A LESSON FROM THE ARBITRATION COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXI, Issue 132, 5 June 1900, Page 4

A LESSON FROM THE ARBITRATION COURT.

The case of the Auckland Saddlers, Harness Makers, Collar Makers, and Bridle Cutters' Industrial Union, in which the Arbitration Court delivered its award a few days ago, is instructive. It shows very plainly the necessity for organisation among the workers, and the need for some constitutional power to enforce an equitable agreement as to the conditions of labour and scale of wages. Admittedly the position of th.se engaged in the trades mentioned above had improved during- the past live years. How necessary such improvement was one may judge from the fact that a journeyman received ot the time the case was brought before the Conciliation Board only from 30/ to 40/ per week. This is not a living wage. The question may well be asked, how is a man to many, and possibly have to rear a family, on such a miserable pittance? Trades in which :-o wretched a scale of pay obtains, are surely bad,ly in need of thorough revision. But this was by no means the .only crying evil of the harness and saddler}- trades. Without question they produced very few competent workmen." Boj's," taken on under an unrestricted form of apprenticeship, were kept exclusively at one branch, and when their time expired their, absolute ignorance of the general business rendered it easy *to replace them 'with - new recruits. Both evils have in a measure been remedied by the recent award. Journeymen are to receive a shilling an hour for a 48 hours' week, and satisfactory overtime payment. Boys, working in any branch, are to be legally, indentured as apprentice., for the term of five years on a fixed scale of remuneration. If the spirit as well as the letter of this latter provision is observed, we will see a marked improvement in the standard of competency .of the .men engaged within a very few years.

There is one clause in the agreement which we think should commend itself to all fair minded men as an admirable departure. One of the unfortunate tendencies of unionism is that its methods haye the effect of driving the older men to the wall. How is a man well advanced in y;-ars to compete with a junior who is just reaching his prime? Yet the uniform wage which the unions insist be paid to members makes the retention of an old man unable to do the average amount of work, in a degree, a matter of charity. It is not fair to the employer that he should have to pay a. man £2 10/ a week who, by reason of his advanced age, does not earn more than 30/. And yet if the employer is desirous cf continuing air old hand in his service he has in many cases to stand the loss. Xow in the agreement under discussion the Court has inserted a provision obviating this difficulty. It is a well safeguarded clause, making it possible for any man who recognises his inability to earn the full wage to have a scale of pay decided, on in proportion to the value of his services. Such a clause is eminently desirable in all unionist trades where a uniform rate of pay is enfoi'eed. Its effect is to prevent the older men being crowded out by the younger and more active generation of v.orkers. While in no way militating against the bulk of employees it ensures a livelihood to men advanced in year.s_dnring the continuance of

moderate health. The example just' set in this matter by the Arbitration Court is worthy of consideration ac.d adoption in practically all trades. !