ARBITRATION COURT

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2774, 18 May 1916, Page 9

ARBITRATION COURT

RURAL WORKERS j AMALGAMATION OF UNIONS Yesterday the Court of Arbitration wns again occupied with the case of 'the Agricultural- and Pastoral Workers' Union. Tlie bench wa.s occupied. by Jlis Honour iUr. JitStico "Stringer; and . Messrs. AV, Scott (employers' representative) and ,T. A.' M'Ouilough (employees' representative). Incoming to the Court, the workers had in view a sUielno to form ono union 'that ivutild embrace all classes of workers in agricultural and pastoral pursuits. The several unions previously in existence inch-,dec! .the Wellington Shearers' /Union and the Wellington District Farm and Station Hands (other than shearers) ami . Creamery, Butter, and Cheese Factory Employees'' Union. These two unions desired to. amalgamate under tlie new.- title of the Wellington Agricultural, and 1 Pastoral Workers' Union. Tho Labour Department was approached, and. tho Registrar of Unions'decided that the new body could not include dairy fnctory v.-orkcrs, as _ tlie Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act (.Section 20) provided that only two unions "connected with tho same industry" could amalgamate. The rules of the new union eonsemiently excluded dairy factory workers from membership. This led. to 'trouble when tho Court met again yesterday. Tho application before the Court was lodged bv tho Wellington Shearers' Union (as a party to existing awards and industrial agreements) for the adjustment of awards'and agreemen'ts by the insertion of ihe name of the new union in place of I,lie other unions named therein. Mr. I». J. O'Ksgan appeared in support of the application, which was opposed by Mr. T. S. Weston and Mr. H. D. Aclnnd, on behalf of the employers.. Mr. I 1!. Hunter took part in the proceedings as the representative of tho Wellington Farm and Station. Hands (other than shearers), and the Creamery, Butter, and Cheese Factory Workers' Unions. Mr. O'Hegan explained that She. new union was in possession of u provisional certificate of registration. His Honour pointed out that this cortilicato.aml the rules of the new union provided for tho dropping of tho dairy factory workers, and this did not api pear to have been done by 'tho regular method.

Mr; Hunter, in answer to His Honour, stated that his union favoured amalgamation it' the dairy factory workers wero included, but the union was opposed to amalgamation if the dairy factory workers were to be excluded from membership. Considerable discussion followed on the question as to the procedure to bo followed. His Honour said the question was as to whether those industries iverc connected within the meaning of .Section 20 of the Act. "My own opinion," added His Honour, "is that there is a radical difference between a purely agricultural and pastoral producing industry and a mainifac:turi ng i nil ustry 'Mr. O'Regan said the question wns right outside of his instructions, and ho had not comd prepared to lirguo the point. Ho would lie glad to do so n't any later date fixed by. the Court. Mr. A eland stated tlmt he would Jje prepared to .argue from the opposite standpoint at any. time. In his opinion it was absurd to 'contend that the iu-tc-rcsts of a farm bund in the Mackenzie Country were identical with tlioso_ of a worker in a factory nenv Chvistch'.u'ch or any ether large centre. His Honour announced that the Court would consider the questions arising under.

&>ctioiu 20 ..of tha Act, and would give r Tilling which. inighfc help tlio liocristrar of Ui\ion9 in future eases. Mr. O'Kegau could submit argument in %vritinsf, and Mr. Weston could reply to it. Atr. Weston mentioned that the employers had raised opposition to the proposals bccauso it appeared to them that the formation, of the now association was an attempt to rcvivo the old Federation of Labour. Jlr. O'ltogan replied that counsel r.p.d no right to maho such a statement when there was no intention of calling ovideiica in. support of it. The very fuct tnal the new association had followed the advice of the Labour Department in order to keep within the jurisdiction of the Court was proof that it would have nothing to do with Ihc Federation of Labour, which was opposed 'to the Arbitration Act.