ARBITRATION COURT

Hokitika Guardian, 7 December 1931, Page 6

ARBITRATION COURT

SITTING AT HOKITIKA

MONDAY, DECEMBER 7th

Two eases for compensaition occupied the attention of the Arbitration Court which sat at Hokitika. this morning. On the bench were Mr Justice Frazer,j Mr W. Cecil Prime (Employers,’ representative) and Air A. If. ALcmteith (Workers’ representative). KOITERANGI ACCIDENT.

Rasmus Anker Aladsen (Mr J, A. Murdoch)' Ay. Koiterangi Co-op Lime Coy., Ltd; (Mr R. Twyneham), dawning a weekly payment of £3 12s for the period of incapacity from date of accident until the trial hereof. Such further compensation by way of lump sum as may be shown at the trial lier-e’of to be reasonable ; such further or other’ relief as may in the circumstances 1 be just; the costs hereof. Cijunsel for pla.iu.tiff submitted in a statement, that, when the accident occurred, the plaintiff was employed by defendant, and the accident arose out of and in the course of his employment. On October 30th., 1930, plaintiff was .employed as defendant’s manager at Koiterangi, and was caught by a revolving .shaft and sustained a broken, right arrn and broken right leg including fractures of the right .femur, fractures of the shaft of the right, ulna, and a. dislocation of the head of the right radius. As a result of the accident it was unlikely that the plaintiff would ever be able to resume his former occupation or do anything but light.' work. Plaintiff’s’average weekly earnings bad not been less than £5 8s a week. The defendant Company had admitted liability in respect of this accident, i aad bad paid, compensation amounting < to £53 for which plaintiff gave credit. ! The plaintiff and defendant had been | unable to agree upon a lump sum in I settlement of the balance of the , claim.

Counsel for the defence saitT that the defendant Company denied each and every allegation of the statement of claim'as if the same had been set out and traversed seriatim, and for a further defence, the Company said that before the issue of the writ and statement of the claim no application had been made to it by the plaintiff for any lump sum as compensation in respect of the accident, and no dispute had therefore arisen between the Company and plaintiff. Dr. B. L. Wilson, said he knew plaintiff, having attended to him personally. When he examined him on October 30th. he found that Aladsen was suffering fractures and dislocation. He described in detail the injuries. On July lltli. he had made a report oil the case in which he considerd that within three months, the state of disability should be in its final stage.

A report drawn up by Dr. H. D. Aohtud who deposed that plaintiff’s earning power would as a result he decreased by 30 per cent. A further report "by Dr. S. P. Foster also dealt with the injuries, and stated that the fore arm was injured to the extent of decreasing earning capacity by 35 per cent.

Dr. Wilson, in reply to questions by

Counsel detailed the present condition of plaintiff, who entered the box and, under the supervision of Dr. Wilson,

displayed the movements of his arms showing the difference between the injured and the’ sound arm.

I)r. Wilson said that if planmtt

were to lift a weight with the injured

arm lie would very soon tire. In view of the fact that the accident occurred thirteen months ago he would say that the disability was permanent. Plaintiff, in ten years, would certainly have more muscular power in the arm, but it would lose its ability, and might be subject, to weakness and pain. A heavy jarring upon the a-m might cause him to give up work W a while. In view of the disability at present he felt that the earning capacjy had been decreased by 40 per cent.

. Dr. Wilson then read a- statement by Dr. S. Will who examined Aladsen last July. With the exception of the arm; the remaining injuries had healed, but the arm was still disabled, and Dr. Will gave figures of the decreased earning capacity which, he considered was the outcome of the accident.

Dr. Wilson thought that the decreased’ capacity had been underrated by other doctors, and he estimated it was fully 40 per cent. Further treatment would not be of much avail. From the point of view of his previous occupation, his arm would not be useful, nor would stripping cows be within bis power. Light work would be all that he could undertake.

