F.O.L. pulls out of council

Press, 14 October 1976, Page 1

F.O.L. pulls out of council

PA Wellington

The Federation of Labour has withdrawn from the Industrial Relations Council and the subcommittee set up to examine the Industrial Relations Amendment Bill,

The federation’s president (Sir Thomas Skinner) said from Auckland last evening that both bodies were “a farce.” The Industrial Relations Council is a tripartite body of employer and union representatives chaired by the Minister of Labour (Mr Gordon). Its sub-committee was formed to examine proposed changes to industrial relations legislation and wage-fixing.

“There does not seem to be any point remaining on the Industrial Relations Council,” Sir Thomas said. “While the sub-committee was sitting and bringing down recommendations to the Government, the Government was drafting amendments to the Industrial Relations Bill.

“The sub-committee asked for more time to consider the bill and while we were doing that the Government was making a

pretence of listening to the sub-committee while it had amendments to the bill in the law draftsmen’s hands.” Sir Thomas said the decision to withdraw was made yesterday when employers’ representatives on the sub-committee were unable to give assurances that they would not go along with "punitive measures” against unions contained in the legislation. The bill, which had its first reading on October 1, is not to go before the Labour Bills Select Committee for submissions on October 27, Sir Thomas said the Government intended to limit the number of groups or individuals who could present submissions, "They want to limit it to a certain number of people to stifle criticism they know they will get from experts in industrial relations.”

Sending the bill to the select committee was a farce. “The Government is putting up a front by saying they will go to the select committee,” he said.

“It does not shut out the Federation of Labour or the employers. But there is only going to be a certain number of meetings the press could attend,” said Sir Thomas. Asked if the F.O.L.

would consider staying away from the select committee, he replied, “the F.O.L. is duty bound to be heard by the select committee. “I think the Government has made up its mind already on the bill. It’s just a front.” Sir Thomas and the secretary of the F.O.L. (Mr W. J, Knox) met Mr Gordon yesterday afternoon but spoke about current industrial disputes and not the federation’s withdrawals.

“The only intimation from Mr Gordon was that he would consider having more people before the select committee,” Sir Thomas said after the meeting.

Asked if the F.O.L. would accept the proposed legislation should it become law, Sir Thomas said it would depend on the final draft.

“We cannot prevent the Government legislating, but we can resist the application of that legislation.”

There would have to be a substantial modification of the proposed bill before it would be acceptable to the federation, he said.

Employers failed to realise the implications of the bill. “They think they have their own Government in office and, as loyal sup-

porters of the Government, are prepared to go along with it,” said Sir Thomas.

The bill would force a complete breakdown of industrial relations if adopted in its present form. An application for a general wage order by the Federation of Labour would have to wait until the Industrial Relations Bill was “dealt with.” The F.O.L. could file for the wage order after the bill had passed through the select committee, he said. The Employers’ Federation is disappointed at the Federation of Labour’s attitude.

The employers’ national president (Mr Derek Sutcliffe) said in a statement last night it was important for industrial relations that the two parties should be able to meet and talk within the Industrial Relations Council. In a council subcommittee early yesterday the F.O.L. had asked employers’ representatives to outline their policy on proposed penalties to be introduced by the Government in amendments to the Industrial Relations Act.

The employers had undertaken to do this. “But the reintroduction of penalties into industrial law is an important step: too important for ernploy-

ers to be rushed in formulating their policy,” said Mr Sutcliffe. The attitude of the Employers’ Federation members was being sought, and the programme for formulation of policy was geared towards the presentation of submissions to the Parliamentary Labour Bills Select Committee in the near future.

“We feel Sir Thomas has been hasty in his announced step. The two federations have a role to play together in the industrial life of this country. Without dialogue, neither federation can carry out that role effectively,” Mr Sutcliffe said, Mr Gordon said he hoped the F.O.L. would reconsider the decision and come back into the council at a later stage. He said he could understand the federation’s frustration at having to work with the employers on the industrial relations sub-committee on a bill which it opposed.

“I think the council’s stepping into the wagefixing arena was a bit optimistic and it was inevitable that friction must have come,” the Minister said. But he thought the parties would still be able to maintain contact.