INDUSTRIAL CRISIS.

Hokitika Guardian, 15 March 1922, Page 4

INDUSTRIAL CRISIS.

POSITION IN AUSTRALIA. EMPLOYERS AND EMPLOYEES CONFER. SYDNEY, Feb. 2S. The round-table conference between representatives of the employers and the employees, convened by the Prime Minister (Mr Hughes), which was opened in Sydney this week, is probably without precedent in Australia, and lor that reason it is being looked upon with a good deal of suspicion by labour generally. So much so, in fact, that many of the invited organisations, including the Trades and Labour Councils of Melbourne, Brisbane, and Adelaide refused to attend, alleging that the conference was merely part of a huge conspiracy on the part of the employers to reduce wages. However, those who attended the conference might be said to he fully representative of both sides. On behalf of the employers there were representatives of the Central Council of Employers, Commonwealth Steamship Owners’ Association, Broken Hill Proprietary Company, Mines and Metal Association, Associated Chambers of

Manufacture, Collieries Proprietors’ Association, and the Graziers’ Federal Council. For the employees there were representatives of the Trades and Lahour Councils of Sydney, Hobart, and Perth, Amalgamated Society of' Engineers, Coal and Shale Employees’ Federation, and the Australasian Society of Engineers. At the outset it appeared that there would he trouble because of the employees’ objection to the nomination by the employers of Mr Hughes as chairman, hut eventually his appointment

was agreed to. Some interesting facts were given by the Prime Minister in outlining tlie reasons for the calling of the conference. “There are,” he said, “two parties to this conference —partners ill production they have been described [ by one section—the employers and the employees. The functions of the former are broadly, to supply necessary plant and machinery, to direct the operation of the industries, and to, carry on their various activities in such n manner as to leave a margin over the cost of production. Before a share of tlte margin can lie divided, or before it can be determined whether the share will he greater or smaller than at present, there must of necessity he a margin. At the present time there is in many industries no margin at all. The employees say. in short, that the businesses into not run in the most efficient and up-to-date way. Whatever the reason, many men have been discharged, and the indications are that it is proposed to dismiss more. Ace we to sit down, until these and other industries are overwhelmed in the morass that threatens them, or are we to meet the situation frankly?” Mr Hughes utfered a timely warning to t ! ’e extremists: “If we arc to deal as practical men with affairs as they arc,” he said, “we have to recog-

nise it it quite wrong to say to an unemployed malt, ‘The remedy for your trouble is revolution—-it rests in communism or syndicalism.’ Tiiose who say this know very well that before the workman can get into the paradise offered by revolution and syndicalism there is a long, bloody road to travel. Meanwhile ho will get very hungry.” Dealing with the economic side of the question, Mr Hughes said that the wages paid in any country were limited by the wealth produced. In 1916-14 the production was £218,000,000, and in 1919-20 £348,000,000. In 1907 £2 2s was considered a fair and reasonable wage, but the purchasing power of the sovereign had so depreciated that what ■could ho bought for £2 2s in 1907

(ink! cost £4 4s in 1916; so that the

actual value of production in 1919-20 was Cl 73,000,000. Wliat, had happen-

ed in this country was that the rate of production was falling off, and it ! was necessary to produce more wealth ; and in order to produce wealth it was not sufficient to find employment, hut it was essential that it should he found under such conditions that would enable industry to be carried on. The man in the street wanted increased production so that lie could get employment. Taking the year 1913-11 as a standard, Australia produced £45,000,000 less in 1919-20 than we did then. Mr Hughes intimated that the Go-

vernment was prepared to create machinery which would enable the establishment of some permanent bodies with authorities much greater than those of the Whitley Councils.

The question of the basis of discussion was also the cause of some disagreement, but at last the following basis was settled on:: The general economic and industrial situation in Australia. Tlfe position of particular industries. The employers’ proposals arising out of the conference. ■ The employees’ proposals. During the discussion on the first question, some startling figures were given by one of the employers’ representatives. He stated that the qualitative mass production of Australia bad fallen off since 1913-14 by more than 20 per dent, and that, allowing for increased population, the production per head had fallen off 28 per cent. He added that generally nearly two-thirds of the expenditure on industry went in wages. In Australia, fuel, administration, and depreciation absorbed about 28 per cent of the total proceeds of industry. If the whole profit of distributions were taken by labour, the result would Ire to yield only a few shillings a week to each worker.