The Dominion THURSDAY, DECEMBER 19, 1918. AN APPEAL TO COMMON SENSE

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 72, 19 December 1918, Page 4

The Dominion THURSDAY, DECEMBER 19, 1918. AN APPEAL TO COMMON SENSE

Taking account of the general conditions of life in New Zealand it might bo expected that industrial strife would diminish and become a less important factor from year to year*. Here as in other countries occasions arise at times when a strike by workers or a stand by employers represents a direct and obvious, though imperfect, method of obtaining remedy or redress. But in a country as highly favoured by Nature as New Zealand is. and as far advanced in democratic development such conflicts ought to be , the rare exception. Tic extent to which, in actual experience, we fall short of this state of affairs points to a failure in industrial organisation which is deplorable in itself and in its effects. Not only arc more or less serious strikes unhappily common, but it might almost be said that the normal relations between employers and employed in this country are those of passive hostility. Instead of free and hearty co-operation there is a widespread spirit of antagonism which hobbles and handicaps industry at every turn. Employers are by no means immune from blame in connection with this state of affairs, but a great deal of the trouble that exists can be traced to conditions of Labour organisation that were touched upon by Me. T. Shailee Weston in his presidential address afc the annual conference of flic New Zealand Employers' Federation yesterday. At present, he said, no sooner did a Labour man begin to inspire the smallest feeling of trust and respect amongst employees than his followers proceeded to cast him out of office. Consequently, unless he was- a man of strong character and great courage, to maintain himself in power he must _ constantly stir up friction and strife between employer and employee. All who have followed the progress of industrial affairs in the Dominion in recent years must be aware that these charges are true. A considerable proportion of the Labour leaders ot the day are by habit mischief-makers, and the reason is obvious. In many trades and industries the men of moderate views, who practically everywhere constitute a majority, tend to neglect union affairs. They stop away from •meetings, and leave it to aggressive and often reckless and ill-instructed minorities to run and control the j organisations. If such an cx- ! plariatioh were lacking tho current I attitude of what it is the fashion to call organised Labour would be quite unintelligible.. The agitator who babbles about class warfare represents in the first place a minority that ought to be inconsiderable, but the prominence he now gains ,is only made possible by the apathy of a much greater number whom he nominally represents, but with whom in fact he has nothing in common. Little help can be hoped for from the frothy section which .at tho moment dominates so many industrial organisations in any effort that may be made to establish the better and more friendly relations between employers and employees for which Mr. Weston appealed. The practical question raised is /whether people of moderate and rational outlook can be induced to shake off apathy and take an effective part , in affairs which concern them very closely. All who give the matter thought will readily perceive tliafc _ the difference between the conditions for which Me. Weston pleads and those which now obtain is the difference between light and dark. The problem of establishing an efficient industrial organisation is, of course, one which immediately concerns 'the whole population. Industrial warfare is ii struggle for mastery, between two . parties, but its penalties fall mostly upon a third party—the long-suffer-ing general public,' which has no recourse but to pay and make the best of it. In almost every case increases in wages extorted by organised workers are passed on to the general body of consumers, many of whom are debarred from obtaining relief by similar" methods, but this is only one aspect ' of the matter and not the most important. It is much more serious that all the loss and waste and inefficiency due to strikes and industrial unsettlement are paid for sooner or later by consumers—paid for in higher prices for essential commodities. As Mr. Weston truly pointed out yesterday, much has already been done in this country to impede the 'efficient and economical development of business enterprise. "The position employers at present find themselves in," he observed, "is that they are bound by the provisions of industrial agreements and awards while the workers—or their representatives—observe them and are only' bound by them so long as it suits their purpose." It hardly needs to be pointed out that these conditions are less a measure of the success of organised Labour in opposing and defeating the employers than of its success in eliminating factors of security and stability in industry winch are essential to the free expansion of production and the sale of commodities at moderate prices. Amongst the consumers who have to bear the penalties tnus imposed workers of limited income, of course, suffer most heavily. These facts are so well established and so easily accessible that it is astonishing that so great a proportion of tho people' of this country have allowed themselves in recent years to be reduced to the position of passive spectators of the costly game of industrial strife.' The remedy I is in their own hands. It is to make industrial organisation a means of promoting instead of garrotting industry, and of lowering instead of increasing the cost of living. If the remedy is to be applied it must be worked out in detail, and the essential first step is the substitution" of an active and enlightened spirit of co-operation for the existing relations netween employers and employees. Mr. Weston spoke yesterday of the steadily developing attack upon the Arbitration Court and of the necessity of carefully considering what is likely to tako the place of our present industrial laws on the Statute Book before definitely deciding that a change is advisable. As a matter of fact not much is to be hoped for from tinkering with industrial legislation. At all events it "will be much more profitable to concentrate upon means of averting and preventing disputes than upon the in-

vention of some new form of tribunal to deal with them when they have arisen, and this is much more a matter for bodies of workers and employers to deal with on their own account than for the intervention of Parliament. In Great Britain the Whitley Committee on relations between employers and employees, in presenting its final report at the end of an exhaustive inquiry) reaffirmed its previously expressed conviction (hat "there is pressing need that every organised industry should equip itself with a representative machinery capable of dealing with the large questions of common interest to employers and employed arising in war time, during .demobilisation, and in the period after the war." There is no doubt that if an inquiry on similar lines were impartially conducted in this country 'much file same conclusion would bo reached. The d- 4 "!:';' of industrial organisation Kii'fi always be a matter of detail adjvUfcmcnt and settlement, but the elimination of the largely aimless strife which is now prevalent, and threatens to become chronic, would result in enormous, benefit alike to the parties engaged in industry and to the great third party which is called upon to meet the cost of their conflicts and shortcomings in organisa-tion. If common sense and a spirit of justice ruled its decision organised Labour would readily respond to the appeal for cloccjj and more friendly relations which was advanced yesterday by Me. Weston on behalf of the employers.