THE ARBITRATION LAW AMENDMENTS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14000, 5 September 1907, Page 5

THE ARBITRATION LAW AMENDMENTS

opposition TO PROPOSED • AMENDMENTS. (Pep. United Pbess Association.) AUCKLAND, "September 4. . ! The Tailorecscs' Union has passed a resolution 6trongl.v- opposing tho Arbitration Act Amendment .Bill, as it is not in. the best'interests of the smaller unions, 7 which need help,and advice from.tko unionists of oilier trades. < " SEAMEN'S UNION'S VIEWS. , •••'; WIILLINGTON, "So'ptcniber 4. ' The following'rcsolution.hiis 'been adopted by- the " Australasian Federated Seamen' 6 Union :.rThat this -union- expresses-'disap-proval of those clauses in the Conciliation and-Arbitration Act, Amendment Bill' pertaining. to tho abolition of Boards of-Con-ciliation, .and;... replacing, them with Industrial. Councils; the compelling of nonunionists ■ to' contribute to tho . funds. of unions, thereby abrogating the long-fought-fof' principlo of>'preference to unionists; (he compelling of unions with their central head oulsido New Zealand to retain so largo a portion of .their' assets in the colony; • the authorising of employers to deduct 25 per .cent, of the wages due!.to a worker for the purposo of liquidating liny fino that might be imposed; the prohibiang of unions froni registering tinder tho Trade Union Act; and tho prohibiting of any person .who is not employed, or has not been employed,'in a ..trade of which'tho union is representative from holding the position'of an ofliocr or a scat on the Committee of Management." ;

1 LABOUR -HGSTILIS -IN* DUNEDK. ■' A MANIFESTO. ISSUED. VIEWS OF TRADES AND LABOUR COUNCIL'S EXECUTIVE. Tlio following, manifesto has been drawn up by tho executive of the. Otago Trades and .Labour Council in connection with tho proposed amendments to the Conciliation and Arbitration Act: — ' To the Trades Unionists of Otago and Sympathisers qf Labour. In view of the importance of the proposed amendments to the Oonc.oliation and Arbitration Act, the Executive of the Otago Hades and Labour Council, having carefully considered the various clauses'iu the bill fintroduced by the Hon. J. A. ilillar, Miuister or Labour, offer the following' opinions thereon:— In, the first place, we as a body, representing several thousands of unionists, wish to enter our most emphatic protest against' tho action of the Minister .of Labour in introducing legislation which has never been asked for by the Trades Councils of the colccny, nor by any other organisation of workers or .employers; and which, if given effect to, will, we feel sure, not only, kill many of the unions at present struggling for an existence, but wijl to a.great extent prevent many unions being formed. We consider that in many of the clauses contained in the bill a deliberate attempt is being made to useitho act .and the unions for tho-purpose of crushing a handful of men who - are doing, their best to protect, the workers of New Zealand 1 from capitalistic greed, by depriving the unions of the benefit' of the sen-ices those men. havo given and are ungrudging'.y giving many of them without any thought of payment whatever.

Ihe clauses in the bill which we take particular exception to aro: (1) That, all funds of cither than thoso required for general management of the union shall be.spon't in the way of providing out-of-work payment and-sick benefits. (2) Prohibiting anyone from being an officer or member of the Committee of Management of a union unless ho has been or is employed in- the • industry with, which the union is established.

(3) Thai tho court may empowor any union to collect payments yfrcm. non-members of same at work in the industry and district, as if such ,indivi4uals were members ai tho union.

(4) Empowering employers to ■ deduct from the wages of any. worker in their employ amounts totalling tho amount imposed by way of a fine under this act.

In respect to the first, while this provision is not at present in the bill, the Minister of Labour has intimated t« the Employers' Federation that it mil be included in 'order to prevent the. unions, building up a fund which might afterwards he' used for the purpose of fighting the capitalistic element. We therefore feel justified in dealing v.-iih tho clause as if it were in the bill. At no time during the history of the act ha 3 any restriction been placed, on unions as to what they should do with their funds. If they feel disposed to' give further benqfife than those usually given by-unions, they should certainly be at liberty to di so, but to compel every union to use its funds for that purpose is arbitrary, .and . should not under any circumstances be tolerated. Friendly societies—of which almost every unionist is a member—are formed for-supplying that need. 'All that a trades union is formed'for is to secure better' working conditions for the members, and the fund 9 of the union should be reserved for that purpose.

