WHAT OF WAIHI?

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLV, Issue 2539, 6 February 1923, Page 4

WHAT OF WAIHI?

GO-SLOW STRIKE POLICY 7 .

We remember one occasion when industrial troubles at Waihi became of a most acute character. It is to be hoped that the present differences between the Mining Companies and the Waihi Miners’ Union will not assume such an aspect. The Union objects to an award given by the Arbitration Court and according to report some of the Unionists desire to take the law into their own hands. A stop-work meeting was arranged by the Union with the result that the Milling Companies through Mr Charles Rhodes, telegraphed the Mining Officials as follows:—

“If a stop-work meeting is called by the Union for Saturday morning notify all. Unions and post notices at the mine, the mill, and the workshops that all operations will cease at eight o’clock on Saturday morning, including the pumping. The question of resuming work is to be considered only after the/go-slow’ policy is vetoed by the unionists. It. is utterly impossible to make the Waihi Company’s operations pay unless every man is doing his very best. In any ease, if there is a stoppage on Saturday, no work, will be recommenced* until Tuesday.” Notwithstanding Ibis declaration we understand the stop-work meeting was held and in consequence work at the mines ceased. Mr Rhodes is reported to have said, in reference to this stoppage—“ One thing is certain that work will not be resumed until the miners have actually vetoed the ‘go-slow’ movement.” It is our hope that the ‘go-slow’ policy may be turned doWn even before this appears in print and some more rational method of settlement found. CONCILIATION COMMTSSION- . ER’S VIEW.

We observe that Mr P. Halley, the Conciliation Commissioner, indicates that there are differences of opinion amongst the men about the “go-slow” plan. One section, he says, is inclined to this dishonourable‘policy but so far as he knew, the leading members of the Union were strongly opposed to going slow and he would be greatly surprised •if this policy was carried into effect. We trust that Mr Halley’s confidence is rightly placed'. The term “dishonourable policy” which he uses is none too strong as the “go-slow” is both dishonourable and stupid.

WHERE RESTS THE CONTROL?: What we would like to know is where rests the power of control in these matters. There is much reported of large combinations of Labour Federation and Alliance—directing on questions of general policy. Does the Waihi Miners Union belong to the N.Z. Miners’ Federation? Has the Miners’ Federation decided what its industrial policy is with respect to “go-slow” practices? Again, we understand •the miners are attached to the Al-liance-of Labour and the question arises “what' is the policy of the Alliance with respect to the “goslow?” From appearances it would seem- as if each single Union acted in this matter for itself and, of course, a bare majority of the Union might decide to hold up a whole industry. This instead of being named “Industrial Unionism” might father be called “Industrial Anarchism.”

Mf Halley, speaks of “the leading members of the- Union” but have we not all known occasions when the leaders- were really “the led.” So much injury can be done to the workers themselv.es and the conimunitiesby the adoption of a wrong policy and the dislocation of industry, that it is time more definite control was exercised-in these matters. If the large Federations, and the Alliance, wish to have the confidence of the public they should trust the people and declaim openly what is their policy in- respect to the practice of go-slow industrial methods. A POLICY OF SUICIDE. The practice of “go-slow” by a

body of workers, to the injury of the industry on which they depend for their living, impresses us as a policy of industrial suicide. Putting aside the evil to the community and the nation of such practices what, we ask, can the working operatives expect to gain by such a method? Where it is entered upon as a bluff the intention is so evident that the practice must defeat its own object. Taking the present case of Waihi and miners’ action has enabled the Mine Management to say that the men cannot be so ill off in regard to earnings when they can afford to cut off part of their own living. Whether the miners have a good ground for objecting to the Arbitration Court’s Award or not we are not qualified to say. Of this we are sure that the remedy is not to be found in stopping the industry, if any remedy is required. To make a further cut in their own''wages, because the Court awarded a reduction is like cutting their own throats to save their lives. Miners in general are men of some sense and we trust the men at Waihi will put aside a practice which would brand them as foolish indeed. (Contributed by the N.Z. Welfare League.)