MONDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1909. EMPLOYERS AND THEIR RISKS.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 420, 1 February 1909, Page 6

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1909. EMPLOYERS AND THEIR RISKS.

$ -^ On Friday and Saturday we printed Bomo interviews upon, tho proposal bi tho Auckland Employers' Association that the employers of the Dominion should co-operate in establishing a defence ititid. Tho readiness of both 6mpldyors and labour represontathes to express decided opinions upon the proposal indicates that such a movoment as is projected has been looked upon as certain to come sooner or later. Tho employers whoso views wo printed may bo considered representative of the whole bddy, and while they differ as to tho direction which the defence movement ought to take they are unanimous in regarding tho present stato of the law and the present temper of labour as such that passive submission is no longer to be thought of. We do not supposo that it is necessary at this time of day to dofend tho employer against the charge that he is an aggressivo and ofiflnsiVo person. There was no occasion, therefore, for tho protestations of more than one of tho omployofs interviewed that the object of concerted action was ''defence, not offonco," and that any defence organisation that may bo formed is not antagonistic to the honest worker. Thoro may onco have been a tirao when the employer was prone to uw rather severely his dominanco of the industrial situation, but in New Zealand to-day he is apt to consider himself lucky if he escapes the worst severities of trades-union persecution. Hβ is encompassed about by every kind of restriction—somo proper , , and somo quite improper—and he has no option but to obey tho law which, professing to hold the balance fairly between him and his employees, is notoriously not binding on the employees at all. So would not greatly object to tho effects of the regulative Aets upon himself, if ho could but feel assured that his sacrifices were balanced by equal sacrifices on tho part of the workers. It is not at all surprising, therefore, that he has at last realised that he must lift his hand in Belf-defence. .

. The opinions of Labour men -upon, the new proposal are as might have,been anticipated. Tho :_Ho»; J; Riotl, M:L.O., who realises the industrial utility of effectivo; combination on both sides, and who is : capable of admitting'just principles into his views on'labour questions, welcomes the establishment .of an employers' .defence itind as making for greater efficiency in industrial "arrangements." But his friends take quite another vic*w. Mr. .M'Laiien, is. stup'eficcT .and. angered at the bare idea that the employers should do anything to defend themselves. ' He,fears that tho "creation ; , of largo defence funds" on both sides will end the hopes l , bf conciliation. Only Labour, apparently, should perfect its fighting organisation if justice is to bo done. Mb. M'Laeen admits tho abstract lcgitimaoy of an .omployors', defence fund, but he wags his head gravely- over the "danger to the public interest" that resides in the establishment of such"' funds by Capital or Labour, "on selfish grounds" and as part of "a polioy which found expression in bitterness and exaggeration." And of course the men wbiom Me. ' M'LAiiElj sweops together v in their infamy as "Capital" cannot possibly establish a defence fund excepting on selfish grounds and as an act of wickedness. Another Labour representative, in giving his reasons why the proposed fund is unnecessary, supplied' the very best of reasons why the employers should prosecute thoiv now policy. :.■■■■'•

So few workers were (he said) likely to 'go out : on strike that the fund would iu all probability not bo called Upon to any extent. Were tho workers' organisations determined upon striking, it would only be in cases where the fund would be of very little vnlus Tho workers knew too well tho detrimental effects of a strike to encourage anything of that nature in industries where tho chances of .success wore small. ■•.■•. ■■■■.'■

This'looks so much like a statement of fact that) employers will probably; take it as justification for their growing feeling that in industry, as in greater things, the best guarantee of peace—and of safety -—is preparedness- for war. :.'■