The Southland Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. MONDAY, MAY 3, 1920. THE RAILWAY SETTLEMENT.

Southland Times, Issue 18811, 3 May 1920, Page 4

The Southland Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. MONDAY, MAY 3, 1920. THE RAILWAY SETTLEMENT.

The Prime Minister has every reason to be pleased at the termination of the railway trouble. Although Mr McArley seems to have striven energetically, and a little obstinately, for a concession committing the government to the retrospective application as from April 1 of last year of any new rates of pay fixed by the commission to be set up he did not hold to that untenable position long, especially as such an undertaking would have put the locomotive men on a belter footing than the other branches of the service. It is evident that there has been a little feeling between the A.S.R.S. and the E.F.C.A. over Mr McArley’s determination to secure retrospective payment even at the cost of continuing the strike. The prospect of a strike carried on by one section of the service clashed with the A.S.R.S. executive which probably’ feared that its own members might not agree to its decision that they should assist in the running of the trains irrespective of the crews manning them. The attitude of the executive of the A.S.R.S. may have contributed to the abatement in Mr McArley’s demands, but in any case it is clear that there was no cohesion between the two societies after the first interviews with Mr Massey. It is probable that the executive of the E.F.C.A., reconsidering the whole position after their secretary’s interview with the Prime Minister, decided that his request was not unreasonable and that the public would not support a continuation of the contest upon the only issue left to them. As a result of this brief dislocation the men have got the thing that they have been looking for for some time—a tribunal that can consider the whole of the railway pay and conditions, quite independently of the General Manager’s last word. It seems to us that this method of handling the railwaymen’s troubles might have been adopted many months ago. It is obvious from Mr Hampton’s moderate statement of the position that the insistence by the government that the General Manager of the Railways should have the “last word” and thus make negotiations with him nothing more than a petition, was the root of the trouble and we are frankly pleased that this position has been abandoned. As Mr Massey has stated, the terms of the settlement provide really for the application of the processes of the Labour Disputes Investigation Act to the railwayman's cases and as this was what the A.S.R.S. men sought before they issued their ultimatum it is clear that they have every reason for satisfaction at the result of their action. The settlement is the only settlement possible at this juncture and we believe that the community will hope that the new tribunal will deal with the points in dispute with as much expedition as possible. The end of the strike is a personal triumph for Mr Massey who, after the earlier delays, due possibly to a failure to realise the seriousness of the discontent in the railway service, tackled the matter energetically and with an evident desire to meet any reasonable requests. Had he been more

definite in his statement after the first interview with Mr McArley his position would have been stronger because it would have been clear that he was keen to settle the immediate trouble on a fair basis. After that interview he was naturally annoyed to find the E.F.C.A. adopting what was an unreasonable attitude; but it is quite clear that the subsequent meeting with the men’s representatives removed the earlier impression and that the discussion and arrangements for the future will do much to put the department and its employees on a better footing. The end of the railway dispute will be hailed with delight by the whole community and everybody will probably be as pleased if the Post and Telegraph officers are able to secure a similar tribunal for the consideration of their grievances.