THE REEFTON MINING DISPUTE.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1568, 11 October 1912, Page 7

THE REEFTON MINING DISPUTE.

THE ARBITRATION PROPOSAL. ißy Tolocrapli,—l'rcEs Association.; Reefton, October 10. The secretary of the Inangahun Miners' Union lias sent a letter to Mr. Jut-tice Sim (President of the Arbitration Court), in which ho slates: I have brought before my union the mutter of your Honour'.-- invitation to meet tlio : einployors' representatives again before your Honour on November 1, with n view to the union binding itself to return to work on any conditions in regard to operating drills and stoping' by contract, which may be imposed by an arbitrator'appointed by your Honour. After fully considering the'matter, the union decided not to accept the invitation, and in order to save further waste of time and misunderstanding, the union wishes to notify' yoilr Honour and the employers that it will not attend on November I. . The 'reasons for Ibis decision are here set ou't'in detail. The Arbitration Court, •it is stated, has repeatedly held that if the workers do not like an award they have a perfect right individually to "go away from'the work."., The .union, members' cannot surrender this right in the present instance. The unioiris- perfectly willing to "accept"'the arbitrator's decision in the same way as it "accepts" the award, viz.. if its members perform the work at all they perform it on the conditions laid down in the award or decision, but have the right to decline to perform tho work at all. Thai; is one of the essential distinctions between a "freeman" and a "slave." Inasmuch lis the present lock-out (assuming it. to be. such) occurred over the question of working drills, it is only fair and honest that arbitration should bo confined to this one point. On this they arc willing In lay tho facts before any arbitrator that may lw appointed. The question of stopping bv contract is not in dispute. The rules of the union prohibit this on account of danger to Vie aid limb, and His prohibition was accepted by tho Uilwnr Department on June 26, 1911, and has been known to tho employers all along. The matter, can be djscussed at the expiry of the present -agreement, and not before. Tho union believes that, its members have been locked out. by. the employers since last .May.. The dispute was referred by the labour Department to the SolicitorGeneral. His decision seems to the union irrelevant, .as. it was in effect that there was neither, a strike nor a lock-out, which was absurd. The. union holds it necessary to have, one pia.n specially allotted to the sprayer .to . keep down the dust. The' ■physical, well-being and safety of the workers arc not. matters for arbitration. In .conclusion, tho. union states that, while .it has-tried .to. express its views plainly, it has.no.'desire, whatever to offer discovirtesy to his Honour, The union's objects in. setting forth its views aTC, first, to show his Honour that it has carefully ' considered the different aspects of the question; and, secondly, to enable his Honour to proceed forthwith to appoint an arbitrator under Clause 2 of the agreement. - - - . The Inangahua Miners' Union informs the "Inangahua, Times" that they are willing to go before the Commissioner of Conciliation ' and the Arbitration Court if necessary, and will submit all tho cvi•dencc required. The Miners' Union have received a tole■gram from Christe.hurch rlmt the agent of the- Consolidated Goldlields, Ltd.. ; there is recruiting men for employment in the mines.

A NEW DEVELOPMENT. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) Reefton, October 10. A new. development has occurred in the local mining dispute. All the miners in the district, not only of the Consolidated Group; but the Keep-it-J)ark miners and the New Big River men have applied to the Commissioner of Conciliation to interfere in the dispute. The. applicants-claim: (1) They shall have the rigui to require- stoping and, all other description of mining operations to be doito by contract, subject to.the provisions of clause fivo.oi the industrial agreement now subsisting between applicants and respondents; (2) applicants shall have the right to determine the specifications iindeY which' such contract shall bo per-formed,-subject to the said clause; (il) applicants shall have the right 10-determine the number of men'required to operate any. machine or drill, and conditions generally under which such machine or drill shall bo operated; (-1) applicants claim that it be made a breach of award for respondents or any member or members thereof to do anything to prevent men from taking any contracts or. with the object of endeavouring to persuade men from tendering for any contracts or from working any machine or drills except under certain conditions or place, or endeavour to place any .restrictions of freedom of men to contract or work machines or drills, or to do any act or deed or tike any steps with,the intention to defy any of the provisions of such award; (5) that. an award bo made for three years at the Warden's Court. Tile Warden adjourned the application of the-consolidated group of mines, until after.the sitting of the Conciliation Commissioners.