COST-OF-LIVING BONUS

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 59, 3 December 1920, Page 8

COST-OF-LIVING BONUS

The Arbitration Court was yesterday ■engaged in hearing further discussim. between the representatives of the em:, ployers and the employees respectively concerning the 9s. cost-of-living bonus. Tho principal advocates for the employers were Messrs. W. Pryor and F. Cooper, whilo tho principal advocates for the workers wero Messrs. ST. J. Beardon, J. M'Combs, .M.P.. and T. Bloodworth. During the morning, further evidence was called in 6upport of the employers' 'case. Mr. H. D. Bennett, president of the Wellington Master Grocers' Association, was asked by Mr. Pryor for short statement regarding the position of the retail grocery trade. In 1914, he said, the accepted average of the percentage of wages to gross turnover was slightly 9 per cent.; in 1920 that ratio had moved up very close, to 10. But,whilo the percentage for 1920 remained at !).» ■ it stood there only because of the inflated value of the sales. The genera' working expenses In 1814 were about !(• per cent, of the turnover. On tho same value of sales—that was, on the inflate'' value of the sales—that. Tatio wnu:<i rise to about 19 per cent. now. Wero It possible for the .values to' come back to the 1914 figures, the working expenses would be about 36 per cent, assuming there was no corresponding diminution - in wages. He did not suggest that tno . case ho had put was a' possibility, but he presumed the Court would consider what would lumpen if values fell. ■ Mr. Justice Stringer observed that in cose of a fall in prices the wages would . automatically fall through tho reduction of the cost-of-living bonus. The trade. Mr. Bennett, believed, was being slowly driven into the 'hands or those who did not employ labour;' but worked themselves; possibly it was being driven into the hand 9 of Chinese. LOWER PRICES FOR GROCERIES. Asked by Mr. Pryor whether there wnj, tl tendency towards lower prices in tho " trade, Mr. Bennett replied in the afiW: mative. Ho did not wish to say that so far there had been much of a reduction. There had been a slight drop, but the potential fall was much more . important. The policy of the trade ;ftt present was to unload as muoh as ' possible of what was on hand. The goods offering or likely to be offering nppeared to be at a'very much lower price level than that at which the people in the trade had been buying. Even ;at present the offerings vrexe all of u weakening tendency. In fact, the feel- . ing was; so weak m the trade generally : that activity in buying from wholesalers, and in importation, had practically been cut off. The markets appeared to have become almost demoralised,, and to havo become so very suddenly. JSj ijn P°, sit i on of a' further bonu s would retard the downward movement in prices to the consumer, suggested Mr. Witness replied that the prices he haj been referring to were chiefly the prices t l' 11^01 '^!. articles over which the | ocal conditions ,had little control though jf the cost of running a- grocerv business wasi so increased as to counteract the effect. of the fall, there St .■ be-something in Mr. Pryor'e suggestion. He wished to be perfectly candid, however, and to say that the consideration m .question did not seem to him very serious m this case. The latest bonus,, by itself, would have but a small bearing on the turnover, though.it would nave some. Mr. Pryor; You will have' to pass it Witness replied in the affirmative, but said he- thought that one per cent, "on tho turnover would cover the increase in working expenses due to the 9s. bonus.' Then an increase of 10 per cent. ■ in - wages need not put up the cost of-living • moi-e than 1 per cent? asked Mr. Jtf'Combs. "That is so," the witness replied, adding that the estimate he had arrived at was .97 per