ARBITRATION COURT

Hokitika Guardian, 26 November 1932, Page 5

ARBITRATION COURT

30 PER CENT CUT

PRIVATE HOTEL WAGES.

(Per Press Association — Copyright.)

WELLINGTON, November 25

An application was mad© to the Arbitration Court to-day by the New Zealand Private Hotel Workers’ Union to fix wages for -female workers. This is .the first case of its kind under the amendment of the 1.0. and A. Act of 1932. In th© case of male workers, both parties must agree before the matter can be taken to the Arbitration Court.

Mr Jas. Roberts appeared for the employees. He pointed out that the Court had'the power to fix the wages for the female employees,, but not their conditions. He contended that many of the private hotelkeeper® were willing to come to an agreement, but their Association opposed any agreement. Mr Roberts pointed out that the benefits under the old Award regarding holidays, laundry, etc. were lost to workers, and he asked the Court to fix a higher rate thfin under the old award.

Mr W. J. Mountjoy,, for the. employers, quoted sixteen industries as showing the average earnings of women workers engaged therein at £1 19s 61-d per week, and said that the private hotel' employe*®, allowing for their board and lodging, .were getting £2 16s 3d. The industry could not pay those rates under the existing conditions. He submitted that reduction of one-third should be mad© in wages. He quoted from declarations made by twenty-five private hotel keepers to show that from 1927 to 1932, in one case, the tariff was reduced 19.4 per cent., and the guests from 7,004 to 4,'847, the gross takings from £6,064 to £3,189, and that a profit of £714 was made in 1927 and a loss of £396 in 1932. The staffs and 1 wages >" had dropped in proportion; but nevertheless, he said, reductions in the weekly wage must be made to carry on. He proposed to submit the 25 statements made on declaration a® avidence.

Mr Roberts objected to this, saying that the evidence should be given from the witness box, and should be subject to cross-examination. Mr Justice Frazer said that the Court had power to accept declarations, which would be considered for what they were worth. • The court had power to fix wages with or without board and lodging.

The court’s decision was reserved