ARBITRATION COURT.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18228, 12 November 1924, Page 5

ARBITRATION COURT.

MUSTERERS' AND DROVERS*

DISPUTE, Tho wages and conditions of th» Cinterbnry musterers', packets', and arovers war vrcro considered by tho Conrt o£ Arbitration yesterday. His Honour Mr Justice zcr presided, and with him were Meesra Scott and H. Hunter. Tho Canterbury Agricultural an d -^ >as ra Labourers' Union a3ked for en increase in wages, and tho Canterbury SheeP t>Wßera Union made application that the presen award rates and conditions should be xe newed. Cr "W. H. Nicholson represented owners' Union, and Mr A. Cook appca the employees. The employees' demands were ®f. ' present award rates being in parent c • Musterers, £1 St «d a day, double time on Sunday (£t a week "T week or 16s e day by tho - > musterers engaged by tho week to paid 168 for Sunday work; packers emp oyed in connexion with mustering, £* ® . week, double time on Sundays (£3 Ee a e or 15s a day); musterer or packer to do snow-raking, £1 10s a day (£i * dav); vouths learning mustering, fii®» J® £■2 a week (£1 10s a. week), eeoond year SS 10s (£2). Pood of good quality and sufficient quantity to bo provided by the e ™ ploy "' and to include jam, and not less than J-i'o of butter per week for each worker (food of good quality and sufficient quantity to e provided); drovers, £1 7s 6d a day and expenses (£1 a. day and expenses). Permanent hands: The award, to apply to any worker who is employed regularly a3 a farm or station hand, and who assists in mustering or does packing for musterers. A clause in tho present award providing sleeping accommodation for mustereis on the hills was accepted by the parties. "The Court has already heard evidence in Dunedin," said Mr Cook, "therefore I intend being very brief, mainly on account of conditions being somewhat similar in Canterbury to those of Otago and Southland, am not calling further evidence as it would be mainly a repetition o£ that given in Dun. edin and won Ici serve no useful purpose, as I contend that the Union's evidence in un - Sdin proved conclusively that the workers were entitled to a, substantial wages increase. The Union ia asking for s.ight alterations in the-present award. Firstly, .the Union asks for the abolition of weekly work; secondly, that tho proportion of learners to daily musterers shall more than one to four or fraction of.iirst four; thirdly, that butter and jam be included in the food clause; and, finally, we ask the Court to have permanent hands, covered bv the award. For some considerable time the cost of living have shown a rising tendency, and the cost of living to-day is 62 per cent, higher than in 1914. I also wish to touch again on the exceptional prosperity of the wool and stock industry, and the Union contends that this important factor should be taken into consideration by the Arbitration Court. Recently in Brisbane, Mr Justice McCauley made it "very clear, when granting the shearers 5s a, hundred increase, that the increase was due to the exceptional prosperity of the industry. Your Honour stated in Dunedin that the Court did not take any notice of tho slump in 1920. The wages were fixed in 1919 when the industry was quite prosperous, and the Court did not reduce them because of the slump in 1920. This ia admitted; but the Union contends that the wages for this class of work were fixed so low in 1919 that it would have been a grave injustice to have reduced them. The men who follow this class of work have always contended that the Court awards have always been less than a breacMine wage and in taking into consideration the nature of the work, the necessary skill required, tiio outlay and risks and the casual nature of the employment, I must agree with them. In conclusion, I wish to appeal finally to tho Court to give full consideration to the heavy expenso of a musterer'a outfit, the casual nature of employment, and, finally, the risk inourrcd in losing valuable dogs, for which they receive no compensation." It was submitted by Mr Nicholson - that the work was extremely simple and not arduous. The -value of the work done remained a' constant factor, provided tho purchasing power of the wages paid was not lowered, and "if anything tho position now showed an improvement. No serious discontent prevailed among the workers, as it was 15 months after tho expiry of the old award before a new award had been filed. The only ground for the present application was I the improved price,being received for wool and ; the natural desire to share in the increase. In the last case before tho Court concerning tho musterers, tho employees stressed the value of the work done, not the ability of tho employer to pay the rates set down. Sow they 60Ught the opposite argument, and the emploj-ers submitted that the workers could not have it both ways. Having fixed the rates to be paid irrespective of the ability or otherwise of tho employer to pay them, the Court could not consistently depart from the last award, as under that award the men were granted a rate of pay based on those paid for a similar class of work under awards of the Court in other industries. Mustering was work essentially for young men, and tho bulk of the men employed wero young and unmarried. Applications came in freely for employment at this work, showing that tho conditions compared favourably with those ruling in other industries. • 'The work was- less arduous now than in the past, beforo closer settlement took place. More fencing has been dono now, and there was less risk of losing sheep. Ho submitted that there was no evidence adduced by tho workers to show tho necessity' *for any alteration in rates of pay. The men as a wholo were satisfied with present conditions: , His Honour said the Court realised it .was impossible to make hard and fast rules for all the conditions met with on the stations. The award was always an outline or skeleton. Seeing that tho Otago award had been made, it would bo unfair to delay unreasonably the present one. The Court never made an award retrospective unless an agreement wa3 reached'by the parties, or one of them had* to bo penalised. Decision would bo reserved.