ARBITERS OR LEGISLATORS

Waikato Times, Volume 94, Issue 14767, 5 October 1921, Page 7

ARBITERS OR LEGISLATORS

CAN THE ARBITRATION SYSTEM SURVIVE? A QUESTION OK INDUSTRIAL FUNCTION. When the original Industrial and Conciliation Act was passed in 1894. it

was staled to bo "an Ac| in encourage the formal ion of unions." There rin be little doubt thai Hie A.-l has dorm much in Hie way of foster-in™ unionism. The first advocates of the Act had probably nn conception that, unions rnichl ho so encouraged In heroine in lime to regard themselves as the

masters of the country. I >ii!in.'- r recent limes of good trade several unions of workers undoubtedly came to the conclusion thai. Ilioy were strong' enough lo dictate. From I"■ illu- unions form-

ed to protect, their members' particular trade interests, they have lakon on Ihe character of organisation lo enthrone class control and propagate the theory and practice of socialist, syndicalist and. lo a degree, communist doctrines. This is an extieme departure from the industrialism of the earlier period. Recent, events such as Ihe bonus question, Ihe reduction in shearers' rates of pay and the resignation of Ihe workers' representative (Mr .T. A. McOullough) have brought fully to light the spirit in which many of the workers' unions arc regarding the Act. They seem lo look upon it as an instrument 'for their special proteclinn and advantage. Fo long as the Court awarded increases of pay and

shortening of hours, they would uphold it: hut when, owing to changed economic, conditions, the Court ceased tn grant such concessions to the wor-

i kers, if was denounced as an enemy of j labour, the tool of Ihe. capitalist, and Iso forth. Tins denunciation of the Court from the workers' unions side is added to hy some Farmers' Unions and private employers calling out for the repeal of the Act, tiecau.se of their distinct preference for individual freedom nf contract. With these attacks being made from both the employers' side and the workers, though only from sections Of each, the question is being asked by many, whether our industrial arbitration system can survive? The Function of Arbitration. In our opinion n very much greater danger exists owinc to carelessness nf Parliament in loading ttie Arbitration Court wilh functional duties which transcend its power of fulfilment. To give Ihe Court, work which il cannot possibly accomplish is a likely method of presenting it in the light of failures, possibly tn an extent which may destroy public confidence and wreck the whole system. At the time of its inception, the Arbitration Act was designed to approximately perform these three functions for Ihe common good: (a) To protect Ihe workers by prevention fif sweating conditions and fixing of fair standards of employment; (b) to protect, the employers by settling working conditions for stated limes, and giving security to the fair minded employers by prevention of undercutting on labour cnsls; (c) to protect the general public by affecting j settlements of industrial disputes with- | out the stoppages of trade and commerce incidental to strikes and lockouts.

Tlint flie conciliation and arbitration system*has done very much during: Hie last 26 years in fulfilment of tliesc desirable purposes every hongst critic will allow. For a fairly lengthy period of lime this Dominion was comparatively free from strikes and lock-outs. and enjoyed conditions of industrial peace. The early Waihi strike and the walersidors' strike of 1913 marked a recrudescence of the fever for slopping work. .Much of that trouble lias been <lue to I lie psychological cause of perpetual teaching on the part of the advocates of I.WAY. and other forms of syndicalist thought. To-day it is being enunciated in the campaigns of the Allianccof Labour and "The N.Z. Workers' Union'' in advocacy of the

"One Rig Union'' ideal; which shortly aims at placing all wage earners in one organisation to further the interests of their class. Class creed cannot, in our opinion, be met by anything (he Conciliation Councils and Arbitration Court may do, as the 0.8. U. advocates will take nil they can get from the Arbitration system and still be ready to throw the system aside where they can dictate by force to their class advantage'. The sectional and anti-social conception of class unionism can only be dealt with by means of a. counter educational propaganda of right ideas inculcating the duties and advantages of social obligations. making the Court a Legislature. Both in Australia and in our Dominion Ihc Governments and Parliaments seem to us to have taken the easy, hut dangerous, course of changing the tunctions of the Arbitration Courts so as to make these tribunals practically "Secondary legislatures within the respective countries. From being bodies formed in hear and adjudicate on industrial disputes as they arise, the Courts have had their powers and duties increased and extended, until we find them engaged in 'a) laying down common rules for Ihe industries; (b) lixing basic wages on the standards of the cost of living: c lixing bonus rales on (lie basis of statistical calculation on the cost of living; (d) slating rules for industries in general, to be reviewed only under extraordinary circumstances: c fixing family standards, of living and payment, in proportion to number of dependents. This policy, i\\n\ we believe, to politicians finding il easier |n pass the problem on lo the Arbitration Courl than to face the social obligations themselves, is bound to reach a climax. The Court'cannot mould economic, law lo its will, try how il may. In our view, it would be belter to let [he Court revert lo its simpler function of settling single disputes, as a means of

expediting lliis work, ;intl probably giving more practical consideration. Iho mailer rniglil be considered id' adding assessors to Ihe Court from Ihe induslr" with which ||ic dispute is associated, Ihus combining tin; functions of Ihe Conciliation Councils and Ihe Court. Not by making Hie Court an industrial legislature, hut making il a more practical arbitration, is the system, in our opinion, likely I" he strengthened and made more permanent. (Contributed by Ihe N.Z. Welfare League.)