NINE THOUSAND POUNDS A YEAR.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 2463, 5 August 1922, Page 2

NINE THOUSAND POUNDS A YEAR.

A LABOUR UNION’S EXPENDITURE. WHERE? HERE IN NEW ZEALAND. It is reported to us that a Labour r Union in New Zealand whose Secretary has talked much about the “One Big Union” idea, has, during the last two years spent £IB,OOO collected from the individual members in fees and levies. £IB,OOO in two years seems outrageous and we will not be surprised if some readers say, “we do not believe it.” But this is not mere idle rumour we are detailing. A copy., of the Union’s balance-sheet for last year is in our possession and it shows an expenditure of £IO,OOO for the year, that is a measure of evidence which cannot. be ignored. The information comes to us that the expenditure has been £IB,OOO for the two years. Readers will exclaim —“where has it gone, what has been done with it!” Well, the Balance-Sheet we possess shows very large sums paid in salaries, organisers expenses, delegates expenses, conference costs, etc. In another place we read of £I,OOO being donated to a Miners Union in S.A. (probably V. South Africa). Those defending such extravagence (to use a mild term) protest that, it is nobody’s business but the members of the Union who pay. That argument is quite unsound in face of the facts that these Unions are Registered bodies established under the law, and that members are compelled to pay into them under pressure of the “preference” provision that is sanctioned by Parliament. We have taken up the matter of seeking to secure from Parliament a legal enactment for the proper safeguarding of Trade Union funds because a number of workers belonging to Unions have asked us to do so. They tell us that if they tried to fight against the abuses taking place they would, as individuals, be marked men and made to suffer for their temerity. In support of that plea we actually know of individuals who have been driven out of the occupation they had followed for years because they dared - - to fight against certain levies being imposed on them. SAFEGUARDING OF FUNDS.

But a little time ago there was the instance of the Miners Federation Secretary embezzling the funds of his organisation, and severe strictures were passed on the looseness of control diplayed in respect to the accounts of'that body. To-day we have it re]>orted lo us that another Union is short some £1,300 or £l,400. Whether this latest rumour is correct or not it is certainly true that from time to time a single Officer gets away with a Union’s funds. In saying this we are not reflecting on the honesty of Trade Union Officers in general. AVhat interests us is to know how so much power is left in the hands of any one Officer that he can, if so disposed, purloin the funds over an extended period of time. There is certainly gross laxity somewhere. Looking at the matter justly and without prejudice it must be recognised that a cruel wrong is perpetrated on the individual workers when they pay regularly rather high fees into a Union the safeguarding of which money is not protected by law.

In the ease of Friendly Societies the members interests are legally protected by strict provisions of statute law. In the instance of Indus trial Unions there are no such provisions, and when we have urged the need for reform to meet these circumstances we have had the bogus Labour members in Parliament talking as if we were attacking Trade Unionism. How stupid these individuals are —we are actually defending Trade Unionism against the evils of wasteful expenditure; the dangers of crooked business and the unjust burdens cast on individual workers. All we ask is that the industrial law shall he amended to provide:—

(a) That all Union -accounts shall be audited by a certificated Accountant. (b) That a. Return of such accounts shall be supplied to the Registrar of Industrial Unions. ' ; (c) That the Registrar of Industrial Unions shall have the same power of scrutinising the accounts of the Union and Associations registered under the Conciliation and Arbitration Act that the Registrar of Friendly Societies 1 ,!, s with respect, to societies registered under the Friendly Societies Act. (d) That Unions and Associations shall be prohibited from spending any of their funds upon objects other than those for which, they-are registered. In conclusion we shall challenge ain member of Parliament to show anything wrong in these proposals. Here is a reform that all parties could support with credit to.themselves, yet by some strange political necromancy none of them will Mainly face the matter of doing this simple act of justice for thousands of individual wage earners whose funds are being left as the sport of ncompetence and, at times, of criminality. (Contributed by the N.Z. Welfare League.)