PARLIAMENT

Waikato Times, Volume 119, Issue 19880, 8 May 1936, Page 8

PARLIAMENT

INDUSTRIAL MEASURE. TO-DAY’S PROCEEDINGS. I RIGID CONDITIONS CRITICISED. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) WELLINGTON. Friday. The House of Representatives met at 10.30 a.m. and the Napier Harbour Board and Napier Borough Enabling Bill was read for the first time. The Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill was further considered In committee the short title still being before the committee. Mr R. A. Wright (Wellington Suburbs) suggested sufficient time should be allowed between the passing of the measure and its coming into operation, especially as far as the basic wage was concerned so that the contracts in force would not toe affected. Mr W. J. Poison (Opposition — Stratford) said the Bill did not give equal rights to both sides. Compulsion was placed entirely upon the employers. whereas there were many loophopes for employees. Pe P,' alties for breaches of the Court s awards were not effective against unions, whereas they were effective against- the employers. Mr H. S. S. Kyle (Opposition—Biccarton) instanced the case of freezing works employees. He said on 'Statutory holidays numbering about eight a year it might happen that the men on those days would have to be paid triple rates and a conservative estimate of the cost would be £30,000 to £50,000 a year if the Bill went through. On those days if the men were required to work perhaps to enable cargo to be prepared for shipping they would toe paid double time for working and also for the holiday. If that was not the position he hoped the Minister would say so as he was assured on the best authority that it was so. - “Not a Bed of Rosea.” The Right Hon. J. G. Coates said the assurances of Ministers were not enough. It was what was written in the Bill that counted. He stressed the value of referring the Bill to a Select Committee and went through the Bill, showing amendments and new clauses that had been added toy the committee. Mr Coates thought they had honestly tried to rectify many weaknesses that existed but it was not going to be a bed of roses. The Minister of Public Works, the Hon. R. Semple, defended the establishment of New Zealand Unions and said the Dominion had reached a point of development when it v was desirable that “calf” unions should disappear. He hoped to see agreements arrived at by means of collective bargaining. He said there was no provision in the Bill for freezing workers to toe paid triple rates. All freezing workers would receive would be determined by a round-table conference through conciliation or by a judge based on the evidence. To talk as Mr Kyle had talked was bunkum. Mr Semple added that a multiplicity of unions in an industry was not conducive to the best interests of the country. Adverse Effects Foreoast. Mr J. Hargest (Opposition—Awarua) thought the Bill would raise costs and also reduce the volume of work, especially in country districts. He 'said it would have an adverse effect on the volume of production of primary industries. He could not see how the farmers could have a forty-hour week and compete with other countries. The Leader of the Opposition, the Right Hon. G. W. Forbes, 'said members of unions should have some pro- j tection as to what levy could be imposed on them. He did not think such rigid conditions should be imposed on employers as were contained in the Bill. The Minister of Labour, the Hon. H. T. Armstrong, said the unions would not be levied for more that it took for the actual running of the unions. All members of a union had a vote and although to-day the unions had a right to levy up to a shilling he knew of no union that had ever reached that maximum. Payment to Unions. Mr Forbes: Then why make the sky the limit? Mr Armstrong said there might be special cases where it might be desirable to make a higher levy If a substantial majority of members wished to do. The general run was sixpence for men and threepence for women. The Minister of Lands, the Hon. F. Langstone: What do employers charge for their union? Mr H. G. Dickie (Opposition— Patea) : Not a shilling a week. Mr Armstrong: I think it is based on the turnover. Opposition voices: No! No! You have it all wrong. Mr Coates asked what would happen if a member of a union refused to pay. Mr Armstrong: He- simply refused to pay, that was all. Much depended on t-he rules of the union. Mr Poison: He can't get another job. Mr Armstrong said some guilds perhaps had sick payments or provided some such benefit and might desire to levy more than a shilling. His desire was to prevent a minority from dominating the majority in the union in the amending Bill by providing that a New Zealand Union could not be formed unless four unions in the eight industrial districts applied for it. He was considering making some provision to cover those affected, such as contractors, by increased costs due to the passing of the Bill but the Taw draughtsman informed him that the Bill was not the place to do it and it could be done in a Finance Bill at a later stage. Mr 5. G. Smith (Opposition—New Plymouth) asked the Minister to leave the law as it stood regarding subscriptions. Conscientious Objectors. Mr Wright thanked the Minister for making provision for those who had conscientious objections to joining unions where businesses were not run for pecuniary gain but he thought exemption should go further and provide for those who were, engaged in other occupations but whose religious beliefs debarred them from a joining a union. He did not suggest they should he exempted from paying their levies and did not think these men desired that.

The short title was passed on the | voices. A division was • called on ’ clause two. covering the extension of the term “industrial matters” as sot out in the principle act and as judicially construed but the clause was retained hv 50 votes to 19. Basic Wage Rate. On Clause Three, Mr Hamilton ! moved an amendment to provide that j the basic wage should be fixed on an hourly as well as a weekly basis. He I said the clause seemed to suggest a weekly rate but the employer~should not be compelled to pay a weekly wage ] for perhaps a day or two’s work. Mr Armstrong said the basic wage was the irreducible minimum but the rest, he thought, could be safely left to the good sense of the court.' He had no serious objection to the amendment but thought it was unnecessary because the Court could as the clause read now fix the hourly or weekly , rate. He suggested the clause should he postponed till later in the day and this was agreed to. An amendment to Clause Four by the Minister regarding the registration of unions where a union is already in j existence was carried and an amendjment by the Minister limiting the applij rations for Dominion registration to j the unions which are fairly well established throughout the Dominion was also carried. The luncheon adjournment was then taken.