ARBITRATION ACT

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8366, 28 February 1913, Page 10

ARBITRATION ACT

AMENDMENTS URGED ADMINISTRATION CRITICISED. GOVERNMENT WILL STAND BY COURT. A numerous deputation from the conference of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers, and representatives also of the Carpenters’ and Joiners’ Union, and tho Tramways Union, yesterday waited upon the Hon. W. F. Massey as Minister of Labour, and urged several amendments to the Arbitration Act, with removal of grievances in regard to enforcement of awards. Mr T, M. Wilford, M.P., introduced the deputation, and outlined their proposals, which may be summarised as follow: That inspectors of factories should take the initiative in seeing that the awards are observed; that in regard to apprentices the Act be amended on the lines of the West Australian Act, providing that indentures he registered in the Arbitration Court; that apprentices be subject to periodical examinations, and that if it is found that the employer is not doing his duty to the apprentice he may be cited, and, if convicted, fined, and that, on the other hand, if the apprentice be found to be unfit for the work the Court may deal with him accordingly; that where industries overlap provision should be made to prevent the Act working unfairly; that the Arbitration Court be converted into an Appeal Board, to which unsettled disputes shall be referred, consisting of two experts, one representing the employers and one the employees, with an independent chairman; and that any association of employers or employees can obtain a Dominion award. UNSATISFACTORY ADMINISTRATION. Mr J. S. Elston, organising secretary for the Society of Engineers, said they regretted that it was necessary for representatives of the unions to have to make complaints against the Labour Department. They were fully convinced that the administration was anything but satisfactory, in so far as the unions were concerned. There was general discontent among workers and unionists on this ground, and he felt quite certain that so far as employers were concerned they got a milch better deal than the workers. It was almost impossible to get a prosecution, no matter how glaring the case might be. They asked that a commission of inquiry be set up to investigate administration of the department. If tho department had nothing to conceal, it would be a matter of indifference to them. On January 24th, at Greymouth, he pointed oat to the inspector of factories there that section of (the Arbitration Act which stated that inspectors of factories were inspectors of awards, and asked the officer whether it was part of his duties to find whether awards were satisfactorily administered. The inspector said "No”; that they did not get any kudos for the number of prosecutions undertaken, but rather got recommended for having a clean sheet. Meeting Mr Lomas afterwards, he (the speaker) asked that officer where inspectors’ duties commenced and finished. Mr Lomas replied that it was part of inspectors’ duties to inquire among workmen and find if awards were observed; they had specific instructions to that effect. , He (the speaker) understood the impression among inspectors was that they should sit in tho” office and wait till some union made a complaint. When v they moved, the result was unsatisfactory, so far as unions were concerned. He suggested that that section of the department might with profit be handed over to the unions. (Laughter.) On the department’s own admission, the unions were in a better position to do the work. He contended that these inspectors should make inquiries on their own initiative as to the ohserv-. ance of awards. “NOT GETTING THE DEAL.” Since November 12th ho had put ten cases before the department, in none of which had they got entire satisfaction. One case concerned an aprrentice who had served five years with a Dunedin firm as a pattern-maker, and wanted to get away for more experience. He got a certificate as a competent mechanic, and after working elsewhere, returned to the firm, who paid him 36s a week instead of tho minimum rate of 60s. The case was reported to the department, but on sentimental grounds (the young man’s father being employed at the same firm) the department did not want to take action. The case was taken up in a half-hearted manner by Mr Loffias, who recommended that it should go before the Arbitration Court for enforcement of award. What the union wanted was a prosecution; it was a case for a penalty, and they had got no satisfaction yet. In another case at Invercargill a man doing engineer’s work was underpaid. Although tho department knew a breach of the award was committed, they were powerless. It was necessary to get the specific dates on which tho work was done, and the firm would not supply these. Other eases of non-ohservanoe of the award were quoted by the speaker. In Wellington, an improver just out of his apprenticeship was taken on by a local foundry as a blacksmith, and paid B.S a day, whereas the rate was 11s a day. The man did not come for a permit, and under the law the employer had no right to start him at the wage without getting a permit. The department took no action. “Undoubtedly, we are not getting the deal out of the department that we should.” OVER-ZEALOUS INSPECTORS. Mr Malone (Dunedin) quoted other instances of non-observance in Dunedin. A delegate from Auckland said that they had very few grievances in the north —in fact, the inspectors were charged with being over-zealous. Similar statements were made by a representative of carpenters in Dunedin, who said there must be some other cause for the complaints. Mr W. Fraser (Auckland) said that their secretary found a difficulty in pressing breaches of awards. > Shops had taken non-unionists, and the attention of inspectors had been called to this. It appeared, however, that the harder the union pushed the matter, the better was notice taken. Mr Elston: It is significant that seventeen unions have cancelled their registrations, in spite of assertions that there were no complaints in Auckland and elsewhere. The Arbitration Act will be in danger unless we can get a better deal from tho Court. ,

