AUXILIARY ARBITRATION COURT.

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Volume 81, Issue 38, 8 November 1937, Page 4

AUXILIARY ARBITRATION COURT.

There can be no question as to tbe Grovernment having adopted tbe proper conrse in deeiding to set up a suppiementary conrt under tbe Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Aet to deal witb the big volume of jndicial twork 'that bas acciimulated since tbe Labour Party took office. This congestion bas, of course, been largely the result of the new degislation passed dnring tbe last two years and calling for fresh interpretations and decisions. Tlie only reproach that may be raised is that the necd for the step that is now being taken was not recognised a good deal earlier, especially when delays in the hearing of cases were heing made the excnse for trade itnions resorting to illegitimate, if not illegal, direct action" in one form and another. Tlie Bill now before the Honse of Representatives assumes that the position that has thns arisen will not he of long duratioi. In fact, it would seem as if the Government entertained hopes that conditions will be returned to normal withrn twelve months, for it is for that period only that appointments to the new Court are in the first instance to be made. Whether these hopes wili be fully realised may perhaps he 'doubted, particularly when we bear in mind that the Government is still threatening further industrial legislation.^ It is reassuring to note that the new Court is to be presided over by one of the present judges of the, Supreme Court, a temporary judge of that Court being appointed by way of sub- ' stitute to carry out his duties under that jurisdiction. There might, however, be some exception taken to the fact that. the Bill proposes to place entirejy in the hands of the Minister the nomination of the other two members of tbe new Arbitration Court, those representing respeetively the employers and the workers, who in the case of the main Court have hitherto been appointed upon the reeommendation of the orgaisations concerned. However, in this respect we shpuld be able^ to rely tipon the Minister, so far as circumstances and expedition will admit, still consulting with these organisations before making his appointments and so avoiding all suspicion of the eonstitution of a lopsided tribunal. There can be no doubt either that the work of both the existing and the new Court will be appreciably facilitated by the power that is given them to refer minor matters of detail for consideration and decision by a stipendiary magistrate, a registrar of the Supreme Court, or some other compe- ' tent and responsible official, who will report to the higher Court. In this respect, moreover, a safeguard is provided inasmuch as decisions are open to appeal to and review hy the higher Court itself. The suggestion has heen offered that, in order to avoid any divergence or conflict of opinion hetween the two Arbitration Courts, there should be some attempt at elassification of the types of cases to which eaeh would give speeial attention It may, however, be doubted whether this can very well be done and at the same time accomplish the primary purpose of clearing up arrears of all kinds as speedily as possible. In fact, having regard to the very unsettled.relations as between employers and employees that . have been and may be created, it may very well be f ound that the seeond Arbitration Court will have to be given a much longer existence than the twelve months now in eontemplation and perhaps, indeed, have to be converted into a permanent institution. In the meantime, however, it will undoubtedly serve a very good purpose, provided it is fully constituted and functions in the way that is hoped