THE FUTURE OF INDUSTRY.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 16414, 7 January 1919, Page 8

THE FUTURE OF INDUSTRY.

IDEAS OF FEDERATION OF

LABOUR

The executive of the N.Z. Federation of Labour have issued a manifesto in. tho shape of a report addressed to unionists., setting forth a scheme for tho regulation of industrial relations. The executive aro reporting under instructions from the conference that mot last July, and they condemn the system of industrial conciliation and arbitration. The system has failed, they say, and will fail more signally in the future. "With regard to suggestions for the amendment of the present institutions that is tp say, the I.C. and A. Act and its administration," they say, "we have none to. offer, because we believe that ! system, based as it is-, ultimately on (compulsion, and tending as it does to perpetuate the wages system, and to rob both employers and employed ot liberty of action, and of freedom to organise as each thinks best, to be wrong m principle, and what is wrong in principle cannot-, in our opinion, be so amended as to be ultimately beneficial in practice. We would further point out that in Britain, where industry has felt the 'effects of tho war to a much greater extent than we have, and where the after effects of the war can bo more clearly foreseen than -is at present possible here, both employers and employed have definitely rejected all proposals for compulsory conciliation and arbitration in any form whatsoever, and, as iti seems desirable to us that the rules for the guidance of industry should be alike in all parts of the Empire, as fai; as possible, we therefore suggest the following as being suitable to the present industrial requirements of New Zealand, and as being in line, as far as we can at present judge, with what has been, or will be, adopted as rules for the guidance of industry in Great Britain." The suggestions referred to consist of eight clauses. Clause 1 sets out that the proper industrial function of tho State is to nationalise industries and entrust their management to the trade unions. But it is reoognised that .so long as the relationship of employers and employed continues "the two parties to the social contract" must meet for discussion. As a basis for meeting and discussion it is proposed that there should be one organisation of employers and one organisation of employees for each industry. Then a National Industrial Council should be formed, consisting of a representative of each side for each industrial district. This Council "shall be, as it were, an Industrial Parliament and an Industrial Court of Appeal, > ' to make suggestions and decide any disDUtes voluntarily brought before it; "but such decisions would not be binding or have any forco of law. Separate advisory councils for each industry in each district are part of the scheme, these councils to concern themselves with the regulation- of w r ages. tho supervision of working "conditions, the prevention of unemployment, technical training and research, publicity, and "continuous and' progressive -improvement." For the ''prevention of unemployment" it would be the duty of the councils "to minimise the fluctuation of trade by.' intelligent anticipation, and the augmentation of demand in slack periods in co-operation with the Government and local authorities."

Other, parts of the machinery would he committees of enquiry -the settingup of "joint district councils," and the appointment of small groups of works oommittees. •

The executive then proceed to make some lengthj' observations on industrial relations generally. "By general oon6ent," ' they say, '-'the old system has proved itself unworthy, and the reasons for its failure are not far to seek. From, the days of the industrial revolution the relations between employers and employed have been based upon antagonism, coercion, and resistance. Throughout the whole of the civilised woria the story is the same. The parallel rise of trade unions, and employers' associations in mutual opposition has reached a point, where it is generally rocognised that thy, 'normal condition of the World of industry ,is one of suppressed .war.' Under Buch a system many a forward move on the part of Labour towards improved conditions is opposed almost as a matter of duty by the employers' associations, and, conversely, many improvements in tho direction- of increased production ana efficiency are countered by the restrictive regulations of the trade unions; both sides acting, .-as they believe, in the interests of their members.

"The two sides rarely meet except to make demands, of one another or to compromise conflicting claims, and negotiations are inevitably carried on as between two hostile bodies. In this way great powers of' leadership and willing service are diverted from constructive work into the sterile fields of largely useless controversy. "Both employers and employed are the victims of- a system that has organised industry on tho .lines of a tug-of-war and permeated the whole national' life with sectional habits of thought and outlook; Wherever coercion has been applied, by one Bide against, the other, it has called forth a resistance that otherwise might npver have arisen, and lias led to much sterility and waste.

"Whilst tho total elimination of such conflict maj bo quite impossible, as we believe it is so long as the wages system lasts, the hope of the immediate future undoubtedly lies in the intimate and ■ continuous association of both management and labour, for tho purpose of adjusting differences, and for the purpose of promoting the progressive improvement of their industrial service, from which alone the national prosperity can be derived.

''The scheme, - briefly outlined above, strikes out a new line of administrative devolution, na"mely, devolution by industry, and it represents justice and self-government applied to industry, and stands out clearly against the rival ; industrial systems of which so much is; heard. And it will have this important result. Hitherto, industrial legislation has always been imposed from without, and has encountered strenuous opposition on the part of organisations concerned to defend what they held to be their interests.

"Now the process would be reversed. The industry itself would, first agree to its conditions through the Advising Councils, and would then submit them to the National Industrial Council for approval and sanction. In this way Parliament would be relieved of an immense mass 'of highly controversial work and.set. free for the larger national and international problems. '"Nor is this. the only advantage that would arise. • The spectacle or organised management and labour, uniting their • constructive energies upon a great programme of reorganisation and advance, might transform the whole atmosphere of our industrial life.

"The increase in efficiency and output consequent upon the substitution of constructive co-operation for the old antagonism and suspicion would be very great. But the change would bring even greater benefits than this. It would raise the whole status of industry,. and, give to its members a dc<v pride in their work as a splendid public service. • It would tend to break down the barriers that have bo long confined and impoverished the national life and would promote the development of a real team spirit. "It should; however, always be borne in mind that we do not regard the wages 'system as permanent, neither do we rccogifise the employers as such as being essential tho conduct of industry. Or aim, aa stated earlier,

is nationalisation of industry with control by those engaged therein, and though, as we have stated, and as the scheme admits, employers and employees have certain interests with regard to industry in common, yet the fundamental antagonism between the two must never bo overlooked, and t«e acceptance by Labour of this or any 6uch scheme must be based upon the principle, not of fusion of interests between employer and ""l ployed, but of an absolute independence and solidarity of each party. The Councils should meet, not as single or harmonious bodies, but as representatives of two independent and self-subsistent bodies, and there should always be standing committees of the trades unions meo£ ing separately to prepare its agenda and decide upon the policy of the union representatives on the Local or National Industrial Councils." Tho report concludes with a novel sugsrestitn:— "Under tho I.C. and A. Act, or any other industrial 6ystem of modern times, there has been no Barrier on the side of employers, at least, to anyone who could find the capital necessary to engaging in ny' industry. This we think has been wrong, and is to a large extent tho cause of the lowering of the standard of work that has taken p?ace, and as wo aim in theso proposals to raise the status of each. trade and ini duetry, that freedom of entry must j cease. As employers.have demanded a certain standard of efficiency amongst employees, so employees have a right, though they have never hitherto exercised it, to demand a certain standard of efficiency among employers, and the industry as a whole must now exorcise that right. We suggest, therefore, that thoro, should bo a certain standard of efficiency set as a qualification for admission to the unions oh both sides, and that only those who were admitted as members of the unions should bo illowed to practise either as employer or employee in tho industry concorned. This idea, though new to industry, is not by any means unknown amonpst ns, and if anyone thinks it is let him put up a sign and try to practise in the profession of law or medicino or certain other professions, then he will eoon find that the barriers which we here propose for industry are already in existence in those professions. AH wo prop<«e is in reality that the status of, industry shall be raised to that of those professions, and we desire to make it as impossible for a lawyer to practise as a builder as it now is for a builder to practise as a lawyer, though, of course, a man may. be qualified for both professions, a'nd it would be a matter for consideration if in their case he should be allowed to practise at both. "These rules and standards of admissions would not have to be very stringent at first, but could be .gradually raised "from time to time by consent of the industry, and it would be found J that the quality of the work performed would improve as the machinery of this scheme operated, and as tho work improved, so would it be i>ossiblo to raise the standards of' admission to the industry without injury to anyone. Wo believe that by this . method 'shoddy work' would be-eliminated , as it is usually the result of a combination of inferior employers and inferior workmen catering for the neods of a market that ha« never been educated to demand the "best article that industry could produce. There are still to bo found employers and employees who make quality of work their standard, but with unrestricted entrance to trades as at present these 'splendid examples of what might be aro finding it harder to live, and wo are satisfied that one of the root causes of the deterioration in the standard of work so often complained of by the public, and so bitterly regretted by all who desire to see industry raised to tho standard it should be, is to be found in the unrestricted entrance of unqualified pei sons to the trades which wo here propose to .eliminate." V