The Dominion FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1921. THE ARBITRATION' ACT

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 303, 16 September 1921, Page 4

The Dominion FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1921. THE ARBITRATION' ACT

Although there is a fairly general opinion that tho industrial legislation of the Dominion is much in need of consolidation and amendment, not many people prob-, ably aro prepared to go as far in this direction as the president of tho Auckland Employers’ Association (Mr. A. Spencer). As he is reported briefly in a Press Association message to-day, Mr. Spencer' thinks that the whole of the laws dealing with the settlement of industrial disputes might well be repealed, and one Act framed on somewhat different lines to existing legislation substituted. Much as clear-working 1 uniformity is ,to be desired in matters of this kind, it is fairly obvious that practical efforts must be concentrated on a rathter more limited programme of change and improvement than Mr. Spencer advocates Decidedly the most hopeful 'immediate step towards providing for the better regulation of industry would be taken in consolidating and remodelling the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act and its amendments, and introducing such changes as experience has shown to be necessary or desirable. The 'word immediate is used, here in a relative sense and with reservations. Some possible improvements in the machinery of the Arbitration Act are of such pressing urgency as to demand the earliest' attention that Parliament can give them, but there can be no question of dealing in the overcrowded session about to open with the whole task of consolidating and remodelling the Act. Hurried attempts in the past to amend the Arbitration Aot 'have too often defeated their intended purpose. Sometimes«they have saddled the Court with additional, difficulties, and helped to make it unpopular with sections of the public. Amending legislation introduced during the forthcoming session ought to aim only at remedying apparent weaknesses which impair the current operation of the Act. but the larger task of overhauling the whole of its machinery ought to be undertaken at the earliest possible date. In any oten it takes to amend and improve the Act the Government ought to draw freely upon the specialised knowledge and experience of the President and other members of the Court. A sound policy was inaugurated in completely separating the Presidency of the Arbitration Court from the Supreme Court judiciary, hut if this policy is to yield tho best results in specialised efficiency the members of the Court, and particularly its President, must be given a voice in framing the legislation they arc appointed to administer.

An important detail weakness in the; Act which Parliament might well be asked to remedy during the coming session has been thrown into high, relief by recent events. The conditions under which the representative of the workers on the Court is at present elected are on the face of it not well calculated either to ensure fair representation or promote smooth working. As the Act stands, unions entitled to • take part in the election—that is to say, all registered unions—exercise one vote 'for every fifty members on their books. Tlyis means that unions of skilled workers who most need, approve, and support the Court—unions which, as a rule, are of small or comparatively small membership—are outvoted by a limited number of unions of large membership, such as those of the watersiders, miners, seamen, and railway servants, which, though registered, either ignore the Court or avail themselves of the machinery of the ■ Arbitration Act only to the extent which suits their passing convenience. According to a report published in our columns on Wednesday; 1 ’ which he has not -'attempted to contradict, the secretary of the Alliance of Labour (Mr. Roberts) stated at the conference held a few days ago that that body “held a trump 1 card because of the votes it controlled in the election of a member of the (Arbitration] Court.” This serves admirably to bring out the facte. The Alliance of Labour is hostile to the, Court; yet. according’ to its secretary', it controls the election of a member of the Court. Pleading as it must be to the declared enemies of industrial arbitration, ’this state of affairs embodies a ridiculous anomaly, and is glaringly unjust to unions whose members believe in the peaceful and orderly settlement of industrial disputes. Failing a complete remedy, a good deal would be done to redress the present unfair distribution of votingpower if the voting quota were incieased from fifty to two hundred —that is to say, if unions were given a vote for any number of members up to two hundred, and an additional vote for each additional two hundred members. In this way the relative voting strength) of unions which loyally support the Court would bo increased, and that of unions which register only for their own limited ends would be correspondingly diminished. The case of the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants, which is registered, but has never used the machinery of the Act for the settlement of any dispute, demands particular’attention. As a departmental service with superannuation rights and other special privileges, the members of the Amalgamated Society are most unlikely ever to apply to the Court, and it is as absurd to allow them to exercise a powerful influence in electing one of its members as it would be to allow the people of

one borough to elect (the Mayor and councillors of another.

While late events have sharply emphasised the necessity of amending the provisions governing the election of a workers’ representative on the Court, there is at least one other section of industrial legislation with which ,Parliament is bound to deal this year. The existing legislation bearing on the cost-of-living bonus expires at the, beginning of next tear. Something must be done next session to extend or amend it. A satisfactory adjustment will not easily be effected, but the experience the Court has gained in grappling with the ' thorny problems involved will no doubt greatly assist the Government and Parliament in making the best arrangement possible in the circumstances. Although there are various other directions in which the system! of industrial arbitration may advantageously be altered or remodelled the matters we have mentioned will probably prove as much as Parliament can usefully undertake to that end in the session about to open. Even this limited programme will do a great deal to strengthen a system of industrial regulation which, though it. cannot at once be made all-embracing, can bo made compact, efficient, and smooth-working. With even-handed justice and impartiality as its constant guiding principles, there is little doubt that the Court as time goes on will steadily overcome prejudice and enlist increasing approval and support. 1