The Duties of Employers

304. Obligations of employers. 1. They are bound to avoid those things which harm workers in the goods of the body.

a. They sin if they force them to labor in workshops harmful to health, or in circumstances in which they are exposed to danger of losing life or the integrity of members, if they force them to labors which greatly harm health, if they must handle poisonous things for a long time.

b. Works in which dangers to life and health cannot be sufficiently excluded can licitly be undertaken only if the reason of the common good requires works of this sort.

2. They are bound to remove those things which harm the salvation of the workers' souls.

They sin if they admit or do not dismiss workers who are a scandal to others or seduce and corrupt them; if promiscuously they force persons of both sexes, or adolescents together with adults, to labor without due precautions.

3. They are bound to have account of the Christian religion, so that they grant workers suitable time for fulfilling the offices of the Christian religion.

They sin if they force workers to labor on Sundays and feast days; but if necessity or the quality of the work requires labor even on those days, they ought at least to take care, as far as can be done, that all can be present at the sacrifice of Mass.

4. They are bound to pay workers a just wage for labor.

a. They sin if they do not pay workers the wage at the due time, or pay a wage less than just; likewise if they give goods instead of money, unless they had previously agreed with the workers about this mode of paying. There will be discussion below concerning the just wage of labor. Moreover, he who pays the common wage is ordinarily judged to have satisfied commutative justice.

b. They ought ordinarily to pay the wage, and that entire, to workers even when they have suffered losses from the unhappy outcome of a work or business.

5. They are bound not to prohibit them from work, that is, to lock them out (aussperren), where either justice or charity prohibits it.

6. They are bound to assist workers placed in necessity.

An employer is joined with his workers by a special bond, because he has entered a special society with them and, moreover, perceives profit from their work; therefore before other poor persons he ought to exercise offices of charity toward his own poor workers.

¹ Cf. Jos. Biederlack, Die soziale Frage^7 (Innsbruck: Rauch, 1908), n. 140 ff.; A. Vermeersch, Quaestiones de iustitia^2 (Brugis: Beyaert, 1904), n. 455 ss.

305. Obligations of workers. 1. They are bound to observe the conditions of a just contract freely entered.

a. He who, compelled by want, consented to a wage less than just is not bound to observe the contract, because he did not consent freely, unless the employer admitted the worker asking only from mercy, when otherwise he would not have needed him. - He who either spontaneously or under compulsion consented to labors to be performed on Sundays and feast days is not bound to labor, unless the master has sufficient reason for requiring labor on those days, because the contract is unjust.

b. They sin who, during the time in which by force of the contract they ought to labor, either labor remissly and lazily or wholly indulge idleness. Wherefore if they do not employ even the lowest degree of ordinary diligence, they ought of themselves to remit part of the wage or restore what has already been received. The more suitable mode of making restitution consists in this, that on other days they labor beyond what is due.

2. They are bound to abstain from those things which bring damage to the employer.

They sin if they badly complete works committed to them; if they do not guard the goods of the master or instruments of the art, or lose them.

3. They are bound to abstain from force and seditions, but especially from unjust cessation from work by agreement.

Concerning strikes, or cessation from work by agreement (Strikes),¹ two things must be declared: a. whether it is just; b. whether it is licit.

¹ Lehmkuhl, Arbeitsvertrag und Strike^3 (Freiburg: Herder, 1904), in Die soziale Frage, 2. Heft; A. Vermeersch, l. c., n. 470 ss.

306. On the justice of cessation. A twofold condition is required so that cessation from work can be called just: a. that the hiring contract not be violated; b. that unjust conditions not be demanded.

1. If the hiring contract is unjust, workers do not injure justice if, before the time of the contract has ended, they cease from work by agreement until they have obtained just conditions of contract.

A hiring contract can be unjust either because workers do not receive a just wage, or because without necessity they are forced to labor even on feast days and Sundays, or because dangers to life or health are not sufficiently forestalled, etc.

2. If the hiring contract is just, they manifestly injure justice when they cease from labors before the time of hiring has ended. But they do not act against justice if, when the time of hiring has ended, they cease from work until they obtain better conditions, provided they demand only just conditions, such as a greater wage, not above the highest, a time of labor not excessive, etc.

a. The just conditions which workers demand are sometimes of such a kind that they cannot be denied by employers without injustice, as a just wage and a time of labor not excessive; but sometimes the conditions, although they are just, can be denied without injustice, as the highest wage, daily labor of eight hours, etc.

b. If indeed they receive the lowest just wage but demand a greater one, those ceasing from work ought to grant other workers the liberty of laboring for the lowest wage, if they wish. But if they do not receive the lowest just wage, they do not act unjustly if they morally compel others to cessation, provided this is done by licit means, for example, by excluding them from societies freely entered for the good of workers.¹

3. Workers ceasing from labors who by persuasions induce other workers also to cease from work, supposing a just cessation, do not injure justice. But those who do this by force, threats, fraud, or lies injure justice in two ways: both toward the workers, who are unjustly impeded from the wage to be earned by them, and toward the employers, who are unjustly impeded from the profit to be procured by them.

