TARANAKI CONCILIATION BOARD.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXIII, Issue 258, 1 November 1901, Page 2

TARANAKI CONCILIATION BOARD.

PRINTERS DISPUTE. The Taranaki Conciliation Board Bat on Thursday at the Courthouse to hear the dispute filed by the Taranaki Letterpress, Lithographers, and Machinists Union. The Board consisted of Messrs J. B. Roy (chairman), D. Berry, W. Ambury, J. 0. George, and W. McEweD.

Mr Bliick, President of the Union, | conducted the casa on behalf of the i employees, and Mr 'W. J. Penn (Tatanaki Herald) was in charge of the interests of the employers, several of whom were present, including Messrs Allsworth (Daily News), Parkinson (Hawora Star), Alexander (Egmont Settler) Buchanan (Waitara Mail), Hammerton (Inglewood Record), Andrews (Waimate Witness), Ambridge, and Hooker. Several of those cited did not appear. The Boird after being satisfied thatj the proceedings were in order, and Mr 1 Penn having admitted the due consti- j tution of the Union, Mr Black was called on to state his case. j Mr Black snd hj» was present to uphold the bye-laws of the Union, and' did not propose at that stage of the | proceedings to say anything, as he considered it was for the employers to raise objections or admit tho demands of the Union. The Chairman pointed out that so far ns tho Board was concerned there was no question of bye-laws, but of demands, and tho Union would have to show the B)ard that it hid made I demands which had not", been complied with

Mr Black said demands had been made but not met.

Mr. Penn raised a preliminary objection that there was no dispute. Every employer present was ready to prove that his man had raised no dispute but on the contrary were satisfied with existing arrangements. He mentioned that fome time back the Wellington Union hud cited some of the Taranaki employers who, however, were dismissed from the case because there was no dispute between them and their employees. He contended it was for the Union to show there was a dispute. Mr. Black relied on the bye-laws to which the employers would not agree. After further argument the Board decided that there was a dispute which it was prepared to hear. The representatives of the papers outside New Plymouth all objected to their inclusion in the case as they had no dispute with their employees who ware moreover not members of the Union. i

Mr. Penn protested that neither was there any dispute with the town employers. Iu reply to the chairman Mr. Black objected to the exclusion of any of the Taranaki employers from the award. He added that the type-setting machines were really the bone of contention.

The Board decided that as the Union was properly constituted for the Taranaki district the country papers must be included in the dispute. The matters in dispute being tbe Union bye-laws they were to.ken seriatim. Claim I.—Piece work and time work to be recognised both for machine and case work.—Agreed to. Claim 2.—Apprentice to be one to every three journeymen—no office to have more than five. Mr Penn agreed to tha maximum for an office, but ho urged that the country papers would be killed if they had to employ three journeymen to one apprentice. He considered that three apprentices should be allowed to one journeyman.

Claim 3.—Monoline operators to be compositors who have duly served their indentures.

This clause was the subject of much argument, the employers insisting that the machines could best be worked by those who were accustomed to use both hands nimbly, instead of one as in the case pf compositors, and therefore they claimed to be allowed to employ those whom they considered most capable of working the machines to the best advantage. Objection was also taken to the last six words in the clause. The retention of the clause was warmly discussed by the Union representative.

Claim 4. Preference of employment on machines to be given to existing staffs.—Agreed to. Claim 5. Wages to journeymen working on machine and fixing hours of operators at 42 per week. Tbe employers objected to less th*n 48 hours per we' k. Claim 6. Apprentices in last year of service, if employed on a machine, to rank aB efficient operators. Considerable argument took place over this claim, which, it was glinted out, was in conflict wir.h other claims.

On the question of WBges for case bands, Mr Black said the rates paid on the News were £\ 17s 6d for 48 hours per week. For extra time on Friday afternoons 2s 6d was allowed, bringing the weekly wage up to £2. For day work on the Herald, they had been on piace, at 9d per 1000 ens, and, though this das a low rate, had been able to make a fair wage. Mr Penn said bis office now paid £1 10s per week, on time.

M r Alls worth s i id that since he came to tbe News, he had slightly raised tha rate of wages. Mr Penn said the employers objected to the minimum wage of £2 15s »skeil for. On piece work he thought 9d per 1000 a fair rate, and tbat being as, £2 per week would be a fair rate for time work.

Mr Black did not think 9d a 1000 was a fair rate.

Mr Allsworth said his office paid for overtime at Is an hour.

Mr Hook r thought £2 a week a fair minimum to be fixed ; though if a man was worth it he was prepared to pay

more,

Some discussion followed on tbe rate lof pay for piece work, the Union asking for lid per 1000 ens, which the proprietors considered too much; but Mr Black siid the Union would stick 'out for that rate. Mr Parkinson pointed out that if tbe rate of lid per 1 1000 were enforced it would drive the employers to introduce machine setters, thus driving tbe men out. At clause 39, preference to Unionists, u suggestion by the employers to make it read that there ssuld be no d ; scrimination as against Unionists was accepted. At claim 40, female compositors, Mr Black urgrd that if w.mea weie employed tuey Bhould be paid tho tame rate of wages as journeymen and apprentices.

Mr Peon thought that would bs fair on piese bus not oil tirqa woik. Messrs Buchanan, Alexander, An-, draws and Hamwerton said they were willing to accept an award similar to the one given at Auckland. This the Union wou'd not agrae to, and the matter was l' ft to the Board,

, It was agreed that the week for i machinists should be 48, instead of 461 i hours as asked for by the IJnioD. I | Some discussion took place on the 1 minimum weekly wage for machißigts, i the Union demanding £2 15s for ' journeymen and £2 lOj for apprentices. ', The employers objected to this, and no ! agreement was come to. i [ At claim 44, apprentices, Mr Hooker . 1 objected to the number being fixed at - one to three journeymen, as it would i seriously affect lithographic printers.

I Is wps agreed that for lithosraphic i machines two apprentices be allowed to each.. 1 After discussion, it was agreed that wages for apprentices bs 5s a week i first yeir, 10* second, 15s third, 20j fourth, 25s fifth, and 30s sixth, and for ! overtime 6d per hour for first three years, 9d next two years, and Is for the sixth year. Mr Fenn addressed the Board briefly. He said the employers were practically willing to accept the award rei i cendy in the Canterbury country '' papers case. | Mr. Alls worth pointed out that the i staff on the News was composed of com- | petent hands as apprentice? were not i allowed to work at night, and the quesJ tion of girl labour did not affect them, i The Board intimated that its recomMmendations would probably be given > next week, and the proceedings closed.