COMPANY UNION

Southland Times, Issue 20208, 20 June 1927, Page 7

COMPANY UNION

SUCCESS IN AMERICA INDUSTRIAL MISSION’S INQUIRIES COMMUNISM CONDEMNED (By Telegraph—Press Assn. —Copyright.) (Rec. 5.5 p.m.) Washington, June 17. The Australian Industrial Mission’s itinerary during the final month has been as strenuous as during the earlier periods. The evidence has been substantially the same and epnnot affect the impressions gained before the Washington members inspected the Carnegie Steel, Westinghouse Electric and Heinz companies at Pittsburg, and the Goodyear Rubber Company at Akron. Representatives of the Goodyear employees attended the dinner given by the Australians, and testified to the success of the Company Union plan, praising the efforts of co-operation and general goodwill between employers and employees. Mr Grayndler, the chairman, in responding, eulogised the company, saying that if the same square deal were given to workers in Australia, the company could rely upon the support of his union, both industrially and politically. High wages were a success in America, because the people were able to purchase more, increasing the standard of living. The mission was welcomed at Cleveland and at luncheon by the employers. Mr Homer Johnson, Cleveland Attorney, toasting the mission, condemned the extremism of Italy and Russia, and said such doctrines were unacceptable to AngloSaxons. Mr Grayndler, responding, said, in view of his leaving the mission to-morrow for Australia, he expressed appreciation at the unlimited hospitality, and thanked business men and Chambers of Commerce for their kindness. It had always been a pleasure to meet them. Australia's development of the interior was necessarily slow’. Though population was needed, people could not be dumped unless there were jobs available. Australia was committed to compulsory arbitration. No party could survive if it supported abolition. Australia had passed through the barbarous methods of industrial warfare, and if courts had not been established the fighting would have continued. The industrial movement advocated constitutional methods. He believed in the political activities of the Australian unions, but defended American Labour’s non-parti-san political beliefs. If he were an American he would do the same as the Federation of Labour had done. He condemned the Communists. Their beliefs would never apply to Britishers, as Communism was a negation of the Constitutional policy. He believed his union was fightii\g the Communists more vigorously than the employers and the Government. The Communists should be rooted out and returned to countries where they belonged. He believed the mission’s inquiries would be of great benefit to Australia.

Mr McNeil replied that the employers did not agree with all Mr Grayndler had said. He recalled Mr Green’s statement. He did not expect more from the industry than the amount inserted. This had been demonstrated in America to a remarkable extent, and unless capital management and labour worked together chaos resulted. Scientific management in America was impressive. He concluded that Australia knew little about it. Australian industries wanted money, and American industries, not knowing the shortage, Americans would find Australia a great outlet for her surplus dollars.—-A. and N.Z.