cent. A LABOUR PROTEST. When Mr. Pryor announced that it was his intention to call the General Manager of Railways (Mr. R. W. M'Villy) as a witness, the Labour representatives protested. • Mr. Heardon submitted that the Court ...was not dealing with the question of wages lor Civil Servants in tho railways or any other .Department A false atmosphere, he said, was being created in order to influence the Court. He thought that this was the first time in the history of the Court that the Prime Minister had made ...comment on a decision of the Court (or actually before the decision was given), and tho Prime Minister's viewpoint was not what the y effect would be on the workers interested in the particular case, liut what the offect would be upon the wages of the Civil Sen-ants. The Arbitration Court never had been asked to decide the. wages of Civil Servants, and so far as he could remember, the wagec of Civil Servants had never been influenced by decisions of the Court. The . newspapers had been unfair in their lead, ing articles and'in other matters relating ' to tho bonus. They had taken sides in the agitation—a thing they know they '■' had no right to do if they had any respect for the law of the country. Tho Labour representatives had to submit to their case being prejudiced bv the entirely false atmosphere created about it. He wished to enter an emphatic protest Mr. M'Combs supported Mr. Eeardon. He said that tho Civil Servants were specifically denied the right to come be- , fore tho Court in connection with arbitration proceedings. That being so, the . General Manager of Railways should not be hoard unless the Minister gavo special permission to the employees also to bo : heard. Moreover, ho wished to draw tho attention of tho Court to'the fact that the Prime Minister was Minister of RailWays, and had specifically said when introducing tho recent amendment to the ' •. War legislation that no attempt was to be made by the Government to interfere with the 9s. bonus. The speaker protested against an officer of tho Prime Minister coming to tho Court on behalf of tho Prime Minister and his Department to do that which the Prime Minister had said it was not tho intention of tho Government to do. Mr. Bloodworth said he thought that tho Court itself had sot a good precedent in the sugar workers' caso at Aucklandt when it had declined to hear an expert eent by the Board of Trade to give evidence. His Honour had said on that occasion that it was quite improper for the .Government to interfere, or to attempt to prejudice the Court in tho exercise of its jurisdiction. His Honour said that tho protest was somewhat premature, because at the moment there was no means of knowing the .purpose for which Mr. M'Villy was bc- - ing called to give evidence The proper time to raise objections would bo when questions wero put to the witness which {t was tihougrht wero for tho purpose of eliciting information that was jiot relevant to the inquiry. Ho could imngino that gcnoral questions might bo put to Mr. M'Villy which would havo an important bearing on a matter such its that before the Court. The Court permitted Mr. M'Villy to bo called. MR. M'VILLY IN THE BOX. Mr. M'Villy said ho anticipated that the granting of a 9s. bonus in other industries would be reflected'in the railway • fcorvice. The railwaymen had already jnado it quite clear that, thev would expect the saino bonus ns the Court awarded. The increase of railway expenditure during the war had been .£850,000 per annum, which had necessitated the raising of fares and freights by about forty per cent. Tho increase in expenditure from 'April 1 to October lIS of this year had Wn .£887,000, and the increaso in the revenue had been .£697,000. The latest agreement with regard to rnllwnymen's wattes was estimated to havo increased the expenditure by about ,£BOO,OOO, The

