UNSCRUPULOUS CRITICISM.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14184, 9 April 1908, Page 6

UNSCRUPULOUS CRITICISM.

Tiie practice of turning and abusing the Arbitration Court when an award' is given that falls short of expectations based oil unreasonable demands is becoming increasingly fashionable among labour unions. This should not be a cause for much surprise. It is a common failing in man that the more lie gets the more ho wants. It needed no very prophetic (vision to foresee that a, day might come in the history of the Arbitration Court when its decisions would! fail to satisfy the 'workers. The reason is not far to seek, for the workers, or at least those of them who make an outcry, do not ask merely for an award of the Court, but are disposed to' make it an indispensable condition of their' loyalty to the system of arbitration that the award shall be favourable to them. As soon s as under the system they cease to obtain concessions and advantages from the Court at the expense of the employers they lift up their voices against the tribunal or its president. Apparently they are obsessed by the fixed idea that the Arbitration Court was created to be an agent for the continuous improvement of the position of the employees wise enough to seek its assistance. Their worst indictment against the Court is based on its most necessary virtue, its absolute impartiality. •, Curiously enough, moreover, that impartiality as seen through labour spectacles assumes the guise of bias and prejudice. The Canterbury Tanners' and Fellmongers' Union is affording thelatest illustration of that attitude of trades unions to which' we have been referring. It has decided that a recent Arbitration Court award in a dispute to which it was a party is the most biassed and prejudibed ever issued by the Court. This not being enough, it has proceeded to express in forcible term's its opinion of the president of the Court, and has passed a resolution to the effect that the Minister of Labour be approached with a view to«securing the removal of Mr Justice Sim. in order that a president may be secured who,is "le,js biassed audi prejudiced." It is, to be Aire, a grievous thing that the simple faith which the Canterbury Tanners' and Fellmongers' Upion had in the Arbitration Court should, have been turned into "absolutely no confidence" in its administration, but it is alscra grievous thing to think that the. president of one - of the most important tribunals in the land is to be exposed to abuse of this kind from' any union that does not get just what it asks for. Even this vilification of the president of the Court is nothing new. That Mr Justice Sim has incurred a good deal of it of late—a monster petition to Parliament for his removal has ?ven been mooted—is simply owing to the fact that he occupies the position of president of the Court at a. time when the resources of the Arbitration Act are being put to a particularly severe test in this country. In the earlier days of its existence the Court was able to give ■just concessions to the workers, and its awards gave satisfaction for a time. The process, however, could not possibly last: concessions could' not be renewed indefinitely. When president of the CourtMr Justice Chapman, it may be remembered, by.no 1 means escaped hostile criticism at the hands of dissatisfied workers who looked, not-for justice in an adjustment of the relations between employer and employee, but for something more advantageous to themselves. Though these attacks upon the president of the . Arbitration Court are beneath contempt in themselves, and do little credit to their originators, they have a distinctly objectionable side also. If the unions wish to be done with the Arbitration Court they may , as well be frank about it, but to accuse the president of bias, and prejudice is a most unfair and foolish line to adopt. As the Canterbury Tanners' and Fellmougers' Union .is going to make representations to the" Minister of Labour in conformity with the resolution it has passed, we hope Mr Millar will make his attitude in this connection sufficiently plain to discourage future resolutions of this kind and make it clear to labour unions that they have nothing to hope for as far as the Labour Department is concerned in formulating preposterous complaints against a judge of whose, impartiality and ability there is really no question. The situation at Blackball has unfortunately encouraged a number of Socialist orators to aii; their views loudly thereon of late. The quality of some of their utterances is deplorable. For instance, Mr Marchant, the secretary of the Denniston Miners' Union, asks us to imagine the' irony of the following little episode:—"A judge is deliberating as to whether fifteen minutes is sufficient time for meii to take their tucker, men who are toiling all day at dangerous occupations, breathing foul and noxious gases.- He suddenly adjourns the Court for seventy-five minutes to partake of lunch, and then discovers that he cannot possibly award those grimy toilers any more than fifteen minutes .for crib." It would be interesting to know when the Arbitration Court Was called on to decide upon this question of

crib time, and how many workers take rapourings and distortion.? ot this kind seriously. The remedy which the Blackball miners should luive sought 011 this particular question was precisely indicated by Sir Justice Sim in his judgment in the case brought against the strikers. It is regrettable that the Arbitration. Court should be exposed' to abuse from Socialists whom it.can never hope to satisfy, and it would be- still more regrettable should the workers of the Dominion be led by unscrupulous agitators to repudiate a system which has achieved a great deal. We can only hope that the majority of the workers are more intelligent than some of thoso who seek to lead them seem to think.