The Timaru Herald WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 20, 1909. WORKERS' COMPENSATION.

Timaru Herald, Volume XIIC, Issue 13808, 20 January 1909, Page 4

The Timaru Herald WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 20, 1909. WORKERS' COMPENSATION.

The owners of the Reef ton quarry mines hare given way, and work is to be resumed in the mines to-day. They have fought their side of the case until convinced that they could gain no further concession than the. offer of the Government Insurance Department, to take the risk of pneumoconiosis, and then decided to reopen the mines and "rely upon the good sense of Parliament to see justice done." Probably they were influenced to--a considerable extent by the legal opinions that have been obtained" and published, to the effect that clause 10 is practically valueless to the miners, owing to the impossibility of proving a case under it. Assuming that these opinions are correct, they show how complex a question was legislated upon in a perfunctory way. They show too that the opinions themselves conlil not have been given, had not the .whole matter been threshed out so" thoroughly as to bring into prominence the actual nature of the disease and the conditions of its development. Now that this has been done, the attention of Parliament (and of the health authorities) should be directed not only to the terms of compensation, but still more earnestly to the question of prevention: Prevention is better than cure, still better than compensation for disease incurred; and an exhaustive inquiry into the conditions of the quartz miners' work, and means of rendering this work less j noxious, should be set about immediately. It would be much more satisfactory' to the public if " pneumoconiosis " could lie struck out of the statute next session, with the willing consent of all parties, because means had been found and applied for eliminating this disease from among the many ills to which miners are liable. If this can be secured as a result of the recent trouble, miners, mine-owners and the public, at large will have good reason to look upon the loss of work and of profits,- the hurrying to and fro, and the excitement and worry that has been occasioned, as a cheap purchase ol an invaluable blessing. In this connection we must make a lew remarks upon the letter of the Hon. J. Anstey which appears in this issue. First, a brief comment on tlie reference to "Christian . Socialism." In characterising his scheme as socialistic— " Christian socialistic "—we certain had no idea of applying these terms in contempt; quite the. contrary; and the adjective used should have assured all readers that no idea of revolutionary Socialism was implied. Coming to Mr Anstey's scheme, our previous article was based upon an "interview "' with him, in which Mr Anstey was reported to liave said that he thought that every worker meeting with an accident should be paid compensation "out of the consolidated fund", and again, that" the contributions should be collected as part of the general revenue, thus doing away with the expense of offices, agents, etc." The reviewer could not have misunderstood Mr Anstey, because he used the former phrase in a speech in the Legislative Council in J"b' la st - But now in his letter he. writes of "a small but regular payment to a common fund," and likens the payment and relief to the system' under which our Friendly Societies provide for the physical misfortunes of their members. Our suggestion that his scheme would be an extension of the charitable aid law rather than of the workers' compensation law, was based upon his proposal that the "compensation" should be graded to suit the needs of the. injured worker's family rather than be

an amount calculated ou the worker's wages. The married man and'the single man .should not, , lie said, he placed on the same level. This is the principle of the charitable aid law, not of the workers' compensation law. This, however, is a mere side issue, not worth pursuing. The question is a national scheme, of support for injured or diseased workmen ami their, families. This is a question well worth discussion, and Ave may suggest a few points that appear to be difficulties that would have to be met before such a scheme could be accounted satisfactory; and others must present themselves in the course of a full inquiry. At present, there is. some indirect compulsion upon employers to guard against accidents to workmen. Even if they insure their risks, they cannot avoid feeling the responsibility for accidents; the fact that they have to provide against those risks is an annual reminder of them. ■T.f' relieved of financial responsibility by a national system, that feeling would probably tend to disappear, unless-a public opinion grew Up that would strengthen the sense of moral responsibility. At present there is a. financial 'inceiltive to close investigation of every claim for compensation. This, there is reason to fear, would he wanting under a national scheme; for it is notorious that there is little compunction iii demanding money from " the Government," if there is any excuse, real or imaginary, for claiming it. There must surely be some classification of industries- according to degrees of risk, ■ and special graduated taxes levied upon these. Then there is the case (too unpleasant to discuss) of the men who were "born tired," and who would easily become chronic invalids under a . system that assured them of a bare subsistence for themselves, and their families. Generally, we are disposed to look favourably upon Mr Aj.stey's scheme ; but the conditions of its applicatiqn must be so varkuis jmd so minute that it would take n long time to work it out, as a scheme of workers' compensation. Tn spite of Mi' Austoy's protests, it, appears to us that —disregarding terms—it would '• be simpler to approach the matter as an extension of the scheme of charitable aid, the machinery for which is already in existence. It could not he called "workmen's compensation" so far as the assistance was given in cases" of accident suffered or illness contracted out of working hours, and the scheme is proposed to cover the twenty-four hours of the clay. Call it what one may, what is required is sufficient assistance in every case, and the State could not afford more than bare sufficiency, or at all events is not likely to agree.lo provide more. Such a. i scale of payments as has been appended to the Workers' Compensation Act .of hist.session would break down any national scheme.