FREEZING INDUSTRY.

Taranaki Daily News, 2 November 1921, Page 5

FREEZING INDUSTRY.

DISPUTE BEFORE THE COURT. COMPLAINT AT DELAY. BONUS MAY BE WITHHELD. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Nov. 1. During the resumed hearing of the freezing works dispute in the Arbitration Court the employers complained of the Union’s attitude in causing delay. Every North Island works should open in the next two or three weeks, but they could not open the season under the present rates of pay. If the Union officials did not agree to the elimination of unnecessary hearings the companies would withhold the bonus, payment of which should have ceased on August 31 and start operations on the basis of the 1919 award. Union representatives denied that they were delaying proceedings. Mr. Justice Frazer said that the Court would feel more satisfied if it heard evidence in Canterbury before making the North Island award. That would only make the difference of a week or two. The temporary withholding of the bonus was a matter for the employers, but it might only create friction. The hearing then proceeded. CASE FOR THE EMPLOYERS. RISE IN WAGES REVIEWED. HEAVY COST OF LABOR. Wellington. Last Night. At the hearing of the freezing works dispute in the Arbitration Court, Mr. Cookson (the employers’ representative) detailed the employers’ ease at lengthHe eaid that prior to the war companies and employees operated under individual awards or agreements, the employees being divided into six groups. There had been no serious friction, excepting the slaughtermen’s strike in 1913. The custom of renewing agreements continued till 1916, when it was agreed that one award or agreement should cover the whole freezing works and related trades, the employees on one side and the companies on the other. The proposals now advanced by the employers provided for practically uniform awards, at any rate through the North Island. This was an argument in favor of a single hearing for the whole dispute. A settlement was urgently necessary to avoid loss, which was inevitable ‘if the works could not. handle the stock immediately it was ready for the market. Mr. Cookson reviewed the rise in wages since 1916. The 1919 agreement was entered into at the height of the season when it would nave been disastrous to allow the works to stop and a bonus was granted in February, 1920, at the height of the season. and further concessions at the end of 1920 made the addition to 1919 rates 25 per cent, for hourly and weeklyworkers and 20 per ceiit for pieceworkers. The employers’ new proposals adopted the conditions in force prior to April, 1919, while the wages in nearly every ease were those prescribed in the 1919 agreement. Mr. Cookson pointed out that wages between 1914 and 1921 increased 87.5 per cent, compared with a 78.97 increase in the cost of living. While the nominal wages increased 87 per cent the actual costs of labor to perform a given amount of work increased a hundred per cent. It was proposed that the new award should cover only the coming season. • [Evidence was given in support of the employers’ proposals that, the 1919 agreement regarding wages and that stricter working conditions be reverted to. Evidence was also heard in regard to the high prices ruling for agricultural implements and other factors in labor and produce farmers have to face. It was stated that manure had increased in price about 75 per cent, and implements about 100 per cent. One former witness estimated that fanners last year paid out £600,000 for shearing and £1,200.000 for freezing. He quoted figures showing how prices for fat stock had altered. He attributed the present position to higli work’ng chargee, labor costs and prices for woo 1