ARMING

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 418, 29 January 1909, Page 6

ARMING

CAPITAL AND LABOUR. EMPLOYERS' DEFENCE F3ND MOOTED

" IS IT NECESSAET? > Inquiries made by a Dominion reporter yesterday show that ; the suggestion of the .Auckland'branch of tho New" Zealand Employers' Federation that a general fund for the protection of tho interests .of employers throughout New Zealand should be established ia generally approved by, local-em-ployers of labour. When the proposal comes ' up for consideration there will probably be a, great deal of discussion _ with respect to the dotails of tho scheme, if it bo adopted. It is suggested by the Auckland branch of the federation that'the fund should bo , one' "from which payments should'be made in order to partially make good losses arising out of decreased profit, damage to property, cost of defending or sustaining any action in Court, recognition of men's loyalty to employers, or any other kindred purposes." The i opinions of a number of employers well quali- • fied'to express their views on the subject will i be read with interest. ' Mr. W.. G. Foster, president of the New ,Zoaland Employers' Federation, said that as the,present law seemed powerless to,prevent industrial- strife by labour movements, the employers would have to take some, steps for their own protection. What form of defence should employers adopt? asked tho reporter. In.reply, Mr. Foster said that he was not prepared to give an answer to that question .until he had given it a great deal more consideration.' But is .the matter not one which has already been under review for a period? continued the pressman. "If the legislators tor the Dominion had in ,the past looked, well ahead there might not have been any industrial troubles at all." was "Mr. Foster' a answer. Continuing, he observed that whilst a policy tending to protect employers against unjust demands on the part of labour was very desirable too much time could not be spent by employers in framing it. - ■ - • When will tho proposal be considered? inquiredthe reporter, in conclusion. \ "It is probable," said Mr. Foster, in reply, "that representatives of the; Employers' FedI eration will discuss the project upon the return of the secretary to Wellington." l Workers Waltz Through tho Awards. ''Undoubtedly a step in the right direction," was hoiv Mr. Robert Hannah, boot importer and'manufacturer, viewed the'pro- ' posal Discussing tho project,; Mr. Hannah said that it should have been" brought forward at an earlier date. Labour had become - a question—if the'awards made by the Arbitration Court suited the' workers they accepted them; if they did not, they ignored them. He considered that the Government should compel both tho employers and the workers to enter into a bond in eachparticular trade to secure the carrying out of awards. If that were done it would put an end to industrial strife. He was strongly of opinion that if a, worker stood loyal to an 'employer in a time of ■ , emergency ho should , be recompensed. 'The , proposal , to defray loss of profit or damage to property through strikes was eminently practicable. He felt that the Employers' Associations should have ft special" fund to meet , tho .cost of defending ' all charges of alleged breaches of awards brought against its members.'"lt was his'opinion thatthe adoption of the proposal would noV entail any hardship on either small or large employers of labour. It had been' the case that large ''business people had had' to come to the assistance of the smaller ones. A Blow at Agitators. Upon being intep-iewed on tho subject, Mr. "Hopkirk, president' of the Wellington Employers' Association, emphasised the fact that tne proposal was one which would require thought."'lf'labour continued to adopt its present attitude towards capital, it would be imperative employers to Dand together to defend themselves. The object of tho various , employers' associations Tjas defence, not offence.. Weapons were required as much for the latter as for the former, and-the best weapon was money. Employers had no desire to bo antagonistic to the "honest" worker—;tho man who did a fair day's work for a fair day's pay.' It was not.the "honest" worker that employers had to defend themselves against so much as the' "honest" workers who got led astray, by agitators. He was of opinion 'that the "honest"'worker was now beginning to pay less heed to the agitator, and to thinkmore for himself. The moro the worker thought for himself the -■-more he would see'that the interests of employer and employee were identical, and must go hand in hand. In connection with the trouble at Huutly it was evident that the workers' union had" oyor-stepped the "mark. If a worker remained loyal, then the employer must in turn stand absolutely loyal to, the workfr 1 . There would he less need for the employers to go far in the direction of establishing a defence fund if the workers became at all conciliatory, hut if the workers were really throwing down the gauntlet—it mattered not how it' aifected the interests' of the employers—then the employers would have no alternative but to defend themselves still further. If need for the proposed fund were shown, he would most certainly favour its establishment. - The First Stiff Step. "It's abouf/ tinfo," ,said Mr. 'G. Shirttliffe, late president of the ..Chamber of Commerce and a city councillor. "It's the first ( stiff step the employers have taken, and I hopo they'll go through with it. I could never understand why tho industrial associations and chambers of commerce did not do something of tho ..sort long ago. The demands of labour are killing the place. Why eight or ten years ago the naxmillers were delighted t& got £13 10s. a ton for hemp,' and now it is £21 a ton there is little or nothing in it for them. I usod to finance men in-the business when it , was £13 10s., but I wouldn't do anything of the sort while it is £21 a ton. This is a good move-they have initiated in Auckland." , If Employers had a Fighting Fiinu - , "Tho proposal to form a defence fund is, in my opinion, an excellent one,',' remarked Mr. H. H. Seaton, president of the Now Zealand Shopkeepers' Association. Generally , speaking, employers were, ho said, only too •glad to keep out of industrial troubles, and icquiesce with any fair'demands of the workfrs,, but unless the proposed fund was "nursed," certain employers might become too prone to allow cases to bo brought against them. Losses of profits and damage to property arising through strikes and .the ■ cost ot necessary litigation ought to be covered by a guarantee insurance fund, towards which each employer should contribute ,' in portion to the amount of his wages bill. There should be a separate fund out of which tho money should be found to recognise loyalty on the part of workers to their employees. Any worker who stuck to his employer in i ,caso of emergency and upheld the .law was de-' serving of somo recognition. It 'was his I opinion that the average employer was very apathetic until the shoe pinched him personal ally. As a consequence the burden of fighting restrictive legislation had to be'shouldered fcy a few employers; in other words,-the minority pulled the nuts out of the fire for the' majority. Other than the recent bakers' strike, there had been'.very few industrial troubles of any magnitude in the Wellington district that had not boon settled amicably. If tho fund became a fact, the; average employer—especially tho smaller ones —would feel more satisfied to face any labour difficulty that might arise. His opinion of. the working man in Wellington was, on the whole, very favourable. Hβ did not think the majority of the men agreed with all that was said and done by the various union executives, which had in the past appeared to be only too eager i to stir up strife between employor and employee. A more tolerant feeling on the part of the executives had been noticeable lately. What was responsible for that feeling was, he thought, the slight wave of depression that was prevalent. How Employers are Harassed. Mr. H. Innis, ex-president of the New Zealand Federation of Employers, was of opinion ,that the time had arived when a

