THE LABOUR MOVEMENT

Evening Star, Issue 21710, 3 May 1934, Page 14

THE LABOUR MOVEMENT

[By J.S.S.]

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

SOCIALIST PARTY AND F.S.U. Two organisations in Christchurch which formerly enjoyed some measure of support from members of the Labour Party are now officially frowned on by the North Canterbury Labour Representation Committee and the New Zealand Labour Party—the Friends of the Soviet Union and the Socialist Party (states the Christchurch ‘Star’). The annual conference of the Labour Party, held in Christchurch at Easter, decided that no member of the Friends of the Soviet Union could retain membership of the party, and, following closely on this decision, it is understood that the local L.R.C. proposes not to accept an invitation from the Socialist Party to participate in the annual May Day celebrations. The party’s attitude towards Socialists is due to the fact that they are regarded as a definite political group, prepared to present candidates in opposition to Labour Party nominees. In the early days, and up till quite recently, the Socialist and Labour Parties were closely allied, but then appeared a new element in the Socialist Party which chose new officials and altered the constitution. . Instead of merely confining its activities to propaganda work, the party entered the political field, and presented several candidates at the last municipal elections. Several candidates contested seats on the Christchurch City Council, but one only was successful. As for the decision regarding the Soviet Union, the National Secretary of the Labour Party (Mr James Thorn) has written to the L.R.C. directing attention to the decision come to at the annual conference, and advising it to procure from any candidates a written statement to the effect that they are not. members of the organisation. The decision, states Mr Thorn, also applies to delegates to the L.R.C. who are representing branches or unions. If any delegate is a member of the F.S.U. he should be given an opportunity of resigning, failing which the affiliated organisation must be asked to appoint another delegate »in his place. * * * * LABOUR IN AMERICA. Mr John Armitage,-of Canada, and one time prominent in the Labour movement in New Zealand, gave a very interesting address to the Auckland Fabian Club recently, dealing with the Labour, movement in North America. During his, twenty years’ sojourn in other lands he has travelled widely, and has gamed a deep knowledge of world working class conditions. He edited the ‘ One Big Union Bulletin.’ Mr Armitage states that the working class movement of the United States of. America was closely allied to that of Canada. Canada was economically bound to the United States, for an intensive study of the facts revealed that 65 per cent, of Canadian industry was owned or controlled by Americans. This was the reason why the American Federation of. Labour was so strongly entrenched across the border in Canada. The American Federation of-Labour was looked upon kindly by most American employers, and despite its defects was still very powerful. It was based on the craft concept in that it assumed that a man who had a craft had a property. Craft unionism divided the organised workers according to their special trades or crafts, and the federation was a conglomeration of craft unions. The federation’s preamble was “ a fair day’s work for a fair day’s wage.” It claimed not to believe in the class struggle,, its president, Mr William Green, having repeatedly declared this publicly. It had never made any, legitimate attempt to organise the semi-skilled and unskilled workers. They had been catered . for by an entirely different organisation, the Industrial Workers of the World. The 1.W.W., organising industrially, embraced all workers, many of them nomadic, and did not subscribe to political action as we knew it. The American Federation of Labour especially believed, that more could be got for . the worker by means of lobbying, no matter what political party was in power, than by working for any particular party. Both these workingclass institutions ' had considerable power in Canada, but two other movements had arisen there, one of which had spread to the United States. The speaker vividly described the general strike of Winnipeg in 1919, out of which these movements sprang. The failure of the strike caused many of the workers and participants to realise the selfishness and narrowness of interest in craft unions, and the weakness of loosely joined craft unions with no conception of the class struggle. Some of the workers went over to the 1.W.W., which gained strength, especially on the lumber fields. Others helped' to form the All-Canadian Congress of Labour, which the speaker alleged was not essentially different from the American Federation, of Labour, except that it strongly advocated nationalism- and denounced the American Federation of Labour as a foreign union. ' In this it was helped by the newly-formed One, Big Union, to which a large number of disgruntled craft union men turned. The One Big Union aimed to draw attention to the class struggle and to lead the workers to realise that only a new social order would eliminate social inequalities and economic insecurity. The membership increased rapidly, and many units were established over the border in the United States, but the headquarters remained at Winnipeg. Nearly one million copies of its official organ, the ‘ Bulletin,’ were sold weekly. The One Big Union has now become frankly nationalistic and had linked up with the All-Canadian Union, which believed only in political action. Many of the prominent men of both unions were members of the Canadian Commonwealth Socialist Party under Mr Woodsworth, the majority of whose members were farmer owners and middle-class people. In the speaker’s opinion, the party as constituted held the seeds of Fascism. Mr Armitage then dealt with the Socialist Labour Party of the U.S.A., which believed that a proletarian movement could not hope to succeed unless it was backed by the industrial movement. Its founder, Daniel de Leon, had said that the political spearhead could not get far without the industrial shaft to thrust it home. Craft unionism, it was contended, had tended to disrupt the Labour Movement, departmentalising it and breaking it up into cliques. The Socialist Labour Party was revolutionary in that it aimed at a complete change and was out frankly to gain control of industry. The unions must be industrialised and the worker led to take more interest in the economic status of the workers as a whole than in his own day-to-day struggle. The growth of the party during the last two years had been tremendous. Many of its leaders were making a very considerable material sacrifice to propagate the working-class ideal. The New Deal being still in the experimental stage, Mr Armitage said that it was.

