EMPLOYERS' ASSOCIATION.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 10235, 18 August 1911, Page 4

EMPLOYERS' ASSOCIATION.

ANNUAL MEETING. The annual dinner and meeting of the Canterbury Employers' Association was held last evening at Messrs Aschoff's Tea Rooms. There was a large attendance, about one hundred persons being present. Mr J. A. FrosEick, president of the Association, was in the chair, and there were also present the members of the executive and Messrs R. Chisholm (president of the Dunedin Employers' Association), J. C. Thomson (an ex-president of the EmB layers' Federation), John Deans and i, Jones.

PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS. The president, in moving the adoption of the report and balance sheet, said that it was nearly twenty-one years since the Canterbury Employers' Association was founded. Among the twenty-four members forming the first executive, ten had died, Messrs W. Boag, P. Cunningham, John Deans, P. Duncan, C. Ensor, W. Chrystall, J. Goss, G. G. Stead, C. W. Turner a«d J. W. Overton, everyone of them a good citizen, who always undertook cheerfully his share of any public work fchich had for its object the advancement and prosperity of the province. There were many others, too, who had Stood shoulder to shoulder in the dark tfays of 1890-1891, when the great urmy of fair-minded and intelligent urorkers of the country blindly followed the call of its angry leaders. The great advance made in education in Rew Zealand and in other countries during the past twenty years had brought about a genuine and laudable desire on the part of the adult population for the exercise of their full Tights as citizens, and for which education had qualified them; that demand was being gradually conceded all the world over, and in New Zealand it was fully realised. All might have been -well had it not been for the blight of fevolutionary "Socialism. No country tad been altogether free from its operation, and notwithstanding its protestations, revolutionary Socialism struck its first and most deadly blow at the apery class it professed to assist, and upon.whom its very existence depended. One prominent Socialist in England was reported to have said only B, few days ago that he urged the use ipf a mightier weapon than all the Dreadnoughts of England, viz., a strike against handling the foodstuffs arriving in England. " Here is a type of man , who has travelled at the expense of the men upon whom the severity of the blow he recommends would first ' fall. The poorest are always the first , ' to suffer, the rich the last. This stupid talk about the idle rich has practically no application in this country, and certainly none whatever with regard to the members of the Employers' Association. "We hear a good deal nowadays about the nationalisation of industries, advocated by the Socialists as a brand new idea, but there is nothing new about it. The experiment made in .1848 by the French Government to establish national workshops was fatal, although persisted in until the people, Btarved and deluded, rose in insurrection, and there was a failure at Brest in 1871, when socialistic principles were applied to the management of municipal , affairs, resulting in strikes in almost every trade; the funds of the municipality were depleted, and the town was reduced to the verge of bankruptcy. The same results have obtained in England wherever the principles of Socialism have been applied. 'America has had a ar experience, so ha(S (Australia. Wlliam Lane's . scheme to found a colony of free men and women ended in failure. He tried a second time, but again failed, as all such experiments must end, because! whilst they may be theoretically beautiful, they are fundamentally un- . sound. Our interests aTe indentical with those of our employees, 95 per cent of whom, if left alone by the Jneddlesome revolutionary Socialists and professional agitators, would certainly give us a fair day's work for a fair day's pay, which we all acknowledge to be their right. "There will arise in the future in New Zealand, as in the past, serious differences of opinion between em-' ployers and workers, which must be adjusted. lam prepared to give great credit to the Hon W. P. Reeves and the Hon R. J. Seddon and other legislators, who, eighteen years ago, realised that education was bringing a new form of unionism into existence, that the methods and policy of Unions composed . largely . of educated men would be altogether different to the methods of the Unions of past days, l whose members were comparatively

