HISTORY OF THE DISPUTE

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 2928, 14 November 1916, Page 8

HISTORY OF THE DISPUTE

/ BOTH SIDES OF THE CASE

On Saturday last we briefly summarised Hhe points of the dispute in the coal strike, giving both points of view. It may be instructive, and assist to a clearer understanding of the position, however, if we give something of the history of the dispute that culminated in the,bank-to-bank demandj which furnished the casus belli of the strike. The following statement, submitted to the public by the colliery proprietors of. New'.South. Wales, states the case for tho employers: . "In July, 1915,' the employees made a demand for a 20 per cent, increase in wages for miners and\26 per cent, for surface hands. At that time they did not raise the question of hours. The "employers met the men in conference, and were unable to arrive at a settlement. The matter was-then referred to tho President of the 'Arbitration Court (Mr. Justice Higgins), and he commenced compulsory conferences in October and November. The result of these conferences was that the proprietors in. the north granted certain increases in wages which were embodied Jn an agreement. This agreement was rejected by the miners' lodges by ballot, and subsequently the employers again met 'the men, and granted further advances, which in the aggregate amounted to from '4d. to 6d. per ton in the miners', hewing rate, and from 6d. to Is. Id. per day to the other employees. This . agreement was ratified by the Coal and. Shale Employees' Federation, and' also by tho council and the members of that body, and pame into effect as from January 1. 1916.

"These agreements, both" in the north and south, fixed the question of hours, which were to be maintained as were 'previously in operation. When tho 'agreement- was presented to Mr. Justice -Higgins to be filed as an award he .stated thatby including the hours the 1 agreement went beyond the scope of the dispute which was before the Court. and it could therefore not be reiristereE as an award. The employers declined to j register the agreement unless the -wholo Jof it had the effect of an award.' The I employers then registered the agree- :. ment in the New South Wales Indus- ; trial Court. ."'

. "Notwithstanding that the term of the agreement was for three years, the employees almost immediately made their present demands.on the employers, vhs.: (1) That eight hours.bank to bank; inclnding_one half-hour for meals, shall constitute a full working shift on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, and that six hours, inclusive of one half-hour for meals, fdiall constitute a full working shift on Saturday and Sunday, and on holidays. (2) That overtime at the rnte of time and a half shall be paid to nil employees working in excess of those hours on any shift. Monday to Saturday , inclusive. (3) All work other than overtime; nerforraed on Sundays and holidavs 'shall ha paid for at double rates. {4) Overtime on Sundays and holidays shall be paid for- at three times the, ordinary rates.

• "Mr. Justice Higgins convened a compulsory conference in Jnlv, 1916r nnd havine rejwd fo the -national interests in view of the war tliwemployers granted a reduction in hours'to'the men in order to ensure th° supplies of coal to tho transnorts. Tin's p-enerally a reduction of Jiajf an hour daily in the "winding of coal, with a r n lattve reduction in output. The council of the federation accepted tliTs agreement before Mr. Justice Higgin.s as a tentative arrancement tocontinue until an award of tho Federal Court was made. The agreement gave the owners tho right, if tber, so desired, to continue working the old hours in nrder to maintain their output, conditional upon their paving overtime for tho half-hour's work. The men declined to honour the agreement, and forced the, proprietors to reduce the hours by ceasing work at individual collieries.

"Mr. Justice Hig<*ins took very strong exception to the men trying to force by direct action the claims which they made to thoCourt.and struck tho ruse out of the list until the men satisfied him that they would_ continue work on the lines of the tentative agreement. As late as Tuesday, October 24, Afr. Justice Higgins named November 13 in Sydney as the date of hearing tho case if the miners'TtouM work under the tentative; agreement.' The men notified tho proprietors that unless, they cranted' a conference with the coal-.nropne-tna of the Commonwealth hefore the mh ultimo they; would only wort: on the terms of their log after- the 30th

ultimo. These notifications were Bent to the individual proprietors, andwere not'received by some of them until October 28. The northern proprietors met on October 26, and informed the federation by letter that they tyere communicating with the proprietors in the other States with he object of arranging a conference.

