gracie4241 wrote: ↑
25 Apr 2019 20:29
They could, and did, transfer workers from plants making one weapon and to another making a different one, regardless of geography if necessary.
They could, and did, do that with Gastarbeiter and Zwangsarbeiter. They had the capability to do that with German workers, but rarely exercised it, at least in the way you think. Regulation of German workers was strict, but in order to keep them in critical positions rather than follow high-paying jobs, especially early on in order to keep agricultural workers on the farm rather than migrating to cities.
(snip) Armament workers were part of the war effort.Period.If work on ,say ammunition was cut back,and you worked at a ammunition plant, as it was drastically in late 40 to early 42,
That misunderstands the reasoning behind that decision. Following the French campaign, massive stocks of ammunition had built up, far in excess of what was believed necessary. As a result, steel allocations to the Heer were cut back drastically, but the excess steel did not go to the other services or to domestic production, it went to export to build up foreign trade. At the same time, the Heer released a large number of draftees back to civilian labor, but that was a temporary measure to meet the demands of the industrialists for labor and lasted a few weeks at most as the preparations for the Soviet campaign. Then on 25 October 1941, in the midst of the huge demand generated by the campaign, a further cut in steel allocations to the Heer was enacted, but then the ammunition program enacted on 10 January shifted steel allocations again.
The ammunition program was the driver, not labor, since it governed where the bulk of the steel resources were going. Ammunition production was cut in 1937 in order to divert steel to other programs, again in the summer of 1939, in the summer of 1940, briefly in fall 1941 before it was ratcheted upwards to meet the critical shortfalls in the East...and then got cut again in summer 1943 in order to compensate for the loss of steel production caused by the early British Ruhr bombing campaign, despite the increasing demands in the East.
(snip)Labor was transferred, and additional shifts created for priority programs, which themselves were modified. quite a bit.I can assure you that if the war in Russia was won in 1941, tank,artillery, truck production could and would have been sharply lowered and U Boat and aircraft production significantly increased; in fact that was the plan and expectation
No, German labor was replaced, by forced labor drawn from occupied countries and POW. German labor went into the Wehrmacht in increasing numbers to meet the demand of the fronts.
Yes, indeed, the decision to reallocate resources to the other services was actually made prematurely on 25 October 1941, but the disarray in German industry caused by coal shortages and the exhaustion of the labor supply due to drafts to the Heer meant the decision was nearly made to declare an industrial holiday in November and December in order to regroup.Instead, the German economy staggered on and it was the massive influx of forced labor and diversion of steel from ammunition production that generated the "armaments miracle" of 1943-1944.
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018