ABSTRACT
Composite longwall working depends on successfully binding together into a corporate whole the rather large overall group comprised by the successive task groups of the three-shift cycle. Widespread scepticism exists that this can be effectively done. It is argued that in the conventional system most trouble occurs in large groups of hewers and fillers, and that among the smaller marrow groups performance varies widely, so that, if merged together, either the pace would be that of the slowest or the ‘merger’ would split up through internal disagreements. There is force to these contentions, but they overlook a fundamental point: the members of filling and hewing groups perform identical as distinct from reciprocal roles. The same is true of the marrows who succeed each other in single place working, though in their case the task is holistic rather than fractionated. In all these groups problems centre on the different amounts of the same task alleged to be done by various members. Problems of composite longwall organization concern the relating together of individuals performing different tasks—the interdependent phases of the cycle in which roles are reciprocal. The size of identical task groups is not increased by the application of composite principles to the orthodox longwall. The overall cycle group which comes into being is composed of the same activity groups which previously had only separate existence. Under these conditions the basic assumption of the wages system becomes organizational as distinct from simply quantitative as in conventional longwalls—where common notes are shared by those who do the same tasks—and the payment group becomes a multiple as distinct from a single role group.
