Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Call For Enforcing Of Industrial Laws

(New Zealand Press Association)

NEW PLYMOUTH, January 15. Stating that certain legislation in New Zealand such as the Transport Regulations and the Justices of the Peace Act, was enforced by responsible organisations, Mr L. H. Rundle, president of the New Zealand Dairy Factory Employers’ Association, and of the Taranaki section of the association, said at a special meeting of the section at Stratford today that someone should be responsible for enforcing industrial legislation. He was reporting to the meeting as one of the four employers’ representatives who met the employees’ representatives in Wellington on January 6 under the chairmanship of Mr F. P. Walsh, president of the Federation of Labour, to deal with the possible strike of dairy factory workers, as a result of which the basic wage was increased. After Mr Rundle had made his statement and thrown the meeting open to questions, Mr A. Hall began to speak, but several members interrupted and suggested that the discussion on Mr Rundle’s statement be taken in committee. There was opposition to this view, but on a show of hands a decision to exclude the press from the meeting was made by 26 votes to 16. “Lawlessness’ ’ With this “act of lawlessness,” Mr Rundle said, the question arose as to how far short of lawlessness the industrial legislation of New Zealand was. It should be someone’s responsibility, when acts of aggression occurred, to accept responsibility, and that had not been done. He said that the industrial laws were based on a five-day week from Monday to Friday. What some persons overlooked was that where workers were employed on a five days a week basis, spread over seven days, they were having time off on week days when others were working. During the time of the recent dispute, Mr Rundle said, there were rumours that other unions of workers connected with the farming industry were “going to have a lick, too.” In referring to the dairy factory workers’ previous basic rate of £9 15s 4d a week, he quoted a number of other basic rates that were about the same. The advantage the dairy factory workers had, he said, was that they worked at week-ends and on public holidays at penal rates of pay. Change in Attitude The present agreement between the employees and employers of the dairy industry was discussed last year and ratified in August, he said. The employees then were quite reasonable, because of the falling prices of primary produce sent overseas. “Why did they change their minds in December?” he asked. “Later on I will give you the reason, but not in open meeting.”

The increase of 10s a week in the basic >fate for adult males would, in effect, mean about 18s a week when allowance was made for works at week-ends and on public holidays, said Mr Rundle. With the amendment made to the award the procedure followed was now completely legalised. Discussing why the employers’ representatives compromised, he said that there was the difficulty of manning the factories. Some said it could have been done by the farmers. Voices: That is so. Mr Rundle: Yes, but for how long? After a time they would have wanted to get back to do work on their farms. Several speakers shouted, “No.” Mr Rundle said another factor was that, had the farmers manned factories, their action might have been declared black by the transport and cool stores workers and possibly by the watersiders. Minister’s View Mr Rundle said there were some persons, who hoped at the time that deregistration of the workers would have some effect but he did not think it would have got them back to work. “About 5 p.m. on January 6, we saw the Minister of Labour and he was not prepared to take any action,” said Mr Rundle. “The Minister said that he would not take the responsibility of deregistering. It was something that would have to go to the Cabinet and it would have been difficult to get a Cabinet meeting at that time.

“We have the assurance of the other side now that when we meet in conciliation in March, the question of the labour reward for basic rate will not be in dispute,” said Mr Rundle.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19590116.2.186

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28795, 16 January 1959, Page 14

Word Count
712

Call For Enforcing Of Industrial Laws Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28795, 16 January 1959, Page 14

Call For Enforcing Of Industrial Laws Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28795, 16 January 1959, Page 14

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert