The Press. Thursday, January 16, 1919. Industrial ' Reorganisation.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 16422, 16 January 1919, Page 6

The Press. Thursday, January 16, 1919. Industrial ' Reorganisation.

The manifesto recently issued by the National Executive of the New Zealand Federation of Labour seems to us to merit more consideration than has hitherto been given to it. In this document the executivo, ■while still holding that "the jroper industrial function of *' the State is to nationalise indtistries " and thereafter to entrust their man- «' agement to the trade unions," recognises, for tho first time, so far as our recollection goes, the duty of making the best of the present system ~while it lasts. "So long as the relationship of " employers and employed continues," it says, "these two parties to the social "contract can and, indeed, must meet "to discuss and endeavour to agree "temporarily upon various matters." Tho manifesto, moreover, does not consist merely of destructive criticism, but has some constructive suggestions to offer.

The manifesto begins with a very emphatic doclaratioii that the system of Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration has proved a failure. It points out that in Great Britain both employers and employed hare definitely rejected all proposals for compulsory conciliation and arbitration. More recently, Mr the groat American leador of Labour, has told us that tho working men in the United States will have none of it. So far as employers in Now Zealand, are concerned, we boliove that

they, too, realise that the Act has proved a failure, and genuinely regret the fact. They clung to it because they thought that at any rato it gave them security against the sudden dislocation of industry, but it is well-known that this hone has proved fallacious. Not only have agreements been deliberately broken, hut by an amendment of tlio law passed last session, awards and agreements under tho Act are made legally subject to revision beforo the date of their expiry. "We are inclined to agree with tho Federation of Labour that tho system of compulsory arbitration has v>roved a disappointment, and should now Ik> replaced by something heeler. Indeed, we ventured to express an opinion to this effect before the last general election.

The constructive proposals put forward by the Federation Executive are evidently based upon what is known as tli<> TVhiteloy "Report. which the late British Cabinet decided to adopt as part of tho policj' which it hoped to carry into offcct in the field of industrial reconstruction. The executive proposes that there sh-ill for every industry bo one organisation of employers and one of employed throughout the country. That, for tho guidance of industry there shall lie a National Industrial Council, composed of ono representative each from employers and employees for each of the present industrial districts, such representatives to bo elected by the people they reprosent. This Council is to be, as it were, 'an Industrial Parliament and an Industrial Court of Appeal. It shall bo its duty , to make suggestions for tho guidance of local councils and to decide any disputes which may voluntarily be brought boforo it. Such decisions aro not to have tho force of law, and workers aro to retain tho right to withhold their labour, and the employers the right to refuse access to thoir industries. Public opinion, after all, is, in the long run, moro powerful than the Court in settling disputes, and the party that defied tlio ruling of the National Council would not bo likely to gain tho public sympathy. It is further proposed that in eaoh industrial district (or, if preferred, in each town) thero shall bo separate Advisory' Councils for each industry, composed of three (or a number to be agreed), elected representatives each of employers and employees. Tho object of those Councils (national and local) would bo "to promote the continuous " and progressive improvement in in- " dustry, to realise the organic unity " of industry as a national service, and " to promote tho woll-bcing and status" "of all connected with, it." The Councils would concern themselves with (1) regulation of wages; (2) the supervision of working conditions, endeavouring to keep them uniform; (3) the prevention of unemployment; (4) the regulation of employment of partially disabled soldiers; (5) provision of technical training for members of each industry. tho improvement of processes, etc.; (6) the issue of authoritative in- | formation to the Press and public; (7) j " to provide a clearing-house for ideas, '•'and to investigate in conjunction with " exports every suggested lino of improvement." •

. Now, it seems to us that, speaking generally, these are very excellent proposals, which, if carried out in the right spirit should benefit the employers, employees, and the general public. Thei result of successive increases of wages through the Arbitration Court has certainly been to penalise the general public, while it is doubtful whether , the apparent benefit to the workers has not been nullified by the increase in the cost of living. Wo are convinced that to enable this country to recover from tho strain of the war, and to hold our* own in tho competition beforo us, it is ne-

cessary to increase production very materially, and we ouglit to utilise every means of securing that result. One of the first essentials is to bring about a friendly understanding and full co-operation between employers and employed. So long as theso two classes hold each other at arm's length, and regard each other with mutual hostility and suspicion, there will be no roal progress, and no material improvement in tho industrial situation. The proposed Councils, if carried out in a friendly spirit, should enable employers to enter more fully into tho feelings and wants of tho men, and should enable the men to understand tho difficulties which employers meet with in carrying on their If tho output is increased, it will bo possible to increase wages and improve conditions of working, without increasing tho cost of living. That is tho secrot in which lies the real solution of all our difficulties. If tho proposed Councils succeed in making this point clear to both sides, and bring about friendly co-oper-ation towards a common end, they will amply justify their creatiou. "We hope trades unionists generally will fall in with those views, and that employers will then make an earnest endeavour to come to an agreement with them on the lines suggested..