‘BUSINESS DEAL”

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 80, Issue 136, 10 June 1937, Page 8

‘BUSINESS DEAL”

POWER OF THE UNIONS HARBOUR BOARD DISPUTE MR. ROBERTS' ALLEGATIONS [ Ter Press Association. J WELLINGTON, June 9. me allegation that there existed in Auckland an crganisation the object of which was to hold up industry and discredit the Labour Government was made by Mr J. Roberts at yesterday’s sitting of the Conciliation Council, when the New Zealand Harbour Boards’ employees’ dispute was under consideration. In the course of some straight talk, following an announcement that the board representatives would not agree to a 40-hour week, Mr Roberts charged the employers’ representatives with a breach of faith and intimated that if the conciliation proceedings failed, the boards would not meet their staffs on the next occasion, but would have to meet the New Zealand Federation of Labour. A statement that the employers could not agree to a 40-hour week was made in the afternoon by Mr V*. J. Gardner, Wanganui, secretary of the Employers’ Association. He stated that the assessors had a meeting on Monday and had further considered the matter during the luncheon adjournment. Mr Roberts: “That’s not conciliation.” He added that the workers could not have held a similar meeting. Mr Roberts said he had been informed that the Harbour Boards were behind the recent objections that had been made in the matter. He alleged the existence in Auckland of the organisation mentioned. “If you are in that kind of push you will have another think coming,” he said. “I did not think it would reach public bodies, but if it is in there well and good. We know where we are going. I was in Auckland the week before last and I was definitely told. If we want a Fascist dictatorship—the British communities prefer a democracy. Mr Gardner: “The assessors on this side know nothing of this body in Auckland.” Mr Roberts: “Will Mr Barnett deny they were down here talking to him last week, because they told me they did?” Mr Gardner: “I don’t think they did.” Mr Barnett, Wellington Board, said he never saw anyone from Auckland or Wellington. Mr Roberts said that on fhe one hand it was suggested that the clerical workers should be organised in their industry, while a move was being made to support an action in the Court that clerical workers should be organised outside their industry. “What side of the fence are you falling off?” he asked Mr Barnett. Mr Barnett replied: “There are a lot of things we could say.” Mr Roberts: “You are not playing the game by these men.” Mr Lane, workers’ assessor, Lyttelton, hoped that a settlement they could be proud of would be brought about. Some blunt expressions were used by the workers’ representatives regarding the refusal of a 40-hour week, and at a later stage Mr Roberts saio his side were of the opinion that the employers wanted to go to Court. “If that is the idea, don’t beg the question,” he said, “just say so. If you come to that decision we will have to make up our minds. We are a young union and there arc a lot of b’g brothers and we may walk into their arms. We established this union mainly at your request. You have committed a serious breach of faith with as. You meet us and you quibble round the whole question and we don’t think you are attempting to meet us. We have the thing you can’t do without—that is, labour power. When you buy cranes you pay the price, but when you are dealing with humans you treat us very much offhand. This is a business deal and it would be a payable thing to treat us in a business way. If you come back as you did with the hours proposal, it is a waste of time.” Mr Roberts said that if there was a second meeting the employers would not meet the present workers’ representatives, they would meet the New Zealand Federation of Labour. “These people might not go to Court at all. We can walk to the Federation of Labour and cut out all these differences in one act. We are keeping our word with you people and you have definitely broken with us.” He warned the boards not to think that the men were in a cleft stick. After the employers had retired, Mr Gardner announced that the assessors thought there was a possibility of an agreement being come to, and the Council adjourned till to-day. ADJOURNMENT SUGGESTED [ fer Tress Association. 1 WELLINGTON, June 9. When the Conciliation Council considering the New Zealand harbour board employees’ dispute resumed this afternoon, a statement was issued byMr. Gardner, on behalf of the employers, denying the union representatives’ suggestion that the employers were stonewalling. The employers' assessors felt that the present proceedings should be adjourned and in she meantime arrangements should be made tor a discussion at each port between representatives of the employers and employees, with the object of setting out in full detail an agreed-upon schedule of conditions, work and other matters relevant to the dispute, such to form bodies of a separate schedule for each port and to be included in a composite agreement.