INDUSTRIAL LAW.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18456, 20 July 1923, Page 9

INDUSTRIAL LAW.

ENGLAND AND AUSTRALIA.

CONTRAST OF METHODS.

, ' * - LONDON, July 12Dr. Jethro' Brown/ president of the In-' dustrial Arbitration • Court . of. South. ' £™* tralia since 1916, who is visiting En* land told a press representative. in my opinion Australia is a long way ahead of England as regards industrial, legistotion TThe Whitley Councils, as I anticipated, are experiencing difficulty omng to lack of co-ordination of standards as between the different industries. # " I am now studying the working oi English industrial legislation, and the administration of justice m the ordinary Courts. I must say I have been impressed by •'■ the dignity v and ■? expedition ■wherewith justice is administered. ;'"■ , ; K " The most remarkable difference'.in procedure," continued Dr. Brown, "isin the Arbitration ' Court. Australia handles disputes from : the '-■ commencement, and tries conciliation first. Then,, if it proves necessary, 1 she ' proceeds to arbitration.; But in England i the 7 Ministry. of Labour first deals with the case, and tries to conSriliate the parties, and then I refers it ito the Industrial Court for arbitration only. " Though ' the Labour Party is divided into many sections, : they are united in Parliament and 0 led 'by very able men, some ; of J them i; possessing ; much ; personal charm arid persuasive )Z eloquence, others with the keen brains necessary for the formulation of a policy likely to command ; general support at; the electionu." :■;■..'-.