THE LABOR LAWS.

Feilding Star, Volume XXVII, Issue 76, 21 October 1905, Page 2

THE LABOR LAWS.

» At the annual meeting of the Em ploy ers Association held in Dunedin on Wednesday last, the President, Mr Thompson, in the course of his address, referring to the Conciliation Board, said :— " The federation as a body is opposed to having cases heard by tbe Board as it has no power to do more than to recommend. Experi ence bas sbown that the recommenda tions are rarely acceptable to both parties, and so tbe matter has to go to the Arbitration Court. This means that a dispute has to be re heard, and is a source of worry, expense and waste of time. We regret to notice, be continued, " that disputes recently brought before the Board bave been by new unions, whose secretary, after having estab lisbed a union, and probably initiated the proceedings, sits as a member of the Board and adjudicates on his own handiwork. It was this kind of proceeding on tbe part of the work ers' representatives which in tbe earlier history of the Boards in the north brought tbem into sucb ill repute, and undermined the underlying principle of the Industrial j Conciliation and Arbitration Act, conciliation. Tbis sort of thing cannot in any way inspire employers j with any degree of confidence in the Otago Board as it is at present constituted, and cannot commend itself to any right thinking person." After reviewing the operations of the Arbitration Act, he summed up tbe result of ten years' working to be that " higher wages, shorter hours ?nd restricted conditions of y .;:{; have hot improved the position b{ the worker, and that industries have now more tban tbey can carry. The WP r, ers themselves are beginning to realise tbe position and to foresee looming in [the immediate future, intermittent work, and consequently reduced earnings. Tbey are holding meetings to discuss the situation and in some of tbe Northern towns have even consulted with tbe em ployers as how best to meet the evil that is threatening them. So far, they can see but one remedy — a high protective tariff. It is very questionable indeed as to whether under high protective duties their lot would be in any way improved. Increased taxation must mean increased burdens to the consumers in tha way pf dearer living. This is a most difficult problepa, but one that will havo to by faced bo our legis lators, and that at no distant date." j