VICTORIAN LABOUR COMMISSION

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 93, 21 April 1902, Page 2

VICTORIAN LABOUR COMMISSION

SITTING IN AUCKLAND

The members of the Victorian Royal Commission appointed by the Victorian Parliament to report on the Shops and Factories Act of the State, which empires this year, and are visiting New Zealand to inquire into the labour legislation of this colony, returned from a visit to Rotorira "on Saturday evening, for the purpose of taking evidence in Auckland prior to their departure for Melbourne. The Commission spent two and a-half days at Rotorua, visiting most of the wonders of the district. They witnessed two geyser displays at Whakarewarewa, and other wonders of the district were pointed out. Fine weather was experienced during the whole trip, which was thoroughly enjoyed. They leave for Melbourne, via Sydney, by the Mararoa to-day.

The Commission commenced their sitting in Auckland at the Municipal Chambers this morning. The Hon. A. it. Out trim, M.L.A., chairman, presided, and the other members of the Commission present were :— Hons. J: Sternberg, li. Reid, and J. Godfrey, M.L.C.'s; Messrs. F. H. Bromley, G. H. Bennett, and H. S. W. Lawson, M.L.A.'s.

Mr J. C. Macky, president of the Auckland Employers' Association, was the first witness examined. He stated that his Association was composed of over 200 members. They had been circularised by the executive, and he put in the following report of their replies: — 1. In your opinion w,as such a measure required:—(a) for the purpose of removing any actual .difficulties then existing, and if so, what difficulties? Yes —as a measure by which strikes and lock-outs might be obviated, (b) As a preventative of prospective evils not otherwise provided against, and if so, what evils? Yes —as a preventative of sweating and of unfair and dishonest, competition both as regards hours and wages, (c) For any other justifiable purpose? Not aware pf any.

2. Has the operation of the Act been in your experience beneficial in any of the following respects?— (a) In the promotion of good feeling between employers and employed? No. We consider it one of the very worst results of this Act that it has divided the employers and Ihe wage earners into two distinct and decidedly hostile camps, and destroyed all the old good feeling- that used to exist between employers and employed, (b) Tn increasing the efficiency or conscientiousness of the workmen? No. The awards of the Court have given no impetus to the men to improve themselves, biit they have decidedly tended to discourage good workmen, (c) Tn increasing the general prosperity and if so, in what way? No. For quite three-fourths of our population the cost of living has been largely increased, while they have themselves received no benefit whatever from the Act.

3. In your opinion has the Act been productive of evils in any of the following ways? (a) In creating disputes between employers and employed? Yes. It has produced an almost endless number of dilutes, affecting every kind of indnVsry. Tn our opinion there have been jsj.i least fr>n +im«»*< :im many fUtspnUs nm-..a*em would have been strikes in the same time without the Act. It has brought into existence a whole army of professional agitators, who have" little or nothing to do with the particular industry, and who incessantly make strife and create, trouble and ill-feel-ing between masters and men. (b) Tn causing loss or waste of time to employers and employed during the "hearing" of such "disputes"? Yes. A seriotfs waste of time and neglect of business. This is increased by the physical features of this colony, and the existence of at' least, four large centres, in all or any of which masters may be called upon to appear, (c) In causing interference with employers in the control of their businesses? Yes. The Arbitration Court has gradually, at the constant instigation and demands of the Unions, changed if! function of ptire and simple, arbitration and conciliation till now it virtually regulates all our industries down to the very smallest details. Some awards of the Court have placed such restriction npon masters, especially with regard to overtime and holidays, that they have made it quite impossible for many trades to meet any special demand or emergency without heavy charges, for which they could get no compensation, (d) In limiting the development or lessening the operations of trade or manufacture, and, if so, in wha,t way? Yes. The development of trade and manufactures has been considerably checked by (1) the excessive limitation of the number of apprentices; (2) by preference to unionists regardless of ability; (3) and the virtual prohibition of the employment of unskilled labour or labour fallen a little below the standard tln'ougn the infirmities of age, at less than the minimum wage. Tn these ways it has not only checked trade, but struck a cruel blow at the settlement and development of our colony, (c) In increasingl the expenses of business without increasing the volume or profit thereof? Yes. This specially applies to all such manufactures as sire affected by foreign competition, such as boots, clothing, saddlery, furniture, etc., etc., where it is simply impossible to get any advance in price. Tn other industries the increased cost has just been passed on to the consumer, who by reason of the general prosperity of the Colony ever since the Act came into force, has not so fa.r seriously felt the incubxis. A period of depression w"ould, we feel certain, reveal many flaws in the working of this Act, and cause very serious trouble and loss to all our manufacturers, (f) In discouraging or preventing the investment of capital in industries? Yes. Rightly or wrongly there is not the slightest doubt that capitalists generally have been disdoura^ed from investing their money in local industries by the uncertainty and unrest created by the provisions of this .Act.

Mr Mackay added that the Association was the outcome lof the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, and its formation with a.ll the attendant expenses in kind, and money had been forced on them in self-defenc.

