ARBITRATION COURT.

Press, Volume LVII, Issue 17117, 12 April 1921, Page 4

ARBITRATION COURT.

YESTERDAY'S PROCEEDINGS. Till© Arbitration Court's Christelrarch session was continued yesterday. Hig Honour Mr justice Frazer presided with hiin being - Mr J. A. McOullougb, 'assessor for tho employees, and Mr W. Scott, assessor for tho employers. BAKERS AND PASTRYCOOKS. ' I'ilw Noitlih Canterbury Baiters' Union (Mr I*. D. Martin) asked for a clause in tli© new award to provr.le that 'foremen should receive 10» a. week more than journeymen. No objection, being raised, the president sadd ithe Court would giant, tho application. • Tho Rendezvous tea rooms were exempted front- tho wntd, . ' Miss Coombs, proprietor of tho Henrietta, "cake shop, asked for exemption. She stated that she conducted a "home-made cako"shop; She employed about 15 hands, all. icttiKles, and paid them from £i a. week down >,o 30s a week. She fad been exempted -previously by.the Court,"and both partita nt the Conciliation Council had agreed r .to her oxttnption; If the were brought under' the award it would be a. hardship. She > would have to employ some? men, and probably would hove to close'lier business. Mr Martin opposed the application. Ho claimed that'fhe women employedby Miss Co'omba should bo' paid the'"nune ! w-ages- sb men'wore under the' award. Jf Mies Coombs employed pastrycooks she should t« bound by the award. Miss Coombs said Ithat' women were not physically suited to do the work. If she employed men they would not do the* kind of work she required, and slie could not control . them. • . ■ ■ ... Hiß.llonour.eaid tile Court would.consider the. application. . '■:-'■ '■•.- ■ .•-,-' ■> ■■ "'""■- ■'■..■.''•:;.'• BOOT REPAIRERS. . Mr P. M 7 Robson, for the Canterbury Booti Repairers' Union, said that an agreement had been awached before the Conciliation Council on all questions in dispute except I piecework and wages. It w*e submitted that boot repairers were skilled Workers, and should be paid accordingly. Mr D. Woods, for the employers, objected to the application. He submitted . that the workers engaged in piecework preferred that system. When the Union issued nptico that piecework was to be. stopped the employees oonceiniisd held a meeting and decided that they would not give up piecework, as it was better for tl>«m and for tho cmployeW. William Taylor, mptoraotor in' boot repairing at tho Chrisfcchurch Technical College, called by Mr Rooaon, p£V« evidence to thn : effect, that in his cpinion'boot repairing was a akilled trade. A bootmaker had to be able" to deal wifh any class of boot, including surgical boots. Witness considered that the use of machinery in making boots bad ; affected boot ropairesre, us thoy often had to repair defects in tho making of the boot?. The work was dirty work; many of tho . boots brought in smelling strongly. Witne.is would not go back to' piecework if ho could get weekly work. .-" To JJr Woods: Witness was president of th« Boot Repairers' Union. Witness considered Hint boots were better mad/., twenty, years .ago than they were to-day. Tin majority of men engaged on piecework. did not favour the sysitem. ' Leonard W. Vollor, foreman repaiter at Cookham House-, gave evidence to tho .iffcot that boot repairing was a skilled trade.. Mr Woods'submitted that the IVion had not made out a caso. Ho said that if wages were increased there woitld be a oongideratJc"'increas* in tho cost of hoot jopairs. ; Tho three- firms affected wiehetl to | hnvi» p;ec*«ork retained.', John N. Du. Feu, principal of She firm of ,J. Jf. Du Feu and Co., said that his firm employed its men on a weekly or hourly wage. Witness did not couaider.ithe trade a» skilled trade as compared with, say, carpentering. Witness had a. returned soldier in his employ, who had becoiuo a good repairer iii six months. Tha employees euRaged on bespoke work were paid more than' award wagos. One got £5 15s a week, another £5, and a- third £i Us. Witness did not agree that Ithe upo of machinery had made the work of repairing more difficult, or that the trftde was a dirty one. Cuthibert John Thornton, manager of John Thornton, Ltd., lfigh street, said his firm's employees wero employed on piecework, and had been since 168<i. The work was nvoro agreeable to tlie men, as they could work just when they pleased. One «' the advantages of piecework was that, thoro. was not the same need for supervision as in the caso of employees oii a weekly va.™e. There was also no need for "driving"—a man did an honest week's work from solf-inteiost. Edmoncl Joseph Burh-y, employed by Jftrange and Co., said that on piecework he earned more than was earned by mijn on an hourly wage. Ho averaged .-C6 a week. His" Honour said tlie- Court would consider the matter; BRUSH AXB BROOM WORKERS. Mr H. Hunter naked that an additional bonus should be. given to tho mombera of tho Brush end Broom Workers' Union. His Honour said itbnt the November bonus would be added to. the award. ' GENERAL -DRIVERS. For the General- Drivers' Union, Mr H. .Hunter said that tho drivers wanted the 3s bonus to be granted up to ivtarch. lTlh. At u 'eittirig of, the Conciliation Council in Dnnedin ':i Dominion agroemont had been arrived at, and it-iwd "been arranged that tho Court, should bo »eked i to )nako a 'scrieß of .uniform iiward» covering tho whole Doiiuaiot. HU Hononr said there would be no difficulty in doing this, provided aU the parties concurred. The only vliiii;? to do now would be to make an order tor the ordinary bonus, but instead of making it up to March 17th, to make it until .the Court should otherwise order.. This *-onid make it certain .thaA it would be paid nn til tho new award c.iine into operation. QUARRT WORKgRS' AWARD. Tho Court made an award in a dispute brought -by the quarry workers regarding wages. " The following rates were used:—Squaring' ; stone,-" getting- pitchers, building-stone, keek- : atone, and paving-stone ready for masons, is 1 Od an hour; certificated men using cxplo-" sives, where a quarry faoe was less tnaa '2O feet high, lsSd; all other workers, le 7d; all with a bonus of S-Jd. Youths—From 17 to 18 years of age, la an hour; 18 to 19, Is ljd; 19 to 23, l«3d. Tha award will come into force on. April 28th, 1921, and continue until April 25th, 192 a. CLERKS AY© CASHIERS. Mr MartiffT appeared on behalf of the Clerk 3, Cashiers', and Offica Hmployeos' Union (local bodies, agricultural implement manufacturers, sas company, and plum bins

