Labor Leg-Ironed OR Liberal and Labor Party Arbitration Acts in N.S.W.

Maoriland Worker, Volume 2, Issue 74, 9 August 1912, Page 8

Labor Leg-Ironed OR Liberal and Labor Party Arbitration Acts in N.S.W.

With Brief Reference to the N.Z. Arbi-

tration Act.

By H. E. HOLLAND.

(Continued.)

Sub-clauses were added giving any policeman of or above the rank of sergeant the, power to enter any house, home, or building, by breaKing open windows or (lours, jf ho suspected a meeting was being held to discuss strike matters. , Two peopb worn declared to eotistitaite a meeting, ano tbercforo tlu- poiieo had power under this law to break into a man s bedroom on tlio plo.i tiiat they suspected that- he and Ins wito woro talkimi; strike, ;uid if a man and his wife were found. guilty oi thus talking strike or discussing how to aid even a woman on strike, they" could c-ucii bo jailed io.r a year with hard labor! How tho <'oal .strike officials, betrayed by Labor members, were prosecuted under the conspiracy laws as well as under tlie Coercion Act. and how they wero eventually jailed, is now a matter of history. , i How tlv. L-'ibor Party's Parliamentary candidates denounced the Coercion Ac',, and declared ihey would repeal it if returned to power, and how-on this promise and by industriously jangling Peter Bowling's iVoin the Tweed to the .Murray and irom Sydney to liroken'llill, they succeeded in winning through to the Ciovortiment. ibv.chc;. and how for a voiir and a-hall they continued to administer the- Coercion Act and prosecuted strikers in hundn :ls and Icul them heavily lined, and Hung some oi them .into jail, and how they did everything in almost, exactly the same way that Wad;'- did it! and how they employed the same police and the same ninm>l rates and Ihe saw Crown prosecutors and the same iiul"-o (Trni") that \Var!e had employed against tho workers, and W they put Uri-.m. "Scully (President of the Western timers) m the sMmi< p! that Wad,'put Pou-r Bowling in, is now a matter ot infamous liistory. THE LABOR PARTY'S MEW COERCION ACT. r !V infamy of tl:at history has now been added tojjy the cnactm:.'u!: oi' the Labor ?*■■. 11 \"s new arbitration law, which succeeds the Coercion. Act. The netv Act. is also a coercion Act—it is designed coerce men inlo scabbcry. It is called the Industrial Arbitration Act, I<JIL\ and io contains all tiie worst features ot Wtuh's Coercion Act. as we .shall we as we go aloiig. it is tine that the h)V2 Act repeals that portion of the 1909 Act which gave such extraordinary powers to the police and made, it possible to jail either men or women for a year, with hard labor, if by striking they interfered with the supply of coal, gas, water or any article of food, etc, but it is significant that in the "definition"' of the 1911> Act Wade's clause ro "necessary commodity" is retained. The definition of the word "strike" is exactly as Wade loft it, except that the woul "ordinary" has been inserted before "meaning." .Section 9 of the new Act provides that: — Tho Court may cancel th" registration- of an i'^:?strial union if proof is given to its' satisfaction that a mix, ;>■ in number of Ihe members of the union, by secret ballot i.... ,i as proscribed, require such cancellation. But- there can be no cancellation while an award is in fore?; and if no award affecting tho union concerned is ouerat'iiig. and the union desires to cancel its ivgisiiai'ion, and end its connection with the Cciii'f. it is. not permitifd i.) have any voice or control in the eoii'liici of the ballot. Clause 1-i of! the "Kegulations" provides til;it the ballot siiall b' , taken at a. pirating summoned by the Registrar and presided over by the Registrar, who shall appoint the polling clerks, the scrutineers, and other officers. Tho Registrar is to provide the ballot boxes and ballot papers and everything else that, is necessary. He is to.decide who shall be present at ".he meeting and who sPmll not —who shall vote and v. ho shall not. vote. All qii".stiori:i of order and procedure are to be by him. And if the union, disapproves of the way he does tilings, the Registrar is lo have pov/ei* io adjourn the meeting to any such time as he pleases. He r.iay declare any voting paper invalid. At the closo of the poll, he will' open, the boxes and examine- the voting papers, and compute the result, of the ballot, and report the ror-ult (n;.t t-o the union) to tho Government. If anyone attempts to' pci'Biiadff a. member to vote, in a certain way (say, in favor of cancellation) he shall be liable to a. penalty of £10. This "regubit'inii" takes the- control of the ballot as completely out of tho hands of the union as though it had never existed. The term for which industrial agreements may be made has been lengthened out. to five years, and clause 12 provides that if a union of employees not registered under tb" Act should enter into nn turreement wiih an employer, the employer (or, for that mnttrr, the employees) ecu file the said agreement, and it at once becomes an instrument of the Courd —and a reminder of the fate that overtook the llv who stepped info the spider's parlor. The Act is made by n party that shouts its alleged principle:-; from the housetops, but in the constitution of the boards it stipulates that each board shall consist ot either two or four representatives respectively from the side of the employers raid employees and a chairman apnointod by the Minister on the recommendation of the jiKl.a,e. The chairman is always; a mnster-clnss man. Therefore, with two from each side and ,t chairman the niaster-claas (say, 15 per cent, of the people) will have three-fifths of the representation, and th" working-Hass (8-"5 per cent, of tho people) will .hav 1 I'.vo-lil'lhs oi the representation, and the masterclass will therefore decide every contested point. This is exactly in accord with lihe principle of the Wad" Act. Clause 19 debars, under a penalty of £500, any trade union representative letting his union know the extent of the surplus value stolen from them by their employers, as revealed by the employers' I)o;)!-:h. Tho clause reads: — K:tch member of a Hoard thai!, upon his appointment, take an oath not to disclove ;iny matter or evidence beforo the, Hoard or Court relating to trade secrets, the profits or losses or the receipts and outgoing!"; of any employer, the books of an employer or witness produced before the Board or Coiirt, or the financial position of any employer or of any witness; and if he violates his oath, he shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding ;t-j(iO. This is exactly as Wr.de passed it into law. and while all matters relating to> the employers' income and expenditure, profits and losses arc dealt with in secret every pitiable detail of the worker's income, every sorry fact p.s to his expenditure— what he pays for tobacco, for t'he dungarees he wears to work, for theatre tickets, for bread, for jam, for potatoes, for meat, for the boots his children wear, for his wife's hat. her dress, her latest blouse, even for her underwear —is dragged from him, under compulsion, in public for the press to print and the bourgeois'o k> crack jokes about. Sub-clause g of clause 24 provides that a Board shall have power to make an award giving preference* of employment to members of an industrials-union, "provided that where any declaration giving such preference of employment has been made in favour of an industrial union of employees, such declaration shall be cancelled by the Court of Arbitration if ot any time such union, or any substantial number of its members, takes part in a strike or instigates or aids any other persons in a strike; and if any lesser number takes part in. a strike or instigates or aids any other persons in a strike, such Court may suspend such declaration for such period as to it may seem just." Wade did not have this in his Act. The clause as it now stands is what the Legislative Council (tho nominee chamber tho

