LABOURERS5 WAGES.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1622, 13 December 1912, Page 8

LABOURERS 5 WAGES.

THE CITY COUNCIL'S DUTY,

DIVERSE OPINIONS.

"That the engineer be authorised.to confer with, the representatives of tho General Labourers Union on the question of their new demands, and report to the Committee." :.' ■'■ ' [ ■ This was a clause in the report- of the, Finance Committee referred to tho City Council.last night. It is well kijown that tho general labourers employed by the City Council, now reoeivirig 9s. per da 3". have asked/for 10s. per day. - The Mayor submitted to the council that tie courss'proposed was a proper one to be followed- in matters of this sort. He confessed : that at the committee the voting had been two and two,-and the clause had/been referred to the council on his casting vote. If the dispute were referred direct to,the Arbitration Court the council was liable to receive a snub from tho President of the Court because he had so dealt with- other parties to similar disputes over'and'over again. '. ■; Councillor J.-Trevor oposed'the motion. (The thing, would' have to be threshed out in the council in the end. The engineer Vould report) and: it might then have to go to the Conciliation Council and to tho Arbitration-Court.' The council might as well hnndo the business first as last, and Bend it to the .'Court at-once; The coun-' cil labourers were receiving,'as a matter of fact, more than the bricklayers' la-, bonrers tf '.Wellington; and they were generally-•recognised as' the best treated labourers'Cof;..all. Why should any demands be entertained? The'thine should be sent on to the Arbitration Court and settled .there finally. These things were cropping up, it appeared, just "before .svery election. ■■■- The Mayor: I think that is/a-very tnean reference. .. '

Councillor Trevor: It may be unpalatable, but it is true nevertheless. I should :ike this business taken clean out of the hands of'the council, and'the machinery >f the law put in'operation.'for the.settlement of these disputes. Let the council to free from labour disputes and the disputes of every-other body that may approach them. He added that in the council this J guestion'"should:not'"be cropping up every now. and again, for the simple reason that thore'; seemed to be an opinion amongst contractors, in Wellington that the City Council was.leading the van in the matter of. wages. Whether' this was so or.not he would not say. He moved that the,%clause be.-.referred back, and that the dispute be sent direct to the Conciliation Council. ■■

Councillor Skirtcliffe seconded the motion, although, he said, it went rather farther than-.he;could have wished.- Ho thought;;it•; was..quite: a wrong proceeding on the part of the council to instruct the engineer to confer with the labourers on the question of wages, without giving him R lead ,of any kind. He hoped the couneil would not put Mr. Morton in the position of, having, to confer with, the men when he did not know the mind of the council.

Councillor Smith'said he knew nothing of the- merits of the case. He did not know iWhether the council should pay more to-the.labourers or not. The only thing he-could >do was to vote against the clause. . ' ■ . .Councillor Hindmarsh said it seemed to lirn that. the.proposal before the-council vjas not a very serious matter. All that .'.was suggested was that -the City Engineer 6bould confer .with the men, and. was the engineer not a strong enough man to take his own part? If the report of the engineer was unsatisfactory, then . the dispute could be referred to the Arbitration Court.

Councillor Fuller agreed with the opinions expressed by the last speaker. Councillor Trezear said that as the cost of living shifted, wages must shift upwards. Whether this was a time for shifting wages, the council did not know'/ He rather resented the inference that because the men were getting- a farthing an hour more than some' other workers the question should not be inquired into. Councillor .Frost thought the. onus of deciding the' matter of wages should not be put upon the city engineer. 'Phe council would be doing the right thing in empowering a.committee of the council to confer with the Workers.

Councillor Fletcher said he did not know what all the fuss was about. The city engineer. liad- had similar work to do before, and no objection had been, wised on those occasions..

The Mayor: That's right. ~ Councillor. Fletcher said - the council knew nothing at all about the proposals. There was no harm in. the clause, and the proper thing to do was to adopt it. Councillor Cameron thought the pro-' posals should be inquired into by the council..

Councillor Fitzgerald said. the engineer was the' only .'man who was conversant with the work of the labourers, and it was not suggested that he was not a strong enough man to uphold, the interests of the council. "What the engineer was directed to do was to enter into preliminaries with the men; and after,he had reported, the council could then set to grips if necessary. If the council had adopted the recommendation of the committee on. the occasion of the tramways strike there would have been no strike.

Councillor Barber said he did not see anything, wron" ;in letting the .engineer report, but he thought it would lie a great deal better if a sub-committee of the council should deal with the men.

The Mayor said-there was something that smacked of hypocrisy about the matter, for the engineer had been empowered to deal with a dispute with the destructor men formerly, and the matters in dispute were.'theh settled. On. being put to the vote, the amendment was lost.-;

Following was the divisfon list:— Ayes: Councillors Frost, Godber, Shirtcliffe, SmTch, and Trevor. Noes: The Mayor. Councillors Atkinson, Barber, Cameron, Cohen, Fitzgerald, FletBher, Fuller, Hindniarsh, M'Kenzie, and fregear.. -v "' ' .: ;