THE DISCUSSION CONCLUDED FURTHER EVIDENCE HEARD TALK OF FALLING PRICES

actual cost was probably more. The indications wero that the increases already made in railway charges in order to meet (lie increased expenditure would not bo sufficient. If the 9s. bonus had to lie paid, he believed it would cost JU.000.000. Ho thought that this would render it necessary to raise fares and freights by SO per cent, on pro-war rates. The effect of the now rise in charges would probably bo a falling off in traffic and a cutting of tho services, which would be a serious matter for industry generally. Tho results of this year's working wero 11 per cent, worse 'than the results of this previous year's working. Last year the percentage of expenditure to Tevenuu wns 73.24; this year it was 84.26. Questioned by Mr. M'Combs, witness stated that the .£1,000,000 ho had mentioned, did not mean .£1,000,000 in wages alone; but the- imposition of the new bonus would cost the Department in all -*t,000.000. All the matonals used by the Department would increase in price owing to the increased cost of labour. He had not the details of his estimate with him, Hut if the Court expressed a desire to have tho figures he would be pleased to supply them. POST AND TELEGRAPH DEPARTMENT. Mr. A. T. Markman, Secretary of the Postand Telegraph Department, said that the ompioyees In his Department'wero nlready asking .for increased payment on Sbcoufitf of the increased cost of living. If- the Department had to pay the 9s. bonus, the total cost to it would probably bo .£250,000. In consequence of wages increases already granted, tho charges for nostil and telegraphic services had had to be increased. Tho indications were that tho increased, revenue anticipator! would hardly bo reached. It was the usual thing that where charges were increased to any considerable extent the volume of business decreased. Though the Department was getting considerably more revenue for this quarter than for the corresponding quarter of last year, the number of messages sent: was considerably, less. The number of messages per day from Wellington had dropped by 600 or 700, and for the Dominion the drop had been something like 2500. Tl' Department was doing with fewer employees on ■ account of the reduction in the number of messages. On tho year's working he estimated that the Department would be enabled by the increase in charges to meet tho increase in expenditure. The rates had been raised as high as they could be raised without seriously affecting business. If the boii' hail to be'paid and the charge was not passed on to the users of the services, the Consolidated Fund would have to come to the rescue. In voply to a question from Mr. Bloodworth, the witness stated that the stopping of bookmakers' telegrams cost the Department something like- .£BOOO or .•€IO,OOO a year. WELLINGTON TRAMWAYS. Mr. W. H. Morton, Wellington City engineer and general manager of tho Wellington tramways, said that for the past thirty-two w«eks of this financial year, notwithstanding the recent increases in fares, tho tramway revenue had gone back .£9OOO, as compared with the revenue for the corresponding period of the previous year. Assuming that Jhe bonus of "9s. per week had to be oaid. it would mean that, roughly, another' .£15.000 a year would have to bo provided, and that amount, ulong witn the deficit of i! 9000, would bring <lie total to about .£24,000 or ,£25.000. He anticipated that the .£9OOO might be cleared off if favourable weather conditions prevailed for tho remainder ot the year, because the weather that had been experienced since April 1 had aff&H-d the revenue to a greater extent than usual. However, the amount to bo made up would bo at least .£15,000, in order to meet tho increased expenditure due to the granting of. the bonus. Only quite recently the corporation had entered into an agreement with -the tramway employees with regard to wages, 'the increases in wages represented by that agreement amounted to ,£40,000 per annum. The uverage increase shown when the wages were compared with the. prewar rates, was about 64 per cent. The .£15,000 !was confined to the wages of the employees of tho tramway department, but if the bonus were granted the cost of supplies to the department would also be increased, and the total cost to the corporation would probably be about .£20,000 a venr. There were two claims filed by tho employees at preseat-ono for the 9s. bonus, and one for 3d. an hour addition to wages. There was no doubt that as the .result of recent increases in fares there had been a iall-ing-off in-the amount of passenger traffic in the central portion of the city, which was the portion m which the profit, if any, wes made. There was a point in charges for short-haul traffic beyond which one could not go. To increase the fares for the long-dis-tance traffic could not meet the cost ot he 9s. bonus, and if the fares for the centre of the city were raised, the hopodfor increase in revenue would be wined out by the in the volume of traffic The only courses open tlien would be a reduction in the service or he imposition of a rate. He considered that very fair wages were being paid o the traraway employees aprosont Tn renlv to Questions asked liy Mr. A. t Monteith representing the Tramways Emplev cf Feffiion, Sir. Morton said tint the fairly frequent stoppages ot traffic luring the tl.My- wo .weeks U had mentioned had been due in part to insufficiency of bo ler power, bu h eflv tn lack of suitable coal. . He though, Mr Monteith was wrong in .suggesting that that part of the loss this year included back pay which should havo been paid in tho previous year. THE BOOT INDUSTRY. Air B. Mapnlcbeck. president of the New Zealand Boot Manufacturers Association, endorsed the statements made by Mr Pryor on Monday recanting the state of the boot industry. Manufacturers, he said, had been doing th«r bw* to retain their hands by "c""^, thev had reached the unit. Some grades of men's boots could not h* solo fb-dav even if there were no labour cost in them at all. Tho-prospects were no good. Several factories were working short time. , Questioned bv Mr. Bloodworth, witneco «aid that In the present state of the trm> he would not be prepared to guarantee a mnn twelve months' employment. Mr Bloodworth asked why it was Hint Advertisements were to be found in an English newspaper offering to -i bootmakers, if thev would come tn New /.calami, not twelve months, but three yearemployment. . , jfr. Manplebcnk said h's association know nothing of that-matter. Pnssibl.-. smvc company was proposing to open a new factory. Mr. Bloodworth remarked that tin; name of th» advertiser wns not given. Tin'? concluded the evidence for the employers. . , AN EXPLANATION. His Honour said he wished to refer to n statement he had made on the previous dav. He had said it was unfortunate that Mr. Fraser (the Government. Ptnt ; sticinn) had been called away from the Dominion just before the fiVt nllnnntinn of the bonus tobk nlnec. He fnun.! that the statement mlr-ht be taken fn enst come ncpersion on nbilitv or-the intention of the Aetinj-Slatistieinn, Mr. Butcher.' Th»re hr-.d boon some misunderstanding between Mr. Butcher •••■ h'm TCKnrdin/r 1 the basis for computing the homier-:, but he wished tn say thnr he had not intended to cast Hip sb'gM.. est aspersion on Mr. Butcher, whom he had always found to he n most cniiiiMe and. obliging officer. The reason for which ho had said that tho misundcr-

