The Dominion. THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1913. A VITAL QUESTION.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1899, 6 November 1913, Page 6

The Dominion. THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1913. A VITAL QUESTION.

In view of the persistent efforts of the Federation of Labour to embroil all the trades unions in the present dispute it is well to emphasise the fact that neither the employers nor any other section of the j public have any_ objection to legiti- ( mate trades unionism, but they do ( object to that phase of the Labour movement which has adopted the re- : volutionary methods of violence, se- , dition, and class war. In its endeavour to secure the sympathy of the , public, the Federation of Labour declares in its manifesto that while admitting "that the stop-work meeting of watersidcrs, which was one of the contributing causes"-of the crisis, "was a breach of the agreement, it respectfully insists that the vital issue just now is to restore peace and order." This from the men who are the primary cause of the rioting and disorder they profess to deprecate; who have inflamed the passions of their followers by their wild and reckless speeches and plunged the whole country into a state of turmoil and who are costing the workers thousands of pounds in lost wages and the country tens of thousands of pounds through the stoppage of trade and industry. These men who talk smoothly of peace and reason and honour, for tactical purposes, are the same men who have declared that "the working classes and the employing classes have nothing in common. . . . Between these two classes a struggle must go on until the workers.of the world organise as a class, take possession of the earth and tho machinery of production, and abolish the wage system." Of course the ordinary trades unionist ha-s very little sympathy with such wild and reckless ideas, but he is, as a general rule, content to go about his work without worrying about economic theories and tho tactics of industrial war; and owing to this spirit of indifference the machinery of unionism has to a large extent got into the hands of the noisy and irresponsible clique of extremists who are_ dragging the main body against, their better judgmenfc into a. life and death conflict with tho rest of the community. I The syndicalist leaders arc openly proclaiming a class war and trying to make tho rank and file believe that the employer is the- natural enemy of the worker. They do not hesitate to declare that "there can bo no talk of loyalty between workers and employers," and yet the employers are asked to accept the men who adopt this uncompromisingly hostile attitude as tho medium for negotiation with the employees and as one of the parties to any agreement that may be arrived at. It is not surprising that the employers should bo disinclined to enter into a contract with the typo of jabour leader whose advice to the unionists of New Zealand is expressed in the following reckless terms:--"Recognise that every agreement en* t o rc<l into is not binding upon you for a singlo instant. No, not if it wero signed by a thousand officials and ratified by a dozen Courts. Tho Agreement is not sacred. Only a fool would repaid it ns such. ' The moment an opportunity 00cnrs to botlcr .your condition break your agreement. Break it whenever it will nay you to do eo. . . . If wo are to in hobbled by 'egrwmwitei dV motto, 'an injw? to «w is Uw oonoem of ftU,

becomes a mockery. . . . Are wo Industrialist.*? Aro wo Revolutionists? If we are, let us act accordingly. If necessary let lis toss every agreement to Srell." In the light of such words as these openly published in their official organ, of what value can the following proposal contained in the Federation manifesto he to any employer?: —

"That before any union can create a stoppage of work, the question at issue shall l;e submitted to the United Federation of Labouj', which hotly shall confer with tlic employers in order to securo a final settlement, the United Federation of Labour doing nil in its power to enforco the terms of the agreement."

Is it surprising that the employers have declined to accept such a proposal ? It affords them no protection. It affords the community no assurance of industrial peace. The agreement which has been so wantonly broken by the watersiders contained a special provision for the settlement of any matter in dispute by conference, but it was contemptuously tossed aside, with the result that the whole Dominion has been thrown into a state of turmoil.

The employers have no desire for industrial trouble. They are anxious to co-operate in the most friendly way with their workmen for their' mutual advantage and for the public convenience and welfare. They want some adequate of good faith in order that business may be carried on without sudden interruptions and unnecessary friction. They believe that the machinery of the Arbitration Court is the best means available for obtaining this security. It may not be a perfect method, but it would be fair to both parties and also a protection to the great third party to all industrial disputes—the general ( public. The crisis which has now disorganised the industrial life of New Zealand has made it quite clear that, however the present trouble may be settled, permanent peaco cannot be restored until the sober-minded and law-abiding section of the workers, who really form the vast majority, take the control of the labour fighting machine out of the hands of the revolutionary extremists. No one would be so foolish as to suggest that they should break up their unions or throw away the power of collective bargaining', - but if they are to avoid disaster they must assert themselves and save their movement from developing into a war dividing the community into two permanently hostile sections. A reaction has_ already commenced in Britain against, the methods of violence and disorder, and the trades unionists are being called upon to face the position resolutely, and not to allow themselves to be the dupes and victims of reckless leadership which can only end in ruin. One of the most experienced of British labour leaders recently declared that it is the duty of trades unionists "to speak out courageously in this crisis, for unless they do their silence will be taken as an encouragement by the wild afid irresponsible men who have now assumed the control of policy." He goes on to say that it is well known inside the movement that nine-tenths of the men who are at the head of the trades unions of the country are opposed to_the ways of the extremists; but while the main body disapprove of the wrecking tactics of the militants they seem unable -to muster sufficient courage to assert themselves and bring back trades union policy to_ common, sense. That is just, the position in New Zealand at the present moment. ' It is to be hoped that the reasonable law-abiding section of the workers will como boldly forward and demand the right to manage their own affairs before the incompetent leadership which is responsible for the present crisis involves the labour movement in a still greater catastrophe.