AUSTRALIAN SHIPPING DISPUTES.

Evening Star, Issue 21007, 22 January 1932, Page 8

AUSTRALIAN SHIPPING DISPUTES.

In Australia trouble in one or other of the branches of the shipping industry is always' simmering. Last year, notwithstanding the enormous amount of unemployment that prevailed, a number of disputes occurred. Most of them were of a minor character, arising over some trivial incident, but at times there were dangers of a serious upheaval. The case of the interstate steamer Canberra will be recalled, as a result of which attempts 'were made to precipitate a big shipping strike. Victimisation of one individual was the ground of the complaint. A strike was declared by the Seamen's Union, but it had a brief and unsuccessful life, and was called off within three weeks. Fortunately, for tho sake of industrial peace in tho Commonwealth, the seamen, the stewards, and the waterside workers rarely see eye to eye in these matters. What seems of prime importance to one body is often regarded by one of the others as trivial, or at any rate not of a nature to justify extreme action. The Canberra complaint is a cash in point. When the strike began the Federated Stewards’ Union sent a letter to the Seamen’s Union at Sydney expressing the deepest resentment at the action of the union in laying up the Canberra. In pointed language it was described as farcical and as nothing short of imbecility. The letter emphasised a truth that might be more generally regarded by saying that any man who claimed to have been victimised and caused a strike himself victimised the whole of the crew and their dependents. Tho Communists were very active in stirring up this trouble. Mr Scullin himself said so in the House of Representatives. His remarks were endorsed in a subsequent message from Canberra, in which it was stated that secret inquiries by the Federal authorities revealed that the strike had been planned by the Australian Communist International acting under instructions from Moscow—first, to capture tho anions by a quiet rank and file penetration; and, secondly, to disorganise the hey industries at every sign- of a move to' capitalist rehabilitation. Curious developments are revealed in the latest waterside trouble which occurred at Adelaide. On the South Australian waterfront there has been friction for year# between unionists and non-unionists, which has broken out into active hostility at intervals. In the present instance the trouble arose on board a steamer through non-union-ists being engaged on work of some kind. On the following day it was reported that a fight had occurred between waterside workers and volunteer labourers, during which one man was fatally stabbed. Tho next development was the announcement that regulations under- the Public Safety Preservation Act, having the effect of barring the employment of volunteer labour on the waterfront at Port Adelaide, had been approved by the South Australian Government, and would he gazetted immediately. Here the South Australian Labour Government, which has been conspicuous for its moderation up to the present, came into conflict with the Federal Government. Its action was characterised by Mr Latham, the Commonwealth Attorney-General, as unconstitutional. His Government has been prompt to act. It has issued new regulations nullifying those of the South Australian Government. Justifying this course it is pointed out that the Commonwealth Government has a special responsibility unde- the Constitution for the maintenance and control of the country’s shipping services. The fhrther declaration is made that it will not abdicate that responsibility because of violence or threats of violence. These incidents arise from a strong disagreement on policy. Mr Hill, as head of his State, is trying to follow tho attempts of the Scullin Government to impose similar regulations. One of the first acts of the Federal Cabinet was to repeal these regulations which wore made under tho Transport Workers Act, but were rendered ineffective by the action of, the Senate. Mr Lyons, in justification of the course tho Cabinet was taking, said that the regulations were made when the Scullin Government did not have a majority in either House, and they gave a preference to the members of the Waterside Workers’ Federation which had been definitely refused by the Arbitration Court. Tho position that has arisen is extraordinary, and tho developments will be watched with tho keenest interest.