SOME LOCAL OPINIONS

Otago Witness, Issue 2811, 26 August 1908, Page 23

SOME LOCAL OPINIONS

By declining to make an award in theCanterbury .farm labourers 1 dispute the Arbitration Court has divided the community into three camps — those who commend it for, the decision arrived at; those who, while approving of that decision, believe that the court's recommendations should not have been made ; and .those who condemn the entire proceedings in the mest whole-hearted way, and declare that, responsibilty or' no responsibility, an award should have been made. It is evident from inquiries made in Dunedin on Saturday that from certain quarters the Arbitration Court has raised about its eai-3 a very hornet's nest of criticism. The first gentleman who was interviewed on tha subject lias had great experience of agricultural matters and men, and is eminently fitted to express an opinion that should carry weight. On being asked .v r hat he thought of The decision of the court he replied that it would have been highly undesirable, from every point of view, had an award been made. In reply to a question as to whether he believed that under the circumstances ihe court could have made an award, and, if so. would that award have teen workable, the gentleman said: "It was, and is, an absolute impossibility to make an award in such a case. Surely everyone must see that." When it was pointed out to him that hundreds of people believed firmly in the possibility and practicability of an award, or else why had the court been requested to make one? he replied : " Oh. that's all nonsense. There are no hundreds of people who really think to the contrary." Agriculture, he remarked, was vastly different from the various -grades- Atmospheric changes and the length or brevity of the days were not the only factors that influenced it. Success in agriculture hung, so to speak, a good deal on the skirts of opportunity, and opportunities once lost perhaps did not occur again. The idea of, a farmer fettered by a machine-mads law keeping his hands inactive while such opportunities came and went was monstrous. The question* the Arbitration Court had been asked- to make an award upon was not only a lar.ge question, but a number of large questions, the regulating of which could not be effected 6y set rules. What might be applicable in one case might be disastrous in another. To make an award was an absolute impossibility. One or two of the stock and station ap^nti who were approached on the matter did not happen to be running farms for tiK-ir own immediate personal benefit, and so were hardly in a position to epeab in that keen personal manner begotten of an inner acquaintanceship with things that can alone carry conviction. A general result of other interviews and conversations was. as might have been expected, that Capital was pleased and Labour was disgusted. Even in the ranks of the former, "however.' there would, seem to be dissatisfaction with the Arbitration Court ior (after having practically declined to meddle with the matter) making five remarkably weak "recommendations," which many farmers in the " industrial district " will possibly ignore. * The farmer, who after all is one of tho two parties most direetlv affected, would appear to have made up his. mind long ago that tbe court would make no award, and from the remarks of one or two of these gentlemen on Saturday it is a matter for speculation what would have happened to them had an award been made. Clearly, from their point o£ view, i'lr Justice Sim and his colleagues would have achieved the ! impossible. -As to the prospect of an 1 award that would prove practicable ever being made, one farmer eaid he believed confidently that when rain, sunshine, and wind, seed times and harvests had been ! made subjects of a fixed award, another governing the working conditions of men j depending on the present vagaries of the | same should be the next step. ' On the other hand, there ars othors who have an uneasy feeling that the Arbitration I Court has deduced some of its arguments j from 6labs of formal evidence- and Year Books, and that it has failed to grasp the inner meaning of the real relationship betwoen .farmer and farm hand. | The Secretary of the Otago Trades and Labour Council stated' to a representative of the Times that the decision of the court fime as a complete surprise to him. While hs» had grave doubts of the court being able to make an award which would be entirely satisfactory to the farm labourers, | ha never doubted for one moment that an attempt would be made to regulate the i condition of country workers. The court | apparently recognised that the conditions of thesd workers are not satisfactory, as witness the recommendation to all farmere.

