Act stretched resources—Douglas

Press, 27 July 1988, Page 42

Act stretched resources—Douglas

PA Hamilton The president of the Council of Trade Unions, Mr Ken Douglas, says he does not believe employers are using the Labour Relations Act to undermine the financial position of individual unions.

But he confirms that the new act has stretched union finances and has considerably changed the way unions work. Mr Douglas was responding to a report which said some unions were being crippled by high legal costs resulting from court cases and interpretations under the att.

One of the early descriptions of the act was that it was more legalistic and confrontational than its predecessor. “As a result there has been a shift in attitudes and resources and the number of damages actions and cases going to court for interpretation mirror the significant increase in legal costs,” he said. ' “One of the inequalities of the system is that the legal expenses for employers can be loaded on to goods and services but with unions it is in the level of fees. “Because of this the

financial bases of unions are quite stretched.” Withdrawal of Government support for conciliation and award enforcement was also placing extra burdens on unions. Organisers had to spend more time on award enforcement and therefore there was a significant readjustment in the relationship between services and what was being paid for legal advice. However, Mr Douglas said he could not blame employers for using the new legal means available to settle disputes. “If employers seek more legal redress it is just using the system but their greater wealth base and economic power is an advantage,” he said. The C.T.U.’s own legal officer has had an increased workload as a result of the act. Mr Douglas said it was now up to unions to restructure to protect themselves. “Amalgamation and reform of bargaining procedures will be necessary to reduce the significant traditional costs to a position where unions can better utilise their financial resources,” he said. Legal cost increases also affected employers, according to the Em-

ployers’ Federation’s deputy director-general, Mr Steve Marshall. However, the general attitude appeared to be that it was necessary because of changes in the law. “We are in a transitional period and burden of costs is on unions while people get. used to the new environment and understand and realise the obligations and learn not to make mistakes that can take them to court,” he said. “There is a slight extra cost but what is happening is necessary because it is healthy.” Mr Marshall said the Government rightly stated that the parties involved in industrial law should be the ones to police it. “We are really moving from the situation where all agreements could be broken with impunity. Now there is a contract,” he said. While it could take time for some people to learn about the new law, some were already learning the hard way in extra cost and the pain of penalties. Mr Marshall said it could take up to two years before unions and employers got everything sorted out and people realised their obligations.