To Air Afonteith: My higher percentage is influenced by the state of injuries a.t present. The development of the arm with increasing time had been considered, and lie considered that the arm would become’ weaker still in 10 or 20 years. Madsen, in. the witness box, corroborated the previous evidence con-

cerning the injuries. He was a working man and did his fair share of the bard work, using a 161 b. hammer in the quarry, and assisting with the crusher, and the bagging. He bad been in this position, for about nine months. The wages were 2s an hour in til© quarry and 2s Gd an hour on the crusher, which meant £4 in a week for 42 hours. He had come out from Denmark and was assisting liis brother in addition to bis usual work, and .augmenting bis weekly wage by £1 or £1 10s, depending on the time lie bad to himself.

Tn reply to Mr Justice Frazer be said bis earnings would not be more than £5 14s 6d a week at the most.

To Air Alurdoeh, lie said the hospital

fees amounted to £B4, and He had received £53 from the Company. Ho. would not be able to return to the quarry work, nor would he be able to milk cows. He had tried this, but I could hardly keep one machine going. | Iu normal times lie often had pains in his arm at night time. His leg, however, was all right. -Mr Twyneham said that the Company’s figures showed that Aladsen drew about £3 2s Id a week on an average. Would that be right?—l have never worked it out.

Mr Justice Frazer: Did you work every week?—No. If the Company could not sell the lime, work would he stopped, while there was no work owing to very wet weather. He had been working for his brother for over a year prior to the accident, but he had not kept any account of the money he had received. ,

Counsel for the defence questioned plaintiff at length on the matter of bis earnings. Mr Twyneham: How do you mark out that you were earning £5 8s » week?—l do not know. I’m not very good at figures. Mr Twyneham: You do not know, then, how much you received from The Lime Cov.—No.

Air Twyneham : —Did you not find out before you took these proceedings. —No.

I Air Twyneham: Have you tried to da anything since the accident?—l had tried to dig drains, go as to exercise mv arm, but received no wages for it. I have also tried to use the hammer at the quarry. Air Twyneham: What are you going to do now—l do not know*. Mr Twyneham: There is no doubt that you are a' trier. Samuel John Godfrey, a farmer of Koiterangi, said he knew Aladsen before the accident and he was a good worker. Aladsen was a man who would always do his best. •At the present time there was little work in the district which he could do satisfactorily, although be was an absolute trier.

The case was adjourned until after lunch to enable Air Twyneham to acquire further particulars as to plaintiff’s earnings. A AIANAXUI CASE. INJURY TO FINGER. QUESTION OF WEEKLY EARNINGS.

James Edwin Sea lie (Mr 'l'. F. ’Brosnan) v. Midland Sawmilling (Jo. (Mr F. A. Kitchinghain). Counsel for the plaintiff submitted a statement which deposed that plaintiff was employed in the defendant company as a sawmill employee at the mill at Mananui. On or about Julie 30, 1931, he met with an injury by accident arising oat of, and in the course of his employment, and lie was disabled. Plaintiff’s middle linger of the right hand was caught in the winch and ijas serixiislv injured, and the first joint was ampuL’ited. The plaintiff had also .bat the use of the second joint of such i ■ ">'■ and he remained totally disabled from the date of the accident to Aug. 20,

anil was permanently injured. His average weekly earning:: in accordance with the Workers’ Compensation Act, were not less than £4 13s. He had been unable, to settle with defendant the amount of compensation payable in respect of the accident. Plaintiff claimed a weekly payment of £3 2s from the date of the accident to August 20; £1 as medical expenses; ►Sncli further compensation by way of lump sum as N would be shown to be reasonable ; The coses hereof and such further or other relief as in the circumstances might be just.

Counsel" for the defence admitted that plaintiff had met with an accident but denied that he was disabled as alleged in the statement of claim. He denied that plaintiff was totally disabled from working until August 20, and .hat he is permanently injured. He also denied that plaintiff’s average weekly earnings at the- time of the accident were not boss than £4 13s, but stated that a sum of £lO as compensation plus £1 medical expenses had been paid by the defendant company.