Hence workers who by persuasions induce others to cease from work, where the cessation is unjust, are bound as counselors together with the others to restitution toward the injured masters; but toward the workers they are bound to nothing, because no injury is done to one willing. But those who by unjust means induce others to cease are themselves bound to repair the damage inflicted both upon masters and upon other workers.

Note. Frequently workers enter associations among themselves, for helping the sick, their widows, etc., into which they are received only on this condition, that they cease from work as often as cessation is decreed by the moderators. Now it is licit to join associations of this sort only when it is established that the moderators will not decree a cessation which is contrary to justice.

¹ Cf. Lehmkuhl, Theolog. mor., I, n. 1119.

307. On the liceity of cessation. A twofold condition is required for the liceity of cessation: a. that the end be honest; b. that there be a proportionately grave cause.

1. It cannot be denied that workers not rarely rightly and deservedly complain about a wage less than just, about labor either too heavy or too long, about conditions of labor unworthy of a Christian man, indeed of a rational man. To meet these evils and to obtain better conditions of labor, which employers refuse to grant, workers sometimes licitly use the means of a just cessation from work.

There are, moreover, other and diverse ends for which cessations from work are sometimes instituted, for example, to disturb social order, to explore the force and number of workers associated by a common league, to extort unjust conditions of labor, etc. It is clear that the end stated above is the only one from which strikes can become licit.

2. Cessation from work brings great damages both to the workers themselves and to employers, to common prosperity, and finally to public tranquility. To avoid these evils, workers from the precept of charity must first try other means by which their just desires may be fulfilled; and only where another way of obtaining the intended just end, truly grave, is not available, is it licit for them to use a means in itself just, from which so many and such great evils follow.

Preliminary Note I. The discussion concerns workers who have not been received into the family, and therefore do not pertain to the masterly society; such as those who labor in factories or workshops.

Preliminary Note II. It is disputed whether between employers and non-domestic servants there exists a relation properly so called of superiority and inferiority, or only that relation which every contract brings with it between contracting parties.¹ Now the reasons which are alleged for the existence of superiority properly so called, that is, authority, seem less firm.

Objection 1. Everything cannot be determined by contract; therefore it remains that authority be admitted, which orders what has not been determined.

Resp. Everything can be sufficiently determined by contract, at least implicitly; but if something obscure remains, recourse should be had to friendly composition, or the matter should be settled by a judge.

Objection 2. Between the employer and the workers there exists a true society, since they are bound to pursue a good common to themselves; but a common good to be pursued argues a society. But where there is a society, there is also authority.

Resp. The employer and servants are bound to pursue a good common to themselves, as all men are bound to that with respect to neighbor; indeed masters and servants are bound to that in a special way because they are joined to one another in a special way: granted. They are bound to pursue a good common to themselves insofar as they constitute a society, or insofar as they must pursue one moral end: this is not proved, or rather seems to be denied, because it is lawful for each one to rest in his own good, with common charity nevertheless preserved.

¹ Cf. Oskar Renz in Xenia Thomistica, vol. I, p. 474 ff.; Peques, Commentaire litteral sur la Somme Theologique, t. XII, on II-II, q. 104, a. 1; Vermeersch, De Iustitia, n. 455; Ned. Kath. Stemmen, 1927, p. 85.

I. Duties of employers. Employers are bound:

1. To treat workers kindly, for example by addressing them kindly and not imposing "more work than their strength can bear, nor that kind which is at variance with their age and sex."¹

2. To grant them a suitable wage, and not dismiss them illegitimately; concerning these things, in the treatise on the Seventh Precept of the Decalogue.

3. The things said in n. 719 about the spiritual care of domestic servants are not to be urged equally as regards workers. Yet certainly employers are bound, insofar as it can morally be done:

a) To take care that those who are of childhood age, and mothers of families, are not employed in factories or workshops.

