TRADE UNION FUNDS.

Taranaki Daily News, 21 February 1922, Page 8

TRADE UNION FUNDS.

WHERE THE MONEY GOj&S. DO THE WORKERS UNDERSTAND?

The financial side of the Trades Union movement is a subject that we have never seen exhaustively examined. All the average Unionist or member of the public knows is that fees are charged and the are supposed to hold substantial funds. We have known of a union charging its members 12s per annum each member, and .having a substantial credit balance, whilst the same union later on, when charging 255, had no balance to speak of, even though it had not paid out strike pay, lock-out pay or any benefits to the individual members.

An article in the London Morning Post supplies some particulars of the financing of some of the large unions at Home, and shows that some of the money goes in administrative expense and political purposes. The cases ©f four large trade unions, taken at random. are given thus: (A.) A union with 10,486 members. Income, £11.553. Spent on benefits £5573, and oh management expenses £3495. Its investments are Government stocks, municipal securities and industrial undertakings. (,B) A union with ,84,910 members. Income £67.877. Management expenses totalled £25,612. Benefits were £17.413, and most of remainder on political and general purposes. (C.) A union with 10,981 members. Income £10.979. Benefits £5532. Management £4423. The greater portion of its assets are in public securities, corporation stock, and freehold property. (D.) A union with 181,000 members. Income £71,481. Benefits are £3382. Management sh'ows: Salaries, allowances to officers, expenses of delegates and deputations. etc., £39.603; whilst a further sum of £2983 was expended in organisers’ expenses and law expenses. What is notable in these cases is that the larger the membership and income, the greater in proportion is the cost of management. The class of case marked “D” is that which calls for special attention, where out of an income of £71,481 onlv £3382 went in benefits and £42,586 in management expenses. The comment is made that ‘ In the case of this and other unions it would obviously be for the better protection of members if the trade union law insisted that all investments should be in trustee securities and that there should be some supervision of management expenses.” The article points out that there is no real protection against the use of thp general funds for political work under the heading of administrative expenses; nor is there any check, apparently, on the investment of accrued funds in undertakings which are political or partly political in character. ‘lt is a public danger that there is. apparently, no adequate safegurd under the law against the use of trade union funds for furthering extremist politics instead of for legitimate trade union purposes.” In New Zealand we fear things are much the same in respect to trade union funds as in the Old Land. Here, for instance, is the position of one New’ Zealand union as shown in its balance sheet for last year:—Total receipts. £10.979; credit balance at commencement of year, £1,634, and at close £BO6. This union expended over £lO.OOO in the year, and of that over £5OOO went in salaries and allowances. As a commentary on tne financing of this union it is notable that though it has been existent for a number of years with a hig income, as disclosed. "its total of assets over liabilities amounts to £l,BOB. Another case which came before us recently was that of a union of over 1200 members, each paying 25/- per annum, which, at the time of trouble, we had not £lOO in reserve.

There are 406 registered workers’ unions with over 96,000 members. The total revenue will probably approximate £lOO.OOO per annum. To the individual workers and members of the public, it shoold be a matter of concern as to what is being done with that large amount of money. Are the management expenses reasonable or wasteful? Are funds drawn constantly from the wage-earners to fatten a few glib talkers, or is the money spent in real constructive services? Are there proper benefits given or is the money frittered away on delegates, deputations, organisers and secretarial allowanced? These are questions' that the wage-earners should investigate. The sum of £lOO,000 invested in industrial undertakings Would employ a large body of men. The question of is being done with trade union funds calls for serious thought in New Zealand as well as elsewhere. It is to the workers’ best interests that they should know these matters fully. (Contributed by the N.Z. Welfare