SHIPOWNERS AND SEAMEN

Dominion, Volume 15, Issue 160, 1 April 1922, Page 8

SHIPOWNERS AND SEAMEN

AN ABORTIVE MEETING IN CONCILIATION COUNCIL A CASE FOR THE COURT The conciliation proceedings in the dispute between the shipowners and the Seamen's Union over wages and conditions of work opened in Wellington yesterday morning and terminated without any approach to a settlement. Tho secretary of the Federated Seamen’s Union, Mr. W. T. Young, took the view that the employers intended to have the case settled in the Court. He declared that the union would discuss nothing at the counoil table, but would "fight to the ' bitter end in the arena the employers had chosen.” The Conciliation Commissioner, Mr. W. Newton, presided over the council. The assessors for the shipowners were Messrs. AV. G. Smith, J. Smith, and AV. H. G. Bennett, and for the liiiioii Messrs. AV. T. Young, T. F. Anderson, and AV. R. Clarke. Captain Petersen attended on behalf of the small shipowners. The claims of the shipowners, who cited the union under the Arbitration Act in the finrt instance, and the counter-claims of the union, have already been published. Mr. AV. T. Young applied to havo a, number of shipowners added as parties to the case, but it was pointed ou,t that the necessary preliminaries had not been complied with, and that the application could more easily be made to tho Arbitration Court. The Commissioner expressed the hope that the parties had come there in a reasonable frame of mind, with the intention of arranging a .settlement. If that was too much to expect in these troublous times, he hoped that they would agree to differ. CASE FOR THE SHIPOWNERS. Mr. Young expressed a wish that Mr. AV. G. Smith should go right through the claims and express the reasons for making them, and the effect they would have on the existing system. Mr. AV. G. Smith pointed out that the claims affected the whole Dominion, and that while the present case was a local one, the intention was to extend the award to the Dominion. He said that it was mainly owing to the present unsatisfactory times that they had to ask for such a modification of wages and conditions as was embodied in the claims of the employers. Pie thought ' the other side would understand the shipowners’ point of view, although they might not agree with it. If the shipowners were to carry on their businesses without riiaking losses, it was essential that they should have a modification of the existing wages and conditions. The shipowners’ proposals were almost entirely based on the 1917 agreement. There was no intention to interfere with the eight-hour day. They would remember that the 1917 agreement was completed only after considerable difficulty, and it was mainly owing to the efforts of the Hon. G. W. Russell, after thq parties had failed to come to an agreement, that a conference was held and a settlement finally effected. Tho employers were not asking for anything that had pot worked satisfactorily in the pa-st; they were merely trying to get rates and conditions which had worked satisfactorily in tho Dominion for three years reinstated at the jiresent time. The other side was l not without knowledge of their claims, considering that it had worked under them for the period Mentioned. Mr. Young: I am perfectly innocent of them while I sit at this table. Mr; Smith said that it was absolutely necessary to modify tho existing conditions if the shipowners were to be able to meet competition. He was quite prepared to hear the other side say thatythe Shipping and Seamen Act protected the local companies so far as trading on the New Zealand coast was concerned, but many Now Zealand ships were trading outside New Zealand, and the rates of pay here were too high to meet the competition. He could quote some of the rates to show this was a fact. Mr. Young: You cannot quote anv of your coolie ships. They were volnntarily entered as competitors with ships already in the trade. STRESS OF COMPETITION. Only this week, said Mr. Smith, a British company had taken a contract for carrying phosphates from Nauru to Auckland —business which' had formerly been done by New Zealand ships —at 4s. 6d. per ton gross per month. The New Zealand ships’ expanses were Bs. -per ton per month. If they allowed for depreciation and for interest on capital at 7 per cent., the Union Company’s costs would be 9s. per ton, or exactly double what the competitor had taken the contract at. They could not put up with that and survive. It was a comparatively new thing for vessels to compete in what they’ looked on as their own trade iii the Pacific. But, oiying to the depression in the shipping trade competitors came out without caring in the least upon whose toes they trod. On British vessels in the latter part V>f. the war period seamen were getting '£l4 10s. n month. About a year ago a reduction of £2 10s. per month was made, bringing the wage down to £l2Since then another £1 10s. had been taken off, and a further 10s. was to be taken off on May 1, bringing the j wage down to £lO a month. The New j Zealand rate was £l4 a month for seamen and £l6 for firemen. Since | the agreement had been made in 1920 an addition of 10s. per month had been j given, equivalent to the bonus granted by the Arbitration Court. ' J Mr. Young: Only ss. for ordinary i seamen, ' • I

