Forest Products troubled over union bill proposals

Press, 3 November 1983, Page 8

Forest Products troubled over union bill proposals

PA Wellington Industrial disruption would occur at main work sites if voluntary unionism legislation was enacted in its present form, said one of New Zealand’s main employers, N.Z. Forest Products, Ltd, yesterday. The inevitable result would be that New Zealand would lose productivity, profits would decrease, and national export income would be reduced, the company told a Parliamentary select committee. ‘‘The incidence of industrial disputes will increase because union members have said that they will not work alongside non-union members.” The committee is considering the Industrial Law Reform Bill which provides for the introduction of voluntary unionism and youth rates. Forest Products was one of several employer groups that made submissions. The Employers’ Federation and the Pulp and Paper Employers’ Association, who also made submissions, suggested that workers be allowed to have closed shops in some workplaces. The employers proposed

that post-entry closed shops, termed “a union workplace agreement” should require a secret ballot to initiate, on 80 to 85 per cent support of the workers, and the consent of the employer. They envisaged such an agreement would run for three years. The Pulp and Paper Employers’ . Association’s proposal was on similar lines. In its submission, Forest Products said that demarcation issues which now arose because of inter-union conflicts would be more frequent because union members would also dispute the right to undertake work with non-unionists. The company said it supported the concept of voluntary unionism in principle, but did not support the removal of provisions relating to the unqualified preference clause.. At major industrial sites such as the company’s mills where an excessive number of unions had some coverage, there was a need for employers to be able to negotiate with accredited representatives of their total work-force the terms and conditions of employment which would be hon-

oured by all parties. It suggested the bill not be enacted now but referred to a special committee of Government, employers and employees to recommend a more comprehensive reform ofthelndustrialßelationsAct. The company said that while some form of “postentry union shop” had been considered, it would be acceptable only if it was conditional on a reduced number of unions accepting collective responsibility for employees and negotiating awards. Earlier in. its submission, the Employers’ Federation said it supported the voluntary unionism proposals in broad terms. It put forward a proposal for a limited use of the unqualified preference clause for some workplaces where it was likely to be conducive to better industrial relations. Answering questions by the Opposition’s spokesman on labour, Mr E. E. Isbey, the federation’s executive director, Mr J. W. Rowe, said the Employers’ Federation had not made a formal or informal request for such legislation. The employers and the Federation of Labour had

received a paper outlining the Government’s proposals at a meeting of the longterm wage-fixing committee, said the deputy executive director, Mr Ray Taylor. They had not been privy to seeing a copy of the bill in a draft form. The Pulp and Paper Employers’ Association said in its submissions that the proposal to dispense with unqualified preference provisions and ban any other form of union membership arrangement would be “an undesirable and unwarranted intervention into the field of industrial relations.” The proposed form of voluntary unionism was a Singularly pure charter for individual freedom. It questioned whether that degree of freedom was compatible with stable, responsible trade unionism. The New Zealand experience and specifically the pulp and paper industry’s experience, suggested strong trade unions were not, per se, contrary to the public interest, the association said. “What would be contrary to the public , interest and to employer interests is a system which destabilises the

’ trade union movement and s allows a militant minority - to disrupt workplaces as a ■ result of the moderate ele- - ment’s opting out of the ■ union membership.” 1 The industry must have a I mechanism where it could negotiate with representatives of its workers when it i was necessary or desirable • to do so. They must also be ■ able to commit workers ■ during such negotiations, - said the association. » The bill provided for new i organisations to be set up to - represent workers who had : opted out of an existing union organisation. f “The bargaining process 1 within the existing system is difficult enough but total chaos will result if a com- ! pany is forced to recognise ! gnd bargain with frag- ! mented groups of workers.” The Council for Civil Lib- ’ erties opposed the introduction of voluntary unionism. I In its submission it said that , in present circumstances it ; believed the bill would seriously damage the relatively high level of co-operation r and mutual endeavour that existed between unions and employers. ; Employees’ views, page 2