speaking, uneducated. The Arbitration "Act has not accomplished all that was .anticipated by its promoters, and for this partial failure the employers are in no small measure to blame. The preamble of the original Act clearly Stated that it was an Act to encourage the formation of Unions. It failed because it did not immediately cause the formation of unions of employers, and for two years after the passing of the Act .there was only one union of employers registered. Thus an opportunity was afforded to the extreme Socialistic section of the Labour Party to ask for amendments year after year, almost unchallenged. The amendments thus made in the Act were, consequently, always in one direction—imposing further and still further restrictions upon industries. Indeed, for about four years after the passing of the Act, the Employers' Association of New Zealand, had, for all practical Surposes, ceased to exist. Members of 'arliament exhibited the same indifference, being more concerned in obtaining appropriations of money for. public works in their respective districts, than fn criticising Labour legislation. Tt Is, indeed, comparatively only of recent date that employers in New Zealand have made any organised attempt to induce the Government to amend Labour Acts, so that the interests of all parties should be fully nrot-ected and the industries left free to develop. The question between capital and Labour to-day is not so much the amount of jvages a man should be paid, as it is ' \rhether that wage is a fair proportion of the earnings of the business." There were' a few employers who said that the Arbitration Act should be repealed. In his opinion it never should be, or ever would be, repealed. New Zealand labour laws most certainly needed amendment in the direction of greater individual and personal freedom, . and when those laws were placed on a fair and equitable basis, public opinion would insist upon a strict observance of all their provisions. The employers in New Zealand had so far set a good example by a loyal ac- . eeptance of the decisions of the Court, but they must recognise that the consolidation of Labour was going on. There, was now no line of demarcation between town and country eo far as Labour was concerned. Nothing could prevent the organisation of labour in country districts, and no attempt on the part of employers should be made to stop the organisation, because it was the workers' right, recognised by law; but it was also the employers'

right to organise, and he would now say to every farmer in New Zealand : " Be ready to meet any emergency " ; it was the surest way to secure industrial peace. One of the difficulties confronting the farmer in the immediate future was that the organisation of the farm workers would in all probability be directed from the town by men who had little or no personal knowledge of those special difficulties with which the farmer had to contend. The farmers' organisation, therefore, should be complete and effective, but it could not be either complete or effective if it were separated from the general body of organised employers. The great problem to be solved in the_ immediate future would be to maintain a fair ahd equitable balance between the payers and the receivers of wages. Rut largely in consequence of the apathy of the employers on the one part, and the vigorous activity of a small section of workers 011 the other part, Labour laws had been used as machines for the oppression, of employers and the manacling of the industries_ without materially improving the position of the general workers. The industries of the country had not crrown, and could not, under existing conditions, grow in proportion to the increase of population.

