THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 1907. THE ARBITRATION LAW.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 13999, 4 September 1907, Page 4

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 1907. THE ARBITRATION LAW.

For the moment tlie Bill -which, MiMillar has introduced for the amendment of the Industrial Conciliation - and Arbitration Act overshadows all '■ the other legislative proposals that ; are before the country. It is even , probable that no Bill lias been , brought down by the Government for i years that is'so largely flight with j political pofsibilities as this one is. t The virulepD with which it is being attacked, J)j' the, Lftijour gi^iyjis^iwfts

suggests ■ that : riot disappointment only but acute .resentment has been aroused oil their part by the provisions of the; measure. For the pre-sent-we. should think the/indignation which the unionists feel over some of the Minister's.proposals has affected their■ judgment 'respecting other features of the Bill, and wo may expect thatj upon; a. more calm and deliberate' examination than has yet been bestowed by them upon it, they . will recognise that siich condemnation as has been passed upon , the measure by the Parliamentary Committee, of the Wellington Trades and Labour Council is, from their own .point of view, uiidiscriminating and unreasonable. ■ The objection which is. raised to the proposal that applications for enforcement of Wards' shall be heard by magistrates seems to us, for example, to be simply factious. The aim of tho . Minister is to remove a oause of. complaint which unionists have had.in the past in the respect that the demands made upon the time ' of '-. the; Arbitration Court through the necessity being imposed upon it of dealing . with cases of alleged breaches of awards have prevented it from overtaking so speedily as might be desired; the work of settling'industrial disputes; and he has proposed-to secure, this end by the adoption of'a method which has been approved in,, the; past by "annual conferences. of delegates f '.fronb'. the j Labour Councils. The';' objections which have been urged against the, relegation ; to the> Magistrates'. Courts; of ,i the. duty of disposing of cases', of breaches of awards have'been various; but wo aro unable to' realise that they outweigh the advantages that would accrue from the adoption of the step. Unfortunately, however, the unionists, so far, at anyrafe/asthei Trades and Labour.'Councilin Wellington may be regarded as their mouthpiece, and the| Employers!, Federation are both , opposed to the Minister's plan, and wo fear that its acceptance by Parliament may, in the circumstances, be looked upon as rather unlikely. ■ The same combination of employer and worker is found; ; in opposition to ;the proposal for the oreation of Industrial Councils; , But, while the Employers' Federation would have the. Arbitration Court' constituted the sole tribunal under, i the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, the Trades and Labour. Council in Wellington' pleads for the retention of the' Conciliation/.Boards with extended powers. We have.always bran favourable to tho Conciliation Board, system, but it must be acknowledged that, as the law at present stands,- the Boards, have virtually ■been destroyed, so infrequently- is an ; industrial dispute referred to Any of them for consideira-

tion., The-proposalfor the establishment of j Industrial Councils, considered in; its propoi- light, represents an attempt :on the, part of the Miniatei' of Labour to reinstate conciliation• in the place originally assigned,to it by Mr. Wi P. Reeve's in the scheme for the settlement of industrial disputes under State auspices. And though there'.may be som-o force, in the .objection of the Employers' Federation to the , appointment, as is the,case under the Wages' Board system in.. Victoria, of a. separate, chairman, for each council, we hold strongly that the councils are at least worthy, the trial which Mr .Millar claims for -them. The' unionists' suggestion that a worker who sits as a member of an Industrial Coiincil will be a " mai-ked man" is scarcely worthy, of serious consideration, i At tlie worst, and on the unsupported assumption that a .system■ of terrorism is actually exercised by employers- over those in their service , who are conspicuous in- the advocacy of their, own and their comrades' interests,' .'earliest- representatives '.'of the:' workers' class in a conference:.. with the employers' .representatives oil the council am .certainly no more likely,to ba,visited with pains arid penalties \tiian witnesses before the industrial .tribunals, at the present time are. But "we prefer to believe that the workers .who , meet tho employers in an amicable spirit as members of aii industrial Council and there ventilate fully the grievances of the employees with those who are competent: to , s .appreciate the arguments which are addressed to them and to thrash 1 put; 'tlie points which are'the ; \ subject of coniplamt are likely to command in increased degree the , respect of tha employers/; And, so far from l this plan, 'destroying,- ?s'the Wellington Trades and Labour Council declares it will, all chance of an amicable .settlement of an industrial dispute, it seems to us to be well adapted for securing a satisfactory adjustment of differences in the majority of cases. If, howeverj. the council should fail to settle a dispute upon terms acceptable to both sides, ;the'Bill provides that an appeal may, by leave- of the Court, be made to the Arbitration Court, .''•Sβ,.' that l finality may- bo reacliecl upon lines very similar to

those laid down in the existing law, Tlie fiercest, denunciation of tho Trades Council .of Wellington is reserved for- other features of the •Bill. We had ; supposed that compulsory unionism was the goal which a considerable section of the unionists in the colony had in view, and it is indisputable that one of the stock arguments in favour of the claim

for a statutory ■preference' of employment for unionists" is that, under present conditions, 'the law presents non-unionists : with advantages for which they have, paid nothing. But the proposal, whereby,'through rcquir-

ing non-unionists to contribute to the funds of unions, the Bill would, in effect, make unionism compulsory is stigmatised as " a straight-out insult, .couched in the language of bribsry," while the implication' Chat the unions desire non-unionists to pay for the' benefits they enjoy under awards of the Court 19 flatly repudiated with a delicate; allusion to Mr Millar's own- ' connection , with unionism: " the unions of to-day make fees far less of a, consideration than the unions of 1890 did, when the Minister in charge of this Bill was secretary of a maritime union.", It is, perhaps, not surprising that the proposals of the Government for the enforcement of orders for the payment of fines under the law are not satisfactory to the unionists. It- should be plain, hovceyer. that ffcr contention, t>hat

fines should be recoverable only as a civil debt cannot be supported on the ground that the effect would be to put employers and employees on. an equal footing. No one can doubt that, were it not for tho presence of an,unsuspected power in the law l to compel obedience to the orders of the Court, many of the slaughtermen who were fined'some months ago at Christchurch would have evaded payment of the penalties inflicted upon them. On. the other" hand, we can sympa-thise-..with the unions in their opposition.to the clause in the Bill which prescribes that the officers of unions must bo persons who: have been.oi' are actually, engaged in. 'tlie industries in respect of which the unions are established, for tho propcsal seeks to place quite unreasonable restrictions upon the?© bodies in, the, choice ;of their servants. Whether the Bill is or is not "the most cunningly-devised, insidious, and dangerous measure, froin the standpoint, of. the workers and the public well : being, which' has : . ever been submitted •• to our Hojise. .of Representatives," we may readily admit that, at anyrate, it;bristles with contentious matter. We , hope however, that it may yet bo realised by the Labour organisations that it is not so exceedingly objectionable as some, of them are now inclined to make out, . .-,.••