Waterfront Conditions

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXXII, 10 March 1939, Page 9

Waterfront Conditions

PLAIN TALK BY MINISTERS APPEAL FOR HARMONY AND CO-OPERATION CONFERENCE OPENS AT WELLINGTON (United Press Association) WELLINGTON, 9th March. Some straightforward remarks about conditions on the waterfront in New Zealand were made to-day by the Minister of Labour (the Hon. P. C. Webb) in opening the conference held in Parliament Buildings to discuss the whole question of waterside work and conditions. In appealing for harmony and cooperation, the Minister expressed the Government’s concern at the existing situation and its desire to improve conditions. He declared that if things continued as they were the waterfront would be the laughing-stock of New Zealand and other parts of the world. The conference was largely attended by representatives of employers and workers concerned in the conditions of waterfront work from all over the Dominion. Mr Webb presided, and addresses were also given by the Minister of Finance (the Hon. W. Nash), the Minister of Transport (the Hon. R. Semple), and the Minister of Housing (the Hon. H. T. Armstrong). The proceedings were not open to the Press.

“All kinds of assertions have been made,” said Mr Webb. “One is to the effect that the plant on our waterfronts is not what it could be, that improvements could be made there. Several statements have been made that the stevedoring is not what it ought to be; that much of the cargo is handled twice when it should not be; that sometimes two gangs of men are employed to do a job that one could most successfully and economically do. Other statements have been made, too, to the effect that cargo shipped from the Old Country has got to be unloaded in Auckland—just taking one instance—in order to unload the Auckland cargo, and then reloaded in order to be discharged in Wellington, and that must, of course, undoubtedly add to the cost.

“Then, from the point of view of labj our, it has been asserted that there is not the co-ordination or co-operation ■ that we have a right to expect, that ef- ! ficient handling of much of our cargo is not to be had, and that in many j cases a certain number of men deliberj ately refuse to work and pull their , weight at all. How much truth there is ir all these statements I guess you men know here. “But this we know, that if thing’s are to continue the way they are the wat- . erfront will be held up as the laughingstock of New Zealand, if not also of other parts of the world. “I don’t want to start throwing bricks into the wheel, but I do want to say this, that a repetition of yesterday and other things reflect discredit upon the whole organisation of the waterfront, and it matters not for the moment just who is to blame. The fact remains that a situation like yesterday should not. under any circumstances, crop up. Now, if it is the fault of organisation from the stevedores’ point of view, it wants to be rectified. If we haven’t got the plant that is needed, that wants to be rectified, too. If, on the other hand, some of the men take the law into their own hands and feel that they are part of a body of men who are doing useful work, they should remember that the advantages they have gained, the conditions they enjoy, have been brought about by their unions in co-operation with their Government and with the employers too, and the maintenance of those advantages carries with it responsibilities as well. I am convinced of this, that whoever is wrong, or if both sides are wrong—my own opinion is that both sides are wrong in many ways, and I am hoping that this conference will enable us to get over that difficulty. “If the men are loafing—or some of them—l want to assure you on both sides of the table they can expect nothing but a hundred per cent, opposition as far as we are concerned, and if a man deliberately loafs he has no right l<> the protection of the union; if he gets the protection of that union the union cannot expect and will not get the proj tection of the Government. r “I want that to be quite clear, because jit is not fair that a few men should hav» the right to hold up the waterfronts after agreements have been brought about. It has also been stated—and, I know, quite freely—that a number of our foremen are not altogether judicious in the way they meet their men. We had an instance yesterday. Many of us were here all the afternoon trying to patch up a trouble, just simply because two men had a row. I am not going into the merits of that row, but I want to suggest that a row of that kind should never hold up work. RESULT OF DIFFERENCE “The result of that quarrel between two men meant cargoes of apples being left on the boat, sent back to Nelson, I understand, only to come back here to-day. But the most serious feature about it was that it lost the boat they were to be loaded on. The boat went away without them. Surely we can be bigger than that. Surely we have reached a stage now where we have When wintry tears my eyes o’erflow 1 In painful sympathy with my nose. I rr t m; heavy head and sigh ( For some relief, or 1 sha 1 ’ die. 1 The hacking cough, the hard-drawn i breath. Can only mean approaching death, But no the remedy. Life’s Renewer. * Is found in Woods’ Great Peppermint 1 Cure.

grown up and we can approach these problems in a common sense kind of way.

“Let us meet to-day* with the idea of concentrating our intelligence and cur knowledge upon the problem of the waterfront, and, whatever that problem may be, if we approach it in a friendly, comradely way, we will overcome that problem. Whatever assistance the Government may be called upon to give you in an endeavour to bring about a better understanding, you | can rest assured that co-operation will be forthcoming. The amount of time lost during this year worked out at about 3600 working days. You have an agreement. Why cannot that agreement be enforced? Who is to blame? How can we overcome it? A loss of 3600 days is a serious thing. We want every pound of stuff we can put on the boats to get away overseas. We want economic working here. If the costs are going up through lack of efficient organisation on the waterfront, the whole community has to pay. The costs are piled on to the rest of the community, and it embarrasses the Government and embarrasses the producers in every possible way. Surely we ought to be able to do something better than that.