"'Wc have had too many socialistic experiments in this country; a marked improvement could soon be made if those who control the great agricultural pursuits would unite with those who control the manufacturing industries, the commercial and distributing business of the country, all of which are more or less interdependent. The position of the genuine worker would be improved, and the position ot the employer made more secure. The Employers' Federation is not a machine to fight Labour, lho workers in New Zealand lia.ve secured better conditions and better pa.y than their fellow-workers obtain in the older countries, but the position of employers is not as good in NewZealand as in the older countries, because the interest oil capital invested m industrial enterprises was, generally speaking, not as large in New Zealand as obtains in similar industries elsewhere. New Zealand is essentially a country of workers, comparatively; we have no idle rich. The basis of the great prosperity in New Zealand has been economic, and not political, the natural resources of the country being very_ great, the damaging effect of political interference has not been so disastrous as it would otherwise have been; but the time has arrived when the country must be freed from the baneful influence of ultra-socialistic legislation. The awards of the Arbitration Court have become so complex and varied that it is of little wonder that the Court itself is sometimes not able to reconcile one judgment another. The Court has accepted the responsibility of making forty-three variations in the question of preference to unionists. The Court would never have dared to decree that"any worker should be permitted to work only for such employer or employers as * were specially mentioned in a particular award, and yet the Court has not hesitated to decree that the employers must only employ such person or persons as are named in a particular award. Such discrimination appears to me to' strike at the very root of British liberty. Unions may be strong enough and selfish enough to enforce it, but it should never receive legal sanction. Notwithstanding that the Legislature has clearly defined the question of holidays in the Factories Act and in the Shops and Offices Aot, yet out of a total of 360 awards in the dominion we find that the Court has made twenty-four different conditions relating to holidays. "There is no question of greater national importance than the proper employment of the :younger members of the community. I believe that the greatest care should be exercised by the State in seeing that the young worker is suited, both mentally and physically, to the trade in which he seeks to be employed. First employment is frequently a question of circumstances, in which neither the qualification nor the natural inclination of the youth is in any way taken into consideration. The Court of Arbitration has, in ' my opinion, dealt with the question of apprenticeship from an entirely wrong basis, which does not and cannot make for the efficiency of the coming generation of workers. The authorities should recognise that the younger members of the community have rights independent of any policy, which for the time being may be adopt-, ed by unions of adult workers. The awards of the Court have in reality been simply the making of a more or less unsatisfactory bargain with the adult workers." There are no fewer than fifteen different rules as to how wages of workmen shall be computed. All wages should legally be computed by the hour, but it might be open to the employer in special cases to make a contract by which both employer and employee would agree to an extension of the statutory obligation. "The Court of Arbitration is alone responsible for the unsatisfactory state of affairs. I believe that much of the blame rests upon the employers of the dominion, but I do say that the judicial training of the Court should have caused it to have sounded a note of warning much earlier than it did." In seconding the adoption of the report and balance sheet, Mr H. Pearce congratulated the president on the address he had delivered. Mr Pearce said that he was strongly of the opinion that it would be a grave mistake to repeal the Arbitration Act, as it had done a great amount of good for the employer and the employee; but whilst employers had done their best to comply with the awards of the Court, the Unions, if their demands were not granted, obeyed the awards reluctantly, an'd in many cases gave notice to cancel their registration. He thought the Court at present was wrongly constituted. It had a Judge of the Supreme Court as chairman and a representative for each side. A Judge might make a good chairman, but the representatives should have an intimate knowledge of the particular trade for which the award was sought. It was impossible that any representative could have a knowledge of the details of the many different trades that took cases to the Court. If the representatives were more conversant with each particular trade, the awards would be more workable and would give greater satisfaction to both sides. If the employer could get into closer touch with the men, excluding the revolutionary Socialist, he was confident that a much better understanding would be arrived at, and both sides would derive greater benefit. In connection with the minimum wage question, the unions should not lose sight of the fact that by forcing wages beyond the point that could be stood by any particular industry they were risking the capital of the employer, but also the chances of employment. In conclusion Mr Pearce said that he differed from the president in the matter of preference to unionists., as the members of the union who had had to do the

