Capital Volume 1
by Karl Marx


Chapter 20

Time-Wages


    Wages themselves again take many forms, a fact not
recognizable in the ordinary economical treatises which,
exclusively interested in the material side of the question,
neglect every difference of form. An exposition of all these
forms however, belongs to the special study of wage-labour, not
therefore to this work. Still the two fundamental forms must be
briefly worked out here.
    The sale of labour-power, as will be remembered, takes place
for a definite period of time. The converted form under which the
daily, weekly, &c., value of labour-power presents itself, is
hence that of time-wages, therefore day-wages, &c.
    Next it is to be noted that the laws set forth, in the 17th
chapter, on the changes in the relative magnitudes of price of
labour-power and surplus-value, pass by a simple transformation
of form, into laws of wages. Similarly the distinction between
the exchange-value of labour-power, and the sum of the
necessaries of life into which this value is converted, now
reappears as the distinction between nominal and real wages. It
would be useless to repeat here, with regard to the phenomenal
form, what has been already worked out in the substantial form.
We limit ourselves therefore to a few points characteristic of
time-wages.
    The sum of money(1*) which the labourer receives for his
daily or weekly labour, forms the amount of his nominal wages, or
of his wages estimated in value. But it is clear that according
to the length of the working-day, that is, according to the
amount of actual labour daily supplied, the same daily or weekly
wage may represent very different prices of labour, i.e., very
different sums of money for the same quantity of labour.(2*) We
must, therefore, in considering time-wages, again distinguish
between the sum total of the daily or weekly wages, &c., and the
price of labour. How then to find this price, i.e., the
money-value of a given quantity of labour? The average price of
labour is found, when the average daily value of the labour-power
is divided by the average number of hours in the working-day. If,
e.g., the daily value of labour-power is 3 shillings, the value
of the product of 6 working hours, and if the working-day is 12
hours, the price of 1 working hour is 3/12 shillings = 3d. The
price of the working hour thus found serves as the unit measure
for the price of labour.
    It follows therefore that the daily and weekly wages, &c.,
may remain the same, although the price of labour falls
constantly. If, e.g., the habitual working-day is 10 hours and
the daily value of the labour-power 3s., the price of the working
hour is 3 3/5d. It falls to 3d. as soon as the working-day rises
to 12 hours, to 2 2/5d. as soon as it rises to 15 hours. Daily or
weekly wages remain, despite all this, unchanged. On the
contrary, the daily or weekly wages may rise, although the price
of labour remains constant or even falls. If, e.g., the working
day is 10 hours, and the daily value of labour-power 3 shillings,
the price of one working hour is 3 3/5d. If the labourer in
consequence of increase of trade works 12 hours, the price of
labour remaining the same, his daily wage now rises to 3
shillings 7 1/5d. without any variation in the price of labour.
The same result might follow if, instead of the extensive amount
of labour, its intensive amount increased.(3*) The rise of the
nominal daily or weekly wages may therefore be accompanied by a
price of labour that remains stationary or falls. The same holds
as to the income of the labourer's family, as soon as the
quantity of labour expended by the head of the family is
increased by the labour of the members of his family. There are,
therefore, methods of lowering the price of labour independent of
the reduction of the nominal daily or weekly wages.(4*)
    As a general law it follows that, given the amount of daily,
weekly labour, &c., the daily or weekly wages depend on the price
of labour which, itself varies either with the value of
labour-power, or with the difference between its price and its
value. Given, on the other hand, the price of labour, the daily
or weekly wages depend on the quantity of the daily or weekly
labour.
    The unit measure for time-wages, the price of the
working-hour, is the quotient of the value of a day's
labour-power, divided by the number of hours of the average
working-day. Let the latter be 12 hours. and the daily value of
labour-power 3 shillings, the value of the product of 6 hours of
labour. Under these circumstances the price of a working-hour is
3d., the value produced in it is 6d. If the labourer is now
employed less than 12 hours (or less than 6 days in the week),
e.g., only 6 or 8 hours, he receives, with this price of labour,
only 2s. or ls. 6d. a day.(5*) As on our hypothesis he must work
