ARBITRATION Court

Hokitika Guardian, 17 July 1922, Page 4

ARBITRATION Court

[liY TELEGRAPH—PER PRESS ASSOCIATION]

CRITICISM AND A DKF,ENCE. WELLINGTON, duly 13

If the Arbitration Act is to remain on tlm Statute Book we must have some better means of enforcing awards of the court, declared the Hon H. Moore, in the Legislative Council, lie agreed with the suggestion that if a union refused to abide by an award its registration should lie cancelled, but he would go further and punisll the agitator who had misled tlio men. Preference to unionists, lie added, bad been used in a way never intended, and bad placed a. dangerous weapon in I lie. hands of the labour agitator. He was not saying that preference to unionists should lie abolished at once, but unless it "as used in a different manner the time would come when it would have to he abolished. No union should lie allowed to go on strike before /it bad taken a secret ballot, under the jurisdiction of an independent official, say one appoint.nl by the Government, so that union bosses would not be in a position to punish those who voted against n. strike. . A whole-hearted support of existing conditions was found in the Hon . . Barr, who followed. To attempt to abolish the Act, he said, would he the greatest mistake that could lie made. Those who spoke of awards not being observed by unions did not seem to real iso that the work of the ordinary union secretary was very largely to get employers to carry out the terms of awards. Little of that was ever given publicity, except occasionally when a question came to the Magistrate’s Court, but the moment some misguided secretary made a mistake along came the critic and Mamed the conit and everything in it. • -