whole work in connection with getting better wages ill any particular trade were entitled to more consideration than the outside worker. If the employer and worker could meet and fairly discuss the different matters in dispute the result would be greater confidence in each other, increased trade, better wages and a pleasing advance in all branches of the industries of the dominion. (Applause.) The report and balance sheet were adopted. Tne following executive was elected for the ensuing year:—Messrs H. D. Acland, W. C. Aiken. S. P. Andrews, A. W. Beaven, R. C. Bishop, G. H. Black well, G. T. Booths E. C. Brown, T. Bunting, T. E. Danks, K. F. England, J. A. Frostick, W\ Goss, John Hall P. L. Hallenstein, J. R. Haywara, W. Hayward, F. W. Hobbs, F. E. Hyman, A. W. Jamieson, A. Kaye, H. Laing, N. L. Macbeth, S. H. Mad-, dren, W. Moreley, A. Peppier, A. Smith, F. H. Steel, J. N. Tayler and another. SOCIAL INSURANCE. Mr H. D. Acland, the vice-president, 6aid that the introduction of Mr Lloyd George's Bill for social insurance into the House of Commons undoubtedly marked an epoch not only in industrial legislation but also in the industrial and social history of the British nation. The first Factories Aot was passed in 1802, and the competitive system so necessary for progress was left without any regulation to deal with the counterbalancing evils of human nature. There were three courses open to a community regarding the industrial and social system:—(l) The principle of laissez faire or the teachings of the Manchester School. That method meant practically no factories Acts, unrestricted competition between classes and leaving the strong in a position when the opportunity arises to oppress the weaker. Those who had examined the social history of England knew the evils of the Manchester School. (2) Regulation of industry and competition so as to prevent the weaker from being crushed and to give to every person a fair chance of success. The second sj'stem left competition unchecked. (3) the third' course was " Socialism," or the elimination of competition by the community as a whole taking over all the means of production and exchange in every industry. In New Zealand they had experimented without any very definite principles with both the second and third methods. "The riddle for the statesman to solve," he said. " arising out of these two great questions is how to provide for the people protection against their wants, comfort for their lives and at the same time secure the abolition of the evils of the competitive system and of the struggle for existence without checking progress. The basic principle underlying social insurance requires all persons and all classes in the community to be protected by the whole community against misfortune to them as either classes or individuals if the strength of the community is to continue. It must be admitted that in England the economic position of the ordinary workers is such that practically no old people and few workers can by their own efforts make suit- ' able provision against unemployment. Thoughtful people must admit the urgent necessity for inquiring into present economic conditions. Even if agreement cannot be arrived at, still support should be given to those who are prepared to attempt a praotical method of improving the condition of the great mass of the people and equalising the distribution of the good things of this world. Compulsory in- ; sura nee for sickness merely offers a device to save people against themselves. Social insurance has been attempted in some form or other in most civilised countries, notably in New Zealand, by old age pensions, but here they are considered a gift and not a ; right earned by personal contributions and they are not obtained until sixtyfive. It has been left to Mr Lloyd George to make a deliberate and bold attempt to solve the riddle. The Bill brought into the House of Commons by him is entitled " A Bill to provide for insurance against loss of health and for the prevention and cure of sickness and for insurance against unemployment and for purposes incidental thereto." The magnitude of the objects almost appals one, for it must be admitted to be a bold and courageous attempt to wrestle by means of a constructive policy with the two great ■

questions which trouble nearly every statesman, namely, sickness and unemployment. The Bill, which is really two Bills in one, is divided into two, (1) sickness insurance, (2) unemployment insurance. The question which most really concerns New Zealand employers is that of insurance against sickness, as unemployment is limited to few deserving people and to practically no classes in this country.