Labor Party is supposed to bo pledged to abolish) insisted on placing in i-ho Act; and what, to i>iacato tho moneyed interests represented by the Upper House, tho Labor Party meekly accepted, thus further demonstrating that the Act in its penal aspect is directed against the workers. The clause just quoted means that a union van only retain preference by pleuging itself to scab on nil other unions in perpetuity, and by iurtlier pledging itself never to vote a shilling ol its hinds to other unions on strike. The charity sweatshops and homes of humiliation for the unfortunate, victims of capitalist society are pandered to, and provision is niado in- sub-dauso L' ol' clause L'l to meet their convenience. Tiio quasi-criminal clauses of the Labor Party's Act are nioro stringently lar-reaching than were those of Wade's Act.' Under the latter, it was impossible to hue either a union or an individual £1000, with the option of two months' jail for tho individual. The records will show thai the highest lino inflicted on an employee was £40, in Tom Garraway's ease, wJion tho Roekchoppcrs were prosecuted. Tho next highest* lines were of. £30 each —in the same series of prosecutions. On tho employers' side, Hoskins was once lined £50. Tlie neAv Act provides in clause 44 for a penalty not exceeding £1000 against an employer or an industrial union of employers. Clause 45 is framed to deal with workers .(men or women) who revolt against conditions that don't suit them. It reads: — If any person does any act or thing in the nature of a strike, or takes part) in a strike, or instigates to or aids in any of tho above-mentioned acts, tho Court may order him to pay a penalty not exceeding fifty pounds. This, with tho exception of the amount of tho penalty, is as Wade left it. It is exactly the same sort of thing in principle as was enacted after tho .Hlack Plague, when people were forbidden, on pain of diro penalties, to demand or receive more than a stipulated wage. In this case, the Labor Party places the power to iix wages in the hands of the master-class. Then it declares that if tho workers dare to> use tlieir economic strength to force higher wages from their masters, it (the Labor Party) will severely punish them with line and imprisonment. Although in the ordinary course of procedure failure to pay a fnw could be met with imprisonment, the Labor Party does not propose to jail men who are lined for striking. The flinging into jail of large numbers of men is very oiton. an impossible matter, and always dangerous for the government that tries it on, as Mr. Wade discovered. For working-men buoyed up with the knowledge that they have done right tho jail has no terrors; but tihe Labor Party, profiting by its past experiences and by Mr. Wade's failures, has, in its feverish desire to serve the bourgeois interests it stands for, devised a iar more fiendishly reprehensible method than ever Wade would have dared. The workers <ou)d laugh at the threat of the jail, but they aro now to be struck at through tho suffering and want of the women and children: and in- future when, men strike for their rights and are fined, the Labor Party, under its now law, will step in and week by week seize tho wages (either wholly or in part) of the unionists until the amount of the fine has been secured. A garnishee order will he served on the employer, and in this way the workers' money will bo legally wrested from them by thoir own Labor Party. The South Australian Labor Party proposed to take all money over £2 a week earned by a. married man, and all over £1 earned by a single man. The N.S.W. Labor Party gives the Court power to take all a man's wages and leave his wife and children to starve. Sub-clause - of clause 45 reads: — Where a person is ordered to pay a penalty, the Court shall order that the amount o£ such penalty shall be a charge on any moiu ys which are then or which may thereafter be duo to such person from his then or future employer, including tho Crown, for wages or in respect of work done. Such order nitty be for the payment ol such penalty in on© sum or by such instalments as the Court may direct. On the making of any such order of attachment the employer, on being notified thereof, shall, from time to time, pay such moneys into the Court as 'hoy become due and payable in satisfaction of the charge imposed by the order. Nd charge upon or assignment of his or of moneys in respect