THE WHARF LABOUR PROBLEM

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1969, 28 January 1914, Page 6

THE WHARF LABOUR PROBLEM

Tflß '■pr-Rfiont -slata' of. affairs regarding the employnioni of waterside wuvkm'H on the Wellington wharves is fiu , from satisfactory, and :each now explanation which appears hi the papers seems to increase tfic difficulty of arriving at a clear understanding of the position. The figures quoted by Mn. .I't-etciier at the last meeting, of .. (he Harbour Board indicated that the Arbitrationists.were getting their fair share of , the'work; but a vary different complexion was placed upon thr. matter, by the explanation of a taembeV

u/' the executive'yl the new Waterside Union which appeared in >-csterda.y's' issiieV l i , .-The general public certainly umUirsUiod liisit the , "new ,, hands referred to in .the statistics pliiccd before the Harhouv 150a.nl • weiv. Arhitriitionists—that is to say, preference men who joined the union on or before L)«ceml);.*r 8, 191',i. It now appears that this interpretation i«; entirely erroneous, for the term "new hands" only means men at present in the Harbmu- Board's employment, and includes' many workers who had conic into the union since the strike was declared off. This new light on the situation shows that the figures quoted hy Mb, I\letch.er arc qiiitc valueless as mi attempt to meet the complaint that full justice is not being clono to the preference men ad regards priority of employment. In his reply to the union official's criticism, Mr. Fletcher does not deny that the term "new hands" has been interpreted in the manner indicated, nor does he controvert the assertion that the "new men get the poor jobs which finish in an hour or h\*ff, while the. old hands get the steady work and overtime." Ho uoes not assail these facts, but merely endeavours to plaeo the responsibility for them on the ■Arbitrafcionists themselves or the shipping companies, and he also asserts that it is very difficult to regulate tho allotment of long or short jobs, as, owing to the nature of wharf work, this must to a large extent be a matter of chance. But whoever is to blaflic, the fact remains that tho Arbitrationists arc not getting the, full advantage of the promise of preference which they received on account of the effective way in which they prevented the trade of the- port from being paralysed during the recent industrial crisis. There are said to be influences at work on the waterfront with the object of reestablishing the old order of things, and it is essential that the Harbour Board and other employers concerned should take prompt measures to ensure that the Arbitrationists are not deprived of their right to preference of employment, and gradually shouldered off the wharves,