"It is wrong to abuse childhood age and the weakness of woman. Let mothers of families chiefly at home, or in those things which are adjacent to the home, devote their labor by applying themselves to domestic cares. But it is a very bad abuse and to be removed by every effort, that mothers of families, on account of the smallness of the father's wage, are compelled to exercise gainful work outside the domestic walls, with their peculiar cares and duties, and especially the instruction of infants, neglected. Therefore one must strive with every effort that fathers of families receive a wage sufficiently ample, which may suitably provide for common domestic necessities."²

b) To take care that in factories or workshops everything be done honorably; hence, for example, let neither sex labor promiscuously, and let those who continue to be a scandal to others be dismissed.³

"The soul shudders if the very grave dangers are weighed, to which in modern workshops the morals of workers (especially younger ones) and the modesty of girls and other women are exposed."⁴

c) To leave them the faculty of fulfilling ecclesiastical precepts.⁵ Besides, other precepts also of common charity - for example of correcting - can be urged more as regards workers, since they are joined to the master by a special bond.

d) To acknowledge the right of workers to establish associations for protecting their rights and promoting their good.⁶

¹ Encyclical of Leo XIII Rerum novarum, May 15, 1891.

² Encyclical of Pius XI Quadragesimo anno, May 15, 1931.

³ Encyclical of Leo XIII Rerum novarum.

⁴ Encyclical Quadragesimo anno.

⁵ Encyclical Rerum novarum; likewise Quadragesimo anno.

⁶ Encyclical of Leo XIII Longinqua oceani, January 6, 1895; Sacred Consistorial Congregation to the Bishop of Lille, June 5, 1929; likewise encyclical Quadragesimo anno.

Duties of Employers and Employees.—Between employers and their domestic servants or workingmen there are general mutual duties as between superiors and subjects, and special mutual duties as between parties to an explicit and implicit contract. Of these latter duties we shall now speak.

Duties of Employers.—(a) Justice.—The labor assigned must not be excessive (e.g., unduly perilous, exhausting, protracted) or injurious (e.g., harmful to religion or morals, an unreasonable impediment to marriage, to cultural opportunity or amusement); the wage paid must be just (i.e., one that will enable the worker to support himself and his family in reasonable comfort) and equitable (i.e., one that rewards special merit and service by pensions or additional compensation); the terms of the contract must be observed (e.g., arbitrary lowering of wages or dismissal are unjust).

(b) Charity.—Liberality should be shown by preference to employees, since they have a special claim on the employ good will. The employer should consider that he is responsible for the spiritual betterment and material improvement of his workers, and should have them in mind when making contributions to religious, educational or special causes, so that his own employees will benefit in particular by his gifts to these worthy causes. Trade schools and insurance against sickness and unemployment are especially deserving of his assistance.

Duties of Employees.—(a) Justice.—Workers are bound to give a fair return in quantity and quality of labor for the pay they receive, and to be loyal to their employer as regards his person, reputation, and property. Hence, it is unjust to loaf or come late or leave early, to turn out work too slowly or of an inferior grade, to damage machinery or property, to waste food or provisions, to act as a household spy or informer, to try to extort what is not due. (For a consideration of the worker’s obligation to join unions see “Catholics in Labor Unions” by Francis J. Connell, C.SS.R., American Ecclesiastical Review, Vol. CXVI, no. 6 June, 1947, pp. 422 ff.)

(b) Charity.—Workers should be willing even at the expense of some right or of some slight loss to help an employer who is in grave necessity; for example, it would be uncharitable for farm hands to stop work promptly on time when this will cause a serious damage to the farmer’s crop, or for a cook to leave on her free day when her mistress is very sick and will be left alone.

Labor Disputes between Employers and Employees.—(a) In themselves these disputes are indifferent, as they are a species of industrial war (see 1380 sqq.) or of industrial self-defense (1826 sqq.). If the end, the means and the circumstances are not against right reason, the disputes are lawful or even laudable.

(b) In the concrete, the strike is labor’s chief means for enforcing demands. Since organized labor seeks to equalize the bargaining power between employer and employee, the way to counteract refusal to pay fairly is by a concerted refusal to work, i.e., a strike. A strike may be defined as an organized cessation from work by a group of workers to obtain advantages from an employer. Since an organized strike is a kind of war, moral theologians apply the principles of a just war to determine concretely the morality of a strike.

