3.1.2.1                        The Work Price  

The work has an indirect and direct value. Indirect value of work is expressed by means of the value of work products, while indirect work value is expressed by the values occurring in the duration of the work as such.  

Currently, the work value is shown almost exclusively in indirect form, by means of the value of the work products, because the work is per se generally not propitious and, accordingly, does not have a direct value. Beside that, a scale that might measure such a non-value does not exist at all. The value of work products is formed on the market by the demand and supply of commodities, and is determined by the price of the commodities. The work finds the confirmation of its indirect value through the sale of commodities on the market. Then the price of commodities represents the work price as well.  

In associated labor, each work price is determined by the work hours, productivity and work burdens with which the workers participate in the production of commodities. As it is difficult to form in the associated labor an objective measure of individual productivity and of work inconveniences, each worker by his subjective consciousness easily attributes to his own contribution to the achievements of the collective productivity a share larger than the one he objectively deserves. In this way, workers expect a larger share in the distribution of income, meaning a larger share in the distribution of the results of collective work or better said incomes.

Since the quantity of produced commodities is limited, the distribution of the associated labor results is performed on the basis of alienated powers in the process of production. Naturally, such distribution results in dissatisfaction among workers and in a crisis in the system of distributing joint operating results. The society has not found to date a democratic form of distributing the collective operating results that could satisfy all workers. In this connection, the work price represents the basis of dissatisfaction and tensions in the process of production.

The solution lies, no doubt, in making the work valuation criteria objective. Past labor is the basis of everything that the society has created, while current labor is the basis of everything the society is creating; therefore, they have to be respected objectively. Such respect can create the conditions for a just distribution of the operating results, which will have a stimulating effect on the man's work and contribute to prosperity of the society.  

In connection with the above, let us accept that indirect work value (in further text: the work price) is in the unit of time equal to the product of past labor income-based value and current labor price.

Work price = (Value of the past labor) x (Current labor price)

Past Labor Value  

According to the labor theory, the work price is linked with the average quantity of work needed to produce a certain product. However, each product incorporates millions of work hours spent in revealing and developing the processes of its production, starting from the discovery of the fire, through wheel, to the present day. The point is, naturally, that there is not a single investigation able to measure the quantity of work spent in producing any product. It is simply not possible to sum up the entire past labor of all generations that were creating the material and cognitive values that the society owns today.   

The socialist system of business operation measured formally the value of past labor by the length of service. A longer service represents a larger quantity of past labor and brings a somewhat larger income. Since such measure of value is formal, as it does not objectively represent the individual contributions to the realized productivity, it is for this reason not productively stimulating and does not contribute to the prosperity of business activity. A great shortcoming of the system is that it did not take into account the value of the past labor of the predecessors who have largely contributed to the creation of everything the society possesses.  

The capitalistic system of business operation is much more efficient in this domain because it shows the value of past labor by the market value of the realized capital. Such presentation of the value of past labor may be useful in social terms, because the increase in capital is achieved by the rise in productivity of the economy. Naturally, capitalism has numerous deficiencies, but we have no better solution but to accept the market value of the past labor results as adopted by the capitalistic system, and then to reform it in order to meet the criteria of the humanistic society.  

It is possible to express the income-based value of past labor indirectly through the past labor results the society possesses today. It is necessary to accept that behind the more valuable past labor results stands a greater value of past labor. The higher value of past labor needs to create a larger income, and vice-versa.  

A numerical system of values needs to be created to analyze the income-based value of past labor. The unit value of past labor will represent a certain value of past labor results. Let us call such value the past labor income-based point. Once the unit value of past labor income-based point is established, then may take place the substitution of private ownership in the form of real estate, movable property, securities and money in the commune for the equivalent quantity of past labor income-based points.  

For example: the unit value of a past income-based point may be, say, twenty monetary units. This means that capital worth 1,000,000 monetary units will bring to the owner 50,000 income-based points. Let the average possession of income-based points be 100.000. If worker had possessed 100,000 income points before he sold his ownership then the increase of 50,000 past labor income points will ensure 50% higher income. The example has been taken fully arbitrarily to give a better idea, while actual value of the past labor income-based point will require a comprehensive study.  

A larger quantity of past labor income-based points owned by individuals will indicate a more valuable past labor, which will give to each individual a greater existential power, a greater voting power, a stronger status position and larger income or, more precisely, a larger share in the distribution of the collective operating results. The commune also needs to ensure the substitution of the past labor based points for money in order to ensure confidence of the commune's inhabitants in such form of the commune's actions.  

