THE TREND OF UNIONISM.

Press, Volume LVIII, Issue 11097, 16 October 1901, Page 5

THE TREND OF UNIONISM.

THE CLABI FOR -PREFERENCE. ADDRESS BY MR G. T. BOOTH. At the quarterly meeting ol the Canterbury Employers' Association, which was held last night, Mr G. T. Booth, the president, delivered the following address on "The Unionist Claim for Preference"': — "Among the varied claims set up by Unionism in New Zealand none is more interesting and, none will have a more far-reaching effect than the claim for preference of employment. It has occurred to mc that an examination of this claim may profitably occupy a few minutes of our time. In wliat follows, however, it must .be" distinctly understood that, I express my personal Views only, to wliich members are in no wise committed. The question I propose to ask, and will endeavour to answer in part and as briefly as possible, is, Is there any reasonable or j suiucient justification for the preference claim on grounds of principle or of expediency? ; "To deal first with principle—Can a Unionist justly claim preference for employment over a non-Unionist? If a man can be said to possess any natural or inherent right at air it is the right to work for his living, to exercise such capacity as nature has bestowed , or training developed, in maintaining himself and those dependent upon him. To restrict the exercise of this right must t>e regarded as an infringement of his liberty, and inasmuch as the subject's" livelihood may be at stake lie is justified in resisting to the utmost of his power. I 4ini jcid?.- aware., that this has j ever been denied in theory or N that any attempt to contradict it in practice has ever received the assent of .intelligent or reasonable men. Yet this very right is attacked by the Unionist claim for preference. „In .effect, the-Unionists say to the noii-Unionists: "lou have no right to work \ for a living unlesa you pay dues .to a Trade j Union, subscribe to its rules, and submit yourself to the ' dictation of its leaders. You shall sink your individuality altogether. You shall "regulate your activities at our; bidding. You shall, work just co hard and ' so ions as we order you, and' you shall, stand,idle when it suits us." INDIVIDUAL AMBITION DES- . TROYED. "It is obvious tiilat to an intelligent, amibitious wodunan who wants to make the most of his manhood, to get ahead in the j iaee, to attain-to something better than} ■doily manual toil, such a proposition offers no attraction. He does not want to surren- ; dear ,hds independence, indeed his only hope ; for the future is to.maintain it and keep his ■ i fate in bis own 'hands. He probably dis- j trusts the motives of the Union; notes that | membership will involve certain expense ; and sacrifice and doubts th!a adequacy cf ] the return. Possibly -he may liave con- ; ' scientious objections to allying himself with ' amen in whose judgment he has no confi- j <knee and with. whose methods, no sym-; pathy. Quite possibly be believes in him- J self and bis,own. ■ability,. but regards: unionism as a delusion and a snare to be ■avoided. . - I "Now, granting that the Unionist has a j ! perfect right to be a unionist; surety this ! j man hlas an equal right to remain a non- j ■ unionist if he" so tteeides, and the iact of ihis so doinjj cannot on any j-usfc cr. reasonable ground, be held to disentitle, him from working for his living. It is manifest that j the claini for preference cannot be defended on the ground of abstract justice.. The fact of a man's belonging to a particular trade union no more entitles him to: claim preference' for, employment -than would the fact of his belonging to a particular religious denomination. And, with I all respect to tEe Court of Arbitration, in , whose ability and integrity I have the highest confidence, I venture to assart, that' so long as a sing-e workman "elects to remain outside the Uunion of his trad« this claim cannot be granted without violating : the non-unionist's right, to labour and outraging his manhood. . : FROM THE STANDPOINT OF EXPEDIENCY. "It may be urged, however, that a claim whiob isobviously unsound from tfce point ;of view of ■ abstract justice, may be reasonably defended on the ground cf expediency. " If, for instance, a, trade union were proved to be an organisation which sought to develop the ability and raise the clvaraeter of its members, aid succeeded in t3iis i aim: if its membership was open to ail respectable tradesmen; if it offered such . advantages to members and could point to. j such admirable service in the past as to reasonably attract intelligent, foreseeing, 1 and ambitious men % if it fully respected the rights and privileges of others; if it encouraged harmonious relations between its members and their employers; if by reason of the increased intelligence, sobriety, and industry of its members better service were rendered to the public* if, in short, its actions tended to raise the status of its particular trade to the. advantage of the state, then the claim for preference might be reasonably advanced, and in fact it ■H-ould be granted without application. is to say that if tie claim were capable of substantiation on the ground of merit, it wo&d not need an order of the Court for its enforcement. It would be too large a task to enquire into every point in detail, and would call for greater powers than mine and longer time than is at- our disposal • bat some of the more obvious may perhaps be briefly considered, with advantage. On the ground of expediency, then. Icteim that the demand for preference is not justified, fer the following reasons among others: — "(1) That Unionism as practised in .New Zealand does not fully recognise the rights and privileges of parties outside the Union fod. -(2) That it does not encourage or try u> promote harmonious relations between employers and employed.

"(3) That it does not develop the ability c: { raise the character of its members. # "(4) That it does not render or even profess to render improved service to the public or the State. - „ • THE EIGHTS OP NON-UKIONISTS. "Evidence as to my first point may h* gathered from any statement of claim lodged by a Union under the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act. In nearly every such claim, a demand is made that the number o* apprentices in a particular trade be restricted. In no base of which I have any knowledge has it been proved that a given trade is overmanned , by reason of the training up of too great a proportion of apprentices,, nor that such training: has been deficient in quality as measured by results, having regard to the individualcapacities of apprentices themselves and the changing conditions prevailing in the modern industrial world. On the contrary, it has been shown conclusively that the reverse of the foregoing is true, and moreover that if the restriction of apprentices as asked for were granted, there f '' would not be room in the various trades for all the boys and girls who may reasonably be expected to seek admission. For if it is i right 1 that restriction should apply in a par- ] ticular trade, it is right that it should apply in all branches of employment, not excluding the professions or even tie lowest ranks of labour. The consequence of this would be j that many thousands of boys and girls each year would be prohibited not only from ! learning a trade, but from, engaging in any I occupation whatever. But we "will assume ! for the moment that this restriction should I apply only to the skilled trades. 1 hold it j to be both jiist and expedient that every '■ young person having the inclination and the ; ability to become a proficient tradesman in J any "branch of industry, should have both I opportunity and encouragement afforded him. To moke a close corporation of a trade is to deny to a large proportion of the youth ] of the colony, for whose existence we are re- ' sponsible and whose future is in our hands, I the right which every man is entitled to j claim for himself. It is quite obvious, also, ! that, such denial must react on the parents, ; who will in many cases be deprived of the i assistance they might naturally expect from ',■ the earnings of their sons. Moreover, as it is in the 'best interest of the State that the producing power of its citizens should be developed to, and maintained at, the highest possible pitch, any such antagonistic action , must be opposed to the public welfare. "If the rights of youth are ignored by the Unions, the rights of age are no less so.

