CARETAKERS’ AWARD

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 345, 4 May 1928, Page 13

CARETAKERS’ AWARD

decision reserved Higher wages and short ®x I ..Jr were the chief demands of th, caretakers, cleaners and liftmen who petitioned for a new before Mr. Justice Fraser at the Arbitration Court this morning. jvir J Purtell. -who appeared for the union, asked for the insertion in the award of a sub-clause to prevent einnlovers from requiring caretakers to lifts in addition to their regular mules Mr. Purtell considered it unfair' to work caretakers 44 hours in lifts and then expect them to clean large buildings in the remaining four h °Tn”eases h tn W tvages -were sought as follow? Liftmen. £3 10s to £4 Is- cleanprs £4 Is to £i ° s; caretakers » I(fc also desired that caretakers living on the premises should be absolved from paying rent. It was to Ihe advantage of the employers said Mr Purtell, to have the caretaker living on the premises, as it was a safeguard against fire and thieves. Some caretakers were charged as much as £2 a week rent. The union considered that the award should provide for two weeks holiday on full the employers, Mr. S. E. Wright stated that capable men were, m practically all cases, receiving more than the award hate. It was quite fair that spare time should be utilised in .working lifts, or in any other reasonable manner tbe employer might think fit. Evidence was called to show tlvtt the interest and rates on accommodation erected for caretakers amounted to over 30s a week. It was quite easy to let the quarters at £2 a week so the owner of the building was reallv losing money when letting accommodation to the caretaker at 30s a week.

Witness stated that a caretaker’s work was by no means arduous and that, in his particular building, the caretaker worked only three hours each day. The court reserved its decision, Mr. Justice Frazer announcing that a new award would be made in due course.