CONCILIATION BOARD.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIII, Issue 9129, 25 April 1908, Page 7

CONCILIATION BOARD.

SITTING AT MASTERTON. GENERAL LABOURERS’ UNION CLAIMS. The Conciliation Board sat in Masterton on Wednesday to take evidence in the claims filed by the General Labourers’ Union. Messrs p. J. Olßegau (chairman), A. H. Cooper, A. Collins, H. Bedford, and H. Innisrcomposed the Board. Mr Mi J. Reardon, secretary of the Wellington Union, and Mr T. Morton, secretary of the Masterton Union, appeared for the employees. Mr W. M. Easthope/ secretary of the Wairarapa Employers’ Association, announced the decision arrived a t by the leceut conference of employers not to be represented at the Board, preferring to. have the matter settled by the Arbitration Court. The Chairman remarked upon the inconsistent action of the employers ■who, no doubt, professed to desire to abide £ by the law, and yet wished to avoid the lawful course open. As they had set their face against an amicable conference, the Board would proceed to call witnesses attending on subpoena. Mr J. M. Ooradine, builder and Mayor of Masterton, the first witness, said he had read the claims. Could not give an approximate estimate of the number of employees employed on the Borough staff. The hours worked were 46 hours per week, the wages being from Bs, 9s to 10s per day. Permanent hands were paid by the week, the rc»t for work done. No tunnel work was done, nor did the demands regarding meat apply to the Council. Permanent hands were paid for holidays. The claims for weekly payments were not convenient for the Borough Council. No concession was at present allowed employees for mileage when the work was some distance away from the centre of the town. The provisions of the building award had been extended by private employers to labourers working on buildings. The -Borough found the tools for workmen. Touching the preference clause witness did not think the clause was practicable in Masterton. Mr Collins:-.Why is it not practical ‘ it . Mr Ooradine: Because the workers are not sufficiently organised. It was a matter for the unions themselves mostly. Mr Collins: Have you heard of anv complaints from other trades against the preference clause? Mr Ooradine : No, hut I do not hear everything. Mr Collins : No, or you would not make the statement you have made. I have heard of no complaints. Mr Ooradine replied warmly that it did not follow that because he did not hear complaints there were none, and he did not desire Mr Collins to father a statement to that effect on him (witness). . Mr Ooradine was then examined by Mr Reardon. He said the men’s wages last winter averaged from 35s to 30s per week, last winter being a very bad winter. "Witness did not think men could live on from 25s to 30s per week. The Borough’s objection to payment weekly was on the score of extra expense. Did not think the suburban clause would operate much against the Borough. Regarding preference, witness had no experience of the strength of the union. The reason witness had said the workers were not organised was because his firm were large employers of labour and no applications were received as specially - from union «meu, and no difference was made between unionists and nonunionists. Witness had no objection to the sanitary clause. Had objection to the overtime clause because witness did not encourage overtime privately and the Borough did not have mncli overtime. Witness did regard the stone-crusher as somewhat detrimental to the health of those employed upon it. The Council had not, however/ made any extra payment on that accounht. The Chairman asked Mr Coradine how the cost of living affected Masterton.

Witness replied that a five or sixroomed house cost from 12s to 16s per week. Firewood was 27s per cord. Could not say what the price of coal was. A. Haughey, plasterer, employing from fonr to five hands, said his men worked 47 hours per week, the wage being Is per hour. Witness had no objection to offer to the claims, remarking “anything can be made practicable.’’ Witness did not resort much to overtime, and already gave the holidays now asked. On country jobs la per day more was generally paid. Witness had paid his men’s fares by train or provided a vehicle when his contracts were out of town. Did not object to preference but could not see how it would operate very successfully with a shifting population such as labourers. . . By Mr Reardon : The cost of living had gone up of late, what exact percentage witness could not say. The time had arrived when the wages should go up in the ratio of the increased cost of living. M. Kerins, road contractor, said 48 hours was the time per week worked by his men. Eight, nine, and ten shillings per day was paid by witness, nine shillings being the general rate, pay being calculated by the hour. The only clause witness took exception to was the preference clause, as he considered employers should have unrestricted choice. Mr Collins; Supposing there are three hundred labourers, and two hundred are now unionists. If preference is given the other hundred must join the union. Where is the restriction then? Witness replied that he supposed t he would be bound by it.

By Mr Reardon ;',Gave his hammer and drill men Is per day extra. The bringing up of wages to an even standard assisted employers in framing their contract prices, and it was, he admitted, fair to the who brought about this state of affairs, that they should receive preference.

