The Sun 42 WYNDHAM STREET, AUCKLAND THURSDAY, OCTOBER 31, 1929 SKILL IN KILLING PIGS

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 808, 31 October 1929, Page 8

The Sun 42 WYNDHAM STREET, AUCKLAND THURSDAY, OCTOBER 31, 1929 SKILL IN KILLING PIGS

A DIFFERENCE of opinion as to the industrial skill required for the killing of pigs in well-equipped abattoirs has precipitated a strike among Auckland slaughtermen. Work was abandoned deliberately at Westfield yesterday, and close on a hundred men are out of employment. The drastic decision of their trade union was, made as a protest against revised terms in a new award, operatively only a day old, by the Arbitration Court.

Before this revision of slaughtermen’s rates of pay was made, the killing of pigs had been classified as skilled work. In the practice of such skill the men engaged in it, as explained by their union’s executive representatives, were able to earn up to eight shillings an hour. If viewed superficially this earning capacity might tempt some people to imagine that the skill required for pig'-sticking was almost surgical in its value. It should be made clear, however, that the slaughtermen so employed had to work very hard, and also that the supply of pigs for slaughter was not equal to providing a weekly wage of £l9 4s for each killer. Under the new award, the hourly aggregate of piecework wages for slaughtering pigs, either in a skilled or unskilled manner, is said to have been reduced from 8s to ‘2s 3d. Even though the killing of swine has always been recognised or heard as a squealing profession, perhaps it is not surprising, if the main cause of the strike be looked at as a question of wages, that the new award is unpopular with the workers affected by its effective wage-reducing interpretation that pig-killing is unskilled work. The union also has a grievance about a reduction in the rate of pay for slaughtering long-shank sheep “without any application from either party.” , The technicalities of the dispute, however, may be left to the consideration of experts. It is the general aspect of the strike and its effects that holds and must hold the interest of the community. Experience in the past in this country and almost in every country has demonstrated clearly that a “strike” is a futile weapon for settling a dispute. It is at best an industrial bludgeon which usually hits most heavily the heads of those who wield it on the impulse of indignation over an apparent injustice.' Of course, it may be contended that the action of the slaughterrhen at Westfield does not constitute the sort of strike which statutorily has been declared as an illegal act. The law lays it down as a fixed rule, which has been more honoured in the breach than in its observance that, “in all cases where an industrial agreement or accepted recommendation or award is filed it becomes binding on all the parties, and a strike or lockout becomes unlawful.” In this particular case, no strike has been declared, but the men certainly have struck work rather than accept the conditions fixed. A strike is on and an award of the Arbitration Court is being resisted and therefore flouted. The fact that any award may be unpopular or even unjust does not alter the law. Indeed, if unpopularity were to be the supreme test of the Arbitration Court the tribunal would not last a week. So far, there has been no talk of punitive measures or anything of a provocative nature. The attitude adopted by the Mayor of Auckland on behalf of the City Council, whose abattoir is involved in the abrupt cessation of work by members of the Slaughtermen’s Union is the right course for each side of the disputants. Not only has Mr. George Baildon been fair and conciliatory, hut he has been Arm in recognising the necessity of obeying industrial law. The Mayor’s appeal for a calm discussion of the points in dispute, each party determined to secure an amicable settlement, should be given a quick response. In order to provide the public with meat, the master butchers have manned the slaughtering hoards. Their action should not and need not he interpreted as an attempt to break a strike. Strikebreaking is not much better than strike-making. Each leads to distemper and industrial disruption. The better way always is to depend on conciliatory methods.

DEPRESSION IN FOOTWEAR INDUSTRY

DEPRESSION in the footwear industry in New Zealand is of clgse interest to Auckland because of the- substantial concentration of manufacturing plants in this city. Like concerns elsewhere, some of these local firms have gone through a difficult time. Their efforts to market their wares have frequently been opposed by unreasoning hostility to the locally-made product. They have been under-sold by overseas manufacturers operating on principles sometimes suspiciously akin to dumping. Not only British and American footwear, but also Continental footwear from the powerful Czecho-Slovakian interests, has been poured into New Zealand to the disadvantage of local manufacturers and local operatives. As a result of these happenings an industry that at one time promised to command its local market has been forced to endure a period of stagnation. Instead of makingheadway it has of recent years been barely able to hold its own.

The Parliamentary Committee which examined the causes of this depression has made one interesting conclusion, that although the intrusion of outside commodities has introduced an element of unfair competition, there are certain internal faults which must be remedied before further protection is justified. The recommendation in which this stipulation is made gives effect to a principle upon which advocates of tariff reform for the benefit of local industry have all along insisted. No measure of tariff assistance should be given to any industry unless it is prepared to undertake the rationalisation demanded hv modern conditions. This applies to the footwear industry. Its effort in the past has been diffused among unprofitable channels and. although, in women’s footwear at least, the style and durability of the finished article are usually beyond challenge, in other directions sounder designs might he pursued. The Parliamentary Committee which has just investigated the problem was fully representative of the trade. It consisted of representatives of both manufacturers and operatives, plus four official Government representatives. From a committee so constituted a comprehensive and analytical examination of the subject was to be expected, and the verdict gives no evidence that the trade members on the committee have shrunk from exposing their own weaknesses. A sequel to this inquiry may be a form of consolidation similar to that adopted by the North Island timber millers, for whom conditions in the past few years have been even worse than those which beset the hoot manufacturers. Associated with better methods, such a merger should yield good results. It is perhaps unfortunate that on the most important question of all, that of a slightly raised tariff, the disinterested Government delegates refrained from expressing an opinion, as they should do if the principle of such examinations is carried to its proper conclusion.