A UNIONIST CRITICISM.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 12896, 30 August 1907, Page 8

A UNIONIST CRITICISM.

The provisions of the new Bill have naturally caused considerable perturbation in local unionist circles. Mr J. Thorn, president of the Canterbury Trades and Labour Council, who was seen by a '"Press" reporter on tho matter, made an official statement on behalf of the body of unionists represented by tho Council. He was careful to explain that his criticisms were based on. the summary of the Bill* as published in the evening papers. He pad not seen a copy of tho Bill, and it might be that his opinions might requirt- modification in tho light of what appearod in the full text.

With regard to the proposal ,to abolish the Boards of Conciliation, and to substitute therefor Industrial Councils, Mr Thorn said there were very many objections to such a change being made. Tho present Board of Conciliation would be quite satisfactory so far as tho unionists were concerned if their powers were extended. Tho recommendations of the Boards should be given tho forco of awards subject to revision by tho Arbitration Court on oppeal, the recommendations, howover, to operate as awards until modified on appeal. Ono serious objection to the Industrial Council system would be that it would havo a harsh effect on the smaller unions. Such unions would have to nominate three of their best men to sit on tho Council, and would consequently have to fall hack upon men of less ability or experience to represent them beforo the Councils, lie could say without hesitation, that that would very seriously embarrass nearly fifty per cent, of tho unions. Tho unions had never asked for such a change, and would be quite satisfied with the present Conciliation - Boards possessing extended powers. Ho felt suro that if the Industrial Councils wero established there would bo continual appeals from their awards, for they would not havo tho weight that tho awards of a more permanent tribuwith tho present Conciliation Boards would have.' Tho provision relating to the enforcement of awards through the Magistrate's Court ? 'Mr Thorn continued, was one which the unions had beon agitating for for some time past, and he thought it was in consequence of that agitation that the clause had been inserted. , . On the. proposal to make unionism compulsory, Mr Thorn said that such a proposal had been discussed on several , occasions at tho annual conferences of the Trades and Labour Councils, and had always been rejected ac being detrimental to the true interests of the trade union movement. The adoption of such a proposal would mean the elimination of the present spirit of unionism ana would have a verj» had effect. "It v good," added Mr Thorn, "for a union to have to battle for its members, and the best kind of preference to unionists is that secured by tho rigorous activity of the unionists themselves." Mr Thorn also pointed ont that if the proposal were carried the unions would be compelled to accept anybody as members, whether desirable or not, and their present right of saying who should and who should not be admitted would be taken away. The unions, in fact, would I* turned into mere registry offices, end they objected to that strongly. Mr Thorn epoke very strongly on tne clause restraining a man acting as a union officer unless he has been or was engaged in the industry in connection with which the union was established. "That clause," he said, "aeeme to have been framed for the purpose of equaring up the Farmers' Union. 9 ne j? the effects of it Would be undoubtedly to impair the efficiency of a anion, for there were many that depended ;for their vitality upon their secretaries, who might belong to other trades, while others, such as the Farm Labourers' Union, would never havo been formed had it not been for the assistance given by experienced unionists. The clause would also operate extremely harshly in another way. A man might be boycotted by employers for the prominent part he had taken in the trades union movement—such a case had, in fact, occurred in Chrietchurch only lately. Several unions might then form thomselves into a federation so ac to give that man work by appointing him as their permanent secretairy. The new clause would absolutely prevent that. "I believe," said Mr Thorn in conclusion, "that the whole of the trade unions throughout Now Zealand will be most violently opposed to the clause. It seems to' have been introduced eimply for the purpose of smashing up quite fifty por cent, of _ the unions in the colony, and to .mako it ac difficult as possible for men to organise at all, and in that respect it is diametrically opposed to tho professed object of the Arbitration Act itself." Mr J. A. McCullough, a well-known unionist, who was aleo interviewed,' explained that be had not examined the new proposals at an closely, but it seemed to him that the Bill followed the lines. previously Indicated by the Minister of Labour, with the exception of the clause relating to the disqualification of a man ac a union officer unless he has been or is engaged in the industry in connection with which the union wae established. It was very difficult to discover what tho object of that clause.was, bnt it would appear on the face of it that it had something to do with the farm labourers , movement. It was a enrious coincidence that the Auckland "Herald" on Saturday Jast published an article urging an amendment of tho Arbitration Act similar to that contained in the clause ho had referred to. He had always contended that Conciliation Boards, if rightly used, were all that w.as n'eceseary, and the proposal to establish the Industrial Councils was not. tho outcome of any suggestion on the part of the workers. . ' •