH APTER IV .---- PLATE GLASS 189 operator tilt the pot over the table and cast the glass, while the helpers or the “ gunners” do the other chores directly connected with the casting table. Finally, the leer controller moves the cast sheet of glass from the table into the first leer compartment and then from one compartment into another until the sheet enters the leer proper. In the continuous process the whole casting crew is eliminated. The glass flows automatically from the tank onto the moving table, passes automatically under the revolving roller, and then in the form of a continuous sheet into and through the continuous leer. It takes but one roller operator to watch and time the synchronous movements of the glass, the table, and the roller, and one oiler to see that the mechanism of the machinery involved is in good working order. In the discontinuous process the separate sheets of rough plate glass emerging at the cold end of the leer are first inspected by an examiner and then transferred to the rough cutting department by the leer motorman. It takes cutters, square men, cullet men, carriers, an overhead crane operator, a matcher, and a booker to cut the large single sheets of rough plate glass into smaller sizes and to deliver them to the rough plate storage racks. In the continuous process there is need only for a single cutter to examine and cut the continuous sheet of plate glass emerging from the leer. Two transfer men deliver the plates to the finishing department. These three men take the place of the 13 to 15 people doing the corresponding work in the discontinuous process. In the finishing department the story is the same, but the changes are not so extreme as in the departments just outlined. The layingout gang, the car men, the grinders, the middle-yard men, the polishers, the relaying gang, and the stripping and washing gang of the discontinuous process— the total ranging from 84 workers in the smaller to 126 and more in the larger plants—are all replaced in the continuous process by a single finishing gang of about 25 workers, scattered along the line of the two long conveyors on which the opaque rough plates travel while being converted into transparent polished plate glass. M AN-HOUR OUTPUT AND LABOR COST Before proceeding with an analysis of the statistics of production of plate glass a number of points must first be made clear which throw additional light on the nature of the data in general as well as on the method used in handling the statistics. The con tinuous process of making plate glass is of very recent date, being only a few years old, and at present there are but three plants, all operated by one company, which are successfully exploiting this process. Another very large plate-glass concern has been for some time experimenting with the continuous process, gradually increasing the capacity of the plant in which this process is in operation, but there is no authentic information available which would prove the success or failure of this experiment. It therefore became necessary to limit this study of the continuous process to the first company mentioned. This company, however, specializes in the production of automobile glass, and for this reason it is often argued that the continuous process is not capable of producing plate glass for any other use. It is further argued that the discontinuous and the con407800— 27-------13 190 PRO D U CTIVITY OF LABOR IN TH E GLASS IN D U ST R Y tinuous processes can not be compared, as their products are not homogeneous. It is not intended in this report to prove or to dis prove the validity of such arguments. In all fairness it must be admitted that not until the continuous process is successfully applied to the production of all kinds and all sizes of plate glass will the force of such arguments be completely dispelled. On the other hand, the largest single demand by far for plate glass in this country is for the kind produced by the continuous process. The demand for automobile glass is so large that many of the plants using the discontinuous process also specialize in this kind of glass and are frequently compelled to cut larger sizes of plate glass to supply this need. In fact, automobile glass constitutes the major product of two of the three plants here taken to represent the dis continuous process. A large percentage of the output of the third plant is also used for the same purpose. The objection of incom parability of the two processes may therefore be set aside, as a large enough proportion of plate glass used for the same purpose is pro duced by both the discontinuous and the continuous processes to constitute a fair basis of comparison for the two processes. Of the plants here taken to represent the discontinuous process Plant A is of average size, Plant B is somewhat smaller than Plant A, and Plant C is a comparatively large plant. Besides varying in size, the three plants differ widely not only in their methods of coordinating the work of the several departments constituting the plant but also in their wage policies. In one plant all of the depart ments work on an 8-hour-shift basis. In another plant one depart ment works on a basis of two 10-hour shifts, a second department three 8-hour shifts, and a third twro 12-hour shifts. Again, in one plant the average rate of wages is exceedingly high—nearly twice as high as in another plant. There are still other differences which, together with those mentioned above, are sufficient to make an aver age of the data for the three plants anything but representative of any one of the plants used. Such an average can not, therefore, be used for a comparison with data for the continuous process, where the principal object is to determine the changes in human productivity effected by the transition from one process to the other. There are too many unknown factors entering into the average to make it a satisfactory standard of measurement. Fortunately, however, Plant A, using the discontinuous process, and the plant taken to represent the continuous process are operated by the same company. Both are used primarily for the making of automobile glass. The same efficiency policy and the same system of wage rates prevails in both plants. Fundamentally, the only difference between the two plants is that one uses the discontinuous and the other the continuous process of making plate glass. There fore, nothing could better serve the purpose of this study in human productivity as affected by a change from one process to another than a comparison of these two plants. This is the reason why in the following statistics Plant A, using the discontinuous process, rather than the average of the three plants, has been selected as the basis of comparison with the continuous process. The other two plants, as well as the average of the three plants, are also given to show the variations in labor output and labor cost due to factors other than a change in the process of production. 191 CH APTER IV .---- PLATE GLASS Table 33 shows a comparison of man-hour output and labor cost of casting rough plate glass by the discontinuous and the continuous processes. Taking the man-hour output in Plant A as the base, or 100, the index of man-hour output by the continuous process is 145, representing an increase of 45 per cent over the discontinuous process. This increase would have been still larger if the continuous process had been compared with the other two plants, especially with Plant B, where man-hour output is 14.4 per cent less than in Plant A. This lower output is due primarily to a lower productivity in the casting department, as witnessed by the fact that the average hourly output of the casting unit is only 1,972,456 square feet as compared with 2,156,346 square feet in Plant C and 2,347,964 square feet in Plant A. As to labor cost of casting rough plate glass, the continuous process shows a decrease of 25.1 per cent from that of the discontinuous process in Plant A. But this decrease would have been much smaller if the comparison had been made with the other two plants, and especially with Plant B, where the labor cost of casting rough plate glass is 12.3 per cent lower than in Plant A. Plant B, indeed, pre sents the anomalous condition of lower labor productivity coupled with lower labor cost. Normally, the reverse is true, i. e., lower labor productivity is expected to be coupled with higher labor costs and higher productivity with lower cost. A glance at the rates of wages in Plants A and B (see pp. 199 to 204) will at once reveal the cause of the abnormal situation in the two plants. In Plant A wages are very high, probably higher than in any other plate-glass plant. On the other hand, wages in Plant B are extremely low, on the aver age less than two-thirds of the wages in Plant A. This very large variation in the rates of wages is sufficient to overbalance the com paratively small difference in the labor productivity of the two plants, resulting in the abnormal situation explained above. It will be noticed that the same conditions prevail in all other departments of the two plants and are therefore also present when the plants as a whole are considered. T able 33.