! Plaintiff, in the box, said he met with the accident on June 20, when he lost the first joint of the rniddre huger, and also the use of the second joint. In answer to questions by Mr Brosnan, plaintiff said he had been with the c ompanv for about 15 years, and had commenced work on June 1 alter the mill clos'd down in December. Tne mi If reopened some time in April or May and again re-opened on June 1. • *’ h- h -rl 'in -tractive fob offered him in April he did not know whether h uuiuu have accepted it, for, unless a man was on the spot, he would be likely to lose his job. He was discharged when the mill closed m April and started again in JuiL. Under the Award he worked 48 hours a week, and notice was always given when services | were terminated. His daily wage was j Jss 6d. The first week in June lie had j worked 5 days, the second 5 days 4 , hours, the third week 6 hours. He re- j joined the mill jn August during which • time the mill worked full time. Since August 20, 'the mill had continued to j work full time. Air Bros nail; What wgre your wages on. June I—About 17s 6d a day until the end of the first fortnight, and 15s '6d onward. 1 have received £2O from defendant as compensation. To Air F. Tracy, plaintiff said he worked when work.was available. There was no attractive work offering whn'e the mill was closed and it was not j worth while moving about. When a j man went on, he never knew how long 1 the job would last, as it depended on the orders to hand. I To Air Brosnan, plaintiff said that the Ruatapu mill was working all the time. Air Brosnan : The work depended on " die-orders, then —Yes. • .1 ' Air Alonteith : Your statement as tori

wages show two days in May. When was that?—l could, not ,say. The boss keeps :a record of that. Mr Brosnan: What is young job? I am the blacksmith. Mr Monteith : What time did the accident occur?—About Sk.a.m. Dr B. Wilson said he examined plaintiff’s finger,-'the end joint of which was amputated. The second joint had a paitial disability but was useful. To Mr Ivitchingham: The tendon on the second joint was stii'l working, but ■the disability was still there, although it was still use tul.

Mr Justice Frazer: Do you think it would incapacitate him that loiigt Yes. It was not properly healed when he returned to work, as it was not a clean wound.

Mr Ivitchingham said that evidence would be brought to show that the industry in the West Coast district had been in a bad condition, and that practically no mill had been working full time. , David Tennant, chairman of the .Sawmillers’ Accident Insurance Company, as well as of oilier timber industrial concerns, said that operations had tailed away during the last twelve months 'on account of trade. Since 1920 there had been a record output, and die industry had improved with the' opening of the Otira Tunne 1 !. \ In reply to further questions by Mr Ivitchingham, Mr Tennant said that when the industry got into this -.ad condition, some very serious reductions took place, and mills had since been carrying on only according to the orders. Previous 'to the slump the sixday week was worked tairly regularly, but at the present time it did not exist. The volume of work to-day demanded only about four-ninths of this time per week. Some mills, wbh which he was connected, were worked according to orders. One Worked about two days, while, none of the others had work’d a full week in the last few months.

Mr Brosnan: There was once a system of pooling the orders.—Yes, but if has been dropped. Mr Brosnan; If the orders h"d come in, your mills would have worked full time ?—Yes, but unfortunately we have not had it.

To Mr Brosnan, Mr Tennant said that the conditions five or six years ago were not the same as to-day. The stump in Australia to-day meant a decrease of about 40 per cent, in the industry on the West Coast.

Henry Walker Thompson, mill manager of the defendant mill, said that for the year prior to the accident, there was not a fixed week, although they would work a full week if they had the orders. Two or three days’ work would be sufficient to open the mills. Plaintiff had been given work whenever available. A man could not depend on a week’s work, as it all depended on what was offering.

To Mr Brosnan ; Since June they had had a pretty good run. It was on the cards for the midi to have a clear run through until after Christmas. Two weeks of five days were worked in' April, when the mill closed down. A man was entitled then to look for another position. Things going well, the men would wor|< 4« hours. Tracy: Was plaintiff always available ?—les. Mr Ivitchingham submitted that the case was similar to others which had been before the Court, and dealt prima.i'ii'y with the average weekly earning. He quoted at length several wellknown cases which had a similar bearing. He said that in these times it would appear that a man was fir bather off if he were to suffer a slight accident than if he were to work only when it was available.

The Court here adjourned for luncheon