Argument About Private Hotels

Chronicle (Levin), 4 October 1949, Page 6

Argument About Private Hotels

i ^ ' . WELLINGTON, Oct. 3. A differenee of opinion about employers ' approaeh to industrial couciliation proceedingS, developed in the Court of Arbitratiori today. Mr. P. G. Young, seeretary of the New Zealand Hotel Workers' Federation, said private hotel employers had b*en more obstructiye in this. case than had employers in any 'other dispute he hal handled in 1S years. ' He was presfentmg an application for a new natf&nal award for private hotel workers. The advoeate for the employers, Mr. J. E. Hanlon, challenged Mr. Young 's allegations and was still making his submissions when the Court adjourned until tomorrow. Mr. Young decl'ared that no real attempt was made by the employers in Oonciliation Council to reach an agreement in this dispute. Little real progress was made and most of the important clauses remained unsettled. The employers were persistent in their -.laim that they desired to supply the public with eheap board and lodgings, continued Mr. Young. With this policy his union was in cordial agreemeut so long as it was not effected at the expense of the wofkers employed in the' industry. "To show their insincerity, " continued Mr. Young, "we need only poiut out that in the capital city only a minority of ordinary private hotels carry out the function of a private hotel aud supply their guests with full board and lodging. The .others, al most wdthout exeeption, are supplying bed and breakfast or bed and tray at very reinunerative rates and employ verv f ew if any staff. ' ' Mr. Young said that in spite of repeated efforts by the employers' agent, it was found impossible to get the employers together or get thein to agree to anything.- He submitted that it was for the Court to determine whether they were fairlv meeting their obligations under the Indiistrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act during Conciliation Council proeeedings and whether they were giving the Court that cooperation it was entitled to expect. Mr. Hanlon objected to Mr. Young 's allegations, saying that the employers were not respomCble for all the d'elay that had taken place. Mr. Young had referred to private hotels becoming bed and breakfast establishments. Some were being driven into the position where they could supply only bed and breakfast, partly by claims such as those now put forward by the union and partly by shortages of staff. He submitted that the position of private 'iotels was different from that of the Iicensed trade where losses on the accommodation side were frequently carried by profits on the sale of liquor. Private hotel employers had not been able to obtain an increase in tariif since 1937.