JOB CONTROL

Evening Star, Issue 19004, 28 July 1925, Page 5

JOB CONTROL

WHAT IS IT?

UNION LEADERS’ VIEWS

No term, in these days of continuous industrial warfare, is more used than “job control,” but the lack of clarity in"labor circles as to what it implies is amazing (says the Sydney ‘ Daily Telegraph ’). " This much can he said to begin with: that the term is only used by the three more militant) onions—the seamen, wharf laborers, and coal miners—-and by the Communists in other unions. 'What do these men mean when they say “job control”? Do they mean control on the job or control of jobs, or do they mean nothing? A member of the seamen’s executive gives this definition : “Job control is the control by the workers on the job of the working conditions in any industry, in the ease of t-lio seamen, it is all important, because points in the award otten are raised at •sea, where no tribunal to settle them is available.”

But the coal minors gave another definition when they were accused ot trying to get “job control” in 11)23. At that time the owners were attempting to keep the “Reds” Irom getting employment. The minors said it could not be done. In that ease it was control of jobs. THE COMMUNIST DEFINITION. Again, Mr Jock Garden _ said last week when asked for a definition ! “ It is futile to talk about such a thing as ‘job control’ whiio tbo capitalist system lasts, because ‘ job control ’ is tbo ultimate goal of Socialism. Indeed, it is Socialism, because both terms moan the ownership and control by the workers of the means of production.” The seamen in their view appear to bo in agreement with the French Syndicalists and the American I.W.W. Both of the latter bodies claim that, if a union can wring an increase in wages or a decrease in hours irom the employer, it has to the extent of that increase or decrease taken away from him ihe control of his own business. MR JOHNSON’S BOOK,

As stated, only the militant unions use tho term. The little bits of friendly societies which predominate at the Trades Hall never think of it. Their officials, when asked for a definition, say “I’m dashed if I know, but I can pnt you on to a. man who will tell you.” or some such reply. Even Mr Beasley (president of the Trades and Labor Council) said he would like a week to think the matter over.

Mr Jacob Johnson, too, agrees that it is a “big question.” “ It’s _so big that I. am writing a. book on it,” ho stated, satirically, “ and I’ll let tho ' Daily Telegraph ’ have the first copy.” Mr Walsh, on tho other hand, appears clearer. He appears to believe that “job control” moans the “right of the workers to secure partial or complete control of job conditions” by moans of strikes and other extra-legal i means. He justifies this in a recent series of articles, by suggesting that : Arbitration Courts arc for the benefit of employers only, and that tho men must do something if they are not to ho crushed by persecution. | Which, nil in all, means, if it means anything, that any union which adopts “ job control ” endorses Mr Garden’s ideal of pure Bolshevism, the applica- | tion of which to industry must nlti- ’ mutely mean the _ ushering in of tho Communist conditions, of which every I “job control” loader without exception approves.