The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo. FRIDAY, MARCH 18, 1910. STRIKERS AND STRIKE LAW.

Auckland Star, Volume XLI, Issue 66, 18 March 1910, Page 4

The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo.

FRIDAY, MARCH 18, 1910. STRIKERS AND STRIKE LAW.

For the cause that: lacks assistance. For the wrong that needs resistance. For the future in the distance. And the good that we can do.

A few weeks ago the Hon. G. Wade, oil 'his return from his New Zealand tour, remarked, in discussing our industrial legislation, that our methods of Conciliation and Arbitration had been adopted as the basis of the system now- in force in New South Wales. This is, no doubt, historically true; but if would t>e a great mistake to assume that there is a close resemblance (between the Arbitration systems of New Zealand and Australia. There is, in the first place, as t'lie "Evening Post" has recently pointed out, this fundamental difference, that here the right to strike is legally admitted- Even in industries that come under the head of "public concern" a fortnight's notice ■will legalise a strike; unless, of course, the unions interested, have -made an industrial agreement or have submitted to an award of the Arbitration Court. In New South Wales, on the other hand, in practically all industries but agriculture, clerical work, and domestic service, the right to strike is legally denied, with or without notice, and whether the strikers are bound by award or agreement' ox not. Moreover, in New Zealand it is necessary to prove to the satisfaction of the Court that the act of ceasing work comes within the legal interpretation of the term "strike"; while in New South Wales the law states what constitutes a strike "without limiting the nature of its meaning," and thus renders it' extremely difficult for tho workers to evade the penalties prescribed for breach of the ' law. In regard to these penalties, it is further to be observed that the New South Wales law is very much more severe than our relatively gentle and persuasive legislation. To quota the "Evening Post' again: "In New South Wales there is a penalty of £1000 or two months' imprisonment lor striking. There is a penalty of twelye months' imprisonment j for two or more persons who meet together to instigate or aid a strike in respect of coal, gas for lighting, cooking or industrial purposes; water for domestic purposes; or any article of food the derivation of which may tend to endanger human life or causa serious bodily harm; or other *irccessary commodity; , or in respect of .the. transport services of the State in relation to any of these things. If a continuing strike is thus managed or aided, there is ■ a penalty of twelve months' imprisonment. Provided that culprits must have reasonable grounds to bojievje—whether they believe or not—that the probable effect of continuance of such, a strike 'win be able to deprive the pnblic either wholry or to a great extent of the supply of such a necessary commodity. And any sergeant of police may enter by force aaiy building or placV which lie has any grounds to believe is being used for 3 meeting to instigate or aid a strike.* As a contrast to this imposing list of sanctions, we may point out that in New Zealand the Act does not prescribe the penalty of imprisonment; and that the fines — in the case of a striker or instigator of strikes may not exceed £10 in ordinary and £25 in "special" industries— collectable by civil process; except only that in the case of strikers in the "special" industries connected with necessary commodities and services, if there is default of distress, imprisonment for three months may— not must—be inflicted at the discretion of the presiding Justice of the Peace. The ordinary striker in New Zealand, even when bound by awards or industrial agreements, is subject merely to a fine, which can be collected as a debt or by an order on his wages. There is thus a striking contrast between our Arbitration system and., that established in New South Wales in regard to the means I>y which the law i≤ enforced. We prohibit strikes only to workers bound by an industrial agreement or award; New South Wales prer hibits them absolutely in all the commercial and mechanical industries. When" a man in an ordinary indnstry does strike we punish him with a fine of £10 at the most; in New South Wales he can be fined up to 1000, or be imprisoned for two months. In "special" industries concerned with the necessaries of life here, a fortnight's notice puts the striker on the same footing as the ordinary artizan in regard to the right to strike; while in New South Wales the . law will not even allow two or more "persons to meet together to discuss industrial matters without falling under suspicion of "instigating, aiding or controlling a strike"; and the penalty for these offences in New South Wales is twelve months' imprisonment. Moreover, the New South Wales law authorizes the police to enter suspected strike meetings if necessary by force, and to seize documents —-.a course to which there is nothing corresponding under our law. To sum up these differences we may fairly say that New Zealand recognizes the right of the worker to strike, just as it recognizes his right to leave his employment; and that New South Wales does not.- It is, of course, true that even in this country a striker may be held subject to fine for •breach of agreement or for leaving his employment without notice, just as an ordinary servant is so liable; and the enforcement of fines merely follows the ordinary

course of civil- process. In New Sotrt] Wales it is clear from, the facts we havi detailed that the law endeavours to gi a great deaJ further, and penalizes witl extraordinary severity any attempt t< exercise the right to strike. And evej though we hold that the great majority of strikes are needless, dangerous ant injurious to the best interests of th< workers, we may well doubt if the labouj la-ws of New South Wales are equitabl( in principle or if they provide a prac ticable means of preventing strikes.