RIVAL UNIONS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXV, Issue 16485, 26 February 1914, Page 8

RIVAL UNIONS.

THE,CARPENTERING TRADE. SERIOUS DISPUTE. Christchurch has the distinction, unique in New Zealand, of possessing two trade unions of carpenters and joiners, and at the present time an inter-union dispute of a serious nature concerning conditions of work, Conciliation Council proceedings and so on is occupying the attention of both bodies. The Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners is a world-wide organisation, having branches in all parts, while the Canterbury Carpenters' Union is a local body formed some twenty-five years ago. This latter body differs from the other Union inasmuch as it is purely a trade Union, while the Amalgamated Society combines the operations of a trade Union and a Friendly Society. In conversation last evening with Messrs H. R. Rusbridge and F. Eldridge, two prominent members of the Canterbury Carpenters' Union, a reporter was told 'that in the past harmony had prevailed between the two. It had been the custom in the trade, on the expiration of an award, for a joint committee of the two bodies to draft fresh proposals. These proposals were then presented for ratification ' or amendment to a combined meeting of the Unions. On the present occasion the usual procedure nad been hampered and complicated by the fact that some time ago a conference of seven members of the Amalgamated Society of .Carpenters and Joiners agreed with a conference of building trade contractors at Wanganui concerning proposals for a dominion award. This agreement was made into an award at Dunedin with some minor alterations. When the decisions of the joint committee in Christchurch were .übmittcd to the meeting, of the' two unions, a member of the Amalgamated Society was in the chair, and it was alleged ho refused to take a number of amendments to the schedule moved by members of the Canterbury Carpenters' UnioUj the meeting consequently breaking up in disorder. As the Canterbury Carpenters'' Union objected to a dominion award for what it considered adequate reasons, it was , decided that each society should proceed on independent lines. Last week the Amalgamated Union met the employers at the Conciliation Council and last, evening a special meeting of the Canterbury Carpenters' Union was held to receive the report of the Hon John Ban-, who represented the union in the dispute, it having been cited by the Amalgamated Society. There was a good attendance of members. at the meeting, and Mr F. J. Prouting presided. Mr F. Eldridge, secretary of the Union, explained the proceedings that had led up to the present development. In accordance with instructions, he had protested against the drafting of proposals for a dominion awara without the Canterbury Carpenter's' Union, being consulted. After discussion, the Carpenters' Union had drafted a set of proposals and presented' them to the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners. Later on he had received a letter from tho. Executive Board- of the Amalgamated Society, advising tho Union to proceed with an award themselves. They decided to do so, but made no attempt to cite the Amalgamated Society. The Amalgamated Society had also gone for an award, but they had cited the Canterbury Carpenters. . , ~-,■•'

