THE ARBITRATION ACT

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 6624, 14 September 1908, Page 7

THE ARBITRATION ACT

THE AMENDED BILL. VARIOUS VIEWS AND OPINIONS. Considerable interest has been manifested in the various amendments made ■n the Arbitration Bill by the Labour liillo Committee, From a number of opinions obtained on Saturday by a '‘Times” representative Uie alterations appear to be acceptable to the majority of tlio students of tbc industrial situatloD‘ A SANGUINE OPINION, Tho chairman of the Labour Hills Committee, Mr Tamior. lias boon a mmnlKir that committee over since it lias j>ucit iu oxmU’iicc—siaco 1891. Kvery !!j|l relating to labour matter*?, . and which has been before the committee,, ha« been through hi* hands, ami, I'here*foro. ho is in u position to give a valuable* opinion on tho subject:. Moreover, bo Wfis in confidential oommumcahon with the Hon. W. V. Ih evr.s before lie hist brought forward his original draft of Uio Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act. Referring to this particular Hill. Mr Tanner said Mr Reeves had attempted to put it through in 1891-2-3, but it met with such stringent opposition, owing to the circumstances o! the time, and the division between worker* and employers, that it was only after a general election in 1003, which ;mvo tho (lovcrnniont an ncce.vdon of strength, that he was able next year to put the measure on the Statute Book. rOHNTKV WITHOUT STRIKES/ "U is a mistake,” said Mr Tanner, "to mippuse Hint the Hill was ever passed as n ..strike prevention measure. It was not. Dciiiari'.'l Lloyd, the Chicago writer, in writing on New Zealand, first coined the phrase ‘a country without strikes.' From that the claim has been made that our legislation prevents strike;. As a proof to the contrary, and to show the- meaning of the former Bill, let me recall a forgotten incident. In IHO3, Captain Russell criticised the provisions of fho Hill, and inquired across the floor of tho House of Air Reeves, 'What if the workmen decide to strike after nil?' Air IRKvcs answered: ‘lf

thoy ignore the machinery we are now providing ami choose to strike, let them ’■trike.' As a matter of fact, until about 1905, there was no nnti-Mriko clause cm-

iKsilictl in tho legislation. Since then the position had become distinctly acute. The HU! ns introduced into the House tliis session showed a good deal ot luoadcmic legal handiwork. Apparently the framer had made himself pretty well .mquniiitcld with the, old repressive legislation directed against workmen in tho time of the Georges—over a century since. Ilis legal knowledge far exceeded his presdnt knowledge of to-day’s conditions. The consequence had been that the committee in handling the Bill hud largely ro-oonstruoted it, ami brought it more into accordance with what they ■leomdd to bo tho modern requirements. Thu Bill ns it now stood gives tho workers the deliberate choice. They could accept its provisions loyally—in which case they made themselves largely responsible for' acts of members of thdir unions or they could cancel registration mil fall back to tho position of trades unions ns trades unions were understood Iwdnty years ago. They could return to the old position of inocasent and perpetual feud with their employers. There Is no question that the former is the best course. A DECADE OF PEACE. 1 believe that the effect of the Bill—if rightly apprehended—will be to compel Hie unions to put in the forefront as leaders and representatives, tho best ability which the unions possess. Unfortunately, of lute years, that has not always boon tho case. The man who toultl distinguish himself most by clamour arid violent advocacy, and had no sense of the responsibilities of his p6sition, was often the man to bo soft in the position of tho representative. Tho result had been disastrous. Now it must, be "brought homo to the unions that they vwd a duty to tho State, as tho Stale has takon measures to safeguard their interests. I believe the new proposals introduced into tho Bill at the instance of tho Minister of Labour for a Conciliation Commisioucr for each Island, if wisely administered, will bo one of tho best correctives of the present ferment, ft is not to bo denied by any calm observer that tho labour.world during tho last two or three years has been in a state of increasing and accentuated unrest. which, I think, has given eucouragvnent eo tho development of what is