of work doiic or to be done whenever or however made by any such person shall have any force whatever to defeat or aii'ect an attachment; and an order of attachment may be made, and shall have effeoti as if. no such charge or assignment existed. Clause 4G—built up on Wade's foundation —provides that a union, whether registered or unregistered, may be made to pay £20 of tho amount of the lino inflicted on its members—UNLESS IT CAN BE PROVED THAT THE UNION AS A UNION PRACTICALLY INSTRUCTED ITS MEMBERS TO BLACKLEG. Whore any person is ordered to pay a penalty, and it appears that , ho was, at the time of his doing tho actsi complained of, a member of a trade or inditstrial union, the Court may, in addition to making the charge provided for in the said section, order such union, or the trustees thereof, to pay out of tho funds of the union any amount not exceeding twenty pounds of the penalty. The Court shall, before making such order, hear the said trustees or the said union, and shall mot make such order if it is proved that the union has by means that are reasonable under the circumstances bona ficta endeavored to prevent its members from doing any act or thing in the natiure of a lockout or strike, or from taking part in a lock-out or strike, or from instigating to or aiding in a lock-out or strike. If all the northern coal miners (numbering, say, 9000) should strike, and they throjiG;li their union to order themselves to scab, they could each be lined £50—a total of £430,000—and of this amount ALL the funds of the union could be seized to the extent of £180,000! If the wharf laborers —now numbering 4000 —struck, their individual fines could aggregate £200,000, and the funds of the union could be levied on for £80,000 of this amount. If the coal lumpers—with, say, 1500 members —struck, their aggregate fines could be made to reach £75,000, anil the union couldl be "hit tip" for £30,000 of this! What a remarkable law for a Labor Party to make! What a remarkable law for any union not a scab union to register under! Clause 47 goes one better still. It sets forth that, if any union of employees, whether registered or not, gives any support whatever to another union on strike, either by resolution or financially —by voting £5 or any smaller portion of its funds, say, to support the wives and children of strikers, it is to be liable to a penalty of £1000 and to other punishments. Clause 48 is the product of the gigantic intellects of the Labor Government who desire osw and for all to subdue the inconveni-' out agitator. If the Australasian Socialist Party and the I.W.W. take sides (as they always do) with men who go out on strike, and their speakers publicly declare that the strikers are right, and that other workers ought not to scab on them, each speaker may lie served with an injunction (tho pet legal weapon of American capitalism), and if he or she disobeys the injunction, and persists in delivering the working-cinss message, the Labor Party will put each of them in jail for six months, with hard labor. If the "International Socialist" persists in delivering its sledge-hammer blows in the cause of the strikers —as it always has done and always will do—its publishers may likewise be served with injunctions and sent to jail for six months by the Labor Party! Needless to say, the Australasian Socialist Party" and the I.W.W. will fearlessly defy such an infamous law. Holding that the workers are ALWAYS RIGHT and NEVER WRONG*"when they meet the master-class' in tht- clash' of conflict on the industrial field, they shall always bo found fighting on the side of Right, and neither the Labor Party nor the Law Court nor the Labor Party's jail shall deter them for one moment. Clause 52 provides that an. employer may be prosecuted and fined £'20 if he unlawfully dismisses an employee • but NO PRO SECTTION CAN BE INSTITUTED UNDER THIS SECTION EXCEPT BY LEAVE OF THE COURT. Twenty pounds on the employer for depriving a worker of the chance to live! Fifty pounds on the worker for striking! And the worker may bo prosecuted without let or hindrance, but the employer only ''by leave of the court." Sub-clause 2 of clause 54 says that: — Any property of a union, whether in the hands of trustees or not, shall be available to answer any order made as aforesaid. Which means that all death funds, all funeral funds, all benefit funds, no matter how they are separated from the general