| '' .Even at present the working classes : in England are fairly well insured in ! certain respects ~~ (1) There are ' 4,200,000 industrial policies against i death; (2) there are under 6,000.000 ; persons with policies ag!>«»ist sickness and medical aid with Friendly Societies; (3) there are 1,400,000 persons in- | sured against unemployment, but only I one-third or one-fourth of these are in i the trades where the evil is most rile, j The working of the scheme is proI posed to be placed in the hands of approved societies, and these will be Friendly Societies and trade unions, but subject to State supervision, in principle industrial democracy is to be compelled, in harmony with employers and the taxpayers, to contribute to its own salvation and to provide firstly against invalidity find secondly against recurrent unemployment through depression in trade or seasonal disadvantages. Every employee of either sex having less than £l6O per annum must contribute to and will, of course, benefit- under the fund, and it is estimated that 15,000,000 people will be insured against sickness and will contribute The Bill hardly seems fair to women, who must insure during their healthy years and drop out on marriage, and domestics do not seem quite fairly treated, as they can receive no benefitother than medical benefit unless their employers turn them out of their houses. There appears to be no provision for small shopkeepers, hawkers, contractors, wives and daughters working for husbands and fathers, and many others. It was proposed that the scheme should come into force at onco, but later information shows that the consideration of the measure has been postponed to the autumn. "It is proposed to put aside £1,500,000 to enable local authorities to deal with that dread disease, consumption. Not only does the scheme provide for building sanatoria, but £1,000,000 a year will be available for their upkeep. No extra contribution will be required. If the scheme failed in any other way but succeeded in stamping out tuberculosis, there can be little doubt that the benefits to the nation from the economic point of view alone would justify the measure. \oluntary contributors are to be allowed, and * will probably consist of small tradesmen, men without definite employers, or who, after employment, work for themselves and small contractors. " These must pay a rate apportionate to their age when joining. The machinery proposed for dealing with unemployment is the Labour Bureau system now in vogue in England; only two groups of trades are to benefit at present, visa., the building and engineering trades. These include construction of railways, harbours, bridges, etc., and shipbuilding. For the 6s per week for builders and 7s per week for engineers is promised. The employee is to contribute the employers the same, and the State onethird of the total cost. No payment will be made for the first week of unemployment or where unemployment is due to misconduct, lock-outs or strikes. The estimated contributions lor the first year are £24,500,000, of which employers and employees are to contribute £22,000,000 and the taxpayers the balance, but by 1916 the contribution of the taxpayers will increase by £4,500,000. Of these funds, about £21,750,000 will go to the sickness fund and the balance, £2,750,000, to the unemployment fund. " The medical profession has made considerable opposition of a serious nature, and this must be appeased, as upon its loyal co-operation the success of the measure depends. Compulsory insurance is said in Germany to encourage thrift, manliness and self-reli-ance, and the system is alleged to be self-respecting and to bring self-satis-faction and content. But it is also' asserted by responsible persons that the compulsory German system has proved a costly inefficient failure; that, whilst designed to replace pauperism and charity, it is itself pauperism in another xorm; that it has encouraged bureaucratic formalities; that it has become a hot-bed of fraud. These defects appear to be in part due to administration, as the original idea was that of co-operation, but it is said to have been impossible to administer on these lines, and in consequence that it has developed into an ordinary charity. In New Zealand, amongst other difficulties to be overcome, is the sparse population in country districts, and the distances to be covered by the doctors would make it impossible for' them to go to the patients. Certain of the benefits proposed could, however, be administered without these questions arising. A determined attempt to fight tuberculosis could bo tried, with but few questions involving human nature arising. In the interests of local employers and local industries, it would appear to be only fair that all imported goods competing with local-made goods that have paid the tax should be subject to a similar tax, and that such oould be part of the State's contribution to the fund." INDUSTRIAL DEPRESSION.

Mr J. B. Laurenson, speaking on "Industrial Depression," said:—The want of life and progress in many manufacturing industries was causing serious thought to manufacturers generally. The undue rise in the cost of raw material and labour, if a manufacturer ran his business on safe lines, has up-to-date machinery and organisation, could only have a temporary effect, because the increased cost would, of necessity, be passed on. Any country to be truly progressive, self-contained, and independent, must develop all the industries, side by side, which the many needs of the people demanded. One needed only to refer to the United States or Germany, for proof that an industry, to be successfully developed, must be protected. In New Zealand such a course was even more necessary, seeing the protection which was given to labour and the primary industries. He quoted figures showing the advance in Germany by protection, and added that the manufacturing industries of the dominion had not received that attention from the Government that their importance demanded. The constant demand for revenue might be a very expensive way of raising money. To the employers and employees of New Zealand the action of taxing raw material for the manufacture of agricultural and other machinery, and allowing figs in free, was grotesque. With constant and profitable employment neither the-worker nor the employer would object to a penny a pound on dates or rice. The settlement of people on the land was a good object, but they had in many cases paid too high a pricefor it, and one was forced to the conclusion that some of the Government's land-acquiring energy could bo much more profitably directed to fostering those industries which employers and employees alike are well equipped to prosecute.

Brief addresses were also given by

Messrs Chisholm, Thomson, J. Deans and K. F. England. A vote 'of thanks to the speakers, proposed by Mr A. Ivaye and seconded bv Mr J. R. Hayward, was carried, and also a vote of appreciation and thanks to the Advisory Board in "Wellington, proposed l>3 r Mr F. V\ r . Mobbs, seconded by Air F. C\ Brown.