INDUSTRIAL ARBITRATION.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19155, 11 November 1927, Page 12

INDUSTRIAL ARBITRATION.

to na iniToa or th» miss. Sir.-It is unfortunate that the statement issued by the New Zealand Employers' Federation was not published in full in the Chrjtchurch papers. The summary supplied bytne Press Association was to?*\?£„Z make clear the attitude othe. leaera_ tion and its reasons for fPP 05 " tain of the provisions of the amending Bill now before Pa r to» ent :,. its at - The Federation realises that its a* titude will not be popular with who are blindly makmg the Artrt£ tion Act the scapegoat e mic troubles of this country, but-the considered views of the *^ 10D ' a * set out in the statement issued were arrived at after a full and very frank discussion of the ultimate effect.of a" possible.alternatives, and with the ,o e object of advising what it thought to be the riebt course to adopt in he be*t interests "of the country as a wnole I hand vou herewith a copy of the statement of the Federation s views, and invite you to publish it in full. It is not my purpose to enter into any controversy through your columns, particularly with correspondents who shelter behind a nom de plume, but the present opportunity seems to maKe it advisable to refer to a letter signed "Disappointed" which you published on Tuesday last. I shall reply to two poiufs in that letter. The first is in the form of a question containing a. veiled insinuation against a prominent public man calculated to mislead readers as to the real standing of the gentleman referred to. The second Is an example of the incorrect statements and loose thinking on which so much of the criticism of our arbitration svstem is based. "Disappointed savs: '"lt would be interesting to know too if Mr Weston is an employer of labour; that is, labour enjoying the protection of the Arbitration Court, or merely a theorist; and, further, whether he has perused and digested the various awards." I can assure your readers. Sir, that Mr Weston's qualifications for the position of president of the New Zealand Employers' Federation are unique. He is a director of several large industrial concerns producing coal, timber, furniture, jewellery', and printing, and is also connected with shipping and picture theatres. Mr Weston has made a life study of economic and industrial problems. No one who has met him can fail to be struck not only by his grip of labour conditions generally, but also hy his intimate knowledge of the details of awards. Mr Weston holds his position as president of the Federation because, above all other considerations, he combines the virtues of sincerity and knowledge. Tour correspondent also says: "In New Zealand it is not only an offence for an employer, under certain conditions, to employ a non-unionist, but entails the dismissal of a highly competent and trustworthy employee for not belonging to and paying a subscription to an organisation of whose principles and methods he does not approve."

Such a statement is nonsense. Had your correspondent made himself conversant with the actual meaning and the practical working of the preference clause, "as inserted in awards by the Court, he would not have so displayed his ignorance. The only harm that can be done by the Arbitration Court's preference clause lies in the fact that such statements can be made br people with as little knowledge of the true position as your correspondent displays. Whatever may be done in connexion with our arbitration system we all desire that the chief consideration should be the interest of the country as a whole, and not those of any one section. If critics of the present system will approach the problem in this spirit and base their criticisms on sound knowledge of the detailed working of the Act, perhans we shall make better progress.—Yours, etc.. S. WILKTNSOtf. President^

Canterbury Employers' Association. [We cannot spare space for the full text of the Federation's statement, which was quite adequately summarised in the Press Association telegram.—Ed., The Press.]