1. There must be a just reason for the strike. Too little pay, too long hours, brutal treatment, unsafe or unsanitary conditions constitute genuine grievances for what may be called a defensive strike, which presupposes injustice in the part of the employer. On the other hand an ameliorative strike does not presuppose an employer’s injustice, but consists essentially in the worker’s attempt to better conditions, e.g., a better salary, shorter working hours, etc. Such a strike seems to be unlawful if it violates a just work contract in effect at the time of the strike. If no such contract has been made, the ameliorative strike can be lawful, granting a proportionately grave cause; but it is never given unqualified approval owing to the fact that such a strike involves many and grave losses both material and moral to the workers, employer, and community. (See Merkelbach, Summa Theologiae Moralis II, n.556.)

2. The strike must be the last means. Owing to the fact that a strike is a kind of warfare, all other peaceful means should be tried, e.g., arbitration, governmental inquiry boards, injunctions, fact-finding boards etc. The moral principle involved is; if an evil is avoidable but not avoided, it cannot be considered as merely incidental to a good end.

3. The strike would be called by proper authority. The decision to strike should be made by the men themselves freely and Without intimidation. Organized labor must have the backing of a responsible union in its strike, for this is the channel of bargaining or arbitration that the employer must use, and it should be used by the workers also. Accordingly, “wildcat” strikes are unlawful unless the unions have ceased to represent the men and have been repudiated by them.

4. The benefits expected from the strike must compensate for the evils inseparable from it. In this matter not only the worker’s personal gains are to be considered, but also the welfare of others, namely the employers and the public. Thus, in a long-drawn-out strike the economic advantage gained in a small salary increase for the worker can never be proportionate to the financial losses inflicted on the workers themselves in loss of income, on the employers, and particularly on a community which suffers the loss of purchasing power of a number of its members. Many strikes in which the products or services of the workers are necessary to the public (transportation, food distribution, etc.) seem to be more a strike against the community than against an employer; and the harm inflicted on the innocent public is not incidental as it must be in order to be justified. Only extraordinarily grave reasons can justify such strikes.

5. The means employed must be just. The common means are work stoppage, persuasion of other workers to keep the work stopped until the demands are met, and picketing in a peaceful manner. Sabotage and violence against an employer’s person or property constitute unjust means. “Scabs,” or professional strike-breakers, may be prevented from depriving the workers of their jobs to which the workers keep their rights; but violence in defense of this right seems illicit, unless violence is begun by the strike-breakers and the workers are forced to defend themselves.

(c) Kinds of Strike. Thus far the analysis has been concerned with a direct strike. Other kinds of strike demand special consideration.

1. Slow-down strike. Since it does not involve cessation from work, but simply a reduction in production or services while the worker is receiving full pay under contract, the strike seems to be immoral. The striker is not giving the work paid for.

2. Sit-down strikes. Some authors justify these strikes by analogy with an act of self-defense in which the person attacked seizes the weapon from the attacker. The analogy seems defective since the place of work is hardly a weapon. This strike seems to be immoral since it involves an unjust invasion of property rights by way of excluding an owner from the use of his property.

3. Sympathy strikes. There is a great diversity of opinion in this kind of strike. A moderate view distinguishes between strikes of several groups against the same employer and one or several groups against different and unassociated employers. The first kind seems justified, for it is directed against the same unjust employer, and the workers are cooperators to defend the rights of one group against him. In the second case of striking against different employers, the “sympathizers” are striking against a just employer and are violating their work contract which binds in commutative justice. Hence this type of strike seems to be essentially unjust.

(d) The lockout is the employer’s strike. Unwilling to grant the worker’s demand, the employer shuts down his plant, thus terminating employment of both strikers and non-strikers. The same conditions and restrictions that apply to the strike are applicable to lockouts. That the lockout itself is not unjust, but at least morally indifferent, appears to be evident in this, that as workers are not bound to submit to injustice, neither is the employer. He cannot be expected to pay wages when essential employers have quit or stalled production.

(e) A boycott is a mass refusal to patronize a certain business with the effort to persuade others to join in the refusal. Historically it has been used by labor to gain support from the public against an employer or by elements of the public itself to protest some evil practice of a business establishment, e.g., Legion of Decency boycotts of indecent pictures, NODL boycotts of literature, etc. In itself, a boycott is not immoral, since no one is obliged to trade in one place in preference to another and may refuse to trade with persons who are unjust or otherwise immoral. There seems to be no reason also to prevent a person from lawfully persuading others to follow his cause. The principles of a just strike are applicable to the justification of boycotts, and the conditions of a sympathy strike are to be applied to secondary boycotts, i.e., against other firms doing business with a boycotted firm. These other firms are not themselves unjust and should not be made to suffer for the injustice of another. Hence, a very grave cause, co-operation in injustice, for example would be necessary to bring pressure against them.