on the average 6 hours daily, in order to produce a day's wage
corresponding merely to the value of his labour-power, as
according to the same hypothesis he works only half of every hour
for himself, and half for the capitalist, it is clear that he
cannot obtain for himself the value of the product of 6 hours if
he is employed less than 12 hours. In previous chapters we saw
the destructive consequences of over-work; here we find the
sources of the sufferings that result to the labourer from his
insufficient employment.
    If the hour's wage is fixed so that the capitalist does not
bind himself to pay a day's or a week's wage, but only to pay
wages for the hours during which he chooses to employ the
labourer, he can employ him for a shorter time than that which is
originally the basis of the calculation of the hour-wage, of the
unit-measure of the price of labour. Since this unit is
determined by the ratio [daily value of
labour-power]/[working-day of a given number of hours], it, of
course, loses all the meaning as soon as the working day ceases
to contain a definite number of hours. The connexion between the
paid and the unpaid labour is destroyed. The capitalist can now
wring from the labourer a certain quantity of surplus-labour
without allowing him the labour-time necessary for his own
subsistence. He can annihilate all regularity of employment, and
according to his own convenience, caprice, and the interest of
the moment, make the most enormous over-work alternate with
relative or absolute cessation of work. He can, under the
pretence of paying "the normal price of labour," abnormally
lengthen the working-day without any corresponding compensation
to the labourer. Hence the perfectly rational revolt in 1860 of
the London labourers, employed in the building trades, against
the attempt of the capitalists to impose on them this sort of
wage by the hour. The legal limitation of the working-day puts an
end to such mischief, although not, of course, to the diminution
of employment caused by the competition of machinery, by changes
in the quality of the labourers employed, and by crisis partial
or general.
    With an increasing daily or weekly wage the price of labour
may remain nominally constant, and yet may fall below its normal
level. This occurs every time that, the price of labour (reckoned
per working hour) remaining constant, the working-day is
prolonged beyond its customary length. If in the fraction: [daily
value of labour-power]/[working day] the denominator increases,
the numerator increases yet more rapidly. The value of
labour-power, as dependent on its wear and tear, increases with
the duration of its functioning, and in more rapid proportion
than the increase of that duration. In many branches of industry
where time-wage is the general rule without legal limits to the
working-time, the habit has, therefore, spontaneously grown up of
regarding the working-day as normal only up to a certain point,
e.g., up to the expiration of the tenth hour ("normal
working-day," "the day's work," "the regular hours of work").
Beyond this limit the working-time is over-time, and is, taking
the hour as unit-measure, paid better ("extra pay"), although
often in a proportion ridiculously small.(6*) The normal
working-day exists here as a fraction of the actual working-day,
and the latter, often during the whole year, lasts longer than
the former.(7*) The increase in the price of labour with the
extension of the working-day beyond a certain normal limit, takes
such a shape in various British industries that the low price of
labour during the so-called normal time compels the labourer to
work during the better paid over-time, if he wishes to obtain a
sufficient wage at all.(8*) Legal limitation of the working-day
puts an end to these amenities.(9*)
    It is a fact generally known that, the longer the
working-days, in any branch of industry, the lower are the
wages.(10*) A.Redgrave, factory-inspector, illustrates this by a
comparative review of the 20 years from 1839-1859, according to
which wages rose in the factories under the 10 hours' law, whilst
they fell in the factories in which the work lasted 14 to 15
hours daily.(11*)
    From the law: "the price of labour being given, the daily or
weekly wage depends on the quantity of labour expended," it
follows, first of all, that, the lower the price of labour, the
greater must be the quantity of labour, or the longer must be the
working-day for the labourer to secure even a miserable
average-wage. The lowness of the price of labour acts here as a
stimulus to the extension of the labour-time.(12*)
    On the other hand, the extension of the working-time
produces, in its turn, a fall in the price of labour, and with
this a fall in the day's or week's wages.
    The determination of the price of labour by:

