ARBITRATION COURT.

Press, Volume LVII, Issue 17112, 6 April 1921, Page 4

ARBITRATION COURT.

CHRISTCHURCH SITTINGS. The Arbitration Court, comprising his Honour Mr Justice Frazer and Messrs W. Scott (employers' representative) and J. A. McCulloch (employees' representative), commenced its sittings in Christclmrch yesterday. The chief business consisted of the settling of dates for cases to be heard, and the hearing of applications for the 3s bonus.

The list of cases was settled as follows : . Thursday, April 7th—Canterbury Hot-el and Restaurant Workers' Industrial dispute, and application for bonus, 10 a.m. Friday, April fcth—G. C. Field v. 5, and D. Duncan, Ltd., claim for compensation,. 10 a.m. Case on -appeal, Inspector of Awards v. United Pictures, Ltd., to follow. Christclmrch Saddlery Trade dispute, and application for bonus, 2.15 p.m. Saturday, April 3th— Canterbury Quarry Workers' dispute, 10 a.m. Canterbury Tailoring Trade Workers, application for bonus, to follow. Monday, April 11th Canterbury Bakers, application to add parties, 10 a.m. Canterbury Boot Repairers' Industrial dispute to follow. Canterbury Drivers' and Brush andßroom WorTiers, applications for awards, 2.flf p.m. Tuesday, April 12th—Christclmrch Printing Trades Industrial dispute, 10 a.m. " Canterbury Shearers' (crutchers... and shearers' section) Industrial dispute, 2.15 p.m. Wednesday, April 13th —Keohane v. Blackball -Goal Co., Ltd., claim for compensation, 10 a.m. Richards v. the King, claim for compensation to follow. Neale'v. Canterbury Frozen Meat Co., claim for compensation, 2.15 p.m. ■ Hamer v. Savage and Clemens, claim for compensation, to follow. Thursday, April 14th—Soman and another v. Stenning, claim for' compensation, 10 a.m. C'hristchurch Butchers' Industrial .dispute, 2.15 p.m. Christchurch Shift Engineers' Industrial dispute, and Christchurch Sheet Metal Workers, application to add parties, to foilow.

Friday, April loth—Clerita, Cashiers, etc.j* Union's application to amend award, 10 a .m. -Clerks, Cashiers, etc., Union's Indusitrial dispute (warehouse section), to l'ollow. CLASSIFICATION OF BOOTMAKERS.

The case of the New Zealand Federated Boot Trade Employees' Association, in regard to the classification of workers, was heard. Mr C. A. Watts appeared for the Union, and Mr H. Ciarke for the employers.

The matter was one which had frequently been before Councils .of Conciliation and before the Court. The representatives of the unions contended that, owing to the nature of the,work, no, man was employed over a whole day as a wholly unskilled worker. 'His'work included skilled work, and, therefore,, a man. who worked in the various branches of the trade, as all had to do, should'be classed as a skilled worker. A lengthy document was read by Mr Watts, concerning the results arrived at by the Executive Council of the applicant Association. That report pointed out that the Efficiency Board had brought forward a classification in which the workers had had no voice, and as they had not been invited to take part in the scheme, which was prepared under abnormal conditions, arising out of the war, they could not be expected to approve of the scheme. The applicant Association, did not favour classification, and could not be expected to present a scheme providing for such; the introduction of such a scheme for consideration rested with the employers. The-respondents having failed to produce qounter-proposals, suggesting or outlining a scheme of classification at the riroper time, and in the manner provided by the" Act, the applicant Asosciation declined to meet the respon-. dents for further consideration of the classification question, and asked that the Court should decide the dispute in accordance with the recommendation of the Council of Conciliation, and in the light of the evidence submitted by both parties at the hearing of the case before the Court in Auckland. In yiew of the many circumstances surrounding the trade, the Association failed, to see how the very doubtful benefit of any ■ classification 'scheme could save the industry from the danger with which it was, allegedly threatened, or how any such scheme, against, the wishes of the workers would help the industry against foreign competition. • The Association held that the workers covered by the award, were skilled workers, and there was • no classification in their industry in any part of the world. His Honour said that the Court liad previously indicated that it, in a way, favoured classification, but there seemed to be some misunderstanding. It was recognised that what the Court had previously in mind was classification by groups ancj not by individuals. It had been* pointed nut that, a man might be emnloved during a day in two or three or four tasks nf perhaps only a semi-skilled nature. The Court might be prepared to look upon him as a skilled:-worker. Such was fair to a man who had been doing such work, I'ut who had not served an apprenticeshit). It was, however, useless to refer the* matter back for conciliation.. The Court would consider the problem as best it could.