The Dominion. TUESDAY, MARCH 26, 1912. COURT AND PARLIAMENT.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1398, 26 March 1912, Page 4

The Dominion. TUESDAY, MARCH 26, 1912. COURT AND PARLIAMENT.

The judgment of the Court of Arbitration in the appeal case Le Chen t>. Wairarapa Farmers' Cooperative Association, Ltd., establishes a position which is unfair to employers and likely to cause vexation both to them and to tho workers. The logic of the judgment seems to us to be as unassailable as its law, and, therefore, to constitute a strong new indictment of our industrial legislation. The Court, in 1909, made the Wellington Grocers' Award, which limits the hours of assistants. Legislation .afterwards came into force prescribing other limits for the working hours. In somo instances the limits named in the Act, and in others tho limits, named in the award, are the narrower. . The business in question is bound by both. There ia one way and only one way in which it can obey both, and thatis by_ keeping, in each separato detail, within the narrower limit, whether that is the one imposed by Parliament or by the Court. To show how this works out in practico one has but to turn to the passage which Mn. Scott contributed to tho judgment of the Court in the case under notice;

Under tho nward ths hours of drivers aro 17* per week; under tho Act they am 52 hours per week. Under tho awaril Htajile work is unlimited; under tho Act it is restricted to one hour por day. Under the > award overtime can bo worked as required, provided ovcrtimo ratios ore paid; under the Act overtime is restricted to DO hours_ in the vear, besides which, before ovortimo can Dβ worked, a permit hns to be obtained from the Inspector of Factories (an impossible condition). Under tho award the work can be spread over the 24 with proper safeguards; under the Act work must cease at G p.m. with the few exceptions mentioned. It will thus be seen that in connection with J the hours of work employers nnd workers j arc compelled in some ca?ts to observe | tho hours preseriljcil liy the u«:iril niul in nlliers the provisions of the Act.

In fact, it is always for (Ik , worker ii case of "Heads I win : (nils you l_osc."_ And Urn complexities of tho situation are such that, as Mn. Scon remarks, "unithar employer .wgrjuj in utfa ixm, j&man-.

lion. There is another way in which these legislative interference* with thu work of the Arbitration I ourt are. prejudicial to the employers. Ihu Court frames an award as a wholi,, rates of pay and hours of worjc being considered together in relation to the question of what the, industry will stand. Whan Parliament, yielding to agitation, reduces the- working hours, it does not alter the wages. Thus, the Butchers' Award has fixed the hours at 50 per week, and Parliament has reduced this to 52, but the award wages, bused on the longer hours, still have to be paid. The truth is, as we have said on other occasions, that the Legislature ought to leave the fixing of hours and wages to the parties themselves or to the tribunal which it has created for the purpose. The Court is by its constitution and methods far better fitted to obtain all the relevant facts and decide fairly upon them than Parliament ever can be. Members are liable to be influenced by the desire of gaining or the fear of losing votes more than by a resolve to do the fair thing or promote the best interests of all concerned. It has been the acknowledged programme of some of the unions to try the Court, and then, if it_does not grant their demands, to insist upon legislation being passed for the purpose. The Court has, in consequence of this tendency, inserted in some of its awards a clause providing for their revision in case any of their clauses are overruled by subsequent legislation, and in some instances the Court has gone so far as to provide, that in such an event the award shall cease altogether, and the industry revert to freedom of contract. These conflicts between the Court and Parliament reflect very little credit on the latter, and perhaps this latest example of the natural consequences may cause Parliament to bo a little more cautious in future. In tho meantime, of course, the unions i?n on making hay and making trouble, and the employers go on suffering.