APPRENTICES. Mr Elston complained of unfair treatment of apprentices, who were not given sufficient opportunities to learn their trades. Boys were put to unsuitable occupations, and employers complained of incompetent workmenEngineering ramified so many industries that the award should apply to engineers in whatever trade they might bo engaged. They desired an amendment to the Machinery Act so that no person should be allowed to work or repair machinery or make connections to gas, oil, or steam engines, unless he had been engaged for five years at the work. Mr Malone said that the engineering trade had always been in a precarious position,: and certain, machines and parts were imported duty free. This was not fair to those beginning in the trade, and the opinion of his society was that some protection was needed. “If you don't give it to us, take it pit our boots and clothing, and make iug cheaper tor us.” idiNISTER’S 11EPLY. The Prune Minister, in reply, said he would give every opportunity lor uhe taking of evidence on the various suojecfcs before the .Labour Bills Committee next session. He ‘was glad to meet them, and if any organisation or individual had a grievance, the proper thing to do was to come to the fountain head and ventilate it with the idea of its being removed. As to complaints against administration of the JLiaboui department, so far as the charge of bias 'was concerned, Tie hardly thought it could be borne out by the facts. He was glad to notice there was a difference of opinion among members of the deputation on this point. As head of the department, his instructions conveyed to Mr Lomas —who was a particularly good officer —were to administer the Act fearlessly and impartially, without fear or favour.' Ho (All* Lomas) understood that the position of inspector was sometimes a very difficult one, and he had to see that the Act was properly administered, so as to avoid harassing employers on the one hand and employees on the other. With regard to the inspector at Dunedin, he (Mr Massey) was of opinion that Air J. h • Arnold was particularly well qualified. Letters had come expressing approval of the appointment. A CONSOLIDATING BILL. As to the cases mentioned, every one would be inquired into. A man who had the position of inspector must do his duty j if not, he must take the consequences. The instructions to inspoctators generally were to carry °ut inspections of awards irrespective of complaints, but as a general rule the total time of inspectors was taken up with complaints. He could hardly set up a Koyal Commission, which, aa suggested, would be a sort of roving commission, but inquiries would be made. With regard to the Arbitration Act, he thought the new measure would bo a consolidating Bill, and he had given instructions to the Law Drafting Department to have an amending Bill prepared, so as to bring the Arbitration Act up to date and simplify it as much as possible. Ihe Government intended to stand by the Arbitration Court. While he said that, he did not say the i Arbitration Act was perfect. • He wanted the assistance of people qualified to heal with these amendments,"'who had had practical experience of the working of the Act. He wanted to get the Act as perfect as -it was possible to make it. „ To make it a breach of the law tor anyone -to undertake repairs to machinery would be too far-reaching - They had. certificated men who had to prove competency to drive engines, and it would not be fair to prevent these men from undertaking repairs. He would give special instructions to have the statements regarding apprentices investigated. •