COVERT SNEERS

Hokitika Guardian, 7 April 1932, Page 5

COVERT SNEERS

FROM EMPLOYERS

A“BREEZE” IN THE COURT.

(By Telegraph—Per Press Assoeiation)

WELLINGTON, April 6. A remark made in the Arbitration Court by Mr W. J. Mountjoy, of the Wellington Employers’ Asociation, who was representing the Wellington Master Butchers, called forth comment to-day from His Honour. Mr Justice Frazer. The Court was hearing an applica-

tion for an interpretation of the Wellington Butchers’ Award. Mr Mountjoy pointed put that, during the week under consideration the men had had a break of three full days from work, and had received full pay. Notwithstanding that, the Union considered that the men ishould be paid overtime for work that, they had done on the usual half-holiday. “Surely this is riding the awards to death?” he concluded. “The question is asked is it any wonder that the employers have lost sympathy with the Arbitration Court awards?”

“I don’t know whether they have or not,” remarked His Honour. “I don’t like either side having these eov* en sneers at the Court and its award,”

Mr Mountjoy said that he had not intended to cast any reflection on the Court. What was meant was the action of Uniops jn asking for things they thought they could get out of the awnrds,

His Honour: “Well, we will regard it as cut out. Supposing the Union is asking for something not really intended, if the Award reads that way, well the Court can’t help it!” Mr Mountjoy agreed with His Honour that, in many cases, the parties to awards were themselves responsible for what they contained. His Honour: “I think more than half of the “bloomers” made in the awards are made in the Conciliation Council.”

Mr A. W. Croskey (for the union): “I don’t agree that this is a bloomer!” ..... .

His Honour: “Well, something not intended.” . .

Mr Croskey proceeded to explain why the phrase in question was included in the award. He added: “I don’t want your Honous to think we are trying to get something out of the award that is not intended.” “Possibly, neither side realised what the ful moaning of this was, where there were two full holidays in one week,” suggested His Honour. Mr Croskey: “I aril very pleased in these times when the Arbitration Court is getting “socks nH over the country,” that your Honour objects to such’ statements. 1 would say you are.” “1 hope 1‘ tun,” observed His Honour “quite within my rights.” Mr Mountjoy (to Mr Croskey): “We say that you are riding award** to death, not the Court.” ■ Mr Croskey: “I object to that'/ j statement! The point is: Are we., "/ right or wrong?” j There wag no further discussion on the subject.