The owners were desirous that the Board should join them in meeting the Bishop, but they were informed that a previous understanding had been come to, by which it was arranged that each side should meet him separately, and then the joint meeting should take place. They had carried out their part of the bargain, and were ready to meet jointly as soon as his lordship should ask them, as they were very wishful not to throw any obstacle in the way of the formation of the Board. On July 27th the formalities were settled, and the rules were left to the four secretaries, with instructions to draw up a circular recommending such rules to the members.
proposed conciliation board
Gentlemen,—We hereby desire your attention and consideration to the rules of the "Proposed Conciliation Board," which you instructed us to form. We have always told you that, however carefully we might draft such rules, the acceptance, amendment, or rejection thereof is with you. We were proud to receive the commission of the duty, and we place before you the result of our work, and are hopeful that great benefits will accrue to the trade of the county if these rules are adopted. We do not claim perfection for them, but we do assert that they are in advance of any method ever arranged here for the settlement of disputes.
We will not trouble you by any lengthy statement by way of urging you to accept the rules, for in our opinion their fitness is clear, but we will in as brief a manner as possible draw your attention to three of their leading features or principles. First, the scope of the operations of the Board; second, its duration; and third, the machinery by which it arrives at its decisions.
The scope of the Board is set forth under the headings of "Objects." We do not quote those objects, but ask you to refer to and consider them carefully. They are clear in their intention and comprehension. What can be more interesting and important to us than the prevention of disputes? We speak for you, as well as ourselves, and say we desire them not, and welcome any mode of settlement which will minimise friction, and help both employers and employed to avoid any irritating action, while it does not interfere with the right of and justice to either party. You will observe that the Board is intended to be more than a Wages Board. It will take into its cognisance and decision any questions which may arise and for which the Joint Committee rules do not provide.
You know as well as we do the numerous cases that arise which have no standing at the Joint Committee, and you will, therefore, easily recognise the value and importance of any tribunal which will deal with such matters in a ready and expeditious manner. There is no need to enumerate those questions. We hope you will not merely glance at the latter portion of the "Objects," but give it your careful attention.
The duration is fixed by rule three. The limit is 1895, and, therefore, if the rules should fail to meet our views, we can terminate the existence of the Board in less than a year and a half from now, which is a short time in the history of our industrial relations. A shorter time than this will not give us the opportunity of testing the usefulness of the arrangement, neither is it long enough to allow any serious evil to arise therefrom.
The machinery or mode of operation is contained in rule four and subsequent rules. If you examine these rules you will see, that while they provide for the appointment of an umpire (which is necessary), yet his services are not to be called in until the Board have tried to settle by negotiation and conciliation. We recommend to your special notice the main features of this portion of the rules. These are the provisions for the play of conciliation and mutual confidence. Anything that will beget a feeling of trust and mutuality, that will remove the desire to overreach and withhold on the one hand, and of suspicion and doubt on the other, should be welcomed and tried, and if possible strengthened.
There were a number of suggested objects and provisions sent in, which were afterwards commented upon by the united Committees. Amongst these was a minimum wage. The Committees, in relation to that question, drew attention to the period between 1877-79, when, in little more than a year and a half, the miners spent £23,000 in the maintenance of men out of work; that, so severe was the pressure, they were compelled to abolish the Relief Fund; that there were collieries where the men asked to be allowed to work at twenty per cent. below the minimum; and that the actual average went down to nearly 6d. per day below the minimum. The second suggestion was "a voice in the selling price of coals." This, the Committees thought, was a very good ideal, but it was yet a great way off. It implied more mutuality than was in existence, and it was a state which must evolve, rather than be fixed arbitrarily. "The voting to be by ballot at the Board meetings." This was thought to be unbusiness-like, as secret voting was a strange thing for a business meeting. Then it was thought by some lodges that the question of sacrificed men, and arranging for all men to be in the Associations, were matters to come within the purview of the Board, but it was found that they were not compatible with its objects. The rules as framed were not perfect, but were far in advance of any to be found in the country. "Many other districts and trades have adopted the principle, but we venture to say that in no instance has a Conciliation Board been formed which, for breadth of scope in its operation and dealing with questions that can arise, is in any way equal to that proposed for this county. We have had the opportunity of studying the rules of all the Boards already formed, we have watched the work of those, and we unhesitatingly declare that in no single instance have such equitable rules been found."
When these views were put before the four sections they were accepted by the other three, but the miners hesitated. The Executive pointed out to them that by a Council resolution the power had been given to the Board to arrange rules and conditions, and therefore theirs was an anomalous position for them to take up by their objection. Under the circumstances they had resolved to call a special Council, in order that the matter might be fully considered. They were confident that if the common good were the aim, and all were imbued by that idea, the Conciliation Board would be formed on the lines suggested by the united Committees. The result of the Council was the acceptance of the proposed constitution, with the alteration of the number of members from fifteen to eighteen on each side, and the owners were informed that the Federation Board was ready to meet and sign the rules. The rules were signed on the 18th of February 1895.
There is no need to insert the rules here, as they can at all times be seen in the office, if any person feels desirous of doing so. The election of the first members took place on the 12th February 1895, the following persons being elected:—
| J. Wilson. | W. H. Patterson. | S. Galbraith. |
| J. Johnson. | T. H. Cann. | W. House. |
| J. Forman. | W. Golightly. | H. Jemison. |
At the first meeting of the Conciliation Board the employers asked for a reduction of wages. Many people thought they were in a hurry. Such a conclusion was hardly justifiable when we remember that they had been pressing for a reduction for some time, and the delay had arisen from the length of time taken in the negotiations to establish the Board.
The employers felt themselves injured by the delay, and therefore took the first opportunity of having their claim put forward and settled. The Federation Board in their circular on the situation acknowledged that, for they said:
We cannot but regret that the first meeting of the Board should have been convened to consider a reduction of wages, yet we feel confident that, however distasteful and unpleasant it may be to submit to a fall in percentage, all who have observed the condition of trade, taken note of the prices prevailing generally, and the serious lessening of the number of hands, during the past six months, could not be otherwise than prepared for a reduction in the rates of wages which were got when the condition of trade was different and prices higher.
While the Board were prepared for a demand for a reduction they were not prepared for the amount asked. The demand was for fifteen per cent., which would bring the wages down to a point to which the scale of 1889 would have brought them. The price of coal in 1889 was 4s. 8d., in 1895 it was 5s. 2d. Wages had risen thirty-five per cent., and therefore they had a claim (said the owners) for at least fifteen per cent. The arguments against that claim we need not state in full. The main one was that, taking the whole period since 1889, wages had been between seven and nine per cent. higher than the periodically quoted net selling prices would have given. That argument, as all are aware, was of great weight, and that it influenced the decision, there is not the slightest doubt. The decision of the umpire was a reduction of seven and a half per cent., but it left the wages higher by that amount than the old arrangement would have done. Under it 5s. 2d. per ton would have given a wage ten per cent. above the standard; the award of Lord Davey in May 1895 left it seventeen and a half above the standard.