FARM LABOURERS' DISPUTE.

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 13102, 29 April 1908, Page 2

FARM LABOURERS' DISPUTE.

SUMMINKI UP. SPEECHES.

Tb© Ooncal.ia.tLon Boa-rd resumed «m----eidera-ticoi of the farm labourers' dis* pirte yesterday. All th© members of tli© Board were present. ' 'Mr H. D. Aekuud, representing tfoe ! stooopownere eked, continued hie sum- ' ir.ing iip sp&ecih, and exhaustively ana- | hwd the ovidenoo erren. doaßng witih I workers on sheep stations and farms. I HOURS AND HOLIDAYS. The whole of the cnidenoe, he said, showed that it -was qui*o impossible to work hours in connection with sheop; it also showed that, those who drew up the demands really knew nothing about the matter, j and were not men engaged in the in- ! dustrv. The omployers said that it ■was impossible to work hours, and practically all the workers said the same thins; of holidays as well as ot hours. If tihe men doing mustering wfrrv to g*t any sort of fixed holidays, i it simply -meant that they would have ' t-o knock off work and sit about the <pmi>; but the abject tiucy had was to i &mJh ihvir work on the back coim.try as quickly ac posdble, and return to the homestead. Thoy would simply eit about doing abeolurtdy nothing, miles away from other human eocic-ty than their own." It would be absurd to ofoange a erstcm that satisfied tlie men and the owners. THE PACKMAN AMD HIS WORK. Praobically no ©vndomoo had been given ac to mustorers' packman., and very little reference had l>een made to the olaee of peckmen who were really camp cooks. He thought tlie evidence showed —certainly it was friis own experience—(that where the pax; km em did cooking for muster ens thoy were only a pert of their time travelling, and they were very often simply camped for two or three days at a time, especially -when drafting out; then thear duties were those of g hut cook. There had been practically no evidence regarding Hie class of packman who cooked for rabbitters, or those w!ho cooked for men out snow-rakdne, or of packmen who, were encaged in I'he carting of fencing amd other material to j places where drays could not be token. Though it had been proved tiuat tlio hours worked extended over a con- | siderable period of the day, sitill tlhe j houTB of work were not long, nor was - the work arduous. In regard to tent work, it was a great mistake to think that tents were cheap; tho wear amd tear of tonte was so greait that practically they had to be renewed every year; conseque.n.tly huts were replacing tente on stations where the leases were on. favourable conditions. It ■was clear that tihe autliors of tih© TJnian'e demands were quite unaware of "tihe duties of packmen, nrnd had no expordonce of their work. The direrexiporience of tfoeir work. No evidence of general dissartisf action (amongst packmen had 'been given, and the Board, in tiheso crircmmstemcce, could draw no other conclusion tihaai that the men doing packing were saitlsfied. had taken no mterest in the Union's demands, and had laughed ait them. THE OTATION PLOUGHMAN. JResarding ploughmen emiptoyed on stations, Mα- AcJand averred tduait the rate of wages paid suctli workers could not be taken as the rate Which should apply to ploughman in purely agricultural country. The roan wiho did agricultural work on a station was not r 6o much a worker <ac a station eervaiut — hia work was done for the use of tho station. men had to (bo very oom(peten.t, amd probo'bly had to do all , the agricultural work—(plough and ; reap and know Jhow to u6e a binder; probably had to know liow to stack, and generally to boss all tho agricultural work dono on a station. A wage (had to bo si-yen sufficiently high to temipt men away from the rnoro j tbicklv populated patrte. To increase ■ .wafice of ploughmen in purely agricultural country to <fcle raito flxnid ploughmen on stations would probably • involve m addition of 50 per cent, to . the working expenses of the agrioul- ; tural farmer.

