ARBITRATION OPPOSED

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 793, 14 October 1929, Page 11

ARBITRATION OPPOSED

Court’s Work Under Fire NEW INDUSTRIAL CONFERENCE URGED THE Arbitration Court came under fire at the annual conference of the Associated Chambers of Commerce this morning-. Abolition of the court was suggested by Mr. C. P Agar, acting-president, and a remit from the Wellington Chamber of Commerce suggested the amendment of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act and the calling of another Industrial Conference.

An industrial readjustment by abolition of the Arbitration Court is advocated by Mr. Agar, who, in his opening address to the conference, said "he abolition of the Arbitration Court would increase the prosperity of this country and would result in the more permanent improvement of the country as a whole. As a result of freedom from the Arbitration Court, some workers would remain on their present scale; others who were not producing would possibly have to accept a lower wage or increase their efforts, but the man who was of main value to the community—the man who today was discouraged because of the system of payment for time put in instead of production put out —would be free to put forward his best efforts and to gain the rewards that are possible as a result of greater effort and greater production. SHARE IN BENEFITS The employer, on his part, Would have to recognise that there should be no attempt at “sweating” or lowering the standard of living-, but that as a man increased his production and so reduced overhead, which is the principal braking force of prosperity, he should share in the increased benefits that accrue to the industry or business. This would result, he believed, in a much sounder and happier" state of affairs. The arbitration system was supported by the worker largely because in his mind there obtained a fear of losing what he had already gained, but, on the other hand, the employee suffered because many employers were.afraid to recognise special work and ability, for the reason that once it was recognised it appeared to follow/ automatically that is was adopted as the standard for all in the next award. FARTHER APART

ANOTHER CONFERENCE WANTED DEFECTS IN THE SYSTEM “The arbitration system has forced employers and employees farther and farther apart,” said Mr. H. S. E. Turner, when discussing a remit concerning another National Industrial Conference. The remit came from the Wellington Chamber and was a recommendation to the Government to convene another conference similar to that of April and May, 1928, which was productive of much good. Mr. D. J. McGowan (Wellington), in presenting the remit said that at the last conference unanimity of opinion was reached on many subjects aa a. result of the frank interchange of views, but on one of the most important matters, the amendment of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, the conflict of opinion between employers and workers was not entirely removed. WONDERFUL PROGRESS MADE Wonderful progress was made, however, and the difference existing at the end, although it was sufficient to prevent a joint recommendation being submitted to the Government, was reduced to a minimum. “It has been proved over and over again that it is impossible by law to entirely prohibit workers from withdrawing their labour on occasion, or employers from closing their works, but the proposals have gone as far as possible to provide that such an event will be a remote contingency. I do not believe that the proposals if carried into law would increase industrial trouble. On the contrary, I believe the effect would be a better understanding by both employers and workers of each others’ necessities, because of the added responsibility they would have to shoulder. Our industries would be given an opportunity to develop, which today is denied them.” HARD NUT TO CRACK Mr. Turner, who seconded the remit, said that the arbitration system was a hard nut to crack, but that the conference could crack it. In bringing the employers and the employees together, the last conference had ac-

complished a great deal. A hard and fast wage-fixing system was no good: the opposing parties must get closer together. The employees must recognise that they were partners. "What they do not seem to realise/’ said Mr. Turner, “is that we cannot have progress in industry without their progress too.” He said that, one of the most noticeable examples of where both sides had come together was the Shearers’ Award. This was based on a formula which in itself was based on the price of wool. This award would not have been made, but for the industrial conference. “The arbitration system is wrong, uneconomic and a bar to progress,” he concluded. The remit was carried. One of the wonderful things accomplished in the 192 S conference was the reconciliation of the views of all sections of the employers. The defects in our present arbitration system were: (1.) It cannot be compulsory since it cannot be enforced upon organised workers. (2.) It is incapable of providing for special conditions in industry because like every other legal system it must lay down on general grounds definite standards for its own guidance and can make no exceptions from those standards. (u.) It removes the responsibility for the proper development of industry from the employer on the one side and the workers on the other, and vests it in a tribunal which has no power to enforce its decisions. (-1.) It maintains a disparity between the country and the' town standard of living and so prevents the adjustment of costs in secondary industries to the purchasing power of the primary producers.

The remedy proposed by the employers was the retention in the system of the present machinery for bringing the parties to industrial disputes together in conciliation afitd the substitution of optional arbitration for compulsory arbitration. It has been found that the present system was a failure when enforcement of the court’s awards on the workers was . necessary against their will, and when industry had to contend with difficult circumstances. Many New Zealand industries were in that position today. They were being carried on under awards of the Arbitration Court which had been in operation, with variations, for a number of years, and they contained all the provisions which the court had come to regard as its standard provisions and from which it had repeatedly stated it would not depart. MEETING DEPRESSION “We have had experience of an attempt under the arbitration system to meet a period of depression,” continued Mr. McGowan. “It was tried in 1922, when the court, by special legislation, was given power to adjust wages upward and downward in accordance with cost of living figures. This legislation was in force for two years and the court made several adjustments. The first was a reduction of 5s a week in the minimum wage. Some industries applied it without necessity; others needed a bigger alteration, but could not obtain it. A general alteration is not what is wanted. Our proposal would maintain the general standard ot living, but it would enable cases of necessity in industry to be specially provided for by the parties most concerned.