As the system will ensure great benefits, stability, and safety of ownership of the past labor income-based points; it is probable that a voluntary collectivization of private ownership will be formed. That will in conjunction with other envisaged measures create a base for a broad social prosperity. In the new system, the man will no longer display his power by ownership of the material resources, but by the past labor income-based points that will indicate each man's contribution to the creation of the values in the commune. On the other hand, some people would not like to be known how much they have contributed to creation of such values. These people will be able to keep in secret their quantity of past labor income points.  

The quantity of the past labor income-based points will represent a form of humanistic shareholding. It will ensure income based on past labor, and also introduce a new humanistic-social dimension. As already explained in the chapters Bases of the Policy and Economy of Humanism, all commune inhabitants will achieve the past labor income-based points on the grounds of education, the length of service, age, and all accomplishments that make values in a common ownership. In this way, all commune inhabitants will irrespective of their age, sex, employment or unemployment realize income in the commune.  

The new system will form net and gross quantity of past labor points. Net quantity of past labor points will determine the net income of workers. Gross quantity of past labor points will determine the gross income of workers that will, in addition to net income also include the value that each worker sets aside for the needs of society. Gross quantity of past labor points will be meritorious for determining the real quantity of past labor points in ownership of the commune's inhabitants.  

A mathematical analysis can establish such a value of past labor income-based points so as that the total gross quantity of past income points of all commune's inhabitants be equal to the commune's revenue numbering value. This is possible to achieve by permanently rebalancing the total quantity of points in the function of workers' responsibility.

Net and gross quantity of past labor points will be mutually lineally dependent. Net quantity of past labor points will be calculated by a percentage decrease of the gross income of the commune by cash assets intended for collective consumption and development of the economy. This percentage will be established by each commune inhabitant by distributing the commune's gross income to cash assets earmarked for the needs of individual consumption, collective consumption, and development of the economy in the possible value intervals set by the commune's leadership. The sum of votes of all inhabitants in the function of their voting power will determine the scope of money distribution. Once it shall be known how much the commune's inhabitants wish to set aside from their own gross income for the needs of collective consumption and development of the economy, there will also be known the net quantity of past labor points that represent the base for the net income formation.  

With the rise of the production, the quantity of new products is also rising. This brings along the new values that increase the gross income of the society. With the rise of gross income, gross quantity of past labor points is also raising. The new points need to be distributed among the commune's inhabitants.  

This measure refers primarily to the production where would be rewarded the work that increases the productivity and thus allows an increased income. The protagonists of such work would be awarded, by way of a special automatic procedure, depending on the increase of productivity and their responsibility, a certain number of income-based points. In this way the rise of productivity will be stimulated, and the community will accomplish thereby a greater prosperity.  

On the other hand, in the same way in which the work or any activity can on a lasting basis promote the quality of life, they can also worsen them on a durable basis. Production in social ownership has not been able to find to date a satisfactory solution to the issue of responsibility of workers for their work, which reduces substantially its efficiency. Moreover, when the man is not accountable for the failure of his own activity, then not even success can bring him adequate conveniences. The society not responsible toward itself is the society that breaks down. The responsibility in the collective form of production may be borne by means of the past labor income-based points. The difference between the envisaged and realized productivity has its value, and such value can be determined and after that by an agreed-upon procedure deducted from gross past labor income-based points of responsible workers. Application of such a mode of bearing the responsibility may solve durably and efficiently the basic problems in the production with the collective ownership of the means of production.  

The bearing of responsibility by means of past labor income-based points is highly efficient, because in this way the man is accountable with his past labor and his current and future income.    

Naturally, the system may also apply to any activity beyond direct work relationship. The present-day system of sanctioning the persons who bring inconveniences to the society is cruel when the imprisonment sanctions of freedom deprivation occur, or insufficiently efficient when the man does not have what to lose. Introduction of the system of past labor income-based points enables to set up an acceptable and efficient form of sanctions by taking away a determined quantity, set by law, of such points from persons creating great inconveniences to the society. Today’s courts know what is the punishment for each and every crime or violation of laws. It should not be difficult to recalculate these punishments into income-based points. In such a system criminals may lose all their income–based points end even get into minus. Person who drops into minus income-based points may lose some rights. If society accepts a strong repressive regulation such a drop into minus may psychologically, sociologically, and economically be very inconvenient. Each man will work hard not to get there and if it happens to escape as soon as possible. That will be possible only by intensive productive acting in society. Taking into account that the man will carry his income-based points all his life the system will require very responsible behavior of each individual towards society. Such a system would be acceptably repressive as it generally would not deprive the man of the freedom of action, but will prevent the society members from using their freedom for creating the inconveniences to anybody in the society. 