I -MARRIED COUPLES ON STATIONS ! Tho fixing of wages and 1 conditions or married couples was am ertremolj difficult ono for the Board to dea! with, as married couples on etationE wore, in almost every case, privatt servants. Mr Justice Chapman, in t>h< Christdturcli gardeners' oase, had. refused,' to provide for men who wore private servants; ifc woe practically impossible to d&tinguish, in' regard tc married couples on stations, between ' private sc.rva.nt3 and farm workers. Oiw witness—lie iuidl his wife- had beoai a married couple on a station—had stated that tho reason he gavo up his position was that he declined' to be under the control of the manager; 'ho bad resigned' because he was not going t<l bo a, farm s?rvant. This a.nd i-imilai Instances o:ily showed tho absurdity oi the Union's demands. As to tLo domand that a woma.ii should' receive oxtra payment for every .additional parson sli© cooked for, Mr Ac-land pointed out that when the* number of rracai increased tlie cooking was specialise-:], and tho woman was relieved of cooking for large numbers of temporary workers.. The head cook in a big h tei d'kl not get extra payment when the number of guests to bo provided' for was .inerc«.wvl'; additional assistaaiee w«s given him; and tho same applied on stations. THE FOOD QUESTION. The o-vid-ecriee bad shovva that tho food supplied, hy the- sheepowneaTs was of a vr>ry gon:l chn.r::f:tor indeed , : f rther, tiißt the quality h-a-I steadily impmrtxi. Complaints as to bad fo d lvire really i-xtracts from ancient history. His own experience was thot broad and mutton were- the mesb expoiwve things that mfin could b<? supplied with: it was cheaper to supply fbem with vftEpotables.. Rico and other thinigs for making curries and'eo forth. \Vith oaiy bread and muttont tho men lived on chops and on a bit of mutton that might l>o boiled, but there was no provision for dealing with the greater portion of tho carcase. If his manager supplied his mem with onJy breed and mutton ho would consider him an extremely extravagant man. Bread boxes, mado out of bullock hido. which were used, on his station and which had been invented by eomo qkltime packman, had got over the difficulty connected "with tho economic M'ineport of bread; jwicked. in an or■lin<ary sack, it whs found that there was a terrible loss and waste of bread. Aβ to the demand for sonp, cardies andi so forth to be supplied, ho a>ss«rted. that experience showed" that m«n did not value articles they did not get themoolvee. THE ALLEGED DISSATISFACTION. Tbe speaker submitted thijt no real dissatasnaction existed either amongst workers on stations or amongst farm labourers. ' Witnesses had' stated that they were dissatisfied, but had given no reasons. There -were three ltirife of dissatisfaction: First, there was the dissatisfaction that had resulted in the present positron- of the British KmpiTe •4.nd! of_ Cantorbory—a diEisatrsfaction that might be called energy or enterprise, a dissatisfaction thett made !lie race progress and enabled the individual to get on in th" world; then there was tho dissatisfaction that consisted of real genuine grievar.oes tlwt existed, about conditions generally; finally there was the dissatisfaction that was constant discontent apd growling. This latter class of dissatisfaction was the only dissatisfaction that had: been bron-rht Wore- tho Board. All the ponuiuft men had been satisfied;• those who were not satisfied wero the shift-

less sort of men who were alwayp cravelline round or hanging round the towm With the exception, of the dieu.aud for butter, they had no case where the men had gone to the owner or manager and complained of any of their conditions. , Mr Kennedy: They would have got the sack I . ~, , Mr Acland , : If so tibey ™>™ a "*** got anotter billet the next day. If fiis <Mr Acland's) men did not teli him, or his manager, of anything that was wrong/he ™Uo& foobsh - NO DISPUTE IN FACT. The evidence showed that there was no dispute in fact, whatever there might be, technically, m law. Other employers and himself had offered to allow their men to go before the Board, bnt in nearly every case the men had scoffed at tho idoa, and treated the whole thing as a joke. The employers could not so treat it, no matter how ridiculous and frivolous they considered some of the demands. Tho Union had filed explanations of the demands, of which he understood tho Board had decided it could not take any notice; but those explanations showed that those making the demands were absolutely irresponsible REGULATION OF FARM LABOUR.

