The Dominion. TUESDAY, MAY 18, 1909. THE ABUSE OF ARBITRATION'

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 510, 18 May 1909, Page 4

The Dominion. TUESDAY, MAY 18, 1909. THE ABUSE OF ARBITRATION'

■« No doubt the public have often wondered why the Arbitration Court has hot raoro frequently exercised- ite privilege of winding up. awards with some observa'f tions'upon such settled aspects: of the T working of the Arbitration Act'as arc worth making the subjects' of general principles or general statements of Court ~ policy.. In the few memoranda of this kind which Court has added to its j awards thore is- some excellent indirect criticism of the Act. When, for example, the Court annbunced, in delivering its award in the Granity coal-mining disd; p'utq, that it would in future reserve the L() right to protect the substance, by vary- - ing the terms, of any award altered by ■. Act of Parliament, it made strikingly clear the grave impropriety of Parliamentary interference with the special functions of the Court. When, again, it announced its intention to hold a union so responsible for a strike amongst its memJ ~ bors Unless that union could show that it U had' really oiulaavcuitod bo. pjeveni tic

strike, the Court revealed one of the most serious weaknesses of the law as it then stood. The Court's latest discourse cornea to us to-day in the shape of a memorandum attached to the award in the case of the Gisborne painters. The evidence taken during the hearing of the dispute went to show that' there has actually been a decrease in the cost of living in Gisborne since 1905, and the new award is accordingly the same in substance as the award just expired.

"It is quite a mistake," the Court observed, "to suppose that it is a function of the Arbitration Court to go on endlessly revising the conditions of a particular industry. Where an industry has been before the Court two or three times, and its conditions investigated,. the last awards should be treated as finally settling these conditions, and any alteration can only be made on clear, definite proof that there has been a change in' the circumstances since the award was ,made. Much expense and disappointment, will be avoided if executives of unions will ponder what we have said, and if, before originating a dispute, thoy will ascertain that there is some definite and reasonable ground for asking for an alteration, and will recognise that without some such ground it is useless to ask for any alteration. It is idle to ask, as many unions do, for an increase in wages fixed by an existing award, and to have nothing better to offer in support of the application than the evidence of a number of workers who are prepared to say that in their opinion the wages asked for are reasonable. To rely on evidence, of that kind is to confess that the union has been unable to find anything in the shape of fact or argument to'support its case."- Whether the unions will be grateful for this good, advice, or will recognise the fairness of the Court's contentions, is by no means certain. The wonder is that the Court did not long ago enter its protest against the practice of some unions in seeking to obtain a constantly ascending scale of wages. .'..,.:.. ... ! ';.. .... :

The memorandum is useful as calling attention to the vicious conception of the Arbitration Act which has been developed in trades-union circles.' When it became law, no' doubt, the trades unions understood the Act, and treated it, as an Act under which genuine disputes would become subject to arbitration. To-day many unions hare forgotten'that arbitration is the purpose of the Act. ' They treat it as a measure provided by a complacent country to enable them to carry out 'a; harassing "policy of "try on." The Court itself has.felt.constrained to notice the fact that very often the unions do not even make any pretence of having, a reasonable case for their demands. "There," so they doubtless say to themselves, "is the Act, and wo : may as woll see whether we can get something more out'of it. It is true that we have no arguments to support our demand for an increase in the wages, or an improvement of the conditions, fixed by, the last award; but. we 'may as well try it on. It will cost us nothing-to do bo. At* the worst wo shall be as well off as we are,now.". That their policy costs the country a good deal, and that it boosts the employers a good deal also, in annoyance as well as hard cash, are considerations that do not trouble the, union secretaries at all. Sooner or later, Wβ: have: frequently said, the Act will, be repealed, so far. as its penal iand ..compulsory clauses are concerned, but in the meantime some means should be devised to prevent its being abused in the mariner complained of by the Court. If sharp penalties, or a very sensible bill of costs,.were made the price of frivolous appeals to the Court, we should see r a'! much :■■ smaller inclination in' Labour circles to .'treat the machinery of'industrial arbitration as if it were merely an automatic wage-raiser. ,