Mr. Smith said that owing to the operation of clause 43 of the agreement, the seamen had since received what might be called a fortuitous increase of £1 6s. Bd. per month, in conformity with the provisional award in the seamen’s case in the Australian Arbitration Court in December. The Australian Court had made its final award! since, reducing that amount to 17s. The rates now being paid to New Zealand seamen were £l5 7s. for seamen and £2 a month more for firemen. Able seamen and firenhm working on ships trading in the Pacific were paid a little over £ll a month, and overtime at sea had been abolished. He had no definite information about the rates in the Atlantic, although he understood that they wore lower than in the Pacific. The New Zealand shipowners wore not competitors in the Atlantic trade. IN THE PACIFIC. Air. Young: To what extent <re you competitors in the'Pacific? Air. Smith said that there wore several vessels belonging to the United States Shipping Board, as well as other vessels, coming to New Zealand. Air, Young: How were you handicapped by this competition prior to

November last? A’ou must know that during the war period these vessels were paying much higher wages than you aro to-day. Mr. Smith: I am dealing with the existing wage. Mr- Voting: “I know you aro. But you sec the great advantage your company had in the war period.” Air. - Youii" added that vessels trading from the Atlantic Coast, the Pacific Coast, and the coast of British Columbia naid £2 a month more than the (7 8 8 Co. did during the war, and this’ company saved thousands and thousands of pounds thereby. Mr Smith: There was no competition during the war -period. Ships were wanted, not cargo. » Mr. Young: Your company did all Smith said one of the made’ by the employers was that overtime pay should not be given for the removal of ashes. That work had always been done by the watch going off’here, but since overtime was paid for it the cost to the Union Company alone had amounted to £20,000 a year. It was easily possible for the watch to do it. . He referred to the Amencan conditions, under which the ashes were removed from the furnaces by the watch on duty without extra pay. Air Youno - did not think that they would go back to the times of slavery. Ain Smith said ho was not suggest'nAinl Voting: You are suggesting that the men should do certain work for n °Mr nK Smith said their competition was in the Pacific. He was not referring to the Germans—he understood they were getting about £1 6s. Bd. ‘"Ain Young asked what the difference was between the New Zealand and Australian shipowners. S d"ffere± Aurtralrin companics were practically confined to tie lusUalian coast, and were pro Wed th c e ouM a ta a r 'o A n Ct the. AustrS coart unless it complied wltb A US j ia ’ li'in wages and conditions, and had a 19^r aP in that. The emplovS thought the 1917 agreement fn r and reasonable compromise. . a in the afternoon seme took Place on several of the clauses, but no agreement was arrived , . FROM THE EMPLOYEES’ SIDE) Mr AV. T. Young, one of the assessors for tho workers, said he had listened with interest and some meut to the statement by one of the ronresentatives for the employei s in the drinute He had apparently pinned hie faith to 1917, the thick of the war period the time the Dominion was engTttecl in sending troops to the front, tis it was an almost imperative necessity to get boats and men to man them' for’the purposes of war transmit In 1917 officers of the seamen s SSnieation in AVellington, Christchurch, and Dunedin had to spend all their time obtaining exemption from military service for seamen who we e excited his amazement, that they were now confronted with a set which, roughly speaking, reduced the Warnings of the men, who . numbered some 5000, by half a million pounds sterling per annum, for the purpose of putting that sum in the P ock ® ts men designated as belonging to thi. employing class. As a matter of tact, during the war period, when strenuous efforts were being made to obtain men to man'the guns, they were told that they‘were fighting for the uplift. of democrary and freedom, an “ ™ a “ those who had served the country so well would be looked after when the iriar was over. The sitting of the Conciliation Council that day was an example of what they could expect. It must bo remembered that the agreement of 1917 had been made in the thick of tho war, when the seamen s organisation possessed the power to extract from the employers almost any terms they desired, but if they looked at that agreement they, would see that there was nothing in it beyond what was reasonable. The existing agreement was made in 1920. onming into effect on March 1,. sixteen, months after the armistice, when most of the troops from Now Zealand had been demobilised, and most of the troopships were out of commission, and. the hospital ships had completed their work; and yet tho agreement was “nothing very great.” --It was now proposed to set that agreement almost completely aside? They had compared minutely the proposals of the employers with the current agreement. That comparison cpvered eight sides of. typed foolscap. They had come to the conclusion that they had little or nothing left of the existing agreement. It was proposed to take £4 16s. sd. a month from, the employees, with the exception of ordinary seamen, who Were to suffer a reduction of'£3 16s. sd. per montin while 6d. an hour was tp be taken oft the overtime. In other respects most drastic alterations were proposed. The employers suggested that they should go tliftfugh the clauses seriatim in the most friendly and harmonious manner, as between master and man, and .yet they submitted such extraordinary proposals. COOLIE LABOUR. He fully recognised that they were really not dealing with tho Union Steam Ship Company as a New, Zealand concern or with the small shipping companies—they were dealing with the P. and 0. combine, with Lord Inchcape, wlio dictated the policy the employers must support at that table. He intended to solve the question i whether they were going to allow a ! foreign corporation to dictate to New | Zealand the conditions, of employment in the mercantile marine, or whether [ the conditions were to ho settled bv I New Zealand They wanted also to ascertain wliat were the ra.miI fications of the huge combine which, he understood, included the Orient [ Company, the New Zealand Shipping I Co., the P. and O. Co., and the 8.1. Co., all of which were employers lof black labour. He had seen at [ the wharf last week a vessel of tho I 8.1. Co. loading wool and flax for ’ the United Kingdom with the aid of | black labour, with coolies paid 25 rupees a month —something the ship had never done before in New ZeaI land; yet the ship was getting the same freight as was usually sent to Europe. At the Glasgow Wharf another oversea ship, the Polshanan, manned by coolie labour, was doing the same. The pbject, of course, was to supersede European labour by the employment of coolies. Lord Inchcape, at a meeting of shipowners, had 'in effect signified bis adherence to ' such a policy. At Napier the speaker . had seen a Norwegian ship manned by seamen who could not speak English, t under charter to a New Zealand mer- ' cantilo house. The ship was miserably manned and miserably paid. There was not a shipping company operating on this coast which was not i controlled by the P. and O. Company, i Air. Bennett: That is not true of my company. “Oh, you,” retorted Air. Young, “yours is only a piccaninny company —vou onlv control one ship.” I Later on, continued Mr. Young, he ’

