For many given task in Britain there are more men than are needed. Strong unions keep them

there. In Fleet Street, home of some of London’s biggest dailies, it is understood that when two unions quarrel over three jobs, the argument is settled by giving each union two. That means 33 percent over-manning, 33 percent less productivity than could be obtained.

A reporter who has visited plants throughout Europe has an impression that the pace of work is much slower here. Nobody tries too hard. Tea breaks do matter and are frequent. It is hard to measure intensity of work, but Britons give a distinct impression of going at their tasks in a more leisurely way.

But is all this so terrible？ It certainly does not improve the gross national product or output per worker. Those observant visitors, however, have noticed something about Britain. It is a pleasant place.

Street crowds in Stockholm. Paris and New York move quickly and silently heads down, all in a hurry. London crowds tend to walk at an easy pace (except in the profitable, efficient city, the financial district).

Every stranger is struck by the patient and orderly way in which Britons queue for a bus. If the saleswoman is slow and out of stock, she will likely say, "Oh dear, what a pity The rubbish collectors stop to chat and call the housewives "Luv". Crime rises here as in every city but there still remains a gentle tone and temper that is unmatched in Berlin, Milan or Detroit.

In short, what is wrong with Britain may also be what is right. Having reached a tolerable standard, Britons appear to be choosing leisure over goods.

What happens when quarrels over job opportunities arise among British unions？

A．More jobs will be provided by the union.

B．Thirty three percent of the workers can’t be employed.

C．More people will be employed than necessary.

D．The unions will try to increase productivity.