In answer to questions put by the chairman, Mr Macky said that the fixing of a minimum wage often dis? satisfied - those receijiug the, _ma»*

mum, the latter thinking they shoul also have their wages increased wjien their less skilful fellow-employees were raised. The employers aJao found it difficult to maintain tne maximum when the minimum oi large number of their employees was raised. They considered • that w operative labour as employed w*° very much more expensive than con tract labour. The Conciliation ana Arbitration Act required fnendmpi^ but he was not prepared to say should be swept away. , Mr J. J. Craig said the result of'tne Conciliation and Arbitration Act in his case had been a loss of £3>° u "' through contracts which he had undertaken and had been obliged to carry out. Increases in wages naa been made during the currency ot these contracts, and he had had w stand the loss. His loss on a railway cartage contract had Dcci £1,400. He did not advocate the abolition of the Act, as it kept masters who were inclined to pay w wages up to the mark. He thought that there should be mutual concessions by masters and men, tne mab ters keeping to the full rate or wages, and the men not being particular to an hour or so. The operation of the Act in his case resulted in a rise in the prices to his customers. Ten or a dozen unemployed came to him every day for work, lie thought there were 200 or 300 carters unemployed in Auckland. In answer to the Hon. Mr bternberg, M.L.A., Mr Craig said he did not think the unrest was likely to cease, though the Act had been m operation five years. The Act was a good one if properly carried out. Under the way the Act was at present administered he would sooner have a strike. Mr T. H. White, manager of the Kauri Timber Company, Auckland branch, said the Conciliation Act had disorganised things considerably m the mill, matters being in a state of turmoil. They were working under three awards, which partly accounted for the turmoil. These awards made a difference of about £60 a week in his wages bill. He thought the spirit and intention of the Act was a good one. In his opinion no man should be allowed to appear before a Court unless he belonged to the trade in which the dispute was being heard. He thought it would ■save time if solicitors were allowed to conduct cases.. He thought that the increases asked for by the unions should be by way of percentage on their wages, as this would result in less disorganisation, and the employers would know exactly in what position they stood.

Mr Arthur Itosser, journeyman carpenter, and vice-president of the Trades' and Labour Council, saii| (he Tepriesp<n.ted 17 unions, averaging over 1000 members. The effect of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act had been to reduce the hours of labour of all the workers.—in the case of cabmen from 110 to 84. In his trade the hours were 44 hours per week, and the pay 1/3 per hour. Before the Act their hours were 47, and the wages varied greatly. The workers desired amendments in the Act, in the direction of having breaches reported by Government officers, for stipendiary magistrates to have power to hear breaches of an. award, to prevent long delaj^s. The workers did not desire to do away with the Conciliation -nortion.,of--+•>«--.-*—-<•• nr his trade there was no limitation of apprentices. They held to the preference to unionists, because they had to bear some of the expense of the administration of the Act, and therefore were entitled to its benefits.

Tn answer to the chairman witness said their experience of the Act proved that it had been beneficial in the extreme. He thought it was equally beneficial to employers, because it kept iinscrupulous employers up to the mark, and prevented unfair competition. He did not think that in all cases the work of the Conciliation Board cleared the way for the Arbitration Court to any great extent. He believed that the present turmoil, which was caused by the amending Act of last session, would soon die down.

Mr. F. H. Templar, secretary of the Employers' Association, concurred with the statement of Mr J. C. Macky, president, in every detail. With regard to the_conference of masters and men previous to the cases appearing before the Board, he said the masters refused to discuss matters with men not in their own employ. He thought that employers and men could meet to discuss matters without any ill-feeling being engendered, provided that the men were not outsiders. Many of the unions were engineered by men who were not members of the trade, and the masters objected to meeting these men.

Mr. G. A. Coles, boot manufacturer, said the difficulty in his trade was that of foreign competition boots. saddles, etc., being- made abroad by cheap labour. So far the Act had not had the effect of allaying ill-feeling between master and man, this being partly caused by the unreasonable demands of the unions. The average earnings of his men was £2 3/8 per man since the Act was introduced. He did not think that the Act had led to increased prosperity among the working classes. The employers considered that the Arbitration Court had taken too much on itself in interfering with the inner workings of the business in the cases brought before them. The overtime rates awarded by the Court were so higii that the employers refused orders rather than have them made up at these rates. He thought the Act should be given a fair trial without prejudice, though he believed certain amendments were necessary. He thought the Act had come to stay, but believed that Conciliation Boards shouTrl be swept away.

Tn answer to the Hon. Sternberg, witness said that the introduction of the Act had led to the abolition of piece-work, and the men were now getting higher wages than under the old system. The price's of the boots had not risen, owing to the forekrn competition preventing this. The Auckland manufacturers were making boots on the American system, and about two-thirds of the American boots sold in Auckland were locally made.

Mr G. C. Garlick, manager of the Tonson Garlick Company, thought the measure a necessary one, but that it could be carried to extremes. He objected to the limitation of apprentices, but he thought this restriction would. probabljLj>e. removed.