— Man-hour output and labor cost of casting by the discontinuous and the continuous processes— rough plate glass Man-hour output Labor cost per 100 square feet Process and plant Discontinuous process: Plant A .......................................... ......... ................................. Plant B_______ _________________________________ _____ Plant C__....................... ........................... ......... .................. Average________________ ____________________________ Continuous process__________ ________ ____________________ Square feet Index number Amount 43.887 37.571 39.206 40.221 63.630 100.0 85.6 89.3 91.6 145.0 $1.812 1.589 1.714 1.705 1.357 Index number 100.0 87.7 94.6 94.1 74.9 In the grinding and polishing and the cutting a considerable per centage of the rough plate glass is broken, and therefore the total polished plate glass produced is always smaller than the quantity of rough plate used in its production. This diminution in the quantity of glass is known in the industry as the “ shrinkage.” The loss of 192 PR O D U CTIVITY O F LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U ST R Y glass through shrinkage varies from plant to plant, depending on the size and variety of the plates made and the general conditions within the plant. Due to this loss, the man-hour output and labor cost of casting polished plate glass is considerably different from those for rough plate glass. The figures of Table 33 must be corrected for this difference. The correction factor is determined separately for each plant by dividing the total quantity of polished glass produced by the quantity of rough plate used in its production. This is shown in Table 34. The percentage of shrinkage in the continuous process is smaller than in any of the plants using the discontinuous process. There are several reasons for this difference: (1) In the continuous process the plates are generally smaller and more uniform than in the discontinuous process; (2) the rough plates are cut of such a length as to insure the minimum loss of glass in the cutting department; and (3), due to the continuous conveyors, there is a minimum amount of handling and rehandling of the glass. T a b l e 34. — Quantity of rough plate glass used and of polished plate glass produced therefrom, by the discontinuous and the continuous processes, 1925, and per cent polished glass was of rough glass Polished glass produced Process and plant Discontinuous process: Plant A ..................................................................................... Plant B _______________________________________________ Plant C_......... ......................................................................... Average_____________________________________________ Continuous process............................................................... ........ Rough glass used (square feet) Square feet Per cent of rough glass used 10,330,122 8,685,155 18,611,455 12,542,244 10,581,723 7,769,348 6,994,015 13,636,532 9,466,632 9,549,216 75.21 80.53 73.27 75.48 90.24 To determine the man-hour output of casting in terms of polished plate glass it is necessary to multiply the man-hour output of rough plate by the per cent representing the relationship between the polished plate produced and the rough plate used in its produc tion. Similarly, to determine the corresponding labor costs, it is necessary to divide the cost of casting rough plate by the same factor. The results are shown in Table 35, which presents a comparison of man-hour output and labor cost of casting polished plate glass by the two processes. The continuous process shows an increase in man-hour output of 74 per cent over that of the discontinuous process as represented by riant A. In labor cost of casting the con tinuous process marks a decrease of 37.6 per cent from the corre sponding cost by the discontinuous process. The larger increase in man-hour output and larger decrease in labor cost shown in Table 35 as compared with those shown in Table 33 are due solely to the smaller percentage of shrinkage in the continuous process. 193 CHAPTER IV .---- PLATE GLASS T a b l e 35*— M an-hou r output and labor cost o f casting by the discontinuous and the continuous processes— polished plate glass Man-hour output Labor cost per 100 square feet Process and plant Discontinuous process: Plant A................................. .................... ............................. Plant B „ ______________________________ ____ __________ Plant CL._____________________________________________ Average__________________ ______ ____________________ Continuous process____________________________________ Square feet Index number Amount 33.007 30.260 28.726 30.664 57.420 100.0 91.7 87.0 92.9 174.0 $2.409 1.973 2.340 2.241 1.504 Index number 100.0 81.9 97.1 93.0 62.4 Table 36 presents a comparison of man-hour output and labor cost of grinding and polishing, or what is known as finishing, the plate glass. Taking the man-hour output of Plant A as the base, or 100, the man-hour output by the continuous process shows an index of 153.5, or an increase of 53.5 per cent over that of the discontinuous process. Again, Plant B shows a lower productivity than Plant A, but Plant C shows a larger productivity than either, due chiefly to the larger size of tables used in the plant.4 T a b l e 36 .— M an-hou r output and labor cost o f grinding and polishing plate glass by the discontinuous and the continuous processes Man hour output Labor cost per 100 square feet Process and plant Discontinuous process: Plant A ......... ...... ................................................................... Plant B_____________________________ ____ ____________ Plant C_______ ____ — ............................ ........................... Average_________________________ ____ _______________ Continuous process___________________ ______ ______________ Square feet Index number Amount 12.873 12.080 14.361 13.105 19.757 100.0 93.8 111.6 101.8 153.5 $6.178 4.207 4.315 4.900 4.297 Index number 100.0 68.1 69.8 79.3 69.6 i In the case of labor cost, the continuous process register^ a de crease of 30.4 per cent as compared with the discontinuous process in Plant A. The lower cost in Plant B, in spite of the lower pro ductivity, is due to very low wage rates combined with a 12-hourshift policy, while in Plant C the cost is lower partly because of the larger size of tables used but mainly because of the rates of wages, which, though higher than in Plant B, are still considerably lower than in Plant A. As explained elsewhere (p. 187) the casting and the finishing departments are the only departments which have been directly affected by the change from a discontinuous to a continuous process. To determine the direct effects of this change on labor productivity and on labor cost in making plate glass, it is necessary merely to com bine the data for these two departments, excluding altogether for the time being the cutting department. This is done in Table 37. < The diameter of the tables used in Plant C is 36 feet as compared with a diameter of 28 feet in the other two plants. 194 PR OD U CTIVITY OF LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U ST R Y The method used to measure the man-hour output and labor cost of the two departments combined must first be explained. The term “ man-hour,” used in this study to measure labor productivity in general, is a purely theoretical unit, representing as it does the work of one man, irrespective of skill or occupation, performed during the period of one hour. So defined, this unit has the merit of being uniform not only for all branches of any one industry, but also for all industries. .Because of its uniformity, the term “ manhour” offers a means of concretely measuring the combined output of two or more departments, provided the unit of output remains the same. This is exactly the situation as regards plate glass. Tables 35 and 36 show the man-hour output of casting and of finishing polished plate glass. Both are expressed in terms of square feet of polished plate glass per man-hour. The man-hour output of the two departments combined is merely the reciprocal of the manhours needed to cast and finish 1 square foot of polished glass.5 The labor cost of the two departments combined is the sum of the labor costs in each. With the data for the casting and the finishing departments thus combined, the increase in man-hour output due directly to the change from the discontinuous to the continuous process is 58.7 per cent, if the man-hour output of Plant A is taken as the base, or 100. The corresponding decrease in labor cost for the two de partments combined is 32.4 per cent of the cost in Plant A. For Plant B the index number for the casting and the finishing depart ments combined is 93.2 for man-hour output and 72 for labor cost, which was to be expected because of the peculiar conditions in that plant. T a b l e 37. — Man-hour output and labor cost of casting, grinding, and polishing plate glass by the discontinuous and the continuous processes Man-hour per square foot of polished glass Process and plant Discontinuous process: Plant A .................................................... Plant B ....................................... .................. Plant C___......................... ............... ......... Average....... ....................................... ...... Continuous process..................................... . Man-hour out Labor cost per put 100 square feet Casting Square Index Index Casting Finish fin feet num Amount num ing and ishing ber ber 0.03030 0.07768 0.10798 .03305 .08278 .11583 . 