WHARF LABOUR

Evening Post, Volume XCIX, Issue 126, 28 May 1920, Page 7

WHARF LABOUR

IS IT EFFICIENT?

COMMITTEE OF INQUIRY APPOINTED.

The Chairman of the Wellington Harbour Board (Mr. J. G. Harkness) reopened an important question last evening by moving : ' That a committee be appointed consisting of Messrs. Cohen. ■ M'Ewaif. Daniell, Turrell,. M'Arthur,' and HarknesG, together with the executive 035----cers of the board, to consider what methods Jhe board .should' adopt to increase the efficiency of.waterside work on the wharves and to suggest some practicable scheme that will secure permanent employment and wages to its labosr and be satisfactory to employers and-.employed, and report to the board at its meeting in June.

• Mr. Harknc-ss said that the .question was urgent must be apparent to all who «had given a moment's consideration io the matter. He trusted that the inquiries would result iv benefit, both to the men and to the employers. Mr. O. E. Dauieli doubted whether the optimistic opinion regarding the proposed committee was justified. He spoke of the attitude of the shipping companies, which very definitely opposed control of labour.on the wharves by the Harbour Board, and; moreover, labour organisations did no< apparently fayour the board's interference in the matter. Shipping and. labour representatives would not come together; of that they had an instance this week when the whole of the shipping had been held up on acount ;of some trivial dispute. In .hie opinion the time was not opportune for the, broaching of the question, but possibly, at some time in „,the future when the actual facts of life were .looked at from a truer point of view an inquiry snch as was proposed would bring about good results. The transport sections of the Labour movement) were going in for the One Big Union movement, but he would remind those present that they represented the biggest union of the lot—the whole community. The board, continued Mr. Daniel!, was told that it must do certain things because the shipping compauies had done them.. The Employers' Association had deliberately handed over the control to the shipping companies* with a result that chaos had come, about. He consid-. ered that the committee would, not be able 'to- carry out its work in t-inle to report to the next meeting. Mr. * M. Cohen urged. that the board should put its. own house in order by looking particularly into -conditions pertaining to its oyn men. ■ Mr. C. M. Turrell said that he agreed that the question of Harbour Board labour should be the firßt consideration of the board. Mr. C. H. Chapman said that there appeared to be an unfortunate ' clash, well founded or baseless, between the board and the shipping companies, and while that difference lasted efficiency could not be reached. The committee should make a point of endeavouring to get the men's point of view: ■ Mr. J. W. M'Ewnn held that efficient control could never be obtained till the three parties concerned co-operated. "The matter should be considered from the co-operative stand point. Captain C. M' Arthur doubted whether the Port of London authorit}', referred to by tho: previous speaker, was thoroughly efficient as a controlling body, in view of the serious : congestion iii "that port. He felt that Oho inquiry was a wise step. ,

, In reply, the Chajrman said that the motion expressly referred to Harbour Board employees. The outcome of the' question was : Should tho board increase the number of its employees in order to be in a position to meet all conditions? That would entail careful financial consideration, and the qiiestion of whether the board'would be in a position to employ those men at all times. It had been said that there were men disengaged but •unwilling to work for the board,, and the. committee would.be wise to inquire into the truth of that statement and the reason, if any, of the' men's unwillingness to work for tho board. The. motion was carried. ' Mr. Daniell moved that three, representatives of the men and three of the employers should be invited to attend a meeting of the committee, but the motion was lost.