The Hon J. Barr then presented his report, which included the following:—■ "The fact of one Union of workers being cited as a party,to a dispute by another Union of workers is, I believe, without precedent; at. least, I Know of no .case since- the- Industrial Con-t ciliation and Arbitration Act came into force., This gives the present case a peculiar interest; together' with the fact .that both Unions cited the employers and both Unions submitted conditions of labour. The nature of our present position makes it necessary, in my opinion, ■ that -1 should review what had taken ■ place prior to your conditious of' labour being submitted .-. -to . ■; the % . employers. I would .remind you that as in; the past the drafted by the joint committee were submitted and were substantially amended, showing that the members present took an . active interest in every clause submitted. The custom has been to submit 'the conditions agreed to. at such a meeting to the employers. On this occasion, the officials of the Amalgamated Society refused to do, so and determined to adopt conditions arrived at in Dunedin and at Wanganui, and which were with one principal exception inferior to the conditions "drawn up by the joint meeting of members of the two Unions. "As to the differences in the'conditions those I will set out in my review of what took place at the Conciliation Council held on t Wednesday, February 1. As this Union was cited as a party, Mr Eldridgo and myself appeared.as instructed on your behalf, and after some time spent in explaining to the Commissioner the peculiarity of the position it was decided by. all parties that the representatives of the two Unions should . sit' together with the object of arriving at some common understanding and that the employers' representatives should adjourn until 2.30 p.m. A working arrangement was arrived at on most points. The arrangement was particularly satisfactory to your representatives as improvements were inserted from your Union's conditions. I regret, however, that one of the most important amendments that appeared on the Amalgamated's list was strenuously opposed by them when it came to be discussed with the employers. The difficulty of the two Union's having been apparently got over the Council resumed in the afternoon, the conditions under consideration being those of the Amalgamated Society. : . The report then went on to deal in extended'detail with the various clauses agreed to at the Conciliation Council and the position taken up by Mr Barr in opposition to some clauses agreed to "by the representatives of the Amalgamated Society, the more important of which are as follows: u Clause 10, Apprentice Clause.— This clause submitted by the Amalgamated was the clause of the Dunedin Award. Two amendments were made to this clause, the first being that an employer may, employ an apprentice Who has one journeyman, but he must have six journeymen before he can employ a second apprentice, and so on, one to every complete three after the first-three. Tho second amendment was the insertion of tho following:— ' For the purpose of determining the proportion of apprentices to journeymen, in taking any new apprentice the calculation shall be based on a twothirds full-time employment of journeymen employed during the previous six months, until a shop has_ four apprentices, and then the proportion of apprentices to journeymen shall be calculated on a two-thirds full-time employment of journeymen for the previous twelve months.' " Clause 12, Preference Clause.—Tins was a most vital clause to your .Union for if it had been passed as submitted by the Amalgamated Society it would have meant tho end of your Union as only the Union submitting the conditions was specified. It was, however, amended by inserting the names of both Unions and wherever necessary, making references to the two Unions instead of the one, so that the position is as it has been since the first award which is.longer than most of you can remember. " Now I come to Clause 11, the Un-der-rate Workers' Clause, which I have left to. the last as I want you to beax

in mind the probable effect of this clause. In my opinion the. provision contained in this clause means a decided stepping backward and will tend to a large extent to nullify the effect of the increase in wages. This clause as submitted: by your Union and as you have been working under for very many years, provided that 'Any worker who lias been not less than five years at the trade and who is not capable of earning the minimum wage by reason of old age, infirmity, or imperfect training, may be paid such wages as may be agreed upon between such worker and the secrethe Joint Committee and the president of' the Canterbury Builders' and, Contractors' Association.': It also provided for a minimum rate. In the Amalgamated Society's proposals the five years qualification is struck put, and now ' Any worker who considers himself incapable of earning the_ minimum wage,' may make application to the Inspector of Factories to have a rate fixed, which means, I submit, that any man who can prove that he has spent any time as a carpenter who has done carpentry work and has received payment for such work as a carpenter is entitled _to a permit. Furthermore the abolition of the minimum wage for underrate workers makes it a great menace to your trade. " I cannot refrain from reporting the following remarkable occurrence in connection with this clause. The Society submitted the following amongst their - typewritten amendments :—•' Under-rate workers, add new section G. —No permit shall be granted for a lower rate of wages than,9s per days.' When the representatives of the two bodies were in conference this was agreed to, but when subsequently submitted to the full Council, the Society representatives opposed it, with one exception. He strenuously supported it, but their actual leader, ,Mr Ivor "Hazell as strenuously opposed it, with the ultimate result that the supporter of a minimum in their ranks .had to capitulate; The employers, it seemed to me, recognised that t>iis was the. clause thatwas to enable them to make, good the increase in wages granted, and admitted that their instructions were to stick hard and fast to the clause as worded. . They know the value of it to the employers. .' I know, the evil of it to the workers in your trade, but a* tho employers had a strong ally in Mr Ivor Hazell, and as his members were forced. to follow him. the clause was carried, and we will have to oppose it at the Court of Arbitration. • :" Taken as a whole, Wednesday's fight was a fight to.prevent the workers in your industry from being dragged backward. The amendments to the conditions submitted by the Amalgamated show that we were successful.' Our only regret is'that we could not improve that greatest of all blots submitted by the Amalgamated Society, namely, the under-rate workers' clcse." • . ... The chairman and Messsrs H. R. Rus"bridge, G. Wliyte, Yates and Dolmer. took ■ part in the subsequent discussion, the speakers expressing indignation ,at the attitude jof the Amalgamated. Society in the matter, and satisfaction at the able manner in which Mr Barr had looked after the Union's interests.' ,".'•".,'-" : ' , '-■'■