ARBITRATION COURT.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2041, 28 March 1907, Page 1

ARBITRATION COURT.

Tlio Court, unclor tlio presidency of Judge Sim, commenced a sitting nt tlio Courthouse yesterday

morning. ORDER OF BUSINESS

Whim the Court opened the .)udge proposed that the parties to the Industrial dispute should have a conference to endeavor to come to an agreement. The Court would have to leave for Auckland on Friday. After a slight discussion it was decided that the parties confer, and that the case he called on at 10 o’clock on the following morning. CASES AGAINST STRIKERS.

Tlio cases against strikers were then taken, and by agreement were heard together.

The following men wore indicted - . —Herbert Cheer. Frank Collis, James Glennv, John Miller, Harold Baigont, John Grant, Joseph Work, John Roderick, Thomas Summers, Maurice Osborne, Wm. Honshu w, Jas. Hughes, John Kinnimont, Bert Prosser, Alfred Castles, Michael Noonan. Robt. Peterson. Thos. Snowsill, Alfred Clarke, Aldgie McKee, Jas. [Collett, Geo. Pen rue, Wm. Sharp, Edward Gregg, John Foss, Harry Evers field, Thos. Edwards, John Dalton, Harry Calcott, John Bowler, Wm. Bishop, Wm. August, Win. Anderson,' Clias. Hewitt, Andrew Harris, John Jamieson, Thos. Jackson, Harry Kinnimont, Richard ICellott, Edward Manning, Jas. O’Neill, Wm. Pearse, Daniel Tyo, Goo. Vine, Alexander Williamson, Geo. Roderick. Mr Finn, who appeared for the defendants, submitted that the cases were not before the Court. The Arbitration Court, like the Supreme Court, was divided into districts, and in whatever district a breach occurs the application to the Court, must be tiled in that district. The papers should bo headed “In the Arbitration Court.” but those before him did not show in what Court the case was or in what district the breach had occurred. There was nothing to show that the applications had been filed at all. Further than that the papers were not signed by the Clerk of Awards —there was only a stamp. Air Nolan, on the other side, held that the regulations demanding that the signature of the Glerk of Awards should he endorsed on the application was directory and not mandatory. The only objection his friend could make was that the signature was not on the back of the application. The signature itself was quite valid. There was a regulation stating that want of form could not be used to stay proceedings in the Court. It was not necessary to have the papers headed as being in the Arbitration Court.

His Honor said the Court could not uphold any of Air Finn’s objections. It would certainly have been better'had tlie heading “In the Arbitration Court” appeared. The application they held to be in correct form.

Air Nolan, in opening the case for the Inspector . of Awards, said he understood the facts would be admitted. On February 22nd one of the men charged waited on the manager of the Gisborne Freezing Company and Nelson Bros. Mr Coderwall asked that the complaints be put ill writing so that they might be put before the directors, -ii- Coderwall received a letter asking that tlio payment for freezing sheep and lambs be increased. from 20s to 25s per hundred, that 44 hours constitute a week’s work and that from 12 to 4 on Saturday be paid for at tlio rate of time and a quarter. The same demands were made verbally to the manager of Nelson Bros. Air Cederwall replied that the directors were always willing to confer with the men as to payment, but would stand by the Arbitration Court. On Fobnrary 25th the men turned up at the Gisborne Freezing Works, but only killed two sheep per hour. At the luncheon hour a letter from the manager was read stating that killing must cease- unless more sheep were killed. The men refused to kill more, some holding that they had been “sacked” and others that the company was looking them pqt. At Nelson Bros.’ the men were allowed to kill two sheep per hour for some time. On the 25th they stated that they would pay the men whatever the Court awarded if they would start again on a normal basis. On the 26th there was an abortive conference between the men and the Gisborne Fx-cczing Works Coy. Later the men asked that 25s be paid pend-

ing the award of the Court. The Company replied that if the Court granted ail increase the Company would pay it as from February 22iul. On March 2nd it was decided that the men 1;e paid 235. The men resumed work after a hipsc of n week. Not only was the Company losing money hut the other employees were also losing money. The position at Nelson Bros, was practically the same as at the Gisborne Freezing Works. The men killed two sheep per hour for some .time and .then killed only one. They demanded 25s per hundred or that they ho discharged. The companies were compelled to close down. They could not afford to keep the rest of their employees on fijll pay when there was no work tor them. The action of the men was practically a strike —if a man sat down and refused to work for forty minutes out of sixty it could not he regarded as anything hut a strike.

