ARBITRATION COURT.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIII, Issue 9110, 1 April 1908, Page 8

ARBITRATION COURT.

A postponed sitting of the Arbitraation Court was held yesterday at Wanganui. His Honour Mr Justice Sim presided,, and with iiim were Messrs S. Brown (employers’ representative ) an 3 J. A. McCullough (workers’ representative). G. .Outelli was charged with employing a, boy for more than three .months on probation and not inden- “* turing him.—After hearing defendant’s evidence the Court decided under the circumstances to inflict »■ only a nominal line cf £l. John Kendall was charged with having employed a driver orr Labour Day and not paid him Is 3d per hour overtime as provided in the award. —Defendant, for whom Mr Treadwell appeared, yaad that Oathro was in charge of thl yard, and that he (the defendant)? did not come down -on Labour Day, thinking Oathro would do as other yards did.—The Court stated that it seemed clear that Oathro was at his master’s premises on Labour Day, but the evidence did not show that he dfd any work as a driver, and, as the breach was under the drivers’ award, the information would have to be dismissed. The Wanganui Herald Company, for employing a machinist (B. Mar tis) at less than the award rate, was fined £3.—The breach was admitted, bnt it was shown to have been caused by an oversight.—The Court made the fine nominal, as the breach had been a hona fide mistake. —B. Martis, for accepting less than the award wages, was fined 10s. Charges against Donaldson (baker) and his driver for respectively giving and receiving less than the award wages, were adjourned till nest sittings. A charge against Zimmerman anti Oarkeok was withdrawn by request of the Labour Department. The Wanganui Chronicle Company was charged with employing a probationer liuotypist on piecework before he was competent to earn the minimum wage of £3 10s per week of 43 hours.—Mr Carson, for the defendants, stated that; the charge was laid under an award which did not come into operation till after the breach alleged to have been commit- . Jed.under it was committed.—The Court dismissed the case on the grounds pointed out by Mr Carson, but pointed out that an information could be laid under the old award. Purser and Son were charged with having employed more than the specified number of apprentices, viz., more than one apprentice to every three journeymen. Defendants pleaded not guilty, and stated that ' the extra boy had been employed on a permit from the Magistrate, the boy being dismissed when the permit ran-out.'—The Court held that there was no evidence to show that the youth referred to in the charge was an apprentice, he being an) underrate workman, working under a per-, mit. The case was therefore dismissed.

R. E. Hornblow, proprietor of the Mangaweka‘Settler,was charged with employing a female at type-setting contrary to the provisions of the Wellington Typographical Industrial Union of Workers’ award, which recognises only to classes of labour — journeymen and apprentices, or youths. —Mr Le Creu appeared for the Labour Department, and said the case was a friendly one to test the question of whether or not females could be employed at typesetting. In the Department’s reading of the award the word “youth” was held to mean a male worker.—The case was adjourned, at the request of theDepartment, to a Southern sitting, in order that full evidence might be called and'.the judgment of the Court obtained. Mr Hornblow agreed to the adjournment. The Court then adjourned'. On resuming at 3.15 Mr Andrew Collins pointed out that several citations on employers at Mangaweka and had been omitted from the list of cases, and applied to have them attached. —The President said the cases could be heard at Palmerston on Friday next, and fixed the hearing for that day at 10 a.m. Dickson and Sarten were charged with having employed an apprentice without giving notice to the Labour Department. The firm was represented by Mr Sarten, who stated'that the matter was due to an oversight, and the apprentice had been paid more than the award wages. The

firm had overlooked the matter of *■' giving notice to the Inspector that they had the apprentice. The President said the firm should have given notice, and a fine of £3 was inflicted. THE BAKERS’ DISPUTE. This was a hearing of the dispute between Wanganui* master bakers and the Wellington Bakers’ Union. . Mr G. Caiman appeared for the master bakers, and Mr W. H. Westbrooke, representative of the ‘Wellington Bakers’ Union, conducted the case for the Unon. Mr Caiman stated that at present the rate of wages was as follows : £3 per week to the foreman. £2 10s a week to the second man, and £2 5s a week for the “third iman. The master bakers of this town had met the Conciliation Board, and had discussed the matter of raising the

wages, but were quite of the opinion that the wages, now being paid were quite sufficient. An alteration in the hours for starting work should be considered. Instead of 4 a.m. it should be 3 a.m., and on Saturday 2 a.m., and so enable the carriers to get away with the bread in a more convenient time.

Mr W. S. Dustin stated that the only difference in of living to-day compared with five years ago was the price of meat. As regards apprentices to the bakery trade, there was no • encouragement, for them here. They procured tradesmen from the large towns when required. Four o’clock in the morning was too late to bake, as the bread was distrbuted over a large area. Before the award "came into force he used to bake at 3 o’clock in the morning. Witness also stated that it had been known for women to go into the bakehouse to assist the manufacturer of bread, and this should not be allowed. To Mr Westbrooke: Meat, potatoes, bread, and boots and shoes were considerably dearer now than they were five years ago, and these were the principal commodities to enable a man to live.

Mr Westbrooke called the following witnesses: — G. W. Bnrmester, a baker, working at the Southern Cross Biscuit Factory, said he was foreman, earning £3 and an allowance of bread. He did not think the carts starting on their rounds an hour early made any difference to the time they took doing their rounds. When starting the baking ho generally had the oven cleared by 4 a.m.

Mr Caiman asked the witness if he did not think the lately introduced coupon*, system did not delay the ■carts.

Witness said he thought it might. Tne .carters would not take the, benefit of an early start. R. Jf. Young, foreman baker for Mr T. Mcßwau, ssnd he earned .£8 a week and bread. He started work five days a week at 3 o’clock. The first batch of bread generally came out absub 8 o’clock. To Mr Caiman: Admitted receiving a letter from the Secretary of the Master Bakers, asking the operators to meet them, but they came the conclusion they were not in a position to have a meeting. Was quite satisfied with the conditions. The reason for starting early was because there were only three carts, and one cart absorbed the batch. There were - not sufficient carts to meet the requirements. At the conclusion of the evidence His Honour suggested the disputers should hold a conference immediately and try to come to terms.