Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen, Die Lohnarbeit in der österreichischen Landwirtschaft und ihre Verhältnisse (1896)

Schullern examines agricultural wage labour in Austria through the official inquiry conducted in 1894 into conditions in 1893, combining statistical analysis with scrutiny of provincial servants’ ordinances. His governing argument is that wages cannot establish workers’ welfare independently of employment security, household resources, personal freedom, and relations with employers. Agricultural crisis and rural migration sharpen the problem: pressure to reduce labour costs must be assessed against workers’ needs and the possible productive benefits of better remuneration.

The methodological discussion establishes the limits of social investigation:

Selbst bei der grössten, praktisch überhaupt kaum denkbaren Sorgfalt wird man aber auf äusserliche Anhaltspunkte vielfach angewiesen bleiben, so dass selbst im besten Falle nur Urtheile von relativer Richtigkeit gewonnen werden können.

English translation: Even with the greatest care, such as is practically hardly conceivable at all, one will in many cases remain dependent upon external indications, so that even in the best case only judgments of relative correctness can be obtained.

This qualification structures the comparisons. Daily wages and averages conceal seasonal unemployment, local prices, family obligations, and payments in kind. Annual purchasing power is more informative, but monetary valuation cannot fully represent the satisfaction workers derive from their resources. Drawing on Menger’s subjective value theory, Schullern distinguishes measurable earnings from experienced welfare. Improvement is also relational: workers may gain absolutely while falling behind other social groups.

District estimates, farm accounts, and accident-insurance earnings records furnish substantial but uneven evidence. The inquiry’s ambitions remain subject to practical limits:

Selbstverständlich sollen möglichst viele Daten gesammelt werden; dass es aber unmöglich ist, sie von allen landwirtschaftlichen Betrieben zu erhalten, braucht wohl nicht erst bewiesen zu werden.

English translation: It goes without saying that as many data as possible should be collected; but that it is impossible to obtain them from all agricultural undertakings hardly needs first to be proved.

Dalmatia falls outside the analysis because its agrarian arrangements did not fit the questionnaires. Such exclusions matter because employment forms arise from different combinations of farm size, cultivation, regional custom, migration, and industrial competition. Schullern accordingly organizes his discussion around labour relationships rather than treating agricultural workers as a homogeneous population.

Resident servants receive the fullest treatment. On medium-sized peasant holdings, board, lodging, regular employment, and proximity to home may compensate for modest cash wages. Yet provincial ordinances undermine contractual equality: servants can be compelled to enter or resume service, whereas employers generally discharge their liability through compensation. Restrictions on movement and private conduct deepen this inequality. Schullern values the social proximity of household service, but argues that preserving it requires personal freedom and legal reform. Coercion helps drive workers toward industry and casual employment, while resident service restricts independent family life.

Large estates more often employ Deputatisten, permanent workers with separate households supported through cash, provisions, housing, and sometimes land. Domestic independence coexists with greater social distance from employers and possible cultivation risks. Bound day labourers exchange labour for wages or access to accommodation, pasture, and land. Small property can support subsistence while weakening bargaining power by tying workers to a restricted local market. Labour obligations secured through loans create a particular danger of debt dependence.

Sharecropping in southern Tyrol and the Littoral links remuneration to output and permits independent household management, but may perpetuate poverty and attachment to the soil. Schullern nevertheless judges it comparatively: arrangements that appear economically backward may offer greater livelihood security than casual wage work. The spread of ordinary day labour therefore has implications beyond a change in employment terminology:

Nicht zu verkennen ist aber, dass auch hier mehr und mehr andere Arbeiterclassen sich breit machen, insbesondere die Classe der gewöhnlichen Taglöhner.

English translation: It is not to be mistaken, however, that here too other classes of workers are spreading themselves more and more, in particular the class of ordinary day labourers.

Formal mobility does not guarantee effective choice. Travel expenses, lost working time, and inadequate information fragment labour markets. Regional comparisons suggest worsening conditions toward the east, yet nominal wages alone cannot establish living standards. Meals, women’s earnings, seasonality, working hours, and piece rates complicate comparison; higher earnings may reflect intensified exertion rather than improved welfare.

The study’s contribution is to connect criticism of wage statistics with analysis of institutions and dependence. Although some regional explanations invoke assumptions about national character and cultural development, its central evaluative framework makes security and autonomy indispensable to understanding remuneration. Economic description thus informs reform without automatically determining its prescriptions.