THE LABOUR MOVEMENT

Evening Star, Issue 19892, 14 June 1928, Page 13

THE LABOUR MOVEMENT

[By Vrtekin.]

Brief contributions on matters with reference to the Labour Movement are invited.

COST OF STRIKES

Tho time and money that is lost in this and every other country through strikes and lockouts and the inconvenience that is caused by these industrial disturbances is very considerable, and causes loss and injury to all concerned. The cooks’ strike, which wo have mot heard the last of, must have cost the union, and also tho shipping companies, a large sum of money, which the union and the prime movers in tho strike can never expect to make up. When will the workers learn that strikes are no good, and will never lend them ■ anywhere worth while?

ATTITUDE OF LABOUR COUNCILS

At a meeting of the Melbourne Trades Hall Council the following resolution was carried:— “ That this council considers that the Australian Council of Trade Unions is the only body competent to handle the marine cooks’ dispute in the interests of all the workers and unionists likely to be involved, as the A.C.T.U. is tho recognised representative of the trade union movement of Australia.” The matter was also discussed at a meeting of the Labour Council of New South Wales, and the following decision was reached: — “That this council declares that it is solidly behind the Marine Cooks’ Union j in its present struggle against tho sliip--1 owners, and points out to tho Cooks’ Union that its isolating itself from tho contra! governing body is antiworking class, and that such action tends to weaken their organisation ; also the council calls upon the Cooks’ Union to co-operato with tho A.C.T.U, for the purpose of winning the struggle, as this council supports tho action of tho A.C.T.U. in the fight.” Criticism of the action of tho A.C.T.U. in intervening in tho dispute was voiced last week by Mr E. A. Chapman, secretary of the New South Wales branch of tho Australian Railways Union. He said that tho conduct of tho A.C.T.U had astonished trade unionists, who had hoped that the council would become a helpful factor in the Labour movement. “ It has to bo remembered,” said Mr Chapman, “ that the marine cooks refused to take a vessel to sea because she was undermanned Arising out of this other vessels were tied up by the shipowners in order to defeat the efforts of tho union. “ When a section of workers is engaged in a struggle it is tho function and duty, of organised Labour generally to render what assistance it can in order to maintain or improve upon existing wage standards and conditions. “ In the cooks’ dispute, however, we find that tho A.C.T.U. (acting through its Emergency Committee) not only threatens the Marine Cooks’ Union, bub endeavours to assume control of the dispute, without being requested to do so by those who are engaged in conflict. Tho A.C.T.U. even goes further than mere interferences. It actually approaches the shipowners and attempts to suppress the fight. “ It is not very long since that Australian T.U. leaders expressed indignation when J. H. Thomas and tho General Council of tho British Trade Union Congress basely deserted the miners, who were lighting for their existence in Britain. “Tho actions of tho A.C.T.U. are on all fours with that working class crime. Further, the A.T.C.U. has declared itself as being totally opposed to tho Amending Arbitration Bill, because it would further cripple tho unions.”— ‘ Australian Worker.’ • * * » PREFERENCE. “ 1i.E.8.,” writing in the ‘Australian Worker,’ says Chief Justice Dethcridge ! may bo a wise judge, but his wisdom doe's nob make itself strikingly apparent. As President of the Federal Arbitration Court, ho wields a. tremendous power, and if he is not to do more harm i than good must have all his wits about him. His decisions affect in the most intimate manner the lives of thousands of men, women, and children. 1 He determines the state of their cup- , boards, the quality of clothes they shall j wear, the kind of houses they shall dwell in, the pleasures they shall cn--1 joy Not only their economic condi- | tion, but their very happiness, is dependent upon bis edicts. It is necessary that such a man should weigh every syllable ho utters in his official capacity with a scrupulous and even nervous exactitude, lest with a single word he should inad- | vertently do an injury to a whole multitude of people. His Honour, unfortunately, does not impress us as a judge of this meticulous character. The other day he declared that he would not put in any award a clause giving preference of employment to a particular union. “I am utterly op- ' posed to preference clauses.” he said. : “ I will not grant any.” ' Without discussing tho merits of the case before him, ■which one is not required to do, seeing that ho made a general and all-inclusive statement, it may bo pointed out that the whole system of compulsory arbitration is i based upon preference, and that if preference is taken away there may bo a deplorable collapse in the value of tho method. It may be submitted, also, that it is perfectly right and proper that the law should prefer those who make it possible for tho law to be ofioctually administered. When a union legitimately covering a field of industry spends a lot of time and money in collecting evidence to assist the Judgment of the court, when, without that assistance it would not bo possible for the court to understand tho circumstances of he industry and the conditions of those employed in it, why should not that union he given preference of employment? Why should persons who do not belong to it stop in and snatch away from its members the advantages the union lias so expensively gained? His Honour gave no indication that ho bad considered these questions in the light of equity and reason. Other arbitration judges in the past have granted preference where they deemed that a union _ had earned it, and where nn award without its active help, its organisation and funds, would obviously be difficult to enforce. Chief Justice Dethrklge, _by departing from tho practice established by his learned predecessors, has by no means demonstrated-his judicial superiority, but, on the contrary, has given ns serious cause to doubt the soundness ol his judgment. A certain class of employers—those who welcome any opportunity to penalise members of a union that has dared to secure improvements in the conditions of tho workers—will rejoice at His Honour’s attitude, but all true friends -of arbitration will view with regret and dismay his failure to grasp an essential principle of tho law that ho administers. | a » ■» » GOING FROM HOME FOR NEWS. While I, tried to-day to get information about tho Industrial Conference in Wellington and failed to do so, I find the following in tho ‘ Australian Worker ’ of last week: — The special joint committee appointed by the New Zealand National Industrial Conference presented unanimous recommendations upon unemployment relief, immigration, and the Workers’ Compensation Act. The report set out that tho problem of unemploy-

ment in New Zealand was acute, and the Government must provide, out ot the Consolidated Fund, money to cope with tho situation. The committee recommends that tho Government Statistical Department should compile data determining the causes and tho volume of periodic and seasonal unemployment, and discover means of minimising the effect of seasonal conditions on the regularity of employment. " The report also desires an investigation to decide tho most suitable form of productive work, under State control, which could absorb labour temporarily not required in industry. Tho committee urges the Government to shape its educational system in the direction of encouraging as many boys as possible to take up farming occupations, rather than professional and commercial vocations. The committee, while recognising New Zealand’s responsibilities in common with the rest of tho Empire to co-operate in solving tho problems of the redistribution of population, recommends tho strictest supervision of the nomination system for all classes 'of migrants, both as regards tho immigrant and the ability ot the nominators to perform their obligations. The report says that immigration should be regulated in accordance with the State labour market, and with due regard to the ability of the dominion to absorb immigrants in employment. Regarding workers’ compensation, the committee recommends that insurance be compulsory, excepting where an employer satisfies the competent authority that his workers are adequately covered. The committee declared it advisable for the Government 10 investigate the principles of the Ontario (Canada) system of workmen’s compensation, with a view of determining what provisions might advantageously be adopted in the dominion.