Farmers’ Conference.

Hokitika Guardian, 9 June 1922, Page 1

Farmers’ Conference.

[ny TELUORAPn— PER PRESS ASSOCIATION] AUCKLAND. Juno 8. The Auckland Fanners’ Conference to-day adopted a remit that preference to unionists be abolished. The mover, 8. Hodge, said the advocates of the abolition of preference had no idea of reducing wages below the cost of living ns thaH; would mean a curtailment of tho peoples’ purchasing power. and would ho inurious to business. He said the preference had greatly increased tho of production, owing to reduced efficiency and it increased wages. If it were right that workers should dictate who should be employed, if was logical that they should have tho right to dictate how business should ho carried on. Men who didn’t want to join a union wore compelled to do so and they therefore look no interest in their union, and its control fell into the hands of extremists.

Captain F. Crlbcck advocated a temporary suspension of flic Arbitration Court, to allow employers and workers t'i get together and make equitable adjustment. The Court was fixing wages that the employers could not pay, resulting in unemployment. SOME STRAIGHT TALK.

Ah- W. Furness said Mint tlio ndoption of this remit would moan open war ngninst unionism. The abolition of preference would moan the destruction of the unions. It would enable men to undersell labour, and ’to force down the standard of living. The farmer lie pointed out, would bo the first to suffer as the consuming power of the community would ho reduced. Mr Furness declared that tlio farmers were being used by the exploiting interest Ho smash labour unionism.

Mr A. A. Ross said that in Canada and in America, where preference to unionists did not exist wages- were higher than in this Dominion. The output of workers in America was in consequence higher than in British countries. Unions were strong enough to get what -they desired, without preference. Mr .T. Shallworlhy said that ono evil of preference was that the employer was afraid to increase the wages of a good worker, as by doing so, ho supplied grounds for union demands for all round increases.' The President, Mr Duxfield, said that no exception would he taken to preference used in the rig'llt way, and if only efficient men were kept in unions. Tlio unions he said, allowed slackers and inoffioients to rule, with the result that preference was abused and discredited.