ARBITRATION COURT

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2536, 10 August 1915, Page 9

ARBITRATION COURT

UNUSUAL CASE APPLICATION TO AMEND AWARDS THE ENGINEERING INDUSTRY. A special sitting- of tho Court of Arbitration was held in Wellington yesterday. His Honour Mr. Justice Stringer presiding. The Court had to deal with a motion—tho first of its kind—for leave to apply to have amended tho Engineers' Award (Dominion), tho Boilermakers' Award (Dominion), and the Metal Workers' Award (Otago and Canterbury). All theso awards had been operating as from July 19, but had been suspended on July 21, when tho employers moved for leave under the following clause, which had in the awards by tho Court; "Tlie Court reserves tho right to suspend, alter, amend, or vary any of the provisions of this award, either of its own motion or with the leavo of tlio Court first obtained,. on tho application of any party to this award." The motion came on for argument yesterday, Mr. W. Pryor appeared for the employel's in support of the motion, whilo tho various unions concerned wero represented as follows: —Amalgamated Society of Engineers (Mr. A. Elston); Boilermakers (Mr. J. E. Jenkinson), Canterbury Motal Workers (Mr. A. llosser), and Otago Motal 'Workers (Mr. E. Kennedy). Mr. M. J. Reardon was granted permission to watch tho proceedings 011 behalf of tho Wellington Trades an<l Labour Council.

The Employers' Case. Mr. Pryor's argument was in the direction of establishing/ a prima facie caso us to why the application should bo heard. Ho admitted that to succeed with the application ho would have to submit evidence, which had not previously been tendered to the Court, and, if. tho application wero to be heard, ho would ask that a date should be fixed some timo ahead in order that all the ncccssary evidence might be obtained. It was proposed that Mr. F. Cooper, secretary of the Canterbury Employers' Association, should go right through tho Dominion to collect certain facts and figures, which could be audited by recognised accountants. Preliminary information, which had been collected, showed that the extra cost to the employers as a result of tho new awards would bo at least .£26,000 per annum, without taking into consideration consequential rises. Tho detailed figures were: —Engineers' Award, Ji20,0l)0; Boilermakers' Award, -£1)000; Metal Workers' Award (Canterbury and Otago), J3500. If these figures wero but approximately correct, _ the Court would, it was submitted, be justified in reviewing tho situation, especially as the industry was not in a position to stand any extra burden. Under the overtime and holiday clauses of the award, tho expense would "bo considerable and serious inconvenience would be caused by tho working of these clauses. A probable result would bo that work previously done ill Aew Zealand would be sent out of tho Dominion. Tho employers objected to the deletion of the stock catalogue work clauso, and they desired that certain words should be added to tho clauso dealing with brass finishers. The provisions dealing with apprentices were very important as, in addition to providing for considerable increases in wages, tliev were too restrictive, and would preclude apprentices fvom attaining allround efficiency at their trade, lno ngures Showed that at the present time thero were in tho Dominion somo'itG apprentices to 447 journeymen. Tho award would limit the number of apprentices to 240. Tho figures really meant tho taking on of only 48 apprentices per annum, whereas for tho mercantile marine alono thev required to supply 91 young men per annum. Mr. Pryor went on to refer to the piecework clause, which ho contended would encourage '"slackers." The employers objected to the preference clause because it practically placcd tho union secretary on the footing of an official of tho Court. After briefly outlining ' the employers' objections to tho Boilermakers' Award, Mr. Pryor concluded by saying that he would have preferred to have been clear of this application, but ho assured tho Court that the employers were honest in the opinion that the operation of tho award would have a disastrous effect on the trade. They believed that the Court would not refuse the application to discuss these matters again. Union Representatives' Reply.

