NO STRIKE PREDICTED.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 12784, 30 October 1919, Page 3

NO STRIKE PREDICTED.

POSSIBLE ATTEMPT TO FORCE EMPLOYERS’ HANDS. Inquiries in Labour circles in Christchurch fail to elicit any definite information as to the intentions of watersiders at Lyttelton, and as far as can be gathered it appears that a succession of “ rests ’’ has been agreed on, as a kind of modified go-slow policv. The watersiders protest that they have done nnth strikes as a clumsy weapon, and they express resentment at the suggestion that a “ rest” should bo regarded as a strike. There is an impression abroad that the new system is intended as an inducement to the employers to adopt the co-operative system of’labour on the wharves, in accordance with the proposals of the watersiders, but this is still a matter of conjecture. MR MASSEY’S DECLARATION “WE MUST 1 FACE THE SITUATION.” [EkOU Ouß CORRESPbNDSJfT.] WELLINGTON, October 29. te The gravity of the situation consequent to the development of the coal crisis, threatening the extension of the trouble to the waterfront and transport workers, was voiced in the House this afternoon. Mr Ell raised the question by asking the Prime Minister just how matters stood, and if he intended to do anything towards trying to effect a settlement. “If those workmen won’t do something to help their fellow workingmen and keep down the cost of living cannot the Prime Minister interj veneP These men are punishing ' all other working men’s homes in the coun--1 try,” declared Mr Ell. The member added, *fT would also like to know if tlio coal ‘miners are, underpaid: or not. If they are we ought, to know iL Are there such conditions; existing that it is our duty to remedy Them ?" Mr Massey agreed that if the miners were, underpaid it was Parliament’s duty* toj see that -they were properly paid. Tie was quite willing to submit that: side of .the question to any: impartial tribunal, whether , the . Arbitration Court, Supreme Court or any other set of men." If the conditions were unsatisfactory let something be done to improve them. The Prime Minister went on to say, that he was kept regularly informed of what was taking place. 1 , The present position ■ was extremely unsatisfactory and was’ becoming intolerable. Industries were how being kept going with the utmost difficulty. Large quantities of coal had been imported in ships ■--.which should have been used: for other.freights.- Unfortunately this trouble had’'occurred at a, time; .when he was so fully occupied withr the'; business of Parliament and,-the. affairs of the country that he

, was quite-unable to give it the attention it deserved. ' LETTER. TO THE MINERS. “I don’t know whether I could do any .good even if I had time to devote to it,” added Mr Massey, who proceeded to read a letter he sent last Saturday to the secretary of the Miners’ Federation respecting the latest development. In that letter the Prime Minister desired to know definitely if the miners intended to accept the employers’ last offer or if, us an alternative? they could file a dispute in the Arbitration Court. - He'pointed cut to them that among other suggestions the miners had rejected was his recommendation that a ballot of the "men should be taken on the question of accepting the coal owners’ last offer, which. in- ‘ chicled willingness to pay increased i wages forthwith. His letter ended, I “In justice, to the citizens oi the Do- j minion, I would .ask that a more sen-1 sible and reasonable attitude he adopted and the difficulties brought to an! end.” j The Prime Minister explained, in; answer to an inquiry from the Labour j benches, that he had also .vent a com-; munioation to the employers. I Mr Holland: Couched m similar I terms? I ’ Mr Massey: The position is different • from the point of view of the employ- i ers. . . ’ ’ ! Mr Holland: You assume that the; miners are wrong and the employers! fight. | Mr- Massey: My opinion is that the j miners are wrong. The miners ap- j plied for an increase of wages, and at I a conference two or three months ago the owners offered a very considerable increase. It made an increase of several shillings a day. At that time ' it was shown by various reports submitted that the miner's were earning approximately a pound per day. Mr Holland: Out of which they had to pay for explosives. The Prime Minister went on to say that he was given to understand on good authority that the increase asked for by the men would increase ' the price of coal by £1 per ton. Hb, for one, could not accept such an increase in the cost of living as was asked for. Mr Holland: Ho you believe that statement? Mr Massey: If the hon. gentleman wants to make further inquiries he is welcome to do so. The coal mine owners take up the position that they have made their offer and will stand by it. “THIS THING HAS TO BE FACED.” Mr Holland: Are you going to back them ? Mr Massey: Here is a plain statement of the position drawn up prior to this difficulty. I say again this thing has to be faced. It simply can’t go on, Mr Holland: You are trying to precipitate a strike. Mr Parr: The public is “ fed up” with it. Mr Massey went on to declare that even if it cost a good deal of money the country would have to face the question of carrying on industry properly and securing a supply of coal for the people. Nobody was more anxious than himself to bring about a satisfactory settlement, but the outlook was not by any means good. “We may ho involved in serious trouble before long,” continued the Prime Minister, “ and if it does come we will have to deal with iv. Wo have to asseit the rights of the people to govern New Zealand in their way and not be governed by a minority.” Mu Holland; In the employers’ way. Mr Massey; A s soon as I get a little time—perhaps to-morrow—l will , inquire into it on my own account and make up my mind what is the right thing to do, and make a statement to the House. Mr Holland advocated calling a compulsory conference of the parties to the dispute and, failing an agreement, tliat' tlie Government should put into operation ■The Industries Committee’s recommendation regarding coal mines, this, he believed, was the. only solutiou ol- the trouble.' M.r Massey; l a m not prepared to say that the Industries Committee’s proposal is a solution. I know it was opposed by the men in England, thou Mi many mine owners would have been glad to accept it. ATTITUDE OP EMPLOYERS’ FEDERATION. ) [Pbr Press Association.] WELLINGTON, October 29. lu connection with the coal mines dispute and the action of the waterside workers in refusing to discharge oversea coal cargoes, the following resolution was unanimously adopted at the meetrug of the Employers’ Federation In the interest of the general community, this annual meeting of the Employers Federation approves of the recent action taken by the Coalmine Owners Association, and of the present action of the employers of waterside labour. ft was also decided to publish a statement m connection with the matter, flus statement, alter outlining the course of the mines dispute and pointing out that after a protracted conference with representatives of the Miners Itederation, the mineowners were compelled to intimate that it was impracticable to enter into a national agreement owing to the varying conditions operating in the Dominion mines, proceedslt is emphasised that the principal demands made by the miners’ representatives are vital questions of principle which _ have now been raised both in the United States and at Broken Hill, in New South Wales. In both these places the employers have felt, it necessary to face all the losses and ,evils of protracted strikes rather than give way in standing for the maintenance of the contract and piecework system.' The coalowners are fighting for the retention of a system vital to all' industries, and which, until human nature becomes radically altered, is essential to any reduction in the costs of production, and, therefore, in the cost of living. Moreover, it enables the individual miner to gain the fullest advantage from the abilities Nature has given him. The interests of the general community appear to demand that the employers of coal miners should not accede to any further demands of the Miners’ Federation. The • frequent breaches of industrial agreements and awards by both the coal minors and waterside workers, and the methods of j direct action adopted by these sections of workers, constitute a grave national j danger and are a deliberate disregard of constitutional means of settling industrial disputes. Such actions are calculated to inflict serious injury upon both primary and secondary industries, which will in ' turn fall with great severity upon the workers of the Dominion generally, owing to the stoppage of work and restriction of national development. The New-''.Zealand' Employers’ ; Federation, therefore, believing it is essential to prevent these tactics being continued, and that the New Zealand Coalmine Owners’ Association and : employers of waterside .labour are adopting the best moans of combating snob desires to assure both these bodies of employers of approval and support in the very difficult position in which they are placed.”