ELECTRICAL WORKERS

Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 183, 30 April 1940, Page 5

ELECTRICAL WORKERS

Dispute Before Court Of Arbitration Decision was reserved in the dispute between the Wellington Electrical Workers' Union and the Alliance Electrical Co., importers, and other employers which was beard in the Court of Arbitration, Wellington, yesterday. Mr. 11. E. Swindell represented the union and -Mr. W. •!. Mountjoy the employers. -Matters in dispute were the minimum wage rates for journeymen. the statutory holidays clause and the term of the award, agreement having been reached on the other clauses. In support of the union's claim for a wage of 3/- an hour. Mr. Swindell stressed the extremely casual nature of the trade, which meant that on. the year round the men would not get more than 2/3 an hour. Tlie number of electrical workers on a large building would not be more than It) or 15, Why was the price charged by subcontractors higher in Wellington than in other centres? asked Mr. .Justice Tynda 11. In his experience, said Mr. Swindell, contracts were so much cut that tlie workers laid to "go for their lives’’ to make it pay. With the shortage of conduit pipe and tlie use of wooden casings some of tho work might lie taken from electricians by the carpenters. Mr. Mountjoy asked that the wage of journeymen remain as in the presettl award, 2/9, which was the rale I in the Taranaki Electrical 'Workers' Award. He suggested that the Court should not be guided by the 'Wellington City Council Electrical Workers' award (2/91 an hour), as such cm- | ployees were a favoured class con>

pared witli I hose employed by persons who were compelled Io carry on their business on a competitive basis and might be employed on emergency work outside ordinary daily hours without the payment of overtime. Tlie Otago Electrical Workers’ Award, with 2/9-i an hour, covered power boards and other local authorities. The most recent Southland award, and the Marlborough. Nelson, ami Canterbury award was for 2/9 an hour. In the Canterbury award a memorandum by Mr. Justice O'Regan stated that tlie I wages issue had been dealt with on the basis of tlie Court's pronouncement of September. 1937. The employers objected to tlie union's claim for a 12 months' award on I the ground that it would increase the work of the Court unnecessarily.