Since the society aspires to increased democracy, it has to award each member with the power to sanction on a lasting basis the movements in the society that are inconvenient for him. This means that each man gets the freedom to assess the activity of any other man. The negative assessment has to take away from each man a certain small portion of past labor income-based points. By introducing such measure, each man will try not to create inconveniences to another man, or to create them to the least extent possible at all levels of complex social relationships. In other words, each man needs to know what is it that is not suitable to another man, and will refrain from acting in that way. If the man is not aware that he is causing inconveniences to other community members, the negative assessments and sanctions by means of taking away the past labor points will force him to make efforts and thus learn where he is making mistakes.  

Such a measure may create a vast range of conveniences in the society. Such a mode of assessment may over a longer period of time and by comprehensive application replace in full the indirect form of the responsibility assessment by judicial authorities, laws and regulations, which will thus become superfluous. The society will form an unwritten justice based on natural knowledge about the rules of its developments and, accordingly, the ways for achieving the natural conveniences. Naturally, each member of the social community needs to be allowed, on the other hand, to reward by his vote containing a small, however, influential value-based point the individuals who have in his opinion contributed to the creation of conveniences in the society.

With such law each man gets a direct and equal executive power in the society, which would in an anarchical way stimulate a favorable social movement at all levels of the complex social relations.  

It may be noted that income-based value of past labor expressed by the quantity of points would need to be a universal measure of the man's essential powers. In order for such value to be fully adopted and formed, it must become the man's sacrosanct ownership. Moreover, acceptance of the past labor points by the society is conditioned by the possibility of their inheritance, and has to be ensured in full, or in a certain percentage according to the decision of the society.  

The quantity of past labor points would be a measure of the value of the work performed by individuals and the society through generations. It will present the power of individuals, and may as such become the basic measure of values in the society. That measure will still be alienated but it will be much more acceptable and effective for building a healthy society than all so far accepted measures of values. 

Current Labor Price 

The price of current labor directly depends on the direct value of current labor. Direct value of current labor shows the relationship of all conveniences and inconveniences arising from the work as such, independently from the value of the operating result.  

The conveniences connected with the work as such stem from the meeting of the man's direct work needs, the necessary exchange of energy with nature, realization of both physical and spiritual needs, the need for developing the man's essential strengths, from the status value of the working position or presentation of the productive potency of individuals in the society, from giving help others and finding satisfaction in helping others, as well as in his contribution to the development of society. The conveniences arising from the work as such bring, by their nature, the long periods of pleasure and broadly embrace the man's personality.  

On the other hand, the work also brings inconveniences and due to that it cannot be accepted as value. The inconveniences in work occur as a consequence of forced work where the man is a means for realization of the needs alienated to him, or from forced work necessary to ensure the existential needs. Such work is not free and, therefore, cannot realize the man's productive forces or bring direct conveniences to the man.  

Direct value of the work needs to show the relationship between total conveniences and inconveniences brought by each form of work while lasting. Greater value will present the work that suits more the man's nature, his individual characteristics, which realizes more conveniences in its duration.  

Let it be accepted that averagely convenient and inconvenient work has as direct current value labor a magnitude equal to 1 (one). If the interval between the extreme inconvenience and the extreme convenience of the work were from 0.1 to 10 then the convenient work would, in mathematical terms, be a hundred times more valuable than the inconvenient one.  

Each worker can most efficiently establish by himself the direct value of current labor, because he knows best how much the work he performs is convenient or inconvenient to him. Each man needs to assess the relationship of the magnitudes of everyday work burden and relaxation with all their psychophysical factors and compare them with other work obligations. The result of such assessment will be a magnitude between 0.1 and 10 that will indicate the relationship of the work conveniences and inconveniences on a specific work post against average work.  

A lower value of current labor represents greater inconveniences in the work duration and therefore needs to realize a larger share in income distribution in order to compensate the work related inconveniences. A higher value of current labor advocates greater conveniences in the work duration in relation to average work and needs from that point of view to realize a smaller share in income distribution, and will thus realize smaller conveniences in the operating results.  

The share in the distribution of operating results is determined by the price of current labor. The current labor price is inversely proportionate to direct current labor value. The current labor price will also have a value scale from 0.1 to 10. A more favorable work will realize direct current labor value higher than 1 (one), so that the price of current labor will be smaller than 1 (one) and the income thus realized will be smaller than average. For example: a very unfavorable work that by direct worker's assessment gets a direct current labor value equal to 0.2, will be five times less favorable than average work and will realize the current labor price equal to 5, and thus an income five times higher than the one on account of average work.      

In a system of protected work posts each worker could by his own subjective consciousness evaluate his work as markedly inappropriate and would require a substantially larger share in the distribution of the performance of collective work than the one he would objectively deserve. The new system would ensure an objective valuation of work with the help of work competition. This means that in the circumstances of equal productivity, the right to work will be exercised by the worker to whom current labor brings greater direct exchange value, or the worker who will demand a lower current labor price and a lower income.  

