Farmers’ plan for freezing industry

Press, 1 July 1978, Page 4

Farmers’ plan for freezing industry

I’A Wellingtoi Federated Farmers' detailed plan for improving industrial relations in the freezing industry was presented to the Minister of Labour (Mr Gordon I } esterday.

Main points are that the industry would be a separate industrial sphere, there would lie a special tribunal, and three days notice of stoppages would be needed. The plan was handed to the Minister by the president of Federated Farmers (Mr A F Wright) and the chairman <>f the meat and wool council of the federation. The detailed plan is: tl) A Freezing Industry Act -would create a separate industrial spnere for the freezing industry or. a par. for example, with the agricultural workers, the waterfront industry and the aircrew employees. The industrial activities of the freezing industry would be conducted within this separate indus- , trial sphere. , (2) A Freezing Industry!) Tribunal would be created to ( administer the legislation. i The tribunal would comprise < a president, who would be i a judge of the Arbitration > Court, as well as an em- i ployees’ and ar> employers’, representative. These would ; be appointed in agreement i with the various employee) and employer groups. (3) At each plant a freezing , industry conciliation commit- j tee would be established. The ; chairman of each committee , would be appointed, after ( agreement by interested j parties, bv the Minister of ( Labour. Should agreement , not be reached, he Minister | would have sta’utory authority to make such an appointment. A deputy chair- ’ man would also be appointed 1 bv the same aroc-dure. Both:! appointments would be for]’ 12 months. |J <4) The chairman of the ( freezing m<’ ‘ry conciliation committee w-'-dd be called in- t stantly to investigate any f

■ chairman of each such coun--I'cil would be appointed from ■ time to time by the Minister • for a term not exceeding a I year. The employers’ repre- ! sentatives and the workers’ representatives would be appointed by the chairman . and would be appointed from 'I time to time as the occasion 'required in relation to the application before the council, on the nomination of the unions concerned with that application, but equality of representation would always be preserved. Any national dispute would be referred to the conciliation council for settlement. (6) The proposed Freezing Industry Act would make it mandatory that all awards be finalised in the freezing industry before the start of each killing season. Should the matter not be settled in i conciliation, it would automatically be referred to the proposed tribunal. (7) Three days’ advance notice of any stoppages would be made a binding procedural requirement. Responsibility for observing the requirement would be placed on unions and their executives, and on management and their boards. Unions and; management would respeclively be fixed with collective responsibilitv for actions on the part of their individual members — for example, if a wildcat strike was successfully argued by an individual worker, irrespective of whether the union approved! of the step, the union would! be fixed with responsibility! for the consequences This is called the princinle of collec-1 tive responsibility and is modelled on the principle of; vicarious liability that an em-j plover has for any employee’s! actions. (8) The initial energy of the ■ chairman of the conciliation! committee would be concentrated on establishing the i primary cause of the breach | and seeking a remedy to the! dispute. Next, the chairman ’ would take steps to ensure ; that a repitition of the breach! was avoided. Where the: chairman considered it warranted, he could publicly identify the root cause of the; dispute and the prime offenders. (9) There would be special-; ised penal provisions forj breach of the award. The severity of the penalties j would be varied, depending; on the seriousnes of the! breach. In the case of a | minor breach, the matter' could rest, once resolved' under the procedure referred \ to in section eight. In more i serious cases, the perpetra-1 tors of the dispute could be I publicly identified and cautioned. In the most serious; cases, the offenders could be I prosecuted with penalties; 1 similar to those in the Indus-; trial Relations Act. '

■ dispute arising within the : plant, and, if desirable, call I together a conciliation comI mittee comprising representatives of the employers and employees related to the i particular dispute — for example, should dispute occur tn the fellmongery, the conciliation committee would comprise representatives from tne fellmongery department. The chairman would be given the statutory responsibility to make a decision on the matter in dispute which w'ould be binding on both parties. Should either party wish, they w'ould be able to lodge an appeal with the proposed Freezing Industry Tribunal. which w'ould be bound to hear the appeal as soon as practicable. It would be: mandatory that normal work continue efore the chairman of the conciliation committee was called to investigate the. dispute. In reading a decision| on any dispute, the chairman Would be required to take note of any effect his decision would have on the national: award and on the relativities’ with other sections of the industry. (5) There would be set up, under the auspices of the proposed Freezing Industry Act a conciliation council which would, as under present cir-[ cumstances, negotiate national awards. Should concilia-I tion break down, the dispute would automatically be referred to the proposed Freezing Industry Tribunal. The conciliation council would comprise an independent chiarman, and an equal number of employee and employe! representatives. The conciliation council would . comprise an independent chairman, and an equal nuni- i ber of employee and employer representatives. The ;