FURNITURE TRADE.

Gisborne Times, Volume IX, Issue 872, 23 April 1903, Page 3

FURNITURE TRADE.

By Telegraph—Dress Association

Auckland, last night. Til the furniture trade disputes to-day, counsel for applicants replied to arguments of counsel on tho other tide. Mr 1010 submitted that- the Court was not concerned with the English law or common law. The Arbitration Court made its awards and

could enforce Mem. His Honor, in the course of Dir Tole's address, asked how long an employer was bound to keep fully competent rnen ecu ployed. Mr Tolc replied that tho employer was so bound in the event ol an award raising Ihe Minimum wages from Is to Is 3d if nc wanted men. His Honor said he had asked the question because in New South Wales there was a clause in the Arbitration Act which met tin: difficulty, tho employer being liable to a penalty of X2O for dismissing a man because of an award by the Court. Mr Talc said he was dealing with a body of men, not- one man, and it had been

proved that the- men dismissed here were wanted —iheir work and benches being ready for them. Later. —Mr Tolo said that it was idle to discuss the position at common law, a? the luw they were considering was the Arbitration Act. The Court had power to say that under the circumstances alleged in this case the men were not to be discharged. His Honor asked Mr Tule how long an employee was bound to keep a fully competent man in his employ. Mr Tolc replied that under ordinary circumstances he was not bound to keep him on at ail if he did not want him, but he was bound to keep him on at a wage fixed by the Court if he wanted tho man’s services. If what had been done in the pre-

sent circumstances were legal then the , whole Act was useless. The whole thing was a scheme to oust men from employment and ultimately render the law a dead-letter. Mr Martin also addressed the Court on behalf of the Union, and Mr Cotter replied for the employers. Evidence was then given by the general manager and man iging directors of the D. 5.0., and Mr Templar, Secretary ol the Employers’ Union, and Mr Tonson Garlick and others, which closed the case for the employers. Judgment will be given on Saturday.