Economic -Conference

Hokitika Guardian, 23 March 1922, Page 4

Economic -Conference

AUSTRALIA’S INDUSTRIAL PROBLEM UNSOLVED.

SYDNEY, March 9

As seemed to be unavoidable from. I the commencement the round-table con Terence between representatives of employees and employers convened by the Prime Minister (Mr Hughes) with the idea of endeavouring to find some •solution of the industrial crisis which threatens Australia, has come to an abrupt and abortive conclusion. For a number of days the delegates at the coiiference did not get beyond academic discussions on economic problems, with an occasional wrangle between the representatives of the two sides. When each side submitted definite proposals, however, the width of the gulf between employer and employee in Australia was apparent, and the abortive ending of the conference seemed certain.

In their proposals the employers accepted the principle of a minimum wage, ascertained on a proper and equitable basis, sufficient to maintain the workers in comfort. As the most effective means of increasing production, and at the same time increasing the workers’ share of the wealth produced. the employers affirmed the principle of piece-work, and suggested that profit-sharing might be applied to those industries whose circumstances lent themselves to such a. proposal. Their proposals also included a 48 hour week, and a reconstruction of industrial arbitration to avoid overlapping and contradictory awards.. The employees’ proposals were in a far less conciliatory spirit.. They declared that only fhel socialisation of industry with workers’ control offered ;i solution for the impending collapse of industrv. They subject to confirmation by the Australian trade union movement as a. whole, that a joint commission be established, composed of representatives of the -Federal and State Governments, the employers and the trade unions to devise teehtiirn.l means whereby continuity of operation in industry may he preserved during the period of crisis, subject to common agreement in principle of the following basic claims of the workers: No reduction in wages or lengthening of hours; adequate employment insurance as a legitimate risk of. and charge upon, industry; effective share by the worker in t e control of industry. The day following the submission of the proposals, the conference terminated abruptly, the employers’ representatives declining to proceed with discussion of the proposals submitted l,v the workers’ delegation, on the ground that the system suggested would result as disastrously in Australia as it had in Russia. The attitude of unionists generally regarding the conference has been voiced by the Australian Workers Union in. an official statement issued at the •termination of the conference, says: “There was an amosphere of irreconcilable hostility about the •fathering that one could not mistake, flow could it he otherwise. The bosses want a .reduction in wages. They want to lengthen the hours of toil. On the side of Labour there is a fierce determination to reject proposals which would involve a lowering of the standard of living. What was the use of asking men thus sundered by unbridgahle differences to meet at a round fable? Every word that was spoken deepened the gulf. It was curious to listen to the discussion.' You could hear the clash of the class war in the accents of the speakers.”