Charles Fenwick, manager of Nelson Bros., said that on February 22, Jackson came to him and stated that he was present with proposals from the slaughtermen. Not rpiite certain if time and a half or time and a quarter was asked fur. Jackson came about nine o'clock in the morning, and asked for a reply by 4 o’clock. Witness said lie could.do nothing himself, but he would put the matter before bis principals. Wrote to Jackson on Saturday and again on Monday, the j£sth. On Monday the men started killing only two sheep per hour. There were" 23 slaughtermen working at the time. The ordinary overage killing was about 10 per- hour. The killing of sheep at two per hour continued for tiro days, and on February 27tli the men commenced to kill only one per hour. That, went on for’three days. Witness was in the killing-shod each day. Tlie Inspector of Awards "as up one morning-and watched the kilI ling for about an hour. Had no conI vernations with the men regarding thoir work, §aw one man lying 011 side and remarked that lie evit on found things very slow. .Some o the men wanted to get the sac. Witness said the men would go on thev were. Killing one. sheep pei hour conj/inucfl until knock-off mm on Friday. Saw the men on 1 n lay night in the bullock-pei* and asked them what they intended to do. Asked them If they would mnillnue to work if the Company promised to pay whatever the Court should award The men asked for time to think until the following On Saturday the men said they must °pe,U, .n «"*»<■?' '"" ,B ,m ' U made- on Saturday mght.

By Air Finn: The men took a long time to kill a .'sheep. They were not working continuously—some of them went outside and lay down. Would not say whether or noL a mail worked continuously for an hour in killing two sheep. When working at the normal rate the men used to talk to one another. Some of the men killed seven sheep an hour and some over ten. All the men who resumed on .Monday had previously been employed by the Company. Summers and Grant had only been employed for a few days previously. They were lea rners. They were not asked to kill ten sheep per hour —they wore allowed t«i* kill as many as they could. The number of sheep each man might kill wqv dependent on the supply of .sheep. If there was an unlimited supply of sjjeep there was no limit lie knew of to the amount each man might kill. John Rees Jones, works manager at the Gisborne Freezing Works, said that about 9 a.m. on Monday, February 25tli. he was told by the head hit teller that something Van wrong with the men. Rang up Air Oedcrwall. and consulted with him ai noon. Got a letter for Jackson and a ropy of it to read to the butchers. There were 23 men killing that day, and he presumed the whole of them were present at the reading of the letter. As soon as it had been read one man sang out: “This is the sack, boys!” ami later another said: “This is a lock-out.” Somebody also asked what the Company reckoned was the normal tally. Witness replied that the hooks of the Company would show that to ho from eight to ton. Asked whether or not they would resume at the normal rate. There was no reply except that a man said they would resume at two sheep per hour. When Jackson got the letter he said: “This amounts to dismissal.” Witness replied that that was not so if the normal tally were killed. Jackson was secretary' of the Union, and was recognised by the butchers as their spokesman. By Afr Finn: In the morning the men all worked at two per hour. None of the men said .to his knowledge, that they would not work. When the remark was made: “This is the sack.” did not reply “Yes, if voti like.” Positive about this. By His Honor: The men did no work after noon, and did not resume work till the following Alonday. Selwyn Spiers, foreman butcher at the Gisborne Freezing Works, said that as a result of information lie went to tile killing-hoard and found that only two sliocp per hour were being killed. Asked tlio butchers what was meant bv the action. The reply was that they were not going to do any more. Witness could not force them to do any more. Told them two would not put a man on the killing-board if be could not Jo more than two sheep an hour. Then reported the matter to Air. Jones, who communicated with Air. Cedorwnll. The men continued until noon in killing two sheep per hour. At one o’clock went to hear a letter read. Some said it was a lock-out, and others dismissal. Air. Jones said that it was not a lock-out, and that if the normal tally were killed work could be resumed, but that if not the works would have to he closed. The men refused to kill more than two. The average killing was 10 per hour. The lowest tally of the men at the works was live. Five was a learner’s tallv.

By Mr. Fluff: ITiWTiVen actually took an hour to kill two sheep. They were srtioking and sitting-about. They could, not put in. the time bn the work. .There-was no limit to the number of sheep eacb man might kill. Twenty-two men on his board could kill ten per liour. Nobody could be called a slaughterman unless ho could do eight an hour. H they did under that they must he called learners. By Air. Nolan : There were no rules about the number of sheep to he killed. Some killed up io fourteen and sixteen.