known as Revolutionary Socialism. It will bti in the power of the Labour » bodies ) now—always assuming' that the administration is what it should' bo—to give the Dominion a deondo of peace in industrial matters. I am sanguine enough to believe that Labour will realise tho position. . SETTLING A DIFFICULT PROBLEM. Mr Arnold, M.P., said: I believe tho Bill as amended by tho committee the host attempt that could bo made to settle what has now become tho most difficult problem that tho public men have to grapple with. Tho unrest in tho labour world ho* been gradually growing during the last four or five years, until nt the present day it is having a most disastrous effect upon the industrial world. In my opinion this has been largely brought about in consequence of the Legislature refusing to listen to tho request* made by the Labour party because they have felt themselves drifting into the present position. Tho Bill as amended, however, is a fair attempt to bring them back to the position they were in when the Act first came into operation. The industrial councils, with representatives on each side and a commissioner presiding over them, without either a deliberative or casting vote, but whose duty it will bo to bring the two parties into agreement, is decidedly a stop in tho right direction. In all suc■*cwsful negotiation between two sides where there is friction or strained relations, conciliation must be a first and a strong point. I am in hopes that experience may find that this has becri. the 'olution of the difficulty that wo have had troubling us so long in tho past. Asked his opinion with respect to the exertion wage, Air Arnold said that from his many years* experience as a worker he regarded this proposal as one of tho :no>t objectionable features contained either in tho Bill of la«fc year or this, rle was very pleased to- find that the Labour Bills Cominitlo had struck it out. If they had not done so he felt sure it roild have meant deploying tho Bill in.

Its pnssago through tho House, and if iv farce of numbers it had got through resimtniput of Ifie workers of the Do•uinion would have boon manifest within »mim* months. The imprisonment clause Sad been struck out, and he was of opinion rightly so, hut, as unpleasant as tho 'bought was of a respectable working man having to eo to gaol and perhaps Tntenmngling with criminals, ho would have* preferred even that to tho provision that it. should bo the duty of em;»k>yei\s to deduct penalties from tho ••ayes of the workmen. In (striking out 'Ms provN’on nho the worker? wore miter an oM’gnHon te the committee. Tie Ousted that the T5«ll would he*placed on >he sdat.ute-hrvoV this session, f-o that‘he’e uiieht be some finality to loth employers and worker* to know the position 1 her hud to meet. WTLCr M! ' \ MT.\DM ENTS.

H'O Hti. - f . T. f'nn.l, <*., '•n fhif frO"> <! CUrHOTV t ;t. w ,, n (»,Tuf M’lMi'rtvnvi'iii I'.n t!i . ■'•» V-l. n»'«l in so f»>»- .»«* jf nr,s r>n ■ -ji'-.-j j r , if. Tlit' mj-.i----r«( (•*' i» •! ■* in 'VI »-i. ? i hrii mil v?f>i V« chM v* ..... . i_ f . ~...,-c, ■ > I* ||| - - •• •■•!»■.> "r : ty -' " I;;*'l vf i y wi *•

ment in excluding any reference to it. He had always been opposed to imprisonment. and welcomed tin? uelcliou of the references to 1 his subject as contained in tho original Bill. ANOTHER POINT OF VIEW.

Mr V. .T. o’Regan, chairman of the Conciliation Board in the MeiLngion district, while admitting that he had not had time to go thoroughly into the

ill ns amended, said it appeared to Mm that the committee .had certainly done ono very sensible thing in deleting the provisions that a. Magistrate should preside over tho industrial tribunal*. Had that provision been retained the result would have been to have dragged i ■ Magistracy of the Dominion into Ihe mire of heated partisan controversy. \-i an instance of what might have been •?d the alteration not been mode, he quoted tho case of tho recent tramway dispute iu Auckland. T)r McArthur's finding in that case had amounted prac- ' Fatly to a declaration of ordinary common law principles. That way to v. he find given n luminous exposition

r tho law of master and servant and yet he had brim virulently availed by certain newspapers and organisations of employers Mr O’Kegnn considered it impossible for any industrial tribunal under the Arbitration Act to escape tint. Such being the case, it was mnni‘Ktly desirable to keep the Magisterial nch apart altogether from industrial iivi He iv. "So far as lire future of the Act is concerned/* emit! Air O’Regan, “my verdict is simply this; There is trouble ahead," "ONE THING OR THE OTHER." THE GOVERNMENT’S ATTITUDE. Speaking to a deputation on Saturday morning the Prime Alinifder said tho Government: was going to do is best to have (he Bill ns brought down put on tho statute book. They had to do either one thing or the other. If they were going to have a recognised system tor tho working of industries, and if they wore going to do it by statute law, they must have amendments made to the Act to provide for alterations that existed a* against tho 1891 system. If they found tho law would not bo of use but a source of friction and trouble, then the alternative was to repeal the law and have no Lw at all, 110 w*as quite satisfird of that. "I do not believe myself—and I am speaking with some knowledge of tho worker—l do not believe that either the worker? or employers will ever get a law- on the statute hook that either will regard us completely snisfactory to them. X do not believe it is possible. For that reason we should try- to make the law ns effective as we can. and if it is m operation it should be accepted by both sides," SOAIE SOUTHERN VIEWS.