standing could not hav« arisen if Mr. Fraser had been present, was that Mr. Fraser was fully aware of what he (Mr. Fraser) had advised the Court somo months tarlier to adopt as 'he basis 01 computation. ADDRESSES OF WORKERS' REPRESENTATIVES. Jlr. Bloodworth resumed his address to tho Court at tho point at which it lia<i been interrupted (with his consent) by the calling of witnesses on the previous day. He contended that the witnesses for tho employers had told the Court nothing that was new. It was well known .that'certain pecple wero in difficulties, but that was not the fault of the workers. The people in question had had their times of prosperity, and during those times they could havo provided against such difficulties as they were now confronted with. Ho hart looked in the Home newspapers In order to seo whether there were reported any speeches like that delivered by Mr. Harold Beauchamp on the previous day. The most he had been able to find was u, few speeches in which caution wns advocated. Mr. Bloodworth expressed the opinion that the present appeal of th? Employers' Association was the greatest' betrayal of an agreement ever recorder in tho industrial history of the country. The revision of the bonus at six-monthly periods had twelve monthfj ago been adopted by the Court, and the. acccp'* rince of that decision wns an nerceinc as binding as if it had been 6igned by the employers.

Mr. .Tilstice Stringer said lie could nnf sec that there wns any breach of agreement because, first of all. ho could not see any agreement, and bccauso in tho second place it had always been open to the employers to show "relevant consideration?." It would at any time, have been considered a relevant consideration that the prosperity of an industry was being imperilled by the. increase In the. cost of production duo U an increase i/i wages.

