VIEWS OF A PROMINENT LABOUR MEMBER.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 12897, 31 August 1907, Page 10

VIEWS OF A PROMINENT LABOUR MEMBER.

(SP-CtAL TO "THU FBKSS.") WELLINGTON, Au C ust 30. With regard to the Councils. Mr J. F. Arnold, M.H.R., expressed the opinion that the new «y»t«ni would not be an improvement upon the old. The weakness of the new idea lay in the fact that the Councils were to be dissolved immediately their work was aooomplLshed in connection with one dispute. Tho great majority of the workers considered that if boards of that kind wero !o bo set up, it would be far better to have a standing Council of a cliairman and two members, who would

have power to select exports to assist them in adjudicating upon particulai trades. Such a board would have some permanent responsibility, and the Court oi Arbitration wouid always 1 . able to consult it on doubtiul pointe. In this connection Mr Arnold pointed out that a provision that already exists iv tho Act for tho appointment ot special boards seems to have been overlooked. As far buck as lft!)G Mr Justice Williams, in the bootmakers' dispute, set up a special board of employers and employees, which was to nave power to deal with all questions affecting wages, altering the scale for piecework, and also dealing with tho minimum wage and the proportion of apprentices to journeymen. Iv regard to breaches of award being dealt with in tho Magistrate's Court, he thought tho workers would be very much opposed to that. It had always been held by the workers that thote who first heard a dispute and became acquainted with the technical points in connection with the trade were the persons who should deal with any breach of the award. A Magistrate would bo an unqualified person through his not having had tho matter before him previously. Tho tendency seemed to be year after year to bring arbitration more and more into the legal arena. They were gradually departing from the first pnnciplo of tho Act, viz., conciliation. As to employers deducting fines from the men's wages, that was a most ridiculous idoa. and one that ho was sure neither the employers nor tho workers would tolerate. The strained relationship that must exist as the result ot such a provision would be fatal. a man who had had a dispute with his omployer, and who was fined in consequence, was to be reminded weekly ot what had taken place by his wages being docked. Next in importance ,to this clause was the one which was supposed to deal with preference. The clause compelling non-unioni-ra to contribute towards the funds of unions would he iewived with the utmost Unionists had always contended that they should not bo the sole financial losers through procuring ™« wa »»- * \ r the money they expend. 1 they should have some compensation, and all they had ever asked for was preference ot employment where ability was equal. What the Minister was now providing for was compulsory unionism, with the exception that a largo number, who contributed should have.no voice in the management of the unions. Iho suggestion made by the Minister to-day to the emplovere' deputation, that nonunionists' contributions should bo usee for sick and benefit funds was a bad one, and he (Mr Arnold) felt sure that Parliament had no right to legislate es to what any union or association should do with its funds ; besides which, it would be thought by a very largv number of workers, rightly or wrongly, that this was only a provision to prevent their accumulating wealth that would enable them either to pay the fines, or to help their members in tho event of the occurrence of a strike. As to the provision that officers must bo members of the unions, and working in tho industry they represented. Mr Arnold thought it an unsatisfactory ono. Only that day, a deputation from a large Wellington union had waited on members of Parliament, asking them to oppose this provision. Both the President and secretary of that union expressed their thankfulness that they wero not employed in the particular trade they represented, because they felt if they were, they would be liable to dismissal. slr Arnold said he knew, thougb this was generally denied by employers, that the feeling existed throughout the whole of the colony. In consequence of this feeling, many of tho secretaries of unions wore to-day paid officers. The workers would nold to this privilege with all the power they possessed. In conclusion, Mr Arnold said there were several very good points in the Bill, such as that to extend the force of agreements, which would be very acceptable to the working classes. As the Bill had to go before the Labour Bills Committee, and evidence would be taken, he did not think it wise to enlarge further on its merits or demerits. "What hope is there of tho Bill pasßing?" I asked. "I should think," replied Mr Arnold, "there is no hope of its passing in its present form."