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

CANTERBURY BRICKLAYERS.

THE NEW AWARD TAKES SHAPE. ' (By TelezraDh—Press Association.' * Christchurch, February 18. The award of tho Arbitration Court, based for the most part oil the recommendation- of the Conciliation Council, which wa's not objected to by any of ;the parties at the hearing, in the dispute between the Canterbury Bricklayers Union and the Builders' and Contractors Association of Canterbury and other, employers, has been filed. In the memorandum the Court states'that tho principal alterations made by it are: — ' ' 1. The Court's usual under-rato workers' clauso has been inserted ,in place; of the clause contained in the recommendatiojl. This last-mentioned clause contained .restrictions .which the,' Court has always declined to insert in any award. ■It seems desirable to''say that in' future the commissioners should see that- the Court's usual clause is inserted in all re- | commendations-on that point, or at least ..there should be uniformity.' v ~ 2. Tho provisions with regard to pro-' fcrence and the employment book have been altered and recast. The clause as to preference, contained in the recommendation, gave preference not to members of the union,-but to members who' were ablo to produce their contribution books. In framing the recommendation of the council; the commissioners should follow the form that -has"been'settled by the Court, and not allow the assessors to indulge in originality of this kind. ' 3.* The provisions with regard to . apprentices havo been altered so as,to conform to the Court's usual clause. That' clause should be followed in every case, unless there is some special reason justifying a departure. '• 4. The clauso prohibiting the subletting of brickwork,, labour only, has not been inserted. Such a clause has been inserted in some awards where the parties have agreed unon it. It is clear, however, that there is not--jurisdiction to prohibit contracting. Tho Court can prohibit niece work, and a clause to that' effect Has'been inserted in the award.'

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19110220.2.65

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1056, 20 February 1911, Page 6

Word count
Tapeke kupu
313

CANTERBURY BRICKLAYERS. Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1056, 20 February 1911, Page 6

CANTERBURY BRICKLAYERS. Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1056, 20 February 1911, Page 6

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