The appeal of the employers must fail on all the grounds put forward bv Mr. Pryor in support of it, Mr. Bloodword submitted. Mr. Pryor had not succeeded in proving that the industries of the ooun'try could not pay tho bonus. The employers' witnesses had merely made the same sort of 'statements as the labour unions had been accustomed to hear since they had first come to thu Court. Mr. Pryor had not succeeaefl m showing that high wages had led to ruin elsewhere, and the speaker did not' believe the stories of unemployment that had been told to the Court. Mr. Eeardon said that the workers were in this case being asked to trust to a. future of falling prices when everyone knew that prices were noil falling, but rising. He had no doubt that immediately the pronouncement was given in this case there would be very considerable further increases in the prices of the goods imported into this country, so that those who had' to go to the banks for assistance in getting their goods out of bond might be enabled to meei.' tho increased charges imposed by tho banks. Despite the fact that the "figures supplied by the Statistician were not iliose which the Court had understood would be supplied, the workers wore entitled to the bonus if the figures were correctl. and nobody denied that thev were. At one stage the Court had granted air increase called a clothing bonus. Sinco that time, .computations had been-made without reference to that mntter. .Ho submitted that the Court should' ask iCie Saidsticinn to make an estimate of the clothing bonus before it considered tho question whether there should be any reduction in the nmount it had publicly stated l should he given. It was no't right for die Court to go back on its public pronouncement. The employers should never have put the Court in its present position. Did thoy think that it was possible for the Judge of the Courii to alter his pronouncement and lay himself open to tho charge of having had his decisions varied at the dictation of the Prime Minister? \ Mr. Pryor rose to-protest against the suggestion that tho Employers' Federation had endeavoured in anv way to influence the Judge of the Court. "Rhetorical Flourishes," Mr. Justice Stringer said he thought it would be better that Mr. Heardon should not; make such observations. Ho treated them more as rhetorical flourishes than anything else. The employers' application was before the Court in proper form, and the\ Court was there to determine the case .on im merits. The suggestion that dictation on the part of politicians or Press writers was involved wns quite out of place. Mr. Eeardon said that he had traced "the whole history of the agitation" on the previous day. His Honour said that so far aB ho could see the whole trouble had arisen from a misconception of the 1918 Act—from lOie idea that it wns mandatory upon the Court, no matter what the circumstances were, to give increased bonusEs in correspondence with the increased cost of living. Apparently it was thought necessary to make it clear that it was a discretionary power of the Court, though the Court had, in factt, always regarded it as discretionary. The same material as had bsen brought before the Court on this occasion might havo been brought before the Court on any occasion on which the Court, had grantfod bonuses. There was finncninl depression, Mr. Eeardon continued, but it was due to the fact that the importers had imported more than, they could pay for, and tHie workers woro to be asked to pay in advance. He submitted that the Court could not ask them to do that. Tho agi'.Ution of the employers must have accentuated the difficulties of the wholo situation. If they were looking for a sudden fall in prices, they were going the right way to get it. Much had been said about whatl the result would be if the bonus were granted; he would leave this question at-the point of interrogation: "AVhat will be tho result if no bonus is granted?" CALCULATION OF BONUS. "I agree with Mr. Pryor," said Mr. -M'Combs, "that in the absence of the 'all groups' index figure the combined 'food groups' number is the best indication of the general increase in the prices of necessary commodities. Unfortunately, the 'all groups' number for the whole period has not been made available in tho Monthly Abstract of statistics and consequently Mr. Pryor and myself have had to accept the next best available, namuly, tho groceries, dairy produce and meat combined as representing tho average increase over all groups. "The. Court apparently agree that sixmonthly moving average is the best basis of. comparison, and Jlr. Pryor has invited the Court to review the whole position to the extent of going back to **tircli, 1919, and taking Is. 9d. por hour as tho basis as from that date, and the Government Statistician testifies that his (Mr. Pryor's) calculations are approximately correct; but I maintain that if tho whole position is to bo reviewed, the proper base is not Mnrch t 1919, but tho baso provided for in the 1918 legislation, namely, to amend the provisions of any award or agreement, and in doing so to 'take into consideration any increase sinco the date of the award or agreement in the cost of living.' Tho legislation did not provide as from March, 1919, but as from the making of any awards or agreements in existence on the passing of the legislation in 1918. March, 1919, which is the dato of. the first nmendment is not, therefore, tho Iron basis nf calculation. I am awire that awards and agreements are for different periods of time, and that the Court, in order to givw practical effect to the legislation, hnd to take a typical case and practically- base all bonuses thereon. "If we go back the whole period, as in The typical case of the carpontors' itward, namely, to April, 1917, which wns an existing award covered by the 1918 legislation, then taking, the six-monthly moving averages as stipulated, I havo already shown that the present bonus should" be 21d. for 7d. increase in nil, including the 2d. increase in March, 1919). My calculations aro based on' the best judex numbers available, namely, tho combined 'food cTnups' as Mm average for all groups; and as only tho Government Statistician could supply an 'all groups' calculation, I would urge that in fairness to the workers and to all parties concerned, tho Court should invito him to supply that calculation, because it is the one provided for in the legislation, and the onlv one which is free from objection. I do not know wlnt the result of the Government Statistician's calculation in tho 'all groups' numbers will bo. I only know that it would be in accordance with the legis-

latlon, and the only fair and equitable method to adopt." Mr. W. Maddison also addressed the Court in support of the employees' case. EMPLOYERS' REPLY. Mr. P. Cooper (Canterbury Employers' Association) gave instances of how labour costs mounted up in the case of materials handled fir?t by one class of labour then, by another, and he showed the cmmila'ive effect of tho 9s. bonus when it had to be passed on. He suggested that employers could not pay the amount without passing it on. On the suggestions put forward by Mr. M'Combs he had some commenii to make. The carpenter was getting Is. Bd. in 1917. The -proper thing, Mr. M'Combs said, was to put on the bonuses and l bring the wage up to date by the addition of 7d. That meant Is. Bd., plus 7d., which was 2s. 3d.; and tlia.V was the amount the carpenter was getting six months ago.

Mr. M'Combs: No; there is the change in the basic wage ns well.

