This comment argues that there must be a follom-up study to James Holt's Compulsory arbitration in New Zealand - the first fourty years and examines three issues important to any such study: the formulation of new unions after 1936: the way the arbitration system has protected vulnerable groups of workers: and women's wages and equal pay

Franks, Peter

English

Open Journal Systems at the Victoria University of Wellington Library

Nelt' Zealand journal of industrial relations. 1987. 12, 199-201 Compulsory arbitration: the next 40 years Peter f ... ~ ranks* This con1n1enl argues that there n1ust be a fol'lov~'-UP study to Jarn.es 1-lolCs Con1pulso1)' arhill~ation in New Zealand- thefll:,·t.fonyyears and exan1ines three issues in1pOI1ant to any such study: the forn1ation of ncv.r unions after 1936: the \\·ay the arbitration systcn1 has protected vulnerable groups of,vorkers: and won1en's wages and equal pay. Con1pulsory arbitration in Nc~r Zealand- thefinafortyyears is an ou~tanding contribution to labour histot)' in this country. In n1y opinion. the n1ost striking thing about Jan1cs 'Holt's book is its relevance to today"s debates ahout the labour n1arket and industrial relations. The qual it)' of those debat·es. and n1orc in1portantly the legislative outcon1e. \vould have been greatly in1proved ifn1ore oft he participants had actually taken account oft he h·istorical experience of the arbitration systen1 in Nev-.t Zealand . • At the recent Labour 1-listOI)' syn1posiun1 on Holt's book. 1 raised a laugh "''hen I pointed out that the zealots of the Business Roundtable have taken their prescriptions for ·labour tnarket llcxibility· fron1 ·experience in Japan and the southern llnited States not New Zealand. l-lowcvcr it is no joke for \Vorking people who \\1ill have to bear the consequences. Holfs book sho\vs ho\\' ironic it is that the leaders oft he Business Roundtable. and those of the En1ployers Federation. clain1 to have based their recent progran1n1es on overseas experience . In large part their prescriptions ~or ·refornl· tnerely echo the views of en1ployer representatives in past econon1ic dovlnturns in Ne\\ Zealand .. particularly during the Great Depre~sion. The best tribute that hi torians could pay to Holt \VOuld be to ensure that the sequel to his book is \Vritten. covering the final forty years of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration (IC&A) Act. The pui:r>ose oft hi con1n1cnt is to point out son1-e of the issues that \\'·ill need to be addressed in that sequel. These issues arise fron1 n1y research it.to the history of the Clerical \\'orkers Union. After its S\veeping election victory in '1935~ the first Labour ~Governn1enl introduced n1ajor changes to the IC&A Act and other laws affecting workers. T·hesc included the restoration of cornpulsory arbitration. the registration of' national unions. the introduction of the 40-hour vveek and con1pulsory union:isn1. One of the n1ain results of these rcfonns was that the n1en1bersh:ip of private sector unions n1ore than trebled fron1 80.929 in Decetnber 1935 to 254~690 in Decen1ber 1939. \\'hile the nun1bcr of a\\'ards increased by ov,er 40~o fron1 417 in • March 1936 to 598 in March 1938 (Hare. ·1946). Several groups ofv1orkers v;h·ich had never been effectively organised forn1ed unions. of which clerical " 'orkers \VCre the largest. Fifty years on il is very easy to assun1e that the consequences of the introduction of con1pulsory unionisn1 were a very n1echanical process and I have often hean..i people describe unions like the Clerical Workers as ·creatures of legislation·. Although a syn1pathetic govern-nl'ent and legislation ·encouraging unionisation \\'ere extrcn1ely in1portant factors. a study of \\'hat happened during the early years of the first Labour Govern n1ent shO\\'S that the process of unionising unorganised " 'orkers was anything but n1echanical. Labour Departn1ent 'files held in lhe National Archives show that after the an1endn1ents to the JC.&A Act were passed in early 1936. the Minister of Labour. Tin1 Annstrong. and his depat1tnenl were flooded \\tith inquiries fro:n1 vlorkcrs and other groups about forn1ing unions. For cxan1ple. don1estic workers, dental nurses in private practice. life agents. Maori guides at • Assistant Secretary (Research). NZ Clerical ¥.' orkers Association - -- - -- - - -- ---200 Pete.r Franks WhakarevJar~e\\'a and taff of the Blind Institutes wanted to form unions while the Womcn~s l)ivision of the Fanners Union (nO\\' Federated Farn1ers) were interested in a union for housekeepers on farn1s (Labour Departrnent. 