STRIKES AND THEIR PREVENTION

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 44, 16 November 1920, Page 7

STRIKES AND THEIR PREVENTION

NEED FOR INDUSTRIAL STABILITY

PROPOSAL FOR PERMANENT TRIBUNAL i The prcsont position in the industrial world is anomalous and full of danger, writes Mr. G. N. Barnes, in the London "Observer," In the fost place organisations of employers and employed have' grown in dimensions and in strength, so that they can, if allowed free play, bring chaos to the community. Time was when organisations were small and when they could bo allowed, without much danger to the public weal, to. fight out their differences. That time has gone. The timo has come when strike or'lock-out assumes national imparlance and affects the whole community for good or ill. Time'was when the consumer was but remotely concerned in nn industrial dispute; now he is crushed between tho upper and nether milling stones of employer and employed—or employed and employer, as tho case may be.

And, in the old days, the Government could always intervene—generally at tho last _ moment—with some show of impartiality bceauso it was not a direct party to a dispute except in the Government workshops, nnd/in those there was the "established" element whirji made for stability. For the moment, and probably for all time in some part of the field, trial time lias also gone. And. in any case, it was not satisfactory, because tho Government had not the requisite technical knowledge to intervene with acceptance to l»th sides. Tt could only act with an eyo to the relative strength of the parties and not on the merits of a case :'n dispute. And. inasmuch as the resources of tho workers, invariably first exhibited signs of decline. Government intervention suffered in the eves of the workers , How can some 6ystem of settlement be Cevisod for tho future? Tieforo answering that question let us 6Ce if there nro forces at work which may make for settlement by the parties immediately concerned. I belicvo that industry is tending in tho direction of industrial councils which will develop a corpora to pride and which will thornselves make provision for settlements of disputes. I look forward, therefore, with, soma hopo to industry being organised in 6uch a way as to cither provent disputes taking place or, if dispute there should be, settle. them in the industry itself. It should be, and I believe ultimately will be, considered a disgrace on the part of an industry that it should ever' be a cause of disquietude to other industries.

As.Hint sense of corporate responsibility is developed disputes should bo sensibly diminished in number. Whatever their academic views may be in regard to ultimato organisation of society, employers and employed will, as sensible men, co-operate together in the task of sensibly conducting industry in the world in which they find themselves. Tho psychological factor will remain as the hardest nut to crack. Men arc contentious -beings, and there will always bo a few disputes which will i require, in their settlement, great patience and knowledge of human nature. But, apart. from these, the main things will, be knowledge of tho facts and technical knowledge of tho trades concerned. Wo bto gradually approaching the solution of industrial difficulties on tho abovo lines. If w« have not yet many industrial councils we at least are making a beginning in 66me of the best organised trades, and in others the executives of employers and employed—in 6ome cases the Government being the employers—do meet, anil as a rulo settle their 'differences. Hut there are the residue which do not get settled. For these I should favour, iii uie first place, some such plait OS was adopted for the transport workers a few months ago under the chairmanship of Lord Shaw—that is to ray, a quasS-judioiai court guided by somc-nno versed in laws of ovidencc and trusted by the community. The transport precedent is in fact a sood one for application to the coal difficulty, which involves not only a settlement of a wagoclaini. but « review of tho coal industry. .But now provision must be made fur' a permanent tribunal. And, in the interests of tho community, provision anust also be made for respect being paid to its decisions. iwH* imm BnOl, W it take? I. suggest that there should bo set up tho permanent olements of such a tribunal/and that additions could be mado of persons chosen from the industry in which, at any time, there was n case of dispute to be' settled. For this permanent centre or' nucleus I know of no bolter material than" lies to our hand in the Arbitration Court preflidod over by Sir David Harrel. It is one of tiro bodies—tho other one being tho Civil Service tribunal under Mr. Goro Brown—which has acquired an immense experience during and since the war. It is trusted as impartial, and is, n 2 m , ucl > " s any tiling: can be, independent of 'tho Government. I should- ask tho chairman of tho Arbitration Court to appoint two of the members to act with himself in tho constitution of tho new body. On a dispute being submitted (o it it would become his dirty to invito the disputants to each appoint a representative to join the court. , _Both_ sides should then come under obligation to slate their causes of dispute, mid they should further come under obligation to abide by the decision for a certain specified time. How could this condition be enforced? In the same way as the Loaguo of Nations covenant provides for the enforcement of its conditions. The offending nation is to be sent "to Coventry." I should do tho same with an offeiidinp organisation. - If it declined to submit its case or, having submitted it, declined io abide by decision, I should cut it off from banking facilities, bar it from receiving aid from kindred organisations, and, eo far as possible, ostracise it. As to tho cases to bo submitted to the court, I should leave that to the Government, with tho assent of Parliament when in session. The cases would only bo those of such magnitude as to be of national coucorn. Now, I know the objection that will be raised. Jt will lie said that.what I nm proposing is in tho nature of compulsory arbitration, and that will b<i enough to damn it in the eyes of the conservative leaders-of Labour. Of course, it is compulsory arbitration. And why not, pray? I would ask my old-fnshion-ed friends to ask themselves the question. Bo they think (hat an organisation which" enjoys the amenities of civilised life should be I'reo to paralyse the community which secures it. in these advantages? Do they think that any section of the people can at its undisputed will resort to methods of barbarism against the common good? If t-htey do they live in a fool's paradise. Of course, the scheme would have Io be discussed and endorsed by Parlia-' ment: and. as I have already said, I should leave the selection of cases io Government nnd to Parliament when in session. It will be- said that Parliament does not and cannot, enjoy the full confidence of the industrial world because of its pro-occupations and localise it has not the requisite knowledge. Well, it is true that Parliament is not nn,ideal Ibody to'deal with industrial problems. I believe that at koijio lime, there will bo devolution of function, and Parliament as we know it will be relieved of much which it dees badly. But the new Parliament, if it comcj, will' grow from the bottom. It will come from local nnd industrial councils, Wo c-.T'iwt wait for that to matirre. Wo must devise some common-sense method of adjusfriwt of industrial disputes now a* -i niv'.i'.i-i of saving ourselves from ntiavculy. And the way.to it is, I lwheve, by homo such menus as I liavo suggesl.cj. ■