Mr. Cooper said that, the case he had given was a fairly typical one. The percentage increases the Court had given to most of the unions in the shape of bonus and basic wage—(Mr. M'Combs: Yes, "and basic wage.")—gave the recipient more than enough to buy the same articles to-day as ho bought in 1914. Mr. Pryor was the las;( speaker to address the Court In the course of his speech he said:— "I feel it is only fair to myself to say that there is no reason whatever for the remarks of Mr. F.ccmlon and Mr. M'Combs to the effect ilhat the protest was tho result of either artificial or spurious agitation. What has been done has only been decided upon ns the result of urgent representations by employers generally and nfiter duo deliberation by the federation as a whole. With'Tegard to the suggested influence of the New Zealand Employers' Federation on the Government I can only say I wish the federation had only half the power which Mr. Beardon seems to think it has. I should say' that the effect the adoption of the Court's pronouncement would have on the-Government services of the Dominion was the cause of the legislation which was passed last session. The statement that hundreds of employers in all parts of the Dominion and >n ninny lines of industry nre paying ilhe bonuses not in in accordance with foot. lam in possession of pretty complete information as to which of the employers aro paying the bonus, and 1 can assure the Court 'that it is not being generally paid, and in most cases where it is Wing paid it is being done under the impression that it is compulsory so io do, in consequence of the Court's* pronouncement. , "BONUS, IF ANY, SHOULD BE 35." "Taking the question of what tho amount of the bonus, if any, should be, I refer-to the information supplied to the Court by Mr. Malcolnl Eraser, the Government Statistician. Mr. Fraser confirmed absolutely the method of computation suggested by us, aijd made it clear that the only way to arrive at a correct result was by means of tho sixmonthly average index numbers. I submit that taking the average index numbers for the three food groups wns strictly in accordance with the statements made in the several monthly abstracts referred to previously. Mr. Fraser 'admitted that the conclusions arrived at were strictlv correct on that basis. Ho, however, evidently as the result of. our representations, has gone into more detail, and now shows that dealing with all groups, including clothing, the result is that for the succeeding six months 15s. per week should bo paid instead of 13s. 3d., or, in other words, that ss. should be the amount of the new bonus instead of the 3b. 3d. ns calculated by us, or tho 9s. proposed in the Courts announcement. I suggest, however, that the workers are not entitled to the full ss. By reference to Mr. Eraser's staw-mont yesterday it will be seen that the workom were paid Is. per week from January 1, 19'0 to April 30, 1920, instead, of 2s. por week, and 10s. per weok from M«r'• 19"0 to October 31, 1920, instoad of Bs. per week. They were thus paid 2s. per week to which they were not entitled for the ten months specified above. In the circumstances, I feci tho Court will not think; it unreasonable, for me to suggest that there should be some adjustment ot the matter. That being so, I propose for the Court's consideration that the amount of bonus for the current six. months should be- 3s. per week, thus giving the workers the benefit of the extra 2s they have received for four months, and also repaying the 2s. extra they received for tho latter six months. SHOULD ANY BONUS BE PAID? "While I havo discussed above tho question of tho amount of tho bonus to be paid, the real claim I am making on behalf of tho employers of the Dominion —and, indeed, I am entitled to say on bohalf or thei'community as a whole—is that no further liomis whatever should he paid. It is essential that I should make this point quite clear, so that it cannot be said that because T have made proposals with regard to tho amount of tho bonus, that 1 have in any way waived mv contention that the Court, should consider tho question of not awarding a further bonus. "I cannot urge too strongly that the Court cannot impose any further burdens upon the ordinary employers of the Dominion without running a »reat risk ot seriously dislocating the public services nt the 'same time. In suggesting r \a> no further bonus should be paid I am not requesting tho Court to take an unusual course of action. In England, America, and Australia the position \t somewhat similar to our position here, only that in each of these other countries the' matter is more fully developed, fn this morning's papers there is a cable message stating that Mr. Lloyd George, speaking at the Federation of British Industries, said 'There was no doubt a time of serious depression wns coming/'' and I have already cited the instance ot the English Industrial Council in refusing to further increase wages of the workers in the iron trades. In America, the position has been somewhat relieved by the reductions of wntes which have been decided upon. In Australia we have tho example of Mr. Hughes in totally rejecting the recommendations of tlie Federal Commission. In Now South Wales, despite a mile-,' larger increase in the cost of living than in New Zealnnd. tho Board of Trade has fixed the basic wage at £i ss. per week of 48 hours for all "adult male employees, with the exception of those working in country areas. As against this, the basic rate in New Zealand for a 49-hour weekis M 8?.. without any additional bonus which might be awarded. The position, therefore, is that the New Zealand worker on tno basis of a JS-hour week is 3s. per week better off without a bonus than the New South Wnles worker Is under the Board of Trade decision or October 8 last."

The Court stated that it would take time to consider its decision.