"UNION BURSTING"

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 69, 18 September 1925, Page 6

"UNION BURSTING"

ALLEGATIONS AGAINST . GOVERNMENT^ "::

REGISTRATION OF RAILWAY TRADESMEN'S ASSOCIATION

LABOUR OPPOSES PROPOSAL.

A new clause inserted in the In-i dustrial Conciliation and Arbitration Bill by the Railways, Committee of the House of Bepreßentatives, providing for the registration of . the Engine-drivers, Firemen, iind Cleaners' Association and the New Zealand Railway .Tradesmen's Association under, the Act was strongly resisted.' by members :of the Labour Party and other members last evening. ; ..■■.-. v, ;■■■'•"■ - ''i.■■■••.• .'■'

Mr. W. E. Parry (Auckland Central) complained^of the policy of the Government in bursting up unions of workers. The manipulating hand of the Government was to bis seen-in every .strong organisation in the Dominion^ / :Such action was not creditable to any Government, and would react on the head of the Government before very many years passed. "'; '. ■■ / '•'■..• ■•;.^ "..■;■'■'.;■ ";'-.

Mr. G. Witty (Uiccarton) said he uri-' derstood the men had broken.away from the A.S:R.S. many years ago, and they seemed to have .benefited as ■ a result. It was absolutely incorrect { to 'say; that: the Government had started the breaking away. .; ■;'■': . - ,-.•■-. .■/■•.■'■';.',.:'•.

Mr. W. S. Glenn. (Rangitikei) said the men concerned wished' to improve the status of the trades in the service,; and to establish a proper apprenticeship. There were 1500 men, and • they had, a right to speak for themselves. | EFFORT TOWARDS DISINTEGRA- \.''•■"''/- ' :■'■ ;;-: v\/v---J .-.■' Mr.' L. M'llvride (Napier) said.it- appeared to him that the Government-was endeavouring to bring about disintegration. He understood men/were ulr ready seceding from the Tradesmen's Association. If, they wanted to : make proper representation to the Court they should do bo through the various tradesmen's unions. . •■-,•■' . - ■.'.:?-.•'■-■•'•'■■ .-• .-'•■'.! The Minister of Labour (the: HohV G. J.'. Anderson) said the fact remained thatthe union was formed • and that it had i asked to be put on the same footing as the A.S.R.S.- and the E.F.C. A. AH the discussion that took place in the House would not dissolve the^ union, which seemed to be the. object aimed, at by the speakers on the opposite benches.. '-„ Mr.' W/ A. Teitch (Wanganui) remarked that, the; proposal was. contrary to the foundation principle of.:the. <■ 'Act, \yhich was :that no^new,union, «hould be recognised if there wm another union in existence to. which they ". might beloug. The was not .conducive to harmony in:the service./It was very sad to him to see the A.S.R.S.: being subdivided; , ; -:: ■; ": .■.:■.■'• ,v/----^ The Minister of Railways (the Hon. J. G. Co'ates) said he could not see the logic of the arguraento being advanced. ■ The various trades in the service ,were to some extent separate.;' The tradesmen had asked, for the present change many years ago,-and he 1 had promised them to 1 investigate \ the position. It ' was;i de- : cided that ;if ■ there, were* 1000 members in the-organisation they should receive recognition. They had complained; that sometimes they were affected/by; disputes in 'other branches of the service in which tlwy werenot directly concerned. Personally he did hot think the bf^eaking away,from the A.S.R.S. w,ould do the slightest, harm,' and. would-not lead to Rny ; trpuble., The.men concerned felt that they were entitled ;to -the same representation aß?the other employees in the service.' ; ■' ■;.'< '■. ■.■"■••■■'•"' ';■•.;'■..'■'. "v : -\

