HOTEL WORKERS' CLAIM

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 63, 8 December 1920, Page 8

HOTEL WORKERS' CLAIM

INCREASED WAGES AND BETTER CONDITIONS M. DESIRE FOR WEEK OF FORTY-EIGHT . . HOURS , SO In tho Arbitration Court yesterday the J Licensed 1 Hotel Workers' Union asked «" for the decision of the Court in refer- <"'< ence to hours of work, weekly and ape- -H-i cial holidays, wages, casual lalxiur, terms, t«< and other points which had not been it] settled by a Conciliation Council. stu Mr. E. Kennedy appeared for the in union, and Mr. W. A. Grenfell for the i„i employers. dr< In outlining tho case for fclio union, uu Mr. Kennedy said that although part of L ; 0 the dispute had been settled in-the conn- t re oil, importaat points had not been tettjed. 1)r He askod that amendments be allowed, in order to provide for pantrymen, pantry women, and housemaids, for whom it ■ was asked that £3 155., JE2, and JJ3 be , J t)ii paid respectively. Tho question of tho 48-hour weok aaid of a livinff wage had , ' to be considered. "Wo have never ob- , tained a living wage," he said. If tlio "/. industry can be carried on in Australia. *■' with a 4S-hour week, it can be carried f > on here under the same conditions. It m cannot bo maintained that the condi- c'l tions will make business unprofitable, be- lie causa if that is so it is 'hard to realise ci< why everyone: seems so anxious to enter trt the business. Eeference to tho Shops ' and Offices Act was made by Mr. Ken- ph nedy, who statod that although the of Court had been given discretionary po-w- i) ( ers by it no action had been taken in w ] amending the homs of hotel workers. Tho j n hours asked were from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. j u on five days of the week and from 9 m a.m. to 1 p.m. ou one other day in each week; and it was 0 desired that the half-day off should t>s ,jj given on the samo day eaoh week. 'Tor . the time beinjf, however," said M.r. Ken- , nedy, "we are prepared -to accept the ~ margin of 11 hours daily, Although we ".' maintain we aro entitled to an eight- t' hour day. ... It may be 'argued by the ™ other side that we havo time off during •>■" the day; and while that is true it is not nt time off work, but is waiting for work, ™" and in any other industry time waiting th for work is paid for." wl The advocate, in reference to th» half- op day off, contended that it was a fair m tiling for hotel workers to receive tiles Pi half-day on the same day each week, as nv the other businesses under tho Shops vl and Offices Act leceived that treatment, wi "Why have we not got this?" he asked. "Is it because hotels do not have to pj close on one half-day in the week like BC other businesses?. If that.is so, Mien all that is left for ns is to agitate for the hotel bf.r» to bo closed for one half-day in each week, as in other businesses." He claimed that the grading adopted in tho demands was on a fnir scale. The highest asked', for a chef in a kitchen in which' eig'ht or more hands were employed, was and the lowest for a workor £2 10s. Lower-rate Workers. "The lower-paid kitchen hand," said Mr. Kennedy, "must be entitled to a living wage, and I may say that suoh a worker has never jet received a fair living wage. In 1916 the Court laid down tho lowest reasonable wage at £2 12s. for weekly servants, and since then tlie cost of living has increased. . , . The present basic wage, in the industry, then, j allowing M a week for boawl l and lodging, will be about £5 ss. a week." Spocial claims for servants in dining-rooms were outlined by the advocate; M a week was asked for head waiters (of whom f 0 in Wellington there were only three), and u recognition was sought for head wai- u tresses, whoso responsibility was great. (| Relative to tho paymsnt of barmen, liarmaids, cellarnien and liottle store hands, 0 Mr. Kennedy asked that the. claims of jj the union bo amended as follow:—Bar- p 1 men, .£3 10s. per week; barmaids, £3 10s.; fi , bottle store hands, A' 3 10s.; and cellar- „• men, £1 10s. "Our reason for asking t for provision for bottle-store bauds," he B j said, "is that with the advent of six ,] o'clock closing many hotels opened bottlo g stores in conjunction with tho bars, and j, the workers should be covered by an c award." Statutory holidays were asked n for, the claim being for double pay for n work done on those days. 0 Mrs. Garrett, an employee at the Al- (l berniarle Hotel, and Mrs. Belcher, a ,i waitress at the Commercial Hotel, in evi- (. dence, said they were receiving £1 2s. „ and £1 a week resneotively, and their ~ ohildren had to be boarded out. ~ Charles -Wakefield, a waiter at Barrett's Hotel, at a. salary of £2 12s. Gd. a \ week. Cecil Trask, A. Williamson, and ] Joseph Baddley, employed, at the Grand T Hotel, at similar rates, gavo evidence ( , as to the conditions of their employment. , Called by Mr. Kennedv, the proprietor , of_ the Cambridge Hotel, H. G. Webb, v said he employed ton hands, of whom six , were men. Tour of the latter received j £i 10a. a week, and two received M. j The Proprietors' View. ' For the employers, Mr. Grenfell main- I tained that the union had endeavoured < to show that in the past hotel workers i had not been well treated: but'awurds that had been made had been finite ac- : ccptable to both parties, the decision < having, been made at the hearing before i Conciliation Councils. • The question of i hours, ho contended, should be dealt : with by the Legislature. In Australia, ; he had ascertained; hours of work had i been restrioted because of the intense i j heat in the summer months—purely for i health reasons. The wages controversy < was scarcely fair. The employers natural- | ly had to bear the brunt of the high cost of. living, because it was incumbent on • them to board the employees, and ho ' considered that such board was equiva- i . ' lent to 30s. «. week. i •On the question of the whole holiday caoh week, Mr. Grenfell said he thought | the workers were well treated. He did not think workers would like, to miss ' their "Sunday off," as might occur were ; the half-day fixed for a week day. Mr. Scott agreed with this. , Mr. Kennedy: That's half the story. We'll tell the Court tho whole story later. Mr. Grenfell referred to the preponder- [ ance of single workers in private hotels in Wellington. Of 295 workers only none were married—only 3 per cent. In reply, Mr. Kennedy said the union would urge the olnim for a 48-hour week, and would not rest until the Court or Parliament moved in the matter. "You nro quite entitled to do that," remarked His Honour. ] Tho Court reserved' its decision.