1936). Many of the unorganised groups were \VOn1en V.'Orkers and there was initially no great expectation that they would form unions. Shortly after the 1935 election. Arn1strong spoke of 'fixing wages by statute. \Vith special refl::n:nce to don1estic and fenutle office en1ployces. who are unlikely to organise .. : (Tornor-ro'v~ 1935). Ho\vever an urn ber of officials of established unions were awake to the in1portance of unionising unorgani"'ed '~'orker. In the first half of 1936 ~Clerical Workers Unions were fonned in n1ost industrial districts through the co·rnbined efforts of these men and of a sn1all ~ band of\\'Onlen office \\'Orkers. 1t took the Clerica 'l ~'orkers Unions aln1ost tv.'o years to get established on a viable basis. During this tin1e they faced det.ern1ined opposition fron1 en1ployers who \\'ere generally appalled at the idea of office of offi(.;e \vorkers being unioni ed. En1ployer oppo ·ition included atten1pl to forn1 con1pany and industry clerical unions which they conlroHed. a cha11enge in the Court of Appeal againsl the legality offorn1ing occupationally-based unions and n1oves to overth rO\V the leadership oft he Clerical Workers Union and replace it \Vith workers syn1path-etic to lhc en1ployers. (Franks. 1986). T'he point 1 an1 tnaking is that the actual history of the fornuHion of new unions after the 1936 reforn1s to the lC&A Act \Va .. a far tnore uncertain proce s than one n1ight assun1e fron1 hind ight. and is son1ething that de erves careful tudy. Another in1portant. issue that hould be exan1ined is the v.ray in which the arbitration y tern operated to protect the po "'ition ofvulnerable groups in the \\'Orkforce. Clerical \¥Orker are one such group. At the tin1e the ("lerical \Vorkers Unions \~ere forn1ed there v.'erc n1any repor1 in the pre about the lo'v vvagcs and had conditions ofn1any office workers (Franks. 1986). Once the unions achieved their fir t awards they \\'ere able to u e the systen1 to establish tninin1un1 " 'ages and conditions for clcaical \vorkers throughout industry. Although the en1ployers consistently tried to do\vngrade the value of clerical v.'orkcr and their \\'age ~the crucial thinl! that enabled the union to continue to n1aintain the e tandard \Vas the Arbitra-..., tion Court's policy of establishing and n1aintaining wages relativitie. betvleen different occu-pations. In the first n1ttlti-district Clerical \VorkersAv.'ard is ued in July 193X. the Arbitration C~ourt set l he 111 in i nHl n1 \vage for rnale clerks ov.er 21 year of age at the san1e rate it had established for killed v.'orkers in ils Standard \\'age Pronouncernent oft he previous year. The Court follo\ved thi relativity v.'ith re1narkable con..istency d0\\' 11 the years: for exarnple. follovling its 1945 and 1952 Standard \\1age Pronounccn1ent and its ruling in the 1966 "n1argins for skill' case in the P ri nti ng Trades A \\'a rd. it set the top a\va rd " 'age for n1a le clerical " 'orkcrs at the sa rne level as, or "lightly less than. the general rate it ~et for "killed n1alc \\Orker (NZ ~Clerical \VorkeJ"' A sociation. 1986). In 197 'I the Court upheld the traditional relativity bel\~'een clerical \\'Orkers and trade "nlcn and granted clerical \vorker a 16 percent av.'ard ri e. thereby causing a n1ajor upst:t in the wage controls in1posed by the National Governrnent of the day (\Valsh. 1984). Finally. in 1977.the lasttin1e the n1ain ~lerical \~·orkers· a\vard \vent to arbitration. the Indus-tri~d Cornn1ission again upheld the traditional relativity (NZ Clerical \Vorkers Association. 19X6 ). The clerical workers· traditional relativity \Va "to course. between the wages paid to ·rnale clerks and n1ale tradesn1en. J1o\vcvcr the great n1ajority of clerical \vorkcrs arc4 and ahvays have been~ \Von1cn and the final issue I \vant to discuss here is that of \~'OJnen·s \\'ages. Unfortunately it is one that i largc'ly ignored in 1--lolfs book1 a it i in other studie of\vages policy in Ne'' Zealand. One of the fe,v studies to consider this question frorn an historical perspective is a recent one by Sue lver on. She tnake ~ the point that relativities (both\\ ithin and bet\\een a\~ards) have had l\\'0 effects in tern1 of~~~on1en's pay. Fir.-t relativitie have ~·orked to a large degree in \VOn1en's favour hy tnaintaining their\vagcs at a reasonable level.l-lo\vever. second. relativities have also preserved the inequalities that existed at lhc tin1e that a\\ ard · and relativitic ,,·ere first established (Iverson. 