CONCILIATION COUNCIL.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 242, 12 April 1912, Page 7

CONCILIATION COUNCIL.

! SITTING AT NEW PLYMOUTH. j LABORERS' DISPUTE. J | The Conciliation Council sat at New j ' Plymouth yesterday morning, in the bor- , I ougli council chambers, to hear the dis-1 pute between the New Plymouth Gener- j *1 Laborers' Union and the New Ply- j mouth Employers' Association. Mr. T. I Harle Giles, Conciliation Commissioner | for the Northern and Taranaki Industrial District, presided, and Mr. Grenfell, assistant secretary of the Employers' Association, Wellington, appeared for the employers. The union was not represented. The assessors were: for the union, Messrs M. J. Reardon and E. Kennedy, of Wellington, and G. E. Roper, of New Plymouth; and for the employers, Messrs W. F. Brooking, Jas. Clarke, and F. Grayling, all of New Plymouth.

In opening the proceedings the Commissioner explained that it was a new dispute, a new union making an application for a new award, and, that being so, the court would have to follow the lines laid down to meet the procedure. Where application was made for a new award, a basis was taken from recent awards that had been made in other parts of the Dominion, and, as far as possible, it was advisable to take awards that in a measure meet with conditions that would apply in this particular district. After receiving the assurance of the assessors that they were there with power to act, Mr. Giles said that they should meet in the spirit of conciliation. They should be out for a settlement, with the earnest desire to come, if pdssible, to a mutual understanding. In arriving at an agreement he did not like the idea of picking something out 'of one award and something out of another. It would greatly simplify matters if the union would say, with the employers' approval, "we are prepared to accept such and such an award."

At the outset Mr. Grenfell 'objected that it was it most unusual proceeding for a union not to be represented by an agent or an advocate.

The Commissioner ruled that it was a matter which was invariably left to the discretion of the parties to the dispute.

APPLICATIONS FOR EXEMPTION. On behalf of the employers, Mr. Grenfell then made application that the following parties cited should be struck out: Henry Brown and Co., New Plymouth Sash and Door Factory, New Plymouth Harbor Board, New Plymouth Borough Council, New Plymouth Gas Company, New Zealand Express Company, the Taranaki Petroleum Company, the Taranaki County Council, and the Taranaki Producers' Freezing Works Co. In regard to Henry Brown and Co. and the New Plymouth Sash and Door Co., Mr. Grenfell said that if they were to be attached to any award it should be to the Timber Workers' award, not to the present dispute. Referring to the Harbour Board, he said that the grounds for exemption were that it employed a variety of workers; was operating in the interests of the general public; was in no way in competition with other works; and was not really engaged in any industry. The same remarks applied to the Borough Council and the Gas Co. The New Zealand Express Company did not employ labor. Mr. Roper: Not even casual labor?

Mr. Grenfell: They may casually. Continuing, he urged that in the case of the Petroleum Co. the men were being well treated, as they were earning up to £3 17s per week.

To the union assessors: The rate of pay was not less than Is per hour. An assessor: That means that to earn £3 17s they have to work 77 hours!

Exemption was claimed for the county council, continued Mr. Grenfell, owing to the fact that the work' carried out by that body was for the safety and convenience of the public. , Referring to the Producers' Freezing Works Co. he stated that its employees were not laborers in the ordinary sense of the word. If any. they should be attached to the freezers' award.

Consideration of the applications was deferred till a later stage. Opportunity was taken by the union assessors to urge that several of the local bodies re : ferred to had had the chance of coming to separate agreements with the union, but had failed to' do so.

The court sat all day, and, after an exhaustive discussion, adjourned until this morning.

THE MEN'S DEMANDS. The demands of the union stipulate that the hours worked shall be 47 each week, at the following rates of wages:— Tunnel work: All workers in tunnels, or workers in foul air, Is 6d per hour; all workers sinking shafts over six feet deep in connection with tunnels, Is Gd per hour. Road-forming and metalling, concrete workers, bricklayers' laborers, quarrymen, drainage and sewerage workers, scaffolders, and all workers working in wet places, Is 4y 2 d per hour. General laborers: Laborers employed on work not hereinbefore mentioned shall be paid at the rate of Is 3d per hour. Provision is also made for overtime, hours of commencing work, holidays, suburban and country works, workmen unable to earn the minimum wage, and preference to unionists. THE COUNTER PROPOSALS.

The employers, in their counter proposals, set down the number of hours to be worked as 48, to be fixed by the'employer to suit his own particular business. The minimum wages are stipulated as follow: Tunnel work, tunnel men and timber men, 10s per shift; all others employed underground, 9s per shift. Quarry work: Powder men, hammer and drill men, and jumper men, Is Id per hour; jail ©ther workers engaged JB quarry work, Is per hour. Laborers employed in connection with the erection, alteration, or demolition of any building, or in excavating or preparing ground for the same, shall be paid not less than la per hour; laborers engaged in the construction of scaffolds sh'allfor the time they are employed on such work, be paid not less than Is iy 3 d per hour. General work: Laborers employed in concrete work, pick and .shovel work, sewer work, kerbing and channelling work, laying and cleaning drains, and asphalt and tar work, Is per hour. There is no mention of preference, but under the heading of "discrimination" the employers ask that where members of the union and nonmembers are employed together they shall work together in harmony, and that there shall be no discrimination between members and non-members. In the event of a strike the employers urge that the award should be nullified.