THE PROBLEM OF INDUSTRIAL UNREST.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume LXIV, Issue 11340, 2 May 1912, Page 2

THE PROBLEM OF INDUSTRIAL UNREST.

(By Rev. James Milne, M.A., in Dunedin Scar.)

One of the great questions of r.Jie clay concerns the maintenance of industrial peace. In every civilised country, where labour is employed and'capital sunk in business, thero is ever the danger, the menace of the strike to paralyse all freedom of labour and of enterprise. The remedy for such state ot affairs is so hard to find as clearly to suggest that the industrial problem is one of those world-wide questions which cannot really be solved by any legislative enactment. Tho binding force of law may be conceived as helpful towards the solution of such, whose true and effective solving, however, pertains to certain elements in human nature itsolf which do not readily adapt themselves to tne best legislation which can bo devised. OiVief amongst these is tho love of liberty, which in the employer leads him naturally to laud freedom of contract, and equally in the man employed construes itsolf into the right to strike. So much is mentinod to show how big tho question is, and how difficult—in fact, how impossible —it is to find its perfect solution through legislative enactment, alone. Yet. that such may bo done in this way is proved from the efficiency of the anti-strike legislation, until recently, in New Zealand. The measures enacted in the Dominion for preserving industrial peace, through Conciliation and Arbitration Courts, are now found inefficient, because they have outlived their usefulness. Tho exact, state of circumstances which they were designed to remedy no longer exists; hence they become obsolete. This in its way indicates that the relationship between Capital and Labour is evolutionary, and cannot bo fixed permanently by any hard-and-fast rule. It shows this relationship must admit of development to suit the ethical ideals and life of the time. Tho rate of wages, e.g., paid for labour to-day m New Zealand contrasts very favourably with that paid, say, a dozen years ago. Why then, it may bo asked, does tho worker still clamour for a higher wage? The answer is: Not solely because he dosires as high a price for his labour as possbile, but very largely that lie makes the demand through sheer necessity, in face of the facts that the price of commodities has risen during tho interval of years, and, further, that the general status of the worker has improved, necessitating for its retention a consequent increase of inconic. Accordingly, tho industrial problem is not solved by the fixing of a minimum wage for the worker by some court or authority representative of Capital and Labour. It is but settled for a time, not finally solved, thus. Nor can it be considered as ultimately solved for any industry by bringing that particular industry under State control. Industrial unrest is, unhappily, not unknown among employees of State railways and among Civil Servants in various departments of State. That is simply because the placing of an industry under public management does not remove it from being influenced by the great body of industrial organisations generally, of which it forms part. To encase a man's nether limbs, e.g., in armour, merely means that the man will not be so vulnerable in those limbs as in other parts of his body. It does uot mean that he may not be wounded where he is so protected, as m modern warfare a missile may be found sufficiently powerful to pierce the strongest armour; and it certainly does not mean that the protected parts of his body are thus to be saved from tho depressing effects felt by tho body generally in consequence of a wound iv some part of it.

So it should be indicated that, while a strike is less liable in an industry under State control than were the industry in private bauds, yet the results are more deplorable, far-reachiug and paralysing to the community generally under tho former tnan under the latter condition. This is because State-con-trolled industries are generally monopolies, and so the better adapted industrially to feel the effect of a strike than were they, say, in several private hands. It means that tho great engine of industrial war can be thus the more directly and drastically applied. In view of these facts, it is befitting that New Zealand, which among the British dominions has been ever foremost to devise legislative measures for the social betterment of the people, should be giving itself seriously to the consideration of what should be done to stay the rising tide of industrial restlessness manifest, as a social menace, even within its own borders. The Auckland Chamber of Commerce, accordingly, lias unanimously passed a resolution requesting the Government to appoint a Royal Commission, consisting of the leading representatives of commercial and Labour interests in the Dominion, to inquire into the matter, witJi a view to finding some adequate solution for the industrial problem of the day. The other Chambers of Commerco have also been asked to co-operate in this requisition to tho Government.

The president of the Auckland Chamber, who introduced the resolution, in referring to the prevalent state of industrial unrest, was inclined to favour tho Canadian plan of settling threatened strikes. This is novel, in as far as it strives to make public opinion the ultimate nudge, as between capital and labour. In Canada, it appears, that in case of threatened differences, the workers are not permitted to strike, nor the employer to lock them out, until the matter in dispute has been referred to tho arbitration of a court consisting of a representative of masters and mon respectively, with a chairman mutually agreed upon. In case of the two representatives failing in such agreement, the Governor for the time being appoints the chairman or president. Thereafter the whole matter in dis-

puto is referred to this court or commission, which endeavours to settle the dispute as between the parties. II however, this cannot bo effected, the wholo evidence ou either side, with the finding of the commission, is published in tho public Press. If, after this has boon douo and within a limited time, the difference is not adjusted, then the employees are at liberty to strike, or tho employers to lock-out, as the case may tie. But the presumption or inference is that neither side should be strong enough to oppose tho arbitrament of public opinion. The plan bus its drawbacks, chief amongst which is the pressure it brings to beta* upon tho employer to fall in with tho finding of tiie court, through consequent necessity, in case of his dissenting, of divulging tho working of his businoss. But, on tho other it contains tho germ of an excellent idea in its reference of the matter to public opinion. This is none other than the encouragement of the growth of a social conscience in the commmuuity. It is an attempt, in its way, to emphasise the old truth, that a man is his brother's keeper. Any such plan, if introduced into Now Zealand, could not fail of at once enlightening and quickening the public conscience as to social righteousness. It should bind yet a heavier responsibility upon the Press for tho maintenance of tho same. But surely in this, other institutions should step in to help the Press. Chief amongst these might be the Church. Not indeed that the clergy and ministers should bring matters of industrial dispute into tho xmlpit. That is the one thing which should never bo done but in meetings of convocation and assembly, at congress and presbytery meetings, wherever ministers .might meet apart from public worship, such matters might well be discussed. J However, there is further word in New Zealand of the introduction of some' system of profit-sharing or co-partnership between employers aud employees, which may be deemed us likewise adaptable to the industrial conditions and social ideas of the Dominion.