I have fought for the best part of my life to bring about agreements, and some of you men sitting round this table I think met thirty years ago and helped to bring about the first national agreement on the waterfronts of this country, but then we adhered to it. We never had the stoppages we have now. We had better harmony and a better spirit prevailing than we have now. Why have we reached the stage where we have to have 3000 and 4000 days lost a year? If the conditions are not right, make them right* If the rates of pay are not right, make them right. If the organisation has not been all that it might have been, let us see if we cannot improve it. RISING CHARGES “But one thing is certain, that no Government realising its responsibility can sit down and see those costs and charges going up all the time, and the lack of organisation that prevails there at the present time. And let me say to the companies that we expect you to give of your best in the way of organisation, not to overload or underload —I mean systematic loading or whatever you might term it. And on the men’s side, is it too much for us to expect you to discipline your own members? If you cannot discipline them, and if men refuse to be disciplined by organisation, then is it too much to say that they have no right to be on the waterfront? They should be looking for a job somewhere else.

“If men think that they can go on the waterfronts or on public works or any other Government building with the idea that they can please themselves what they do and how they do it, then they have got another think coming to them.

“You cannot have harmony or organisation or efficiency either. We are setting out with the idea of getting together, and where there is a weakness, let us concentrate upon it and let us develop the courage and the strength to do the job that ought to be done, and whoever is to blame, let us try to remedy that and let us confer together with the idea of evolving some plan or some scheme. I was hoping perhaps that after a discussion we might be able to evolve some form of control on each waterfront, but the one thing I want to say, and then I will conclude, is when we have met here to-day let us meet as practical men dealing with a practical problem, and the problem is very small compared with the many big problems that we have to face every day. It is a human problem that can be settled with the application of common sense and give-and-take as far as the people are concerned, and if we are to be ruled by a few here or a few there, there is something wrong with the organisation of the employers and the employees, and on the part of the Government as well. SCHEME OF CONTROL "Now, I want to appeal to you today to have an- all-round, free-for-all discussion for a start, and then let us see if we cannot evolve some schetne of control on the waterfront without having to have commissions of inquiry and throwing mud at each other.

“Let us forget our differences to-day but concentrate upon the thing that will matter to-day, and I am confident if we do that we are likely to bring about

a state of organisation and harmony ! that will mean much to the waterside workers, much to the shipping companies, and mean an enormous amount to the Government as a whole.

“I am conscious of this as a result of my experience and co-operation with all the different elements of industry throughout this country, that there is a better spirit growing up. It is up to us to cultivate that spirit and give practical expression to it in our everyday work. I believe that can be done. I am hoping it will be done, and whatever assistance the Government can vender in bringing that happy state of affairs about, you can rest assured we will be very pleased to do it.

"I welcome you all here to-day,” concluded Mr Webb, “and thank you very much for coming. Let me express the hope that, as a result of a conference of this kind, where we. can meet as friends and discuss matters in a friendly way. we will be able to evolve something that will be worth while on the waterfronts of this country.” HOLD-UP OF FRUIT The Minister of Finance (the Hon. W Nash) said he would like to say how the Dominion was the vital factor concerned—not exclusively the waterside workers and the shipping companies. “It is a Dominion factor because the whole economy of the Dominion has been very adversely affected by actions on the waterfront, whether right or wrong I am not concerned with, because I don’t know anything about it,” Mr Nash continued. “But commodities available for shipping to the Old Country were not so shipped, and that has made difficulties from my point of view as Minister of Finance, and particularly as Minister of Marketing in charge of the commodities that we send overseas. I want to point out how these actions affected use as a nation and how it affected me from the marketing point of view.

“There is not a single hold-up on the waterfronts of this country—whether it is by the ship owners or the watcrsiders—that does not have a detrimental effect on our economy.

“It is not a question of wages. It is a question that if you prevent the unloading or the loading of certain commodities in the most expeditious way, it has a more harmful effect on the national economy than it does on the particular people who are interested for the moment. There may he points during the course of your discussion where I might be able to bring information over in connection with marketing or in connection with our trade, but I do hope that there will be some procedure followed here that will stop all the little avoidable hold-ups. “The circumstances yesterday were tragic from my point of view. I want to emphasise that it is a Government matter—a national matter and a financial matter. If we can’t get the circumstances brought into being that you want to see brought into being, then the nation as a whole suffers. I hope you will be able to arrange discussions that will engender a spirit under which the men will get decent pay for the work that they will do, and the ship owners will get decent work for the pay that they give. T will be discussing ship owners’ freight rates later on, and if you can make a decent arrangement here we might bo able to make a decent arrangement later on.”

DEFECT IN PRESENT LAW Mr Armstrong said it seemed to him that while the present system existed disputes would crop up from time (o time. It was very difficult to say just where to fix the blame. Possibly there was a certain amount of blame on both sides. He had often thought that the union should be able to discipline some of the men who were not prepared to do a fair thing, or who acted if defiance. not so much of the shipping companies, but of the union itself and their fellow workers. That class of man was likely to wreck the finest working-class organisation that was ever created. It was in the interests of the movement to which the men belonged that they should be subject to discinline at times.

“There is a defect in the law which wants to be remedied.” said Mr Armstrong. “I don’t think we would go very far wrong if we said we will amend the law and get the union to expel men who openly defy their own organisation, and their own rules and agreement The union should have the right to expel them. . . . The worker is not always responsible for what happens. I worked on the waterfront for two years and I had quite enough of it.”

Mr Armstrong said that if both sides believed in payment by results surely there should be a solution of the problem. He thought the conference would be wise to discuss that aspect, because it seemed there was not going to be a permanent solution in any proposals that had been submitted to him. The solution of the problem was in their own hands. He appealed to the parties concerned, not only in the interests of the waterfront workers and shipping generally, but in the interests of the country, to try to arrive at some conclusions that would bring about a more happy result than obtained at present. CO-OPERATIVE BASIS SUGGESTED Mr Semple said he thought it was quite obvious to everyone who looked LOCAL INDUSTRIES 1%/f ORE trained men will be wanted by N.Z. manufacturers. Do not delay! Fit yourself for a good position by taking an I.C.S specialised Course NOW! Some of the 300 home study Courses are:— Welding Accountancy Diesel Eng. Draftsmanship Foundry Work Salesmanship Electrical Commercial Art Radio Advertising Building Matriculation Call or write for Free Booklet and advice—no obligation INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENCE SCHOOLS. Dept, N, 182 Wakefield-st., Wellington.

round the Dominion that there was! room for improvement on the water-1 front. The representative of the Dun-i edin watersiders had stated that the! men had offered to do the work on a J co-operative basis, but that the ship- I

ping companies had replied that they did not want to hand over their management to the union. Mr Semple, who expressed the view that the co-opera-tive system was the practical remedy, said there would be no need for the companies to relax their management in any shape or form.

“The companies could still have the right to supervise and see that everything was done to the hard and fast agreement that could be drafted to do the job.” said the Minister. “I am satisfied you would get a greater measure of discipline, not imposed by punishment but self-imposed by men. if you gave to them some responsibility and some interest in the job that you are doing. That is my experience. Men feel they are part of the same business and take more interest in the business. They bccom * a unit in industry, and they realise the more they do the better it will be for themselves, and in the process of doing more for themselves they are doing more for the nation.

“What is wrong with this country is that there are too many people who want to take more out of the national pool that represents the annual production of the nation than they put in. It cannot be done. You cannot take more out than is put in. and the volume and value of that national pool depend upon the efforts of everyone who toils and spins. Those who do not put their weight are taking something from that national pool that does not belong to them, that someone else has created. That cannot go on unless everybody automatically suffers.

“The national annual production of the country increases in volume and value according to the effort that every individual who does work puts into it and out of that national pool comes the income of the nation. Naturally, then, if the pool diminishes by the act of an individual or a group in the nation everybody who depends on the volume and value of that national pool suffers. Our task is to increase that national pool in volume and in value so that it will reflect in a higher standard of living and a greater measure oi security for everybody. I have been talking this principle to the workmen on mv jobs all over this country.

“One illustration is the Ngahauranga Gorge. The earnings of those men are pooled and the men get out of that pool what they put in. . . . Why cannot that principle apply to the waterfront? I say it is not impossible. “I want to say finally that the companies would not forfeit the right to manage their own business. I would not be one to ask them to. I would not forfeit my right as Minister of the Crown or take the right away of the chief engineer to be master of his job. He is the head supervisor of the public works activities in this country. Wc have absolute control. There is no question in the world about that. But the men arc working on co-operative basis and they are working as they have never worked before because they feel they have an interest in the job and the more they do the more they get and in that case the more the nation gets. “If I was working on the principle you are working on on the waterfront j to-day it would cost me twice as much ! to do a mile of railway or road than it j does. I had a kick from men about i this thing. Some wanted the wage system and I had some trouble. You might ask what I did with the fellow who would not work. You know what I did with him, and his mates dealt with him after. There is no need for the employer to stand over the men because the good man will sec that the other man comes up to his standard. In your system the good man goes down to the waster standard because he says ‘what is the good of my working?’” Mr Semple said he commended to the conference the principle of co-operation, not piece work or competitive piece work. That led to sweating. There was a lot of difference between the piecework system and a properly organised co-operative system.