TRADES UNIONISM.

Evening Post, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 9, 10 July 1909, Page 9

TRADES UNIONISM.

PREFERENCE FOR NONUNIONISTS. THE MINISTER FOR LABOUR'S VIEWS. SOME IMPORTANT STATEMENTS. Mr. T. M. Wilford, M.P., last night introduced a deputation to the Hon. Mr. Millar, Minister for Labour. It comprised — Messrs. Cade, Swindell, Smith, and Moriarty, officials of the Cabinetmakers' Union. Mr. Moriarty, the principal speakei, asked the Minister's opinion on an anomaly which exists through a judgment of a Stipendiary Magistrate, which establishes that any non-unionist who was employed before an Arbitration Court award was made may be suspended (by his employer) for an indefinite period without having to be classed as discharged, though a member of the union is accounted discharged, in terms of the 'Arbitration Court award governing the trade, if he has been suspended for a definite period of ten days or more. The non-unionist's case is not provided for in the statute nor in the award. ' Consequently, the clause of the award which gives preference to unionists becomes inoperative when a firm merely suspends its non-unionist employees. LEGISLATION NECESSARY. The Hon. Mr. Millar replied that the point as to when employment ceased was of material importance. It was evident that the Legislature intended it to be terminated by any suspension of ten days' duration, or longer, but so far as he knew there was nothing in the statute to meet such a case as this one. The anomaly would have to be legislated for, and it seemed to him the best way to do it would be for Parliament to define what would be a fair term of unemployment to constitute a cancellation of the engagement. He did not propose to bring in many amending clauses to the Act; he had no desire to again traverse all the byways that were gone into during the discussions last year. But what was seem to be absolutely necessary he would go on with. INEFFICIENT APPRENTICES. A point was raised as to the action of a Wanganui employer whose apprentice came out of his time with so poor a knowledge of his trade that he was undeniably inefficient, and the magistrate granted him an under rate permit, which enabled him to continue in the employ of his old employer. For this reason it was not proposed to take action against the employer for damages, though the union contended that a clear case could be made out. It was put to the Minister that in similar cases to thi& power should be given, to allow of the employer being sued, the more so as his remissness was unEair to the great bulk of employers in the trade, who were said to be particular to have their apprentices properly taught.. , The Minister replied that this opened vp 1 a very large question, and he was not prepared to advise on it. If the boy would not take action, what could they do? He would look into the matter and see what could be done. He thought it might be well if the union could have a test case brought. On the broad question of apprenticeship, Mr. Millar was in accord with a suggestion made by Mr. Moriarty, that often the trouble arose through the disinclination of a master to pay £3 per week to an ex-apprentice who had been receiving only 25s a week before, though possibly he was as much worthy of full wages as the others who received it. The remedy for this, the Minister considered, would be to divide apprenticeship into four periods, or quarters. In the first one only nominal wages should be paid, for it was the case that an apprentice was of very small use in it. In the second period, he should receive 20 per cent, of the journeymen's wage ; in the third 60 per cent., and in the fourth 80 per cent. That would be fair to both sides, and the transition to full wages would be less striking than it was now. And, more important still, it would ensure that boys would be taught their trades properly. It was the fact that comparatively small wages had to be paid them that made some employers careless in regard to their apprentices. Whether this method would work satisfactorily in all trades was another matter; he was prepared to admit there might be trades to which it could not apply satisfactorily. BREACHES OF AWARD. Incidentally, the Minister spoke of his instructions to the Labour Department regarding breaches of awards. He had told the inspectors that he did not want them to come into court unless it seemed clear that a distinct breach of an award had been committed. It was in the interests of. the workers and the Act that he had done this, for he recognised ' that the more cases the department lost the weaker it would make its position. UNEMPLOYMENT. An important announcement was made by the Minister in regard to unemployment registration with the Labour Department. He intimated that he would accede to a request of the deputation that all the unions' employment books should be kept under the 'Labour Department counter, 'in&tead of being accessible to all c;illers, as the rule had been. He went on to say he intended to alter the whole .system of departmental registration. He proposed that anyone who went to the department, wanting work, would have to fill in a form, setting out whether he was married or single, who was his last employer, the time he has been out of work, etc. Thus a complete record would be made and kept, which would be of great service when \vork was to be given out to tho unemployed, or for other references, and the most deserving cases ascertained. Anyone making false statements could be dealt with in a 6alutary manner. At present there was not sufficient check on the statements of applicants, and he knew that home men were not too particular about what they said. A man's record would he filed for all lime against him. The honest man would have nothing to fear, but the waiter would have a great deal. And he was thi> man the department desired to catch.