STRIKE ECHOES.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19197, 13 June 1924, Page 8

STRIKE ECHOES.

WHY THE STIUKE FAILED. The Brisbane Daily Standard of May .57 contains a statement by Mr James Roberts, of Wellington, secretary of tin Waterside Workers’ r (.'deration and 01 the Alliance of Labour, contained in a letter written by him to Queensland, respecting the recent strike of railwaymen. Mr Roberts writes as follows: “I want to tell you that the men belonging to the Amalgamated Society o; Railway Servants were very solid, but the engine-drivers simply ‘scabbed’ on them. Hence the failure of the strike—for failure it was. “The facts are that the railwayman s strike was conducted by a new executive. None of them had had any experience in negotiating, but they expected that if they look a strike ballot it would be sufficient to compel the Government to concede their demands. As a matter ol fact, the Government was looking for r. strike. This is the off season in New Zealand, and if the railways did not nir for weeks it would not matter materially, ns all the farmers’ produce nas now gone to the London markets. The Govern ment, therefore, simply said: ‘Go ahead.’ The strike was called, and the A.S.E.fS attempted to get the engine-drivers to refuse to run ‘scab’ trains, but they not only ran ‘scab’ trains but acted as mards in the following manner: The Gov eminent regulations in New Zealand pro vide that if there is a ‘hanking’ engine at the rear of the train a guari, need not be employed, and the enginedrivers at Wellington at any rate, rat. U.ese ‘banking’ engines at the rear of the train, and, therefore, assisted the Government. “The strike was called off, as far as 1 know, without any definite promise from the Government whatever, although I am of the opinion that there was no necos sity to do so. The rail way men would not hand over their strike to the i\ew Zealand Alliance of Labour, as they were afraid that every large transport'organisation would be involved, and that may have prevented the ra.ilwaymen going bade if they could arrive at a settlement

for themselves. The Alliance of Labour nas, therefore, left cut of the strike altogether, and I can only sura up the position as follows: (1) That the negotiations leading up . to the strike were badly handled. (2) That the strike was called at mo wrong time. (3) Thai the Government desired a strike, and were willing to fight it to the bitter end. (4) The raihvaymen canid have won out if they had had the support of the engine-drivers; and (5) That the calling ofl of the strike when it was done was a tactical blunder, as the railwayman were sufficiently strong, along with the rest of the transport workers, to demand' the terms on which the men would resume work. “The Government has now set up a board to go into the railwayman’s conditions, but what the result of that board will be I do not know. The men are still working the 44-hour week, but T understand that one of the conditions on which they went hack was that the raihvaymen should disaffiliate with the New Zealand Alliance of ! Labour.”