ARBITRATION COURT

Southland Times, Issue 20201, 11 June 1927, Page 5

ARBITRATION COURT

SHOULD IT BE ABOLISHED? DISCUSSION AT FARMERS’ CONFERENCE. The question as to whether or not the Arbitration Court should be abolished was discussed at the annual conference of the Southland Provincial branch of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union at Invercargill yesterday. Remits in favour of abolishment were forwarded by several branches of the union, but after discussion a modified decision, favouring the setting up of a committee of inquiry on the matter, was arrived at. The remits were as follows: — Lumsden Branch—That this conference is of the opinion that the Arbitration Act as at present administered is pressing heavily on farmers and should be abolished. Wyndham Branch —That this conference considers that the Arbitration Court Act is arbitrary in its application, unjust in principle, and that in the interest of farmers generally it should be abolished. Knapdale Branch —That this conference favours the abolition of the Arbitration Court, but as an alternative suggests that the Hon. Minister of Labour and Mr Justice Frazer be asked to fix the cost of production. Southland Executive—That the Industrial, Conciliation, and Arbitration Act be amended thus:— (1) The preference to unionists clause to be deleted. (2) Provision be made for the hearing of a third party such as the N.Z. Farmers’ Union, at the Arbitration Court, in all cases affecting the primary producers of the Dominion. (3) When an award is under discussion, its effect on the industry concerned be carefully considered. The secretary (Mr A. L. Adamson) stated the executive’s recommendation that the first three remits be deleted in favour of the executive’s, but unanimity on the matter could not be reached and the consideration of the Lumsden remit was proceeded with.

Mr. W. H. Ward commended this remit to the conference, saying that his branch considered that the farmers were not in a position to pay the rates of wages laid down by the Arbitration Court. With wages going higher and higher the country would soon be overrun by people who were used to a low standard of living, and wages rates would have to be debased in the interests of the Dominion workers themselves. Mr. R. Arnott seconded, saying that he was heartily in favour of abolition. Every award made by the Court went back on the farmer in the long run. Industrialists cared little about the awards made as they simply passed the burden on, the farmer eventually bearing the brunt. Mr. R. Sim contended that it was possible that the Court could be amended to meet, the needs and approval of all sections of the community, while Mr P. Arnott also agreed that they should not go the length of suggesting the abolishing of the Court. There were two sides to the question and the farmers should remember that the Court had accomplished a great deal of good for many of their fellow citizens. He moved an amendment that the executive’s remit be approved. Mr. D. Dickie spoke against the Lumsden remit saying that he was opposed to it as framed. Proceeding, he quoted from Dominion Executive discussions on the Arbitration Court in which Mr. Polson (Dominion President.) had voiced the fear that it was useless expecting the Government to go to the length of abolishing the Court altogether. “We have some chance of being listened to if we ask for one or two reasonable amendments,” said Mr Dickie, “but we have no chance of getting anywhere if we ask for the total abolition.” Mr. G. Earwaker disputed the contention of the Wyndham branch that the Arbitration Court was “arbitrary in its application and unjust in principle,” but Mr T. Major urged that the time had come when the farmer would have to take a definite stand against the heavy loads that were piled on to him.

Mr. G. R. Herron contended that the Arbitration Court sheltered the inefficient worker and placed him on the same level as the capable man. Mr. P. Arnott’s amendment was put to the conference after Messrs Walker and R. Arnott had replied, and was lost on a show of hands. Mr. R. Sim then moved a further amendment as follows: —That this conference strongly supports the suggestion of the Hon. W. Downie Stewart, for the necessity for a committee of inquiry being set up immediately to inquire into the wages system of the Dominion, the workings of the Arbitration Court and the effects of its workings upon production. Mr. H. G. Bacon seconded. The vote resulted: For the amendment 27; against the amendment 24.