Is There Any Obligation of Giving Employment?—(a) The State certainly has an obligation in legal justice of offering opportunities of work to those who cannot find it, if the public welfare is compromised by widespread unemployment. Even if only one worker were without work through no fault of his own, the duty of helping him would seem to devolve on the State, since the laborer has a right to work and the State has the duty of promoting the temporal welfare of its subjects when they are unable to provide for themselves.

(b) Employers have a duty of commutative justice to give work to men with whom they have made a contract of labor and not to keep work from men unfairly; hence, arbitrary dismissal or blacklisting is a crime against justice. They should also try to secure other employment for good workers whom they are unable to keep, so as to tide over for the men the slack seasons when some have to be laid off. Industry, organized labor and individuals should interest themselves practically in private movements and plans to remedy unemployment situations, for these are matters that should not be left entirely to the State and charity. Employment and honest wages are in the long run to the advantage of employers as well as of employees, and are therefore good business as well as good morals.

158. The things which have been said of masters and servants must be understood, with due proportion, of patrons and workers, as we have already said, whether these are craftsmen or tenants, who for some definite time, or for some determined work, labor for the utility of others. Moreover, the first duty of all is that they enter a just pact, with due equality preserved between labor and stipend. Then the contract entered must be faithfully observed. Accordingly, the worker ought to furnish the promised work; the patron is bound to pay the promised wage. Patrons and workers can indeed enter a contract of hiring of work or labor for a fitting wage. They can also enter between themselves a contract of partnership, so that the patrons confer capital into the partnership, the workers labor, and then receive proportionate fruit. Each contract is lawful; but neither can patrons compel workers, nor workers patrons, to one rather than to the other; the matter must be determined by free convention of patrons and workers.

159. Masters and patrons are bound per se not to burden workers with longer and graver labors, nor to expose them to dangerous labors, unless the reason of the common good requires otherwise and due precautions are employed.

They are bound to treat workers well, with urbanity and Christian charity. Besides, they must leave them liberty of fulfilling the offices of religion, and therefore by no means ought to compel them to work on Sundays and feast days, unless grave necessity urges; and then at least they must grant them time, as far as can be done, for hearing Mass.

They are bound to pay a just wage, according to the pacts entered, and at its time. They are bound not unjustly to impede them from laboring, and from being able suitably to sustain themselves by their labor. Likewise, from charity they ought to succor them when they are placed in necessity, before other outside poor persons, since the workers are more joined to them and are of no small utility; for the profit which they receive is owed in great part to the labor of workers.

Masters and patrons, as superiors, are bound to avert dangers of body and soul from workshops in which many workers labor. Of body, by providing for their health with suitable safeguards; of soul, by prohibiting blasphemies, shameful conversations, perverse journals, obscene images, and that men and women, especially the younger, not be together promiscuously.

160. Workers in turn are bound with due skill and diligence to furnish the promised work, with the conditions of the freely entered convention observed. Conditions, that is, lawful and just. Therefore, if they do not labor during the time established by the contract, or if in labor they do not employ at least ordinary and moderate diligence, they are bound to restitution, and must also repair the damage that followed. Nor indeed in any way can they, against the aforesaid just contract, cease from labor, with damage to the master, and much less induce other workers to the same cessation, in order to obtain a diminution of the time of labor and an increase of salary. This is manifest injustice. When the time of the contract has elapsed, and the promised work has been furnished, if they wish to renew the contract under better conditions, lawful and just, and cannot obtain this otherwise by lawful and just means, then they surely can, if they wish, cease from work, yet without impeding by threats and force others willing to labor, and without disturbing public order.

And here it must be noted that the better conditions which workers can demand in entering a new contract can be unjust and just. Patrons are not bound to accept unjust ones; but they are not always bound to accept just ones; for if they also offer just conditions, they are evidently not then bound to accept the just conditions which the workers propose; and those same workers cannot impede other workers willing to labor under those just conditions of the patrons.

161. Therefore workers act unjustly if, contrary to the pacts entered, they cease from labor; and much more if by threats and force they compel other workers also to desist from labor; but most of all if they disturb the peace of the city; so that by these means they themselves may furnish the smallest work with the recompense of the greatest wage. - Patrons likewise would act unjustly if, contrary to the pacts entered, they dismissed workers; and much more if they also compelled others by threats and force to dismiss them, so that workers may furnish the greatest work for the recompense of the smallest wage. - To impede this struggle between patrons and workers, it is necessary that patrons embrace workers with Christian charity, and that workers tolerate labor with Christian patience and revere patrons.

