SATURDAY, OCTOBER 22, 1898. WORKERS AND ACCIDENTS.

Evening Post, Volume LVI, Issue 98, 22 October 1898, Page 4

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 22, 1898. WORKERS AND ACCIDENTS.

4 The Labour Bil's Committee of the Legislative Council reported yesterday upon the Workers' Compensation for Accidents Bill, and, as will be seen from particulars given in another column, recommended material amendments. These alterations would not detract in any way from the utility of the measure, but on the other hand would render it more logioal, and at the same time ensure its working smoothly without unnecessary dislocation of trade. The Bill is decidedly revolutionary in character, and as such, one of the most important Labour measures introduced into our Parliament. An entirely new principle is contained in it — namely, that an employer is to be held responsible for the effects oi" an accident, even when the mishap cannot in any sense be attributed to his own or his agent's neglect or default. The theory advanced by the supporters of its English original was that all injuries incurred in the course of work should be made a direct charge upon the industry in which the sufferer was engaged. In order to effect this mitigation of individual hardship it was necessary to tln'ow the burden of paying compensation upon the employer*. They were thus regarded as controllers of the industry, and orgauically related to every member of it, and not, as heretc/ore, merely as separate individuals entering into impersonal contracts with their workpeople — contracts that carried no responsibility for life and limb provided there were not shown to have been any default or negligence. Henceforth the industry was to be recognised as a sort of organism made up of both employers and workers'. The capital of the industry, held by the employers, was to be called upon to compensate the wage-earners in case of injuries due to their being engaged upoa the industry. This principle, it can easily be seen, was quite other than that lying at the back of the Employers' Liability Acts which we have hitherto known. The chief advantage of the Bill is the security it would give to the wage-earners, many of whom owe.their comparative poverty to the hardships resulting from accidents. The risks, however, to which employers are made liable are no light matter, and in order to prevent sudden embarrassments and? other commercial troubles a system of accident insurance becomes desirable. It is argued by some extremists that employers should not be allowed, to insure themselves against such risks, because the immunity acquired would render them less careful of the little details that prevent mishaps. This point of view is necessarily due to false ideas about the humanity of employers, and tacitly assumes that they are mere commercial vampires sucking all they can from labour and regardless of all human considerations. It is quite time this foolish and ill-judged talk were banished from the conversation of reasonable men. It may serve the purpose of politicians, but it is out of keeping with real social reform. la order to avoid the failures and disorganisation that would ensue from employers being unable to meet claims for compensation, every facility should be given for insurance. The Committee of the Council evidently realised this, and hence its recommendation that the Bill should not come into force until the Government had taken up accident insurance. It would be well that measures for putting the responsibility upon employers, and for enabling them to iusure at reasonable rates, should come into operation simultaneously. Another amendment proposed is that in disputes under the Act either party may appear by attorney before the Courts set up under the Arbitration Act. Hitherto the Arbitration and Conciliation Courts huve not recognised lawyers, but, as we pointed out on a previous occasion, it is only a matter of time before they will be admitted. The Premier's original Bill went further than the-English Autiu its provision of securities for the workers 1 compensation. In doing so it went behind mortgages and departed from the principle of making each industry responsible for its own accidents. The Premier wished to make the damages to an injured wage-earner a first charge on mines, factories, buildings, &c. — a charge that might destroy the effect of a mortgage and might fall upon a person in no direct way connected with ihe industry in fault. General exception has been taken to this arbitrary and dangerous provision. The Council's Committee now proposes to strike it out altogether. In this we entirely agree with the Committee, and hope the Legislature will take its advice. The clause, if retained, would disturb existing relations and contracts to an extent quite out of keeping with the slight addition it might possibly make to the security now given to the injured worker. There was no need for the clause, it certainly marred the consistency of! the Act as placed on the imperial Statute-book, and was in short one of those doubtful provisions by which the Premier, in trying to " go one better " than wiser men, lauds himself and the country in an unpleasant predicament. Some minor amendments were also suggested, but they do not call for much comment. They tend, for the most part, to clear up some ambiguities and to tone down a few of the extravagances of the Bill. On the whole, the work done by the Committee is of a high character, and if the Couuoil adopts its suggestions the measure will be considerably improved.