Mr. Elston submitted reasons as to why the new award should not bo suspended or altered, at least not without a trial. He pointed out that the award gave the workers 110 increase in wages, although the main object of tho workers in coming to the Court had been to secure' on increase. Notwithstanding this the workers wero willing to abide by the decision ol' the Court, but the employers, with indecent haste, had come to the Court and asked that the award should be hung up and not given a trial. As the hearing of the dispute had extended over a period of three months the employers had had ample opportunity of obtaining all tho evidence at their command and had moreover been given every latitude in the conduct of their . case, and tho workers contended that if evidence could not be secured in that timo it could not bp obtained in three years. Equity, justice, and commonsense demanded that tho workers' struggle to live in decent comfort should not be made more intense by any variation of tho award. If the ca.?e were reopened it would throw an additional burden on the unions, who could not add anything to their case. It was contended that nothing new could be adduced by tho employers. If it could, why had they waited until this late hour. Tho employers merely said they could not carry on if tho award were cu forced. How did tliev know this, if they had not given it a trial? They had never been tired of telling this to the Court; for years past, but they still carried on. Tho Court had listened to the story in so far as no increase of wages had been granted and the union prayed that no variation of tho award should now bo made. If the award wero varied it would shako tho confidence of the unions' in tho Court and would inevitably lead to a condition of disaster and chaos. Mr. Elstou had counselled patience among the unions with which lie was concerned, but if tho award wero now varied ho could not take tho responsibility of continuing the counsel. That was not in the nature of a threat to tho Court but merely n frank statement of the position. The unions had agreed to abide by tho ruling of the Court and to give the award a trial for two years. The application by the employers was practically a reflection on the Court and the unions hoped it would be dismissed.

Mr. Jenkinson considered that no good reason bad been shown why the boilermakers' dispute should bo reopened. Tlio boilermakers had not received tho new award with any great jubilation bccauso they had received no great advance, except as regards overtime and the bringing of all journeymen on to a level as regards ordinary rates of wages. Tho extra money .that had been awarded the second-class men would not be sufficient to overburden tho employers, some of whom had long ago abolished (he distinction and had yet been able to compete successfully with others in the trade. The demand in regard lo overtime had been framed with the intention of doing away with overtime. Mr. llossnr submitted that it was arguable whether tho Court had power under the Act to alter an award except to remedy an omission or a clerical error, unless on the application of both parties, lie contended that the Court, with a duo sense of its responsibilities, couild not (oil the facts placed before it) suspend or vary the awards. Tho unions were, it was submitted, entitled to costs for tho expense to which they had been put. If the application were granted, it would

lie the greatest blow the Arbitration Act had ever received since its inception. .Mr. Kimi le'ly also opposed the application. Alter Jtr. Pryor had replied, tho Court reserved decision, intimating that it would probably be given 011 Monday next. JUDGMENT 131" CONSENT. Tll the compensation case, Johnson v. M'Arthur, Jlilliken and Co., Ltd., judgment by consent was given for the plaintiff for tho .sum of J2SO, tho amount to bo paid to the Public Trustee. Mr. P. J. O'liegan appealed for tho plaintiff, while Mr. T. Reave appeared for the defendant company.

DECISION RESERVED. The Court reserved decision on the Daily Employees' dispute, in which an agreement luid teen readied in all but a couple of cluuscs relating to hours, etc. Decision was also reserved on the question of amending the clause in the Plumbers' Award relating to travelling allowance for suburban work. PARTIES ADDED. 'An application to add certain parties to the Wellington Private Hotels' Award was granted. FIXTURES. Fixtures for other cases were made as follow:— Wednesday, August 11.—Inspector of Awards v. Kirkcaldio and Stains, case for interpretation. Monday, August 16.—Compensation cases as followLogan v. .Tolms and others; Smith v. Union Stc-am Ship Company, Ltd.; and Clifford v. Shaw, Savill and Albion Company, Ltd. Tuesday, August 17.—Bacon Factories Employees' dispute. Wednesday, August 18.—Soft Goods Employees' dispute. Tho caso of Comfort t. Union Steam Ship Company was, on the application of Mr. P. J. O'Regan, adjourned until next session.