162. In this matter the civil prince can furnish many things rightly and usefully by his authority: "If it ever should happen that some disturbance threatens because of a withdrawal of craftsmen, or works interrupted by agreement; that the natural bonds of the family are relaxed among proletarians; that religion is violated in the workers, by not sufficiently granting convenience for the offices of piety; if danger threatens integrity of morals in workshops from sex mixed together or other pernicious enticements of sin; or if the masterly order presses the order of workers with unjust burdens, or afflicts them with conditions foreign to the person and to human dignity; if health is harmed by immoderate work, and not accommodated to sex and age: in these causes the force and authority of the laws must plainly be employed within definite limits. These limits are determined by the same cause which demands the help of the laws: namely, no more is to be undertaken by laws, nor is progress to be made farther, than the healing of inconveniences or the repulsion of danger requires." Leo XIII, encyclical letter de Conditione Opificum.

163. For determining the just quantity of salary, attention must be paid not only to free convention, but also to the nature of labor. Now indeed "to labor is to exercise oneself for the sake of obtaining things which are for the various uses of life, and especially necessary for the protection of oneself. In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread. Therefore labor in man has two notes, as it were, implanted by nature: namely that it be personal, because the active force inheres in the person and is entirely proper to him by whom it is exercised and for whose utility it is born; then that it be necessary for this reason, that the fruit of labors is needed by man for protecting life; but nature itself of things, which must especially be obeyed, commands that life be protected. Now, if it is considered only from that part by which it is personal, there is no doubt that it is free to the craftsman to define more narrowly the measure of the stipulated wage; for as he gives his works by will, so also by will he can be content with a small wage for the works, or plainly with none. But one must judge far otherwise if with the reason of personality there is joined the reason of necessity, separable from it in thought, indeed, but not in reality. In fact, to remain in life is the common duty of individuals, which it is a crime to fail. Hence there necessarily arises the right of finding things by which life is sustained: but the faculty of these things is supplied to every lowest man only by the wage acquired by labor. Therefore let it be that the worker and the master freely consent to the same agreement, and by name to the measure of salary; nevertheless there is always underlying something from natural justice, and this greater and older than the free will of those making the pact, namely, that the wage ought not to be unequal to nourishing the worker, frugal indeed and well behaved. But if the worker, compelled by necessity or moved by fear of a worse evil, accepts a harsher condition, which, even though he does not wish it, must be accepted, because it is imposed by the master or by the contractor of works, that indeed is to undergo force, against which justice cries out."

164. But since the price of things which are necessary for life is various, it is clear that the just wage to be paid to the worker is to be attended not only from the labor furnished, according to common estimation, but also from this varying price of things. Therefore the just wage of workers depends on various causes.

The work which is furnished by workers for the convenience and utility of others is the work of a human person, proceeding from human liberty; hence, although it is considered as a certain quasi-thing, it is something nobler than merchandise, and it assumes the nature of merit and of right to reward. Therefore the wage which is rendered to them, and which is usually called salary and stipend, although it is considered as a certain price, exceeds the price of things, and takes to itself the nature of reward and remuneration. But that work, from the provident disposition itself of nature, must be furnished by the worker so that by that work he may procure for himself the things necessary for life. Therefore the salary which is given to the worker for his work furnished is not as it were an exchange of thing with thing, of merchandise with price; nor consequently is it given only for the work itself furnished for the utility of another, but it is also given for the person himself, for the necessity of the person, for the merit of the person.

165. Therefore the wage of works ought to suffice for the worker to be nourished, from the intention itself of nature, which supplies industry and labor to man for seeking those things which are necessary to himself for life. Hence primarily the justice of the wage is to be estimated which consequently, since it ought to suffice for daily sustenance, supposes a daily office on the part of the worker. Daily sustenance is certainly not to be taken strictly, as for an animal, but more broadly and suitably, as for a man, so that in it there is comprehended, with due proportion, with the whole time of human life inspected, and the condition of workers in civil society, both food and dwelling and clothing and other things, in the various necessities occurring in human life from sickness, from old age, etc., altogether indispensable for life itself. And these things besides are to be estimated with due moderation; for the worker is supposed not to be vicious and a squanderer, but well behaved and frugal. But the daily office is to be understood only morally, and likewise suitably to the labor itself to be exercised, harder or lighter. Hence, as it certainly does not comprehend the twenty-four hours of the day, so neither is it confined to one or another hour. But since those things which are necessary for life have varying price according to varying time and place, hence also the just salary of workers will be various according to the various circumstances of times and places.