"On Monday afternoon the proprietors advised the officials of the Coal and Shalo Federation in Sydney and Newcastle that they would meet them.in conference on Thursday, hut despite this the collieries went on strilte on Tuesday, and have since remained idle, although the conference took place .on Thursday as arranged, notwithstanding the fact that the men were on strike. ■ "If the present demands of the men were conceded it would mean a total reduction of one and a half hours per day in the drawing of I coal at shaft collieries,' which would reduce the potentiality of the mines to the maximum output obtained by working only six and a half hours per day. The miners are paid by contract, and are enabled to press for only six and a half hours' worlc per day by the_,fact that they 'are now earning such high wages, averaging from 16s. to 275. 6d. a day. The men have .already declined to work more than one shift a day ; and as a consequence the plant in. which the proprietors have had to invest an immense amount of canital would: be limited to six and a half hours' work a da v. The proprietors stated that this would mean ruination, and no .'colliery could continue to work under such conditions." What the. Men Say. The following statement in, reference to the coal men's case was made on behalf of the! executive, of the Australasian Coal and Shale Employees' Federation. It was contended that in July, 1915, the employees had made a demand for 20 per cent, increase in wages for miners and 26 per cent, for surface hands. ,In spite of anything the .employers might §ay to the contrary, the question of hours had been raised 'on that occasion. The increased rates then asked for were sought/largely on the ground of the abnormal increase in the cost of living, owing to the fact that the majority of the employees had had no increases since 1908. The employers ■were asked-for a conference to discuss the matter, but refused to grant it, arid it was only when, a general upheaval "in the mining industry was threatened tljat Mr. Justice- Higgms called a compulsory conference of the parties in Melbourne. After several conferences aid in view of the'national crisis the men finally agreed to accept nominal increases; ranging from sto 8 per cent. These increases were only accepted on the distinct understanding that the men would be allowed to proceed with their claim for reduced working hours forthwith. The notes tliat Mr. Justice Higgins made at the conference would confirm this. / N "After this agreement had been completed," the statement proceeds, "the owners attempted to have it filed in the Federal Arbitration Court, but His Honour declined- to certificate the agreement or allow it to he filed unless the owners agreed that it contain a settlement.of the question, of Jhours. For that reason the agreement has never been filed in'the Court. . "On January 1 of this year the whole of the South Coast mines were laid idle for three weeks on the eight-hour ques r tion. The federation got .the men to return to work on the distinct understanding that unless the eight-hour question was being dealt with by the Court on, March 1, common action 'tvould be taken to enforce the claim. We were, however, unable <to get the Court to deal with ffie matter by that date, and from then'till now the council of the federation has bad great difficulty in. : keeping, the men at work. When we met in Melbourne at the end of Julv the Court was still unable to deal with the case, and His Honour urged the parties to come to some arrangement in order to avoid a- rupture before the Court dealt-with the matter. On" July 27 a tentative agreement was arrived at on the distinct understanding that the Court would proceed to arbitrate on tins' question within six weeks. - ". "The Federation as a whole accepted this. When the first pay was drawn by the men, under the tentative agree- . nient, a dispute arose at some of the collieries over the question of payment. The men contended that tho owners had not paid them in accordance with the agreement, and consequently at three collieries the men refused from then 'onwards to work more than eight hours per shift. When the case was called on in the Court His Honour declined to proceed, on the! ground that members of certain collieries were refusing to Work their proper hours. He requested the officers of the Federation to get the men to carry out the agreement. These officials did. all they possibly could in this direction, although they had reason to believe that at certain collieries the men were being allowed to work the lesser hours in order to provide the owners with an •excuse for preventing "flie Court from proceeding with the hearing of the case. ,i. ; - "On September 27 all the collieries were working in accordance with the terms of the agreement, with the exception of fifteen men who had left their work some 30 or 35 minutes tinder tho full nine hours. The owners urged that the Court should not proceed until these .men were made to work what they claimed were then proper hours. The men claimed that it had been their custom for years tc come out about that time to enable them to catch the workmen's train home. His Honour, however, again adjourned the hearing, and_asked the ' federation's officers to (compel their men to work what the owners claimed to be their "proper hours. ♦, "When the men learned that the case was again adjourned, practicallj ' the whole of the men on the South I Coast 'decided that they would not work more than eight hours per shift. "If the actual.time at the working I face at some collieries is reduced, surely that is not the fault of the men, ' In some instances the owners have ! provided-means for conveying the mer as rapidly as possible to and fron the working face. If, 'in other cases this has not been done, the fault musi be the owners' and not the men s. < "In some mines the journey fron-t-he shaft to the working face and bad; is the most arduous and disagreeable part of the miner's daily experience In many instances he has to traye under a low roof, and to carry his picks, drills, water bottle, and othei things through a dimly-lit passage way, and sometimes through, finely powdered dust, as much, at times, a< six inches in thickness. In one of tin reports a mining inspector stated thai after the horses had passed throng! the travelling road, dust was so thick ly suspended in the air that he coulc not discern tho light of the lamp carried by tho overman walking a yarc in front of him. He also complaince in the report of being almost sufto cated by. the dusty state of the atmosphere." .