MIKING DISPUTE

New Zealand Times, Volume L, Issue 11660, 26 October 1923, Page 7

MIKING DISPUTE

CONFERENCE ABORTIVE “MINERS HAVE NO CONFIDENCE IN ARBITRATION COURT.” '£ DISAPPOINTED MINISTER. Per Press Association. REEFTON, October 25. The conference of miners’ and mineowners’ representatives with the Minister for Labour (the Hon. G. J. Anderson) with reference to the coal miners’ dispute, met yesterday, when the miners’ representative** said they had been instructed to discuss with the owners’ representatives fourteen of the nineteen points raised at the Reefton conference on August 31st, and that the decisions arrived at were emlbodied in the present award. The owners declined to enter into discussion of these points, but intimated that they would immediately after resumption of work discuss at each mine local grievances outeide the scope of the award 1 with a representative of the District Council, a representative of the C'oal Owners’ Association, and the local management and the local union; and the owners further agreed to immediately make a joint application with the local union for the termination of the present award at the end of next month, on condition that both sides should institute proceedings to obtain a new award. It was pointed out that as the Court would 1 be meeting in Qreymouth on November 23rd, the Conciliation Council could meet almost at once, and the case could be dealt with" at the Greymouth sitting of the court. The miners, fiaving declined ;to entertain the owners’ proposal, the Minister suggested' they should take a ballot of the union members regarding it. This they also declined to do, and then put forward tho follgwing proposal :—“Providing that the coaY owners will grant to the day wages men in and around the mines a 15 per cent, increase in wages, or guarantee the Arbitration Court’s weekly # minimum of £3 16s Id, the miners’ delegate will agree to refer all the other points in dispute to a tribunal consisting pf five representatives from each side, presided over by a Conciliation Commissioner for settlement. If this proposal is agreed ta, the delegates will recommend a resumption of work immediately.” The owners were not prepared to adopt this proposal, and. as it was clear that no agreement could be reaohpd, the conference terminated. MINISTER INTERVIEWED THE DIFFICULTIES EXPLAINED. NO CONFIDENCE IN ARBITRATION COURT. REEFTON, October 25. Interviewed by a Press representative this morning in regard to the abortive conference held at Reefton yesterday re the mining dispute, the Hon. G. J. Anderson said he much regretted it had not been successful, but it was not to he wondered at when the viewpoint of the opposing parties was taken into consideration. The miners’ delegates were very much opposed to approaching the Arbitration Court in any way whatever. This could be seen by their whole attitude throughout the | various negotiations which have taken j place. This attitude can only he exI plained, he said, by want of confidence I m the institution. On the other side, the ’nine-owner® claimed to have an award, and while willing to discuss on ! the spot all matters in dispute outside j tho termr, of the award, they would not discuss any item embodied in it. This | attitude was maintained right through i the conference bv their representatives both at Wellington and Reefton. As a solution to the present trouble the mineowners were prepared to agree to caneel the present award, and through the machinery of the Industrial, Conciliation and Arbitration Act apply for a new award, when all the points in dispute could be discussed before the Conciliation Council. Any nointis not settled by the council to he adjusted by the court, on which there were to he six expert assessors, three representing each side in the dispute. This was to meet the objections raised by miners’ delegates, that the judge and permanent assessors had not a. practical knowledge of coal mining. The mineo w ners adhered to this proposal throughout the negotiations with the exception that for a few minutes at yesterday’s conference they claimed the right to withdraw it, hut that was afterwards waived. The miners asked that all the points at the Reefton conference ill August should be brought up and discussed at a conference at which the miners and owners would be represented, and presided over by the Conciliation Commissioner, preferably Mr F. Hally; he to have the deciding vote, and the award to he then amended by the decision of that conference. This the mme-owners would not agree to, contending that the decision given by the Conciliation Commissioner would be derogatory to the Arbitration Court, as it would give power to the lower court to amend a decision of the higher court. Tlie last proposal put forward by the men was that the minimum wages of the day wage® men should be raised by 15 per cent., the men to resume work, and the other matters be decided by a conference. It would thus be seen from the foregoing that the real cause of the failure of the partiee to settle the dis pute was the desire on the part of the employers to maintain the Conciliation and Arbitration Court system, and the strong opposition by the delegates i ACT BENEFICIAL.

“As most, if not all, miners’ delegates present at the conference bad no experience and probably little knowledge of the conditions which operated in New Zealand prior to the passing of the Act,” said the Minister, “A explained that from personal experience, there was no doubt the Act Had Veen a considerable 'benefit to workers generally, and I believed it is the best system so far evolved for the settlement of disputes. ' When I found it was impossible to bring the parties together, I urged the miners’ very strongly to put the proposal of the owners for the issue of a now award to a Ballot of members of unions in order that the individual might know the position and express an opinion upon it. lam satisfied if this were cone, seeing that the miners unions’ request would be provided for in that the Conciliation Council would first deal with all matters in dispute before they went to tlie court, and only the matters not agreed to by the Conciliation Council would be referred to court, a satisfactory solution of the difficulty could he obtained. However, the miners’ delegates sa\v otherwise and the conference was abortive.” The Minister left for Westport this afternoon.

LAW MUST BE OBEYED ALLEGED INTENT TO DEFY THE COURT. About &• fortnight ago several Laboui nicmbeis of Parliament interviewed the Hon. G. J. Anderson, Minister for Labour, and urged him to intervene with a view of arriving at a settlement of the West Coast trouble. The Minister then stated that the miners could resume if prepared to comply with the conditions of the award of the Arbitration Court which still had ever a year to run. The men had been guilty of a hrfach of the award, mid were apparently intent on defying the court. As Minister for Labour he had to see the law was obeyed, and could not support the action of the miners. Mr Anderson stated that if either side showed an inclination for a conference and approached him ha would endeavour to arrange one. Several days later several Labour members and minus’ representatives informed the Minister they were prepared to attend a conference with the mine owner© if one could he arranged. Ultimately an informal meeting of both sides was held in Wellington on Thursday and Friday last, when the owners submitted a proposal that the miners should resume work immediately, and that a conference be Hold at Dice to consider the points in dispute cuteide the scope of the arbitration award. The owners made it plain that mattert provided in xhe award opuld not be discussed, as such action would he usurpation of the function of the court. This proposal was not acceptable to the miners’ representatives. NEW AWARD SUGGESTED.

The owners then proposed that both sides should mutually agree to the termination of the present award and the issue of a fiesh award. ITiis meant that all matters would first be considered at a Conciliation Council meeting, r.nd those on which agreement was not reached would be decided by the court. It was suggested that the court have the assistance of two or three expert assessors from each side when considering -matters not decided by the Conciliation Council. The Minister agreed to assessors sitting on the court when dealing with a new award and promis 3d to facilitate in every way the issue of a new award. The owners pointed out that under this proposal the men would have an opportunity of having all matters affecting them investigated, and expressed their willingness in the meantime to have all looal grievances outside the award inquired into at once. The miners’ represent stives suggested a- tribunal consisting of three representatives of each side with the Conciliation Council commissioner presiding, the latter to have a deciding vote, and that finding© of this tribunal bo embodied in the present award. They thought the adoption of this proposal would result in the immediate resumption of work. After considerable discussion and as no decision was arrived at, it was arranged that the miners’ representatives should return, to the West Coast and place all three proposals before the unions concerned, and that a further conference be held in Reefton on Wednesday, the 24th. at which a representative from each union should meet a representative from each company for further discussion on the pi oposals.