Emil Lederer · 1910
Lederer’s brief review of Der Arbeitsmarkt in Industrie und Landwirtschaft und seine Organisation assesses two lectures delivered in Berlin in May 1909. He values Bodenstein’s contribution chiefly for its tables and charts documenting foreign workers’ growing presence in industry and agriculture even during unemployment and crisis. Yet the implications of immigration remain underdeveloped; Lederer’s description also reproduces a cultural hierarchy among workers.
His central critical move is to distinguish organizational neutrality from workers’ interests:
Für die Industrie scheint Bodenstein eine ähnliche Einrichtung zu empfehlen, wie sie die Landwirtschaft in der deutschen Feldarbeiterzentrale bereits besitzt. Er dürfte damit, trotz des sichtlichen Bestrebens, neutral zu sein, bei der Arbeiterschaft nicht sehr viel Zustimmung finden.
English translation: For industry Bodenstein appears to recommend an institution similar to that which agriculture already possesses in the German Central Office for Field Labourers. With this, despite his evident endeavour to be neutral, he is not likely to find very much assent among the workers.
The proposed extension of an agricultural placement model to industry thus raises a question of worker acceptance that administrative design alone cannot resolve. Lederer then faults Stojentin’s account of German placement institutions for lacking figures or other concrete evidence. His closing verdict makes originality, alongside empirical substance, a criterion of evaluation:
Die Leitsätze bringen keinerlei neuen Anregungen.
English translation: The guiding theses bring no new suggestions of any kind.
This work was divided into 1 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 1 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian