LABOUR NOTES.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXII, Issue 25, 29 July 1911, Page 12

LABOUR NOTES.

(By "Unionist.") COUNTRY HOTEL AWARD. Under the presidency of Mr. Halley, Industrial Commissioner, representatives of the Hastings and Napier hotclkeepers and of the Wellington Cooks and Waiters' Union, met last week to discuss th© union's claims for an industrial award for th© district. 4n agreement was in the end arrived at,' and after the signatures of the parties are all attached the court will be asked to convert the agreement into an award. In the main, the conditions agreed on compare favourably with the provisions of the Wellington award in the industry. For kitchen workers the wages range from 2?s 6d per week for kitchen hands (an advance of 2s 6d-on Welling' ton) to £4 10s for chefs. Barmen are awarded £2 per week in singla-handed jobs, and where two' are kept the first hand is to receive £2 10s per week. Waters' wager, range from £i 10s to £2 10s weekly. Other weekly wages aro fixed as follow :— Barmaids 30s, housemaids l?s 6d, waitresses 20s, night porters 30s, porters and general hands . 255. Th© Wages are in every case to be supplemented by board and lodging, or an additional 15s weekly. The hours and holidays are as determined by legislation. Males workers may be employed 62 hours and women workers 58 hojirs weekly. In addition to the statutory half-holiday, under the agreement the employees are to be granted every thjrd Sunday off from 2.30 p.m. The greatest gain to the union is the preference clause agreed on. It provides that every worker engaged in hotels under the award shall join the nhion within seven days after its institution, and that workers hereafter engaged shall join the union within a week of their engagement. There are the usual qualifications, and one relieving employers from liability under the section if notification of the enjoyment of non-unionist workers is given ! the union. The sense of the .section is to place the non-unionist in the position of showing cause why he should not join up with hjs fellow- workers. If j accepted by the court, the agreement will be made an award lasting till August, 1913. NEW SOUTH WALES LABOUR SPLIT. I The rock on which the New South Wales Labour Party has split is the question of Land Nationalisation. J/lank 22 of the party's general platlofth. reads :— "Nationalisation of Landd.— At the annual conference of the State Labour Party, in February last, much time was devoted to the framing of h. ■'practical' land policy. There weto motions to delete Plank 22, and, again, to make it the second plank of the fighting platform. ' ' Both were defeated, but the speecli of the mover of the motion to delete the plank is specially indicative oJ: tho grounds of difference now disrupting the Parliamentary Party. Speaking on the motion, the delegate responsiblesaid :— "There was nothing to be gaiii. Ed by having a definite plank for th& nationalisation of land — on the contrary, there was much to be lost. It did the party more harm than good. The land was already nationalised j it could be tafced up to any amount. Country electorates did not understand Plank 22 j they thought it meant that a Labour Government would take their land away from them. The other side made a great amount of capital out of the plank. In abolishing the plank the party still had $he same powers to tax land, and that was all that was necessary. There was no real difference between leasehold and freehold. Practically, the State always held the freehold. There was nothing gained by ail alteration in the title-deeds." Mr. J. C. Watson put the other side of the question. "Jie had," he Said, "always been a strong believer in laijd nationalisation. Land taxation was not of value in lieU of land nationalisation. Tho same objects could not be attained by any system of tai^tion as surely and as readily. Conference had been told that candidate* had goil& down in country electorates on account of the plank of land nationalisation being on the Labour Platfown. That was Bimply becuaso sufficient attention had not been paid to the organisation and education of the landless people in the country. There wefe thousands of wandering Australians who were at present fenced off the land. These men should be considered .*athet than an attempt made to placate those who had got hold of a piece of land and thought they might be lobbed of the chance of robbing others. He had rto quarrel with those who had taken advantage of the laws of the country^ to own land. They were perfectly justified in doing so, and they could not be justly dispossessed of their land. But there was no menace to just existing rightß in the proposal of nationalisation It only guaranteed that the value cr-eated by the community should be- retained foi the community's use. Th» individual had proprietary right* over any other value. If they were to jettison Plank 22, they would be invited to fhrow plank aftef plank pverboard, because they weie unpopular. If thup were done, the Labour movement would not be worth the sacrifices that many had made tot it. Labourites believed in certain economic principles, and coiifild' ered they were worth waiting fot. He urged with all the force he could that the plank pf ( land nationalisation should be retained intact upon tho platform in epite of the difficulty of carrying on with it." In. the end, the conference left the land planks of the policy much as they wore before. Land Nationalisation remains in the genera) platform, numbered 22. In the fighting platform, tfie land planks are .—(a) Cessation of fut ther sales of Crown lands; (b) a propeT system of Closel fJettlemc'nt ; (c) Water Conservation and Irrigation} (b) Gradu- i ated Land Tax. ' ! And now the promised legislation, I tending to prohibit freehold titles after another nine or ten months, in rclatio., to land already taken up under that prospect, has brought about the clash between the Minister lav Lands and the country members of the party. Mz. Wade planned well. The Government would have- prefefed the postponement of the issue, but the no-confidence motion forced a declaration. So far, there have been two Labour resignations ; there may be more. Whatever the result, the next Labour Conference will have to decide as to just how far practical pffect and legislative enactment can be given to some- of tne "objective" planks of the platform if (the conference) is responsible for framing.