would endeavour to establish _ m the proper place the truth of his statement. In most shipping companies in the Dominion the U.S.S. Co. had a large share, of dummies speak mg on its behalf. On December 17 he had forwarded to the U.S.S. Co. and pthcfr shipping companies proposals for a new agreement, which he asked them to discuss at a meeting to be convened for they purpose. The small shipping companies formally replied, ana stated that the matter had been referred to tho Shipowners Federation, but no reply came from the others until he again wrote to the New Zealand Shipowners’ Federation on February 9, 1922. On February 15 letter was acknowledged, and the statement made that the proposals and request for a conference had been considered at a meeting of shipowners, and could not be accepted 1 . “FALSE PRETENCES.”

It was, therefore, evident that the shipowners had made up their minds to settle nownere, except in the Arbitration Court. In tho face of their letter ho felt that they were there that day under false pretences, and he said that with all deference, to the Commissioner and the Arbitration Court itself. His side would discuss nothing at all there, but would take the dispute to the arena the employers had chosen, and fight it to the bitter end. They would ask the employers there to put all their cards on the table, to give the public an opportunity of judging what they were endeavouring to get from the seamen, and he had no doubt the result would be very different from the proposals before them. Before he concluded, he wanted to point out that the proposals sent to the Wellington branch of the Seamen’s Union, signed by .Mr. Bennet, those sent to the Dunedin branch signed by a U.S.S. official, and those sent to tho Auckland branch signed by an official of tho Northern S.S. Co., were identical, except that the last-men-tioned contained proposals in regard to river steamers, which were not in the others. So this was evidently a concerted act by the employers to take advantage of tho conditions ■ of tho labour market.' That was democracy. The essence of the arbitration system introduced by .the Hon. W. P. Reeves was the amicable meeting of employers and employed to concert methods for the settlement of industrial disputes. The men in« Parliament representative of those on the other side of the table opposed that feature of the system, and they still pursued that policy. cONTR adICTION.

Mr W. G. - Smith said he did. not intend to discuss Air. Young’s speech, but he did desire to contradict the extravagant assertion that tho claims represented half a n P ui ° u c< ' ln , ons y - At present tho U.S.S. Co. einplojed 433 seamen and 563 firemen, trimmers, etc Let them concede 2000 more employed by other companies, which was an extravagant estimate, and the reduction could not possibly be more, allowing liberally tor every saving, than £224,000 a year. He was obliged to Air. Young for stating straight out. the position he intended to take up, instead of wasting tune going into Young- asked the Commissioner if he would set out in the recommendation to the Court his masons for refusing to discuss the details at that St< Mr. Newton said it was clear, from the attitude of tho parties khat there iVas no possibility of a settlement, and he would report accordingly. , . Air. Young repeated that his intention was to go .right through to the end with the dispute, and show the public, the employers, and the AA elfare I/cague, when the cards were on the table, that the seamen were in the right in the attitude they had taken •A heartv vote, of thanks te the Com.missioner ’for the tactful and impartial manner in which he had conducted the proceedings terminated the sitting.