Unions and the Arbitration Act

Press, Volume LVI, Issue 16986, 8 November 1920, Page 6

Unions and the Arbitration Act

It is easy to understand the opposition of the trade unions to clauses 3 and 4 of the Arbitration Amendment BillOne of thes:> clauses proposes that in proceedings before the Court or a Conciliation Council employers and workers engaged in the industry, but not directly connected with the dispute, may appear and be heard. The ether clause proposed that the way should be left open for workers ni an industry to form a new organisation if thr-v are unwilling

tf» join an existing union. Of course, in this case, somo reascnabh 1 c-a'.iso wcMild have to lie shown. The ilinister, when the J.aliour nicmbcrs protested very strongly last week, declared his rendine"; to drop Wio second of t-hc.sa jjrcposals. We do not see why ho should do so, for the proposal is not merely reasonable, but really necessary in the. interests of freedom and justice. As wo have said, the opposition of the leaders of the unions affiliated to the Federation of Labour (or whatever that body may now rail itself) is natural

enough. As the law at present stands, .it is easy for lite extremists to dominate the Labour movement. In most industries it is necessary for a. man to join the union, however much he may dislike the union's policy and metheds, and the militant minority, being in the nature of things keenly political, dominate the union's affairs. It is notorious that the affairs of the average union aro controlled, and the meetings attended, by only a small number of tho members. And the whole tendency of industrial legislation has been towards strengthening the monopoly of authority by the extremist minority. This is a monopoly which is obviously against public policy, and the natural method of ending it is the withdrawal of tho provision that preference of employment shall be given to unionists. We discussed this point some time ago, and we showed that even if compulsory unionism could bo justified where unions confined themselves to tho proper business of unionism, no shadow of excusc remained for giving this and other powers and privileges to a unionism which had completely altered its charactor. What "preference to unionists'' amounts to to-day is nothing less than

.mpulsion to support Communist policy and propaganda. Compared with the proper remedy the clauses in the amend - | ing Bill are very mild indeed. The necessity for those clauses is made clear in the mo3sago sent to the Minister by the New Zealand Freezing and Allied Officers' Guild. The members of tho Guild strongly object to being brought under the control- of the Canterbury Clci'ks' Union. Tho Clerks' Union has a membership of 240 out of a total of over 3000 clerks in Canterbury, whereas the membership of the Guild is 194 out of 200 employed. The Guild can therefore claim to be heard, and to liavo its desires granted, and the same can be said of -the Wholesale "Warehouse Clerks' Society, which has a membership of 123, which is only two short of the total of the clerical staffs of the 21 wholesale warehouses whose employees hare formed the society. The Freezing and Allied Officers' Guild declare tlhat "workers need protection from Labour "extremists more than they do from "their employers." . No worker will deny this who realises —as an increasing number must realise —that the worst enemies of the wage-earner are those who, by actively pursuing a policy that is. manifestly foolish and dishonest, are antagonising sensible and honest people, -who aro after all a majority of the nation, and turning them against what is called "the Labour movement." Unless organised Labour secures new leaders and a. new policy and objective, the movement against unionism will increase in strength, and it will be only playing the game of the extremists to seek to check it.