THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS THURSDAY, MAY 11, 1939 ARBITRATION DELAYS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVI, Issue 23343, 11 May 1939, Page 12

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS THURSDAY, MAY 11, 1939 ARBITRATION DELAYS

From time to time during the past few years, serious delays have occurred in the determination of industrial and conciliation claims by the Court of Arbitration. Legislative attempts to tinker with the procedure have not proved wholly acceptable to the parties mainly concerned, and it seems inevitable that further steps will liave to be taken to improve the existing machinery. The position is being brought to a head by the delay in the operations of the Court occasioned bj r the illness of its President, Mr. Justice O'Regan, but this is only a symptom, not the cause, of the trouble. For the past two years, Mr. Justice O'Regan has thrown himself into the work of the Court with energy and zeal and has not spared himself in his endeavour to keep pace with cases. Shortly before his appointmentj however, the Government had introduced legislation that imposed additional burdens on the Court. There had been a period of "compulsory conciliation and voluntary arbitration" and, with a reversion to the old order and an official pronouncement as to working hours, there was a constant stream of applicants for new awards. First a temporary Court and then an Industrial Magistrate were appointed in an endeavour to lighten the pressure, but at no stage was the original Court given any reasonable respite. The hearing of disputes is only part of its activity; far more exacting is the task of framing awards, often dealing with highly technical matters, in such a fashion that they measure up to the highest standards of legal clarity. This unremitting labour has resulted in the illness of Mr. Justice O'Regan. It is to be hoped that before long he will again be presiding over the Court, but in the meantime immediate attention must be given to the lightening of a load that no one man should be expected to carry. Several factors have contributed to the increased volume of work confronting the Arbitration Court. Changes in. the industrial arbitration law during the depression probably constituted a primary cause. These were revoked by the Labour Government during its first year of office and at the same time, as has already been stated, "further amendments were introduced which complicated the framing of awards. The instructions to the Court regarding the 40-hour week and the various blanketing provisions in amendments to the Factories and Shops and Offices Acts are cases in point. Thus access to the Court was suddenly restored to workers and on terms more favourable than any they had previously known. The subsequent rush of claims was inevitable, but it was unquestionably accentuated by the policy of the unions in seeking short-term awards. A year's currency was generally the maximum, and no sooner had the Court fixed an award for a particular group of workers than they were busy preparing claims for their next appearance. Then came the Secoijd Arbitration Court, appointed on a temporary basis to assist in overtaking the mounting arrears. Right from the' start that Court was doomed to failure. It meant obvious risks in the direction of separate tribunals starting from different premises and reaching different conclusions. The passing; of the Court was mourned neither "by employers nor by workers. The next step was the appointment of an Industrial Magistrate, authorised to deal with matters delegated to him by the Court. If such an appointment had been made a year or so earlier, it might have resulted in an avoidance of the present difficulties, but, in spite of the efficient work of Mr. Gilmour ( during the past few months, it cannot be claimed that the existing machinery is perfect.

Ifc has long been apparent that industrial pressure on the Arbitration Court might well be relieved by the setting up of a separate tribunal to deal with compensation cases. This should be the first step in improving the existing procedure. The separation of industrial and compensation claims would mean a more expeditious and probably a more judicial treatment of both. Two Courts would be in existence but they would be dealing with entirely separate matters, and the risk of conflicting conclusions would not arise. This division of responsibility iis advocated by the workers themselves, and its realisation would probably bring about a rapid improvement in the existing state of affairs. At the same time, there i is no reason why the work of Industrial Magistrates should not be extended. Two such magistrates, guided largely by precedent in the judgments of the Arbitration Court, could relieve the higher tribunal of much routine work and leave it free for the important task of dealing with new awards. A further condition for permanent improvement is not so easily realised. It depends on the reasonableness of parties in industrial disputes. There is no | reason why a much larger percentage of these cases should not be settled in Conciliation Council. From past'records, no one party can be exclusively charged with obduracy, but at least it has appeared that many' unions, rejoicing in the new initiative provided for them, have been advancing their claims "early and often." The Government has now appealed for something in the nature of a breathing space irt the formulating of demands, and, if the unions agree to take a reasonable attitude in the matter, the work of the Court in the immediate future should be appreciably lightened. The fixing of awards for longer terms should £,lso do much to stabilise the position a,:ad to provide ample time for the judicial consideration of industrial claims..