ARBITRATION AWARDS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2293, 11 September 1908, Page 1

ARBITRATION AWARDS.

THE LATEST PHRASE.

[Special to “Times.”]

WELLINGTON, Sept. 10

Thor® cun bo no doubt tlmt the Arbitration Count’® decision in tho southern suwmilliiTg dispute regarding tho automatic suspension of awards has proved a “facer” to labor unions. Tho great majority of members of Parliament are very chary of expressing an opinion regarding tho new provision. I have, however, obtained itho views of some of the Labor representatives on the subject and tlieso will no doubt bo read with interest. The Hon. J. T. Paul remarked that the principle embodied in the award was not a new one. Part of it was to be seen in the Wellington Waterside Workers’ award, while it was also slightly incorporated in. the Arbitration Amendment Bill lately introduced by the-Government. In tho two awards-'mentioued tho unions lisul agreed to such a clause in consideration of getting pr • ■nee to unionists. Ho strongly ... .pp roved of the clause as it stood in (the new Southland award; but lie would favor a similar provision being made by Act of Parliament if surrounded by proper safeguards and accompanied by statutory preference. Ho did not think they had gono outside its powers, but ho questioned its wisdom in putting such a clauso into tho award. He wholly disapproved of aii award automatically ceasing to exist simply boeauso a small section of workers went on strike. It was iniquitous to punish a majority of unionists directly or indirectly for the acts of a small majority. Ho held that tho Act could not be permanently successful without a strengthening of unionism which was its basis by means of statutory preference. The Hon. Mr. itigg expresses tile opinion that the Court in its latest decision has usurped the functions of the Legislature, and ho dees not think this should be allowed without nrotest.. The Supreme Court, ho thinks, should be asked to decide whether or not the Arbitration Court has exceeded its jurisdiction. He strongly upheld Mr. McCullough’s contention that if there was to bo such a clause, the award should not be suspended automatically but only after inquiry by tile Court. The powers given to the Court were certainly very wide, but, speaking from memory, lie believed it lmd been la ill down by tho Supreme Court, on appeal from tho decision of Mr Justice Williams in tho bootmaker’s case, that the powers of the Court wore confined to the matters laid down in tho Act. If that was. so lie thought the Court had, in the present instance, exceeded its jurisdiction. The judge had also apparently overlooked the fact that the ceasing of tlie award might be an unintended punishment to the employer, by placing him at the mercy of unfair and unscrupulous competition on the part of the other employers who would under-pay and overwork their men. He questioned whether the operation of tile now clause would have uiucli effect in preventing strikes, even with the long penalty clauses of the Act, for it was obvious that if a strike occurred, even tinder the conditions obtaining, there must have been in most cases something unsatisfactory in the award. In my opinion, concluded Mr. Bigg, the Court lias shown itself so incapable that it would better advised to devote a little more time to perfecting the details of its administration before undertaking duties which belong more properly to the Legislature.