“A NEW DEAL”

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26199, 9 July 1946, Page 4

“A NEW DEAL”

WATERFRONT CLAIMS SPECIAL COMMISSION SITS (Special) WELLINGTON, July 8. Workers’ and employers’ submissions on a new agreement for labour conditions on the waterfront are being argued before the new Waterfront Industry Control Commission, which began its sitting to-day. Two representatives each from the employers’ and workers’ unions sit on the commission, with Mr Justice Ongley as president.

The claims are widely divergent, so much so that when the parties first met to discuss them the meeting lasted less than an hour, and the Government set up a completely new Waterfront Commission to deal with the problem, with powers unprecedented in peace-time. How privileged the industry is within the industrial arbitration system can be seen in the fact that whereas most unions and employers are obliged to queue up for fixtures in the Arbitration Court, the waterfront workers and managements have their own separate commission, with a judge to preside and give constant attention to their disputes. “ We are looking for peace in our industry with the new waterfront setup,” declared the watersiders’ national secretary, Mr T. Hill,* in a statement last week.

Reporting the first meeting of the employers on the new claims, Mr Hill declared: “The employers showed their teeth. They submitted to the workers their ecnomic Magna Charta. All their lavish promises which were made when their dividends were in jeopardy and when it looked as though Tojo might displace Peter Fraser as Prime Minister of New Zealand, were dispersed. “ One of our officials with over 30 years’ experience said that the employers’ proposals were tougher than those imposed by the Forbes-Coates Ministry in the black years of New Zealand s record economic depression.” Mr Hill accused the employers of trying to impose “ industrial slavery*,” and declared that they were looking for trouble on the waterfront as this was election year. “ Let it be clearly understood,” he said, “that unless we obtain satisfaction, then, come what may, I have no hesitation in stating that we must accept the employers’ challenge and be prepared to fight. Should there be industrial trouble this time we will place the responsibility where it belongs—with the employers.”

Since those preliminary negouations broke down, there have been long discussions with Mr Fraser and much argument with him about the authority of the commission to impose conditions on the waterfront. At last a decision has been reached over the commission's powers, and it has assumed office.

Under the commission a rigid system of control can be maintained, but the old disputants face one another in a peace-time alignment which offers no greater prospect of permanent settlement than did the old.

The most significant fact at the moment is the emphasis more lately placed by Mr Hill on the desire from’ his quarter for peace within the industry. It seems that the public can expect the Waterfront Union to adopt conciliatory tactics for the remainder of this election year. There can be no doubt that Mr Fraser during discussions with union representatives raised the issue—so vital to political labour—of industrial peace during the campaigning months before the polls. From Mr Hill’s latest statement it would appear that Mr Fraser’s wishes in this matter will be respected by the union. That, at least, is the position at the moment.