ARBITRATION COURT

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 144, 7 March 1918, Page 3

ARBITRATION COURT

GROCERS' DISPUTE HIGHER WAGES AND LESS HOURS WANTED The Wellington Grooers' Union dispiito was brought 011 in the Arbitration Court yesterday, before tbo President (Mr. Justice Stringer) and Mr. V, Scott (employers' assessor), and Mr. J. A. M'Cullough (employees' aßseacov). The Court had to deal with a of material points not settled by tho Conciliation Council. Mr. W. A. Grenfell appeared for the Employers' Association, and Mr. M. J. Reardon for the union. According to Mr. Resirdon, tins was ail application for a new award to tako ibe place of the present [-.ward, which was made on December 8, 1915. "10 main points in the dispute were tr -9 relating to hours and wages. _As 2gards liours, Mr. Reardon said ti.at the union asked that these shouiti - he reduced from 52 hours (the number obtaining under the old award) 10 48 hours per week. In this the Court was being asked to only bring the grocers' employees into line with the majority of other employees in New Zealand, who were required to work 48 hours, and in many oases less than thip. New Zealand prided itself on being the pioneer country to adopt the , 48 hours a week movement —this many years ago —yet hero was a case where | this pride was decidedly not justified. Coming to the question of wages, Mr. Reardon said the union was asicing I'or £3 15s. a week, as against £2 Ijs. (id. granted by the employers under the existing award, with corresponding increases in the wages of joutlis. That this demand was not unjustified Mr. Reardon proceeded to show by giving the following as a table of tho wages actually paid by the five principal crocerv firms in Wellington. (1) £3 155.; (2) £3 75.; (3) £310s ; (4) £3 ss. (exclusive of 11 bonus), (0) i! 3 17s. 6d. Wages paid by smaller giocers were equally as high, if not higher. It would thus be seen that the union was not asking too much. I'he union also desired payment for stable time, an annual, paid holiday of twelve work days per year, payment for canvassers meals when iway from home 011 business, and a definite stipulation that the statutory halfholiday be observed, so that employees should not be required to work during this time even at overtime rates. Mr. Reardon asked that the term of the aivard be for twelve months. Evidence was given by Mr. Robert M'Keen, secretary of the union, along the lines indicated by Mr. Reardon. On behalf, of the employers, Mr. Grenfell asked the Court to bear in juitid the low profit basis of tlio grocer s business, which business wns subject to great competition. Small grocers were able to attend to, their shops themselves, and there 'were fifty or sixty Chinese shops open at all liours. Tho euployors had shown a very liboral spirit. The .minimum wages were only a starting point, as a return he had prepared would show. The number of hands in the principal shops, receiving over £4 was 20; between £310s. and £8 17a. 6d., 34; between £3 and £3 7s. 6d., 29; minimum wage, 2. This return covered 85 men out of a total of 141. The trade was being depleted of its efficient men, and employers were forced to employ inexperienced, low-standard workers, and. should not bo penalised by an increase in tho minimum wage. Further, employers allowed their hands. 5 per cent, to >10 per cont. discount on all goods pur'clmsed for their own household. As regard the employment of females, Mr. Grcnfoll intimated that the.wagea offered (305.) were only ss. less than rhoso allowed under the Soft Goods Award. Seeing that so many men had gone to tho front, the Court would be justified in adding the' clause to the award. There should be' a provision limiting the weight of a parcel to be handled by a female. 111 opposing the demand for a compulsory annual holiday, Mr. Grenfell said that in the past this had been granted by the employers as a special privilege, as an award of merit.. This was as far as it should go. Mr. Grenfell also opiwsed tlio demand for payment for stnblo time, and he asked that the term of tlio award be made as long as possible. Honry Wardell, a member of the firm of Wartlell Bros., gave evidence' in support of Mr. Grenfell's contention. Witness stated that any man at all efficient could command a wage up to "Li a week, and if he could not get this fi»m ooie employer, he would be able to get it from another. Ou the other hand there was, on account of the war-time scarcity of experienced hands, a class of men that the employers had to "try out" at a lower wage. Henry S. Bennett and John M'llraitli, both master grocers, also gave evidence.. The former admitted to Mr. Reardon that the claims of the union would not effect him financially. The Court reserved its decision.