PREFERENCE TO UNIONISTS.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 9642, 6 November 1909, Page 6

PREFERENCE TO UNIONISTS.

DISCUSSION AT BUILDERS' CONFERENCE. By Telegraph—Press Association. CHRIS'fCHURCH, Nov. 5. The question of preference to unionists was introduced at the annual meeting of the Federated Builders and Contractors of New Zealand yesterday, by Mr L. S. Humphries (Wellington), who spoke strongly in favour of a mutual preference to unionists. "Unionism has come to stay," he said, "and the time has arrive J, I think, when we should ap> proach the unions more closely than we have done In the past. We can't put it out, and the best thing is to work with it. 'we have been trying to work in with the architects, and we should go further; we should say to the unionists; 'We recognise your unions, and as we have to give you preference we ask you to give us preference, too. When your men want work they should give the mem • bers of our federation the preference. I think that the Arbitration Court would agree to such a proposal. It would strengthen the Builders' Federation considerably." Mr HumphriHs moved: "That the executive be asked, seeing that the Arbitration Court grants preference to unionists, whether we should not, as a combined oody, be entitled to preference on the following lines. That when union men are accepting work they give preference to members as against non-members of the federation, and if they fail to do so they commit a breach of the award." Mr Meuli seconded the motion. Mr W. H. Grenfell said that the proposal would be a somersault. The employers had at first opposed the granting of preference. The trouble was that the unionist was not neces-

sarily a competent man, necause under the award they had to throw the unions open to everyone. The scheme would be of no benefit to employers, for all they wanted was the best men in the work. Mr H. Pearce said that in the past he had opposed preference, but since then he had turned a somersault and agreed with Mr Humphries. Theyjcould not getj out of it, and he thought that in the future they would see preference granted in eight out of ten awards. The employers had unions, and why should not workers have them? In the past 50 per cent, of the members of the workers' union were not tip-top men, hut now he ventured to 3ay that 85 per cent, were first-class, and if they succeded in getting every workman to join the union—and he thought this move would accomplish that preference would not be worth a snap of the fingers, because the employers would be able to pick their men from the unionists. The president (Mr S. I. Clarke) said thatjhe could not accept the motion, because it would commit the federation without the associations having had an opportunity to discus 3

it. He suggested that a motion merely referring the question of preference to the executive should be proposed. Mr Humphries moved: "That the executive should be instructed xo consider the matter of working in with the unions in mutual preference and other maters of common interest, and, if possible, to bring forward a workable scheme, and to report to the next meeting." Mr Clarke said that he would not accept the instruction to bring forward a workable scheme. Mr Humphries: "I will add'if desirable,' if you like." The motion, with the substitution of the words "if desirable" for "if possible," was carried by. twelve votes to six.