ARBITRATION SYSTEM

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22612, 2 July 1935, Page 6

ARBITRATION SYSTEM

PRINCIPLE OF COMPULSION LABOUR OPINION DIVIDED (Special to Daily Times) AUCKLAND, July 1. From the speeches made in Parliament during the past three years by Labour members it might appear that the workers of New Zealand are unanimous in their desire for the restoration of compulsory arbitration, but such is not the case. Inquiries made in Auckland revealed the fact that the Labour movement is actually divided into two camps, one of which favours compulsory arbitration and the other of which is opposed to it. The position was stated to be that the Trades Hall unions—that is, the smaller organisations of workers representing the lesser phases of industry—would welcome the restoration of compulsory arbitration as it was known before its abolition in April, 1932. On the other hand, powerful, militant unions such as those representing the waterside workers, the hotel and restaurant employees, and the majority of the other organisations in the Alliance of Labour do not desire restoration. “ We have no desire to see compulsory arbitration restored,” said a. member of the executive of one of the larger unions. “We are in a position to demand fair conditions of work and reasonable rates of wages, and we are able to fend for ourselves.” It was felt, he continued, that if the element of compulsion was restored to arbitration there would he a certain amount of delay in the workers securing improvements owing to the machinery of the court. The attitude of the larger unions was that they would he able to improve the position of their members more quickly by independent action. The attitude of the smaller unions, it is stated, u that they recognise that they are not in the same position as the larger organisations and cannot act independently. They urge that compulsory arbitration should be restored as it offers the best method of ameliorating their conditions. "If the larger unions do not favour this method,” one official said, “ they can still act independently by not registering under the Act. They would still be in the same position as they are now.” In shaping its campaign for the forthcoming general election, the New Zealand Labour Party will be called upon to state its attitude towards this question. “After the fight we put up in the House against the abolition of compulsory arbitration I do not think there is any doubt that we will make Its restoration one of the main planks of our platform for the general election, was a statement by one member of the party. Political Labour, he added, recognised its duty to the small unions and the large body of workers they represented in the aggregate. The larger unions were able to fend them selves. They could continue to act independently by not registering under the Act.