The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1900-12-22
I HfAlE OF THE H0UR
DISCUSSION OF THE COMPULSORY
ARBITRATION LAW.

Some Say That it Will Destroy the
Right of Free COntract-NO Such
Thing as Free Contract Between
the Man With the Empty Stomach
and the Employer Who Controls
the Means of Employment.
Compulsory arbitration sounds some
thing like a misnomer. To arbitr-
ate anything is voluntarily to get to-
gether, talk over the situation and ami
cably decide what to do. Arbitration
on any other plan is a. resort to force.
It must be admitted that peaceful
arbitration, insofar as it refers to labor
troubles, has not been very successful
in this country. That is because it has
been tried before the public saw the
necessity for accepting such decisions
as binding. With almost boundless
natural resources undeveloped, hereto
fore if the employe did not like his en-
ployer he could change for another, and
he always had the option Of working
for himself if the offer for his services
was not satisfactory. But the rapid
monopolization of the opportunities to
self employment, added to the enor
nous accumulation of capital in few
hands, and the industrial change from
small factories to few large ones, has
narrowed the field Of employment inso-
far as ease in changing an employer is
concerned, and has made a. strike or
lockout much graver problem than
heretofore. Thus, instead Of industrial
disturbance being question to be set
tied between employers and workers, it
now deranges all kinds of business, and
rises to the dignity of national pro-
blem.
It is these changed conditions that
have brought into the foreground the
idea Of compulsory arbitration, which,
on the part of the employer, looks like
| robbery, when somebody outside of his
! business tells him that he must pay his
employees more wages, and on the part
Of the worker it resembles slavery,
when he is informed that a. supposedly
disinterested board has decreed that he
shall work for less pay. Of course
there is the option on the part of the
employer of shutting down, and on the
ployment, or at least his employer.
yet both are easier said than done.
A man with his capital locked up in
his business is in no position to stop.
He cannot sell to advantage, because
the decision Of the board is against his
mill or factory, and not against himself
personally. And with en1plo loyments
Econsentrat ed under tie controlsuf afeW
and these we'll organized, the worker
is not in position to pull up stakes and
quit. He is simply inviting disaster.
This is why recent ACCOUNTS of the
compulsory arbitration law of New
Few Zealand are particularly timely as
well as interesting. And very plausible
arguments are constructed on one side
of compulsory arbitration. The law
was passed some six years ago, and
while it applies only to industries in
which there are trade unions, and does
not prevent private conciliation or ar
bitration, yet it compels both sides,
when an arbitration board has been
asked for by either party to- the dis
pute, to abide by the finding. 1t goes
| farther than this. If, without good
cause, the employer shuts down, or the
employe quits work during the life OF
the decision, they can punish by fine or
Imprisonment.
The New Zealand law was first tried
in. the dispute between the federated
boot manufacturers and the associated
unions. This difficulty started in 1891
but was patched up by: an agreement
| q of
facturers refused to- prolong the life OF
the contract and the men appealed to
the court of arbitration; which refused
the request of the men that only union.
lists should be employed, but enjoined
that members of the union should be
given the preference, for this had beer
the '"custom' of the trade" And il
limited the hours to not more than nine
a day, or more than forty -eight week
It also fixed the number of apprentices
and decided that the wage should be
SO per week.
The manufacturers grumbled at the
decision and said that those in the as.
) ISOLATION We're placed at. a disadvan.
tage with those outside, but the court
cited the :outside manufacturers before
it, and twfthstanding they said they
had "conscientious scruples' agains,
belonging to any association, compelled
them to carry on their: business unde,
the Same conditions as.. insisted upor
in the factories where the difficult,
arose.
The women workers of the country
also received attention. The shirtmak
ers and other clothing operative.
thought they were being oppressed, ant
after unsuccessful attempts to better
their condition, appealed to the arbi
tration court. The court awarded thu
operatives only a part Of the wag,
asked, but gave members of the unio1
the preference, and abolished the sweat
shop. Seven out of forty-nine manu-
facturers refused to accept the finding
but the court compelled them to, 81
that women now get higher wages ant
better conditions, and whatever com
petition there is, is transferred from
grinding of flesh and blood to busines!
ability in buying raw material an6
! planning for an economical system O.
manufacture.
Does not compulsory arbitration in
l Fnnrn l. - R>.> Sz~1SA