COURT OF ARBITRATION.

Auckland Star, Volume XXIX, Issue 15, 19 January 1898, Page 5

COURT OF ARBITRATION.

TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS.

(Continued from Page .2.)

TUG BOATS AND OIL ENGINE

VESSELS NOT JOINED.

(Before Mr Justice Williams, President, Messrs Henry Thompson and Robert .- •• Slater.) '„ •"

When the Court resumed, Mr E. W. Alison said, as representing the Devonport Ferry Company, owners of the s.s. Admiral, he must apologise for not being in .attendance earlier. He would like at the present stage to raise a point for the consideration of the Court.

His Honor: I understand so far as the Seamen's Union is concerned it was not their wish that the Devonport Ferry Company should ho joined in these proceedings, is it not so, Mr Belcher '!

Mr Belcher: That is so.

His Honor : I would sooner not interrupt the proceedings to hear your contention unless you can state it very shortly, Mr Alison.

Mr Alison : 1 shall nob take live minutes yonr Honor. I appear on behalf of the l)evonport Steam Ferry Company, owners of the s.s. Admiral, the Company being cited to appeal' before this court as parties to an industrial dispute between the Auckland branch of the Federated Seamen's Union of New Zealand and the Northern Steamship Company and others, and of a reference thereof for settlement. Now, if your Honor will kindly refer to the particulars of dispute sent in by the Seamen's Union to the Conciliation Board for settlement, you will observe that the parties to the dispute are (1) The Northern Steamship Company, Limited; (2) A. McGregor, manager steamers Kia Ora, Rose Casey and Maori; (3) Captain Shaw, p.s. Tenanora; (4) Messrs Ley land and O'Brien, owners s.s. Stella; (5) Captain Braid wood, s.s. A karoo. During the proceedings certain other steamboat owners were cited to appear, including the Ferry Company as owners of the tug-boat Admiral. J appeared before the Conciliation Board on behalf of my Company, and placed before the Board any information they desired to know. Mr Hanson was not present on that occasion, and Mr Belcher stated he was surprised that the Northern Steamship Company was unrepresented, as it was solely at their instance the Admiral was brought into the dispute at all — that as far as the Seaman's Union was concerned they had no dispute whatever with the Ferry Company and the Admiral, as the Union was quite satisfied that there wasT no cause of grievance existing with reference to that steamer, either as to wa<'es or any other mattci'; I then contended, and now respectfully-submit the same contention for the dee'isldh of this Court, that my company could, not he made party to an industrial dispute excepting by consent or at the instance of an industrial union. As this is a dispute between the Federated Seamen's Union and certain steamboat owners, not including the Ferry Company, and as the Union state they have no cause of grievance against the Company, nor desire it should be made party to this dispute, I respectfully submit that the Company should not be cited to appear as a party to the dispute. According to the Act, "industrial dispute" means any dispute arising between one or more employers or industrial unions, trade unions or associations of employers, and one or more industrial unions, trade unions or associations of workmen in relation to industrial matters as herein defined. I ask the ruling of the Court with respect to the contention lhave raised. His Honor : What do the Northern S.s. Company say to this contention? Mr Hanson : I think we as a Company did not wish to be brought into this dispute at all. We only maintain that as we ■were brought in those who are to pay the wages iixed upon should be clearly dehned. Before these proceedings they did not know what wages were paid in other boats. We had not the means at our disposal to find that out. It was the work of the Union. If the Court are satisfied these other shipowners are not required to be brought in we don't wish to ask them any questions at all. It is for the Court to say. 1 wish to point out we are only one of the parties cited in the original case. We don't, therefore, care to take the whole onus on ourselves.

Mr McGregor: We also feel we have been unjustly cited ourselves and we have sympathy with the others. We think if the wages are fixed they should apply universally. If the others are paying higher wages than those cited it will not injure them by the rates being made to apply to them. It seems unfair for only those in the original citation to be bound by the award of the Court. We think the award should apply to all vessels whether propelled by steam or oil that might compete with the vessels of those cited. If those wages are not to be paid by vessels likely to compete with us it does not seem fair. At the same time, we do not want to bring the others into the proceeding, because we feel they could not afford to pay any increased wages any more than we can ourselves.

Mr Niccol: We have no desire to have the Admiral included at present because she is not engaged in the same class of work as our vessel. If that is defined then the Admiral need not be linked.with us in this matter.

His Honor : The Court will not trouble you, Mr Alison, to reply. Our opinion is that your contention is correct. It may be very desirable that all the steamship owners and oil engine vessels should be brought into line with the Northern Company and others. What, however, is now the question is, whether according to the Act these others can be made parties to the dispute as denned by the Act. The Act is very precise in its definition that a dispute must be between one or more employers and an industrial union or one or more industrial unions, trade unions or associations of workers and employers. The Seamen's Union say they have no dispute at all with you, Mr Alison, or with the owners of boats propelled by oil engines. The Union requires nothing of them. That being so there is no dispute between the Union and these persons as denned by the Act, and the Court has no justification to join them at the instance of other persons, between whom and the Union there is a dispute. The Act states, "Any employees association, trade union, or industrial union may on application be joined as a party to any'such proceedings." Such applications must be made either by the party himself or by some party to the proceedings with.whom the party is cited

or joined, who has an industrial dispute as defined by the Act. That is not the case as regards your Company or oil engine vessels. Ido not see how you can be joined or can be affected directly, though you might indirectly. This may happen if the rate ot wages be fixed, although that would not be legally binding upon the Ferry Company or upon the owners of oil engines. Still, the fact of the rate of wages being fixed as between the Union and the Northern S.S. Company might serve as a starting point for the Union at some future time to institute proceedings against the Ferry Company and. oil engine vessel owners, for the purpose of bringing them into line. That would be merely the' indirect result, but any award made by the Court would not be legally binding'iu^Bh persons not made party to these proceedings. Your attendance, will, therefore, not be required further. Mr Alison thanked the Court and retired.

SEAMEN'S UNION V. SHIPOWNERS.

The first witness called this morning by Mr Belcher was William Agar, able seaman, who said he had 27 years' experience at sea. He had been about three or four years in the Northern Company's employ. He had been detained on shore to give evidence in this case from the s.s. lona. The seamen worked from 9 to 17 hours per day. Witness kept a time book of the hours worked (produced). It contained a true and correct account kept .separately, for bot,h watches. The hours were Tead ont, and starting from the 20th December were as follows : —13.V hours, 11 hours, 10 hours, 14 hours, B{i hours. Witness said on Christinas Day he kept watch.

Mr Slater : How long

From eight o'clock until nine o'clock at night. We got a holiday on Monday. On the 29th of December they only worked four hours, as the boat was flagship at Tauranga. On the 30th he worked 13 hours, and on the 31st 11 hours. When they arrived in Auckland on Sunday, one sailor had to remain on board all day until relieved by the oilicer. ;That meant every fourth Sunday he had.to keep watch. He got neither overtime nor time off for that. He had not been allowed time off for it for the last J8 months. He averaged a £1 J)er month extra for overtime. He always was paid cash during the last 18 months. Before that he had been allowed time oil Hour for hour was allowed. Overtime was paid Is per hour. He had been given time off when lying in a roadstead and also alongside wharves, sometimes in Auckland. lie had been given time off when lying outside of Opotiki bar. On one occasion all the men left the Wellington rather than keep watcli after live o'clock at night when they were to sail that evening. He believed the matter was represented to the officers of the Company. The lona carried two tiremcii. The fireman kept six hour' watches continuously from the time of leaving Auckland until the vessel returned.

Mr Belcher produced a book of the hours the lircmen worked, but the Court said it must be sworn to by the man who wrote it.

Mr Belcher : We might be able to pro duce him yet, your Honor.

In answer to Mr Belcher, witness stated further that on holidays the watchman and one of the stewards remained onboard. On Sundays they cooked for themselves. Witness had been in the Union Company's vessel, the Moa. They were paid on that boat if they worked on Sundays or holidays. He had not kept a watch on that vessel on Sunday. The firemen on the Moa kept six hour watches and were paid £9 per month. That was prior to tho increase of 10s being given by tlld Union Company, ■ when the- four-rhonr watch firemen were getting £8 per month, the lireinen got overtime.. ,paid ~also. The lona -was a Jittle bigger than tho Moa. There were better regulations, in the Moa. They knew they would be paid for work done as overtime and also what they would get to eat. His wages on the Moa were £G per month, but he averaged £11 because he was surling on the coast. He had made £8 5s per month on the lona two years ago. He was at present paying a man 10s per day to take his place, and would rejoin the vessel after the Court finished.

By Mr Hanson : Witness had been in the lona over two years. His home was in Auckland, and he preferred to work with the Northern Company. They were at sea on the lirst of January, and he was carrying maize on the 2nd. Mr Hanson : You got paid for overtime ? Well, after 5 o'clock they generally worked cargo with one watch.

Did you speak to the captain about it ? I did to the mate.

At the Great Barrier it is an open road stead ?

Pretty well. Then owing to the character of the trade we cannot help long hours ? That is so in open roadsteads. "When men work overtime they should get it. I wonder you did not go to the Captain. What overtime did you get last month ?

I got 225. If you earned more you should go to the Captain and insist upon having it. Witness : Last Saturday I worked 171 hours and only made 6d overtime. Mr ltanson : Did you not protest ? We arc protesting all the time. By Mr McGregor : It was not a practice for him to keep the time worked , ,<<His book started on the 20th of December. Mr McGregor: Is not that the busy week. No there was just the same running. What do you do on Sunday ? Hoist the Hags first. That takes two minutes ? Yes. All the work takes very little time ? Yes ; but I have to be there all the same. Is not the lona a hard running vessel ? Well, I dare say she is, because many of her ports are open roadsteads. Then I have to hump quartz through the-surf and handle 3001b sacks of maize. Yet you prefer to stay in the lona? Yes, because my family is in Auckland. • Precisely, and you get time to go home and see them. Yes, on Sundays. By Mr Niocol:" Witness left the Union, Company voluntarily. At present seamen's wages on vessels sailing out of Auckland were £i or £4 10s per month. Mr Niccol: Then you are better off in the lona? . .. .'...'. I prefer to be in Auckland, where I can get home two or three times a week. - The Moa was a better boat, but she was sailing out of Auckland once a fortnight. Mr Gow : In your time book you have not allowed for meal hours ? Well, the watch off can take five hours to their meals,'but the watcli on get meals as they can. Mr Gow: If you work during meaHihies : you are entitled to be paid for it. v r" H r' Witness: I give time from 8 o'clock to 5. But there are two meal hours in that you have not allowed. Last Saturday one. watch worked 17£ hours and only had half an hour for meals. By Mr Belcher: The Union Company paid overtime for work done after 5 o'clock in open roadsteads. On the - lona if they arrived in the day time all hands were turned out to work, but after 5 o'clock only one watch was called, to save overtime.

What would have been the result had you protested, as suggested ? I expect I would have got the sack. Is that the general opinion of the men ? Yes. By Mr Hanson: It was only two days a week when their meals were irregular.

Captain Braidwood being called by Mr Belcher deposed he was master and part owner <^ the s.s. Akaroa which ran to Coromandel. They carried two able seamen and one fireman. They did not run every day, but averaged four trips a week. Sailors averaged six to seven hours a day, and firemen seven hours. The men were not called upon to work before eight or after live in Auckland, but they had to at Coromandel. He had not known his men to- work 15 to 16 hours a day. He had known theni 'to work 12 hours a day, but not within the last 12 months. The fireman sometimes took the vessel down and brought her back. The fireman was now paid £6 per month. Close up to the end of December £9 per month was paid. They had a Fiji boy now as fireman.

Mr Belcher: And you are giving him £3 less.

His work is nofc equal to that of a white man.

i Mr Belcher: You were a, member of the Seamen's Union.

I was.

By Mr Ranson : Overtime could not be .worked at a tidal part like Coromandel, Business was not so good now as it was (luring the boom. When he was on the Moa the men often started work at 2 in the morning and worked till 8 at night. The Akaroa when running to Coromandel during the heighth of the1; beam averaged the men's work at ten to twelve hours a day, They were not in a position .at the time to give any,increase in pay, bub were pi-epared to give the men a slsare of the vessel, and run it on co-operative principles.

Mr McGregor : I don't think the men want that.

By Mr Niccol : If overtime was awarded he could not make the vessel pay. They had to reduce expenditure £25 per month to make any profit at all. There was no margin at present to permit of an increase. He believed work was harder in the Union Company's cargo boats Chan on the vessels out of Auckland. He had seen shore labour employed at the Waiotahi, Waitangi and other of the Northern Company's boats. ■ ■•■.-■

Have you seen shore labour employed for the Union Company's boats?

It is absurd to ask such questions or compare the two. A Union Company's boat will handle 550 tons of cargo, where a ■Northern boat has from 10 to 20 tons.

" Pascoe S. Marks, iireman, deposed he ihad been in the Chelmsford, Waiotahi, and ;lona of the Northern Company as well an the Stella, and Terranora. He had been taken out of the Terranora to give evidence at the inquiry. The Waiotahi when he was in it carried two firemen and a greaser. The firemen got £8 and the greaser £6. The firemen kept six-hour watches from Auckland to Opotiki. They generally had a night there when the watch was broken. On an average he worked about 12 to 13 hours a day when in the Waiotahi. He could not say he had worked on Sunday. Once he remembered 7s (id overtime for nine hours work overhauling and alteration. Work on the Chelmsford was similar. Witness had to do the greasing and keep the boiler supplied with water. The engineer came down occasionally and said, " Look after so and so." Witness got no overtime in the CheliuaforcL On the lona they kept six hour watches as on the other boats. The six-hour watch 'was kept continuously from Monday morning to Sunday morning. That meant 12 hours a day for the six days. On' the lona he received 2s 6d for six or seven hours' work overtime. The following month he got 5s for 13^ hours' overtime. He left the lona because after working 9.\ hours he was compelled to pay another man 5s to do another 4& hours. The reason lie had to do so was that being a big man there was a place he could not get into.' He-was told to get another mari tifdo tlic job; Hti had to do fio and pay the man ss. There was not much fun in doihg.9^ hours work for 4d. That was \vhat it'eanie to when "he paid the other man 5s for doing the 4| hours. Mr Belcher: Did you represent this to the Engineer ?

Yes. I was told I would have to do it or go ashore. I said at first I would not, but I did pay him.

His Honor: What was the name of the engineer you spoke to? Mr Hancock.

Mr Belcher: And you paid that man ss. I did. 1 had to borrow the money from a person on shore to do so.

Mr Belcher : Had you been able to get into that place would you have got overtime ?

I would have had 5s perhaps for 8 or 9 hours work. I told the engineer I did not think it was fair to have to pay that man and Igave notice to leave the sliip.

(Left Sitting.)