There are several channels through which participation can take place at Scott Bader, but the Constitution is hedged about by 'checks and balances', and up till now participation seems to be rather limited in practice. Unfortunately, in the only full length study available, Blum (1968) says very little about the Commonwealth's day-to-day practice. However, it is clear that, as at the John Lewis partnership, levels of interest and participation among the employees with rank and file jobs are low. Blum says that 'there have been considerable differences in the participation of different groups ... Workers have undoubtedly participated less than other groups' (p. 329~ In general, the proportion of total employees who have participated by holding office as a representative is fairly small because, from 1951 to 1963, thirty-four people served on the Community Council and 'a large majority' were re-elected for more than one term; about ten of those elected were from the shop floor. It was found, using as criteria of participation speaking at General Meetings, obtaining information from representatives, standing for election and initiating proposals through a participative body, that about a fifth of managers, technicians, junior managers and clerical workers were 'high' or 'moderate' participants whereas all the factory workers were 'low' or non-participants (p. 374 For most of those questioned by Blum the 'advantages of the Common wealth' were seen, particularly by the factory workers, first and foremost in terms of the job security it gave (including the six months' sick leave although 'participation' was the item mentioned the next most frequently.' Finally, in a question on the knowledge of the powers of the Community Council it was found that .26% of respondents had a 'working knowledge"~ 36% had a 'partial knowledge' and 38% 'little or no knowledge' (p. 37SJ ~~~•