LABOUR ON THE WHARVES.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1966, 24 January 1914, Page 4

LABOUR ON THE WHARVES.

. The conference of harbour representatives. which . met yesterday," ■at tho- invitation, of the TnaiE Minister, to discuss the problem of.waterside labour, and if possible devise some more satisfactory system of em- , plo.vmcnt than now exists, does not appear to have thrown any great amount of light upon the matter. It is possible, however, that the private deliberations of the conference led to some more definite result than is indicated in the brief official report which is published in our news columns. The conference was representative of tho Harbour Boards- in the four principal ports—it did not include shipping company representatives—ana the resolutions which it passed are, in effect, a statement of the general principles upon which it considers that a reorganisation of waterside labour should proceed. Probably the conclusions of the conference, as far as they go. will be received with fairly general approval, bi.t a great deal will depend on the way in which these broad conclusions . are translated into practical working proposals. The conference did , not approve the tentative-suggestion , laid before, it by the Prime' Minister that a standing commission should b-j set up in each of tho four princi- , pal ports to control the employment of waterside labour. The idea was that the commission should include re- ! presetifritfvtM of the waterside workers and of the Harbour Board, ship- ! owners, and the Railway Depart- : ment-, and should be presided over by ■ a stipendiary magistrate represent- ; ing the Government. It was further • I- suggested that tho commission should ; determine the amount of casual lab- . oi.u- requii ett from month to month i during each season of the year, and! employ that number of hands at a | minimum weekly wage, no outside casual labour to he employed until i : the, panel retained b.v the commission i had been exhausted. In rejecting ; these suggestions, the conference ex-! : pressed, the opinion that the eonsti- ; tution of a new authority to deal i with the question of waterside lab- 1 ! our was undesirable, as it would in- ] volve dual control of, the business of . the ports, and that in.the event of. : any change or improvement ifl the • . present conditions, being deemed atl- ; visable, the responsibility -for administering it should remain with the ; Harbour Boards. There is a good ■ deal of weight in these contentions. - more particularly when it is -rcmem- ; bored- that the representation' upon ; the suggested commission would have ! been to some extent parallel with the ■ existing representation upon Harbour Boards. Advancing suggestions ' oh its own account, the conference : in the first place recommended an amendment of the Harbours Act ■ which would enable Harbour Boards, ; by arrangement with -shipowners, to ■ .carry on the business of stevedoring, • or license persons or firms to do so. J The only other suggestion put for- [ i ward was that waterside . workers r should be as far as possible perrnan- > ently employed by Harbour Boards j or shipowners/and thatsuperannua--i t-ion should be arranged for such'erei- ; ployecs, There is a general desire I that waterside labour should be re- ■ organised in order that more stable ■ conditions may be established in the 1 ports and industrial difficulties ■ avoided, but a. general affirmation {such as the conference has made) of i the desirability of effecting this > change_ does not bring a solution of s the existing problem appreciably ! nearer.- It would have been interest.- ■ ing to have had an expression of '• opinion as to the practicability of ■ the suggested reform, and some dc-fin- > ite particulars as to. the amount of • labour actually required in the dif--3 ferent ports, and the amount usually ' available. 'It is recognised that a s factor raising difficulties at present - ;is that the available supply of water- • side labour is almost always great- : ly in excess of the demand. Inmost ! industries a difficulty of this kind i would tend to right- itself, but in the ■ case of waterside labour a chr-onic • problem seems to have, arisen, The i problem is enhanced b.v the fluetuat.- - ing character of waterside work. - which leads inevitably to a variable t demand for labour. It is necessary ■ that a sufficient number of men should bfi i on hand to meet tho de< i mand at its'height, and the irregularity of the employment is to some > extent balanced by the comparatjvei ly high rate of pay which wateri side workers receive. At the same . time existing conditions, in some ol > the ports at least, suggest that the i surplus labour available is in excess of requirements, and a pronounce- ' ment on the subject from the port . administrators who attended yester- . day's conference would have been [ timely. The whole question cer- > tainly demands much more extended s discussion' than it has yet received.