DEMOCRATIC UNIONISM

Otago Daily Times, Issue 27515, 9 October 1950, Page 4

DEMOCRATIC UNIONISM

PURPOSE OF PRESENT INDUSTRIAL AMENDMENT BILL Special Correspondent WELLINGTON, Oct 8. The principal clauses of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill, introduced in the House last Tuesday, pertain to compulsory unionism and to the election of officers. Other matters ar* mentioned in the Bill, and there are clauses affecting them, but the Issues of compulsion, and elections, are easily the most important. In the British Commonwealth of Nations, compulsion by the Stat* to join a trade union is peculiar to New Zealand alone. Indeed, as faf as can be ascertained, compulsory unionism does not exist outsid* countries where Communism is dominant.

It is true that, in 1936, when the compulsory principle was first introduced here, there was a " Labour Front ” in Nazi Germany, but no other country apart from Germany and Russia had seen any merit in the idea of forcing workers to belong to industrial organisations. That the compulsory principle was adopted in New Zealand without much public clamour can be attributed to the somewhat weak and flabby origin of unionism here. According to Dr A. E. C. Hare, whose “Industrial Relations in New Zealand,” published in 1 946, still remains the best ond most authoritative record of unionism in this country, “ the greater part of the unions in New Zealand would not exist at all were it not for the State which calls them into being as a prior condition to enforcing minimum rates of wages.”

The tremendous efforts on the part of unionists to obtain recognition, so strikingly evident in British trade unionism, were not repeated here. Indeed, the original Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act of 1894 contains the preamble that it is "An Act to encourage the formation of industrial unions.” Few, if any, unions in New Zealand possess the vitalising records of British unions, of victory obtained in the face of crushing odds, of the fight for recognition having been won at the cost of martyrdom. Until 1936, unionism in New Zealand was voluntary, in the sense that workers who refused to join a union were not compelled by the Government to change their minds, though of course pressure from fellow workers who were unionists could be brought to bear, and frequently was brought to bear. Herein, for instance, it would be interesting to learn of a single case of a coal miner, who, while employed in the mines, was not also a member of the union. But many workers had never been interested in unionism, or in awards; clerks, office workers of all kinds, public accountants’ employees, wireless operators, dental and optical assistants, hospital employees, ice cream workers, oyster canning workers, paint and varnish workers, wire goods workers, some shop assistants, and so on. Reluctant Conscripts After the introduction of compulsory unionism, the number of unions jumped from 410 in 1935 to 499 in 1937, because of many small groups of workers for the first time becoming unionised and securing an award. Comparing membership of unions in 1929 (the last pre-slump year, after which time membership declined because of slump conditions) with 1937 —the year after compulsion was introduced—Dr Hare says that in 1929 there was only one union of clerical workers .with eight members; in 1937. there were 20,000 members of clerical workers’ unions. In 1929 there were only 5000 shop assistants registered in unions; in 1937, over 17,000. Membership of the groups organised in the New Zealand Workers’ Union jumped from 6000 in 1929 to 28,000 in 1937. But the hard and harsh fact remains that most of the new recruits were unwilling conscripts. “Whereas before the introduction of compulsory unionism all my members were convinced unionists,” said one trade union secretary to Dr Hare, “ now not 20 per cent, have any understanding or belief in the union.” Twenty per cent, is perhaps an overestimate. Again, another secretary refused to recruit women as collectors of union dues because of the abusive language from members which, he said, was unfit for a woman to hear. In April, 1949, Mr W. B. Richards, president of the Otago Trades Council, said that compulsory unionism was not in the best interests of the trade union movement. He said that he had advocated its introduction, but that he had since come to the conclusion that it was a mistake.

Compulsory unionism gave to many enterprising gentlemen a chance to cash m on unionism'. As Dr Hare regards, well-paid secretarial positions were captured by people who had not previously been members of trade unions. Many worthy citizens have managed to live in comparative affluence since 1936, while, at the same time, the crusading spirit of the older unionists has been blunted and crushed, inasmuch as there is no longer any struggle to convert the unconvinced and to preach the gospel of united strength. The Proposed Changes

In terms of the present Bill, union members will have the opportunity to decide whether unionism in their industry is to be compulsory or not. A pre-requisite to the ballot on compulsion is a written requisition made by 5 per cent, of the membership, or 200 members, whichever is the less. Subsequent ballots may be taken at intervals of not less than two years. As to the election of officers, the Bill provides that union rules are now to include a section that officers are to be elected by a secret ballot, or such other method as may be approved by the registrar. According to an article published by Mr J. Freeman, president of the Auckland Trades and Labour Council in the official organ of the Labour Party, the Standard, in November of last year, some unions make no provision whatever in their rules for any kind of a ballot to determine who shall be the officers. Mr Freeman strongly condemned this omission. There has been testimony from other sources that haphazard methods—to use a euphemistic term—have been adopted in the vital matter of electing leaders of trade unions. The measure now before the House will certainly result in some improvement; but one feels that although a Government can go a certain distance in the way of reforming unionism, in the final analysis it will be the trade union members themselves who will have to undertake the difficult task of raising the prestige of unionism to somewhere near the level obtaining in Britain and elsewhere in the Commonwealth. Unfortunately, apart from isolated examples of heart-searching such as that provided by Mr Freeman, it seems that unionism in New Zealand is in the doldrums.