And from this again it is clear that the work of man is not properly merchandise, nor properly is its wage a price. Nevertheless there is no doubt that that work is also as it were merchandise, considered in itself and not in relation to the person whose act it is, and consequently its wage is taken as a quasi-price. Hence the wage of works is estimated variously also under this head, according to the various customs of regions, from the works themselves, that is, from their intrinsic excellence, general necessity, utility, labor, and danger. Hence it is estimated differently in physicians, schoolmasters, painters; differently in architects, masons, diggers. But by no means is it estimated from their peculiar necessity and utility; for this pertains to the hirer, for example, if the boy to be instructed is endowed with great talent.

166. Therefore, as prices of things, so again wages of works can be increased and diminished. But they are increased and diminished from those same causes by which prices of things increase and decrease: from the fact that there are many who furnish works, few who hire them; from their daily duration, longer or shorter; from the labor expended in them; from the danger which is incurred in them; from the required skill; from the spontaneous offering of them. Consequently the wage of works will be just if it at least reaches the lowest wage which, in such a place and time, is customarily given to such workers. - And if one furnishing his works furnishes them to another or to others as a quasi-partner, it is equitable that he also receive something from the profits.

But the wage of works can by no means be increased or diminished from the various conditions either of the person to whom they are furnished, or of the person who furnishes them. For justice inspects the equality of thing to thing, not the various circumstances of persons. And thus a greater wage is not to be paid because a less skilled locator furnishes them with greater labor, time, and danger than others; or because he is in want, has a wife, and also has children; whence that absurd family salary is exploded. This is besides exploded also from the very established breadth of the just wage of workers, if these, namely, are well behaved and frugal, and live with due parsimony, which at the beginning is indeed necessary, and then ends in a small patrimony to be acquired.

V. Admonition: concerning masters who preside over larger industrial workshops and more abundant stores of things. - Let these take special care not to act unjustly toward workers, and to use great riches well, lest they be a scandal to workers and the poor. As Lehmkuhl notes,³ the confessor ought to watch: whether they fulfill the duties of a good father of a family and duly watch over their own, whether they abstain from depraved or dangerous amusements. But let him take care: that they lead a life useful to the common good and use money for founding works truly useful to human society, abstaining from excessive prodigalities; that they make large alms to the poor and to charitable works; that in honor and imitation of Christ crucified they abstain from worldly amusements and lead a simple life.

³ In the edition of the work of Reuter, Neo-conf., n. 156a.

551. The duties of justice of owners were defined by the same Leo XIII:

"These things, however, pertain to the wealthy and to owners: 1. that workers are not to be held in the place of slaves; that it is equitable to revere in them the dignity of the person, everywhere ennobled by that which is called the Christian character... It is truly shameful and inhuman to abuse men as things for gain, and not to value them more than according as they are strong in sinews and powers. 2. Similarly it is prescribed that regard ought to be had for religion and the goods of the soul in proletarians. Wherefore it is the part of owners to bring it about that the worker be free for piety in a suitable space of time; not to expose the man to the allurements of corruptions and enticements of sinning; nor in any way to draw him away from domestic care and the study of thrift. 3. Likewise, not to impose more work than their powers can bear, nor that kind which is at variance with age and sex. 4. But among the greatest duties of owners this stands forth, to furnish to each one what is just... But to defraud anyone of the wage due is a great crime, which calls down avenging wrath from heaven. Behold, the wages of the laborers... which have been defrauded by you, cry out: and their cry has entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth (Jas. V, 4). 5. Finally, the wealthy must religiously take care that they harm the profits of proletarians in nothing, neither by force, nor by deceit, nor by usurious arts; and this all the more because they are not sufficiently fortified against injuries and impotence, and their goods, the smaller they are, the more sacred they must be held." Among these harms also must be considered unjust dismissal from work.

Therefore owners must:

1. Revere in workers the human, religious, Christian dignity of the person, and not hold them as slaves, or as mere instruments of production, in which there is no other value than what they produce.⁷

⁷ Ibid., a. 15.

Hence a) workers must furnish obedience to owners only in those things which regard the agreed work, and indeed during the time of furnishing labor; b) when that time has passed, they remain free, nor do owners have the right of commanding anything against their conscience or liberty; c) indeed, in commanding those things which regard the work, they must abstain from those which are repugnant to human dignity or are altogether less fitting.

2. Have regard for the goods of the soul in proletarians, and concede to them a suitable space of time so that they may be able to live as men, that is, so that they may be able to attend to religious and moral and familial duties.