[daily value of labour-power]/[working-day of a given number of
hours.]

shows that a mere prolongation of the working-day lowers the
price of labour, if no compensation steps in. But the same
circumstances which allow the capitalist in the long run to
prolong the working-day, also allow him first, and compel him
finally, to nominally lower the price of labour, until the total
price of the increased number of hours is lowered, and,
therefore, the daily or weekly wage. Reference to two
circumstances is sufficient here. If one man does the work of 1
1/2 or 2 men, the supply of labour increases, although the supply
of labour-power on the market remains constant. The competition
thus created between the labourers allows the capitalist to beat
down the price of labour, whilst the falling price of labour
allows him, on the other hand, to screw up still further the
working-time.(13*) Soon, however, this command over abnormal
quantities of unpaid labour, i.e., quantities in excess of the
average social amount, becomes a source of competition amongst
the capitalists themselves. A part of the price of the commodity
consists of the price of labour. The unpaid part of the
labour-price need not be reckoned in the price of the commodity.
It may be presented to the buyer. This is the first step to which
competition leads. The second step to which it drives, is to
exclude also from the selling-price of the commodity, at least a
part of the abnormal surplus-value created by the extension of
the working-day. In this way an abnormally low selling-price of
the commodity arises, at first sporadically, and becomes fixed by
degrees; a lower selling price which henceforward becomes the
constant basis of a miserable wage for an excessive working-time,
as originally it was the product of these very circumstances.
This movement is simply indicated here, as the analysis of
competition does not belong to this part of our subject.
Nevertheless, the capitalist may, for a moment, speak for
himself. "In Birmingham there is so much competition of masters
one against another, that many are obliged to do things as
employers that they would otherwise be ashamed of; and yet no
more money is made, but only the public gets the benefit."(14*)
The reader will remember the two sorts of London bakers, of whom
one sold the bread at its full price (the "full-priced" bakers),
the other below its normal price ("the under-priced," "the
undersellers"). The "full-priced" denounced their rivals before
the Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry: "They only exist now by
first defrauding the public, and next getting 18 hours' work out
of their men for 12 hours' wages.... The unpaid labour of the men
was made... the source whereby the competition was carried on,
and continues so to this day.... The competition among the master
bakers is the cause of the difficulty in getting rid of
night-work. An underseller, who sells his bread below the cost
price according to the price of flour, must make it up by getting
more out of the labour of the men.... If I got only 12 hours'
work out of my men, and my neighbour got 18 or 20, he must beat
me in the selling price. If the men could insist on payment for
over-work, this would be set right.... A large number of those
employed by the undersellers are foreigners, and youths, who are
obliged to accept almost any wages they can obtain."(15*)
    This jeremiad is also interesting because it shows, how the
appearance only of the relations of production mirrors itself in
the brain of the capitalist. The capitalist does not know that
the normal price of labour also includes a definite quantity of
unpaid labour, and that this very unpaid labour is the normal
source of his gain. The category, surplus labour time, does not
exist at all for him, since it is included in the normal
working-day, which he thinks he has paid for in the day's wages.
But overtime does exist for him, the prolongation of the working
day beyond the limits corresponding with the usual price of
labour. Face to face with his underselling competitor, he even
insists upon extra pay for this overtime. He again does not know
that this extra pay includes unpaid labour, just as well as does
the price of the customary hour of labour. For example, the price
of one hour of the 12 hours' working-day is 3d., say the
value-product of half a working-hour, whilst the price of the
overtime working-hour is 4d., or 2/3 of a working-hour. In the
first case the capitalist appropriates to himself one-half, in
the second, one-third of the working-hours without paying for it.

NOTES:

1. The value of money itself is here always supposed constant.

2. "The price of labour is the sum paid for a given quantity of
labour." (Sir Edward West, "Price of Corn and Wages of Labour."
London, 1836, p. 67). West is the author of the anonymous "Essay
on the Application of Capital to Land. By a Fellow of the
University College of Oxford, London, 1815." An epoch making work
in the history of political economy.

3. "The wages of labour depend upon the price of labour and the
quantity of labour performed... An increase in the wages of
labour does not necessarily imply an enhancement of the price of
labour. From fuller employment, and greater exertions, the wages
of labour may be considerably increased, while the price of
labour may continue the same." West, l.c. pp. 67, 68, 112. The
main question: "How is the price of labour determined?" West,
however, dismisses with mere banalities. 

4. This is perceived by the fanatical representative of the
industrial bourgeoisie of the 18th century, the author of the
"Essay on Trade and Commerce" often quoted by us, although he
puts the matter in a confused way: "It is the quantity of labour
and not the price of it (he means by this the nominal daily or
weekly wages) that is determined by the price of provisions and
other necessaries: reduce the price of necessaries very low, and
of course you reduce the quantity of labour in proportion. Master
manufacturers know that there are various ways of raising and
felling the price of labour, besides that of altering its nominal
amount." (l.c. pp. 48, 61) In his "Three Lectures on the rate of
Wages," London, 1830, in which N.W. Senior uses West's work
without mentioning it, he says: "The labourer is principally
interested in the amount of wages," (p. 14), that is to say the
labourer is principally interested in what he receives, the
nominal sum of his wages, not in that which he gives, the amount
of labour!

5. The effect of such an abnormal lessening of employment is
quite different from that of a general reduction of the
working-day, enforced by law. The former has nothing to do with
the absolute length of the Working-day, and may occur just as
well in a working-day of 15, as of 6 hours. The normal price of
labour is in the first case calculated on the labourer working 15
hours, in the second case in his working 6 hours a day on the
average. The result is therefore the same if he in the one case
is employed only for 7 1/2, in the other only for 3 hours. 

