THE NEW ARBITRATION BILL

Otago Daily Times, Issue 13998, 3 September 1907, Page 3

THE NEW ARBITRATION BILL

STRONG CONDEMNATION OF ns. PROVISIONS. A MANIFESTO. (From Our Own Correspondent.) WELLINGTON. September 2. In previous telegrams I have indioated tlmt in Labour cirolcs here t.hc proposed amendment of the Arbitration Act was promptly and forcibly condemned. Tho voice of the local unions is now sent forth in a manifesto drawn up by the Parliamentary Committee set up by tho Wellington Trades and Labour Council, as follows: — Follow unionists and fellow workers.—ln tho fulfilment of our duty in watching over the bills b!-ing laid before Parliament, aa such affoc-t the interests' of tho workers, wo have carefully ox-i-mined the above-named bill, and .find that the salient of thin proposed amendment of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act a,to these:— (1) Abolition'of the Conciliation Eoarda and creation of Industrial Councils with rights of appeal to the Arbitration Court. Hie proposed substitution of Industrial Councils for tho Boards of Conciliation will destroy all chanco of on amicable. settlement of an industrial dispute. Wo believe that in roost case 3 it will bo p.:most impossible to secure industrial councillors -for the workers' side of the council, who will be independent enough to declare their convictions. _ Under the proBcurt wages' p.ystcm, that a 1 worker who has tho courage of the convictions while sitting on an Industrial Council will bo a marked man is apparent to every worker in the colony, and because for that reason alone it will be futile to expect to get a thorough'workers' representative on an Industrial Council for an industry who is. dependent on that industry for his livelihood. AVe, thereto®), recommend the retention of tho present Boards of Conciliation, giving to their decißions a greater, finality and' tho full force of an award of the court. Wo believe that, a workers' representative who sits continually on the Conciliation Board will have a better grasp of proocduro. and bo of greater utility towards tho effecting of a settlement of an industrial dispute than any chance Subsorvient industrial councillor.. .Wo acrco to tho appointment of ejepe-rfs to sit' on tho boards with representatives whenever it is so deeired' by either party. The Minister in cliargo of tho bill has lost sight of the fact that thoro is no provision in tho. act s« it stands at present to abpoirji. special Boards ol Conciliation when the parties dcom euoh ■boards desirable, and add experts, to the existing boards. (2) Morcement of awards by magistrates with right of appeal to the Arbitration Court. For magistrates alone to enforce awards, the practical nature of. which they will' probably blow nothing about, is a clear contradiction in principle of the Industrial Council's proposal. -and to allow appeals from fines imposed would probably end in virtually fining any union of workers which dared to take aot-ion for enforcement. Tho mode of enforce-'' ment by magistrates with practical assessors added; is the better court". (3) Enactment of provisions (wbich, according to Ihe decision of tho Supreme Court) gives ipower to imprison for nonpayment of fines. Tho writ of attachment and imprisonment provisions arc a disgrace, as whatever may bo said from a theoretic standpoint, we know that in practice none but tho workers will ever bo so dealt with, aiid that whilst employers wi-ll bo held to. the la-w- by property obligations, tbo workers will bo held liable oh tho quasi criminal basis of attachment of parson. We contend that fines should only bo recoverable as .a civil debt, for only on these lines can we expect equal judgment fts applied to employees and employed. (4) Making individual members of unions personally lLiblo for payment of fines imposed on tho union of which they are members. If the porsonaJ property of individual memMI3 of workers' unions is made attachable for acts of the'union, then there will be added a strong inducement for workers to remain out of tho unions.. At present a person joining a union incurs financial responsibilities in accordance with the union's articles of assooiMlion, to'nse a business definition, but it is proposed to add thereto financial responsibilities which tho individual never voluntarily incurred, i which principle, if applied to goncTad business concerns, would be he'.di as tyrannical anxl shameless robbery. This, with otter sections, makes it appear as if the general aimed by this, bill was tho entire destruction of trades unionism in I\ew Zealand.

(5) Empowering employers to deduct from the wages of_any workci in tyieir employ amount;) totalling the amount imposed by way of a fine under this act.

riiero is no doubt that this proposal oalls for tho strongest protest which 'the workers can make. It is an abrogation of the prillcipl<»3 of {ho Truck Act, Iho Workmen's wages, Act, and the general principles of our labour, jaws, and the treatment of the workers Generally, as serfs, over whom the employers should hold - a power of possession, if ever this is put into force the workers from ono end of the country to tha other will be justi.iT m nstng an) means at hiuid to relieve tfrcni of suoh huso enslavement.. Special meeting to refer it dispute for hearing to be advertised three times, and notices and proxy forms posted to all members of the union.