03481 .06963 .10444 . 01742 . 05061 .06803 9.261 8.633 9.575 9.156 14.699 100.0 93.2 103.4 98.9 158.7 $8.587 6.180 6.655 7.141 5.801 100.0 72.0 77.5 83.2 67.6 While the transition from the discontinuous to the continuous process of casting and finishing plate glass has not directly affected the cutting department, in the sense that the method of cutting the polished plate glass into sizes remains essentially the same, the indi 6 This method is illustrated by an example taken from Plant A. The man-hour output in the casting department in this plant was 33.007 square feet of polished glass. It takes, therefore, — or 0.03030 man-hour to cast 1 square foot of polished glass. In the same plant the man-hour output of the finishing department was 12.873 square feet of polished glass, and it takes, therefore, or 0.07768 man-hour to grind and polish 1 square foot of polished glass. For similar reasons it takes 0.03030+0.07768 =0.10798 manhour to cast and finish 1 square foot of polished glass, and the reciprocal thereof will represent the man-bour output of the casting and the finishing departments combined. 195 CH APTER IV .---- PLATE GLASS rect effects of the change on the output of the cutting department have been very great. This is shown in Table 38, where a comparison is given of the man-hour output and the labor cost of cutting plate glass. The continuous process shows an increase of 69.8 per cent in man-hour output and a decrease of 37.1 per cent in labor cost, as compared with those of the discontinuous process in Plant A. This difference is due primarily to the fact that the plates reaching the cutting department in the continuous process are uniform in size and of such dimensions as to require the minimum amount of labor to cut them into the required standard sizes. In the discontinuous process all sizes and all grades of plate glass reach the cutting department, and it requires a good deal of judgment on the part of the examiners and cutters to get the maximum percentage of larger sizes and better grades of plate glass. Hence the resulting low output as compared with the continuous process. T a b l e 38 . — Man-hour output and labor cost of cutting plate glass in plants with the discontinuous and the continuous processes Man-hour output Labor cost per 100 square feet Process and plant Discontinuous process: Plant A _______________________________________________ Plant B _ _______________ ____________________ Plant C _ ____ _ _______________________________ Average ____ _______________________ :__________ Continuous process________________________________________ Square feet Index number Amount 44.438 44. 541 48. 919 45.966 75.438 100.0 100.2 110.1 103.4 169.8 $1.810 1.028 1.216 1.351 1.138 Index number 100.0 56.8 67.2 74.6 62.9 To measure the man-hour output and the labor cost of the industry as a whole one need but add the figures for the cutting department to those of the other two departments. The results are shown in Table 39, the method used to combine the three departments being the same as that used in Table 37. T a b l e 3 9 . — Man-hour output and labor cost of making polished plate glass by the discontinuous and the continuous processes Man-hour per square foot of polished plate glass Process and plant Cast ing Discontinuous process: Plant A_ _________________ Plant B ________ ______ _________ Plant C __ _________________ Average______________________ Continuous process.______ _____ Finish ing Cut ting Total 0.03030 0.07768 0.02250 0.13048 .03305 . 08278 .02245 .13828 .03481 .06963 .02044 .12488 . 01742 .05061 . 01327 .08130 Man-hour output Labor cost per 100 square feet Index Square num Amount Index num feet ber ber 7.6&4 7.232 8.008 7.635 12.300 100.0 94.4 104.5 99.6 160.5 $10.397 7.208 7.871 8.492 6.939 100.0 69.3 75.7 81.7 66.7 Taking the man-hour output of Plant A as the base, or 100, the man-hour output in the continuous process shows an index of 160.5, or an increase of 60.5 per cent over the discontinous process. In the case of labor cost the continuous process registers a decrease of 33.3 per cent from the corresponding cost in the discontinuous process of 196 PRO D U CTIVITY OF LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U ST R Y Plant A. Of the other two plants, Plant B shows a smaller labor productivity throughout the plant, due probably to the 12-hour-shift system practiced in the major portion of the plant. Directly con nected with this policy are the extremely low wage rates, with the resulting abnormal combination of a low labor productivity with a very low labor cost. In Plant C the man-hour output for the plant is somewhat larger than in Plant A, due to a large extent to the size of tables used in the finishing department. The labor cost of pro duction in this plant is also considerably lower than in Plant A, partly because the labor productivity is higher but mainly because the rates of wages in this plant, though higher than in Plant B, are still much lower than in Plant A. It is clear from the above that the variations in output and in labor cost, as shown by Plants B and C, are due to factors other than changes in the method of production. But these variations are so large as at times completely to overshadow the variations due to such a change. This is especially true with labor cost, which is more affected by the rate of wages than by the labor output. It is there fore absolutely imperative in comparing the two processes to select plants which differ as little as possible in all other respects than the method of production. This is the reason why Plant A, which has the same management and the same wage rates as the plant representing the continuous process, has been selected as a basis of comparison with that process. Such a comparison, with the other plants eliminated, is shown in Table 40, which contains a comparison of man-hour output of the two processes in (a) the casting department; (b) the finishing department; (c) the casting and finishing departments com bined; (d) the cutting department; and (e) all departments com bined. The increase in man-hour output effected by the continuous process varies from 53.5 per cent in the finishing department to 74 per cent in the casting department, with an increase of 60.5 per cent for all departments combined. The table also shows a compari son of the labor cost in the same departments. The decrease in labor cost effected by the continuous process varies from 30.4 per cent in the finishing department to 37.6 in the casting department, with a decrease of 33.3 per cent in all departments combined. T a b l e 40. — Co?nparison of man-hour output and labor cost in making plate glass by the discontinuous and the continuous processes, by departments Man-hour output Labor cost per 100 square feet Square feet Index number Amount 33.007 57.420 100.0 174.0 $2.409 1.504 12.873 19.757 100.0 153.5 6.178 :I 4.297 | 100.0 69.6 9.261 14.699 100.0 158.7 8.587 5.801 j 100.0 67.6 44.438 75.438 100.0 1.810 169.8 | 1.138 1 100.0 10.397 • 6.939 160.5 Department and process Casting: Discontinuous process—....................................................... . Continuous process. ............................................................... Grinding and polishing: Discontinuous process........................................................ . Continuous process.............................................................. Casting, grinding, and polishing: Discontinuous process.......................................... ......... ........ Continuous process................................................................ Cutting: Discontinuous process............................................................ Continuous process................................................................. All departments: Discontinuous process..... ....................................................... Continuous process................................................................. 7.664 12. 300 Index number 100.0 62.4 i | 100.0 62.9 ! ; 100.0 66.7 CH APTER IV .