WASTE LABOUR PROBLEM.

Otago Witness, Issue 2894, 25 August 1909, Page 34

WASTE LABOUR PROBLEM.

DISCUSSION BY WATERSIDE WORKERS.

PREFERENCE TO UNIONISTS ATTACKED.

WELLINGTON, august 19. The " waste " problem, as it applies to superfluous labour was discussed at the . Watei^side "Workers' Conference to-day on the following Wellington remit: — "That the conference requests the Government to institute an - inquiry into the extent of waste labour involved In the existing system of employing labour' to carry out the waterside work of the country, and that legislation be provided to limit the numbers that shall be employed in the industry to the number that can find a living in it." Mr J. Bruton, who proposed the motion, said he did not want the delegates to ' think that he wished to exclude any man I from an industry in which he might make a living. Casual labour Iwtd come to such a pass that there was a deplorable amount of waste. He said, with all due responsibility, that men .were not able to earn a living on the Wellington wharves, .and that they were being degraded. The pangs ot poverty were the worst of all pangs. It was reasonable to ask the Government to grapple with the matter. The country could maintain three times its present population if men were only given an opportunity to make a living. The best way to employ labour was on tbs soil. It was heart-break\ng to look" round Wellington and see people gcing to places of amusements, motor cars Flying here and there, and men going home without a penny in their pockecs. Mr J. Jackson (G-reyinouth) the motion. Up to laefc Christmas, he said, 230 men had been pretty constantly engaged on the wharf at Greymcuth, but then suddenly the export "of timber dropped. Many of tihe me^i left, p but, as soon as the timber industry ' resumed a little the men came nocking back to the wharf. The supply of labour on the wharves was altogether too great. It was convenient to' the, shipping companies, from a commercial point ot view, to have large crowds of men waiting' on them. The problem had to be faced,- and tlie only way to tackle it was by an inquiry. Air H. Voyce (Lyttelton) contended that the casual worker was not 'assisted to the extent that he should be by the present Government. The average wage of the stevedore working in Lyttelton did not amount to mono than ±>£ per week. Delegates : They a»e lucky. Mr V oyce -. I am quoting me maxinvum. He complained that the Railway Union ' at Lyttelton monopolised labour. He could prove that the men in the Railway Union had averaged more than £6 per week in Lyttelton for 12 months. The time had arrived when the Uovefnan-ent should make provision for dealing with the influx of casual labourers to the ports of the Dominion.

"You may talk about the curse of diink, but the curse of casual labour is far worse than the curse of drink," said Mr A. L. Jones. "Many a good man has 'been driven to drink by the curse of casual labour. You may talk about preference as much as you. like, but -what has preference <d*one here? The union has swelled its membership, swelled its finances, and largely helped to bring about the curse of casual labour." Owing to the existence of this very curse, he continued, men were driven to commit crime. They could see men charged in the criminal courts with offences. " What is your occupation?" the magistrate would a.sk. "Wharf labourer" would perhaps be the ;mswer. That was why the wharf labourer was looked down upon. He pleaded for the unfortunates who had wives and families. " I can suffer," he ?aid, " but I don't want to £cc my wife and children suffering." Mr F. M'Cann (Wellington) launched out into a vigoious attack on pvefeitnce. A union, he ?aid, could debar no one from becoming a member of a waterside workers' union «> long eb preference obtained. There would be no possibility of limitation, and th-e preference clause would have to be rep«a.l«d. Men had been forced into the unions. Mr Jackson : Who forced them ? Mr M'Cann : The preference clause. You cannot obtain employment from any man unless you can show that you are a financial member of the union. Preference unquestionably had forced men into the unions in many instances. They paid their 3s 6d (entrance fee) and nothing more was heard of them for 12 months. A Delegate: Where do they co? Mr M'Cann : On the wharves. They compete for employment with men who are financial members of the union — men who have paid their contributions for 12 months. When an election of a secretary for the Wellington Waterside Workers took place he found that there were 1700 financial members and 200 unfinancial. He could not say how many men were umfinancial now Until the preference clause was removed they could have no proper understanding between master and man.

Mr D. Agnewi We fought hard for j ireferen.ee. I

Air Bruton raised a point of order. He submitted that the motion had nothing

to do with preference. The Chairman l'uled that the subject of preference could not be discussed. Mr D. M'Laren said that preference or no preference there would be an excess of , labour under the present conditions. When employment was slack in any industry there was a rush to the wharves. It would not be right to exclude men from member- i ship of an union. The motion suggested : that the supply of labour should -be regn- '■ lated by some inrlenendent authority, not that the unions should be made a close corporation. Mr D. Cacey (Xcpier) hsld that the Governaient wae laTg-ely to blame, and the j

fostering of immigration had a direct bearing on the existing conditions of things. Preference had nothing to do with the question, and preference or no preference the men would be on the wharves.

Mr J. Osborne (Greymouth) said the solution of the question was in getting labour adequately represented in Parliament.

In reply, Mr Bruton contended that if the Government properly handled the land question a solution would be reached The motion was carried unanimously.