ENFORCEMENT OF AWARDS.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1686, 28 February 1913, Page 4

ENFORCEMENT OF AWARDS.

The deputation which waited on the Minister for Labour yesterday to make complaint concerning the administration of awards under the Arbitration Act was not very convincing .in its main purpose. It certainly quoted sbme - specific instances in which awards appeared to have been broken without any immediate action "on the part of ,the Labour Department being taken, but the general charge of neglect to see to the enforcement of awards was not substantiated. Indeed, members of the deputation differed amongst themselves on'this point. Some' had no complaint to make against the Departmental officers, but, on the contrary, expressed thftir satisfaction with the attention matters Had. received at 'their, -hands.. At the ' same time,'-it isjcasy to conceive that .those who did complain felt that they had ground for doing so. They, however, apparently failed to appreciate that if the Arbitration' Act is to work smootjily and successfully, and prove what it was intended to do—that "ig," an amicable means of settling differences between employers and 'employees—the officials of the Labour Department miisfc cxcrcisc a reasonable discretion in acting on "complaints received and in supervising the enforcement of awards. There are maiiy trifling breaches of awards which have only to be pointed'oii.t to be remedied.:' In all of these, probably, the offending employer or employee could .he' taken into Court, but no good purpose would.be served] in .the majority 'of. cases, unless it' were shown that ' there had be<Sn wilful'and persistent evasion ,bf an award. It is surely in the'interests of, both employers' and employees that,, as far as possible, any unnecessary cause, of friction should -be avoided, arid it is much better that inspectors ■' should, where (possible, smooth over 1 between' the!; parties minor breaches; if it can .be' done satisfactorily, rather than be wasting the time of the Court and all concerned ; with.'; trifling, "niattei's' which only cause unnecessary irritation, find'strained relations. We do not.siiggijst. for one, moment • that the inspectors should attempt to favour one side or the other, or to ignore or .cover up , broaches of awards which plainly call for redress and exposure in the law Courts. But where the offences ;arc' trivial and due to oversight/ or ignorance, ■ and when pointed out are remedied, it surely must bo obvious that more' often than riot it is better in the interests of albpartics that the inspector should sccji to settle the matter amicably rather than force it into Court. There- arc extremists, no doubt, who would adhere to the strict letter of* awards under' all circumstances,' but they are- not likely in the end to benefit those whose cause they would serve; a little give and take may mean a great deal in such matters in assist-ing-to preserve-that' good feeling and harmony,', which are ; essential between employer arid employee to ensure ; that'smooth' and successful working of a business, which, .after all, it is to the advantage of, both' to secure. The Minister for Labour has undertaken to make inquiry into the complaints laid before him by the deputation', and if in any <pasc it is found that an inspector has acted unfairly or improperly, it will, of course, be his duty to bring the ; offender to' book." But the suggestion that there has bc-n any systematic favouritism or neglect, we believe, will be found to be unsupported by the facts. -