The establishment of a minimum wage, as cLaimed by them, must necessarily exile from employment most, if not all, of those who, by reason of age, infirmity, or natural disability are incompetent to render adequate service. The fittitude of the Unions towards these unfortunate incompetents, as shown in evidence before the Arbitration Courts an more than one occasion, is scandalous and reprehensible in the highest degree, while the protection provided in certain awards is inadequate in its extent and demoralising in its application. "As to the Bon-TJnionists, I have already pointed cut that their monopolistic brethren would, if they had their way, deny them, ths very right to exist in this "ultra-democratic, or should I not rather say, ajiti-democratic country.»lt is only necessary to add that the onus of penalising the misguided independent is proposed to ire put upon the shoulders of employers who are to be directed to say to them in effect, "Your independence and ambition are at a discount. You must go. and bow your neck to the Union and submit yourself to its mercies. Otherwise, I cannot employ you. I cannot be your master,' I am not even my own." Surelyan intolerable position' this for both the. conscientious employer and the self-respect-ing workman. As*for the employers, the Unionist .view appears to be that they have no rights at all, but should feel thankful for the privilege of keeping their shops open until the Unionist Democracy is ready to take them over at its own valuation. The Unionist attitude in reference to the rights of youth and of old age or infirmity, and to the interests of employers, parents, and non-unionists, is essentially selfish and unjust,. and should surely discredit the claim for preference even on the insufficient' ground of expediency. A BREAKDOWN INEVITABLE. "(2) Previous to the iiirtoduction of-our so-called Labour Legislation, the relations between employers and employed in v this colony were,- on the whoTey and with, but few unimportant interruptions, harmonious and friendly. There, is. a form of Trade Union which may be called. a natural one, which is at any rate economically sound and good. That is the union between an employer and his workpeople for their common, goods—a partnership, on well understood terms, with a wry definite object, in which both parties have a common interest. This sense of community of interest breeds : mutual respect, good feeling, and confidence and promotes a healthy competition between shop and shop from which advantage accrues to the- community. This was the ok time condition, but since 1896 a marvellous change has taken place. Unions have either misconceived the intention of the Labour Legislation, or have wilfully twisted it from its proper purpose.. The 'Conciliation and Arbitration Act was designed as an instrument for the settlement of disputes, but it has been used as an instrument for their manufacture. Machinery intended to.promote harmony has been employed to produce discord: Our. elaborate preparations for peace have excited one of the parties to declare war. By this means the Unions have endeavoured, and with much success, to upsst'the old time pleasant, reasonable, and profitable relationship, and to substitute for it a hard'mechanical relationship, the terms i; of which are to be dictated by them through the; medium of an outside authority. - It is apparently their determination that thi» partnership is to be dissolved for ever and the partners aT6 henceforth to regard each other as enemies to -be dreaded, instead of as* friends,to-be-trusted. I.am convinced that i this is entirely in the wrong direction, and ! that industry cannot be carried on con-" tinuously and successfully under such an obviously • artificial arrangement. No out- I side authority, however gifted, and however just, can determine the course of trade. It may award high wages; and while conditions are favourable, it may be obeyed, but i it has no power to create employment, and I will be helpless to maintain its award in ! the face of adverse conditions. When the I strain comes there will be a breakdown., I In the meantime, a breach has been made, ! and the utmost patienos and care on the part of employers will be needed to prevent its growing wider as .time goes on. ' UNIONISM AND EFFICIENCY OF LABOUR. , "(3) One of the most serious charges, that can be laid against Unionism 'is' that it reduces the efficiency of labour. This is the direct and inevitable outcome, of the minimum wage, which means scaling efficiency down to the level of the least competent workman. This is perfectly manifest in theory, and practical evidence has been adduced in connection with more than one trade now working under awards of the Court. The direct effect upon industry cannot fail to be felt sooner or later, revealing itself in increased cost, and inferior And this effect will become more marked aa the area of deterioration extends. The local manufacturer will suffer in his competition witli the importer, as indeed he is already suffering, and trade will tend more and more towards the larger centres of production, where specialised m*chinerv can be more fully used and the labour element in cost correspondingly reduced. THE EFFECT OF UNIONS ON CHARACTER. "But more serious even than its direct effect upon trade is its indirect effect upon character. To destroy a man's ambition, his independence, of mind and his self-re-liance, is to undermine the very foundation of his character, and to destroy the one thing on which his manliness and his chances of real happiness depends. And how can a man maintain a high standard of character if m matters affecting his daily work, the exercise of his natural powers, the gaining of , his livelihood, his relations witjThis employer, he delivers himself up to tlie control of a Trade Union, usually managed by a 'small, often unwise, sometimes selfish and dishonest clique'? An organisation which exists for the sole purpose of squeezing employers, and through them the public, whose definite aim is r..-> extort something for nothing, to csact higher reward for equal, or even less efficient, service; an organisation which sets a curb on his praiseworthy ambition, which