6. "The rate of payment for overtime (in lace-making) is so
small, from 1/2d. and 3/4 d. to 2d. per hour, that it stands in
painful contrast to the amount of injury produced to the health
and stamina of the workpeople... The small amount thus earned is
also often obliged to be spent in extra nourishment." ("Child
Emp. Com., II. Rep.," p. xvi., n. 117)

7. E.g., in paper-staining before the recent introduction into
this trade of the Factory Act. "We work on with no stoppage for
meals, so that the day's work of 10 1/2 hours is finished by 4.30
pm, and all after that is overtime, and we seldom leave off
working before 6 pm, so that we are really working overtime the
whole year round." (Mr Smith's "Evidence in Child Emp. Com., I.
Rep.," p. 125)

8. E.g.. in the Scotch bleaching-works. "In some parts of
Scotland this trade [before the introduction of the Factory Act
in 1862] was carried on by a system of overtime, i.e., ten hours
a day were the regular hours of work. for which a nominal wage of
1s. 2d. per day was paid to a man, there being every day overtime
for three or four hours. paid at the rate of 3d. per hour. The
effect of this system... a man could not earn more than 8s. per
week when working the ordinary hours... without overtime they
could not earn a fair day's wages." ("Rept. of Insp. of
Factories," April 30th, 1863, p. 10) "The higher wages, for
getting adult males to work longer hours, are a temptation too
strong to be resisted." ("Rept. of Insp. of Fact.," April 30th,
1848, p. 5) The bookbinding trade in the city of London employs
very many young girls from 14 to 15 years old, and that under
indentures which prescribe certain definite hours of labour.
Nevertheless, they work in the last week of each month until 10,
11, 12, or 1 o'clock at night, along with the older labourers, in
a very mixed company. "The masters tempt them by extra pay and
supper," which they eat in neighboring public-houses. The great
debauchery thus produced among these 'young immortals'
("Children's Employment Comm., V, Rept.," p. 44, n. 191) is
compensated by the fact that among the rest many Bibles and
religious books are bound by them. 

9. See "Reports of Insp. of Fact.," 30th April, l863, l.c. With
very accurate appreciation of the state of things, the London
labourers employed in the building trades declared, during the
great strike and lockout of 1860, that they would only accept
wages by the hour under two conditions (1) that, with the price
of the working-hour, a normal working-day of 9 and 10 hours
respectively should be fixed, and that the price of the hour for
the 10 hours' working-day should be higher than that for the hour
of the 9 hours' working-day; (2) that every hour beyond the
normal working-day should be reckoned as overtime and
proportionally more highly paid. 

10. "It is a very notable thing, too, that where long hours are
the rule, small wages are also so." ("Report of Insp. of Fact.,"
31st Oct., 1863, p. 9) "The work which obtains the scanty
pittance of food, is, for the most part, excessively prolonged."
("Public Health, Sixth Report," 1864, p. 15)

11. "Reports of Inspectors of Fact.," 30th April, 1860, Pp. 31,
32. 

12. The hand-nail makers in England, e.g., have, on account of
the low price of labour, to work 15 hours a day in order to
hammer out their miserable weekly wage. "it's a great many hours
in a day (6 am to 8 pm), and he has to work hard all the time to
get 11d. or 1s.. and there is the wear of the tools, the cost of
firing. and something for waste iron to go out of this, which
takes off altogether 21/2d. or 3d." ("Children's Employment Com.,
III, Report." p. 136, n. 671) The women earn by the same
working-time a week's wage of only 5 shilling (l.c., p. 137. n.
674.)

13. If a factory-hand, e.g.. refused to work the customary long
hours, "he would very shortly be replaced by somebody who would
work any length of time, and thus be thrown out of employment."
("Report of inspectors of Fact.," 31st Oct., 1848. Evidence, p.
39, n. 58) "If one man performs the work of two the rate of
profits will generally be raised... in consequence of the
additional supply of labour having diminished its price."
(Senior, l.c., p. 14)

14. "Children's Employment Com., III. Rep." Evidence, p.66, n.
22.

15. Report, etc. relative to the Grievances complained of by the
Journeyman Bakers" London, 1862, p. 411, and ib. Evidence, notes
479, 359, 27. Anyhow the full-priced also, as was mentioned
above, and as their spokesman, Bennett, himself admits, make
their men "generally begin work at 11 pm... up to 8 o'clock the
next morning... they are then engaged all day long... as late as
7 o'clock in the evening." (l.c., p. 22)