---- PLATE GLASS 197 PRESENT SITUATION IN THE PLATE-GLASS BRANCH OF THE INDUSTRY In view of the statistics of man-hour output and of labor cost here tofore shown it can hardly be denied that, at least so far as labor productivity and labor cost are concerned, the continuous process marks a decided step forward in plate-glass making. It is also a more integrated and at the same time a simpler process than the discontinuous process. Nevertheless, while *admitting that the continuous process is still very young—only four to five years—it must also be admitted that it has not made the progress which might be expected from the figures of man-hour output and of labor cost. There are other factors which must be taken into consideration in order to give a complete picture of the present situation in the plateglass branch of the industry. They are as follows: 1. The continuous process so far has been successfully used in the production of automobile glass only, and it is still an open question whether the same process can be applied to the manufacture of all grades and all sizes of plate glass. 2. The glass produced in the continuous tanks is admittedly of a lower grade than pot glass. Besides, a large tank of 400 or more tons of molten material is harder to control than a single pot with less than a ton of glass, and the danger of loss is more serious when the glass in a whole tank “ goes wrong.” 3. There is the problem of plant reconstruction, which is inex tricably bound up with the introduction of the continuous process. In spite of the similarity of the actual operations performed, there is such a difference in the kind of plants needed for the two processes that a change from the discontinuous to the continuous process would mean a complete abandoning of the old plant and the construction of a new one. It is even a question if the building housing the old process could be retained for the new one. The situation is such, therefore, that it would require much con sideration on the part of manufacturers before they would decide to abandon the discontinuous in favor of the continuous process. Even if it were possible to produce all grades and all sizes of plate glass by the new process, and even if the glass produced by the tank were as good as pot glass, the question would still remain whether the increase in labor productivity and the decrease in labor cost are sufficient to compensate for the expenses entailed in a change from the old to the new process. The continuous process has certainly come to stay, and has become an important factor as to at least one kind of plate glass— automobile glass—but the discontinuous process has more than held its ground during the same period, and the indica tions are that as long as tne demand for plate glass keeps growing as fast as it has in the last decade, and as long as there is no serious shortage of labor, the two processes will continue to exist side by side. STATISTICS OF PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST The statistics of production of plate glass are somewhat more complicated than those in any other branch of the glass industry. This is especially true of the discontinuous process as represented in Plants A, B, and C. First, the data for each plant has to be divided into that for three separate departments, the labor and the output of 198 PRO D U CTIVITY OF LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U ST R Y which are very little, if at all, related to one another. The casting department produces rough plate glass; the finishing department grinds and polishes the rough plate; and the cutting department cuts the polished plates into sizes. Each department is an independent unit, not only because of the differences in the nature of the work performed but also because there are separate wage and hour con ditions in each. Hence separate data are given for each department. In the casting department the casting gang was selected as the nucleus of the labor ’unit. The selection was prompted partly by the fact that this group of workers actually performs the operation of casting the rough plate, but chieffy because it is more or less uniform in size and composition in all plate-glass plants using the discontinuous process. To these workers was added the equivalent of that portion of the labor of the other groups in the casting department which could be allotted to a single casting gang. For instance, in one plant the casting gang is normally operating on a three 8-hour-shift basis, while the batch room of the same plant is operating on a two 10-hour-shift basis. For this reason the equivalent of five-sixths of the labor in the batch room was added to the casting gang, as this constitutes the fraction of the batch-room labor needed to keep one casting gang in operation. The same method was used to determine the relations between the casting gang and the other groups in the casting department, the resulting total representing a complete casting unit with its constituent parts proportionally related to one another. That such a unit is significant can be seen from the fact that in spite of considerable differences in the size and regulations in the three plants given the variation in the number of workers constituting a casting unit is very small. Plant A shows 5 3 ^ workers per unit, Plant B 523^ workers, and Plant C 55 workers. This method of selecting a single group of workers around which the other workers could be so arranged as to form a complete pro duction unit can not be applied either to the finishing or the cutting department. There is no way to. determine the proportions of the separate operations needed in connection with the process of grinding and polishing plate glass or in cutting the polished plates into sizes. For this reason all the workers employed in each of these departments during one shift were taken as constituting the unit in that depart ment. No comparison can therefore be made between these units in one plant and the corresponding units in any other plant. A larger unit merely signifies a larger plant and a smaller unit a smaller plant. In the continuous process, as represented in the plant chosen, the problem of determining the labor attendance in the separate depart ments is comparatively simple. There the three departments con stitute a single definite production unit, or a “ line,” as it is officially termed. The workers engaged in the batch room and those in charge of the casting operations, including the workers whose duty it is to transfer the rough plates from the leer to the finishing conveyor, constitute the casting department. On the same basis, all the work ers in charge of the two grinding and polishing conveyors, including the workers who deliver the polished plates to the cutters, constitute the finishing department. The other workers of the “ line” belong to the cutting department. There is no definite wage policy which can be described as char acteristic of plate-glass plants. Nor is there any uniformity in the CH APTER IV .---- PLATE GLASS 199 number of shifts in operation in each plant or the hours of work prevailing in the plant. The labor is essentially nonskilled, and the rates of wages are largely determined either by conditions prevailing in the community or by the policy pursued in the individual plants. The 8-hour shift predominates in most plants, especially in the casting departments, but in Plant B its finishing department operates on two 12-hour shifts and its cutting department on one 10-hour shift. Similar or other variations can be found in other plants. The statistics of output as shown in the second part of each section of Table H are prepared on the same principle as those for other branches of the glass industry. They give the quantity produced in square feet, the unit of the market; the total number of hours the plant, if reduced to a single labor unit or a single machine, would have to operate to produce such output; the output of a labor unit per hour; the man-hour output; and the labor cost per hour. T a b l e H . — PROD UCTIO N GLASS B Y PROCESSES TH E AND LABOR COST IN M A K IN G PLATE DISCONTINUOUS A N D TH E CONTINUO US ROUGH PLATE GLASS—DISCONTINUOUS PROCESS: PLANT A [In this table all wage rates are for 1925 and labor cost is based on 1925 wage rates regardless of year of out put data. Italicized figures represent minimum and maximum] Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Batch room: Batch mixers.......................... Pot leer: Pot-leer tender. Furnace room: Foreman..... ............. 1 Boss finisher............ 1 Finishers____ _____ 4 Melters......... ........... 4 Metal tender............ 1 Blocker.................... 1 Hoist-ups................. 2 Cleaners.................. 6 Casting room: Shift foreman........... V2 Teemer..................... 1 Skimmer.................. 1 Skim cutter............ 1 Pot craneman........... 1 Wagon man..... ........ 1 Teeming craneman.. 1 Skim catcher............ 1 Table m en......... . 3 Leer controller......... 1 Annealing leer: Leer men.................. m Leer motormen........ m Rough cutting room: Examiner................ 1 Booker...................... 1 Cutters..................... 2 Square-up men......... 2 Carriers..................... 4 Helpers................... 3 Rackman................. 1 Craneman................ 