THE REEFTON DISPUTE

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVI, Issue 8179, 22 July 1912, Page 8

THE REEFTON DISPUTE

TO GO TO ARBITRATION MINE-OWNERS CONFER WITH MR MASSEY. PRESS ASSOCIATION. AUCKLAND, July 21. For several weeks some hundreds cf miners have been idle on the Reefton gold field because they will not accept the proposals of their employers that one man can safely work a "popper" drill. The present position is that the companies concerned have agreed to submit tho question to arbitration. This advance towards settlement of the dispute resulted from a conference between the New Zealand Gold Mine-owners Association and the Minister for Labor (Hon. W. F. Massey). The president of tho association (Mr Charles Rhodes) returned from Wellington to-day. THEAEBITEATIQN QUESTION ' POSITION EXPLAINED BY LEGAL ADVISER. Tho following statement was published on Saturday: Tho Consolidated Goldfields and Allied Companies at Reefton, acting ! under legal advice, have lodged an application for a rehearing, and also notice of appeal against the Warden’s decision granting conditional protecttion. Under strong pressure from the Prime Minister they are prepared to waive their strict legal rights and to at once submit the matters in dispute to arbitration, subject to the following The employers are prepared to agree to the appointment of an arbitrator as provided by clause 11 of the industrial agreement and to abide by the decision of that arbitrator and resume operations immediately his decision is given, if the union will also agree to abide by such decision and to officially instruct its members to return to work in accordance with the decision. The two points to be submitted to the arbitrator are: —

(1) The question of the employment of one man only to each “popper" drill. (3) The right of employers to have any mining operation performed by contract, including contracts in the stopes. Mr P. J. O’Regan, tho Reefton miners' legal adviser, discussing the matter with a “Times" reporter, said: "The statement that the companies proposed to appeal against the Warden’s decision granting them protection conditionally on their applying to the President of the Arbitration Court within fourteen days, under clause 11 of the industrial agreement, for the appointment of an arbitrator, if correct, indicates nothing lees than a breach of faith. Directly the proceedings opened at tho Warden's Court on the list inst., Mr Hannan, on behalf of tho companies, intimated that they were quite willing to have the matter submitted to an arbitrator. They pressed us to agree, but we refused for three reasons: (1) Because it had been open to the . companies all along, even before the mines were shut down, to take advantage of the provisions of clause 11. (2) Because our consent never was, and is not, necessary. (3) Because if we had given superfluous consent when tho matter reached the Warden’s Court it would appear to the public that our consent was necessary in order to bring the matter to arbitration and that we had refused until practically compel-

led. NO OBJECTION TO ARBITRATION. "The miners did not, and don’t object, to the matter going to arbitration, and of course they will submit to the arbitrator the evidence which they were precluded from giving in the Warden’s Court. The application for a rehearing seems to me a device to gain time, a. method of postponing the settlement beyond the period prescribed by the Warden. A RETROSPECT. “The Rcefton miners have been under the jurisdiction of- the Arbitration Court since 1896. Prior to that date excellent relations existed between the miners and the companies. Indeed, the miners then had no organisation because they did not require one. In that year, however, the company, at the head of which was Mr Ziman, made an attemutv to reduce wages from A'3 to .£2 10s per week, on the ground that the industry could not stand the prevailing rate of wages. The ‘men instantly struck work, formed an industrial union, and in due course the matter was adjudicated upon by the Court of Arbitration, with the result that the wages were left practically as they were. That was very satisfactory from the miners’ point of view, but it did not eliminate altogether a feeling of unpleasantness between employer and employed, from which that district had theretofore been completely immune. However, no serious industrial difficulty arose until January, 1909, when the mining companies, taking the Workers' Compensation Act of the previous session as a pretext, insisted upon a medical examination. It is needless now to do more than recapitulate this incident very briefly. The men refused to submit to medical examination, and for a fortnight or three weeks the miners were idle in consequence. The men’s position was legally and morally unassailable. notwithstanding the gross misrepresents tie ns to which they were subjected. The soundness of their position has since been verified to the letter by Parliament, which has enacted legislation making a medical, examination for miners illegal. As a' matter of fact, the companies on that occasion could have been successfully- prosecuted for a lock-out.hut the men had no desire' to be vindictive once the trouble was over.

