WATERSIDE BUREAUX.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 16877, 26 October 1920, Page 3

WATERSIDE BUREAUX.

CRISIS IN SYDNEY. AN ABORTIVE CONFERENCE. By Telegraph—Press Assn.—Copyright. SYDNEY, Oct. 23. Tho conference between the waterr side‘workers and tho overseas shipping companies, arranged by Mr. Huglres' intervention to discuss a proposal for the abolition of tho bureaux established as a result of the 1017 strike, proved abortive.

Sir Owen Cox, acting as spokesman for the shipowners, appealed for collaboration instead of antagonism. Mr. Morris, secretary of the waterside workers welcomed the appeal for amicable negotiations. Ho set out the men’s objection to the bureaux system, and submitted a scheme for appointing a standing joint committee of management representing both sides to control tho waterfront labour, and ho suggested the establishment of a fund subscribed to equally by masters and men, from which the living wage would be made up to those whose earnings fell below that point. Mr. Morris declared tho scheme was not possible so long as the employers upheld’the bureaux. Sir Owen Cox thereupon declared: “If your last word is that we must abolish tho bureaux, and throw tho loyalists to the wolves, then our answer, plainly and firmly, is no. If it has gpt to be a fight, then let us stand up and make it a clean fight.” Mr. Morris said: “If it has got to bo* a fight to the end. 1 hope, when all is over-, we will, like boxers, shake hand*®' Tha»?onforence then ended. Developments as a result of the failure of the conference are anxiously awaited.

The executive of the Transport Workers’ Federation has called a special meeting to discus's the shipowners’ ultimatum. It is feared that if action is taken the whole of the waterside and affiliated" unions will be involved. Tho coal miners also sympathise with the federation’s attitude.—Aus.-N.Z. Cable Assn. WHY SHIPOWNERS ARE FIRM. SYDNEY, Oct. 15. Shipowners, in an official statement concerning the water-front trouble issued to-night, say that on August 9, 1917, members of the Sydney branchy of tho Waterside Workers’ Federation struck work. They refused to handle hospital ships, transports, munitions, and food supplies. They admitted that they had not any dispute of their own, but simply ceased work in sympathy. Tho “sympathy” was extended toother unions already on strike,—not to soldiers at the front, then facing the most critical period of the war. Tho effect of their sympathy with the soldier was to declare hint “black.” The federation members then enjoyed preference of employment in the industry. This preference made them arrogant. They formed their union into a close corporation. Even in .times of labour shortages they would not open their books and admit other working men. The statement then goes on to say that in 1917 they considered themselves the “king pin” of the industrial position, and if they stopped work the wheels of industry would stop and the Government would have to capitulate. The Federal and State Governments called for volunteer workers, and promised through the employers preference of employment. Quotations aro given from the declarations by tho Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) and the statement goes on to say that the abolitionof the bureau would mean the driving off the waterfront of the volunteers and returned soldiers who are not members of the Waterside Workers’ Federation, in spite of the fact that many of these men belong to unions registered under the State legislation. Two instances of assaults upon returned soldiers presenting themselves for work are cited, and the owners assert that the bureau has not been used in any way to oppress waterside workers. They conclude : “The system of allotting the labour hv the bureau is the only fair way by which every man gets a square deal. Tho federation wants to upset this system and readout the old system, whereby certain of their members regularly obtained all tho pickings, and the others could starve. The public may well ask what right the Waterside Workers’ Federation has to demand preference of wharf work with such a past record, and if ah effort is not being made to dupe the Transport Workers’ Federation to assist them in bolstering up a bad case in defiance of the law and the awards of tho Arbitration 000111.”