defence fund'should be established. One good object of the : sojieme would be to; prevent what might'be termed persecution of employers by the workers. In particular, employers in-a small way had frequently been harassed by inspectors of tho Labour .Department)!.who had.at; the instance of officials of the various unions been compelled to prefer against them frivolous charges of breaches : of awards. • The moneys of the proposed fund should, be available to meet partially or wholly, the cost of cases which ought: not. to have: been ■ brought against employers,-also the, expenses in connection with-cases: toi.test particular .sections.of■.■■.an. award. v Hβ would.want it very clearly defined How sportions, of the proposed fund ;were,to...be'applied to.make up for 'loss of profits-or.damage to ( property through ,the •.ill-advised;'action; of-.part-.of the workers, or. in ;the' event .of. ia, strike, before lie -could support that' part of the suggestion! His opinion just now .was that losses of the fund ought to be made the subject of an: insurance fund, otherwise it: would be', too large a project for the federation to take lip. The question-;of recognition of loyalty ,on the part of the, workers to their employers ought to ;be .a matter for settlement, privately between employerand worker. '■. Hβ would object- to the-establishment -of, a , "loyalty! : fund,",;because,he ; could see so many ways in which it could be abused. It-was pos-sible'tnat-.the benefits proposed to be conferred :ont of the ."loyalty fund":- might go in channels in which they were not:"origi- 1 nally intended.;. There .'could be no doubt but' that : .the/various,unions were piling up, reserve funds. The amounts which were contributed'■ in; -connection with'the Bjackball 'strike, were evidence of that fact. His opinion'was that-it would be 1 only right'that the Employers! Federation should also possess; a ''defence', fund.- if it"; were only : to oom : pensata. employers for losses caused through strikes' when the .trouble.- had no& ;arisen owing to the ;direot; action of the individual employers. ' OV,'. : •':':■. .":'':v A :/