PAINTERS’ DISPUTE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 17280, 22 September 1916, Page 3

PAINTERS’ DISPUTE.

CASE BEFORE ARBITRATION - COURT.

„ JUDGMENT RESERVED

The Christchurch sittings of the Arbitration Court wore resumed in the Provincial Council Chambers yesterday, his Honor Mr Justice Stringer, president, presiding. With him were Mr AY. Scott (for the employers) and Mr J. A. M’Cullough (for the-employees). The Christchurch Painters’ Industrial Union of Workers applied for an award, having regard to certain amendments on the' regulations prevailing under tli e old award against the Christchurch ;, Ma.stei" Painters’. Association. Mr H. Hunter appeared on behalf of the union, and Mr F. Cooper represented tho, employers. Mr -A. E. Kirk applied for exemption on behalf of the firms of. Messrs March and Co., and -the Christchurch Cleaning Company. * • Tho president asked for the grounds of exemption. Mr Kirk replied that the firms had been included on the grounds that they did oiling, distempering and whitewashing. Mr Kirk stated that the firms desired to state that they did not do any of the work referred to. Mr fHunter said lie- would accept Mr Kirk’s assurance. The president granted the applications. Air Hunter, in applying .for an award, said that at the Conciliation Council •proceedings a settlement had been practically completed on all. points except wages, but that owing to one of the employers’ assessors dissenting from the union’s claim for the minimum wage for jouiTieymen to be 1 s fid per hour—the two other ■•assessors being agreeable—the whole of the proposals were referred to the Court. Mr Hunter set out the statement of 'claim, and made reference to and emphasised major points of the dispute. He mentioned • that the Christchurch painters had for the past three years and nine months been working under an award "* of the Court. That award prescribed a minimum of Is 4|d per hour for 4 journeymen painters. The union now ‘asked for an advance of lid per hour, making tho minimum Is 6d per hour-. Mr Hunter > referred to the abnormal conditions which prevailed in regard to the cost of living. ’ Ho claimed that even if the Court granted the claim'of Is Gd per hour,it was contended by the union that, owing to the decreased purchasing power of the sovereign, tho employees would-be still 10 per cent worse off than formerly.. On a proper proportional basis, men who were paid ].s 4}d per hour in 1913 should now receive Is 7sd per hour. Mr Hunter said* that at a conference held prior to the dispute being filed the representatives of tho Master Painters’ Association had offered a war bonus of 10 per cent, but, as the association represented less than one-third of the employers, and the union was of opinion that quite a large number of the employers "were prepared to pay the increase in wages as asked, instead of a war bonus, and were also of opinion that tho war tjonus, as offeree! by the association, would-not be binding on tho other employers until ratified by the Court, the offer was declined, and a dispute was filed. Mr Hunter referred to the state of tho trade-and work, to the scarcity of men and to *the fact that wages had been raised in other trades. The master painters of Wellington had already granted the increase asked for, and the increase had been embodied in a- recommendation of the Couiicil of, Conciliation to take effect from June 1 last. The Masterton master painters had also agreed to increase the wages to Is Gd per hour! Tho work done by the paintprs of ’Christchurch was of higher standard than that in other centres, particularly in the North Island. Painters were entitled to a higher rate of pay than stonemasons, plumbers, carpenters and bricklayers, all of whom received Is Gd per hour or more. Painters had to provide themselves with tools at their own expense, costing anything up to £5, according to whether a .man were a painter, glazier, paperhanger or a signwriter. Air Cooper said that the trade had “been considerably affected by the war. Tho cost of materials 'was now very much higher. If on top of that,an increase wore given in wages, the portion would become difficult. People were economising, and though labour might be difficult, to obtain, that was dub to men enlisting. Were conditions normal there would ibe H surplus of workers. In regard to the-unhealthy aspect, lie had looked into statistics, and found that among painters the total deaths f>-<m «!! ■ : ■.'•as thi.wv-

five. He'calculated that there were about 3000 painters in New Zealand, so that if that were accepted the proportion of deaths was of average nature, and painting, therefore, could not be said to bo more unhealthy than any other occupation. The President remarked that he rid not think the point was material. Mr Hunter, ho thought, would not contend seriously that load poisoning 1 ad increased; indeed, it was clear that under improved conditions the trouble was becoming minimised. The painting trade was not more unhealthy, probably. than many others. ‘ Mr Cooper, continuing, denied that any of the employers’ assessors had agreed to Is 6d per hour being the minimum wage for journeymen.' In regard to the war; bonus,, the employers were under the impression that the war. bonus had been made mandatory by. the Court. It was the union o hat had turned down the proposal. He

thought it had been a wise course, ns had it been accepted the employees’ earning power would have, been lessened. Mr Cooper, in closing his address, contended that the employers could not increase wages. . The Court reserved its decision.