498 PROCEEDINGS OF SECTION Gl. 



grievances. There were no doubt many perfectly legitimate 

 claims from the men, but these would in all probability have been 

 more easily and satisfactorily settled by the Wages Board method. 



Before the Arbitration Act of 1901 expired^(it was to run to 

 1909)— Mr. Wade passed the Industrial Disputes Act of 1908, a 

 measure based largely upon the Victorian Wages Board. For a 

 time the two Acts had concurrent existence, but shortly afterwards 

 the Arbitration Act expired, leaving the Wages Board in possession 

 of the industrial field. 



The Act of 1908 provides for an Industrial Cciitt, to adjudicate 

 on appeals, on applications for the constitution of Boards, and the 

 like— such Court being presided over by a Supreme or District 

 Court Judge. The Bcatds representing the various trades consist 

 of an elected chairman, usually quite disinterested, with not less 

 than two or more than four other members — half representing the 

 employers and half the employees. All but the chairman must be 

 men who have been, or still are, engaged in the particular trade 

 concerned. Awards are enforceable by fine and, if necessary, 

 imprisonment. Appeals to the Industrial Court are only allowed 

 where the chairman is not a Judge. The Boards may grant 

 preference to unionists (other things being equal), and can make 

 a common rule. 



The practical distinction between these Boards and the older 

 Arbitration Court may be briefly summarised as follows : A Board 

 for each trade, friendly discussion by experts directly interested, 

 expert witnesses on oath rarely required, rapid and inexpensive 

 settlement by the parties themselves. As against : One non- 

 expert Court attempting to deal with all trades, hostile hearings 

 conducted by legal men, with " expert " witnesses on oath repre- 

 senting each side, delayed and costly settlement by external 

 authority. 



In practice the difference between a decision arrived at by the 

 parties themselves and one superimposed by a Court is far greater 

 than might have been expected. The Board decisions appear to 

 command the respect of the parties ; the Court decisions always 

 leave one side sore, and sometimes both. It is all the difference 

 between a friendly adjustment of some grievance with a neighbour 

 across the mutual fence, and a settlement of the same trifle in a 

 court of law. 



The following has been the actual experience to date (Decem- 

 ber, 1910) under the Act of 1908 :— 



Boards appointed to date , . . . . . 165 



Unions now registered under the Act . . 112 



Original Board determinations .. .. 119 



Variations of old awards . . , . , , 77 

 Awards re-enacting awards of Arbitration 



Court 20 



Largest number of Boards sitting at one time 28 



