The Evening Star TUESDAY, JUNE 19, 1934. THE SHIPPING TROUBLE.

Evening Star, Issue 21750, 19 June 1934, Page 8

The Evening Star TUESDAY, JUNE 19, 1934. THE SHIPPING TROUBLE.

A week ago it began to be evident that trouble was brewing in the shipping industry. When the Union Company’s liner Mauuganui left Sydney for Wellington she was due for overhaul in the latter port. Some of her cooks and stewards who had originally signed on in Sydney were paid off there, the company preferring that course to tho alternative of paying them off a few days later in Wellington and then providing them with a passage back to Sydney, their home port. The Makura, which had just completed an overhaul in Wellington, was to have taken up the Maunganui’s uncompleted voyage to San Francisco next day’, but in the meantime a meeting of the Cooks and Stewards’ Union had been held, and none of their members responded to tho call to sign on with tho Makura. The union officials, however, notified the shipowners that if an increase in wages were granted the men would sign articles. This rise the company declined to grant, and the Makura was laid up. The same company’s Monowai then arrived in Wellington from Auckland, and was scheduled to sail for Sydney, hut as soon as she arrived those of her cooks and stewards whose home port was Wellington gave notice and were paid off. Nevertheless, her passengers embarked, but, as the rest of the crew declined to take the vessel to sea shorthanded in the department mentioned, the trip was cancelled, and tho Monowai is to remain in Wellington and undergo survey and overhaul some time later. It now appears as though the connection between New Zealand and Australia will devolve off the Wanganella, whoso crew are on Australian articles, and tho Matson liners, whoso crews are on American articles, while to these latter vessels will fall a monopoly of the Australia-New Zealand-’Frisco route. It is true that there has also been trouble between tho Matson line and the watersiders, but that disputehas its origin on the Pacific Coast, and should in no way be confused with what to New Zealanders is a far more vital and disturbing issue. There seems to bo very little doubt that at the root of tho matter is the 10 per cent, cut made just three years ago, and this is a matter in which more than the cooks and stewards are directly interested. For some time past negotiations for restoration have been attempted on behalf of the union. The award was cancelled consequent on the repeal of compulsory arbitration, and proceedings under the conciliation provisions of the law have been abortive. Repeatedly the union’s requests for a conference with representatives of the Union Company have been declined, one reason given being that other maritime unions were involved. Representatives of the various unions have recently conferred and have sought for a conference villi the Union Company early in July to discuss wages. The company replied that it ■ would meet tho men’s representatives to discuss the agreement.” The men, however, insisted on the issue being confined to the wages question. There thus arose a deadlock, and a subsequent approach to tho Shipowners’ Federation disclosed the same attitude as has been adopted by its most important unit of membership—the shipowners are not prepared to limit the discussion to one of wages, but are prepared to discuss complete new agreements in accordance with invariable custom.

To the layman it is somewhat mysterious that while one party is keenly desirous of a conference, and the other party is not unwilling, they remain aloof. It appears to be a fixed principle with the men that the 10 per cent, wages cut is a thing apart, and that its restoration must be discussed separately from anything else at issue, notably the divergence as to whether the working week shall consist of fortyeight hours or sixty-three hours as now. The argument they put forward is that the savings made by the lower wage sheets have not been passed on to customers in the shape of lower fares and Heights, but are a gift to the shareholders. In the terribly depressed state of the British shipping industry this argument will cut less ice with the general public than it might have done in other circumstances. The gradual displacement of British shipping by subsidised foreign shipping is a possibility to which the Commonwealth of British nations is slowly awakening. At the present juncture an internal dispute leading to dislocation of services of any duration is one of the surest ways to turn that possibility into a probability. It is understood that the New Zealand Government is at present watching developments without as yet finding cause for. intervention. However, as colliers and cargo vessels in the same ownership are now lying up as they reach Wellington, tho determination of the unions to bring matters to a head is evident. What influence the Government can exert to bring about a conference before dislocation develops into paralysis of services might well bo brought to bear without delay. AIR STRENGTHS. The statement of Lord Londonderry. British Air Minister, that Britain must increase her air force if other nations persist in adding to theirs was inevitable in all the circumstances. It was prepared for by an earlier statement by Mr Baldwin, But if “ parity in the aiy,” as announced by Lord Londonderry, is to be the British objective, a long leeway must be made up, at heavy financial cost, to obtain it, and if the first effect of British building is to give a new spurt to that of other nations the cost will be heavier still. When the Great War closed Britain stood first among the air Powers. She stands fifth at tho present time. Since it is doubtful whether any defensive measures can ever give more than very partial protection against an air in-

vasion, the strongest reason is presented why the nations should agree on limitations to the typos and uses of this arm, instead of competing in construction. If the German Government is sincere in its profession that it wants only defensive short range aeroplanes, without bombers, agreement should not be impossible, but France does not trust the German Government. The conversations of Signor Mussolini and Herr Hitler would have more power for general reassurance if they detonated less with talk about their defence. The air correspondent of the London ‘ Observer ’ has been studying Germany’s aerial activity, and to him it seems less alarming than it does to France. At the same time he is by no means disposed to treat it lightly.. Since the war, he declares, under the restrictions imposed by the Allies, which have often been a stimulus to her resourcefulness, Germany has achieved wonders in technical efficiency. “ There is abundant evidence of plan in the organisation of her aircraft industries and of her air-line development, in the Advanced training of her air-line pilots, in what amounts almost to compulsory instruction in aeronautics, of her youth, and in the liberal financial and other stimulus (not all of it on the surface) given to flying. It is certain that when all restrictions are openly cast asifle Germany will be ready for an incredibly swift advance to the position of an air Power of the first rank.” Nevertheless, there have been exaggerations in England of her achievements.- For example, it has been seriously stated that the big flying-boat, Do-X, carries a crew of 170 (!), and can deliver a load of seve.i tons of bombs, the truth of the matte. 1 being that in a trial flight with the least possible petrol on board she carried a dense pack of 170 people into the air. As a war instrument this unwieldy craft need not be taken too seriously. Germany has ordered highpower aero-engines from Great Britain and the United States, and the very fact 1 that she lias given these orders is proof of her own inability to supply all her needs in this respect. The advice of this expert is: “Let cur' engine makers sell all they can, for it is highly probable that in two years’ time Germany will be self-sufficient in this as in other manufacturing resources. This assistance to Germany’s equipment need not cause alarm, for the supply could at any moment be stopped, and Germany has not the means for the manufacture of these types. There appears to be no doubt, however, that Germany has for some time past been building highpower aero-engines, and that not all of them are intended for use on the air lines.” What the scare reports overlook is the fact that it is not sufficient merely to design high-performance aeroplanes or engines; it takes three or four years to make them satisfactory in operation, the process involving longcontinued technical trials, and further trials under service conditions. The correspondent believes that Germany is almost certainly building fighters and bombers, and many of her air-line trainers are designed for rapid fitting of more powerful engines, which would turn them into fighters. It is certain, too, that she has war aircraft stored in branch factories in neighbouring countries. The first necessity of any limitation agreement, therefore, would be an efficient system of international supervision and inspection.