LABOUR NOTES.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVI, Issue 230, 28 September 1935, Page 18

LABOUR NOTES.

UNION ACTIVITIES.

(By INDUSTRIAL TRAMP.)

; UNION MEETINGS FOR THE WEEK. >. This .Evening, September 28—Drivers' social. Tuesday. October I—Seamen's monthly i stop-work. Drivers. ■ Wednesday, October 2 —Tramway officers. I "INDUSTRIAL TRAMP'S" REPLY. In answer to "Co-operation," I must state that the particulars contained in my paragraph oil bakers' carters in last week's column, were furnished me by the secretary of the Auckland Operative Bakers' Union, and regarded by me as reliable. I .have the names of several of the leading master bakers who pay the low rates complained of. The bakers' carters are not endeavouring to break away from the General Carters' Union, as stated by "Co-opera-tion," for they have all joined the latter organisation, and both' secretaries aro in co-ordination on the matter. Labour unions do not support the price-cutter, although it is to be regretted that some individual workers, by reason of their low rates of pay or sustenance rates, "yield to temptation" and buy in the cheapest markets. The modern law of libel is so fearfully and wonderfully made that it is dangerous to institute a boycott, or black list, but a couple of weeks ago, as a union secretary, I received a circular from the workers' union detailing certain firms who were engaged in price-cutting and paying low wages to their carters and I was advised, if I agreed with these practices, to deal with these particular firms. All union secretaries received one of theso circulars, and their unions have been notified and advised. It is not illegal to advise the public what to do, but it is to advise what not to do. I mention this to show that in making the statement that Labour (with the capial L) will support tho non-union price-cutter, "Co-operation" is not correct. "Co-operation" has another grievance. It is tliat tho (Labour) City Council declined to help the Master Bakers' Association to put the Auckland bread supply on a better footing. Our bylaws already provide for the hygienic distribution *of bread, but the bait to the proposal was a very thin one, and the City Council declined to become a party to practically compelling the nonunion master bakers to join the Master Bakers' Union. Even the unions who Worked to return the Labour majority to the council have never ventured to ask the council to enforce comnulsory unionism. How, then, could the employers expect this drastic step to be taken by a council elected in spite of their opposition? So far as lam concerned, this reply finishes the matter, for my space each week is limited and therefore I am not to be drawn into a wordy warfare. My aim, during tho 20 years I have been conducting this column, has always been to. comment on current Labour topics and give as much information as possible on Labour matters at home and abroad.

LABOUR AND PRICE-CUTTING. "Co-operation" writes: —In the "Labour Notes" of the "Star" there was a reference to the position of the bakers' carters and the wages paid, in which it was stated that some bakers were paying as low as 25/ per week. The writer, however, stated that a number of the larger concerns did pay higher wages. He forgot to eay that they got no more for tttiSir delivered bread owing to lack labour co-operation. What the bakers' carters are endeavouring to do is to break away from the general carters' union and compel the bakers to enter into a separate agreement. This the Master Bakers' Association refuses to do. Labour is busy at tile present moment endeavouring to do two things — leinstate the Arbitration Court system and prevent the amendment of the wommercial Ti lists Act. Labour claims that any alteration of the Commercial Trusts Act would enable the employers to bring about monopolies, increase prices, etc. This is indeed a strange stand for Labour to take. Tho greatest monopoly in New Zealand to-day is labour—that is, union labour. Union labour forces tlio employer to pay a fixed rate of wages and work a fixed number of hours, ctc.; but having got an agreement, the unions in the majority of cases do not help to make it possible for the organised employers to obtain the price for the goods or services produced to enable them to pay the wage plus a profit for the capital employed. For example, Labour will support the non-union price cutter. If there are two shops side by side, one observing nnion conditions and the other —say a non-union shop—run by the proprietor, his wife and family working any hours, and so able to sell more cheaply. Labour will support the latter. If Labour would support tho employer of union labour, co-operate with him in fixing wages, hours, etc., and at the same time fix the selling price to enable such wages to be paid, there would be less difficulty iu employer and employees coming to an agreement. The sooner Labour wakes up to the fact that private enterprise aa well as municipal government enterprise is necessary the better it will be for all concerned. At present the unions will refuse to work with nonunionists—lll their own trade—but they will buy from and give service to nonunionists jn other trades. We have just example: The Master Bakers' Association made an appeal to the (Labour) City Council to co-operate witli them and the employees who had come to 4n arrangement re wages, etc., to fix the price and conditions of sales. The reply was that that was not the job of a municipal council, but the Government's job. Thus we had employer and en-ployee in agreement, and a Labour council whioh turned down their local responsibility and handed it over to an opposition Government! Lsjbbur has the power now, if it would work in co-opera-tion with the employer. It is the pricecutter who beats employer and employee.