I AM very sorry that my letter of October 16 has given Mr. Wilkinson the impression that I think it is only the strikers who break the rules, because I am sure that management is also to blame.
The most important thing. however, is not who has done wrong but what steps are taken to put the wrong right. Two wrongs do not make a right, and it is no justification for employers or employees to take the law into their own hands if the other party breaks the rules.
The current philosophy today is that the ends justify the means. They do not, and such a philosophy can lead only to anarchy.
Mr. Wilkinson (October 23) also raises the question of managements' absolute right to manage. First, let us be clear that this is a finite world and therefore there can be no such thing as an absolute right.
Secondly no one can have a right without a duty. The func
tion of management gives it the right to issue orders but it has a duty to treat the recipients of those orders as human beings and you cannot treat a person as a human being unless you know his feelings. What better Way is there of knowing those feelings than by having a chat — consultation before is.suing any orders?
The managed, however, having exercised their rights, have a duty to remember that management has responsibility to those who appointed them, be they State or private shareholders.
The above is only a glimpse at employee-employer relationship, because you rightly insist upon letters being short. But the ruling principle is that freedom, rights and duties can only be considered as one. You cannot have one without the other two, which in effect is Our Lord's teaching — Love thy neighbour as thyself.
G. H. Fowler Croydon, Surrey.