ARBITRATION COURT.

Press, Volume LVII, Issue 17115, 9 April 1921, Page 6

ARBITRATION COURT.

■ YESTERDAY'S PROCEEDINGS. The Court of Aibitrrlion—Air Justice Frazer (president), Messrs W. Scott (cmployeia" reyresentativs!, and J.. A. McCulIcugh (employees' representative)—resumed yesterday morning. - AX INJURED HAND C. C. Field (Mr H. D. Acland) claimed compensation from P. and D. Duncan, Ltd. (Mr J. H. Unham). iu respect of an injured light hand. The plaintiff was «muloy-'d as .x striker at defendant's works, ur.d on October i:h- he received injuries to -tlw tendons of the risht hand, v.hkii were stiaiiwd. H-e was unable to work ror eighteen awns, and was stated to be still partially disable-,!. Evidence as to the nature of the injury was ■riven bv Dr. AViddowson, I>r. Saudi-ton. ai(d Or. Acland. Dr. Sondstou sta-i-ed thai th: nervous condition of plaintiff was one ir. some luaasur-? to auto-sug-Restioi; on ljiamtiff's part, arising cut of ins anxiety as if whether he woul-i be able to £0 Lack to work, and also nnxi.-ty as to conipcnsaiion': in morA compvns«Uio:i cases this iion, resulting iu certain nervous phenomena, occurred. Mi- Upham submitted that -plaintiff was able to do -light work on January '2ml, thut stiitablc lis hi" work (sorting bolt*s) had Vcu offered him, but he had not take-n it. L. L. Ojvdery, a director of- defendant company, slaU-.l "that the bolts to to sorted avi'j-aired from ioz to 30-i -each. Witnoss hud enquired and found that the statement that plaintiff. w-.r» given heavy lif.'.-inir work (■••as not correct. For th? light work plaintin' would have bx'ii paid his ordinary wages, JE-1 2s 6d a weak: the offer 31 this oas? of work was ftill open. The Court reserved its decision. ALLEGED BREACH OF AWARD. John Gecrgeson (Inspector of Awards) v. Unite-.! Pictures, Ltd., A. Rowley, manager (,My J. H. Upham), was am app-a.l on r. ;v>int of law froui* the decision of Mr B. E. McCarthy, S.M., who dismissed a case alleging breach of award .on the part of '-ho United Pictures, Ltd., in failing 'to pay the. award rates to a person employed to attend ;o mi electric-piano player; the wages paid having been. 30s a week instea-.l ol £'2 13s. 2d. It' was admitted that .at the time the Cllnstchuich Performing- Musicians' award was' made there were no'electric- pianos in the Di-minion, and that the 'instrument referred tr. required the possession of no inusieiauly skill on the part of the person attending it, all thali was n-ecewaa-ry being to switch on. or sfl. the electric curicnt, and to change the ivcords. It- was possible to leave the player en lively unattended for ta-fl-Iy lengthy periods. In support cf the Union's contention that t'h? attendant camo un-ler t'/a award, Mr Gcorgesnii cited.the' Ar.c-kland Poifonnaug Musicians' award, in which provision is luiide for the payment of persons employed "to pluv, or cpe'rato." He admitted that I-Jie Christc-hurdi award referred only to persons emplovH "to play" insliiuuems or pianolas. ' He Hunt in making av.-ai-as the Court sough t to make conditions as nnifojui' as possible throuehoiit the Dominion* Mi- Uiih'airi submitted that -.he Clxristohurch a'wvvrd did not cover tK-.: attendant upon' this okctric piano. In the Magistrate's Court it-he company did not seriously cjn'.-s!. '.lit. o/iestion of wages; they, had taken the noint : i-b.;t the attendant on such ,in im-trumsnt di:l ' not come within the The members'« the to wit-, ness a demonstration of tli'.» instrument. The . Court reserved itis decision. CHKISTCHURCH SADDLERS. In -this dispute Mr F. Cooper, appeared for the employers and the Hon. J. Barr, M.L.C., for Mia.-Union. , , , Mr Barr said that in view of the recent Duncdin awaa-.1, iu which the wages wore fixed at Cs an hour, plus 3d an hour bonus, the Christcihurclx Union could not persist m it* demand for 2s Gd an hour, and was rjcpared to accept tho Dunedin rale. lno Cliristchurcli Union asked fur a' 44 hours wwk but. in view of 46* hours having been prcvMed -for in the Ihmedin award, they would" abandon thciy demand and accept tho Auckland hours. . . . Argument was heard as to the exemption of firma engaged in horse and cow cover making and tent making. ' _ ;. Tho Court suggested that a. union compmi'n.' the workers in that trade might he formed. This course was beinp; aclopted. in Dunedin. Mr Bair sxibmitted that, owing, to the nitei-cha-nge possible, ull» ehould bo xmder one award. , >. , . , , Mr Cooper sakl that the employers, objected to the Auckland rates. He called evidence as to tho present state of the trade; . .■■■ ■\V. H. Denton (Trigs'and Denton) stated th.it' in September last:-his. firm-employed 59 hands; at present 29. Since tho beginning o' the year trade hud been falling off. The chief reason waa that customers would not buy goods a* the high cost . of production. At present the staff was manufacturing a, good dealof stock: it'was likely that a further reduction of hand* would bo- necessary.F. J. Tucker (manager saddlery, department Mason, Strutters, Ltd.) stated that the firm employed 17 hands last September; at present 14, and six men had been given notice. The ; cost of production and tho quantity of importations were the chief Masons for the falling off in trade. E. E. -West-oil (manager Weston iJroa.. Ltd., manufacturers of fancy leather goods) stated that the hands employed had decreased from 49 in September last to 23 at present. The- hi"h cost of production was tho principal cause of the falling off of trade. The. industry' was practically a -new- one, established during the war period. > J. E. Kent stated that in November last ho employed 17 men and 13 women; now, 9 men-and .6 women. Replying to his Honour, witn-ss said that ho had anticipated a. decieaso in the fancy lcatlier gopds trade, Mr Cooper said that the employers were piepa-red to accept the conditions, m tho Auckland award with the exception of the wages. Ho quoted statistics showing that -tfte total number employed in'tho saddlery and harness trade in the Domiiyon wa a . 587 w 1916 and 407 in 1919; in 1916 there were 61 employed in- the manufacturing of fancy leather goods; in 1919 there xvere 90. In 1914 the importations of saddlers', goods, including saddlers' ironmongery, totalled £62,813; in 1920 the total was £389,562; in the month of January, 1920, tho total importations amounted to £62861; in January last £l7-,33C. His Honour commented that these figures appeared to bo due to over-importations, or the- rush of importations He mentioned that the "s 3d an hour accepted ill Dunedin was 3d xo. hour under the basic wage. • Mr. Barr submitted that, with the exception of one. witness—the ot Mason Strulhers and Co.—the state of affairs describe* was due to fluctuations in the fancy goods department. The secretary of the union informed him that ho only knew of six saddlers out of work at present, there wore indications that the trade- -would im-n.-ove as tho result of the demand for leather work for motor-cars. The Court reserved decision. TRAMWAY EMPLOYEES' -WAGES. The Christchurch Tramway Employees' Union (Mr H. T.- Armstrong) applied for an amendment of the award, with the view of increasing tho wages of all classes of workers covered by the award to the rates paid in Wellington, r , Mr Frank Thompson, general manager oi tho Christchurch tramways, appeared for tile Tramway Board. , Mr Armstrong stated that the Board last vear, when the Court announced its cost ot "living bonus, gave a bonus of njd an hour instead of 3d an hour fixed by the Court. The Board had opposed the union s application for the full bonus. The result was that Christchurch tramway men were the worst paid in the Dominion, and the Board s labourers were worse paid than the labourers of any other local body. Assuming that tho t-amway employeca were not entitled to the basic 'wage, that was no reason why they should V.ot have received the fell cost of lixin* bonus. He quoted - the rates ruling m Wellington as compared with Christchurcn. Evidence was given in support of trie union's case by John Wibon, motorman. Mr Thompson protested , against the imputation that the Board had broken its agreement before the Conciliation Council. the Board had paid the ljd an hour cost of living bonus; tho other ljd represented eddition to tho basic wage. • Hia Honour said that it must bo shown, that the tramway employees' work was intermittent before they would bo entitled to the addition to the basic wage. . Witness, replying to Mr Thompson, said tha-t Christchurch tramwaymen were about, the best dressed tramwaymen in tlie -Dominion: the fact that -uniforms were provided, represented about 2s 6d a, week.. Mr Thompson stated that contributions made by tho Board and the State to tho superannuation fund represented 6s 2d a week, in respect to each employee. A. E. Home, employed on the* permanent way, also gave evidence. Mr Thompson said that the union h»d railed to pjove that tramway employees came under the Court's Ghborne pronouncement, as it applied to additions to the basic wage. Ho mentioned that a carpenter and a bricklayer prefened- the tramway service, owing to the continuity of tha work, to following their own trades. He had on one occasion made a .review of the former employments o: tramwaymen, and he .was Eurprised to find the great variety that there was. Mr Armstrong said that, for each carpenter, bricklayer, or other artisan who had taken eervice on the tramway 9 he could cite twenty tramwaymen who had taken up wharf labouring. He submitted that the conceasiona given the employees xvere not the cxmceeK»na