1 3 1 m/2 Total..................... Wage rates per hour Labor cost per hour $0.75 .75 $2.25 .75 1.05 .90 .85 .80 .85 .75 .75 .75 1.05 .90 3.40 3.20 .85 .75 1.50 4.50 1.20 .90 .85 .85 .80 .85 .80 .80 .75 .80 .60 .90 .85 .85 .80 .85 .80 .80 2.25 .80 .80 .80 1.20 1.20 .80 .75 .80 .75 .75 .75 .80 .80 .80 .75 1.60 1.50 3.00 2.25 .80 .80 42.55 Year and month Output 1925 Jan___ F e b .... M a r ... Apr___ May.__ June__ July— Aug----Sept___ Oct___ N ov___ Dec----- Sq.ft. 972,543 909,810 980,084 1,022,733 938,332 912.306 995,042 1,040,916 923,271 991,725 874,300 892.306 Total. 11,453,368 Unithours 384.0 364.0 416.0 416.0 390.0 416.0 426.0 452.0 402.0 432.0 384.0 396.0 Output per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- 100 hour sq. ft. Sq. ft. ,532.664 2,499.478 2,355.971 2,458.493 2,405.979 2,193.043 2,335.779 2,302.912 2,296. 694 2,295. 660 2,276.823 2,253. 298 Sq.ft. 47.340 $1.680 46. 719 1.702 44.037 1.806 45.953 1.731 44.972 1.769 40.991 1.940 43. 659 1.822 43.045 1.848 42.929 1.853 42.910 1.853 42. 557 1.869 42.118 1.888 4,878.0 2,347.964 43.887 1.812; PRO D U CTIVITY OF LABOR I X 2 0 0 TH E GLASS IN D U ST R Y H .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING PLATE GLASS BY THE DISCONTINUOUS AND THE CONTINUOUS PROCESS— Continued T able ROUGH PLATE GLASS—DISCONTINUOUS PROCESS: PLANT B Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers 1X lX IX 1 3K 3X 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 IX IX l l 4 6 1 1 52X Occupation Wage rates per hour Labor cost per hour Year and month 1925 Batch room: Boss mixer. .............. $0. 6750 !0.3375 J a n ... . 6125 Feb.... Mixer.............. ........ 0125 5700 .8550 M ar... Helpers....... ......... . 4000 .6000 Apr__ Pot leer: Leer tenders.._ Furnace room: M ay... Foreman__________ .7500 . 7500 June.. Fillers....................... . 6125 2.4500 July... Finishers__________ .5700 1.9950 Aug... .4850 1. 6975 Sept--. Melters__________.. . 5250 Metal tender______ .5250 O c t... Cleaners....... ........... .5250 3.6750 N ov_Casting room: Dec— Shift foreman........... .0000 1.0000 Teemer------ ------ .8500 .8500 Skimmer. ............... .7500 . 7500 Skim cutter------------ .7000 .7000 .7000 Pot craneman.......... .7000 Wagon man............. .7000 .7000 Table men------------- .6700 2.0100 Teeming craneman.. .8750 . 8750 .7000 Leer controller. .7000 Annealing leer: .5000 Leer men............. .7500 .5000 .7500 Leer motormen. _ Rough cutting room: Examiner---------.5375 .5375 Booker_________ .3500 .3500 .7000 2.8000 Cutters................ .5375 3.2250 Helpers-.......... .4550 Hackman---------.4550 .7000 .7000 Craneman______ Total..................- _______ 31.3500 Total. Output Sq.ft. 215,344 716,136 779,146 796,862 829,551 803,246 811,371 805,730 856,276 816,436 316,978 699,985 8,947,061 Unithours 112.0 384.0 416.0 416.0 416.0 416.0 392.0 416.0 432.0 416.0 400.0 320.0 Output per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- 100 hour sq. ft. S q.ft 1,922. 714 1,864.987 1,872.947 1,915.534 1,994.113 1,930.880 2,069.824 1,936.851 1,982.120 1,962. 587 2,042.445 2, 187.458 36.623 $1.631 85.528 1.681 35.675 1.674 36.486 1.637 37.983 1.572 36. 779 1.624 39.425 1.515 36.892 1. 619 37. 755 1. 582 37.383 1.597 38.904 1.535 41.666 1.483 4,536.0 1,972.456 37.571 ROUGH PLATE GLASS—DISCONTINUOUS PROCESS: PLANT C Batch room: Boss mixer............... X Mixers____________ 2 Pot leer: Pot-leer tend 3 10 ers. Furnace room: Foreman............... . Finishers................. Melters................... Fillers................ . Cleaners...... ............ Craneman------------Fill-hopper operator. Mud-ups.................. Casting room: Teemer....... .......... Skimmer__________ Skim cutter..... ....... Skim catcher______ Pot tongs man------Pot craneman.......... Teeming craneman.. Gunners................... Leer motorman____ Annealing leer: Leer m a n .............. . Leer motorman____ Rough cutting room: Cutters----------------Examiner............... . Booker___________ Rackman................. Helpers and carriers. 55 T o ta l--............... . X 4 5 6 3 $0.80 .55 . 55 $0.20 1.00 .73 .75 2.92 3.30 3.60 1.80 .47 .47 1.05 .66 1.65 1.10 1925 Jan___ F eb.— Mar___ Apr___ M ay— June... July.... Aug---S e p t... Oct___ Nov....... D ec- 534,841 716,227 786,064 776,477 808,817 667,500 635,717 808,870 444,242 407,173 344,439 718,256 648.0 768.0 832.0 800.0 832.0 832.0 832.0 864.0 664.0 648.0 600.0 792.0 2,868.582 2,234.671 2,146. 712 2,220.596 2,174.060 2,004.207 1,966.006 2,093.600 2,172.320 2,171.563 2,240.761 2,169.515 1065 $1,660 >.630 1.654 39.031 1.722 40.374 1.664 39. 528 1.700 36.440 1.845 85.746 1.881 38.065 1.766 1.497 1.702 39.501 1.702 40.741 1.649 39.446 1.704 .92 .76 .76 .70 .76 .72 .76 2.10 .72 .73 .65 1.64 .65 .66 .60 6.50 36.95 T ota l- 19,648,623 9, U2.0 2,156.346 39.206 1.714 201 CH APTER IV .---- PLATE GLASS H .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING PLATE GLASS BY THE DISCONTINUOUS AND THE CONTINUOUS PROCESSES—Continued. T a b le ROUGH PLATE GLASS—CONTINUOUS PROCESS Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers 2 X lA i y2 l l l 2 m Occupation Wage rates per hour Labor cost per hour Batch room: Mixers----- $0,800 $1.6000 Furnace room: .3125 Chief foreman.......... 1.250 .5500 Assistant foreman . . 1.100 .8500 .850 Furnace man ___ .4500 .900 Skimmer _________ .9250 .925 Roller........................ .850 .8500 Oiler.......................... .850 .8500 Stripper or cutter.. _ .800 1.6000 Transfer men______ 7.9875 Total..................... XJnithours Output per unithout Out Labor put cost per per man- 100 hour sq. ft. 1925 Sq. ft. Aug------ 1,050,262 Sept___ 1,235,227 Oct........ 1,016,491 901,160 N ov....... Dec....... ! 905,241 1,704.0 1,944.0 1,584.0 1,440.0 1,560.0 Sq. jt. 616.351 630.261 641.724 625.806 580.283 Sq. ft. 66.633 $1.296 68.136 1.267 69.876 1.245 67.655 1,276 62. 733 1.377 1926 Jan....... 986,269 Feb 984,305 717,964 Mar Apr * 762,638 M ay___ 1,054,434 June___ 1,053,895 July 593,225 1,800.0 1,848.0 1,200.0 1,377.6 1,826.4 1,800.0 1,048.0 547. S27 582.688 598.303 553.599 577.329 585.497 565.623 59.235 57.582 64, 681 59.849 62. 414 63.297 61.148 1.458 1.500 1.335 1.443 1.384 1.364 1.412 588.576 63.630 1.357 Year and month Output Total __ 11,261,111 19,132.8 GRINDING AND POLISHING PLATE GLASS—DISCONTINUOUS PROCESS: PLANT A x 84 Laying-out and turnover gangs: Shift foreman--------Matchers------------- . Boss la y e r ........... . First layers-----------Second layers--------Third layers. ........... Fourth layers........— Fifth layers-----------Cullet m en._........... Plaster mixers-------Cleaners ........... ........ Table transfer gangs: Carmen_____________ Grinding machines: Machinist_________ Operators-------------Helpers----------------Sandman................Emory m an ............ Middle-yard gangs: Foreman__________ Examiner-------------Matchers--------------First layer------------Second layer............ Third layer-----------Plaster mixer______ Helpers......... ........... Cleaner......... .......... Polishing machines: M achinist-,............ Block felters_______ Operators.............. . Stripping! and washing gangs: Bookers.................. . Cranemen____ ____ Washers___________ Cleaners........... ........ Total _ $1.20 $1.20 .90 .90 .90 .80 .75 .75 .75 .75 .75 .75 1.80 .90 3.60 3.20 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 .75 4.50 .85 .80 .75 .75 .80 .85 6.40 3.00 .75 .80 1.20 .95 .90 .90 .80 .75 .75 .75 .75 1.20 .95 1.80 .90 .80 .75 .75 3.75 .75 .80 .80 .85 1.33 3.20 .75 .75 .75 .27 1.50 1.50 1.50 66.80 1 Stripping is done by laying-out gangs. 1925 Jan____ Feb____ Mar___ Apr____ M ay----June___ July----Aug-----Sept___ Oct....... N ov___ Dec____ Total 620,152 649,991 706,990 658,979 632,984 604,759 701,278 712,137 685,580 606,470 597,705 592,323 7,769,348 568.0 564.0 624.0 624.0 600.0 600.0 624.0 624.0 600.0 600.0 557.0 600.0 1,091.817 1, 152.466 1,132.997 1,056.056 1,054.973 1,007.932 1,123.843 1,141.245 1,142. 633 1,010.783 1,073.079 987.205 12.998 |>6.118 18. 720 5.796 13.488 5.896 12.572 12.559 11.999 6.628 13.379 5.944 13.586 5.853 13.603 5.846 12.033 6.609 12. 775 6.225 11.752 6.767 7,185.0 1,081.329 12.873 6.178 202 PRO D U CTIVITY OF LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U ST R Y H . — PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN M AKING PLATE GLASS BY THE DISCONTINUOUS AND THE CONTINUOUS PROCESSES— Continued. T able GRINDING AND POLISHING PLATE GLASS—DISCONTINUOUS PROCESS: PLANT B Labor unit Num ber of work ers Occupation Output and labor cost Wage rates per hour Labor cost per hour 1.900 .675 .650 .575 .560 .540 .560 .375 .420 .650 $0,900 .675 1.300 3.450 1.680 5.940 1.680 1.125 .840 .650 .520 .475 .520 .950 .520 .485 .370 .370 .400 .520 3.880 1.480 .370 .400 .665 .650 .575 .560 .540 .520 .570 .375 .650 .575 .560 .540 3.120 .570 .375 .900 .520 .900 1.040 Laying-out and turnover 1 1 2 6 3 11 3 3 2 1 1 2 1 8 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 2 4 m 84K Shift foreman--------Boss layer_________ First layers-----------Second layers.. ....... Third layers---------Fourth layers.......... Plaster mixers......... Cleaners................. Cranemen................ Matcher--------- -----Table transfer gangs: Carman______ ____ Rope pullers........... Grinding machines: Machinist................ Operators-------------Helpers.................... Sandman...... .......... Emery man............. Middle-yard gangs: Examiner................. First layer................ Second layer........... Third layer............. Fourth layer.......... . Helpers. .................. Plaster mixer........... Cleaner______ _____ Polishing machines: Foreman................. Finishers................. Operators (bench boys)...... .............. Block felters.......... Stripping and washing gangs: Booker.......... .......... First stripper......... . Second strippers___ Third strippers....... Craneman............... Washers.................. Cleaners.................. Year and month 1925 Jan... F eb.. Mar.. Apr... M ay. June. July__ Aug.. Sept.. Oct._ Nov._ D ec- Output S qjt. 226,346 541,534 603,797 627,042 624,328 604,714 658,264 660,774 694,195 633,174 605.206 514,641 Unithours 216.0 576.0 624.0 624.0 624.0 588.0 624.0 624.0 648.0 624.0 600.0 480.0 Output per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- 100 hour sq. ft. Sq.ft. 1,048.898 HO. 168 967.623 1,004.875 1,000.526 1,028.425 1,054.910 1,058.933 1,071.289 1,014.702 1,008.677 1,072.169 Sq.ft. 12.401 $4,098 11.126 4.567 11.451 4.437 11.892 4.273 11.841 4.292 12.171 4.175 12.484 4.070 12.532 4.055 12.678 4.008 12.008 4.232 11.937 4.257 12.688 4.005 .370 .455 .370 .600 .520 .490 .420 .380 .380 Total. .370 .600 1.040 1.470 .420 .760 .760 42.938 Total 6,994,015 6,852.0 1,020.726 12.080 4.207 GRINDING AND POLISHING PLATE GLASS-DISCONTINUOUS PROCESS: PLANT C Laying-out and turn over gangs: Boss layer................ $0,785 Turnover boss layer. .785 Matchers................. .645 .775 First layers............ Second layers-........ .680 Third layers........... . .610 Fourth layers......... . .595 Oullet matchers___ .610 .595 Plaster mixers........ . .545 Cleaners................... Table transfer gangs: .620 Boss carman........... . Carmen.................... .610 Grinding machines: .785 Machinist............... . Operators................. .665 .555 Helpers.................. . Sandman................ .500 Emery m an............ .500 $0,785 .785 1.935 3.875 6.800 3.050 2.975 3.050 5.950 2.725 .620 3.660 .785 5.985 4.995 .500 .500 1925 Jan........ Feb Mar Apr....... M ay___ June___ July Aug....... Sept___ Oct........ Nov Dec____ 1,103,689 1,098,261 1,182,954 1,189,622 1,176,084 1,136,876 1,136,068 1,193,899 1,172,246 1,149,338 1,053,278 1,044,217 664.0 592.0 648.0 648.0 640.0 640.0 600.0 640.0 640.0 640.0 592.0 592.0 1,662.182 1,855.171 1,825.546 1,835.836 1,837.631 1,776.369 1,898.447 1,865.467 1,831.634 1,795.841 1,779.186 1,763.880 13.192 $4*69* 14.724 4.209 14.488 4.277 14.570 4.253 14.584 4.249 14.098 4.396 15.027 4.124 14.805 4.186 14.537 4.283 14.253 4.348 14.121 4.389 13.999 4.427 CH APTER IV .---- PLATE GLASS 203 T a b l e H . — -PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN M AKING PLATE GLASS BY THE DISCONTINUOUS AND THE CONTINUOUS PROCESSES— Continued GRINDING AND POLISHING PLATE GLASS—DISCONTINUOUS PROCESS: PLANT <3—Continued Output and labor cost Labor unit Num ber of work ers 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 7 2 1 2 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 126 Occupation Wage rates per hour Middle yard: Middle yard boss. - . $0,775 .725 Examiner_________ .635 Matchers _________ .595 First layers________ .595 Second layers______ .560 Third la y e r .______ Plaster mixers_____ .560 .555 Helpers___________ .545 Cleaners__________ Polishing machines: .785 Machinist............... _ Finishing inspectors. .710 Machine operators. _ .630 Block felter________ .560 .500 Helper____________ Stripping yard and wash ing gangs: .775 Boss stripper______ Second stripper____ .680 Third stripper_____ .610 .595 Fourth stripper-----Fifth strippers.......... .580 .560 Helpers___________ Washers___________ .560 .560 Cleaners__________ Labor cost per hour $0,775 .725 1.270 1.190 1.190 .560 1.120 3.885 1.090 Output 1925 Sq.ft. Unithours Out Labor put cost per per man- 100 hour sq. ft. Output per unithour Sq.ft. S q.jl .785 1.420 6.300 [ .560 .500 .775 .680 .610 .595 1.160 1.680 1.120 1.120 78.085 Total___ ________ Year and month Total. 13,636,532 7,536.0 1,809.519 14.361 $4.315 GRINDING AND POLISHING PLATE GLASS-CONTINUOUS PROCESS K M A X 9 2 2 1 2 4 1 1 A U M M Grinding foreman______ Polishing foreman ____ Assistant foreman______ Layers________________ Sandmen______________ Pump and tank men___ Garnet man----------------Polishers_______ ____ — Strippers______________ Repair m a n __________ Block felter.... ........... . Carrier_______________ Brushman.................... Washing-machine man_. Stacker............................ 24M T o ta l................... $1.20 1.20 1.00 .85 .85 .85 .80 .90 .80 .85 .80 .80 .80 .80 .80 $0.300 .300 .500 7.650 1.700 1.700 .800 1.800 3.200 .850 .800 .400 .200 .200 .400 20.800 1925 949,892 Aug____ Sept___ 897,860 Oct....... 906,928 Nov....... 596,286 Dec....... 1,069, 738 1,896.0 1,584.0 1,464.0 1.248.0 2.256.0 500.998 566.830 619.486 477. 793 474.175 20.449 $4.152 23.136 3.670 25.285 8.858 19.502 4.353 19.354 4.387 1926 Jan____ Feb Mar Apr____ M ay___ June___ July___ 1.968.0 1, 992.0 1.476.0 1,521. 6 1, 680.0 1,358.4 1,284.0 486.996 406.108 438.405 415. 929 471. 497 472. 635 503.924 19.877 16.576 17.894 16.977 19.245 19.291 20.568 4.271 5.122 4.744 5.001 4.411 4.401 4.128 484.044 19. 757 4.297 958,408 808,958 647,086 632,878 792,115 642,028 647,039 Total. 9,549,216 19,728.0 CUTTING POLISHED PLATE GLASS-DISCONTINUOUS PROCESS: PLANT A 1 2 28 24 16 1 1 Chief foreman................ Assistant foremen______ Cutters_______________ Helpers and cleaners----_______ Examiners Booker...................... . Craneman..................... . 73 Total..................... $1.25 .95 .80 .75 .85 .75 .80 $1.25 1.90 22.40 18.00 13.60 .75 .80 58.70 1925 Jan........ Feb Mar Apr....... May___ June___ July Aug....... Sept___ Oct........ Nov Dec....... 620,152 649,991 706,990 658,979 632,984 604,759 701,278 712,137 685,580 606,470 597,705 592,323 Total. 7,769,348 189.0 188.0 208.0 208.0 200.0 200.0 208.0 208.0 200.0 200.0 186.0 200.0 3, 281.228 3, 457.898 3,398.990 3,168.168 3,164.920 3,023. 795 3,371.529 3,423. 736 3,427.900 3,032. 350 3, 213.468 961. 615 44. 948 $1. 789 47.862 1.698 46. 562 1.727 43.400 1.853 43.355 1.855 41.422 1.941 46.185 1.741 46.900 1.715 46. 958 1.712 41. 539 1.936 44.020 1.827 40. 570 1.982 2,395.0 3,243.987 44. 438 1.810 204 P R O D U C T IV ITY OF LABOR IN T H E GLASS IN D U STRY H .— PRODUCTION AND LABOR COST IN MAKING PLATE GLASS BY THE DISCONTINUOUS AND THE CONTINUOUS PROCESSES— Continued T able CUTTING POLISHED PLATE GLASS-DISCONTINUOUS PROCESS: PLANT B Labor unit Num ber of work ers Output and labor cost Occupation Wage rates per hour Labor cost per hour Year and month Shift foreman................. Assistant foreman_____ Cutters.............. .......... . Table men and helpers.. Bookers....... ............ . Cleaners and examiners Craneman..................... . $1.50 .80 . 55 .40 .39 .37 .44 $1.50 .80 8.25 1925 Jan____ Feb Mar Apr M ay___ June___ July Aug....... Sept___ Oct____ Nov ... Dec....... 6.00 1.17 7.03 .44 Output Sq. ft. 226,346 541,534 603,797 627,042 624,328 604,714 658,264 660,774 694,195 633,174 605,206 514,641 T otal. 6,994,015 Total. Unithours Output per unithour Out Labor put cost per per man- 100 hour sq. ft. 90.0 240.0 260.0 260.0 260.0 245.0 260.0 260.0 270.0 260.0 250.0 200.0 Sq.ft. 2,514.956 2,256.892 2,322. 296 2,411.700 2,401.262 2,468.220 2,531. 785 2,541.438 2,571.093 2,435.285 2,420.824 2,573.205 Sq.ft. 45.726 $1,002 4L025 1.116 42.224 1.085 43.849 1.044 43.659 1.049 44.877 1.021 46. 032 .995 46.208 .991 46.747 .980 44. 278 1.034 44.015 1.041 46.786 .979 2,855.0 2,449.743 44. 541 1.028 CUTTING POLISHED PLATE GLASS-DISCONTINUOUS PROCESS: PLANT C Foreman__________ Assistant foremen... Cutters____ _______ Helpers and carriers. Examiners............... Cleaners................... Bookers......... ........... 115 Total. $1.25 $1.25 .65 .55 .65 .50 .55 16. 25 25.30 10.40 7.50 5.50 1.10 2.20 68.40 1925 Jan........ Feb....... Mar....... Apr....... M ay___ June___ July....... Aug....... Sept___ Oct........ Nov....... Dec....... 1,103,689 1,098,261 1,182,954 1,189,622 1,176,084 1,136,876 1,136,068 1,193,899 1,172,246 1,149,338 1,053,278 1,044,217 T otal. 13,636,532 216.0 192.0 208.0 208.0 208.0 200.0 192.0 208.0 208.0 208.0 192.0 184.0 5,109.671 5,720.109 5,687.279 5,719.337 5,654.250 5,684.380 5,917.021 5, 739.899 5,635.798 5,525. 663 5,485.823 5,675.092 44-4$2 $1.889 49.740 1.196 49.455 1.203 49.733 1.196 49.167 1. 210 49.429 1.203 51.452 1.156 49.912 1.192 49.007 1. 214 48.049 1.238 47.703 1.247 49.349 1.205 2,424.0 5,625.632 48.919 1. 