“One Big Union” or One Big Bluff.

Hokitika Guardian, 27 February 1922, Page 4

“One Big Union” or One Big Bluff.

WHAT IS THE ALLIANCE .OF LABOURP

C KNTP A LIS ATI ON, TH E AM) 1 1 KE U S ENEMY. (Contributed by the N.Z. Welfare League). In the last issue of the “Maorilnnd Worker” it is stated that “'Four organisers ane visiting branches of the Post

and Telegraph .Officers’ Associat ion wit!) the object of explaining the constitution of the Alliance of Labour, and of educating members in the benefits of affiliation.” This is interesting in view of the fact, which the P. and 1. officers ought to know, that the greater number of Trade bilious in New Zealand are not affiliated with tit?- ALlianeo of Labour. A great many Trade Unionists regard the Alliance eombina- j tion as a positive danger to the Lab- , our movement of the Dominion. We find that a good deal of mystery surrounds this Alliance, its aims are explained one way by such men as Messrs M. J. Mack and W. T. Young and in quite another way by -Messrs J. Roberts and L. Glover of t'be AY aterside ' Federation. At one time it is against the Conciliation and Arbitration Act, at another time for it. When we put ’ certain plain direct questions to its officers, in order to make clear its position, they had not either the courtesy or the 'courage to answer them. If the Alliancel wants to let the Civil ,Servants know what .its Constitution is; we would suggest that an easy means, and less costly than sending out organisers, is to supply the press with some copies for publication. As l.ar hack as November 1920 it was report?d “that a conference representing 80,000 workers met as delegates to the Alliance of Labour, when a resolution wj»s passed that the aims and objects of the Alliance should he more fully placed l e- : fore the public in the various centres.” From that time till now we have never seen the Constitution printed in any daily newspaper, where it could be read by the public. We know leading newspapers that ImVte tried to secure a copy and have so far failed to do so. The League has respectfully asked lor a copy hut has not yet secured one. Messrs J. Roberts and L. Glover in an interview with the “Tiiuaru LIT raid” the aims were (1) —“To have the Parliamentary representatives of the people elected Ingroups of individual trades, irom wharf labourers to bankers, rather than by the present haphazard method ot geographical representation.” (2) —“To give control of the manual carrying out of the diflorent industries to the worker.”

(3). —“To coiiline industrial disputes to the Department in which they originate.”

It is perfectly clear that aim No. 1 is political anl yfet we find Mr M. J. Mack, President of the Alliance, writing to the “N.%. Times” of the 14th December 192*1, that “the Alliance takes no part in tilie political activities ot the N.Z. Labour Party. They confine themselves to the industrial situation.” It is surely an utter sham for a body to say its aim is to revolutionise the whole Parliamentary system, and that it confines itself to thrfe industrial situation.

W’liat the P. and T. Officers’ Association is being urged to join is an Alliance having a political revolutionary policy of exactly the same character as the old Red Federation, which the Alliance has replaced. Further proof of this' is presented in an article supplied by Mr J. Roberts, Secretary for the Alliance, in which he says:—Clause 42 of the objective of the N.Z. Alliance of

Labour is—“ The collective ownership of the means of production and distribution and the control of the industries by the workers who operate them in the interests of the community.”

The agents of the Alliance profess that it has now 40,000 members, tliat it, is seeking to include all National

Labour Unions and Federations, together with the Civil Servants of the Dominion. It is to be the “One big Union.” A Labour oligarchy which will dominate by force of numbers. It is the German junkers ideal of centralising power and relying on force. Ylr YY. Livesey, late chief clerk to tlie .Mining Crisis” (which we advise all

trade unionists to read) shows that the one big unionism is a very big bluff on the public and a big fraud on the workers. Everywhere it lias been tried it, lias resulted in:—

(1). —The placing of political revolution in the forefront of the industrial programme.

(*>).—The withdrawal of self direction from the rank and file of the workers and enhancing the power of the officials.

(3). —The creation ol a Labour Bureaucracy which challenged the State and involved the workers in impossible contests < from which they had to withdraw with great suffering. Where the “(hie Big Unionism” fails is that it dare not face its logical outcome which is physical revolution, and its very bigness and complexity makes it' ineffective in dealing with industrial disputes on their real merits as well as the single Unions can. In Great Britain whilst the Gods of the “Triple Alliance” (officials) debated, and debated, tens of thousands of

workers wert run into trouble, eonfusion, misery and hitter want. What the P. and T. Officers, and all workers, would do well to consider is that One big Unionism means strengthening the vested interests ; f official heads; that it has recently created conditions of untold hardship in England by its impracticability and that the individual workers are cutting their own throats where they allow tie pooler of control, negotiation and settlement to go out of their own hands into the One big Unionism, which in practice is “too big officialism, If the Alliance officers think we are doing them an injustice we challenge tfifem to publish their constitution and let the public judge.