Solving Problems Of Automation

Press, Volume CV, Issue 30971, 29 January 1966, Page 16

Solving Problems Of Automation

The State, rather than the Court of Arbitration might have to step in if unions and employers in New Zealand did not measure up to the problems of automation, said the workers’ representative on the court (Mr A. B. Grant) in Christchurch. He was addressing the monthly meeting of the Canterbury Trades Council of the Federation of Labour.

“I am sure that neither party would appreciate State intervention,” said Mr Grant. “One party would call such intervention fascism’ and the other would obviously call it ‘socialism.’ ” Mr Grant said that in his opinion the problems created by such innovations as the alteration of skills and the simplification of work processes would not be solved by “blind stubborn, rearguard action of the trades unions trying to defend traditional concepts.” Nor would they be solved by the employers consistently endeavouring to reduce the wages standard and conditions of the workers.

In his opinion, said Mr Grant the responsibility for the streamlining of awards and agreements to meet the innovations and improvements in industry should rest fairly and squarely with the workers and the employers. Mr Grant said it had been shown by industrial agreements already made in some countries that the fast-rising problem of automation could be solved —possibly without full satisfaction but with some measure of success.

“A notable illustration is the agreement made between the shipping authorities and the United States West Coast longshoremen. unSer the leadership of Harry Bridges.” said Mr Grant. To the workers, he said, every innovation in industrial processing—every improvement in machine production; every streamlining of production were steps towards automation.

In New Zealand, he said, painters, furniture workers, and printing trade workers, not to mention waterfront workers, were faced with the problems of the alteration of skills and the simplification of work processes. On the subject of wages and women workers, Mr Grant said that the policy of the trade union movement was for equal pay for the sexes.

But in his opinion, the determination of that policy, because of the social and economic implications was not so much the responsibility of the Court. Rather it was the responsibility of the trade unions and the employers, or perhaps in the final analysis, of the State.