PREFERENCE TO UNIONISTS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19799, 21 November 1927, Page 12

PREFERENCE TO UNIONISTS.

Sir, —The question of preference to unionists qught to be faced. Is there any just reason why labour unions should be specially privileged beyond all other citizens '! AU other societies and organisations have to maintain their membership and finance by their own efforts; yet Parliament has placed the labour unions in a specially privileged class, whose membership and finance, by operation of the preference clause, come to them as a forced levy. The argument of union officials is that the workers in an industry who benefit from the activities of the union should pay into the union. That is a!l right as an appeal, but should they be compelled by law, or a. Court's judgment, to do so ? On the same principle a citizens' union or association might equally- clain that all citizens who benefit by its activities should be compelled to subscribe to its funds and enter its ranks. The argument will not stand examination as a plea for the preference clause. Wher3 the tyranny of this enactment commences is that it lays a civil compulsion on certain citizens that in order to earn their livelihood they must join an organisation they do not agree with. This strikes at the first principle of civil liberty, that each and every citizen of the country shall be free to earn his living and hold bis own opinions as to what associations he shall form with others. What is lost sight of is that many of the unions having the special privilege of preference are more than industrial bodies They form political affiliations and their registered rules in some instances affirm political objects. Here is an affirmation from the "objects" of one union which is registered under the Arbitiation Act: —"To educate member? and build an organisation for the purpose of abolishing capitalism, and substituting in its place the social ownership of the means of production, to btf controlled by the workers in the:ir respective industries. That socialist and syndicalist objective has nothing to do with conciliation or arbitration. It is, indeed, a negation of any conciliation. Moreover, it is a declaration of class war. How blind is Parliament that it can allow a provision whereby workmen of the industry must assent to that objective, join and pay into the union which makes it a rule, ana this under the compulsion of the preference clause without any right of protest or redress. A law such as this might be described as an Act to compel workers to support socialist doctrines without their assent, and assist in their promulgation by forced levy on the individual. These are some of the fruits of the unjust preference clause enactment. We make no apology for naming it a tyranny, and urge that it be reviewed by Parliament at the earliest opportunity. The N.Z. Welfare League.