SETTLING INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1213, 23 August 1911, Page 4

SETTLING INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES.

The London Daily Mail, so wc arc informod to-day, has been advocating "compulsory "arbitration" as

"tne best bulwark against a general strike." The full text of the Mail's article is not necessary to an under- , standing that the ''compulsory arbitration" which it advocates is an entirely different thing from compulsory arbitration on the New Zealand model. AVhat it is advocating is obviously compulsory arbitration as provided for in the "Lesiieux Act" of Canada, as the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act of 1907 is called. We have so often discussed this admirable measure that it will be sufficient here to remind our readers that it provides that in the case of certain industries no strike or lockout- shall take place until the dispute is investigated and reported upon by a Board. If no agreement is arrived at then the parties shall be at liberty to act as they choose. The principle of the measure, it will be seen, is ah assertion of the wisdom of relying, first, upon the strong likelihood of settlement by a frank conference between free workers and free employers, and, second, upon the force of public sentiment when the facts are fully set forth. In the official report of the Canadian Department of Labour for the year ended March 31, 1910, there is abundance of evidence in the fifty pages devoted to the Act to support the propriety of this claim that "there is no reason to depart from the conviction expressed in former years regarding the effectiveness of the measure as a factor in the adjustment of industrial disputes," and a second claim, that "the principles on which the Act is based are obtaining continually a- wider recognition, both in Canada and elsewhere."

Since the enactment of the Act in March, 1907, there has been a tremendous number of disputes, and yet nothing was more rare than for the Board to fail in settling the trouble. That the principle of the Canadian measuro is finding favour in England was made clear last month, during the § serious Manchester strikes, by th'o i attention that was everywhere paid to' a notable letter to the Lord. Mayor of Manchester from Sir Charles Macara, the great cotton-spinner whose remarkable labours for the settlement of industrial disputes earned him his baronetcy last New Year. For some years (he wrote) I have given considerable'thought k> tho best means of attaining this end, and venture to make Hie suggestion that a special department sljoiii(l"bo created, with an advisory body composed of a few well-known men, with the widest experieree, representing both capital and labour, to whom disputes must bo referred before the stage of a lockout or a strike is reached. There may be dillinilties in tho way _ of putting these suggestions into opcrntinn, but the interdependence of all industries must be recognised, and the dislocation of tho largest commercial centre in the world shows me the absolute necessity that iny suggestion should be n>nous|y considered and acted upon. There is nothing iu my opinion of more vital iuipnrlnncc to the iritionnl welfare , than harmonious relationship between capital and labour. The want of it seriously imperils our position as n great commercial nation. A special department with an advisory body such as .1 have suggested would provide that if a real grievance did oxi-l it would receive :i fair hearing,' exorbitant; claims would meet with their jus! dc-erU, while re.-i.-tiiuce lo reasonable demands would lie ei|U-jlly condemned. I might also designate the president of I he proposed advistiiv body as an Industrial Judge. The appointment nuehl In be a permanent rue. and entirely iiid'pendnit of piut.v politics, It* holder should be naturally

a man of judicial mind, shict impartiality, nml experienced in the settlement of labour troubles. It seems to me that the successful settlement of this and other labour disputes in various parts of tho country in recent years clearly indicates that- it is not impossible to find a man v.'ith the requisite qualilicafioiis, and in jny opinion such an arrangement could lie made as an act of administration and without the necessity of an Act of Parlainent, tho proposed Industrial Judge being supplied wfth a deputy to assist him and an adequate staff.

11l a subsequent statement to tho Manchester Guardian Sin Charles Macaiu made it clear that lie wanted the Canadian system: "The dispute would bo taken for the time being out of the hands of the combatants. They would go before an independent tribunal and state their case to men representing the widest experience of both capital and labour. _ There is no suggestion of arbitrarily enforcing that tribunal's decision. On the contrary, both parties will have perfect, freedom to reject or accept it." It is of high significance that the growing need for some measure of regulation, which is felt in all countries, and especially in America and I France, and now in Britain, has nowhere suggested the adoption of the New Zealand system. It is the best known system, and the one of which the longest trial lias been made, yet statesmanship almost instinctively rejects it in favour of the Canadian system or tho Australian sysfcm of Wages Boards. Only yesterday a cable message reported that the Premier of West Australia' announced his Government's decision to repeal the Arbitration Act and substitute a, system of Wages Boards. Tho sooner New Zealand decides that it is simply silly to persist in the crotchet of Mr. Pember Reeves the better it will be for everybody.