INDUSTRIAL LAW

Evening Star, Issue 18335, 24 July 1923, Page 10

INDUSTRIAL LAW

ENGLAND AND AUSTRALIA

CONTRAST OF METHODS,

LONDON, July 12,

Dr Jethro Brown, president of the Industrial Arbitration Court of South Australia since 1916, who is visiting England, told a Frees representative: “In my opinion Australia is a long way ahead of England as regards industrial legislation. The Whitley Councils, as I anticipated, arc experiencing difficulty owing to lack of co-ordination of standards as between the different industries.

“I am now studying the 'working of English industrial legislation, and the administration of justice in the ordinary courts. 1 must say 1 have been impressed by the dignity and expedition wherewith justice is administered. ihc must remarkable difference in procedure,” continued Dr Brown, “is in the Arbitration Court. Australia handles disputes from the commencement, and tries conciliation first. Then, if it proves necessary, she proceeds to arbitration. But in England the Ministry of Labor first deals with the case, and tries to conciliate the parties, and then refers it to the Industrial Court for arbitration only.

“ Tjhough the Labor Parly is divided into ’ many sections, it united in Parliament, and led by very able men, some of them possessing much personal charm and persuasive eloquence; others with the keen brains necessary for the formulation of a* policy likely to command general support at the elections.”