prescribes limits to his activities, which will cast him off in his old age and meanwhile forbids his eons following in Ins footsteps; an organisation which tramples upon the rights of others, and recognises no privileges but its own. How else can such an organisation affect character tLan to its debasement? I am far from siying that no man of high character is or can be a Unionist. I know much better than that. Nor do I assert that the foregoing description' is necessarily true, of any and every form of Trades "Union. I do not refer to any indiviaual or any varticular Trade Union, but to present spirit and tendency of the system in this colony. DOES UNIONISM BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY? «(4)_One -would naturally expect that the claim for "preference would be supported reference to service rendered to the public or the State.. It is of the essence of democratic institutions that ■ they shall be of some' service to the 'State. It is incumbent, therefore, upon Unionism to justify its existence in reference to the State if it shall expect a continuance of State sanction and encouragement. It has done nothing in this direction. Latter-day Unionism in New Zealand exists for no other purpose than its' own immediate adivantage, and this it sets itself to gain at all or any cost to employer, producer, or public. It does not hesitate, indeed, to suggest that the producer or the consumer, or both, should Dβ specially taxed for its benefit, and the suggestion may any day develop into a uemand. The authors of 'Industrial Democracy,' an English lady and gentleman who have visited/New Zealand for the purpose of investigating labour conditions, who are deeply in sympathy with labour and Trade Unionism, make this clear statements 'The economist and the statesman will judge of Trade Unionism, not by its results in improving the position of a particular section of workmen at a particular time, but by its effects on the permanent efficiency of the natur., . Among certain abuses which they say.form no part of the policy of Unionism, ard which they totally disclaim, they enunie j rate .'The exclusive right to a trade, the restriction of the number of apprentices, the i objection to piecework,, the objection , to the introduction of, improved machinery, the Ca'-Canny principle (that is, limitation of output), und interference with management." . "Out of the mouths of Dr, and Mrs Webb, New Zealand Trade Unionism stands 1 cbnd'emned. It has adopted as its guiding principles the very abuses which they disclaim, and l makes no pretence to the possession of the cardinal virtue. There is little need to carry the argument further, though much more might be said.' THE ULTIMATE OF UNIONISM.. "Unionists present but one argument in justification of their ciaim for special consideration, and it has reference only to tifosir own immediate advantage. It may or .may not be true that tibeir efforts of recent years have 'resulted, ki higher wages being obtained than would otherwise have been | the case. If this is true at all, which is ' .open to question, it is so only to v very limited extent, and even to such extent it is a doubtful* benefit. It may be possible to squeeze the public successfully up.to a certain .point, but the,limit of endurance must very soon be reaoh'ed. Costs cannot be increased indefinitely without inviting reaction in- the shape of diminished trade. Trade is a matter of delicate adjustment between .supply and demand, and is senSJSive to "t&e smallest and most remote influences. Economic demand is absolutely a matter of price. An enhancement of price consequent upon an attempt to maintain an artificial , wage level will speedily induce - changes in trade movement.. The man who contemplates building a house will defer Operations < until ■ prices go down. The father of a family will turn to import shops for cheaper boots and shoes. The baker and butcher and tie barber will auise their tariff?. The manufacturer will either install labour-saving machlkiery or contract his local operations, and send work to the foreign workman. Business will seek out for itself fresh courses and' cut new dumnels. Ttoe local demand for 'the ovei'-valued classes of labour will be curtailed, and the cost of living will probably go up, and so the apparent immediate gain will ultimately, and at no distant date, turn to loss. All 'thisyis co-obvious that he who runs * may read, and only, those can fail to see who deliberately shut their eyes to fact and reason. ~ "I hope I ihave not wearied you. I have not aimed at exhaustive. treatmemt of thlis .important question, but have tried to put some of; its leading features in suoh shape as to afford you food for thought. THE DISCUSSION. Mr R; M. Macdonald congratulated the President upon his well-thoughc address, and said that, the points drawn attention to with. regard to tne young and tne aged comprised the • serious argument against Unionism. Unions were intended oniy lor men in their prime, not for the young or those who had passed their prime. The only thing Unionism could do lor the latter class was to allow them to work for reduced wages, and the methods by which this was attained were detrimental to the man and difficult to determine, it put such a man in; false position simply because he was five or hisl years older than liis fellows. Until the Unions represented the majority of the workers they had no exclusive right to preference in employment. Personally, he had come in contact with many Unionists who did not believe that they" possessed that right or that they were entitled to it, and who took largely the better view that a Union, could be a most useful adjunct to a particular industry without of necessity demanding' a monopoly of the work in such, industry. He mored a hearty vote of thanks to the President for his audress, Mr J. M. Taylor, in seconding the motion, also congratulated the President on 'his address, aud sai<j if the Association and the public had a few more of such addresses they would , be able to form better conclusions on, such subjects than they bad in the past. How was it that so "many elderly workers knuckled down to what he would call the oppression of the Unions? He had come to the conclusion from his experience of the Conciliation Board and the Arbitration Court that it was due to the fact that all the cases were conducted by' young men who were certainly not in synipathy with the older members. Indeed, if they had not had tit»

old age pension system, whatever would these elderly workers have "done? The system had come at the light time to help them. Mr H. also spoke in eulogistic terms of the address, which he hoped would be published and distributed widely. JMr " Duncan agreed -with . the remarks of the last speaker, and 'said that the remarks of the President on the subject of the Unionist claim lor preference ap* , pealed to them as a cominoh-sense view of the position. The motion was agreed to unanimously.