LABOUR AT GENEVA

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 40, 17 February 1930, Page 11

LABOUR AT GENEVA

SELECTION OF DELEGATE

ME. REARDON'S REPLY

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—lt is seldom that Mr. E. Kennedy lias such a loosq hold of his facts as he has in his letter of the 14th February. Ho says that I "complain about the Alliance of Labour issuing a circular to unions." I beg to assure him that I have made no complaint on that score. The circular is a source of great joy to me. It gives me a shot at tlio Great Panjandrum of Labour. 1 promise Mr. Kennedy that (space permitting) I shall deal with the whole "question from the national viewpoint." * ■ Take an extract from the circular, to begin with: "Mr. Roberts was selected as leader of the Labour Section of tho National Industrial Conference by the representatives of the whole of tho Trade Union Movement in New Zealand, and it will be admitted by every delegate who attended the Conference that lie filled the position in the most capable manner possible." Well, uulcss the delegates fear to tread on the corns of Mr. Koberts, they will have to admit:— (1) That Mr. James Roberts led them into a, morass. (2) That some of their number came out from the Conference and called upon a group of Wellington men to help them out of tho bog into which they had b'cen dragged. ■ In the main the proceedings of this National Industrial Conference were devoted to the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration ■ Act. Listen to the wise man: "The Labour Movement has given full •consideration to this matter, and, although it may appear to some that wo are in favour of tie Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act in its present form, this is not the case," (Report, page 142.) Again: "Then we come to the Court of Arbitration itself. Tho Labour Movement has considered the- question, and wo see no reason why other methods of adjusting industrial disputes could not be put into operation." There are 400 unions registered under this Act, "with upwards of 100,000 members. Does anyone believe that this man was expressing the studied opinion of such an army of unionists? Is that the sort of tosh the Alliance of Labour wishes to circulate on behalf of New Zealand at the Geneva Conference? The whole paper from which these two extracts are taken is the greatest jumble of balderdash and inaccuracy that I have ever seen in print. Mr. Roberts works up to his subject by stating that the Councils of Conciliation did better work than the Court of Arbitration, but were hamstrung by the pronouncements made by tho Court. In law, I understand, ignorance cannot be pleaded as an excuse. The law is quite clear. No case can be heard by the Court until it has first been submitted to a Council of Conciliation. What the Court did was to reserve to itself power to vary wages during tho currency of an award. The majority of tho unions took full advantage of the clause. "We ,say unhesitatingly that we have not received justice from that institution (the Court of Arbitration)' for many years past." That's one example of balderdash! "During th,e war period the bonuses allowed by the Court of Arbitration were only conceded to the .workers months after the cost of living had increased, and when these bonuses were conceded they did not by any means compensate the workers for the increaso in the price of commodities." The variation in the cost of living figures were ascertained by the Government Statistician, and the Court was bound by legislation to take this factor into consideration. But although this legia-_ latiou disappeared from the Statute' Book some years ago it was the subject of a,- broken melody by Mr. Roberts at the Industrial Conference in 1928. ■ "In 1921 Parliament wave power to the Court' of Arbitration to reduce wages by general order; but it may be as well to point out that Parliament gave no such power to the Court of Arbitration to, increase wages by general order." (Page 140.) Is it necessary to traverse such a glaring inaccuracy as that is? Yet it is typical of.the whole paper. But it was when Mr. Roberts demanded the 'abolition of compulsory arbitration that both sides sat up and took notice. It was for this very purpose that many of the employers' representatives were present. They felt at this stage that both sides were in complete agreement. • But no such enthusiasm marked the men who had entrusted Mr. Roberts with their leadership. The upshot of it was that the Labour delegation had to spend tho rest of its time backing down, the employers having conceded the thing that Mr. Roberts led them to believe that Labour was most anxious to possess. - I should like now to deal with the "national" character of tho Alliance of Labour. It sounds big. But it has a foreign flavour about it. It is an exotic growth that will find little favour with the workers of the Dominion once they have the chance to examine its inner workings.. It follows tho lines of the Industrial Workers of tli© World, born in Chicago, U.S.A., 1905. The preamble of the I.W.W. will come to memory if I just state the- opening paragraph:—"The working class and tho employing class have nothing in common. There can be no peace so long as hunger and want are found among millions of working people, and tho few, who make up the employing class, have all the good things of life." The whole rigmarole has been tried on the workers over and over again, but has been kept out of sight in recent years. I never found any , great number of workers in any part of this' Dominion who eared two hoots about high-sounding names and preambles. Most of them are old-fashioned unionists of the British typo who concern themselves about wages and working conditions and give their support to tho Labour Party in politics. The group of men in control of the Alliance of Labour have a fine contempt for these things.- If a delegate were being selected for a conference of the I.W.W. the Alliance of Labour would be tho right body to make a selection. But there is very little in common between those who propound the policy of tho Alliance of Labour and tho working people of this country. Tho high-sounding national title does not indicate the views of the trades unionists, and its title seems to bo its- stock-in-trade. The Chicago product sounded much .more awe-inspiring than the American Federation of Labour, but it was a wen on the great labour movement of America. So with the Alliance of Labour. Side by side with.the attempt to force their delegate on to tho Government, some of the group are- setting tho stage for an attack on the Labour Party. They will then appear in their true colours. Yet they do not blush at tho idea of sending a .delegate to Geneva, where the business is entirely devoted to consideration of Parliamentary action. What the trade unions should seek for in their delegate is-ono who will speak on behalf of the workers of this Dominion with some'regard for facts.—l am, etc., M. J. KEAKDON. 17th February.