funds of a union, may be seized to meet fines inflicted on unions tthat refuse to scab!

This is also exactly tho law as Wade made it. Clause 58 provides that the decision of the Court is to be final—there is to bo no appeal from it! This is also tlio law as Wade made it. lit all its fundamentals, it will bo seen that tho N.S.W. Labor Party's law is identical with that of the Liberal Party's law; ami as tho whole superstructure of Australian Arbitration is fashioned after the idea of the New Zealand system of Arbitration, the New Zealand Act is deserving of some attention at this stage. THE NEW ZEALAND ARBITRATION ACT. Tho first Arbitration Act was passed in New Zealand in 1894. It has been amended from time to time, and is now known as the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, 1908. Under its regulations, New Zealand is divided into eight "industrial" districts, and the Act itself provides for the appointment of four Conciliation Commissioners, who hold office for three years, and each of the industrial districts is placed under tho jurisdiction of one of these Commissioners. When a dispute arises, tho union or employer concerned is required to notify the Commissioner, who, with "assessors" from each side, hears the dispute. If the Conciliation Council fails to settle the dispute, the matter must be sent along to the Arbitration Gohrt. The. Arbitration Court is appointed for the whole of NSw Zealand, and consists of one member from the employers' side, one from tlio union, and a judge of the Supreme Court; and it is not necessary to point out that in New Zealand, as in Australia, the employers thus have control of the Court —they have twothirds of the representation. The judge and one member constitute, a. quorum. Except in the matter of jurisdiction, there is no appeal from the Arbitration Court's decisions. Awards and agreements may bo made for any period up to three years. No award can be made and no agreement- registered unless the union concerned is registered under the Act. Strikes and lock-outs are only illegal if the parties concerned arc bound-by an award. If a strike occurs in any industry, each worker who is a party to it, and who is bound by all award or-agreement, may be tilled £10. For "inciting, instigating, aiding or abetting an unlawful strike or its 'continuance" —that is, for urging other workers not to scab on their fellow-workers on strike, or for contributing to strike funds, or in any Way supporting those who are "illegally" on strike—a worker may be fined £10 and a union may be fined £200. It is clearly laid down that "a gift of money or other valuable thing for the .benefit of a party or union engaged in a strike is deemed to bo aiding andi abetting." Tho New Zealand Act contains a special clause to reach strikers whose downing of tools affects "tlio supply of the necessaries of life, such as water, milk, meat, coal, or electricity, or the working of .any ferry, tramway or railwayl used for the public carriage of goods or passengers." In these cases, whether the union is registered or not, and whether there is an award or' agreement or none at all, 14 days' notice must be given within one month of tho intention to strike. Failing this notice, each striker is liable to be fined £25 and each union £500. For inciting, aiding, or abetting in such strikes a worker may bo fined up to £25 and a union up to £500. Tho purpose of such a clause is, of course, to give the employers time- to secure scab labor, and furnishes one reason why the employers are so violently in favor of the Arbitration Court. Strikes and lock-outs are forbidden while a case is before either the Conciliation Council or the Court. > The New Zcalnnd Aft defines *a strike as "the act of any number of workers who are, or have been, in the employment, whether of the same employer or different employers, in discontinuing their employment, whether wholly or partially, or in breaking their contract of service, or in refusing or failing after any such discontinuance to resume or return to their employment, the said discontinuance, breach, or refusal being due to any combination, agreement, oV common understanding, whether express or implicit, made or entered into by the said workers with intent to compel or induce any employer to agree to terms of employment, er comply with any demands made by workers, or with' intent to cause loss or inconvenience to any such employer in the conduct of his business, or with intent to incite, aid, abet, or instigate or