Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

GROCERS' DISPUTE

NEW AWARD SOUGHT

CHAIN STORE SHOPS

BOY LABOUR QUESTION

A conciliation council recently adopted a proposal that the Wellington grocers' dispute be referred to tho Arbitration Court, a full settlement having been reached, except as to the clauses dealing with overtime, wages for men in chargo of branch jtorcs, special holidays, and the term of the award. Tho provisions referred •to the Court included the following:—"Overtime: (c) employees shall not be employed in or about the business of the shop on tho statutory half-holiday or on any Sunday or holiday mentioned in clause 8 hereof." The words "or on any Sunday" were objected to. Tho wording of the clause dealing with the proportion of youths and juniors referred to tho Court was: "The proportion of youths or boys to Workers in receipt of not less than £4 5s 6d per week shall bo one youth or boy to three or fraction of the first three." The workers' union proposed that new sub-clauses be added relating to the position and pay of certain shopmen. The employers requested that certain sub-clauses relating to pay and conditions be struck out. Further amendments were proposed on behalf of Alfred Lindon Brown and other employers. At the sitting of the Arbitration Court, today,. Mr. Justice Frazer prosided and associated with him wore Mr. A. L. Monteith and Mr. W. Cecil Prime. Mr. M. J. Beardou appeared for the Wellington Mlaster Grocers' Union, Mr. W. J. Mountjoy for what arc known as the.chain stores employers, and Mr..A. W. Croskery for the "Wellington Grocers' Assistants' Union. . MASTER GROCERS' CASElii opening the case for the Master Grocers' .Union, Mr. Beardon said that the application was for a. new award to take tho place of the award which camo into force on December 14, 1931, and was made for a period of two years. That award was based in tho main on the- recommendation of the Conciliation Council. The Court, however, after hearing,certain evidence, decided to depart from the recommendation of the Conciliation Council with- reference to branch managers.. Because of that clause, the award had never been satisfactory, to the members of the Master Grocers' Union. ' Mr. Beardon contended that thcro had been an abuse of tho law and of the concessions which tho Court had granted.". The Court was now asked by the Master Grocers' Union to put tho trade on a better and more equitable basis. Was boy labour to be commercialised while adults were being paid unemployment wages? Ho contended that thcro was an undue proportion'''of boys employed in chain stores, and said that tho staff of chain stores, usually consisted of a man, a youth, and a boy. Evidence was called on behalf _of the Wellington Master Grocers' Union. Henry Wardell, of Wardell Bros, and Co., said ho employed in his shop 23 men, senior assistants, 2 boys in tho store and two boys who accompanied tho delivery vans, and two cash girls. The head shopman was paid £6 15s a week; most of the mpmbcrs of his staff were paid £4 5s 6d, tho minimum rate. Most of. his adult employees had been' in his employ sinco they were youths. Ho considcrod that where an cmployor could-employ a man in tho grocery trade and pay him a man's wages, ho should do so. ,\. His Honour: Tako the average boy and tho average man, would,you rather. employ tho average man. at a man's wages than.the average boy at a boy's wages?— Yes. His Honour: Leaving the chain stores out of the question; you aro of tho opinion that one boy to three men might be a fair proportion in certain big shops; but, tako the case of tho ordinary small store?— For a small store an employer might do his own work, and employ a boy until his trade was sujlicient to justify him employing a mail. . ' " ■ : In reply to M-r. Mountjoy, witness said that he had only ono shop, in the cdntro of the city, and it was necessary to send out vans to certain customers. A largo proportion of his business was cash business. He preferred 4, man as a grocers' assistant rather than a boy. (Proceeding.)

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19331002.2.129

Bibliographic details

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 80, 2 October 1933, Page 10

Word Count
697

GROCERS' DISPUTE Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 80, 2 October 1933, Page 10

GROCERS' DISPUTE Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 80, 2 October 1933, Page 10

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert