Evening Republican, Volume 16, Number 73, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 25 March 1912 — SHARE IN PROFITS [ARTICLE]

SHARE IN PROFITS

System Which Might Eliminate Labor Disturbances. Is Plan of L. D. Brandeis—How Boston Grocers Flourished After They Gave Their Employes Real Incentive to Efficiency. Boston, Mass. —John T. Connor is an employer who sees the human side of employment In his method of operating a chain of 105 grocery stores in and around Boston he believes he has a solution of labor troubles which, if adopted by other employers, would eliminate the necessity of strikes and labor unions. Mr. Connor, as head of the John T. Connor company, has been In business for about a dozen years, starting with four stores, but his success has come mainly in the last few years. About five years ago he became intercHSted in profit sharing from reading news items on the subject and from actual cases where he had seen the project tried. But at that time the profits of his business seemed not to warrant sharing them. By 1,909, however, the business hud grown, largely and the net returns were much more satisfactory, determining him to give the plan a trial. "So I went to Louis D. Brandeis.’* says Mr. Connor to telling the story, and asked him to help me. He whipped a system into shape in a couple of interviews, making little out *of what had seemed quite a problem to me. And incidentally let me tell you Louis D. Brandeis is one of tfcr greatest men to this country today.” “Mr. Brandeis’ plan was simple, after it was evolved, and has worked very smoothly. He divided the business into departments, each of which with the exception of one, contained a group of stores. The remaining department included the central office, warehouse and shipping end of the business. One-half the profit shares are held by the company, the other

half by the employes, of which there are now 600. At the end of the year the profits of each department are calculated, and, in general, the employes in the stores of the departments which have produced the most net gain receive the largest percentage of results. But Mr. Connor does not believe In carrying out the scheme literally—that is, by making employes suffer If in departments which have not shown large profits —so under the'way he administers the system every one is bound to get some share. The practical results of the system were finely illustrated the other night when at a monthly meeting of the employes’ association the sum of $17,000, representing exactly one-half the company’s net profits for the past year, was divided among them. Every one who had been with the firm for a year or more, from the order boys to the highest paid officials, received something, the amounts varying from $5 to SI,OOO. The money was given to them in the form of bank deposits, as an encouragement to thrift. The first year the plan was tried SII,OOO was distributetd among the sharers who are employes* and last year $15,000 was given them. In addition to holding certificates entitling them to shares the clerks and others have this year adopted a neat little button bearing toe inscription, “Profit Sharer.”