This proposal for advertising siicli meetings, etc., only emphasises the'absurdity of ( be whole business. What matters it wheflior ballot papers or proxy papers arc posted, seeing, as thb Government well knows, the great bulk df such papers'never reach tho members they are posted to? The plea of union officers everywhere is,, "Let lis have a little commonsenso in these matters." The assumption which lies lat the base of all these petty restrictions, that disputes ore forced on by Trades tiinon agitators is mainly noticeable as alio'of long standing. Surely when a union's rules are registered under ■the act all meetings held under the rules should be recognised, as legal. (7) That the court may empower any union to collect payments from non-members of same at work in the industry and district, as if such individuals were members of the union.

This is the Government's answer to our plea for "statutory prefereTice to unionists," and the answer is a straight-out insult, couchcd in the language of bribery. It suggests that the motive actuating "the . unions is a mercenary one, and that this can be met by giving tho unions power -to extract money from men" who are not in tue unions. Our reply, to this proposal is that of the decent class of men who arc outside our unions, wo want them and not their money. ; And of the other class, who are enemies both to unions ■ and themselves, we don't want either them or their money until they change tlicir ; ways, when wo will welcome them as comrades. The unions of to-day make fees far los 3 of a consideration than tho union 3 of IS9O did, when 'tbe Minister in charge of this bill was secretary of a maritime union. Wo trust that no union will disgrace itself by assenting to this proposal in tho bill,\ for it appears to us to sound the death knell of all character in tho. Labour movement of our country.

(8) Inspectors of factories to issue all permits to underrate workers.

This is a further limitation of tho rights of unions, and probnbly another attempt to undercut the minimum wage principle. Tho unions must strongly oppose it. (9) Limiting the right of a union, which is a branch of a society the head ofiico of which is outside New Zealand, to dispeco of its funds in its own way. (10) No further registration under "Tho Trades Union Act, 1878," if this bill ia passed.

(11) Prohibiting anyone from being on officer or member of tho Committee of Management o! a union unless he has been or is employed in .the industry with which the union is established. (12) That all' funds of a union other than thoso required for general management of union shall be spent in the way of providing out of work payment and sick benefits. (N.B.—This last proposal is not yet in the bill, but the Minister has informed the Employers' Federation " that the soction was •icing drafted, but had to bo held over, as ho 'was anxious to send on tho measure to the employers.") The above proposals for the'abolition of the ■hades Union Act, the dictation by the boreniment as to what the union shall do irilh rts funds, and tho dictation also of i&i> Government as to whom the members of a union shall elect as their officers is perhaps tho most autocratic of all clauses. In conservative England, since the decision in the luff Yale case, the wholo trend of legislation affecting trades unions has been to enable those unions to have a free hand in the control of all their funds and tho functions of the union. We assert that the memb*rs of a union are best fitted to manage tnoir affairs without dictation from nny outside body. Especially despotic is tho clause which seeks to prevent' others thau those actually engaged in an industry to which the union relates from being officers of that union, Wo say that it is impossible to make such a> hard and fast rule, and assert again tho ehoico of officers lies with the members of a uuion, It is most difficult fiom a mere recital of (the principles .of this amending bill to get at its hidden depths and meaning. After a most exhaustive scrutiny of every detail of tho bill wo have no hesitation in saying that this is the most cunningly devised, insidious, and dangerous measure from tho standpoint of the workers'and the public wellbeing which has, ever been submitted to our House of Representatives, a.'.'d to the people of New Zealand. Let us no the proposals made. (1) "Abolish the boards." This is contrary to the clearlyexpressed intentions of the framcrs r,f the original act, • and if it is carried out organise:! labour will do well to consider 1 whether we cannot condomn this bill too 3troDj;ly, and if it is passed into law wo must advise the unions to withdraw their I MStfion to this kin;! of lejislntioj), and to

uso all means of passivo resistance to make tho legislation null and void.—Wo aro, etc., A. PautjiNE (President), W T. Yotjkg, W. H, Wkbtbhooke (Secretary), A. J, Camv, M, J. Reardoj.', G. Lightfoot, Prran L. Muib, 1). M'Laken, A. H. Cooper, T; J. Lyons.