The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 29, 1911. LABOUR TROUBLES.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1088, 29 March 1911, Page 6

The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 29, 1911. LABOUR TROUBLES.

Australia is suffering from a par--1 ticularly severe period of industrial . unrest just now. Newspapers to a hand by this week's mail contain r columns of matter relating to labour J disputes of various kinds, and a large amount of space is also devoted j to editorial comment on different phases of the situation. One of the . most bitter and outspoken articles 5 we have seen for a long time appear- , ed in the Melbourne Argus of March ■ 21, dealing with the action of the ; Home Secretary, Mr. King O'Mal- , ley, in supporting the strike of im-plement-makers. Perhaps no better • indication of the bitterness of fccl- ; ing that has been generated could , be gathered than is disclosed by this • outburst from a journal of the < standing and weight of the Argus. . Mr. O'Malley accompanied a dona- , tion to tho strike fund with a. letter . to one of the strike leaders, and it i is this communication which has put : the final touch to the wrath of tho , Melbourne paper: i Nothing more tiresome than Mr. King , O'Malley's letter to "Brother Itussell" has appeared in print for years. This gentleman, who now makes Australia ridiculous by being its Minister for Home Affairs, poses, with maudlin hypocrisy, as a sworn enemy of Capital and a generous friend of Labour. He expresses crude economical ideas, and encourages false industrial hopes, to which ho has given the lie in the conduct of his own life. Prating of the alleged cruelty, injustice, and oppression of the existing social system, he has to far turned that system to his own advantage that he is now ono of tho few rich men in tlie Federal Parliament. . . . This scourge ■ of tho financial system, who lias made a fortune by skilfully calculating upon its chances; this apostlo of Socialism, who lias tilled his pockets before Individualism perishes; this flail of tho rich, who is among their number—has scut a cheque for .£5 to tho strikers. It is part of his election expanses. Beyond this" .Co lie has guaranteed that he will try to spend an infinitely greater amount of tlie people's money in supporting the men in their strjee against Wages Boards and against a'groun of non-unionists. His own pitiful wmtra'.iction of his cant by his life would matter little if lie were not in power anil able to pledgo the Labour Ministry and tho Labour party _ to partisanship in an industrial fight. The tono and terms in W'jcli ho has promised to find work for tlio strikers are such that the Ministry is ■now ranged behind Mr. Russell and Mr. Hyett, with their "hell-unon-earth" policy and all tho .incitements to violence which have been uttered. ... In a mood which must seem to have been one of open satire the Labour parly last session passed an "Arbitration Act." Its real purpose was to give power —political and industrial—to the trades unions cracking tho whip behind Ministers; but ".rbitration was tho hypocritical name Riven to it. Now the Ministrv's advertising agent supports, strife. It certainly is a most extraordinary thing to find a member of the Government which passed the Arbitration Act supporting the strikers by a personal contribution to their funds; but still more astonishing to find him in his official capacity promising to do his best to find the strikers Government employment so that they may suffer as little inconvenience as possible from their action in refusing to continue to work at their trade with private employers. The principal grounds for the strike in question arise out of a demand for higher wages and objection to working with non-unionists. The Melbott rne Age, the great champion of Liberalism in Australia and with a sympathetic regard for the bost aspirations of Labour, lias a very interesting article on the situation, in the course of which it touches on the question of the rights of non-unionists. If Labour cultivated more respect for the powers of thinking out its complicated problems it would see, the Age thinks, the moral weakness of the attack on a small minority of non-unionists by an overwhelming majority of unionists. _ "Granted that the non-union-ists include those selfish unsocial creatures who grasp all tho benefits won by unionism, but bear none of its responsibilities, they also include men of resolute grit, who enjoy paddling their own canoe and who feel hampered by tho unnatural demand of loyalty to a union with which they are not in sympathy. The unionist dwells too complacently on the advantages that unionism has won for him without reflecting that those men who can stand up on principle against a majority keep alive the spirit that has won us most of our reforms. The best of tho non-unipnists stand for a principle, too, just as much as the unionists, and for • that reason ought to win the respect due to a brave opponent." This puts the position very well from the non-unionists' point of view, and no doubt many good unionists who have given the subject any real thought will admit the soundness of tho > contentions put forward. But, while the press has been writing in this strain, the employers and commercial.men who are all more or less affected and inconvenienced by industrial troubles have not . been idle. Tho growing strength of the Labour unions, accompanied, as it has been, by increased demands, has convinced many of the more far-see-ing that under existing conditions there is little hope of successfully resisting the demands of organised labour unless tho employers in turn organise on more practical lines than , has been attempted in the past. As the result of this feeling a movement has been started to prepare a scheme for the protection of employers and non-unionists from loss through strikes. It is proposed that a per- : manent fund of £200,000 bo raised, ; to be styled "The Employers' and ] Employees' Reimbursement Defence , Fund," the objects of which-.ire: 1. To protect, assist; and reimburse em- ; ployers of labour against losses in connection with strikes and their attendant : ovils. 2. To protect, assist, and reimburse free 1 employees against losses in connection 1 with strikes and their attendant evils. 3. To givo substantial assistance to any < approved benefit or educational association or society of free employees. It is explained that the £200,000, or | more, is to lie raised by donations j from those who hold the principles of j freedom of contract and tlie open | shop as being in the best interests of \ employer and employee; preserving | to the employer the right to conduct . his business with that freedom which : is essential to the well-being and development of every business, and ] alike preserving unto the employee ; that freedom of contract which is tho < right, of every person in any com- j muuityi at the same time conserving i

and preserving the reward of industry and individuality. The attractiveness of the scheme to the free worker is wry considerable. He will not only be protected and assisted when by reason of strikes he has been debarred from earning his livelihood at his trade; but it is proposed that he shall also rcccivc succour and assistance when in case of sickness he is prevented from following his usual avocation. Moreover, from an educational point of view lie will benefit, funds being provided for any educational schemc which may bo considered in the interest of free_ employees embracing free scholarships, technical education, etc. The movement is the biggest thing of its kind yet attempted and according to the Aye. the committee which has the matter in hand has already met with promises of solid support. It is a deplorable thing that such a movement should be necessary, but if it meets with the anticipated it may have a beneficial effect in quite a different way to that outlined by the promoters. Should the movement reach the strength aimed at, organised labour will be confronted with a force so powerful that it may well see reason to pause before precipitating trouble. With greater respect for the powers arrayed against them each side in the industrial arena may reasonably be expccted to show less inclination to become embroiled in a wasteful labour war, and counsels of prudence may avert many of the troubles which arc at present so injuriously affecting both employer and employee in the Commonwealth.