COMPULSORY UNIONISM

Evening Post, Volume XCI, Issue 107, 6 May 1916, Page 6

COMPULSORY UNIONISM

EFFECT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT

SOME LABOUR OPINIONS.

One of the most important legal decisions affecting organised labour was that delivered by the Court of Appeal yesterday in regard to what is popularly termed the "compulsory preference", clause. A Post reporter to-day discussed the probable effect of the judgment with a number of Wellington Labour leaders. To publish their individual opinions in a small space is not possible, but the views may be summarised. NOT "COMPULSORY PREFER- j ENCE." | In the first place, it may be stated , that the description "compulsory preference" is wrongly applied to the clause. In all awards possessing preference clauses the preference is compulsory, . but there is this distinction: that in some cases the employer may engage non-unionists if unionists of equal capacity are not available. In the clause which the Appeal Court has declared to be beyond the jurisdiction of the Arbitration Court it is compulsory for tlie non-unionist to join the union. It is "compulsory unionism." FEW UNIONS AFFECTED. The effect of the decision will not be so widespread as is generally anticipated, for the reason that the clause in question is embodied in only a few awards. The , Arbitration Court has never awarded the clause to any union, but has permitted its inclusion when it has been inserted' by agreement between the employers and the union concerned. The cases in which such an agreement has been arrived at are not many. In Wellington there are at most, only three or four awards embodying the clause. The Country Hotel Workers' Award was the one on which the case- was argued ; and one similar in principle has been embodied in the Wellington Painters' Award for some years. The' painters' clause, however, has other provisions^ which are not affected by the Appeal Court's decision ; One section of the clause provides that members of the Master Painters' Association shall have preference in the engagement of workers. Section (b), relating to the same subject, reads: "An employer, when engaging any journeyman, shall ascertain if such journeyman is a member of the workers' union, and. if not, his engagement shall be subject to his becoming a member within one week of being engaged." Section (c), which embodies the "compulsory preference" principle, reads: "All journeymen at present working for an employer, and who are not members of the workers' union, shall become members within one week from the time- of this award coming . into operation." It may be mentioned here that a case under this sec-, tion was taken some years ago, and was won. The fact that section (c) now becomes inoperative is not received with any alarm by the union. All workers at present in the industry are unionists, and the parts of the preference clause which are not affected provide sufficient powers for dealing with non-unionists who may hereafter be engaged. THE COURT'S PREFERENCE. The Arbitration Court, in granting preference within recont years, has adopted a standard clause, which is as follows:'—"(a). In the event of any employer hereafter engaging any worker who shall npt be a member of the union, and who, within six days after his engagement, shall not become and remain a member of the union, the employer shall dismiss such worker from his service if requested to do so'by the union, provided that there is then a member of the union who is equally qualified to perform' the particular work required to be done, and ready and willing to undertake the same;'(h) the provisions of the foregoing clause shall operate if and only so long as the rules of tho union shall permit any person of good character and sober habits to become a member of the union upon' payment of an entrance fee not exceeding 5s upon a written or verbal • application without ballot or other election, and to continue a member upon payment of subsequent contributions not exceeding 6d per week." 'This clause, with slight variations, is embodied in the great majority of awards, applying to both skilled and unskilled occupations. Waterside workers, tailors, carpenters, and many others are included, HOW COMPULSION CAME. The "compulsory unionism" clause was first ■ inserted because the regular clause was found to cause trouble without effecting its object. The employers said,' in-effect : "We think that it is a fair thing that unionists should have preference, but don't bother us. We don't want to have to enquire whether a unionist is available; just say that every man must join, and then we shall know where we stand." The clause provfed direct and effective in forcing workers who might be unwilling to contribute to the funds of the organisation in their industry. "DID NOT MAKE GOOD UNIONISTS." The defect of the clause from the Labour point of view was, as one prominent leader put it : "It did not make good unionists." A man paid his fees, and there the matter ended. He never attended meetings, or took any interest in the union. "We want preference," said one secretary, "to see that our members have a fair deal, and are not refused employment because they are unionists. We don't want preference so as to get members, for members obtained by such means are only a drag on the union. The Court's preference clause operates fairly well in our industry for that purpose. Its defect, one that cannot well be removed, is that the union must supply a man equally capable, and the employer is judge of the capacity of the man. ' That defeats the object of the clause in some instances, but it would be difficult to alter it." Strong unions do not bother much about preference clavses. "Yes, we have preference," said the leader of one such organisation, "but i.t would not make any difference if we had not. The members themselves see to it that honi unionists are brought into line quickly. That is as it should be for a Labour movement, as in England, where there is no preference, but where, in certain industries, a non-unionist dare not show his face for a minute. The Court's decision will affect the small struggling unions most. They have no power under the authorised clauses to force m-s.i who are at present in employment to join the union. They will have to get to work and organise—moral suasion ; and it won't do them or tho Labour movement any harm." A VISITOR'S OPINION. • In this connection it is interesting to note the opinion of Mr. J. Dias, Australasian delegate to the conference of the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners. Mr. Dias, when in New Zealand recently, commented upon the lack of backbone in the New Zealand Union movement, and expressed the* opinion that this was due in a, measure to the dependence upon legislative aid,

such as preference, obviating the need for organising work and the Union atmosphere. PARLIAMENT MAY BE APPROACHED. Though the effect of the decision will not be extremely widespread, it is probable that a strong attempt will, nevertheless, be made to obtain an amendment of the Act which will permit the "compulsory unionism" clause to be embodied in awards. This clause, it is contended, would have been quite legal before the preamble of the Act, stating as one of its objects .the encouragement of unionism, was amended.