CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION ACT.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXX, Issue 8524, 29 August 1907, Page 5

CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION ACT.

By Telegraph—Press t Association. WELLINGTON, August 28. At the conference of the Employers' Federation, Mr W. Scott, of Otago, delivered an address on the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, tracing the measure from its inception in 1894 and analysing the results of its operations. He considered that the Act had proved a failure. It had not prevented strikes and nevex* were the workers of the colony more discontented or had friction been greater than to-day. One defect was the fixing of a standard in lieu of a minimum wage. This had prevented sweating, an object which could have been as well accomplished through the medium of the Factories Act. Mr Scott urged that unions rather than individuals should be held responsible for strikes, as there could' be no strikes without organisation. After saying that during the past thirteen years there had been no period of depression to test the Act, Mr Scott asserts that apart from this there are two view points from which the Act can be surveyed—its effect on the manufacturing industries, and its effect on the workex - s. With regard to industries the Act has not made for better work nor improved methods, nor has it fostered trade. It has had an opposite effect. Instead of helping it has hindered trade, as it has greatly increased the cost of production to the detriment of trade, and the best interests of all concerned. Summing up Mr Scott said: "I am fully nersuaded in my own mind that the advantages of an Act such as we have at the present time are more than outweighed by the many serious disadvantages and that tne workers, employers and industries alike would have been better off to-day had the Act never been introduced. As the Act stands to-day it has failed in many things. It , has failed to conciliate. The conciliation part of it is 'as dead as Julius Caesar. It has not made for industrial peace, it has not improvedthe quality or quantity of work, it has not fostered trade, and it has not bettered the real position of the workers in whose interest it was introduced. On the contrary, it has created strife, restricted the output, increased the cost of production, and put up the cost of living to such an extent that a pound to-day goes no further than sixteen shillings did in 1894, to the detriment of all especially the good worker, as his wages have not been increased. The latest statistics show the increase in wages to be from 8£ per cent, to 10 per cent., and the increased cost of living from 25 per cent, to 30 per cent. The only good thing that the Act has done that could not have been accomplished through the medium of the Factories Act is that it has, to a considerable extent, protected the honest and liberal-minded employer against his unscrupulous and dishonest competitor. But even this boon has "been purchased at too great a cost. Under the circumstances, it is manifest that if the Act is to be mate a permanent and lasting measure, it must be greatly mended; some say it is better ended."