THE COAL MINES

Dominion, Volume 18, Issue 182, 4 May 1925, Page 9

THE COAL MINES

AWARDS INTERPRETED BY ARBITRATION COURT The Arbitration Court has given its decisions on two matters remitted to it by the inspector of awards, and both, parties combined in regard to the working of coal-mines. The first point, which was submitted, tc the Court by joint application, was what the.pillar rate would be, seeing that two rates were provided for in the Hiuurangi award, and that clause 4 (b) states that "all pillar places shall be 9-foot wide places and the hewing rates shall be the foregoing rates less 2d. per ton.” The opinion states: “The unions contention is that pillar places less than 9ft. wide should be paid for at a higher rate than the 9ft. rate. The expression ‘all pillar places shall be 9ft. wide places’ can bear only one of two possible meanings, viz., that the pillar places must all be exactly Oft. wide, neither more nor less, or that all pillar places shall be regarded as 9ft. places, and paid, for accordingly. The adoption of the first meaning involves ah absurdity, and. the second meaning is obviously that intended by the parties, and is the only - reasonable meaning to be given to the wording of the clause.” In the other case, a question had arisen as to the interpretation of the Hikurangi coal-mines’ award. In Wilson's Collieries’ mine there is a band of fireclay which is underneath the coal but above the mam floor of trie seam. Aimers having this fireclay are paid for it according to clause 23 of the award. In order to determine the tonnage rate payable, should the thickness of the coal only he measured or should the thickness of fireclay also be included with coal? The inspector of awards had made the application for interpretation. The Court’s opinion was as fallows: — The employers' contention is that the words ‘height of coal’ were intended by the parties to mean 'height of place,’ that is, the total height of coal and fireclay. In the West Coast awards the expression used is ‘height of seam?’ The Court cannot go behind the wording of the award unless there is some ambigu-' . ity, or unless a well-recognised custom is proyed. Though it appears from tile rates fixed that it is quite likely that some at least of the members of the Conciliation Council had the height of ihe place in mind, the word ‘coal’ has been used in the recommendations filed by them, and that word is unambiguous. Further, as the present award is the first award to be made since fireclay has been worked as at present, it is im-t possible to show the existence of a well- ' recognised customary interpretation of the expression ‘height of coal.’ Tfiat would justify the Court in giving that - expression a" wider meaning than that ordinarily borne by the words. The Ccurt is accordingly of the opinion that the thickness of the fireclay should not be included in determining tho tonnage rate.”