THE NEEDS AND EXERTION WAGE. TIIESS ASSOCIATION*. CHRISTCHURCH. -September 13. Newspaper lepreseutalives secured some local opinions on the Arbitration Bill as amended by tho Labour Bills Comm it too this morning. MrH. Broadheacl, secretary of the Cantcrlmry Employers’ Association, author of btnte .Regulation of Labour and Labour Disputes iu New Zealand,” said that generally speaking he regarded the Bill as another experiment in conciliation and arbitration. In the past the Act had been to n large extent an experiment, and it had been weighed in tho balance and found wanting. It had proved a disappointment to those who expected a great deal from it. Whether the new experiment would prove successful ho was not prepared to say. Referring to the deletion of tho provision for imprisonment when default was maclo of the payment of fines inflicted for striking, he said that the idea of imprisonment was certainly not one people cared for, though on the other hand it was undoubtedly the case that a number of people thought that it was the only way by which the law could be made thoroughly effective. He advised patience in order io see what the effect would be. Of the provision for the issue of writs of attachment on wages, ho noted that the hues had been increased in omouiit, and possibly that would have the desired effect. Tho appointment of conciliation commissioners seemed to him to be a step towards conciliation pure and simple, and with the assessors would be certainly more satisfactory than tho Boards as at present constituted. Employers generally would approve tho amendment providing that the conciliation commissioners shall not possess a vole, as it will mean that the commissioners ■will be conciliators and nothing else. Then if the parlies could not agree the only reasonable alternative would be t) take the dispute to tho Court. Tho Canterbury Association had always been in favour of this amendment, and he was of opinion that if suitable men were pointed as commissioners it was almost certain that they would perform a great service by creating a good feoling between the representatives of both sides to a dispute, and in assisting to bring about satisfactory settlements. The new definition of '"worker” was intended to cevor every conceivable class of employment, but whether the civil courts would support the idea that a worker included those not engaged in industrial pursuits was problematical. Mr G. T. Booth, of Booth, MacDonald and Co., Carlyle Implement Works, a prominent member of the Canterbury Employers’ Association, was rather favourably disposed towards the amended TSill. He stated that so far as tho strike and lock-out clauses were concerned there was not much to be said. Tho alterations did not seem to affect the provisions embodied in tho original Bill to any appreciable extent. Tho amendments making a strike or lock-out a continuing offence, and providing substantial penalties on either side, were in the right direction, and in his opinion they would make tho compulsory provisions move adequate and of move oven bearing than in the past- Apparently the theory of tho Government was that every effort should bo made to bring the disputing parties together without invoking the assistance of the Court or putting the compulsory clauses into effect. The proposal to appoint conciliation commissioners, who should bo available to preside over meetings of the disputing parties, was a good one, and much more likely to lead to true conciliation than uio proposal originally embodied in the Bill. "The success of this proposal, Mr Booth continued, "will depend almost entirely on the character of the mon appointed. Assuming that they will be well adapted for their duties and entnusiastic in the work, there seems little reason to doubt that the commissioners will bo able to bring the parties together in many coses, and so reduce tho l umber of references to the Arbitration Court.” The commissioners, ho was inclined to think, would be taken from tho Tanks of Stipendiary Magistrates and mvcm a status equal to a Magistrate. *‘Tt is a' great pity that the section regarding the needs and exertion wage has been Struck out.” Air Booth, said. ‘‘Although it would' obviously bo impossible for the Arbitration Court, to prescribe the exact method in wjiich the principle should ho nprdicd to each wage'or factory, yet B was valuable ns a suggestion having legislative sanction behind it. It is particularly unfortunate that tho Government have given way on this point, seeing that the labour organisations arc determined to resist any method-of wage payment which might act an inducement to workmen to use their wits and intelligence with a view to making a hotter return to employers for the -mounts paid them. ’ On the general question of arbitration, M ■• Booth said that employers were not prepared to fight for tho absolute repeal of the law. Tho system hud been worked into tho industrial life oi the country, ‘it'd the sudden repeal of the lair might pvvipitute a rri.-ds which would be dieestrous. If conciliation could be made

more effective so as to reduce the strain z,i the arbitration svstem, good would bo done. The proper method of bringing disputing parties to a common ground was to let them thrash out their dillicullirs ar far as possible by meeting tho coinmb doners who were’ to preside at these mco'ing'. and it they were capable men their iidluonco on behalf cf conciliation would bo powerful.