Mr Reeves, in his book '"State Experiments in Australia and New Zealand," referring to the question of tho regulation of labour, stated that a grave responsibility rested on the plaintiffs in an industrial disputo in trotting evidence together. Ho (Mr Acland) would say that in this present case the plaintiffs had not appreciated that responsibility. He submitted that regulation meant constant friction in the country districts, in which there ovisted an extraordinary amount of give and take. It would also interfere- with family life—the evidence regarding married couples showed how difficult it would be to distinguish between family life and the farming busiross.. Further, regulation would reverse the policy of the Government and people of tho country, which was to settle the small man on the land, and encourage tho independent settler. It would bring the Arbitration Act right into the farmer's house, and would mean that the farmer would be under the domination of an award —a sort of impossible octopus. Tho Act was designed to prevent strikes and lock-outs, but the conditions under which, farming was conducted were so varied that such a thing as a strike occurring, at any rate a strike that would affect tho consumers was unlikely. He laid stress on the point tihut the farmor could not γ-ass on. the increased cost of production to the consunior, as the manufacturer was able to do, and he emphasised the fact that, unlike the manufacturer, the farmer, if anawaid were made, "could not make his calculations on an ascertained basis." He further contended that as no disputo existed, the present conditions constituted a "reasonable modus vivendi," and they did not want any manufactured conditions that would suit neither masters nor men. Awards in other disputes had practically fixed and regulated existing conditions; an award in the present dispute would alter all the social conditions of those affected by it. REAL OBJECTS OF THE DEMANDS. The object of the demands were practically political—a point that would be dealt with moro fully by Mr Jones. Mr Thorn had alleged, in his opening remarks, that the JJnion. "represented tho largo body of intelligent opinion among farm labourers;" but he (Mr Acland) would bo rory sorry to think that the 'class of men brought before the Board by the Union represented tho class of men he knew so. well, and for whom he had the greatest respect— tho class of men mot with, on stations consisted of some of the. finest fellows in tho world. In his evidence Mr Thorn had said:—"He did not think that thrift and industry would settle tho labour question: if everybody was thrifty, there would be many unemployed. :, Apparently the leaders or the labour movement were going on the assumption that for a country to succeed it was necessary for everyone to bo unthrifty;' the adoption of that policy would be very unfortunate for

Now Zealand. , THE DEMANDS OF EXTREMISTS. All the evidence showed that tho demands were simpfy those of a few extremists in Christchxirch. Tho farmers said to such:—"Leave U3 alone and attend to your affairs in town; we don't want you in tho country; if you come out you will injure tho whole country; you will gradually ruin it, because you do not understand the conditions." Tho ovidenco further showed that the so-called "Agricultural and Pastoral Labourers' Union" did not represent the agricultural and paetoral labourers. Ho questioned whether any award could deal satisfactorily with the farmer, who also took employment on the farms of others. PREFERENCE TO UNIONISTS. In the event of an award being made, ho did not think that the Board could seriously entertain tho' idea that peo--1 plo should take into their houses all and every class and description of man. The Farm Labourers' Union was a close corporation, and excluded farmers' sons. Mr Thorn dissented from this statement. Mr Acland (continuing) pointed out tb<* importance of character in farm employees, especially in tho case of farmers who had families. He knew from professional experience {Tiafc ruination had conio to families owing to an undcsirablo Rotting on a man's place and staying there. An award would tend to make a dividing line between the farmer and the worker; at present there was, practically, no such division. CONCLUDING REMARKS. In conclusion. Mr Acland said that upon the Board rested a very serious responsibility. Ho had folt that he had a great responsibility in conducting tho case on behalf of a large body of men, but ho was thankful that ho "had not the responsibility that rested on the chairman of the Board. The regulation of the farming industry would have the most far-reaching effects, not only in Canterbury but all over New Zealand and olsewhere. They wanted absolutely no compromise in the matter; if there was to bo an award, let there be one and a good ono. They said that the Board could not make an award after hearing the evidence and hearing £he complicated conditions that exioted; it would bo impossible to make an award that would work satisfactorily; it was impoasiblo for any bedv of men, no matter how a Lie- or learned i they might be, to mako an award ' that would deal with new conditions as they arose; it was impossible, in the circumstances, to do anything but leave well alone. Hβ thanked the Board for tho good hearing it had given him, and ho felt sure it would give the matters in dispute the gravest consideration. At 3.50 p.m.. the Board adjourned till 10.30 a.m. to-day at the Supreme Court.