19,)6). 1'he .Arbitration Court \Vas not inclined to redress these inequalities. as its attitud~ to equal pay sho\VS. Union first ·tartcd to raise equal pay clain1s during and in11nediately afler the Second \~1orld War (\vhich sa\\ a big increase in the proportion of\\Otnen in the ~'orkforcc). and in 1949 the Clerical Workers Association look a n1ajor equal pay ca e to the Court. ·rhc Court had no ent.husiasn1 for equal pay: the Judge tnade it clear that he considered the union's clain1 for one cale for \VOtnen and n1cn a._ being quite foreign toe tablished ''-'age-fixing principles (~loynihan, 19X6). 201 The next 40 years I·ron1 'that tin1e until the [-:qual Pay Act v.as passed in 1972~ the ('ourt failed to addrc~~ clain1~ for equal pay. r~efusing evt:n to con1n1ent on the issue. l·o n1ak~ n1atter~ \\Orse. the standard response of politicians on the issue was to tell unions that if the) \\anteu ClJUal pa) they should negotiate it with crnploycrs or 'take their clain1s to the c·ourt! l~hc frustration \vhich these attitude~ caused can he seen frorn the foUo\\ ing union conl-n'lcnt after the c·terical Workers A\\'ard \\'ent to arbitration in 19X6: l~canale \\Orker~ have no rca~on to be happy about Mr Holyoakc. Mr Marshall or th\! Arbitration Court. The) arc getting'' hat b Ubually known as th~ ·run around' on equal pa) . Mr Holyoake and Mr ~1ar~halltold us to appl) to the Arbitration Court ftHc4ual pay.\\ c therefor~ went to the Court and \\Cnt again. \\•c Jo not kno\\ v.hcthcr the tourt C\Cil con~idercd our clain1~. it certain I) didn't do an) thing to grant thc.rn ... Bc.lic' cit or note\ en th·is plea for a C01llll1Cllt b) the ( OUrt 11lade 011 behalf of 30.000 clerical \\Orkcroo~ fell upon apparcn tly deaf ear~.\\' c accept the principle of arbitration.\\' c there fore accept the Court\. right to reject our dain1s or to grnnt thcn1 in part only. Bu'l \\hen the Court under the ci rcu rnsta nces. n1eets uS~ with a" all of sil·encc it is dest raying our faith in a rhit rataon (( "lerica I Ne\\ s. 196 7). The c~ourCs perfonnance on equal pay diJ not irnprove even after the 1972 E4ual Pay Act ·was passed. In heranalysisofa nun1berofe4ua.l pay cases dealt v.rith bythe(·ourt betv.ecn 1972 and 1986.. Eliza beth Orr cone I udcs that the(~ ou rt rcgist.ered a n urn her ofagrecn1ents \Vh ich diu not fully con1ply \Vith the Acl~ failed to provide adequate gu iJeli ncs in Scct'ion 9oft he 197 2 Act and that it generally interpreted lhc Act in a restrictive n1anncr so that equal pay legishHion \\Ould be unl·ikcly to be in1plen1cntctl satisfactorily under it~ juri~diction (Orr. 19X6). l~his con1n1ent has touched on only a fe\v of the issue that should be addressetl in an) follOYt'-up study to Jan1es Holt' book. I hope that hislorians ,,·ill lake up the challenge to continue his excellent \\Ork: if the sequel is as good as the first in •'talnlcnt it can only he of benefit to all the participants in today·s debates about 'the future of industrial relations. References C' lcrical Ne'v\S. ( 1967) March. Franks P ( 1986) Nothing to lose but our gains- 50th annil'ersaiJ' ofthefounding of the Hl'ellington. Taranaki: Marlborough and Nelson C'/erical U ~orkers Union unpublished address to the Union·~ annual confer~nc,e. Hare A E ~c ( 1946) Repon on industrial relations in 1\'e,·r Zealand \¥ellington. lver on Sue ( 1987) \Vhy \\'Ornen get paid lcs~ Br~oadsheet Jan ua ry/ Februa ry. Labour ·ocpartnlent file 3/2/ 1020 Part l. l936- 193R. National An:hi\e~. Moynihan Carolyn ( 1986) ,Qn your side- a histOlJ' of the l\1orthern (~/erical. Adn:1inistrative and Related Workers Union, 1936-1986 Auckland. NZ Clerical \Vorkers Associal'ion ( 19H6) Subtnissions to theA rhitration Coun on equal pay and the J~·qua/J)ayAct 1972 Vv'e'llington NZ Clerical \Vorkcrs Association. ~Orr E ( 19R6) The Arbitration Court's role in super•:ising the };qual l'ay Act 1972. Centre for Continuing Education. Victoria Un ,ivers:ity. Ton101TO~ ( 1935) IS Decen1ber. ~'a Ish Patrick J ( l9R6) The rejection of' COI]Joratisn1.· u~ade union.\, en1ployer~ and the stare in New Zealand Ph.D Thesis. University of M:inncsota. 

Compulsory arbitration: the next 40 years

https://ojs.victoria.ac.nz/nzjir/article/download/3623/3242

Compulsory arbitration: the next 40 years

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Open Journal Systems at the Victoria University of Wellington Library