WORKING UNDER AGREEMENT. "Since then things have gone on satistorily in Reeftcm, up to the time that the present difficulty arose. The men are working not under an award of tho court but under an industrial agreement which adopts tho rate of wages and conditions theretofore prevailing. This agreement has just twelve months more to run. At the date when that agreement took effect it was the regular practice for two men to work a drill. I may point out that any custom of tho industry prevailing at the date of the award or agreement, even if no express mention is made therein of it, is by implication part of that award or agreement. In this case, however, there is express mention in the agreement, since it fixes XOs 6d as a minimum daily wage of the man in charge of the drill, and 10s for his assistant. The companies, therefore, must have known that any attempt to go back on tho agreement during its currency could meet with nothing but opposition from tho men, and if the companies were really desirous of avoiding trouble, tho proper course was to defer raising the question until the expiration of the present agreement. THE MEN PROVOKED. "In reality, however, the companies have left no means untried to provoke he men. The Waugh hammer drill was introduced in January last. It is admitted that even with two men it greatly diminishes the cost of production. It is ilso admitted that il is possible for one man to work it, just as it is possible for one man to work ten hours instead of eight. For some weeks tho drill was worked by two men without question. Then certain emissaries of the companies actually approached some of the miners and asked them if they were willing to work the drill single-handed in consideration of I another shilling a day. The men at once

refused, and stated that they would have to refer the matter to their union.

AN IMPROPER, PROCEEDING.

‘'Now, let mo point out that this was a most improper proceeding, as there is a Miners' "Union with which a collective agreement has been, solemnly entered into by the companies. Any variation of tho terms of that agreement should be a matter of negotiation, between, the companies and the union, not between certain secret emissaries of tho companies and individuals. Well, tho union unanimously resolved to oppose any attempt to work the drills single-handed. Then on Friday, May 17th, placards were posted up in conspicuous’ places above ground stating .that thereafter the men would bo required to work one man on© drill. The men on. going to work read the notice, but nevertheless descended and presented themselves at their working .places. They were instantly informed by tho shift._bosses that they were required to work the drills single-handed. Tho men. mutually refused, and they were then bold there was no more work for them. This is what certain, newspapers would have us believe is a strike. Of course, it is nothing of the kind. We have the Solicitor-Gene-ral’s opinion that it is not a lockout, but it is decidedly significant that he prefaces his opinion with the ( words on tho evidence submitted to me.

ARBITRATION A CONDITION. “But the point I wish to emphasise is quite apart from tho merits of the matter in controversy. Dot it be clearly understood that without shutting down tho mines at all the companies could, have had the matter arbitrated upon under clause 11 of the agreement. I hey preferred to shut down their mines and to say nothing about arbitration until they reached the Warden’s Court with their application for protection and were confronted, with our objections. A.ft would appear that for the purpose ot circumventing the "Warden's decision they intend to object to the conditions he imposed, though these conditions were practically invited by themselves when they intimated at the beginning or tho proceedings ip court their willingness to have the matter arbitrated upon. ihc Press Association telegram from- Auckland to the effect that arbitration has been secured through the good omces ot Mr Massey is not correct. Arbitration was made a condition when the Warden granted protection on the 11th mst. at Reef ton.

STAGE-MANAGED EXHIBITIONS. “Those stage-managed exhibitions of the Waugh drill in the open-air and with a selected block of cement, though no doubt very convincing to persons who know no better, are absolutely worthless. While in. itaefton 1 was one ot a party who saw the drill at work in' real earnest —that was, 1 went 5b chains into a tunnel under a hill, then descended 1500 ieet (about 500 feet below sea level) and saw a man in the dim candle lignt using this drill between two solid walls of i«ck. Kemember that under the blue sky there is always a breath of air to blow the dust clear, hut you do not get that when you breathe compressed aid 500 feet below sea level. It is, I know, quite possible for one man to work the drill. 1 willing to believe that nadirs and Mexicans do us© the drill single-handed, but 1 want it to be unuerstoou that even with two men using it it is quit© impossible to ‘kill' all the dust—and deadly dust it is. While I was in Keefton a man aged fortv-seven died from miner s complaint and I saw another man. thirtyfive years old dying from the same disease in hospital. We can prove that even, under luo most favorable conditions the men who work these drills find grit in their teeth next day and that they expectorate black phlegm. ) * ith one man working tho drill more dust must inevitably be inhaled, ior you cannot get any mechanical contrivance, to utilise the water spray to tho same advantage as a rair of human hands. KILLING DUST—THE ONLY WAY. “Tbs most dangerous hoie_ to drill is an ‘upper/ that is, a hole in the rock right over the miner’s head, for tho dust from it drops down close to his face. If the water-jet strikes the actual hole tho drill soon becomes jammed by the congealed dust and so the spray must he so adjusted as to strike the rock a couple of inches away from the hole, with tho result that a large quantity of dust is not moistened at all. With an assistant, however, the jet is held in such a position that while no water enters the hole and the drill consequently cannot be jammed, the water strikes the descending column of dust at right angles and effectually ‘kill’ it. I am quite satisfied that this is absolutely the only way to reduce tho dust evil to the minimum, and having regard to the terrible nature of miner's disease it is also absolutely necessary tbat the risk of contracting it should bo minimised as far as possible.”