COMMENT FROM THE CAPITAL THURSDAY IS ZERO-DAY ON INDUSTRIAL LABOUR FRONT

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32525, 8 February 1971, Page 12

COMMENT FROM THE CAPITAL THURSDAY IS ZERO-DAY ON INDUSTRIAL LABOUR FRONT

(By

C. R. MENTIPLAY.

our Parliamentary reporter)

WELLINGTON February 7.—Will New Zealand have wage restraints by agreement, or will the Government have to take action? Will there be an acceptance of longer-term awards without interim adjustment or will this be rejected ? ’

And will Parliament meet before the end of this month in order to discuss Goverment measures to control the vicious cost-of-living spiral ? These and many other related questions will be revealed next Thursday, or even late on Wednesday night. There is little likelihood of round-table discussions being carried further.

The outlook is not bright. There is a conspiracy of silence between the three parties to last week’s discussions—the Government, the Employers’ Federation, and the Federation of Labour —for obvious reasons. If statements were being made, there would be a buildup of telegrams and letters from unions and employers’ associations, and a proliferation of side issues. One point which is being accepted by all three groups of negotiators is the necessity to keep the issues simple. This is not the time for sideissues. It is a time to establish which points are agreed upon, which points enjoy substantial agreement, and which points are still sharply at issue.

The Government’s main problem in the talks has been to convince the parties that the time for temporising and non-positive talking is nearly gone, and that this time the Government intends positive action in the absence of agreement. The chairman of the discussions, the Minister of Labour (Mr Marshall) made this clear in a statement early last week. No leapfrogging Inevitably the industrial conciliation and arbitration system, or more exactly the

present-day interpretation of it, has been the point most discussed. Nobody wants to abandon it for something untried, but there is room for believing that its built-in safeguards have been tampered with considerably during its long existence. A prime cause for continuing price-rises is the practice of “leapfrogging" awards, and there is strong Government feeling that more stability would be achieved if this were abandoned in favour of a more balanced system. Awards are “leapfrogged” by the adoption of interim agreements during the currency of the main award. The Government view is best expressed thus: 1. The practice of making adjustments to awards during their currency must stop. When an agreement is made, the parties must stick to it throughout its currency.

2. The renegotiation of awards should be conducted ■on reasonable grounds. Some claims received recently have involved blanket increases of 25 per cent in wage structures—which officers regard as “ridiculous.”

3. The wage-cost-of-living relationship must be fair. That is, if the cost of living rises, there must be an adjustment, whether it be by General Wage Order, by interim arrangement, or by the decision of a wages committee. The difficulty, even if agreement is obtained, will be in getting a general acceptance. A series of strikes following a decision which proves unacceptable to a section of the industrial labour movement could be disastrous, in that it could plunge the country into the kind of crisis which the talks have been called to avoid. “If there is a decision, it has to be both fair and easy to understand,” a high Govment authority told me. “Everyone has to understand it, and to accept its fairness. This would apply to any change in the present system.” Early session? .

The possibility of a session of Parliament being called within a fortnight of the announced course of action is not discounted. This could bring Parliament together as early as February 23, and certainly before the end of the month. It is emphasised, however, that this course would be taken only in the absence of agreement on vital matters. This agreement would not

necessarily be complete—but would include the acceptance by employers and employees that the restraints intended would be for the good of the country.

The Government could take action by itself, but if that action were unpopular (and it could hardly be otherwise) the public reaction could be violent and long-lasting. Amendment of the I.C. and A. Act and other legislation would require the sitting of the House—as would the handling of other legislation directed at unruly trade bodies.

To proceed far without the sanction of Parliament would be to put an invaluable weapon in the hands of the Labour Opposition, which could fairly claim that it had not been consulted, and could make charges of “Star Chamber Methods.” “Government bv Order in Council” and the like. Trial of strength The possibility of a trial of strength on the labour front has been in the air for a long time. Talks held in November and December did not please the Ministers concerned, who left them believing that at least some sections of the industrial labour movement were not prepared to face the cold, hard facts of life.

This may have been why, at the last meeting of the Government Party caucus before Christmas, members were warned of the possibility of an early session. One source savs that inquiries set in train then were aimed at ensuring that sufficient Government members would be within reach at all times after January to ensure a Government majority. The “crunch” is coming. The Cabinet meeting tomorrow (Mondav) will receive a full report from Mr Marshall, and possibly from other members of the “ad hoc” committee. There might be an earlier meeting of the Cabinet Economic Committee. No ffiove will be made, however, until the conference of the Federation of Labour has met on Tuesday and Wednesday to discuss this as well as other matters. This . will leave the rest of Wednesday for discussions on decisions which have already been reached, on a contingency basis, by the Government. The atmosphere around Parliament Buildings this week-end is not without hope —but it is demonstrably one of apprehension. Too many believe that the die has already been cast.