extremely difficult to be explicit concerning it. Roosevelt appeared to him to be an inflationist, who believed that, by creating more money, prices could be raised. He claimed to be raising wages and to some extent this had been done, especially wages of female workers who previously worked at sweated rates. Even so wages did ; not keep pace with the rise in prices, and this was largely the cause of the many industrial disputes reported in the Press. Industrial workers had to join a union but they had only two alternatives—the A.F. of L. or the company union. The I.W.W. and other unions were barred. Communism in North America had made little advance for, unfortunately, its adherents spent their time trying to convince the worker that the only solution was to follow blindly in the footsteps of Russia along the Moscow road. The unemployment movement was referred to by Mr Armitage. These many millions of men and their dependants were a force to be reckoned with, and, with the exception of the A.F. and L., all the unions and political movements were alive to this and were taking steps to cope with the situation. The plight of the unemployed was very desperate, especially those of the transient section, whose chances of getting relief anywhere were very slender. A very strong proletarian feeling was evident among the unemployed, and the long-sighted unions were realising that they must foster this if only to protect themselves for the fight of the employed worker. The status of the former could and did affect the wage payments of the latter. As vet the unemployed were not allowed to hold official positions in the unions, but the fact remained they were being organised and their very radical influence would be felt. New cases and new methods of Labour racketeering were being uncovered daily, and the whole trade union movement had suffered. However, the influx ot new members with a determination to change things and to smash the bureaucracy which up to now had ruled organised Labour with an iron hand was bound to alter those institutions. The Roosevelt policy had had union support, so far, in the desperate hope that the workers might get something from it. Should they be disillusioned there would be trouble. * * * * WELLINGTON TEA ROOM WORKERS. The following is a brief resume *of the new Wellington tea room workers award, which will operate for one year:— Hours of work: 48 per week, not more than 10 per day. . Holidays: One full holiday, m each week of seven days. A rationing clause allows for rationing work among employees when insufficient is available tor all. Wages for cooks are as previously agreed upon. Minimum wage for waitresses, pantry maids, and kitchenmaids: 30s a-week. Waiters and male kitchen hands receive £2 2s 6d. There is a provision for probationers to be employed in the proportion of one to three or fraction of three fully-paid workers. All other clauses were agreed upon, except that a special provision has been included allowing emergency workers to be employed on five days of the week only, for whom a lesser rate is payable than for six-day workers. *** \ * ESKIMOS ON STRIKE. The Eskimos have had the first strike in their history. Out of the vastness of Canada’s northland comes the unique story of the victory of the diminutive dark-skinned wards of the country. It is the story of the Eskimo organising labour for the first time, and against none other than the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the historic Hudson Bay Company. Badly needed for Arctic coastal posts, a congestion of police and company supplies was on hand at Aklavid. The usual seasonal pay of £4 a ton for unloading was offered the Eskimos. Sensing the exigencies of the situation, . the wily “ stevedores ” held an impromptu meeting. They demanded £5 a ton, and refused to capitulate. The police and • company capitulated. $ * * * TAX ON MACHINERY ADVOCATED. All labour-saving machinery should be taxed to counteract some of the injustices which the existing system of production (imposes on working people, declares Paul Lymon, president of the Tennessee (U.S.A.) Federation .of Labour. “ Such a tax,” he contends, “ would provide closer governmental supervision of disputes between labour and manufacturers, and would decrease, the profits enjoyed by employers who discard workers for machines.” Aymon opposes the chartering of corporations to compete in already crowded fields. In failing to limit charters, he avers, State Governments assist in disrupting both labour and marketing arrangements of industries. * * * * BACK TO WAGES. It is good news to hear of a relief organisation that is no longer required for relief purposes. Wollongong, centre of the New South Wales south coast coalfields and manufacturing district, recently reported as follows:—The Wollongong Relief Society, which was formed when the depression started, has disbanded and handed over its funds and clothing to the Wollongong Benevolent Society, In referring to the good work done by the society, Mr A. R. Sevan said that when the society was formed only 200 men were employed at the Australian Iron and Steel Company’s works. Now there are 2,400. It was a pleasure to. have come to a time when the conditions in the district had so improved that the society could cease operations.” * * • • LONDON LABOUR SUCCESSES. Of the 124 seats on the London County Council the Labour Party held 69 after the election against 35 before it. The Tories, who masquerade under the name of “ Municipal Reformers,” emerged from the elections with 55 seats as against 89 in the old council. The Liberals had six in the old council; at the elections their representation was completely wiped out. Labour’s strength in the new council entitles it to 11 out of the 20 aldermen. Of the 2,083,060 electors (one half of whom were women) 672,570 went to the polls. The Labour Party’s aggregate vote was 341,390, the remainder being distributed between the Tories, Liberals, Communists, and Independents. The Labour Party vote was 137,000 greater than it was in county council elections three years ago. The Tory vote was 11,000 greater than the vote by which they got their majority in 1931. The percentage of voters to the. number m the role was 33.44, as against 25 per cent, in 1931. The vote given to the Labour Party was the largest ever given to any party in tho history of London County Council elections. The Communist vote was negligible. Among the Labour candidates elected were seven doctors and several women. Mr Herbert Morrison, the Labour Party leader in the County Council, was Minister of Transport in the second Labour Government of Great Britain. The son of a policeman, he is 46 years of age. He is now described as the “ Prime Minister p£ London,”