Alfred Islierwood, Inspector of Factories, said he visited the Taruhoru works on February 25th. Found the men killing two sheep per hour. They killed the sheep in about a quarter of an hour and,then sat about and smoked. Said nothing to any of the men. Then went to the Gisborne works and spoke with Jackson. Jackson 'said they were killing two pelhour because they wanted an increase of pay, and that they were dissatisfied with the delay of the Arbitration Court |n hearjng tln-ir iljspqto, Spoke to Jackson because he knew he represented them. Went, to the Taruhoru works again on Wednesday. They were killing one an hour. All'. Fenwick said to the men that if they resumed at the normal tally the company would pay tlie rate fixed by the Arbitration Court. This closed Afr. Nolan’s ease.

Mr. Filin, in opening the case for the defendants, held that all the informations must he dismissed. • It was no offence under the Act to take part in a movement to produce a strike —the olfonce in the Act was taking part In a strike, There was a great difference between the two actions.

His Honor: If we find that there was a strike, what can stop us from fining the men for taking part in a strike ?

Mr. Finn : They have not been charged with the offence. His Honor: Why did you not object to the evidence taken as not. being relevant to the charge?

Mr. Finn said that there had been no strike. A strike .was defined as quitting work and refusing to work until higher wages 'wore conceded. Was there anything in the award to compel tjio men |q kill ipqre than two sheep per hour. It was the fault of the employers that the number was not fixed, YVba! work were tinmen supposed to do? There was absolutely no indication in the evidence —the rate was merely fixed at per hundred. He wanted to know if there was anything to show that the men’s action was illegal. His Honor said if the action amounted to a strike it was an illegal act. Mr Finn said the men had continued to work. The employers had ample power to fix the minimum or maximum number ol sheep to be killed. Sections and 7 of the award gave that liflwpih T|io employers lin'd failed to fix a limit and there was absolutely nothing to compel the men to kill a certain number. The companies might just as well he irj ven the right to use the lash, as to uemaiul of them that they kill at a rate not fixed in any way. Clause ! of the awards stipulated the hours and laid it down that they must work, hut the rate at which they should kill was not defined. They had-evidence that the Gisborne Company had suspended work beqau.se the men's action was an illegal act. Might not the men have taken the action in order to lu|ve ;i Jialf-holi-du.v. There was no offence disclosed in the application, but, the defendants might be convicted of offences disclosed by the evidence. It was no offence if the -men had acted as they did in order to get (lismisscd. They were asked to presume that a strike had occurred, but it was Impossible for a strike to happen.. He quoted a Mouse of Lords decision affirming that if an act were legal it

could bo done, ,no mii.Ltcr how bad the motive might be. He submitted that there was nothing in the award to say how much work the men must do —the men were the solo judges of that. If their work was not .satisfactory the mr.ii .could he..dismissed. Where was the evidence that the men’s action was intended to cause a strike. To justify the fining of the defendants the evidnce of the men’s intention to cause a strike must he very clear. The letter of the Company suspending work was an' illegal act, and the'Company should have been cited to appear to answer a charge of breaking the law. On the grounds stated he would ask that the applications he dismissed.

His Honor asked that evidence for the defence he called. Henry George Warren, secretary in New Zealand for Nelson Bros., stated that ho conducted tlie Company's ease when the present award

was made. Had no recoiledion >f having stated on Unit occasion that the men could kill as many or as few as they liked. This was all the evidence called for ilie defence. Mr. Finn said that before the Court could fine the individual men before it. it would be necessary for the Court to bo satisfied that each man was guilt.v of the offence alleged in the application. The defendants were in a peculiar position. They wore broil giit to Court aml found Unit tlioy had committed no offence under tins Act. The Court reserved its decision. ENFORCEMENT OF AWARDS. Five applications were received for uiforoemont of avoid against Geo. Smith, the Oishorne Painters’ Union making the applications. Mr 0: E. Dsuton, representing the Union, said Mr. omith was a builder by trade, lint recently had added 'minting to his business, doing liis own painting. Ho had employed a •nan named Foster at less than the award wages. The award gave Is 3d per hour, but Foster only received 8s per day. lie had no information that Smith actually knew of the award. Two other applications were regarding overtime (time and a half) on Saturday afternoon. Smith admitted the offence and remedied the matter at once. Therefore the Union did not want a heavy line. The only reason for the eases was to bring home to people who competed in the painting trade should pay the award wages. George Smith, the. respondent, stated that Foster was not a competent man, and was told by the secretary of the Union that up permits were issued by the Union. Know nothing about the painters’ award. The secretary of the Union told him the man was well paid at Bs. The Inspector of Factories discovered the breach, and on his suggestion he (the Speaker) sent along a cheque for a sum making up the man’s wages to 10s per day and double time for Saturday afternoon. The breach had been caused through ignorance of the award. _ Deeisi on was reserved. Pit inters* Union v. Frederick Hall. —Mr Nolan appeared for respondent. There were four a plications. Mr. Darton appeared for the Union. In aiib'wor to Mr. Nolan, Mr. Darton said that the charge sought to be proved was that overtime was not paid. The Union hoped to tie abl.>-to prove that Beaumont was employed a painter..