; Mr. R. M'Keen '(Wellington. South) said the Minister would be well advised to' cut the clause out of the Bill.- When. they 'heard Reformer* supporting a separate union-it made members very »\Upicious. The position had arisen be--cause of the railway ( strike, ■; and: the ' tradesmen^, would not have formed a 1 separate organisation had they not re; ceived support- from the Minister.; of 'Railways". , He waß BatiEfied that a ma-j - jority of the tradesmen* did not want a separate organisation- from the -A.S.E.S. The amendment should have been considered by the Labour Bills Committee. 'It was just another'matter of "union.bursting."' The amendment was the first ■ endeavour on the part of. the Government to burst up the industrial • unions of the country, i ;""; : FACING BOTH WAYS - Mr. E; J. Howard (Chriatctiureh. South) criticised the method of inserting the amendment in the Bill, which, the Minister had:declared to be a consolidating one. If 2000 railwaymen-wanted a separate union, much v he would re- ; gret it, he would not deny them the opportunity, but he opposed the method adopted in this instance. :. The Prime Minister: '•'■ You are facing both ways—two-faced." v , At this moment the suppsr adjournment was announced. >, , -'^- : After the resumption Mr. Howard said it was:characteristic of the Erim» Minister to pass'»uch ■ remark just «s the 'House rose..' ■. '■;■"■; ■ ',':..'■ .' ',-: ■• -.'', . • Mr. 'Coates said it was unfortunate that the House adjourned "at such, a moment. He did. not know, whether it was characteristic of him, but he hoped it, was riot. The remark about Mr. Howard being two-faced was hardly Parliamentary,"and'he would voluntarily withdraw

it. .-.' •■-"■. ;:■ ■■■."■ ■■ .". •.■:'"- ■;•: ■ 'Mr. Howard aaid the introduction -of the amendment was a '"smart piece of. work V"'-■' If- the Government had no-' thing to hide, there would have/been no need to have rushed the thing through. There had been double dealing. all through, and the matter ahould have gone to the Labour Bills Committee. It was not clean ..and above board. •

"The lion, gentleman, is suspicious," remarked the Hon. G. J. Anderson. "He is not endowed -with that spirit of charity which. we are supposed to have if we follow the Good Old! Book." ;He didinot agree that the clause concerned the Labour Bills Committee; it was a railway matter. The I Government had had no desire to delude the House. He knew . nothing. about the. clause .when the-Bill was . before .the Labour" Bills* Committee, but the Minister of '.Bailways .was a very busy man,, and probably forgot to mention the matter-to the speaker before'tbo Bill went to the Committee. . . ' , . :

Mr. Howard said. that.in view ; ;of. tho 'Minister's.'' statement he; would withdra^- what; he "hail said, biit he considered that the Minister' had treated ■the-House lightly.^: No ballot .of. the men had been taken among' the men to ascertain if they wanted registration. . ( ■'■•':-. .•.'■:' ... •''.■■•• "■".-'. ■ ■'.' '•''

CONFLICTING ORGANISATIONS

Tho Leader of the Labour.Party (Mr..' 11. K." Holland) recalled, a remark by the Minister.that he did: not '■■ anticipate that the' Tradesmen's Association would take advantage of tho Arbitration Court, and he asked what wag the use., ther<>

fore, of taking up the time oi: the House unnecessarily. ■;■■■;,-;/■ '.:; '■■■.■;..■■:■ ;,;.-• ■■ 'vv;- : Mr, Anderson: "The association wants to register under the Act." ; Mr. Holland protested against the method in which the clause had been' presentedj and the fact ttiat ppportun-'----ity had not been given for it to be con-, sidered. In time a multitude of;small organisations: groiw up in the , service at the present rate of progress, < and he contended that that would not be in the best interests of the service. He considered it:would.be better, to have 4 one organisation in the -railway service ' rather than a dozen conflicting organ- ' -isations. \;!.■/'■,:-:■ ■'.■\'-.--~ "'■:;,:"■ .ir;-.*-.; .■.-.-■>.:>'..". .'■ Mr.: H. T. Armstrong (Camstchurch r East), - maintained v .that the:.'.': railway . tradesmen had . representation-on i the ' A.S;R.Si -now.: The late president- Mr.:: Hampton, was) a tradesman;: and had polled a record number of votes. : TheJ •' Government had been, used to..doing the' dirty work of tKfe Employers' Federa-' tion, which- believed in "one big union"' o[:employers;:''.V'-T-"''::-■";" •'. ":'■' ■'-. :'■ ":t^i-■'■■ '•'■■ The clause was agreed to. 1:- ■■'.'■* ; \ ■•■'; . Speaking on the. third reading,-sthe;?-■!:• Hon. 0. Ji Anderson'*aid ;- that:. the '.' clause ■ ■ waa' not before the Labour Bills / v Committee because so. far: as he knew it; was not then /contemplated.' -.:■:, \ ■:; :; ■ ; The ;Bill. was ; ;put through its ■first .1" ''stages, and; passed.' ,;;'; .'■; .■'''','■'. :" ■■.''■''•:•.•-,'-'.'-