WATERFRONT DISPUTE ENDED

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23370, 9 December 1937, Page 9

WATERFRONT DISPUTE ENDED

SATISFACTORY AGREEMENT REACHED VESSELS IMMEDIATELY WORKED LONG DISCUSSION IN THE HOUSE The labour dispute on the Auckland waterfront, which eommenced last Thursday, ended suddenly yesterday morning, and by mid-day the 554 vessels which had been lying idle were being worked by both union and non-union labour. Before an official announcement had been received of the settlement of the dispute the House of Representatives engaged in a discussion of various aspects of the trouble, and a detailed explanation of the steps which he had taken in the matter was furnished by the Minister of Labour (Mr H. T. Armstrong).

the companies to make up the time lost through the dispute. Within an hour of work being resumed at mid-day the wharves were again piled with a miscellaneous assortment of cargo and Quay street carried more heavy traffic than it had done since last Thursday In addition to the relief felt by the shipping companies at the termination of the difficulties, as allowing them to rearrange their schedules with the same degree of certainty, considerable satisfaction with the result of the negotiations was expressed by business interests, whose export and import work had been seriously delayed. This applied particularly to the Auckland Woolbrokers’ Association, which had been forced to advise growers to hold their clips in the country pending a settlement of the labour trouble on the wharves. At least 10,000 bales were being held to-day in city stores awaiting shipment, and all afternoon trucks were to be seen passing from them to such ships as the Port Hunter Port Hobart, Port Chalmers and Waipawa, piled high with bales for export. It was stated, however, that even although this work proceeded steadily it would still take several days 'to relieve the congestion in the stores. Miscellaneous merchandise was also being continually taken to and from the wharves.

One important feature of the settlement was the prevention- of unemployment among men who were in no way responsible for the dispute. To at least 100 men it meant a continuation of their employment, since about 60 men had been temporarily discharged from one company’s wool stores and about 50 drivers had received provisional notice of dismissal from a cartage firm. Considerable interest was shown In the settlement of the dispute by members of the general public, and throughout the afternoon clusters of spectators watched cargo operations on the wharves. One of the first ships to be given attention was the Wanganella. where a large consignment of Australian oranges and pineapples, which was needed to relieve possible shortage in the city, was brought ashore quickly and despatched to the city markets. Other cargo handled included wool. meat, butter, cheese, potatoes, and fish, which had been waiting in the stores for shipment to overseas or provincial markets.

WANGANELLA DELATED

LEAVING ON SATURDAY (Per United Press Association) AUCKLAND, Dec. 8. Because of delays through the Auckland waterfront dispute the departure for Sydney of the Huddart Parker motor-liner Wanganella has been postponed from tomorrow afternoon until noon on Saturday. This decision was contained in a cablegram received from the office at Melbourne, which instructed that all outward and inward cargo should be handled. In order to maintain her schedule, the Wanganella will not continue from Sydney to Melbourne, which was to have been her terminal port this voyage.

Following the settlement, the South Pacific Line steamer Van Rees will now proceed direct to port and will arrive from Singapore and Eastern ports at 6 o’clock tomorrow night. It was feared on Tuesday that the steamer would not he worked at Auckland, and she was ordered to divert to Wellington This order was cancelled/ and the Van Rees will visit Wellington after handling cargo here. It is considered that the return to schedule will prevent the inconvenience contingent on the proposed diversion to Wellington. The Van Rees has 22 passengers and a large amount of cargo for Auckland, including a quantity of sugar. She will berth at Chelsea after a delay of two days The Union Company’s motor ship Matua will leave Auckland to-mor-row nieht for Rarotonga and Island ports with passengers, mails and general cargo.

