INDUSTRIAL AWARDS.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 552, 6 July 1909, Page 5

INDUSTRIAL AWARDS.

POSITION OP LOCAL BODIES'.

(By Telegraph.—Presß Association.) Duncdin, July 5. An important application of interest, to the whole Dominion, involving the question whether the employees of local bodies should bo subject to the provisions of industrial awards, was argued at considerable length in the Arbitration Court to-day. Tho Dunedin Painters Union applied to have two parties, the City Corporation and tho Otago Harbour Board, added to the painter;,' award. Mr. A, K. Barclav appeared for the Union, Mr. \V. C. Macgregor for the Corporation, and Mr. J. C. Stenhons for the Harbour Board. Mr, Barolay contended that the Corporation and board each employed tradesmon, and that gain lias the purpese, to a greater or lesser extent, of their operations. He' argued that as tho definition ot employer included pertons, firms, companies, corporations, and harbours, the Act made the board a corporation. The board must come within 'the Act. He further submitted that as the Aot provided that an emplojcr shall bo deemed to be engaged in an industry when ho employs workers who by reason of being so employed are themselves engaged in , that industry, if a body employed painters to 1 paint it brought itself within that section. Counsel for the other side put two questions Ito tho Court. Has the Court jurisdiction to grant tho application? Assuming jurisdiction, 1 will the Court do so in tho eieroiso of its discretion Counsel argued that tho corporation and board were not thcro for tho purposes of gain, but as public conveniences, and stated on behalf of the corporation that its servants were not employed in the ordinary sense, but under Section 82 of tho Municipal Corporations Act, 1900, which, beinig a special Act, overrode tho Conciliation and Arbitration Acts, which were general Acts. Municipal bodies incorpor. ated under tho 1800 Act were not Svithm the scope and purview of the industrial Acts, and at onco were above industrial legislation, and did not contemplate the existence of emplojcr and worker. ~,,.,, »•* Mr Jnstice Sim said that the question was an important one, and thought he ought to state a case for tho opinion of the Court of Appeal as to whether such bodies as municina corporations or harbour boards were intended to come within tho meaning of the Act. Tho Court had certainly acted as if such bodies were included, but tho question had never been raised. Perhaps it would bo as well to hear the merits of the cases as to fact, and then if the Court of Appeal 6aid that tho Court had discretion, the Court could say. in view of the foots, whether, the bodies should be joined,:and upon what terms. ;^;:■;.;:• . . Evidence was taken, and a;case is being pre-. Dared for the Court of.Appeal with tion, if possible,'of obtaining an opinion during the present sitting.. ~.-:' ■.. ..,'.■.;;,■ ;■•.'■•