Witli regard to No. .2, we. think tho most arbitrary. clausc in the bill, and should be strenuously resisted by all unionists. We ask, What business is it to any person whom the unions have for their officers, so long as they are respectable—and we can safely trust tho unions tq see that no undesirable per?on, whether engaged at the particular calling or not, holds office in any union? -AVc have yet to learn • that such has been done. Many unions have been compelled, for various reasons, to ongago the services of the samo person as their secretary. By doing eo they are able to secure, the services of a person who is at their disposal at all times, and by that mean 9 are -able to have grievances settled which would be otherwise. impossible. This those unions are. to be prevented from doing. This clause will.also interfere to a gTeat extent with those unions composed of females only. So far as Otago is concerned there are three such unions; but we lielieve in other parts of New .Zealand there are more. In every case these young girls have had to depend on the assistance of members of the Trades and Labour Council and others; in fact, at least two of those unions would not havo lived six months without such assistance. The Tailoresses'. Union, which is the largest union of females in Duiiedin, .has ever since its inception had as its president and vicepresidents- men. not only connected with unionism, but a,lso others , who wera not, .members of any union at all.. (The first score-' tary of the, Tailoresses',JJniou was' the Hon. J. A. Miliar himself.). In respect to jjo. 3, which, gives tho court power to order non-unionists to .contribute an amount equal- to.that paid by unionists, wo entirely oppose. .The council'asked for preference to unionists, and ncit compulsory unionism; and we wish to [ gain that right by legitimate means, and riot by any back-door methods. - This clause has-to bo rkd with No. 1, which provides for not only, the money derived from non-unionists, but also that contributed 1 by members, of the union, being devoted for -friendly 'society purposes. More; over, the clause will only-, apply ' to'unions where a majority of the men employed in the industry are members of the union. Many of our unions have not only:- a' inajarit), but havo 99-per cent; of the men in tho-union; therefore, while they would not have their funds increased by perhaps more than, a couple of'pounds per annum, they would be compelled by the other clause to use that, fund for proving benefits other than those for which, tho union was formed. While we are a peaceful bedy, we recognise it is a wise policy to be prepared for war, and the best*, weapon is a strong fighting fund. To .rob :. a union of its funds and keop'its finances low : is simpljr placing the members at the mcrcy | of employers.. This wo think, very, unwise, •as if the unions wish pcace with, fair :c'ohditicms they, must be prepared -with .the sinews of war. Some, of our unions, we regret to say, do not contain a. ,majority of all the men employed in the industry, but to those unions no relief is promised'by, the clause.- Their position, therefore, remains unchanged, except that their funds would be eaten up in providing sick benefits for tho members, There is law in .the land,, to prevent. employers building up, a fighting fund, and no attempt has been* made by the Minister of Labour to prevent them ■ doing so. We are satisfied, 'therefore, this.clause is not intended for the good of unionism, and we have no hesitation in advising all unionists to strenuously oppose it; ' .. No. ,4. —We consider, this -clause is onlyintended, as another means 'of crushing the workers, «i>d' for ".that reason should he resisted. , No provision is made for the recovery of fines imposed on'employers, mid' until that is done we see no reason whatever for further degrading; the workers. . The proposal for ..(be abolition of Conciliation. Boards and substitution of Industrial Councils is riot, in our opinion, a step in the right direction. The failure of, Conciliation Boards in the ' past to bring about better results has been, caused through the powers. of,the boards being too limited. If the -power '-which'"is proposed to bo given to tho/Industrial Council were extended to the Conciliation Boards,we veutute to say tho boards ivoiild be capable -of doing all that is promised by; the council. The proposal !o spt up separate-tribunals for hearing disputes _ may be .acceptable to a few, but to compel-til unions to select men employed in the particular trade to which the dispute relates'will inflict a- great hardsbiw on the great majority of • utfions. " We. know from experience .that, it will be very ■ difficult (if possible) for a.-large' number of unions to secure members willing to sit on the council who are independent enough to stand up for the cause, t)i«y represent. That men havo suffered through the prominent part they "havo lakea itf copsctioii _ with their unions is

beyond a doubt, and no one kuows that better than the Hon. Mr Millar himself, the author of theso amendments. Wero it necessary, abundant evidence could l>c produced. What has happened in the past will, under similar circumstances, happen in. the future, and this clause will give a 'splendid opportunity. "With respect to many of tho other clauses in the bill, some of which) with slight alteration, might be beneficial, we consider of minor importance, ana do'not propose dealing'with in' t'tiia manifesto, The clauses we have re- • forred to are of the greatest importance,'and if brought into operation will have a farreaching • and anything but beneficial effect. "We therefore recommend all unionist's to condemn the clauses we have ' particularly referred to. Family, we' would point out that if the Minister of Labour persists in pushing through this bill with, the clauses referred to ''by us, and anything serious happens, the . responsibility must rest on Ilia and not the ahotdders, of the trsdes unions of New Zealand, The Executive, Trades and La bo up. Council, ok Otago. SOME AUCKLAND OPINIONS. (From Our Own . Correspondent.) AUCKLAND, September 3. Tlio manifesto issued by the Wellington Trades anil Labour Council's Parliamentary Committee was much discussed in Auckland , Labour circles during ■ the day. "While opinions, on any great question of policy or political moment differ greatly, anil very often the two extremes are seemingly irreconcilable, there is always a great body of-public opinion which• regards the questjqn at issue from a. more temperate standpoint. and is not inclined to.rush into wild and ill-considered criticism. This section takes what might generally be termed the " moderate " view. It was with a view of gaining '6omo idea of what the mass of " workers" really think about the proposed amendment to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act that I instituted careful inquiries amongst those who work for their living. The views of extremists ancl " agitators" wero already known, and therefore those whcec- opinions .were sought were looked for amongst the men who rarely ventilate their opinions at the .meetings of any Labour or- political organisation— mci\ who might be calculated to give tho question tho broadest ftudy they were capable of, and to. view it from as many points as they could. It was found that as a whole the "moderates" were disinclined fo endorse the manifesto issued, by the Wellington Trades and Labout Council, and several did not hesitate to-express tho opinion that those responsible for the manifesto had not given the subject matter of the bill that careful consideration it merited, being as it was a measure put forward by a responsible Government. "While there was not unreserved approval of the provisions of the bill, tho interviewer found a consensus of opinion in its favour. The opposite view to that put forward in the Wellington manifesto was taken in connection with the proposed; industrial councils. Those-inter-viewer], with one exception, found reason to'favour the proposal. Tho exception contended that the provision would not be workable, bccauso it would not bo possible to-secure on tho council workers who would bo independent enough to meet their employersvand declare their grievances, and if such workers .were found thay would henceforth ■ bo marked men. ■■ The pthor side fairly represented the "moderate" view. He said,. " I think tho industrial councils •idea meets the opinion I held for somo time, that tho nearer we can get to something making for amicable settlement without recourse to court the better. I think .the workers as a whole are'broad-minded enough to meet their employers fairly and squarely and speak for all, and an employer who would 'mark' a man for that is simply not worth wofking for.' I am a great believer in the broad, common sense of employers and workers as a. whole, and I am satisfied- wo could get plenty of : fair-minded men to act as chairman: Look at the recent Conciliation.Board which sat to. hear the slaughtermen's dispute, with Mr Myers (tho Mayor) as chairman. Could you havo found a dispute better handled ? In tho south thore was no end of wrangling over the slaughtermen's dispute, but here everything went as nioely as could bo, and both sitlcs wero heartily pleased. The 'marked' man idea is held up as a bogey by agitators all over the colony. I suppose they must do it to show they are working for their money, but tho workers as a > whole aro well able to manage their disputes without 'agitators,' and" if the 'agitators' aro dispensed with I fancy the disputes will be easier of , settlement, and there will bo more satisfaction and more amicable settlement all round. I always Iook» at it that my employer has rights as well as I have. Ho risks his capital,,Tjiroi pretty; big risks eome of them ha-ye;;* but. I' have-.worked' for dozens of fiims" in Auckland and T nevor vet found the .'boss' was not willing to meet his men fairly" if they showed good reasons' for requests. There are," of course, a few who seem to think employees are slaves, but thai sort is dying out, and it would not be fair to legislate for the whole lot just to scoop in a few miserablosouled specimens. That sort, wiH'get paid out in tho end, anyhow." Many of those seen questioned the' policy of tho provision for imprisonment for non-payment of fines, but others held again that the power was necessary in order to enforce tho act, and an act which could not bo enforced was not of much use. nor _ was the making of individual members liable for the acts of the union generally looked upon as "aiming at tho destruction of trades unionism.", The provision empowering employers to deduct fines from wagCß was, however, not looked upon with favour, and of all those interviewed not ono was found to speak in favour of it, while the ' majority held that. " preference to unionists" was a. far more workable and. desirable provision than the proposal of the bill, which was that the unions should h'ayo power to collect payments from non--memliorfi. And tlio statement on nil sides was that, the main object of unionism was not.'the mercenary one of collection of fees. No i exception was taken to allowing inspec--tors to issue permits to under-rate workers. As one man expressed it, the feeling;.has been that there lwj been just, a little- 100 strict a reading of the law in this connection, and' manr decent and willing-men have been subjected tpcrreat hardship through, it." Clause 11, prohibiting anyone from being an officer or member of a union unless he was or; had been employed' in the particular industry, was received rather, with favour than disapnroval, as tending to eliminate the " agitator ■" element, and making for tlio promotion of amicable settlement, although several reserved an opinion on this point, saying they wero not quite certain as to what its ultimate effect" might, be. There were some, however, amongst those seen ~w'ho considered that the time xtas not Tipe for such a wholesale amendment as the bill, now before the House, and that; it would, havo been far bett&r if the Minister had contented himself with .widening the definition of "workers" and one,or two of the clauses to whioh no one ,could reasonably take exception.. A number of tho unions have condemned the bill, and expressed their opinion that it contains little or noHiinir of benefit to the workers. The Carters', Onarrymch's, Brewers', and Aerated Waters Manufacturers', Fellmongers', and Engineers' Unions have passed resolutions against it. ' •

(Pep. Ukited Press Association.) AUCKLAND, September 4. At a meeting of tho Trades and Labour Council to-night the manifesto of the Wellington Trades Council concerning" the Arbitration Bill was endorsed. "The 1 provisions' of the measure wero discussed by various and generally condemned. , .'• • • '