THE LABOR MOVEMENT

Evening Star, Issue 19774, 26 January 1928, Page 14

THE LABOR MOVEMENT

[By Vetebin.]

Brief contributions on matters with reference to the Labor Movement are invited. ALTERING THE ARBITRATION ACT. One of the most important Bills that came before Parliament last session was the proposed amendment to the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act. There were several very flimsy reasons given as to why an amendment was needed. Mr Waite, for Clutha, made a great speech. One wonders if this is the same Mr Waite who was once a journalist and a great advocate of the arbitration system. If so, tho fact that he has joined the Farmers’ Union and also the Coates I Government may make a difference to I his views. Following the debate right through we find that there are men who have been longer in Parliament and have had more experience than him who think quite differently on this subject, and who do npt belong to what is called the Reform Party, or any other party. Take, for instance, the speech of the Right Hon. Sir Joseph Ward, His was the most vigorous denunciation of the Bill. In ‘Hansard’ (number 47, page 136) he says:—“l do not think that anyone who has had experience of the conciliation and arbitration system in this country during the last thirty-odd years could have expected other than a considerable diversity of opinion in the discussion upon proposals such as are contained in tho Bill before tho House. I recall tho fact that 1 was a member of the Ministry along with the Hon. W. P. Reeves, when the whole question of conciliation and arbitration was first discussed by the Ballanco Government. It was a novel departure, this being the first country to pass legislation embodying the principle. Tho forecasting of the evils that were expected to follow in the wake of that legislation can hardly bo reverberating through tlio hills and dales now; but at the time they sounded most unfairly_ with the intended odious appellation of “ social pest,” which was applied to the Hon. Mr Reeves by his then opponents to mark their sense of what they said was the interference ami disturbance —for which he, as Minister in charge, was being held responsible—because of the introduction of the measure. Time has shown tho unfairness of tho attitude adopted towards him. I wish to remind the House of the conditions as they then existed. This was in some respects a sweating country from ono end to tho other, as far as a section of the community was concerned. 1 shall only vividly iccall what was given in evidence _ at the inquiries as to the _ conditions of labor enforced by a section of employers. who might well bo called unprincipled. The great majority of employers then, as now, were irreproachable from the standpoint of doing tho right thing by those whom they employed. And if any honorable member cares to investigate the records he will find that wholesalers and retailers sent materials to women to make up into garments, and the price paid was about one-quarter of the ordinary rates. And tho women who undertook the work wore those who had lost their , husbands and were compelled to undertake this sweated labor in order to keep their families going; and they had to work, too, into tho small hours of the morning in their homes. Notwithstanding that, there was strong opposition to the idea of the arbitration system, on tho ground that it was an interference with the rights_of private individuals. Rut the arbitration law has operated lor over thirty yeais, and there is not a business man in the country who will not admit that had it not' been for the existence of such, a law he would have been unable to carry on successiully—but for the altered conditions brought .about by the arbitration system. No business roan would have been safe in making a contract for two years ahead, except that ho knew his opponents and competitors were bound by the same wages, hours, and renditions as he himself was bound by. Had it not, been for the arbitration system, senseless cutting would have been rife, and business would have been difficult, and in many instances impossible. That is what, to my mind, is the underlying principle of the Act. ft put everyone on the same footing, and sweating disappeared. I have not made any inquiries from the representatives of the employers about this Bill. That, and not, ns has been suggested by some bon. members a desire to get into closer association with the Alliance of Labor, has been the underlying principle—a principle which the wholesale and retail business men of this country have found to bo so beneficial to them under the varying conditions of modern trading, and which has enabled them to carry on especially manufacturing businesses with reasonable success. And 1 say without hesitation that, as a result of over thirty years of arbitration, the mercantile world has benefited tremendously. “When I said that I had been advised by some farmers in this country that they were not favorable to this legislation, the Minister of Lands and other hon. members asked me who they wore. I would like to say that I am not called upon to give tho names of my correspondents unless I elect to do so, and I do not know that I am always justified in doing so. All I can say is that two of them represent a largo number of farmers. At any rate, they are the only section of the farming world from whom I have received requests to support the Bill. Let me for one moment express what I think is the material cause for dissatisfaction on tho part of dairy farmers, or any other part of the community that makes its living from tho land. When times are bad and the prices of our products low the people always feel disturbed, and they are ready for some change—ready to bring about a fundamental change, even in a law that has operated well, because they do not realise that bad times and low prices have contributed to the conditions that exist. The hon. member for Raglan referred to what the conditions of the dairy farmers would be in the event of there being a strike in tho industry, and the industry being outside the operations of either the conciliation or arbitration system. Now, what condition would they bo in? Does any hon. member mean to tell mo that this section of the community, made up principally of men in a small way, even though they may he members of associations, could carry on their dairying operations during the period of a sustained strike? Does any non. member mean to tell mo that the dairy farmers would bo safe under conditions such as those? From my knowledge of business methods I have no hesitation in saying that they would he very unsafe in abnormal times if they were outside the conciliation" or arbitration system; but with the conditions ns to hours and everything else fixed by the State they know what they are doing. Considering this country -from end to end at the present moment, if we are to exclude the primary industries from, the system that we have in operation in tho towns for the control and regulation and conduct of business and of labor, and have an entirely different system in the country, where are we to got to? . . . The idea that a man can, under existing conditions, live anything like as cheaply as before the war is contrary to the actual position. It is impossible to do it. I am one who wants to see the farmers placed in the very best position possible. I have never done, and would not do, anything intentionally to injurs them. I always have, and always jwill, do anything reasonable for them in connection with lawmaking and the administrating of the laws of this country. But. we cannot get away from the fact that, if