companies' section), application for bonus. It was agreed to take the .various applications together. , , „„i;'" Mi- Martin said that although tho-appli-cation was for a bonus it -was submitted that the workers concerned were entitled' to moro than the ordinary 3s a week bonus ; Mr Cooper objected that the Imon had failed to supply, the employers with the grounds for the special-application as quired by the War Refutations Act; also that as far as the local W™v\V«"??l concerned they were- practically asking lor a new award. „ , ,'. ,;„„ His Honour said Mr Cooper's objection would be noted. ~ ~ , „,„_ Mr Martin said that oven if the 9s bonus were granted the workers concerned would be worse off than any other section ot workers. The average wage of a senior clerK, with five years' experience U P to ,, J * n ]J!2t had been £3 a week.. They were the lowest paid skilled workers in the Dominion. tie asked tbo Court to award tie full bonus of 7s on the grouud that this was the firstaward, and the workers had not yet received any bonus. That would only'>£«,™ e workers concerned on a reasonable footing, and cTen then tber would bo at a disadvantage- compared with the other workers. Some discussion took'place on the application of the local bodies section of tbo Union for a classification of meter-readers as: clei&s,Mr Martin -submitting that moter-readera should receive not less thou £4 10s a week. Mr Cooper said that tho award provided for increases in the wages of all employees in accordance with years of service, £4 Cs, plus (is bonus, being gi«?n in tho fifth year. To his Honour: Tho intention of tho award was that an adult worker should get not leas than four guineas a week. . . His Honour said that tho Court had jurisdiction only as regards\wag es and-hours. The Union was raising another point, tnat of classification. He suggested that the parties should agree to the insertion of a clause in the award that meter-readers over tho age of 21 should be paid not less than £4 10s a Mr' Cooper said that what 4ha Union wanted was that the meter-readera employed, by local bodies should be placed on the same fooling as clerks. This was being done by the local bodies, so he could not sec what all the trouble was about. His Honour eaid the Court would consider tho matter. The question of the application for a bonus larger than the 3s bonus was also held over by tho Court for consideration. HAIRDRESSKKS. Mr Martin, for the Chriatchmch '•Hairr dressers' Union, asked for the Ss bonus, that the hours of work should be reduced from 51 ft week to 48, to be worked before 5.30 p.m., and for Saturday half-holiday. Mr Martin said that the workers concerned wet© tho only ones who could he .worked moro than 48 hours a week. Even, the hairdressers' assistants outside tho four-mile radius had a 48 hour week. After some discussion. Mr Martin said ho Would hot press the other points if the employers would concede the .48 hours' week. Mr Cooper formally opposed the Union's demands. He called—!, William Simpson, hairdresser and tobacconist, who said that at tho Conciliation Council, whon the agreement with the "employees was entered into, it had been definitely understood by tho employers that no application for a bonus would be made. Frederick William Woodward stated that if his business had to close on Saturday afternoon it would moan a serious loss. Mr Cooper pointed out that if tho hours were reduced, tho employers had the right to reduce wages proportionately. He opposed ail' the applications, stating that the workers were liberally paid, and the bonus was more than covered by the agreement regarding wages arrived at between the parties at tho Conciliation Council. Mr Martin said that the late secretary of the Union had emphatically denied that any arrangement had been made whereby the Union undertook not to apply for the bonus. His Honour said the Court yould consider the matter; BONUSES GRANTED. ■. The Court awarded the' 8s bonus to the folldwihg:—Canterbury Electrical Workers, Canterbury Range Workers, Canterbury Cycle Workers) Canterbury Tinsmiths and Sheet 'Metal-Assistants,' Canterbury Motor Mechanics, Canterbury Metal Workers Assistants, Canterbury Paper Bag, Carton and Boxroakers' Assistants, Canterbury Stereo:typers, 'Canterbury Retail Shop Assistants, Canterbury Rotary Machine Printers, Canterbury Brush and Broom Trad© Christohurch (five-mil© radius) Porters. . Cleaners, and Lift Attendants ' (in Bhops), Christchurah Journalists ("Referee" and spbrtimg papers), Canterbury -Local Bodies' Drivers, Canterbury Retail Shop Assistants {seedsmen';,and florists), -Canterbury Stonemasons, Canterbury Wholesale Merchants' Storemen and Packers, Canterbury Tailoresses (shirt, whife, and silk workers), Canterbury Tractiotijand Stationary Engine Drivers, Fjrerrieh and Male Boot "Operatives (boot repairers), Christohurch (ton-mile'radius, except, New Brighton and,Lvttelton) Picture- Theatres and Fiont-of- : House Employees (except New Brighton and Lyttolton), North Canterbury Timber Yards, Sawmills,' and Coal Sard Employees.