"CLOSER" RELATIONS WITH LABOUR?

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 272, 6 August 1918, Page 6

"CLOSER" RELATIONS WITH LABOUR?

Sir,—lt is generally conccdcd that the man or men who cause unnecessary strife, produce ill-i'ccling, which results in diminution of effort, aro enemies to their lvuig and eo'nntry. What, then, shall be said of the Government, the Law Courts, the Labour Department, and the Lmployers' Federation, who aro making strenuous oli'orts lo break down Labour organisation lor their own petty ends, and thereby causing endless friction, which is resulting: in a lessoned output? 1 he Government have stood by whilst their friends have stolon Iho coal from the (human) engine, and then they complain that they nro not getting the same amount of energy as beforo. If they had a littlo less wood iu their lioad they would have seen that long ago, Tlio Law Courts, too, aro very busy trying to stretch and strain the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act so that it is meaningless to Labour. They have given decisions which it would not lake a lot of argument to show aro ultra vires, and would bo readily upset if taken to the Privy Council. Take, for instance, the decision in the Ohinomuri case. In dealing with the clause providing for "any other matter not contrary to law," the Court holds that it must not lie contrary to tlio Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act. In other words, if it is not specified as being provided for in the Act the Court holds it is contrary to law. Can absurdity further than this? Hero is an Act with certain specifics. Then follow the words, "any other matter." Clearly this makes provision for something not specified. Any other matter not contrary lo law is held to mean that it must not ]xj contrary to that particular law. Now, a. perusal of i other Acts shows that whenever such a provision is intended the words "this Act" are used. There are matters which trades unions aro called upon to deal with which aro not "contrary to law;" that is, not contrary lo the general laws of the country. But our Courts object, f)id 60 another source of friction is cast amongst the populace. To-day the Labour Department is endeavouring to get a judgment that ivill prevent labour unions federating. What for? What is their object? What a their instructions? Who instructed them? If Labour may not federate, is it intended to break up the Employers' Federation, because they come under the same Act? And in view of the decision just .'-ivon, aro not now entitled lo registrar tion because they are an amalgamation of various trades, not even related industries. If the Department were doing (heir duly they would under these circumstances see that their registration was cancelled.

To-day the workers are not only warweary, they are tired of the burden of the "high cost of living." They are tired ofhaving not only their purchasing power but their privileges stolen from them. They are tired of the utter insincority and incapacity of the Government, they are sick to death of the camouflage of the,employing classes; and this means tljat the average worker is suffering from "monotony of life," one of the most dangerous opponents to "output" that a commnuity can bo cursed with.

What do the opponents of Labour want? Do they want to deprive Labour of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act? Trades unionism lias existed for seventy years or more in spite of the law, not because of it, and can continue without the law, or ill spite of it. The day has ccme when, if the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act is not differently administered, the unions will soon make an end of it by cancelling their registration. It is no use hanging on to anything useless. Either the position has to be mended or ended.

In the meantime it would be as well if employers talked less about drawing "closer to Labour," whilst endeavouring b tleece them fit the same time, Labour is not deceived. The employers will have to make good, and show their bona fides before Labour will trust them or their words. In conclusion, nil this means friction. Friction means loss of output. And while the employing classes are playing their game, the country as ft whole is suffering in loss of output. One thing is quite clear to the worker to-day, and that is that tliero is no need to go to Germany for German methods.—l am, etc., W. MADDISON. Wellington, August 4.