216 CUTTING POLISHED PLATE GLASS—CONTINUOUS PROCESS X 2 1 12 4 19K Foreman.. Carriers... Examiner. Cutters... Inspectors. Total - $1.10 i $0,275 .80 1.600 .85 .850 .85 10.200 .90 3.600 $16.525 1925 Aug----Sept___ Oct____ N ov___ Dec___ 949,892 897,860 906,928 596,286 1,069,738 632.0 528.0 488.0 416.0 752.0 1,502.994 1,700.492 1,858.459 1,433.380 1,422.524 78.078 $1,099 88.337 .972 96.543 .889 74.461 1.153 73.897 1.162 1926 Jan____ F e b .... Mar___ Apr___ M a y ... June... July.... 958,408 808,958 647,086 632,878 792,115 642,028 647,039 656.0 664.0 492.0 507.0 560.0 452.8 428.0 1,460.988 1,218,310 1,315.215 1,248.280 1,414.491 1,417.906 1,511.773 75.895 68.289 68.323 64.846 73.480 73.657 78.534 1.131 1.856 1.256 1.324 1.168 1.165 1.093 6,575.8 1,452.176 75.438 1.138 Total 9,549,216 LIST OF BULLETINS OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS The following is a list of all bulletins of the Bureau o f Labor Statistics published since July, 1912, except that in the case of bulletins giving the results of periodic surveys of the bureau, only the latest bulletin on any one subject is here listed. A complete list of the reports and bulletins issued prior to July , 1912, as well as the bulletins published since that date, will be furnished on application. Bulletins marked, thus (*) are out o f print . Wholesale Prices. No. 284. Index numbers of wholesale prices in the United States and foreign countries. No. 440. Wholesale prices, 1890 to 1926. [1921.] Retail Prices and Cost o f Living. *No. 121. Sugar prices, from refiner to consumer. [1913.] *No. 130. Wheat and flour prices, from farmer to consumer. [1913.] ♦No. 161. Butter prices, from producer to consumer. [1914.] No. 170. Foreign food prices as affected by the war. [1915.] No. 357. Cost of living in the United States. [1924.] No. 369. The use of cost-of-living figures in wage adjustments. [1925. No. 418. Retail prices, 1890 to 1925. Wages and Hours o f Labor. ♦No. 146. Wages and regularity of employment and standardization of piece rates in the dress and waist industry of New York City. [1914.] ♦No. 147. Wages and regularity of employment in the cloak, suit, and skirt industry. [1914.] No. 161. Wages and hours of labor in the clothing and cigar industries, 1911 to 1913. No. 163. Wages and hours of labor in the building and repairing of steam railroad cars, 1907 to 1913. *No. 190. Wages and hours of labor in the cotton, woolen, and silk industries, 1907 to 1914. No. 204. Street railway employment in the United States. [1917.] No. 225. Wages and hours of labor in the lumber, miliwork, and furniture industries, 1915. No. 2C5. Industrial survey in selected industries in the United States, 1919. No. 297. Wages and hours of labor in the petroleum industry, 1920. No. 356. Productivity costs in the common-brick industry. [1924.] No. 358. Wages and hours of labor in the automobile-tire industry, 1923. No. 360. Time and labor costs in manufacturing 3GOpairs of shoes. [1924.] No. 365. Wages and hours of labor in the paper and pulp industry, 1923. No. 371. Wages and hours of labor in cot ton-goods manufacturing, 1924. No. 374. Wages and hours of labor in the boot and shoe in d u stry , 3907 to 1924. N o. 37f>. Wages and hours of labor in the hosiery and underwear industry, 1907 to 1924, No. 377. No. 381. No. 394. No. 407. No. 412. No. 413. No. 416. No. 421. No. 422. No. 431. No. 434. No. 438. Wages and hours of labor in woolen and worsted goods manufacturing, 1924. Wages and houis of labor in the iron and steel industry, 1907 to 3924. Wages and hours of labor in metalliferous mines, 1924. Labor cost of production and wages and hours in the paper box-board industry, 1925. Wages, houis, and productivity in the pottery industry, 1925. Wages and hours of labor in the lumber industry in the United States, 1925. Hours and earnings in anthracite and bituminous coal mining, 1922 and 3924. Wages and hours of labor in the slaughtering and meat-packing industry, 1925. Wages and hours of labor in foundries and machine shops, 1925. Union scale of wages and hours of labor, May 15, 1923. Wages and hours of labor in the men’s clothing industry, 1911 to 192;i. Wages and hours of labor in the motor-vehiele industry, 1925. Employment and Unemployment. ♦No. 109. Statistics of unemployment and the work of employment ollices in the U nitcd States. fl913.] No. 172. Unemployment in New York City, N. Y. [lUio.] ♦No. 183. Regularity of employment in the women's ready-to-wear garment industries. [1915.] ♦No. 195. Unemployment in the United States. [3916.] No. 196. Proceedings of the Employment Managers’ Conference held at Minneapolis, Minn., Jan uary, 1916. ♦No. 202. Proceedings of the conference of Employment Managers’ Association, Boston, Mass., held May 10, 1916. No. 206. The British system of labor exchanges. [ 1916.] ♦No. 227. Proceedings of the Employment Managers’ Conference, Philadelphia, Pa., April 2 and 3, 3917. No. 235. Employment system of the Lake Carriers’ Association. [1918.] ♦No. 241. Public employment offices in the United States. [1918.] 40780°— 27-------14 (i) Employment No. 247. No. 310. No. 409. and Unemployment—Continued. Proceedings of Employment Managers’ Conference, Rochester, N. Y., May 9-11, 1918. Industrial unemployment* A statistical study of its extent and causes. [1922.] Unemployment in Columbus, Ohio, 1921 to 1925 Proceedings o f Annual Meetings o f International Association o f Public Employment Services. No. 192. First, Chicago, December 19 and2Q, 1913; Second, Indianapolis, September 24 and 25,1914; Third, Detroit, July 1 and 2,1915. No. 220. Fourth, Buffalo, N. Y ., July 20 and 21,1916. No. 311. Ninth, Buffalo, N. Y., September 7-9,1921. No. 337. Tenth, Washington, D. C., September 11-13,1922. No. 355. Eleventh, Toronto, Canada, September 4-7, 1923. No. 400. Twelfth, Chicago, 111., May 19-23, 1924. No. 414. Thirteenth, Rochester, N. Y., September 15-17, 1925. Women and Children in Industry. No. 116. Hours, earnings, and duration of employment of wage-earning womeni n selected industries in the District of CQlumbia. [1913.] ♦No. 117. Prohibition of night work of young persons. [1913.] ♦No. 118. Ten-hour maximum working-da.v for women and young persons. [1913.] ♦No. 119. Working hours of women in the pea canneries of Wisconsin. [1913.] ♦No. 122. Employment of women in power laundries in Milwaukee. [1913.] No. 160. Hours, earnings, and conditions of labor of women in Indiana mercantile establishments and garment factories. [1914.] *No. 167. Minimum wage legislation in the United States and foreign countries. [1915.] ♦No. 175. Summary of the report on conditions of woman and child wage earners in the United States. [1915.] ♦No. 176. Effect of minimum-wage determinations in Oregon. [1915.] *No. 180. The boot and shoe industry in Massachusetts as a vocation for women. [1915.] ♦No. 182. Unemployment among women in department and other retail stores of Boston, Mass. [1916.] No. 193. Dressmaking as a trade for women in Massachusetts. [1916.] No. 215. Industrial experience of trade-school girls in Massachusetts. [1917.] *No. 217. Effect of workmen’s compensation laws in diminishing the necessity of industrial employ ment of women and children. [1918.] No. 223. Employment of women and juveniles in Great Britain during the war. [1917.] No. 253. Women in lead industries. [1919.] Workmen’s Insurance and Compensation (including laws relating thereto). ♦No. 101. Care of tuberculous wage earners in Germany. [1912.] ♦No. 102. British national insurance act. [1911.] ♦No. 103. Sickness and accident insurance law of Switzerland. [1912.] No. 107. Law relating to insurance of salaried employees in Germany. [1913.] ♦No. 155. Compensation for accidents to employees of the United States. [1914.] No. 212. Proceedings of the conference on social insurance called by the International Association of Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions, Washington, D. C., December 5-9, 1916. No. 243. Workmen’s compensation legislation in the United States and foreign countries, 1917 and 1918. No. 301. Comparison of workmen’s compensation insurance and administration. [1922.] No. 312. National health insurance in Great Britain, 1911 to 1920. No. 379. Comparison of workmen’s compensation laws of the United States as of January 1, 1925. No. 423. Workmen’s compensation legislat ion of the United States and Canada as of July 1,1926. Proceedings o f Annual Meetings o f the International Association o f Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions. ♦No. 210. Third, Columbus, Ohio, April 25-28,1916. No. 248. Fourth, Boston, Mass., August 21-25,1917. No. 264. Fifth, Madison, Wis., September 24-27, 191S. ♦No. 273. Sixth, Toronto, Canada, September 23-26, 1919. No. 281. Seventh, San Francisco, Calif., September 20-24, 1920. No. 304. Eighth, Chicago, 111., September 19-23,1921. No. 333. Ninth, Baltimore, Md., October 9-13,1922. No. 359. Tenth, St. Paul, Minn., September 24-26, 1923. No. 385. Eleventh, Halifax, Nova Scotia, August 26-28, 1924. No. 395. Index to proceedings, 1914-1924. No. 406. Twelfth, Salt Lake City, Utah, August 17-20,1925. No. 432. Thirteenth, Hartford, Conn., September 14-17, 1926. Industrial Accidents and Hygiene. ♦No. 104. Lead poisoning in potteries, tile