ARBITRATION ACT

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 11303, 31 August 1922, Page 4

ARBITRATION ACT

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ABOLITION OF PREFERENCE TO UNIONISTS. HOX. MR MACGREGOR’S BlLii. The Arbitration and Conciliation Amendment Bill which has been introduced in the Legislative Council by the Hon. J. MacGregor and read a first time contains some interesting proposals. The iir?t amendment proposed is tho deletion of paragraph (e) of the second .section of the principal Act. This section reads as follows:—‘‘All reference in any such agreement, award, order, or instrument to tho president of tho court shall be construed ae reference to the judge of the court.” Mr MacGregor goes on to propose that any award made bv the Court of Arbitration or any industrial agreement purporting to grant to the members of any union preference of employment before non-members it should be declared to be null and void. Any strike commenced or promoted for the purpose of compelling any person to become a member of an industrial union, or to compel or induce any employer to dismiss any person who lefusos to become a member of any industrial union, or to employ none but members of a union, shall be deemed for all purposes to be an unlawful 6trike, is another proposal. Mr MacGregor further proposes the repeal of the eleventh section of tbe principal Act, which provides for the prevention of multiplicity of unions. In its place he seeks to nave put the following: “In the case of more than one application in the same industry or the same locality or industrial die* trict for the reference of any industrial dispute coming before any board it filial! be the duty of the registrar to satisfy himself as to which of the industrial unions making such application has the largest membership and to report the result to the board, and thereupon the application of the union so reported as having the largest membership shall be dealt with as if it were the only application, provided, however, that the board or the court <as the case may be) may allow the other union or unions to take such part as it thinks proper in the proceedings.

THE TWO PERILS

AND ARBITRATION COURT. VALUABLE SAFEGUARD FOB WORKERS. “The Arbitration Court is in peril in two directions at the present moment,” remarked the Hon. W. Downic Stewart during the financial debate in tho House of Representatives last night. In'the first place, he thought there was a section of the employers who would like to see it wiped out because it was not' bringing down wages quickly enough. Mr McCombs: Oh, that is why you would like to see it wiped out. Mr Stewart said that he was defending the court, and he pointed out that the member for Lyttelton had been a little hasty with his interjection. Mr Stewart eaid that the other peril was from a certain section of the Labour Party—he thought the Alliance of Labour, or, at any rate, the more aggressive unione—who thought they could do better without the Arbitration Court. In the earlier days of the court (continued the Minister) it had always been eaid that the workers would back it while wages were rising, and would turn against it when they were falling. As far as he conld see, exactly the opposite was happening, and th' unions were leaving It to the court to. see that wages were not allowed to fall too suddenly. There were sections of the employers and workers who did not realise the value of the court to the workers at the present moment, but had they compared what was happening here with what was happening in America, where wages came down with a run? Those who thought that the present system of adjusting wages was unsatisfactory would be well advised before abandoning the present system, to try to improve it. He did not want to see things go to the stage they had gone to in other countries. He thought the court, if it could hold up, would prove the most valuable safeguard the workers of the country could have. If it did not readjust wages with sufficient alacritv to allow business to continue it would he in very grave danger. He would, however, like it to come through this storm, because he believed we were turning the corner now, and if our emI ployers could hang on for a year or two until the passing of the financial chaos which was troubling Europe at present, it would he a wise thing to do. In England they had seen how the seamen had lost nearly everything they had gamed during the war. Mr McCombs: The workers didn't gain during the war in New Zealand. They lost, and you consolidated their losses. Government members: Nonsense!