Air. Nolan said that Beaumont had been paid ill full for all work on the day named. Harry Beaumont, who worked for the respondent, said that on August 31st went down Gladstone road on liis way io work and called in at the. she.]) and picked up two tins of varnish, which were required in his work. This was about 7.30. Was working an cottages in Pahneston Road, nearly a mile from the shop. It, was not customary to go to the shop and get material. AVent on his own free will to get the varnish. At the end of the week did not put in for overtime.

By Mr. Noian: Had to walk to his work anyhow. It did not take him any longer to walk to his work because he had the varnish.- Tbe lieocssary materials were, always sent out to jobs by a trap. Oil this occasion the varnish had been omitted from the order sent to the shop, Air-. Nqlflii said that if secretaries of Unions were going to make that Court the tool for bringing trivial cases the Court ceased to exist the better. All that was charged was that a man had called at the shop on his way to work and picked it]) two tins of varnish which he could hold in one hand. All-. Darton said that as. secretary of the Union ho had only to carry put the instructions of (.is Union. He submitted that,- tlio case was not a trivial one. It was not tlio Union who were concerned SO niqoh iia the other master pafiitors wlui.se men started at the correct time. The tins of varnish wore large. Ihe fact that there was no claim for overtime did not eliminate the liability of the master to pay.

His Honor s;iid the Union had failed to prove a case. I here was no avidcncc of Beaumont's action being in accordance wjlh a role of the shop. Judgment would he given for respondent'! hilt it must not he tuIvCU is affirming the legality of such actions as tlio one complained of. Costs £2 2s were allowed respondent. Painters’ Union v. Frederick Hall. This was a claim for overtime. Mr. Nolan for the respondent and Mr. Daring for t]i« Union. Mr. Nolan said Jolilfe was foreman of respondent's business and was paid at per day v.Yt «>r dry. work or no work. He as paid 12s per day and u bonus of £lO per year in Ulition. Portion of his duty was i prepare for the work of the day, anil in the “Factories’ Act” such persons w. re ti.emaHy exempted from overtime, if the stand of the Union was upheld the man, would he paid lOs per day ami overtime. Under this contention the man could he paid -Ids a day and still he .liable to he called upon to he paid for overtime. • i the true sense of the word the man was not a journeyman painter, to which pm suns only the award applied. It was .admitted that -the work complained of was done. Joliffe was merely employed to manage the business and arrange the jobs.

llis Honor asked that evidence he called as to Joliffe’s duties. Frederick- Hall stated that Joliffe’s duties were tp manage the business. He also did the more superior work—graining and gilding doors, etc. Witness generally engaged the men. Mr. Darton .said the only point wished to he proved was that no time sheet was put in by Jolilfe. The Union was not concerned much about Jolilfe as he was only one man. They wanted to know if such method of payment wore legal. Joliffe was a journeyman. The award was binding on foremen in that all foremen were journeymen. The award only allowed for competent workers, apprentices and under-rate . workers, and did not consider foremen. The Union claimed that all foremen should get time and a-quarter for time worked prior to 7.45. By the present arrangement the workmen

of Hall could he got on jobs earlier than any other firm. The 2s extra paid to Joliffo was for his duties as manager and not for any overtime ho may have worked. Joliffo actually worked as a journeyman. Judgment was reserved.

