THE CO-OPERATIVE WORKER'S POSITION.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14702, 9 December 1909, Page 6

THE CO-OPERATIVE WORKER'S POSITION.

Tiik rather curious position which was disclosed by the decision of the Ai'bitration Court in regard to a recent claim for compensation preferred against the Public Works Department has not escaped attention in Parliament. The claimants were the purcnts ot Patrick Lawless, who was killed while working cm tho Catiins-Waiinahaka railway construction works, a.nd the circumstances attending deceased's employment were shown to be that- the formation of « section of the* railway track had been let to a. party of co-operative ivorkers, that this party arranged with one Sc'noies to provide a horse and driver to draw the tracks used in tile work, and that Scholes is his turn employed Lawless the driver in question. The Court, as is set out in its judgment, decided that, ths facts made it clear that deceased was not at the time of the accident, in the employ of the Minister of Public Works under any contract of service or apprenticeship, and tnat if the claimants were entitled to recover compensation it could only be bv virtue of section 13 of tlm Workers' Compensation Act, in which it is provided that, '■ in any case where any person (Hereinafter referred to as tho principal) contracts with any other person (hereinafter referred to as the contractor) for the execution of any

work by or under the contractor, and the contractor employs <my worker therein, both the principal nnd tho contractor shall, for the purposes of •'■his Act. be- doomed to b» employers of the worker so employed, and shall be jointly and severally 'mble to pay any compensation ivhicii tin; contractor would bt> liablb to pay uikW this Act" ''lie ug'ilt of ).Ir> claimants •o recover under jhi. M'etioic becanib dependent therefore on whether the members of this party of cooperative workers- were contractors within the meaning of the secto or Aether, they were to bfl rt /'ii U ' /-1 " S l" eciMVor k fir:! The decision 0 the Court was that the terms upon winch the members of the partv undertook to perform this work wero such as to negative the relationship of master and servant- between the Public Works Department- and theiu, and to establish that, of employer and contractor. Tho Court held that, it was the intention of the contract entered into that such should be the relationship This decision has a, curious result, it will bo observed, m so far as it- alfect-s the co-operativo worker. He is raised to the dignity of a coik tractor, but tho more exalted status can Hardly be very welcome en bini, since, irrespective of other disabilities, it prevents the application to him of the legal definition of worker., and thus renders him unable, in the event of injury, to come upon tho State for compensation. In the circumstances he can hardly be expected to appreciate the dignity which the Arbitration Court has now conferred upon him. since it places him at- a disadvantago as compared' with those who work for .1 private employer. This determination of its relationship to the co-opera-tive wc-rkor affords another illustration of the manner in which, under existing conditions, the Government escapes liability, or has the means of doing so, while the private employer must shoulder bis responsibility. Tho reply which tho Minister for Labour returned to a question that- was put to him yesterday 011 the point was, however, not unsympathetic, and encourages the hope that co-operativo labourers will bo accorded'the same rights of compensaj tion as are possessed under the law by workers in private employment.