Care must be taken a) that rest be conceded on Sundays and feast days, unless true necessity stands in the way; and that to those workers who more often must labor on Sunday from necessity there be granted at least the time necessary for fulfilling religious duties;⁸

⁸ Hence the Belgian law of 17 July 1905 concerning rest on Sunday.

b) that workers not be exposed to the allurements of corruptions and enticements of sinning; especially that occasions of sinning not arise from the promiscuity of the sexes, that scandal not be given by impious or lustful conversations, that superiors not abuse authority to extort something repugnant to good morals;

c) that the time necessary be conceded to men, and especially to women, for rightly arranging domestic life and well educating offspring.

3. Have regard for the powers of the body in imposing work, and for difference of age or sex; and, as much as possible, turn away from workers damages and dangers to life, integrity, and health.

Hence a) in dangerous works or industries, precautions must be applied by which danger is removed for life, security, or health;⁹

⁹ Cf. Belgian law of 20 July 1899.

b) if it is impossible to avert the danger totally, the wage must be increased according to the probability of the danger, or the damage inflicted must be equitably compensated;

c) the owner must take upon himself the dangers arising from the labor itself, and insure the workers against them, except in the case of graver fault in the workers¹⁰ or of an evil intention;

¹⁰ Cf. Belgian law of 24 Dec. 1903. This law extends natural right, so that the owner is held even in the case of graver fault on the part of the worker, unless however the latter acted with the intention of provoking harm; but that disposition of the law obliges in conscience only after the sentence of the judge.

d) daily labor must not be prolonged excessively, lest the worker's powers be exhausted, "the mind grow dull by excessive labor, and at the same time the body succumb to weariness,... but intervals of rest ought to exist";¹¹

¹¹ Hence the law concerning labor for 8 hours, 14 June 1921.

e) there should not be imposed upon women labor which exceeds their powers or is unbecoming to their sex, as are many things to be performed in workshops, while they are rather born for domestic works;¹²

¹² Cf. Belgian law of 13 Dec. 1889 and 10 Aug. 1911, 14 June 1921.

f) nor should works be committed to children for the performance of which they are not yet equal: thus especially in the weaker age, while lighter things rather should be assigned to those more grown.

4. Pay a just wage, and indeed at the established time.¹³

¹³ Cf. Belgian law of 10 March 1900, a. 11 and following.

This is the chief duty, concerning which one must speak expressly.

5. Finally, beware of every unjust harm, especially of unjust dismissal from work.

The owner cannot cast out workers before the prefixed time without a grave reason; but if the time is indefinite, he must warn them at the due time. Otherwise he is held concerning damages.¹⁴

¹⁴ Ibid., a. 16 and following.

Pius X, in the Motu Proprio of December 18, 1903, hands down the fundamental norms of Christian popular action, among which some clearly place before the eyes the duties of workers and of the wealthy.

1st. "The duties of justice, as regards the proletarian and worker, are these: that what has been freely and equitably agreed upon as to work, he render entirely and faithfully; that he harm the property in no way, that he not violate the person of the masters; in protecting his own interests, that he abstain from force and never stir up sedition." 2nd. "As regards capitalists and employers, the duties of justice are these: to furnish a just wage to workers; that they harm their just savings in nothing, neither by force nor by fraud nor by usurious arts (manifest or disguised usury); to grant them liberty for fulfilling their religious duties; not to expose them to corrupting seduction and dangers of scandal nor draw them away from the spirit of family and pursuit of thrift; not to impose more work than their strength can bear nor that kind which is at variance with age and sex." 3rd. "The duty of charity of the rich and fortunate is that they assist the poor and needy according to the Gospel precept, which precept indeed obliges so gravely that on the day of judgment an account of its observance will have to be rendered most severely." 4th. "Therefore let the poor not have their poverty as a reproach, nor disdain to accept the charity of the rich. Let them always place before their eyes Jesus the Redeemer, who, although he could have been born amid riches, made himself poor so that he might ennoble their poverty and render it rich with incomparable merits for heaven." 5th. "For resolving the worker question, capitalists and workers themselves can do much by institutes ordered to extending opportune remedies to the needy and to effecting that one order approach nearer to and be united with the other. Such are mutual aid societies, manifold private insurances, patronages for protecting children, but above all corporations of workers."

But if these principles ought to be dear to all, much more to those who are the example of the flock, as is clear from the Code:

All, and especially clerics, religious, and administrators of ecclesiastical goods, in the hiring of labor must assign to workers an honorable and just wage; take care that these same have leisure for piety for a suitable space of time; in no pact lead them away from domestic care and the pursuit of thrift, nor impose more work upon them than their strength can bear, nor that kind which is at variance with age and sex (Can. 1524).