ARBITRATION BILL

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19156, 12 November 1927, Page 18

ARBITRATION BILL

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. LABOUR BILLS COMMITTEE HEARS EVIDENCE. (rP.ESS ASSOCIATION' TELIGBA*.) WELLINGTON. November 11. Before the Labour Bills Committee Mr Bromley, representing the "Wellington Trades'and Labour Council, incorI porating the district council of the j New Zealand Alliance of Labour, said that there were affiliated unions with a membership of 10,000. Ho was also deputed to place before the committee the views of the dairy employees ol the "Wellington district. He believed that the Bill would destroy the system of arbitration. He did not believe it would destroy trade unionism, but it could destroy cooperation between employers unci employees, liven it" it were assumed that exemption from the Act was in the best interests of dairy-farmers, uiis would still be a dangerous precedent the Government proposed to enter upon. The employers in an industry had made a request for exemption, and the Government was prepared to legislate for that exemption. Suppose the workers in another industry, say the seamen, expressed a desire by a majority vote to 1* exempt, was it the intention of the Government to legislate them from under the Act. He traversed the evidence of witnesses with the object of showing that there was no uniformity behind the request, and was satisfied that the progress of the dairy industry would bo best guaranteed by stable conditions with regard to wages and costs. Mr Corn well, representing the Sew Zealand I'ainters' and Decorators' Federation, said that his organisation opposed any alteration to the present constitution of the Arbitration Court, He said that the proposed arbitrators would create industrial friction and might undo the uniformity of conditions at present existing in industries. They were opposed to any industry which was exempted. "Mr Andrew Tarlane, representing the New Zealand Drivers' Federation, said that he had been instructed to ask the Minister to withdraw the Bill in regard to payment by results. He said that this could not be fair unless the workers had a say in the management. Dr. Belshaw. Professor of Economic; at Auckland University College, said the authorities controlling industries in Britain and Europe had come in for as much criticism a% if not more than, the Arbitration Court in New Zealand, such attacks being made in a period of depression. He did not think the proposed amendments would improve defects in the system. He thought some' amendment was desirable with reference to assessors, whom he thought tendted to balance each other and tended to compromise, but the proposed amendments would make for delays. While the assessors it was proposed to put in might have knowledge of their own business, they would not have an idea of the broad value of certain matters, and it seemed to him that some of the smaller industries would find] it difficult to obtain assessors, and there was also the possibility of victimisation, not removed by the six months' provision, especially in the smaller dairy factories. He suggested an amendment whereby two economists would take the place of the two assessors. He believed that these two economist* with a Judge would be preferable to the present constitution. He suggested, that the economists should be chosen one each from panels selected by the employers and employees. Hie did not consider the present award injured dairy factories or that thert was more injury to dairy factories thar to any other industry. The Bill, with its provisions for individual bargaining, was a definite bait" to the unscrupulous employer. He considered wage rates under the Court too inelastic, and he thought they should be I adjusted more frequently than at present. He stated with reference to piecework that there might be an incentive to effort, but there would be a diminution of quality, though he had no objection to piecework as the result of collective bargaining. He saw no need for uniformity, and if employers and employees' associations desired to put agreements into force without the present formalities they should be allowed to do so. Also, where the majority of employers and employees desired it, trade boardfe might take the place of compulsory arbitration. He saw no reason why the system of profit sharing should not be applied to the dairying industry. He pid not think the Court would work satisfactorily in regard to farm labourers except in dairy factories. Mr H. A. Seifert, representing the Flaxmillers' Association, said they were opposed to the Employers' Federation view, but should it be decided that any industry must be exempted, then they also claimed exemption for theirs. Were the industry taken out of the Act they would probably negotiate with the employees for a reduction of the wages. "My Association does not see how the country can" continue to carry on on a basis of increased wages of 70 per cent, as against a n increase in the price of the produce of 30 per cent.," said witness. Air W. Nash, secretary of the New Zealand Labour Party, will give evidence on Tuesday.