INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 21117, 26 February 1932, Page 12

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES.

PEACEFUL SETTLEMENTS.

DOMINION'S LEAD TO WORLD

EARLY LEGISLATION RECALLED

The announcement that amendments to the Arbitration Act are to lie brought before Parliament to-day recalls that New Zealand, 38 years ago, led the world in its endeavour to substitute for the doubleedged weapons of strike and lock-out the method of compulsory arbitration for the settlement of labour disputes. Condliffe, indeed, describes the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act "of 1894 as "probably the most important, and certainly the best known, of the legislative experiments that have been made in Isew Zealand."

The Act has been amended on numerous occasions, but tho Arbitration Couit, vrhich is the heart of the system, has sui■vived in spite of many changes in econ'fomic and political conditions. The system lias not lacked its critics, and, as Condliffe points out, there have been considerable shifts in criticism from various quarters. However, the author of the Act, tho Hon. William Pcmber Reeves, reviewing the position in 1924, was able to assert: A careful " analysis of tho magnitude of labour conflicts in New Zealand during the last 30 years, by which is meant the number of men.who have lost wages and the extent to which employers have lost working time, is a triumphant vindication of the usefulness of the Arbitration Act. . . . The condition of New Zealand labour since 1894 has been in every way better than it was before. If workmen there do not know that they are on the whole better off than their fellows elsewhere, then they ought to know: it is true." Conciliation Efforts First. Tho original Act provided that disputes between trade unions and employors shouldTirst be referred to a board of conciliation, one of which was appointed for each industrial district. Each board was composed equally of employers and employees, with an impartial chairman. The awards of such boards, however, were not enforceable in law, but were merely in the nature of friendly advice. If all or any of the parties refused to accept the recommendation of a board, an appeal lay to the Court of Arbitration, composed of a judge of the Supreme Court, sitting with two assessors, representing the employers and tho - employees respectively. As a rule it was .found that file decisions of the loeal"t:Gacitiation boards were not accepted. h Among the questions arbitrated on were the hours of labour, holidays, the amount of wages, piecework prices, the proportion ©f apprentices to skilled artisans, and so on. The work of tho Court developed greatly until it became a tribunal in continuous session. Complaints have frequently been made that an impossible task has been set the Court in asking it to range from end to end_ of New Zealand to hear disputes, arid keep abreast of its ■work. Position of Farm Labourers. The amending and consolidating Act of 1905 closed the first period of experimentation with the machinery of tho Court. During that period wore decided most of the important points of administrative principle which tho Court lias since followed. An incident of 1908 deserves mention in the light of more recent developments. In that year the Court refused to grant an award on the application of the Christchurch Agricultural and Pastoral Labourers' Union, thus making perfectly plain the implicit assumption on which the Court had worked prior to that date—namely, that its operations were confined to the organised and unionised secondary urban industries. A prominent part in opposing union's application was played by Mr. David Jones, who "was recently Minister of Agriculture in the Coalition Cabinet. However, breaches in that principle have since occurred by the granting of awards to unions of sheaieis, drovers, threshing-mill hands, musierers and packers. In addition,. farmers have a vital interest in the secondary manufacturing processes of meat and dairy production. The Cost of Living.

' From 1894 until 1906 New Zealand was completely free from industrial conflicts. Labour dissatisfaction with the Court's awards became aCuto in the latter year. One definite cause of discontent was the rising cost of living, which began to appear as a new phenomenon to be reckoned //with in all labour negotiations. The conciliation procedure had virtually been in abeyance since 1901, but in 1908 the system was revived on remodelled lines, eonciliation commissioners, who were civil servants, being appointed to act as chairmen of conciliation councils. It is reported that in recent years conciliation / councils have settled more than 93 per, cent.' of the disputes, while the Court has' fixed minimum rates and laid down general policies. The legislation of 1908 also provided for . more effective penalties for strikes and lock-outs. Growing industrial unrest,: culminating in the Waihi strike of 1912 and tho waterside workers' strike of 1913, revealed a new feeling in the labour movement. However, the arbitration system withstood a prolonged and wellplanned challenge from militant labour, and emerged from the ordeal with increased strength.

The War Years and After. In order to minimise the effects of price movements during the war and post-war period, the Court adopted £t basic or minimum wage scale applicable to all industries, and reviewed that scale at frequent ! intervals. During the war it became necessary to provide war bonuses to meet the position. Then came tho post-war depression, necessitating reconsideration of the rates of wages. Legislation was passed, enabling the Arbitration Court to amend awards in regards to wages, providing that in so doing tho Court should "have regard to a fair standard of living. During the whole period of post-war adjustment and depression following {lie boom, covering a period of three years from May, 1921, to May, 1924, the general level of wages had but two changes, amounting together to a reduction of 2d an hour on all wages, whether skilled or unskilled.

Similar power to revise wages during tho currency of awards was given to the Court by legislation passed during the emergency session of March-April of last year. Certain criticism of the Court in recent years has been grounded on tho allegation that the minuteness of its awards has a hampering influence in industrial organisation. On that point Condliffe comments: —"New Zealand opinion generally assumes that the abolition of the Court or the weakening of its powers of compulsion wouklTestilt in efforts to reduce wages and consequently in industrial conflict, The risk of lowered productivity from this cause is deemed greater than the present b'tirden of over-regulation."