works, and porcelain enameled sanitary ware factories. [1912.] No. 120. Hygiene in the painters’ trade. [1913.] ♦No. 127. Dangers to workers from dust and fumes, and methods of protection. [1913.] ♦No. 141. Lead poisoning in the smelting and refining of lead. [1914.] (II) Industrial Accidents and Hygiene—Continued. ♦No. 157. Industrial accident statistics. [1915.] ♦No. 165. Lead poisoning in the manufacture of storage batteries. [1914.] ♦No. 179. Industrial poisons used in the rubber industry. [1915.] No. 188. Report of British departmental committee on the danger in the use of lead in the painting of buildings. [1916.] ♦No. 201. Report of committee on statistics and compensation-insurance cost of the International Association of Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions. [1916.] ♦No. 207. Causes of death by occupation. [1917.] ♦No. 209. Hygiene of the printing trades. [1917.] No. 219. Industrial poisons used or produced in the manufacture of explosives. [1917.] No. 221. Hours, fatigue, and health in British munitions factories. [1917.] No. 230. Industrial efficiency and fatigue in British munitions factories. [1917.] ♦No. 231. Mortality from respiratory diseases in dusty trades (inorganic dusts). [1918 ] No. 234. Safety movement in the iron and steel industry, 1907 to 1917. ♦No. 236. Effect of the air hammer on the hands of stonecutters. [1918.] No. 249. Industrial health and efficiency. Final report of British Health of Munition Workers Com mittee. [1919.] ♦No. 251. Preventable death in the cotton-manufacturing industry. [1919.] No. 256. Accidents and accident prevention in machine building. [1919.] No. 267. Anthrax as an occupational disease. [1920.] No. 276. Standardization of industrial accident statistics. [1920.] No. 280. Industrial poisoning in the making of coal-tar dyes and dye intermediates. [1921.] No. 291. Carbon monoxide poisoning. [1921.] No. 293. The problem of dust phthisis in the granite-stone industry. [1922.] No. 298. Causes and prevention of accidents in the iron and steel industry, 1916 to 1919. No. 306. Occupational hazards and diagnostic signs: A guide to impairments to be looked for in hazardous occupations. [1922.] No. 339. Statistics of industrial accidents in the United States. [1923.] No. 392. Survey of hygienic conditions in the printing trades. [1925.] No. 405. Phosphorus necrosis in the manufacture of fireworks and the preparation of phosphorus. [1926.] No. 425. Record of industrial accidents in the United States to 1925. No. 426. Deaths from lead poisoning. [1926.] No. 427. Health survey in the printing trades, 1922 to 1925. No. 428. Proceedings ^f the Industrial Accident Prevention Conference, held at Washington, D. C.f July 14-16, 1926. Conciliation and Arbitration (including strikes and lockouts). ♦No. 124. Conciliation and arbitration in the building trades of Greater New York. [1913.1 ♦No. 133. Report of the industrial council of the British Board of Trade in its inquiry into industrial agreements. [1913.1 ♦No. 139. Michigan copper district strike. [1914.1 No. 144. Industrial court of the cloak, suit, and skirt industry of New York City. [1914.] No. 145. Conciliation, arbitration, and sanitation in the dress and waist industry of New York City. [1914.] ♦No. 191. Collective bargaining in the anthracite coal industry. [1916.] ♦No. 198. Collective agreements in the men’s clothing industry. [1916.] No. 233. Operation of the industrial disputes investigation act of Canada. [1918.] No. 255. Joint industrial councils in Great Britain. [1919.] No. 283. History of the Shipbuilding Labor Adjustment Board, 1917 to 1919. No. 287. National War Labor Board: History of its formation, activities, etc. [1921.] No. 303. Use of Federal power in settlement of railway labor disputes. [1922.] No. 341. Trade agreement in the silk-ribbon industry of New York City. [1923.] No. 402. Collective bargaining by actors. [1926.] No. 419. Trade agreements, 1925. Labor Laws o f the United States (including decisions o f courts relating to labor). No. 211. Labor laws and their administration in the Pacific States. [1917.] No. 229. Wage-payment legislation in the United States. [1917.1 No. 285. Minimum-wage legislation in the United States. [1921.] No. 321. Labor laws that have been declared unconstitutional. [1922.] No. 322. Kansas Court of Industrial Relations. [1923.] No. 343. Laws providing for bureaus of labor statistics, etc. [1923.1 No. 370. Labor laws of the United States, with decisions of courts relating thereto. [1925.] No. 408. Laws relating to payment of wages. [1926.] No. 417. Decisions of courts and opinions affecting labor, 1925. No. 434. Labor legislation of 1926. Foreign Labor Laws. ♦No. 142. Administration of labor laws and factory inspection in certain European countries (m) [1914.] Vocational and Workers’ Education. •No. 159. Short-unit courses for wage earners, and a factory school experiment. [1915.] *No. 162. Vocational education survey of Richmond, Va. [1915.] No. 199. Vocational education survey of Minneapolis, Minn. [1916.] No. 271. Adult working-class education in Great Britain and the United States. [1920.] Safety Codes. No. 331. Code of lighting factories, mills, and other work places. No. 336. Safety code for the protection of industrial workers in foundries. No. 350. Specifications of laboratory tests for approval of ebctric headlighting devices for motor vehicles. No. 351. Safety code for the construction, care, and use of ladders. No. 364. Safety code for the mechanical power-transmission apparatus. No. 375. Safety code for laundry machinery and operation. No. 378. Safety code for woodworking plants. No. 382. Code of lighting school buildings. No. 410. Safety code for paper and pulp mills. No. 430. Safety code for power presses and foot and hand presses. No. 433. Safety codes for prevention of dust explosions. No. 436. Safety code for the use, care, and protection of abrasive wheels. Industrial Relations and Labor Conditions. No. 237. Industrial unrest in Great Britain. [1917.] No. 340. Chinese migrations, with special reference to labor conditions. [1923.] No. 349. Industrial relations in the West Coast lumber industry. [1923.] No. 361. Labor relations in the Fairmont (W. Va.) bituminous coal field. [1924.] No. 380. Postwar labor conditions in Germany. [1925.] No. 383. Works council movement in Germany. [1925.] No. 384. Labor conditions in the shoe industry in Massachusetts, 1920 to 1924. No. 399. Labor relations in the lace and lace-curtain industries in the United States. [1925. Welfare Work. *No. 123. Employers’ welfare work. [1913.] Nc. 222. Welfare work in British munitions factories. [1917.] *No. 250. Welfare work for employees in industrial establishments in the United States. [1919.] Cooperation. No. 313. Consumers’ cooperative societies in the United States in 1920. No. 314. Cooperative credit societies in America and in foreign countries. [1922.] No. 437. Cooperative movement in the United States in 1925 (other than agricultural). Housing. *No. 158. Government aid to home owning and housing of working people in foreign countries. [1914.] No. 263. Housing by employers in the United States. [1920.] No. 295. Building operations in representative cities in 1020. No. 424. Building permits in the principal cities of the United States, 1925. Proceedings o f Annual Conventions o f Association o f Governmental Labor Officials o f the United States and Canada. No. 266. Seventh, Seattle, Wash., July 12-15,1920. No. 307. Eighth, New Orleans, La., May 2-6,1921. *No. 323. Ninth, Harrisburg, Pa., M ay 22-26,1922. No. 352. Tenth? Richmond, Va., M ay 1-4,1923. No. 389. Eleventh, Chicago, 111., M ay 19-23,1924. No. 411. Twelfth, Salt Lake City, Utah, August 13-15, 1925. No. 429. Thirteenth, Columbus, Ohio, June 7-10,1928. Miscellaneous Series. *No. 174. Subject index of the publications of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics up to May 1,1915. No. 208. Profit sharing in the United States. [1916.] No. 242. Food situation in central Europe, 1917. No. 254.’ International labor legislation and the society of nations. [1919.] No. 268. Historical survey of international action affecting labor. [1920.] No. 282. Mutual relief associations among Government employees in Washington, D. C. [1921.] No. 299. Personnel research agencies. A guide to organized research in employment, management, industrial relations, training, and working conditions. [1921.] No. 319. The Bureau of Labor Statistics: Its history, activities, and organization. No. 326. Methods of procuring and computing statistical informationof the Bureau of Labor Statistics [1923.] No. 342. International Seamen’s Union of America: A study of its history and problems. [1923.] No. 346. Humanity in government. [1923.] No. 372. Convict labor in 1923. No. 386. The cost of American almshouses. [1925.1 No. 398. Growth of legal-aid work in the United States. [1926.] No. 401. Family allowances in foreign countries. [1926.] No. 420. Handbook of American trade-unions. [1926.] No. 439. Handbook of labor statistics, 1924-1926. [iv]
@FedFRASER