DISPUTE SETTLEMENT: DEFECTS AND REMEDY

Press, Volume LXXXI, Issue 24567, 16 May 1945, Page 6

DISPUTE SETTLEMENT: DEFECTS AND REMEDY

industrial relations ■■ '*j||

[By A. E. C. HARE, PhD M

(Specially Written for “The Press.")

n

The reasons lor the delays which occur in setting In motion the machinery for the settlement of are so varied that no generalisation about the however, that there is one^ o }^? )on New li unlike most ts. Sn U “ pr T. n S ■SSffiS' prohibits* strikes does hot prevent them and that of enforcingfinesonorimnrisoning a large number of workmen K great that strict enforcement of the law is impracticable. One residt the legislation has had. It has prevented the growth in New Zealand of a fimy fledged conciliation service, The exurting concitiation commissioners and conciliation councils are all part of the legal system for collective under the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, which culminates in the Arbitration Court; and the commissioners do not normally step outside that legal framework unless by special request; Nor do the commissioners keep .watch on industry and endeavour to anticipate the points at which disputes are likely to arise. Their activities are mainly confined to routine duties under the I.C. and A. Act, and they intervene only at the request of the parties when a dispute over an award has broken out. Moreover the commissioners are local officials and as such lack authority of a national scope. Thus the work of the conciliation commissioners is not fully comparable with that of the conciliation division of the British Minis* try of Labour or the conciliation service of the United States Department of Labour. The last 30 years has seen a remarkable growth in the means of voluntary conciliation and of methods of State intervention in these countries; but in New Zealand no parallel growth has taken place, because it has been assumed that the legal framework of the arbitration system ,is sufficient to prevent all but occasional strikes. The. strikes of the last four yean should be sufficient proof that something further than legal prohibition is now required. Disabilities of Labour Department Theoretically it is, the duty of the Department of Labour to keep watch on all disputes and to see that the machinery for settlement is -used without delay and tip take whatever steps are necessary if the negotiations break down. In practice, however, the Department of Labour only comes into the picture' when a dispute is reported •to it and generally only after the initial steps to find a solution have failed. Thus the department often starts at a disadvantage, Its activities are not preventive. as they should be, but only I

curative, and often then only begun at a late stage in the disease. Moreover, though the Department of Labour ad- r ministers the Strike and Lockout , * Emergency Regulations, which fa theory cover all industries, it praett- S cally never Intervenes in disputes fa State enterprises such as the railways, State mines, or public works, and seldom handles disputes in the coalrnfa. ing industry, which are the responsible u ity of the Department of Mines, The A Department of Labour, therefore, only. r 5 partially covers industry. Some im> £ portent industries which give rise faVf s much unrest are outside the scope Of vil its work. Further, the Department of Labour suffers from serious difficulties in handling industrial disputes. The vi chief of these arise from the grogg 'understating of the department. inspectors of awards, who are technp ijl cally the source from which the D£ partment of Labour obtains informa* tion concerning local industrial dfe »|i putea, are heavily over-burdened with'J| duties as inspectors of factories and weights and measures and with a host 'll of other duties, besides that of kesoiag an eye on disputes. In the larger this is not so serious as in the conm*-’®f| districts where, as at Hamilton, stance, tiie inspectors will greatest difficulty in keeping in :«j|H with events in industrieg a very wide area, the daily the meat freezing works, and thh of the Waikato. In practice it fa ally impossible for the local to do more than to' draw the of the department to a dispute oSeaPlii has broken out; and the self may not hear of a local distent part of his district until a two after It has .begun, N»b<l|dy’fßuiiieas usually late stage jmd ite to therattention is then riven ter; unlew the dispute takes a serious turn or a breakdown at tuuamm tlations or threat of a strike majkefa|^H ther steps urgent. There is no of the.department, with autteWigaielflilß national scope, whose exe|api^^mHfl| our*to* ptovmi^ pute, to watch disputes one* tSaiMBgB at ever^dagg putes, alvraysobaerving qeiriMfflHHl see that no delay bfgtirr to take the n&emm trouble. ;Xt of which means, dUtleS ' ITo be