Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. FRIDAY, MARCH 28th., 1930. SAFETY IN MINES

Greymouth Evening Star, 28 March 1930, Page 6

Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. FRIDAY, MARCH 28th., 1930. SAFETY IN MINES

UNSCRUPULOUSLY, our morning contemporary attempts to distort our yesterday’s reference to the Dobson mine dispute, by suggesting that the “Star” places little iinportance on the safety of mine employees. We have proved otherwise on many occasions. We did not hesitate to criticise the Unions for being apathetic regarding instances of matches or smoking material being found in possession of men employed in the Dobson and other mines. Our contemporary had nothing to say about this great danger brought about by defiance of commonsense precautions, whereas if it were really concerned about the men’s welfare as a whole, and not dominated by a trouble-making section, it would have joined in our denunciation. We shall never be party to the cry that the miners can do no wrong, and must be supported in all they

propose. The Dobson dispute' is one between unions, and the “Argus” is naturally on the side of the big battalion against the smaller organisation. We have expressed no opinion on the merits of the dispute, but have published statements by all the parties concerned. The deputy, whose estimate of the gas present has been criticised, has provided rebutting evidence, and is supported by his own union, as well as by the mine manager. These are as eager for adequate safety in the mine, as arc the other factions. The deputy concerned is entitled to a fair deal, and unless proved guilty should be acquitted of any serious mistake in his calculations. Unions should avoid victimisation of any worker, as such terrorism is worse from a union than it would be from an employer. The tendency to be autocratic is increasing among Coast Union executives; union-slavery is no more to be encouraged than any other form.

Whatever the pros, and cons, of the Dobson dispute, we i*epeat the opinion expressed yesterday, that such controversy forms no reason

for other mines to stop working. Most Coast collieries have had a good. run of late, but the settlement of the Australian dispute will open another chapter, and those Coast miners not earning when

they may, may not when they will The Australian miners will be de-

termined to recoup some of their lost wages, and as no restriction of output has been agreed upon, it requires little foresight to realise what competition is in store for New Zealand products. Nor is the state of affairs in the Dominion itself such as to make those who have employment to be careless about retaining it. Already serious unemployment among skilled tradesmen is reported, and the miners will be a poor sort of trades unionists if they callously add to the workless in other industries, dependent partly on regular coal supplies. The Dobson dispute is best settled by arbitration, each side

loyally accepting the award. Meanwhile, Coast miners should determine to have amended the policy, followed too often, that loss of wages by the many must accompany a dispute among the few, no matter the nature of the controversy. Disclosures made when Union leaders quarrel should cause the rank and file to display more moral courage, and refuse to be so docile to those whose misguidance in the past has cost them so much.