MEETING OF SHEEPOWNERS.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10115, 10 October 1910, Page 5

MEETING OF SHEEPOWNERS.

HELD IN MASTERTON

THE ARBITRATION COURT AWARD.

I Between twenty and thirty sheep owners met in Masterton on Saturday last to hear a report of Mr H. Nevins, the employers' representative who had taken a prominent part in the negotiations with the shearers before the Conciliation Council and Arbitration Court. Mr H. Morrison was voted to the chair.

Mr Nevins traced the history of - the alleged dispute with the shearers, from the time that the Shearers' Union was formed, at Hunterville, with a membership of sixteen, until the recent award of the Arbitratin Court. He stated that when the owners were cited about two and a half years ago it had been decided to ac. ept an award of £1 per hundred all round because one or two of those present had been in the habit of paying that amount for big sheep. They bad since found that they had made a mi stake, with the result that many owners did not shear their lambs that season, and had not done so since. This had meant a difference of 500,000 in the number shorn. It would have been far better had they gone to the Arbitration Court for an award at that time. Mr Nevins then

recounted the difference incidents that had occurred since the shearers were cited by the owners this season. All attempts at eoj.-ciliation had faied, and it had ultimately been de cided to take the case to the Arbitra tion Court and to ask for a Dominion award. Up till the very last moment the (.cnciliation Commissioners had urged that an agreement should be come to, stating that a failure to agree would mean the failure of the

conciliation system. The Judge of the Arbitration Court had decided to either make an award or to declare for freedom of contract, and the employers had chosen the former. r lhe term 9of the award .they all knew. He now asked that farmers abide strictly tD the award, 'ihey. could not do so this season, as many of them had made contracts at 20s per hundred all-round. They should, however, ccinlu'ne to pay the award wage next year. If they did not keep their contracts this yeai% they might have to cc fend actions for breach of contract.

MrPilmer: But, supposing that the award had been for 22s fc'd per hundred, would we have been cble to enforce the contracts we had made with the shearers to shear at 20a?

. Mr Kevins replied that they probably woul.l not. They would have had to abide the award. He again urged that they should keep strictly ta the award next season.. He pointed out that the owners had been put to considerable expense in preparing evidenced in making provision for an emergency. They had offers from big contractors in Austraia to come over and shear their sheep. An attempt had been made to fcring shed hands under an award, but, no far, this had failed. The shearers, however, were sure to bring the matter on again. The Judge had ruled that he could not make an award for agricultural labourers, and yet the shearers were attacking this ruling by endeavouring to bring shed hands, many of whom were permanently employed on farms, under an award. The farmers would have'to fight this proposal. Mr Nevin asked that owners keep a tally of the lambs shorn, to see how they compared with the big sheep. He was satisfied himself that the shearers put up much bigger tallies with lambs than with bigsheep. The shearers' representatives, , however, tried to convince the Court that they did not. In conclusion, Mr Nevins strongly recommended owners to put a few learners into their sheds I every season. By this means alone would they be able to provide a continuous supply of shearers. He said it should be made widely known that any contracts made this year for shearing-at 20s per hundred were not binding next season. He also asked owners who had made these contracts to think twice before shearing their lambs.

Mr C. P Vallance pointed out that they would keep the shearers going the whole time if tiiey shore their lambs. Mr J. Strang urged that the owners should combine to adhere to the award of the Arbitration Court next season. Unless they stuck together, the shearers would get the upper hand. If they, did not support the : award, they woulld be backing up the shearers in any future demands. Mr Nevins stated that they intended sticking to the award in Canterbury. He thought that a resolution might be passed here that they "j intended abiding by 'the 'award next season. Mr H. B. McKenzie was of opinion that such a resolution might inflame the shearers and cause trouble this year. Mr Strang though* it desirable to let the shearers know at once that they intended abiding by the award next year.

Alter further discussion, a heartv vote of thanks wa3 accorded Mr Nevins for his address and his services on behalf of the owners, and, on the motion of Mr Guy Williams, a committee consisting of Messrs Strang, Nevins and Vallance was set up to arrange a meeting, through the. Farmers' Union, at which th importance of combining to maintain the award would be imprasred noon farmers.. ' "