A WARNING TO WORKERS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 27043, 30 March 1949, Page 4

A WARNING TO WORKERS

. For nearly six weeks the building in Auckland has been at a Already, it is estimated, buildings worth £350,000 have been lost to the community; the body of carpenter labour has been dispersed, much of it has been diverted to other employment and may be permanently lost to this essential industry. At the end of last week the Government —which has indeed been slow to wrath—took the ■■unusual step of cancelling the ■registration of the Auckland bunion concerned, and although of the men have now to work, the union leaders to fight a battle from s*which the whole of organised now stands apart, except Sthat some unions are still contributing to a “ strike ” fund. But- the carpenters’ dispute has a significance which extends beyond its IS immediate and obvious results—just how far, it would be difficult to say. Although the moves in the • struggle have been reported in the press from day to day, it has been hard to understand why certain action was taken and why, later, ■cit was cancelled. It is not imposc':sible that the real fight has been behind the scenes, with questions v ,of precedence in the industrial ;;'hierarchy and matters of high ■ ‘ policy at stake. It has been more obvious, however, that the record of the dispute is worthy of study as a case history of how a minority can manipulate the members of a union into action against their own interests and those of the community. In December a new award , was ■ drawn up to which the - Carpenters’ Union was a party, ' but within two months the Auckland branch decided to express its dissatisfaction with the terms by resorting to the unfairness of the “ go-slow ” policy. The branches in other centres did not follow suit. In effect, the Auckland Union revealed that it had entered into arbitration proceedings with no intention of accepting any. terms but - its own. It ignored its obligations under the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, and embarked on a wholly illegal course. Very properly, the master builders resisted the attempted blackmail and / dismissed the men. Then the union appealed for a special tribunal to be set up, but in this case the facts were too obvious for the Government to agree to this more than y dubious action. Next, determined efforts were made to involve other unions, and several did take part in 4 boycott against employers refusing to engage the dismissed men. ' Their action was, at best, inspired by a mistaken sense of loyalty. The Auckland Trades Council wa= heat-

edly involved, and then the Federation of Labour, which finally requested the carpenters to return to work and leave their case in its hands. The carpenters refused. At least, at a “ mass ” meeting, with no secret vote, 495 refused and 229 voted to return; the remainder of approximately 1700 members were not at the meeting. The picketing tactics which have been adopted since deregistration was imposed may suggest why many of the men did not attend that meeting.

The issue of the ’ dispute is still in doubt, but it is more certain now than it was a month ago that the carpenters must be the losers. The community is once more an innocent sufferer, but the experience will have been worth-while if the carpenters—and organised labour as a whole —take heed and examine carefully their leadership and are warned . of the consequences of apathetically surrendering their rights of full participation in the control of all business of their unions.