Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

APPLICATIONS REJECTED

NEW RATES OF PAY FOR CITY

WORKERS

Application was made to the Arbi* tration Court in Christchurch recently for approval of certain industrial agreements that had been entered into between the Christchurch City Council and the New Zealand (except the Northern Industrial District) Engineering and Related Trades Union, the Christchurch Cleaners’, Caretakers, and Lift-attendants’ Union, and the Canterbury Local Bodies* Officers (other than clerical) Union. Having regard to the general purposes of the regulations, declared Mr Justice Tyndall in a judgment issued yesterday, the Court was satisfied that the agreements should not bo approved of in their present form, and the applications were, therefore, declined. . . , , The agreements had provided for many increases in rates of wages to the workers concerned. In some cases the increases were substantial. The proposed rates, in the opinion of the Court, were appreciably in excess, in a number of cases, of the rates prescribed for similar services elsewhere in New Zealand. “It would appear that if the proposed rates were approved,” said his Honour, “there would be some grounds for claims by other parties that anomalies had been created.” The main argument submitted to the Court in support of the applications was that the City Council had decided months ago to give a general all-round increase to the employees as the respective awards and industrial agreements came up for reconsideration. It was stated that certain employees had already received the benefit of that policy, and it was claimed that it would be anomalous if the workers affected by the three industrial agreements concerned were not similarly treated.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19430609.2.51

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Press, Volume LXXIX, Issue 23969, 9 June 1943, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
264

APPLICATIONS REJECTED Press, Volume LXXIX, Issue 23969, 9 June 1943, Page 5

APPLICATIONS REJECTED Press, Volume LXXIX, Issue 23969, 9 June 1943, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert