REFUSAL OF SUPPORT FOR CARPENTERS AT AUCKLAND

Grey River Argus, 26 February 1949, Page 5

REFUSAL OF SUPPORT FOR CARPENTERS AT AUCKLAND

By Three Unions Connected with Building P.A. AUCKLAND, Feb. 25 Three of the unions of workers connected with the building industry have voted against supporting the Auckland branch of the Carpenters’ Union in its dispute with the Master Builders. The Auckland Painters’ Union, by an overwhelming majority, at a special meeting to-night, condemned the branche’s tactics. It is understood that the Auckland branch of the North Island Electrical Workers' Union also decided to-night, not to support the carpenters. The Auckland branch of the Plumbers' Union decided not to take any action in dispute. These were three of the allied trades unions which were asked to support the proposal for a stop-work meeting in Carlaw Park on next Wednesday • morning. This suggestion came from a meeting of Union executives last Monday. After the meeting of the Painters' Union, the following statement was issued by the president, Mr A. J. Carpenter, and the secretary, Mr F. Williams: “At a special meeting of the union, called by a circular, the precis of the carpenters’ dispute was given by the secretary of the Auckland branch of the Carpenters’ Union, Mr D. McEwen, who, spoke, and answered questions, for approximately three-quarters of an hour. After the retirement of the carpenters’ representatives from the meeting, the question of the relationship of the carpenters’ dispute and the policy of the Auckland Painters’ Union was fully discussed. The following resolution was moved: “That this. union non concur in the present attitude of the Carpenters’ Union, and condemn its illegal tactics.” This motion was carried by 101 votes to 21 votes. Fifty fewer State housing units will be available in the Auckland metropolitan area between now and March 31. This is because of the hold-up in the building. Unless there is a new development it is considered that all activities allied to the building trade will be brought to a standstill next week. About 255 idle carpenters registered at the Labour and Employment Department’s office for alternative work, after applying for unemployment benefits. The great majority have not secured jobs. Some who were directed to unskilled work did not turn up on the job. Some employers have refused work to men sent to them. Those who applied for unemployment benefits on Monday will receive their replies next week, after the usual lapse of time between registration and notification of eligibility for payments. The Auckland Ceramic, Builders’ and General Labourers’ Union is temporarily enrolling carpenters as members of its organisation and finding them emplpyment. Union’s Criticism of Award AUCKLAND, Feb. 25 "With 1500 members out of work, and determined net to De starved into swallowing what they regard as an injustice, it is necessary lor the Auckland branch oi the Carpenters' Union to make ciear the issue involved in the dispute with the builders, as the?, appeared to our members’ meeting to-day when deciding to stand fast,'' said Mr D. McEwen, secretary ot the union in a statement. “Under the arbitration system a decision of the Court is absolutely tinal. There is a safeguard with almost every other judicial body that parties dissatisfied with the decision may appeal to a higher Court. The Arbitration Court, being human, can conceivably make decisions which are against the evidence or bad in law, but there is no check by way of the right of appeal.

REASON FOR GO-SLOW ' "The Auckland carpenters operated a ‘go-slow’ because they firmly believe that the Court made a. wrong decision on their award, especially in two particulars. They believe that on their application for 4s an hour wage rate, the Court did not correctly administer the stabilisation regulations. These empower the Court to ‘restore or preserve 1 relationships with other sections of workers. The union’s case was based on the fact that between 1919 and 1936, the wage margin between skilled and unskilled workers was over 25 per’ cent., this being also the position in many othei parts of the world to-day. As the margin has shrunk to 14 per cent., during recent years the union claimed another 5d to restore the former position in accordance with the law. The Court awarded half the claim, but for this compromise amount the stabilisation regulations appear to give no justification. “In regard to the ‘suburban work clause, which was changed by the Court back to the 1943 clause, the union claims that the Court acted against the evidence. The ‘experimental clause’ was awarded in 1945, and was confirmed in 1947, after exhaustive evidence had been given by both sides. The union claims that no fresh evidence, came before the Court in 1948, though the evidence previously brought forward was repeated by the advocates in various forms. The only witness from either side was an employer who stated that, while still opposing the 1945-47 clause, the employers were prepared to make certain concessions to soften some of the harshness of the 1943 clause. “The Court’s award ignored the emplovers’ concessions and reproduced the" substance of the 1943 clause,' continued Mr McEwen. “The union is satisfied that the change of policy from the 1947 to the 1948 award cannot be justified on the grounds of fresh evidence placed before it. . But no appeal against the decision is allowable. “The union took what steps it could to settle the dispute amicably. Twice the representatives of employers and workers met, but the employers returned an emphatic negative to the hope that further negotiations might take place. The only alternative to meek acceptance of what was felt to be an unjust, decision was action against that minority of employers which was not willing to admit that the workers’ claims were just. The majority of employers throughout New Zealand and some hundreds in Auckland, equally with the union, refused, to recognise the new award, and with them the unio nhad no quarrel. “In retaliation for the go-slow operated against the minority of employee, the master builders decided to lock out the whole membership of the union. This decision involved bot h workers not operating a ‘go-slow and builders already providing conditions satisfactory to the union. The extension of this action to the whole membership was not possible except bv the methods which have been adopted by those promoting it. It is noteworthy that out of nearly 900 builders in Auckland, only 130 were present when the lock-out decision was made. , , x “Many others later expressed determination not to carry out this decision—since they already agreed in practice, that the carpenters should receive what they were asking. However, builders who desired to .continue employing carpenters risked losing their future supplies of materials. , . “Scores of employers sacked car-

penters only through fear of retaliation. Such a risk Is potent in the building industry because of the monopoly position of the suppliers of materials.' The entry of outside employers into a domestic dispute exposes the true object of the monopolies—to maintain a low-wage policy in the building industry, and in their own industries. The lock-out is directed both at the carpenters who are taking action for higher wages, who are taking action for higher wages, and carpenters and their employers “The support given to the master where better wages are paid. builders by the Chamber of Commerce, Employers’ Association, Manufacturers’ Federation and the Council for the Building Industry clearly shows that the present carpenters dispute is one of importance to all workers and all employers, said Mr McEwen. “Employers in other industries have undertaken not to employ the dismissed carpenters, with the view to breaking down the carpenters’ demand for reasonable wages.” Mangakino Workers’ Support MANGAKINO, Feb. 24 A resolution giving full moral and financial support to the Auckland carpenters in their dispute with the master builders was passed at a meeting of the Mangakino branch ot the New Zealand Workers’ Union held on Tuesday night. After hearing an address by the national secretary of the carpenters union Mr Roy Stanley, on the facts and background to the dispute, the meeting decided to strike a compulsory leyv on its members in support or the carnenters. . . The meeting also passed a tion requesting the national office o the New Zealand Workers Union tc give -£5OO to the carpenters’ Dock-out Fund.