we are going to dissociate the farming world from the operations of the law that should apply to everybody, let us acknowledge that we are going to raise the position of the farmers being isolated from the other sections of the community, and the whole question of town versus country, with immense disadvantage to the farmers, would arise. As a matter of fact, what is the chief cause of the troubles of the farmers? If they are able to save 5s a week in labor, what is that compared with what they have to pay extra for the money they require? • Far more can be done for the farmers by obtaining cheap money for them. And they are not at present going to get cheap money, even though an Intermediate Credit Bill has been put on the Statute Book. Every man of any sense knows that is so. What would be the advantage of that saving in labor charges compared with tho benefit they would obtain from reduced railway charges? The railway charges have been increased materially in the last two years, and that is a matter that directly affects the farmer. Are we going to have a different rate for the people in the country from that for people in the towns upon the hypothesis applied to the Bill by tho Minister in charge of it—a separate and lower rate because of the conditions which exist in connection with the parity of prices—we are now having raised indirectly tho basis of a condition which will raise the question of town versus country. Without loss of dignity the Minister of Labor might well recommend his colleagues to allow this Bill to stand over until next session, and in the interval have a conference of the many interests concerned, irrespective of political leanings of members of Parliament and others.

* * * * When a difficult Bill such as this is opposed by employers, by employees, and by at least sorae_ farmers—and that is beyond all question—should ask himself whether, in view of this flow of water adverse to the proposals contained in the Bill, which may swamp them in tho event of trouble arising later on, it might, by putting it through not do himself and his colleagues an immense amount of harm. Would it not be a wise thing to take' time and allow these conflicting interests to come together in conference and discuss the matter freely and openly? Everyone knows that there is a wide difference of opinion on tho matter among members of the House; and why put a measure on the Statute Book under pressure that later on must only cause trouble for every, member of the House when it comes to an election? What loss of dignity would there be on the part of the Minister if he would let all parties interested come together and discuss this matter, as I have said, freely and openly. The thing is too big and too important to talk of dignity, and tho country is not going to lightly partially abolish the arbitration system. The Hon. Mr Anderson: Wo arc not attempting to do that _ Sir Joseph Ward: I admit that; but the country will not agree to have it weakened by having it amended in tho direction proposed in tho Bill. What the country wants is a system by which all sections of the community can bo sure of carrying on their affairs in as' satisfactory a manner as possible. I put it to tho Munster that that is tho best way out of the difficulty, so far as I can see. 1 hold that opinion, and I have no reason for holding it except my knowledge of tho way in which the arbitration svstem has worked in this country tor thirty to forty years past. If it is weighed in the balance it ■will ho found that it has done a great amount of good fo rtho employers and tho_ wage workers of the Dominion. It is the wage workers who feel the increased cost of living to-day. Those with big incomes do not fool tho pinch so much, as those with small ones, and _the smaller the income the more the pmen is felt. Any one who supposes that the pound at its present depreciated value and the increased cost of living affect the farmers or tho dairy farmers only cannot have any thinking powers at all. These changed conditions _ affect the working man also, prtirularly the working man with a family to support; and if you abolish the protection of the Arbitration _ Court, and tlie worker finds himself in the position of getting only half his present pay, how is ho going to Jive? How_ is ho going to make up for the depreciation of tho pound and the appreciation of the cost of living in his homo? He is probably less able to do it than most other sections of the community. 1 say advisedly that 1 do not think you caii afford to discriminate very much between different sections of the people under these altered conditions which Hew Zealanders are living under to-day, and which apply more or less all over the world. 1 f you go to a hotel to-day you pay 20, 35, or -10 per cent, more than you paid before tae war, possibly 100 per cent. i have placed on record my views. There is probably hardly a member in .the house who can have the .same feeling that I have in connection with the law that is now before the House lor consideration. I remember as if it were yesterday the days when Mr.Ballance was Prime Minister, and 1 remember later on when Mr Seddon was Prime Minister, when some of the minor evolution which was going on in connection with this new method of helping to govern a young country under a conciliation and arbitration system was being discussed. I remember tho diversity of opinion in the Cabinet of Mr Ballance about it._ I remember, also, the diversity of opinion about it in Mr Seddon’s Administration; and I remember the unknown conditions which stood right out before those of us who wore members of the Administrations to which I have just referred. On tho whole, I have no hesitation in saying that the operation of tho Act, with all the troubles which have cropped up from time to time, has justified tho action taken then, which, let me say, needed a great deal of courage. It brought a nickname to the principal advocate of it, botli in the House and in the country, which time incontestibly proved was "undeserved.-■ It brought that intended to be insulting name, because people honestly thought wo were going into unknown and dangerous regions in introducing such an Act. I think the way in which the Act has worked for the last thirty years has been wonderful, and has more than justified its establishment.

* * * * FIVE-DAY WEEK. TO KEEP RAILWAYMEN AT WORK The Victorian Minister for Railways (Mr Tunnecliffe) and the Railway Commissioners are discussing; a scheme for a five-day week for employees in certain departments where it lias been found necessary to retrench. The idea is to spread the work over as many employees as possible, and thereby keep down the number of dismissals. Following a conference with the Commissioners, the Minister said that the Commissioners were exploring every avenue with a view to economising in keeping with a request made by the Government. He was pleased with the loyalty shown to the Government. Economy, however, meant retrenchment, and in certain departments, especially that engaged in the maintenance of rolling stock, dismissals were inevitable. The failure of the harvest, which bad meant a loss of £300,000, bad decreased the amount of rolling stock entering the repair shoo, and men would have to he put off. He had suggested to tho Commissioners that a five-day week should be introduced, the men to work the short week until prospects brightened.