If work becomes a value in its duration, then a larger realized productivity would require a smaller share in the distribution of income. In that way a new trend in the society may be achieved in which direct exchange value of the work would rise to the point where it would become more important than the operating result. Such a trend may form a turning point in the development of the society.  

The society needs to form such distribution of work so as to allow the work to realize a greater direct value. This is possible to achieve by automation of the production, by the redistribution of inappropriate forms of labor and by increased possibility of selecting the types of work where the man may find the sources of realization of his productive, essential forces. The work as a form of realization of the man's being may find a non-exhaustive inspiration and also a necessity, convenience and value. Such work has its usable value. The prosperity of the society lies in the approach where the work in its duration becomes a value, in which it brings conveniences greater or at least equal to the conveniences realized beyond the work.  

The result of such approach to the valuation of current labor is the number that shows the price of current labor of each worker employed in enterprises, where workers directly realize income by their work. However, each socially useful activity would need to be proclaimed as valuable, irrespective of whether it participates directly in the production. A man not directly employed gives some form of contribution to the society on a daily basis. The man is a value to the man, and this standpoint must be accepted by the society in order for such value to develop.     

This measure refers to all not employed people: to pre-school age children, to pupils, to persons of advanced age who are no longer able to work, to invalids and those not wishing to work. Accepting the values of each man's current labor means to ensure to each man an income-based compensation to the level of the recognized price of current labor. The current labor price of unemployed population needs to be determined by the commune's leadership on the basis of the commune's needs and possibilities, and adopted by the commune's assembly or council. Such values may be changeable according to economic possibilities and needs of the social community. If workers were not sufficiently interested in work, the price of current labor would with the unemployed portion of the population fall depending on the category of the unemployed, which would reduce their income and would rise, in terms on income, the interest in work.  

On the other hand, if workers were interested in work more than it would be necessary or, more precisely said, if direct work becomes a value, the current labor price of the unemployed portion of the population will rise immediately with the increase of their share in the distribution of the operating result, which would reduce the income-based share of the interest in work.  

Such regulation of income between directly employed and unemployed portions of the population will contribute to the balance in the work demand and supply, and to the balance within complex social relations.

Such approach of work valuation will ensure both the economic and existential independence, and freedom to each man, which is a basic prerequisite for social freedom, stability and prosperity. It is necessary to ensure to each man the meeting of minimum subsistence needs, because endangered survival of an individual leads to endangered survival of the society. This measure is nothing else but a universal substitution for social, pension and disability insurance, for solidarity-based allowances to the unemployed, for children allowances or for tax facilities in the case of multi-member families. Therefore, such a system of distribution does not represent any additional burden to the society, because everyone spends money anyway. Instead, it represents a simpler, more just and more efficient redistribution that is at the same time more natural and wiser when social determinations are concerned.  

Each work contains elements of current and past labor. The past labor without the current one that maintains it has no value, while current labor cannot exist without the past one.  

As current and past labor are mutually linked, and as production develops by geometric progression, the price of each work may be shown by the product of the past labor value expressed in net income-based points of the past labor and the price of current labor.  

Work price = (Net points of past labor) x (Current labor price) 

Such price of current labor needs to be the basis of the work's indirect value. It clearly arises from the formula that the price of each work is proportionate to the net quantity of past labor income-based points and the current labor price. The more past labor points a worker gathers, the higher will be the price of his work, and the supposed net income will be higher. On the other hand, the more productive and more difficult, more responsible, more dangerous, more complex, more inconvenient, more unhealthy work a worker performs, the smaller will be the value of current labor and, therefore, the work price will be justifiably greater, as will be the net income.  

Association of enterprises in the commune realizes the right of workers to work on any work post, while the method of substituting indirect forms of the past labor values allows them to realize the income proportionate to the quantity of past labor income-based points. Worker who possesses a larger quantity of income-based point will realize a larger income than worker who possesses smaller quantity of income-based points even though both workers realize the same work performance. The past labor income–based points will become a sort of humanistic shares that will bring income substitution for all kinds of profits, interests, rents, dividends of capitalist form of production. However, workers’ large individual income will not create a large income burden to their companies because the incomes will be calculated at level of commune. It will be better explained in the chapter “Commodity Price”.  

The current labor price will be maximally objective because it will be directly established by work competition. Do not be confused with a small value of current labor price in relation to the past labor income-based points because the increase of current labor price of only 0.1 will according to formula, increase the price of work for significant 10%. 

The price of work will be a basis for forming the incomes of workers. As the price of work will be objectively established, the society will accept such a system of distribution as a just one. In this way, the big problems of distribution of incomes we have today in society will be overcome. Such a system of distribution of incomes may pave the way for a continuous productive orientation in the society. Naturally, the work price will find its confirmation or negation in the realized income that will depend on the realized labor productivity and on a multitude of other factors.      

  Back to Top