J. Carmody, contractor, gave evidence very similar to that of the previous witnesses. He did not believe in preference. He allowed his employees the option of holidays. By Mr Reardon. It was not customary to make extra allowance in ®ay to men working in wet places. T. Moss, farmer, a member of the Eketahuna County Council, said the Council paid 8s and 9s, according to the class of work for wet and dry weather. Four holidays in the year were paid for. An allowance of £2 per year for tools was made. Casual men received the same rate of pay as permanent, but the former found their own tools. Regarding the

claims, the conditions were so different in such a large industrial district. The County preferred to look after its own men and let the Board or Court deal with the towns. The Council had now a good class of men, and it was somewhat irritating to be drawn into a dispute in which they were not really concerned. Witness was in favour of preference, hut not compulsory. He mentioned that he had been a unionist (a carpenter) since he was twenty, and had always thought it better to have voluntary preference." By Mr Reardon: Had never employed labour affected by the Court or Board. Had only had experience of what these tribunals had done through reading the newspapers. Witness admitted he was the author of the resolution passed at the conference of local'body representatives, to the effect -that the Board had acted injuriously to“the best interests of the trade of the country farmers “had not yet been affected by the Court. The recent rise in butter was not due to the operations of the Board. The London market affected the price to some extent. The : same applied to cheese. The price of mutton was not affected by awards, nor beef either. The Chairman here interposed that the sum total of the matter was that in a moment of weakness Mr Moss had given expression to sentiments that had better have been _ left unsaid. and it was now established that Mr Reardon had proved his case to the opposite. He asked that .tins line of examination cease, and the claims only he discussed. H. Drake, labourer, employed privately and also in the .Government ballast pit, said he had received wages varying from Is per hour paid by the Borough, to 7s per day paid by private employees. Witness said that it was difficult to make both ends meet on the present wages. Last winter his wages had averaged from 29s to 80s per week. Boots and clothing were an expensive item on account of the great wear and tear. . No extra wage for overtime was paid. preferred to be paid weekly for his work. No allowance had been made to witness for travelling to and from work. Mr Reardon: What did the “Liberal” Government allow you in this respect? Witness; We had occasionally to he travelling three hours per day in our own time to and from a job, and the pay was 7s per day, and if a workman was a quarter ,of an hour late he was docked for it. Mr Reardon: A fine liberal Gov- ” eminent! Witness, continuing, Tsaid the claims as framed by the Union were in his opinion very reasonable. Witness had never been paid for holidays, nor extra for overtime, [and generally had to walk to work, no matter how far away, in his own time. Witness thought the unionists should have preference. The Union here was fairly strong. Regarding the cost of living, house rents and commodities were going up continually. Witness detailed the prices *of various items. He had been twenty-five years in the district.

By Mr Collins; Ic was three years ago since witness had received 7s per day from the Government in the ballast pit, and he could not say what was being paid now. James Kennedy, scaffolder, said scaffolders as a rule received 3d per hour more than the-general labourer. The reason the Union asked more for concrete work was because it was harder, and more severe on clothes. Little provision was as a rule made by employers. The Board here adjourned till 2.30 p.m. Thomas Gadsby, contractor, of Taueru, saidjie employed up to 14 men on occasions, paying 9s a day for 48 hours per week, and finding all tools. Only paid for holidays when worked. Witness considered more than ordinary wage should be paid for blasting work, and he was in favour of preference to Unionists. By Mr Reardon : Was satisfied the time had arrived when wages paid to labourers should be increased. J. S. McLean, a Borough labourer, said that during the last twelve months he had lost about a day a week through wet weather. He had had to make sacrifices through inadequate pay. David Knowles, a casual labourer, employed by the Borough Council, considered that extra pay should be given to asphalters and men on the scone-crusher, as the former work was very rough on clothes and the latter injurious to health. Kerbing and channelling, requiring a certain degree of skill, should also be better paid for than general work. Witness had worked four miles out of town on the stone-crusher, and had to go to and from work by his own means and in'his own time. The workers were organised in Masterton, the majority being Unionists. Had received nothing extra for scaffolding work in ,'New Zealand, whereas at Home it was always recognised as a dangerous work, and was better paid in consequence. He contended Unionists were entitled to preference, as it was they who were instrumental in raising and maintaining the standard of work and wages. ■J. Elder, builder, an employer, offered no objections to any of the claims in general, bnt was not wholly in favour of the preferepce clause.

Thomas Lee, labourer, said he had usually received Is per hour, at present he was receiving Is 3d. Last winter witness averaged insufficient wages to make ends meet, and had been summoned to pay his debts. Concrete work should he better paid for than pick and shovel work. By the Chairman: Even without broken time it would be difficult to make ends meet.

F. Lambourne, general labourer, in the Borough employ, said he had had wide experience of the work embodied in the claims. The increased rate asked for asphalting was amply justified, through the wear and tear on clothes. The same applied to concrete work. The Board then adjourned to Napier.