CARPENTERS’ DISPUTE RAISES NEW ISSUES

Grey River Argus, 21 September 1948, Page 5

CARPENTERS’ DISPUTE RAISES NEW ISSUES

Question of Separate Awards ’WELLINGTON, Sept. 20. Hearing of the combined districts’ carpenters and joiners’ dispute began in the Arbitration Court to-day. Justice Tyndall described it as a complicated dispute. A number of applications were made for exemption and the Freezing Companies’ Association had applied for the striking out of freezing workers as parties to the dispute. s “I see no evidence of these applications being considered in Conciliation Council,” said His Honour. “No mention is made in the report under ‘referred to Court,” to the applications for striking out. There is nothing to indicate that they have been referred to this court for a decision.” “The complication has not been brought about by us,” said the employees’ representative, Mr R. Stanley. His Honour adjourned the court to enable inquiries to be made of the Conciliation Commissioner. On resumption, His Honour said a report had been received which indicated that the documents before the court were not correct.

His Honour read a list of parties which had been struck out during conciliation proceedings, including two which were among the applications to court.

Mr W. E. Anderson (Auckland) proposed that the dispute be heard before the applications . for striking out. If their applications were not granted, then the people for whom he appeared would, as respondents, wish to give evidence on all of the clauses.

Mr Stanley then objected, stating that the workers were thus placed in an unfair position. The court then adjourned to make its decision on the procedure to be followed. The court subsequently announced that the applications for striking out would be heard first: The building industry should have an award of its own; submitted Mr Anderson. Carpenters who were working in, say, freezing works or sugar refineries, had completely different working conditions from builders’ carpenters. The employers whom he represented had found it completely impracticable to be adequately represented in conciliation council with the master builders. The time had come for the award to be split into two parts. The employers in, the northern district had made application already for a separate award, which had passed through the conciliation stages, and would be heard in Auckland, said Mr Anderson.

Mr Anderson appeared for a number of non-builder applicants for exemption in the Auckland district, including the Auckland Harbdpr Board. Mr J. R. Hanlon appeared for a list of further applicants in Taranaki. Marlborough, Nelson, Westland and Canterbury districts, and Mr W. J. Mountjoy for a list of Wellington applicants, including the Wellington City Council. For the F'reezing Companies’ Association, Mr J. B. Walton applied for the striking out of the freezing works as parties to the dispute, and Mr N. S. Triggs, for the Wanganui Education Board, withdrew an application for striking out, and submitted counter-proposals.