procure any other strike, or with intent to assist the , workers in the employment of any other employer to compel or induce the employer to agree to terms of employment or comply with any demands made upon him by any workers." For breaches of awards or agreements, an employer may be fined not more than £100; a union of employees may also be fined £100, and an individual worker £5. The fines may be recovered by levy and distress. If the worker has no goods and chattels that can be seized and sold, he or she may , be sent to jail. The records for the year ending March 31, 1911, show that there were 5-' 1 prosecutions of employers for Tbreaches of awards find agreements, and that in 472 of these convictions were secured. There were only 68 prosecutions for strikes. There were]lß employers' unions, with 4262 members, and 308 employees' unions, with 57.091 members. Thus the ratio of employers charged with having broken awards and agreements for that period was one in oight, while the ratio of those convicted was one in nine. 'Die ratio of employees who broke awards or agreements, etc., was a fraction more than one in one thousand. Those figures show how ready the employers always are to break award's and violate agreements when it sujts t]*eir class interests to do so. The payment of occasional small fines is* a little thing to them. To the employees a fine of' even £5 is a big thing,"especially when the verdict is backed up by the power of levy and distress —the power to sell the workers' furniture or other goods. It need not, therefore, be Wondered at that the employers are strongly in favor of tho Arbitration Court; but that any "union" of working-men or working-women should ever be willing to come under the bondage of such a leg-ironing instrument is only understandable as the outcome of class unconscious* ness—that is, ignorance- of the working-class position. THE SOCIALIST ALTERNATIVE. Tho Socialist Party maintains its attitude of uncoaipfomising hostility to the principle of the Arbitration Court. The present form of society rests on the owvifersliip of land and machinery—the primary source of.wealth production and the tools of wealth production. Those who own the iand and machinery constitute the capitalist-class. This form <& ownership divides society into two classes —the owners and tbG workers. The workers produce all the wealth, and receive tVh ever-decreasing portion of it. Because, this is so there is an irreconchble conflict of interests between the two classes. The owners strive to secure a larger proportion of the wealth the workers make; the workers strive to get more of the wealth they make. The Arbitration Court really exists to say how much the workers shall be legally robbed of—and to see that they are penalised if they object to the robbery. The Socialist Party proclaims that the workers should not be satisfied with a portion—they should demand ALL the wealth they wrest, from Nature's resources. .To get the wealth they make the workers must first abolish the wage's system I—they1 —they must abolish wage-shivery. To abolish wage-slavery and thus win economic freedom the workers of this country must unite on the industrial and political field. They must unite industrially in one great revolutionary organisation—ONE BIG UNION —on the lines of the Industrial Workers of the World, to fight scientifically, and uncompromisingly, with never a section of the workers scabbing on any other section —to fight with every weapon that "will serve working-class interests, to wrest from the exploiters every temporary concession that may be wrested, but ever £o keep its eyes turned towards the goal of the Social Revolution (ownership of the world and its wealth by the workers), its feet ever tending thitherward. They must unite on the. political field in one big revolutionary Socialist Party, likewise to wrest every concession that may be wrested, as our "Guiding Principle" lays down, but always to strive for our revolutionary objective.: the overthrow of capitalism, the uprearing of the Socialist Republic. So organised—and with our' orgaifisation built on a solid foundation of working-class knowledge—with no divisions of race or creed, color or sex, we might W<;11 laugh our exploiters to scorn, smash through the awards and penalties of their Arbitration Courts, tear down the superstructure of their legal power to oppress, and swiftly plant the Red Flag—emblem alike of work-ing-class revolt arid of humanity freed —on the world's, citadel of industrialism.