The Dominion. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 1944. SECTIONALISM VERSUS COMMUNITY INTEREST

Dominion, Volume 38, Issue 3, 28 September 1944, Page 4

The Dominion. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 1944. SECTIONALISM VERSUS COMMUNITY INTEREST

When the war is over and the country turns to the problems of peace, the tasks to be faced will be simple or difficult according to the spirit in which they are approached. What will be needed is a recognition on the part of all sections that these problems should be regarded as a common cause, to be served in a spirit of goodwill and co-operation. This demands the cultivation of an attitude altogether different from that which is so disturbingly manifest today; and which may be broadly described as sectionalism versus community interest, in which self-seeking strives to prevail over the common welfare.

This attitude has been most conspicuous in the relationships between industrial unionism and constituted authority, especially in respect of those sections of organized labour whose policy and actions are dominated by militant elements. But it is not confined to industrial unionism. It only appears more prominently there because strikes, and stop-work meetings such as happened in the Wellington tramways recently, and which the Canterbury Branch of the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants proposes to hold today unless wiser counsels have prevailed in the meantime, react upon the public with more or less serious effects according to the nature of the case. In the wider sense it exists and is occasionally made visible in surface indications, in a growing feeling of antagonism on the part of individuals or groups toward those set in authority over them. The last half-century has seen a great accumulation of concessions and privileges to many classes of the community. . Instead of an increasing degree of satisfaction and contentment resulting from these, as might reasonably have been expected, there is greater unrest, with more and more demands on the part of self-interested groups oblivious of the effects of these upon the public welfare as a whole. This is especially the case with certain elements in industrial unionism, which in setting authority—within and outside their unions—at defiance and seeking to obtain satisfaction of demands by direct action, have set an unhealthy example to others, as illustrated recently by strike talk on the part of a section of secondary school teachers. It should need no argument to show that unless a more reasonable attitude is allowed to prevail in human relationships, and the trend of these directed toward a more ethical conception of civic responsibility regarding law and order, and constituted authority both public and private, the foundations of organized society may be ultimately undermined, and serious disorders may ensue. It may be pertinent in this connexion to draw attention to certain warnings given by responsible industrial union leaders in America to the danger to organized labour inherent in defiances of authority which react upon the public. The president of the United Automobile Workers, Mr. R. J. Thomas, recently addressed this statement to the members of the union, numbering one million:

A minority, even a handful (he said), can do. a union irreparable harm, even destroy it. The workers who insist in taking part in unauthorized strikes may be such a minority. There have been too many wildcat strikes. Public opinion has become inflamed against our union. Word of these strikes is going to our millions of men in uniform. Our union cannot survive if the nation and our soldiers believe that we are obstructing the war effort. Our loyal membership must face that fact. They must see to.it that the good name of our union is maintained, that the acts of isolated handfuls are not permitted to continue, to the detriment of all of us. Mr. George Q. Lynch, president of the Pattern-Makers’ League, declared that “unless the responsible unions actively support reasonable union regulations in the public interest, then all unions will feel the wrath of public reactions, and also without reference to merits. My sole interest,” he added, “is to urge a basis of accommodation between free industry and free employees that will rid organized labour of usurped irresponsible leadership, and. render innocuous the class-hatred appeals of Communists.” It is this “basis of accommodation” for which the speaker has pleaded, that is needed in human intercourse, among all sections, today. Tolerance and understanding and co-operation for the common good must replace the animosities and jealousies and artificially stimulated class divisions if the general welfare is to be soundly advanced.