Painters’ Union v. Francis Staf ford. —Mr. Darton for tlie Union Mr. .Stafford appeared on his owi behalf.

i\Li\ Rurton explained that two of Mr. Stafford’s builder's apprentices had painted some of tile fences erected by respondent. MV. Stafford oxcnsd himself on the ground tlmt the painters were late in arriving. The ease was to show builders that they must not do painting on their own account without paying award wages. Mr. Stafford said lie had engaged a journeyman painter to do the work liut lie had failed to come along, ft would have paid him (the speaker) hotter to keep the hoys on the work to which they were indentured. His Honor said the Court did not regard the ease as serious and would only inflict a line of C 1 without costs. FREEZING WORKERS’ DEMANDS. Following are the demands of the Union with a comparison with the terms of the award which expired in August last: Rate of wages: The Union now ask for £1 os per 100 for killing freezing sheep and lambs, as against £1 .under the previous working schedule, £1 for leg-of-mutton sheep as against 10s Bd, 10s 8d for potters as compared with 12s fid, £2 for rams as against £1 ss, 2s Gd each for bullocks (all round) as compared with 2s. For woolly sheep £1 10s a hundred is asked from September Ist. An increase is asked for in the case of pullers, painters, llesliers, pelt-classers, curing dolly, steam-dryer and dollymen from Ss a day to Is 3d an hour; scudders, skinwashers, wool-scourers, and trimmers, 8s to 8s Gd per day; general laborers outside and floor hands, 8s per day. On the cooling floor iin increase is asked in the case of fathouse hands from 7s to 9s per day, fathouse bauds 7s to 9s, boners 8s per day to Is (id an hour, manure and blood crushing hands from 7s Gd to 9s. In the preserving department Is -i id per hour for tinsmiths is asked for as against 8s a dav under the present working schedule, general hands 8s as compared with 7s. For freezing chamber hands (regular and casual) an increase from Is to Is- Gd an hour is asked for, shoot hands to he the same as before, Is an hour. In the engine-room- an increase from £2 12s (id a week , of seven days to 10s a day is asked for, general labor Bs. In regard to employment of hoys it is asked that all youths over 19 to bo accounted as men, instead of the ages going up to 21 as formerly. The Union then ask that an increase of 2s Gd he made in the wages of boys aged It to 15 from 12s 6d to 15s, those of 15 to 1G years to be paid £l, 16 to 17 £1 ss, 17 to 18 £1 10s, 18 to 19 £1 15s. The night watchman to he paid £3 3s per week instead of 7k Gd a night. All general labor unspecified 8s pep day instead of 7s.

Hours of labor: It is asked by the Union that eight hours constitute a day’s work; hours to be between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m., with an hour- for dinner.

Overtime wages: The Union ask that freezing chamber hands he paid 'Zs !«.* f Hour, gen oral., jatesrnr? 7- ! 1 ill e and a quarter, slaughtermen -rate and a half. All sheep killed after SO to be paid-f'Or at overtime rates. All cattle over 8 per man rate and a quarter. Under the existing schedule overtime was merely paid for at the rate of time and a quarter.

An increase in the number of holidays and remuneration therefor is asked for. Formerly the men were paid double time for Sundays, Christmas Day, and Good Friday, and time and a half for other holidays. Clause 11 of the now demand requires holidays to be as follows:—Sundays, Christmas Day, Boxing Day, New Year’s Day, Good Friday, Easter Monday, Prince of ’Vales’ Birthday, Labor Day, King’s Birthday, Show Day. Men called upon to work during those days to he paid double time. and. for all time beyond eight hours on such days, time and a half on double timo. Other demands nro: “Night Watchman; Seven nights of twelve hours each and no work, £U As per week; or, as the present system at the, Gisborne works. “Preference to Unionists: Preference of employment shall he given to members of the Union. ’•General Clauses: Lavatories and dressing-rooms to he provided for each department, bln lightermen to he exempted from washing down. Nelson Bros.’ agreement (which is objected to by the inetij t» he dispensed with, All men called out to wqi'iv to he paid not less than a halfday's pay; slaughtermen excepted. ■Waiting time and delays to he avoided as jar as possible. Where contracts are lot the employer shall hind the contractor to pay the award rates. Any slaughtermen taken oil' the hoard for other work shall he paid wages equal to what, he is earning on the hoard. Spells of 15 minutes each to be allowed throughout the works, at as nun;, two-hour intervals as possible, for ‘Sinokclio.’ Spells of reasonable time to he allowed for men to cool who arc in a heated condition through working outside, before going into the freezing chamber. No deduction to l;o made from wages for such spells. Gloves, loggings, aprons, and smocks to be provided for men requiring them; fd.aughtermoh excepted, Any worker- who through old irge or ’physical infirmity is unable to earn the minimum rate of wages herein proscribed shall he paid at such lesser rate as shall from time to time be agreed upon between such worker and the secretary of the Unicoi,’’