Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

HEAVY BURDEN

SHOP ASSISTANTS’ WAGES CASE FOR THE EMPLOYERS OUTSIDE SALESMEN (By Telegraph.—Press Association) WELLINGTON, Wednesday. The hearing of the Dominion shop assistant's industrial dispute was continued to-day in the Second Court of Arbitration. Several witnesses were heard in support of the points raised by Mr F. D. Cornwell, advocate for the workers. Mr T. O. Bishop opened the case for the employers late in the afternoon. He said the first motion in the dispute was whether the award should applv to travellers, speciality salesmen and collectors- “ There is a class of worker engaged in connection with the retail sales of certain classes of goods to whom the provisions of the general shop assistants’ award cannot be made fo apply,” lie added. “The scope of tiie award is being greatly enlarged on this occasion. The union appears to have entirely overlooked the fact that the conditions under which these salesmen, collectors and travellers work are

'jjjicwu iiißmc iiie nuups. Exemptions Claimed Mr Bishop claimed also that female assistants in receipt of a weekly wage of £3 10s or more, and mate "assistants receiving £G a week, should he exempt from the award. He directed the Court’s attention to the provisions of the Shops and Offices Act, 193(3, which prevented the application of the definition of ‘’occupier" to male workers whose wages did not exceed £6 and to female workers whose wages did not exceed £4 a week. "The occupier of a shop should not be brought under the provisions of tiie award, and for this reason £G has been selected as determining the amount," added Mr Bishop. Reference lo oilier matters in dispute was made by Mr Bishop, who submitted that tiie cost of selling goods had been steadily mounting for some years. To increase tile wages of shop assistants beyond die general increment, which was laid down by the Court Since July of last year, would be an unduly heavy burden on tiie class trade. "It would be sufficiently severe," lie added, "to justify the fear that rising prices niiglit adversely react upon sales." Tiie Court adjourned until to-mor-row.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WT19380512.2.107

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Waikato Times, Volume 122, Issue 20496, 12 May 1938, Page 13

Word count
Tapeke kupu
350

HEAVY BURDEN Waikato Times, Volume 122, Issue 20496, 12 May 1938, Page 13

HEAVY BURDEN Waikato Times, Volume 122, Issue 20496, 12 May 1938, Page 13

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert