FREE LABOUR.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 799, 23 April 1910, Page 5

FREE LABOUR.

ITS RIGHTS IN INDUSTRIAL LAW. A DIFFICULTY AVOIDED. By TeleeraDh-Preaa Aesociatidn-Coprris'at (Rec. April 22, 9 p.m.) Sydney, April 22. On March 14, in the Industrial Court, Judge Heydon dealt with an application by the Free Labourers' Association (opposed by the Wharf Labourers' Union) for representation on che Waterside Workers' 'Wages Board.' The union contained 3700 ' men—of; whom about half,: 1850,- worked on the deep-sea wharves—and the free labourers numbered only 450. Many free labourers whose services were gladly availed of by the employers during the strike, had been replaced by unionists when work was resumed. Judge Hey-' don eaid he thought it very singular that the dismissal of free labourers was rendered possible by'tbe fact that the Act contained no provision protecting non-unionists against such treatment. Had unionists been dismissed because' they were unionists, instead of nonunionists being dismissed' because they were non-unionists, the .employers would bo liable to : penalties aggregating £3000. If the right to work was not a right which the law should protect, it was hard to say what was. To bo a .-.non-unionist, was not an offence Sgamst the law. Hβ was afraid strong feeling would be aroused, but, he came to the conclusion that the free labourers claim to representation on the' Wages Board must bo conceded. • In the Industrial Court to-day'the trouble wac settled by the free laboui'>ers' nominee withdrawing. ~ Mr. W. M. Eughes (Labour M.H.E.), on behalf' of the Wharf. Labourers' Union, stated that with a view to easing the position, the members of the union had decided not to press for preference to unionists in the board's award. ■

_Tbe president, of" the Industrial Court, Judge Heydon, in accepting the nomination of two unionists to the Board, congratulated the Wharf Labourers' Union upon its action, which' had helped the Court: out of a "difficulty. . -.....■