If th© conditions were satisfactory, this recommendation would be unnecessary, and s if it was necessary, why was it not embodied in an award? It would then have been of some value, but as it is, it was not wortih the paper it was written on. The position, he said, was unique in the history of the Conciliation and ArbitraEon Act. He knew of only one other case where th© court failed to make an award in a dispute referred to it for settlement, "but the reasons given in that case were totally different from the present case. Mr Breen was a strong believer in the act as a means of settling disputes, as he is perfectly satisfied it has been instrumental in improving- the conditions of. a large section of the workers of the Dominion. He did not approve of anything in the nature of a etiike, as he eonsjdered that when a union submits its case to the court it should loyally abide by the award given, but if the farm labourers in Canterbury went out on etiSke to-morrow he would support them to the utmost of his power, and he- honestly believed the men would receive the sympathy and financial support of every union of workers in the Dominion. He considered the decision of the court was not only unjust, but savoured of Russia and* despotism. Here- was a body of men properly constituted and registered under an act" which was placed on the Statute Book for the purpose of allowing them a | rational method of having the conditions undeg.- which they work regulated, and the tribunal which was set up to regulate those conditions refused to do so. The Government, through the Minister of Labour, had publicly announced that no -section of farm or other workers shall be excluded from the operation of the act. 3Tet^ in the face of thie announcement, one individual ©et himself up in opposition to the representative of the peopled and said they shall be excluded. If the Government *as sincere it should take from the court the power to refuse a.n award, or else pass legislation to regulate the condition of country workers. If it did not do something in that direction, it wa<s unworthy of the support of any honest working man. The leasons given by the court "for refusing an av?ar>d wore, in ]iis opinion, very weak, i especially the one referring to the number of inspectors that would be required to enforce the provisions of the award. The court had nothing to do with the question of enforcements until they were brought officially before it. The responsibility of seeing that the provisions, of an award were carried out rested with the Government, and the question of whether an army of inspectors would be necessary should (if it was not> have been considered by the Government before assuring us chat the farm workers would not be excluded from th© operation of the act. At the present time a small army of inspectors was necessary to see that the Factories Act and Shops and Offices Act were properly administered,* yet that would be no argument in favour of the repeal of those acte or ao-ainst their being originally placed 'on the Statute Book. Thousands of employers were working under awards, some under several awards, and almost all of them had resented very much the interference with tiheir business, and in many .cases it has been suggested that the court should not make an award,' but without success. However, it w>as left to the Farmers Association to succeed with the same weapons where the Employers' Aesooiation had failed. This victory of the farmers would no doubt serve to encourage the city em- | ployers to persevere, and to go in for a. series of revival meetings. They could then introduce the old, old story, which had proved the salvation, of the farmer, and if they tell the story often enough it might reach the ears of a very sympathetic court, and then, to use the words of Mr H. D. Acland, it will be another great victory and a triumph fox the employers of the Dominion, and perhaps the downfall of unionism. On being interviewed by a Daily Times reporter on Saturday evening and asked his -opinion in regard to the decision of the court and the probable effect thereof, Mr J. F. Arnold, M.P., said he had read the report of the decision with considerable interest, as at the present time industrial matters were taking up a large proportion of public attention. Any new phase in the working of the Arbitration Act was of special interest. Of course, it was impossible for him to expressman opinion as to the merits or otherwise of the awards made by the union, but while it had always been recognised that under extraordinary circumstances th© court _ could refuse to make an award, he did not think that the Labour party had ever anticipated that such a thing would coma about. Tt had always been believed that if a dispute was taken before the court an award would be made, whether it , nroved acceptable to the parties or not. I However, in this' ease the court had thought wise not to do so, and, of course, the recommendations made ac to_ what employers should do, not beinsr binding, were not. worth . the paper they were written on. He had always upheld the Arbitration Court, believinsr that it ronkl do justice in accordance with the evidence brought before it. and he would not now criticise this decision. He knew, however, that it would be a great disappointment to the Labour parry throughout the Dominion to find that it was possible to expend ability, effort, and money in conducting for months a dispute, and the whole matter should then prove abortive. As to what the probable result would be, he was not prepared to say, but, no doubt. as far as Canterbury was concerned, one result would be a greater organised effort and more political ability in the country constituencies.