IS THERE PILFERING?

Evening Post, Volume LXXX, Issue 114, 10 November 1910, Page 3

IS THERE PILFERING?

■«» WATERSIDE WORKERS. DISCUSSION IN PARLIAMENT. To the last award of the Arbitration. Court in the Auckland waterside workers' dispute the President of the Court (Mr. Justice Sim) attached a> "tag," blaming the union for not having taken more effective measure® to put a stop to cargo-pilfering. The union resented this, aud this session presented a petition to the House asking that a Royal Commission should be- set up to enquire into the whole question. Yesterday the Labour Bills Committee reported cm the petition, recommending that it be referred to the Government for favourable consideration. A long discussion followed, Mr. Poole, on behalf of the waterside workers, expressing hidignattion at such a stigma being oast on a body of respectable men. "A GREAT DEAL OF PILFERING." Mr. Hardy took the opposite view. Botween. Wellington and Lytitelton, for instance, he said, there was a great- deal of pilfering going on — to such an extent, in fact, that some of the wholesale houses did not oaa-e about shipping goods, and special insurances were taken out against pilfering. The "fact remained that there was a great deal of pilfering, and only that day he had a letter complaining about the mlfeong that was going on. A STRONG PROTEST. Mr. M'Laretn remarked that if such attachments were to be made -to awards workmen of good reputation would be very chary of entering that occupation, which would become degraded. He had, lie said, been in association with these men for years, and he wanted to raise his strcingest protest against tbe degradation of the men that might bo brought about by su-ch a ta.g to an award. He protested, also, against tbe power being left in the hands of the court to deal with matters other •than thoso defined in the Act. It was to be regretted that such a practice should be carried on by a person occupying a high judicial posdti on. The Government should prevent the possibility of such r i tiring happening In the futare. He dad not want to see political influence brought to. benr on the Arbitration Court in the way of interfering with its proper functions, but he did want to see a limit placed upon what he ccaisideired to bo its purely arbitrary power. -^ Mr. Hogan. remarked that there wero black sheep in every flock, and it was fair to place the blame on them, butib was not fair to place the blame on a whole section of men from one end of the country to the other. Pillaging did take place, but it was not the duty of the Arbitration. Court, in making an awa-rd, to decide who wae responsible. He uv<9jed that the Government should give the maittcr very earnest consideration. It was thei duty of the Government to see tha/L this stigma atti Ji.ng to the great body of waterside wo'keis throughout the Dominion was removed. MEMBERSHIP OF UNIONS. Mr. Laurenson urged that it was practically impossible for pilfering to take place between Wellington and Lyttelton, and he pointed out, also, that during the past year the claims for pilfering had amounted to less than a thousand pounds, while Ihe imports of goods that were capable of being piiferod amounted in value to over five and a half millions sterling. Further, he asked what convictions for pilfering had there been during the past few yoars? The only serious case was against officers ancN men of a certain shipping company. It was not the waterside workers who did the pilfering. What opportunity had they to pilfer, in vifjw of the amount of supervision to which they were subject ? * He appealed also to the Minister of Labour to put at 1 end to the system of indiscriminate admittance into the Waterside Workers" Unions, so as to restrict the membership to a number capable of earning a living wage from the work available. The Minister of Labour (Hon. J. \. Millar) pointed out that any union had a right to limit its membership, but it- could nolf do so if it got preference iv Us award. What Mr. Laurenson asked would simply mean denying men an avenua of employment. They would never get that done ii" they gave preference to unionists. The *tvo things could not go on side by side, because they could :>ot deny n>i>n Uie rlcht to work, fn fart, +he Labour Party was now asking for the right to work, and yet at the same time they wore asking the Government to limit the avenues of employment. LABOUR REPRESENTATIVE?. Mr. T. E. Taylor said that tho grievance they were discussing would >iever be settled until they had at least a score of direct Labour representatives in the House. Then they would find 'he Executive falling over itself in Its anxiety to respond to their wishes, and making it impossible for a court to inflict an insult upon a largo body of workers, amongst whom wero crowds of men with as good bodies and morals as a Judge of the Arbitration Court. Ho regarded the "fag" to the award as a wanton insult to a body of men who were equal in everything but legal knowledge to the Judge who wrote it, and he should have hesitated before he published a slander such as that "but'^ constituted. Mr. Justice Rim might as well hold himself personally responsible for the misconduct of thelegal fraternity in New Zealand — and no doubt that would mean a very considerable amount — as to ask the wharf labourers of Auckland o*- a-iiy other port to hold themselves responsible for the misconduct of a few men, even if it could bs proved that those men were wharf labourers. The report of the committee was re- | ferred to the Government for favourable consideration.