THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1930. THE COURT AND WAGES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20743, 10 December 1930, Page 12

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1930. THE COURT AND WAGES.

In recent discussions of the difficulties of the times, wages have naturally figured among the subjects when the need for an all round adjustment of costs has been considered. Three suggestions can be taken as typical of much that has been said. Mr. Goodiiellow, in a schedule of things necessary to lighten the burden of cosits falling on the dairy farmer, included suspension of the Arbitration Court to allow a natural basis to be established for the wage scale. Sir James Gunson, in his scheme of action for the times, proposed suspension of tho Arbitration Act for two years, with a definite provision that it be restored at the end of that time to resume operations in face of an altered economic outlook. Lord Barnby, in an address on the general situation of New Zealand, advised legislation by agreement making possible simultaneous amendment of all awards of the Court. Two leading citizens of the country have urged that the machinery for the settlement of industrial disputes should be put ont of action, in one instance for two years, in the other for an indefinite period. A visitor, with the detachment of a stranger in the community, advocated Parliamentary action to vary the existing awards issued by the Court. Whatever the merits of all three proposals, their appearance, in close succession, shows that the problem of wage levels must come to the surface when the features of and possible remedies for the present economic crisis are being considered. It is not an easy question to approach, nor one that anybody attacks with any pleasure ; but the fact is apparent that it must be faced if the whole problem of the moment is itself to be faced. Nothing is gained, nothing can be solved, by running away from difficulties.

Suspension of the Arbitration Act, or Court, implies also the simultaneous termination of all existing awards. The move is advocated as an essential part of a process of wage adjustment. Yet the suspension of the Court would mean putting out of action the machinery for wage adjustment that has existed in this country for many years. The Court originates nothing, does nothing of its own motion. It exists to handle disputes referred to it. If it is made to cease functioning, and disputes or potential disputes arc created in all tho industries accustomed to resort to it, how arc they to be settled 1 Those who advocate that its operations should cease ought also to suggest some machinery in its place for handling disputes. This they have not done, and it is impossible to see, therefore, what would be gained by following their advice. Lord Barnby suggested legislation making possible simultaneous amendments in all awards. In an article appearing to-day it is recalled that the Arbitration Court was given power, during and immediately after the war, to vary awards by general orders. This power, it is suggested, might be restoied, with necessary modifications, to deal with the peculiar needs of the present. The two ideas are sufficiently similar to

be capable of consideration together. They both appeal as having more merit than the simple stopping of machinery hitherto considered essential. Yet the difficulties involved are great. Legislation would be needed, and it would be no easy legislation to pass. It would demand unusual courage and resolution, qualities that do not flourish in the existent political situation. The Government would have to give the lead, and it has shown no sign of having even considered the question. Its decided leaning throughout its term of office toward the Labour Party leaves little reason to expect it would take any such course unless it were forced upon it; and who is to force this upon the Government 1 ? It is the authority which raised wages on purely relief works to standard rates, and made a merit out of doing so. This, incidentally, is something which needs adjusting before any general question of wages is considered. The Government shows no sign of adjusting it. Another difficulty in the way of legislation is the time factor. In the ordinary way Parliament will not meet until June. Those who have proposed an earlier session have been given no encouragement by the only authority that can summon Parliament—the Government. Even after it met, Parliament would doubtless take as long as ever in coming to grips with essential questions. Allowing for the lapse of time in calling Parliament together, the natural slowness of its wheels in beginning to turn, and the inevitable opposition, accompanied probably by obstruction, that would be aroused by any measures affecting wages, a long while must necessarily elapse before anything could be done in that way. Meanwhile it is open for those concerned in any industry to put the wages question to the test before the Court. In the article already referred to, it is recalled that the Court is accustomed to take into consideration in framing awards such questions as the general economic condition of the country and of trade and industry, as well as the particular circumstances of the trade or industry in which a dispute occurs. If, therefore, a test case were brought by a typical industry with an expired award, the whole position could be argued before the Court, and it would be given the opportunity to make a significant pronouncement. Its decision in such a case would certainly set a precedent. Such an application and such a decision would pave the way to legislation authorising general orders should such be proved necessary. It might hurry its course along. When the need for general wage adjustments is proclaimed, it is surely better to test the machinery that already exists for the purpose than to propose its temporary abandonment without v any clear statement of the procedure to be followed in its absence. That is the dominating flaw in the proposals to interfere with the normal functioning of the arbitration system; they have nothing to offer in its place.