MINISTERIAL ACTION

SETTLING THE DISPUTE MR ARMSTRONG EXPLAINS From Our .Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON Dec. 8. The steps he had taken to bring about a settlement of the Auckland waterfront dispute were detailed by the Minister of Labour (Mr H. 1. Arm strong) in the House of Representatives to-day The Minister said the men concerned had not played the game with the Government and their fellow-unionists in New Zealand. By their actions they had assisted to wreck the prospects of workers generally For that reason a serious view of the situation. “I am no more in favour of industrial disputes than the member for iStratford.” Mr Armstrong said. ' and [ have done a good deal more in my time to brine about industrial peace than he is likely to do if he lives for 1000 years. The terms of an agreement should be strictly adhered to. and it is the duty of the Labour Department to see that agreements are observed The workers are not the only people who break agreements” “I heard nothing of the dispute until the Saturday.” added Mr Armstrong. ‘ I immediately made representations to the shipping companies and also got into touch with the Waterside Workers’ Federation meeting in conference in Wanganui. I did everything possible to bring the parties together with a view to effecting a settlem Mr W. J. Poison: You did your best and failed. „ , . ~ . The Minister: Your best would not be as good as my worst. The result of Saturday’s negotiations, said Mr Armstrong, was that the union advised its men to return to work on Monday, but when they did so )he companies said they proposed to engage new men. Two days previously the same kind of dispute had happened in Wellington, but the employers had

allowed the men to work. The workers at Auckland had said that if the employers insisted on the men they wanted to work the ship concerned they would not allow the men to work the others. “Had it not been for the fact that all the leading officials of the union were at a conference at Wanganui I hardly believe the trouble would have occurred,” Mr Armstrong said. “On my recommendation the conference allowed the two Auckland delegates to return to Auckland immediately, and the representatives of the shipping companies agreed to go to Auckland at the same time. They met immediately on Monday to discuss the points in dispute. I was in touch with them on the telephone and they told me it was a very wet day and that it did not matter very much if the dispute were not settled that day, as it was too wet to work. The member for Stratford has talked about delay in the loading of the farmers’ produce, but the most the produce was ‘held up was three or four hours this morning.” Mr Poison: Twenty-four ships were idle. Mr Armstrong: They were wet davs and the ships would not be worked “When I thought sufficient progress was not being made with the negotiations,” Mr Armstrong continued, I again got into touch with Mr J. Roberts at Wanganui and told him the Government held the federation responsible and that we wanted him to proceed to Auckland Mr Roberts arrived there this morning and he apparently conveyed the message from the Government as to the action it would take if the dispute were not settled.” The Government would go into the matter in the very near future and do everything possible to put a stop to what had been happening in the past. A union that had a clause in an agreement at its own request by Which disputes were to be referred to a disputes’ committee without a stoppage of work had a right to observe that condition. If it did not do so it was not playing the game by its own union the Government or the people of the country. u If a union has no more control over its members than to allow little gangs of men to take the law into their own hands and cause hold-ups, then it should not be allowed to retain its registration,” said Mr Armstrong. “ People who do that sort of thing are betrayers of every decent principle of unionism and should be expelled from the union." The Minister of Lands (Mr F. Langstone): And the employers, too! Mr Armstrong: The same principle applies to the employers. The Government, said Mr Armstrong, had accomplished a good deal for the waterside workers and other worxers. including the men involved in the Auckland dispute. Every effort had been made to settle the dispute as soon as possible -in the interests of industrial peace and for the benefit of the people of the country generally, and the trade union movement in particular.

A SUDDEN ENDING

MEN RETURN TO WORK TERMS OF SETTLEMENT (Per United Press Association) AUCKLAND, Dec. 8. The labour dispute on the Auckland waterfront was settled this morti lug.' It ended lust as suddenly as it had started on Thursday night, and within a few minutes of an agreement being reached at a joint conference between representatives of shippine Interests and of the waterside workers the men had started accepting their engagement discs from the bureau on the Central wharf, and were dispersing to their respective ships. Shortly after mid-day the 24 vessels in port which were affected by the dispute were being worked again, some or them for the first time in five days. Overhead cranes on the wharves were once more swinging cargo out and inboard, and the waterfront was alive with working men. machinery and trucks. . , , . Three main clauses were included In the terms of settlement, which were accepted without comment by the men These terms were: , (1) That the bureau man tne Waiana forthwith. (2) After engagement for the Waiana has been accepted, all other ships to be manned immediately. (3) The five men who attended the Waiana on Thursday night, and also the four who asked for leave of absence, be included in the general enSa ili"addition, It was decided. that the Bureau Control Board, consisting of representatives of each party should meet later to consider the position. Once work had been resumed various machinery matters arising fromi the agreement and governing the o working of the bureau were discussed. The conference between the parties began about 845 a.m. and lasted over two hours, with one adjournment to givrepresentatives of wate:rsme workers, including Mr J. Roberts, sec retarv of the New Zealand Waters.de Workers’ Federation, who had -come up from Wellington especially to attend the conference, an opportumt., o ' M a r d ßoSl played 6 ” prominent part In the negotiations, and once and his colleagues had “ e ‘ l"The am{Sen^lonMo ld rea?h "°"i £ Union LpihlJ. Company in Auckland, and Mr W.HG. Bennett, representing Wellington shinning interests, acted for the em nlovers and, in addition to Mr RobMessrs T. Solomon (president), ■r Jones (vice-president), and W. *L Cuthbert (walking delegate) appeared meantime, over 1000 members of the union and hundreds unionists had on the Central wharf in the union hall, and else where’ They arrived with their kits in readiness for work, and many of them betrayed little interest m the events of the dispute preferring to talk about everyday matters which had no relation to their work. Others discussed the matter eagerly, but the majority of them appeared to have every faith in the ability of their representatives to arrive at a satisfactory arrangement for resuming work. Some were frank in their declaration that their support for the others, contentions arose merely because tney were all unionists and no; through any particular desire to stop work. When it was decided to man he Waiana. waterside workers immediately clustered about the bureau and accepted discs for the ship without any further reluctance. As soon as the Waiana was manned all qther ships needing labour were provided with their requirements immediately,, and work was resumed generally at 1 o’clock By the terms of the settlement those men who refused to work the Waiana on Thursday night were not included in the general engagement. Their position was discussed in the afternoon a-, a meeting of the Bureau Control Board, and arrangements were made after a long discussion for them to return to work. . * While the meeting was being held these men waited outside the bureau and anxiously questioned their representatives whenever they appeared outside, indicating clearly that thov were ready to return to work. Beyond remarking that a settlement had been reached quite amicably Mr Roberts declined to make anv statement about the dispute “The agreement is satisfactory to both sides,” said Mr Solomon ‘We still think that we have been acting in a proper manner in the circumstances, although it has been obvious that there have been faults on each side The employers should not have hung oul engagement discs at three minutes to 10 when, by the rules of the bureau all employment must be made between the hours of eight and 10 In this case labour was called for three bis shins when it was perfectly clear that the men could not be engaged in the three minutes in hand. The fault on our side was In acceptin'* engagement discs under those conditions. The result or the negotiations this morning cannot be called victory for the employers because the settlement was equallv satisfactory to us.”

A HIVE OF INDUSTRY

WHARVES PILED WITH CARGO OPERATIONS PROCEED SMOOTHLY (Special to Daily Times) AUCKLAND Dec. 8. In sharp contrast to the conditions which have prevailed on the Auckland waterfront since last Thursday when the refusal of over 100 men to imh the Union Company’s motor ship Waiana after they had accepted engagement nlunged the port into idleness the wharves were a hive of industry this afternoon. Although there was no appreciable difference in the rate of working csrgo, operations procoGdod •moothly and in general the waterside workers were obviously keen to assist

MEN TO BLAME

MR FRASER’S DECLARATION “LESSON TO THOSE CONCERNED” (From Our Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, Dec. 8, The declaration that, in the light of the facts before him, the men were unquestionably in the wrong was made by the Minister of Marine (Mr P. Fraser) when discussing the hold-up on the waterfront in the House of Representatives. Mr Fraser said the Government had acted promptly, and with the assistance of shipowners and waterside workers had achieved a settlement in record time. Wherever there were violations of agreements, irrespective of which side was to blame, the Government would not hesitate to condemn or to take whatever remedial action was necessary. “This particular dispute,” Mr Fraser said, “ had all the possibilities of a disaster. The trouble arose through the men refusing to take up work on Friday evening at 6 o’clock. An Opposition member: You admit they are to blame? “ I would say the men were unquestionably wrong,” Mr Fraser replied, “ I qualify that by stating I am only expressing an opinion on the facts before me, and they reveal that the men who dio not take up work at 6 o’clock on Friday were wrong. Any consideration of the case would have to be started on that basis, but I understand the whole question is being investigated, and therefore I defer any final opinion." Mr Fraser added that the vast majority of the men had not voluntarily engaged in the dispute. The dispute had spread because the employers, in the interests of discipline, decided to make the Waiana a preference ship. In the circumstances the wholesale condemnation of all the men on the waterfront at Auckland was not justified. Force was the only alternative to the methods the Government had adopted, and he was grateful that common sense had prevailed. The epi sode, minor as it was, had contained all the possibilities of a major industrial conflict, and it would be a lesson to those concerned.

GOVERNMENT’S ATTITUDE

RESPONSIBILITY RECOGNISED BETTER SYSTEM NEEDED (From Our Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, Dec. 8. “ The Government realises that it has some responsibility in this matter and it does not intend to run away from that responsibility.” said the Prime Minister (Mr M. J Savage) when speaking during the discussion on the waterfront hold-up. The Prime Minister claimed that it was for the interested parties to get together and devise a better system which would prevent such disturbances. “It is merely a question whether there is sufficient intelligence among the waterside workers and the members of Parliament to enable them to devise a better means of doing the job,” said Mr Savage, “ and the Government is not sleeping on the job.’ Mr W. J. Poison: We have wakened you up, then? , , Mr Savage: The Government did not need waking up. It was awake before. But the time might come very soon when the honourable gentleman will need waking up. Mr Poison: I do not know what the Prime Minister means by that, but if it is a threat I am willing to meet him at any time. “The situation which developed at Auckland has shown us that there has to be a better method of doing the job,” Mr Savage said. “To blame the shipping companies or the waterside workers is not to solve the problem It is still there after that. I do not care whose fault it was We have to clean the matter up. There should be intelligence enough among those interested to see that the job is done better in the future. We realise that we have some responsibility and wo arc not going to run awav from it but I certainly feel that this afternoon's business in the House has been mainly for political reasons.”

A LENGTHY DEBATE

UNANIMITY OF OPINION IMPORTANCE OF HARMONY (From Our Parliamentary Reporter 1 WELLINGTON, Dec. 8. The question of the shipping hold-up was debated at length in the House of Representatives this afternoon in a motion moved by Mr W J Poison (Opposition Stratford) that the House should be adjourned for that nnrnnse Various opinions were expressed on the subject but ‘here was unanimity on the need for better relations between employers and workers on the waterfront in New Zealand.

“ What is disturbing the minds ot most people is the question: How safe are we, and to what extent do the waterside workers intend to live uc to their agreements? ” said Mr J G. Coates (Opposition, Kaipara). Mr Coates quoted a statement which he said was submitted to the Prime Minister last year, pointing out that between 1933 and 1936 there had been an increase of 50 per cent, in the cost of handling cargo at the main ports of the Dominion. In the next year, 193637, the figure had jumped up by another 20 per cent. At thfe same time shipmasters coming to the Dominion had been complaining that it was costing from 50 per cent, to 100 per cent, more to handle produce on New Zealand wharves than in any other country. The Minister of Labour was grappling with this problem from the moment it arose, and I want to congratulate him on the tactful and efficient way in which he.handled it,” said the Minister of Mines (Mr P. C. Webb) Mr Webb said that as soon as the matter had been brought under his notice Mr Armstrong had approached every responsible body with tne object that they should get together and settle the trouble. The situation was one that could have produced extremely serious results. He was confident that the Minister would be responsible for a better system of waterfront work ir this country. Mr W. A. Bodkin (Opposition, Central Otago) said that the powerfm union concerned in the hold-up was out to try and almost demand moral support from the Government. This union had been steadily endeavouring to get itself in a position of authority when at any time it could seize the community by the throat and paralyse the country. The position could not be allowed to rest where it was. The economic life of the community demanded that the situation should be cleared up in such a way that it could not possibly arise in the future. “ This union, because of its strength and of the strategic position it occupies, believes that it is almosl in a position to dictate terms to the Government,” Mr Bodkin continued “Mr James Roberts is the man who believes in direct action, and he is the uncrowned king of New Zealand today.”

The importance of harmony on tne waterfront and the necessity for better relations between the employers and labour in that sphere were emphasised by the Minister of Finance, Mr W Nash. “If the work is not better done than in the past, and if we are no* able to avoid these breaks, the standard of living in this country must be affected lam hoping that now that the men are back at work again there will be a better spirit among the workers, shippers and farmers, and all those interested. If we do not get that spirit I think these difficulties will destroy us. This is not a matter merely for the Government or the Opposition and I think there is justification for some inauiry being held to see if we c-.n avoid these stoppages. The debate was interrupted by the tea adiournment.

MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT

DISCUSSION OF DISPUTE WARMLY-CONTESTED ARGUMENT (From Our Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, Dec. 8. The question whether the situation on the waterfront was sufficiently serious to justify an adjournment of the House of Representatives so that it could be discussed gave rise to a warmly-contested argument in the House this afternoon. Mr W. J. Poison (Opposition, Stratford) moved that the House should adjourn so that the situation, at Auckland should be discussed, but the issue was immediately taken up by the Minister of Education (Mr P. Fraser), who contended that the matter was not an urgent one. After a great deal of argument the Speaker (Mr W. E. Barnard) said he did not think he would be justified in ruling the motion out of order, and the House then proceeded to discuss the question. When Mr Poison moved his motion Mr Fraser contended that it did not conform with the Standing Orders, as the subject of such a moti was required to be of definite public importance. He believed the dispute at Auckland had been settled, and in that case there was no auestion of urgency. Mr H. S. S. Kyle (Opposition, Riccarton): Since when has the trouble been settled?

Mr Fraser: Since this morning. Mr J. G. Coates (Opposition, Kaipara) said he thought the Minister of Education had rather missed the point. It was a question whether the position would be much altered even if there had been a settlement for the moment because the transport of the country’s products overseas was a matter of urgent importance to every person in the Dominion. If there were unexpected hold-ups that must be a matter of urgent public concern. “I would draw attention in the first place to the fact that this motion applies to Auckland, and not to the general ' uestion of waterfront work,” said the Prime Minister (Mr M. J. Savage). Mr Coates: But is Auckland not rather the whole shooting match? “This subject has been frequently discussed in the House,” Mr Savage went on. “and I think the privilege extended by the Standing Orders is meant to apply to things that develop suddenly, such as the declaration of war, for instance, and for which there is no other opportunity of discussion We would never get any business done if members were allowed to move an adjournment of the House to discuss genera] questions. T.think the motion ; s based on a dispute that is not in existence at the present moment.” Mr W. A, Bodkin/Opposition, Central Otago) suggested that the only consideration the Speaker should take into accoun' was whether the matter was one of major importance, and he did not think that could be denied

Mr Speaker 1 It is undoubtedly a public matter, but the question is "'bother it is n urgent public matter The Attorney-general (Mr H. G R. Mason) submitted that the purpose of the Standing Orders relating to adjournments of the House was to provide the opportunity for the discussion of an urgent public matter which could not otherwise be conveniently discussed He thought the auestion could have been very conveniently raised on the Appropriation Bill passed early that morning, and that in that event the means now being sought hv the Opo"c!tjnn was not openMr W J. Broadfont (Opposition. Waitomo' drew attention to the fact that that there was no official intimation that the trouble had been settled, and the auestion was undoubted!" of urgent importance “The Anprnnriation Bill was passed last night merely by leave of the House.” said Mr S G, Smith (Opposition, New Plvmouth) ‘and it is wrong to suggest that it is not proper for this motion to he brought forward now."

Giving his ruling, the Speaker said u had been contended by the Govern menf speakers that the hold-up described in the motion no longer existed and that conseauentlv the auestion wa c no longer urgent He did not think he would bo iustifled a 1 the •riomeni in preventing Mr Poison from ovoceeding with his motion but if it did annear during the debate that the dispute was at an end he would be prepared to accept a motion that would •erminafo the debate

In reply to a request by Mr Fraser for an explanation of the circumstances in which he originally had accepted the motion (he Sneaker said that •-•cceotance of suet a motion must be determined bv him in ibe chair That had been determined and as 'he motion definitely specified the Auck land dispute the discussion must be confined to Auckland The debate then proceeded.