they- xvere sxipposed to bo. As to continuity of employment, he pointed out that it only affected one-third of the employees—the traf:&e staff. - The Court reserved its decision. The Court adjourned 'till 10 a.m. to-day. • AWARDS MADE. . In tho following disputes tho recommendations of the Council of Conciliation' have been made into awards of-the'Court :-■- Canterbury Freezing Works and Belated Trades'; - ■6hristchurcli Wholesales Merchants' Employees';" Christclrurch: Brush and Broom Workers'; Christchurch Clerks, Cashiers, and Office Employees (Laundry,, Dyers,-, and Cleaners'- section); Canterbury Dairymen's Employees; audi . Canterbury Builders! and General Labourers, Quarryworkers, and Wool and Grain Employees (South Canterbury Wool and Grain Eniployets' section). .-. The Court declined to add th 3 Lytlclton Pictures, Ltd., to the Christchurch Picture Theatre awards. ORDERS FOR. BONUS. Orders granting the 3s bonu&i have been made as under: — . Canterbury Bricklayers, Canterbury Plumbeiu ajul Gitsfii-tters, .-Canterbury. Guxderters, Christchurch (21 miles radius) Aerated Water Workers and other Bottleis, Christclrurch Gasworks Employees, Canterbury General Labourers (Counties oi Waimairi; Paparaa, Heathcote, and. Halswell), Canterbury Leadlight and G-lass. Workers, Canterbury Flour, Oatmeal, and Barley Mills Employees, Canterbury Tanners aijd Fellmongers, Cnntoxbury Dress and Mantle Makers, Canterbury Manure, Tallow, and .Soap Workers, Christchurch District and Timaru 'Quarry Workers, Christchurch Performing Musicians, Canterbury Wick-srworkers', ChriEtchurch Suburban, Ashburton, Akaroa, Rangiora, and JCaiapoi Local Bodies Labourers, and Canterbury Upholsterers. " , Increaf36 of xmges—Canterbury Leadlight and Glass Svbrkcra.