ARBITRATION COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXV, Issue 96, 22 April 1904, Page 2

ARBITRATION COURT.

, THE TRAMWAYS DISMJTE. . CASE FOR THE MEN. The hearing of the dispute in connection with the electric tramways was com tinued before the Arbitration Court after we went to press yesterday, the case for the men being proceeded with. George Bighton, motorman, formerly a horse car driver, stated that he was no better off under the present system, with the increased wages, than under the old system. Paul Richardson, president of tho Tramways Union, .stated that living in Auckland was very much dearer than in Sydney. Money went nearly twice as far in Sydney, and while a man could get board in Sydney for 12/ to 14/ a week,' it would cost him, for similar board in Auckland, 18/ to £ 1 a week. His Honor: Then the charges must be higher in Auckland than in the South, Wellington is considered an expensive town, but board and residence costs less than that, and in Dunedin the cost i 3 15/. Witness (continuing) said that the meal which cost 1/ in Auckland only cost Od in Sydney, and ah eightpenny meal here costs 4d there. His Honor: I should be inclined to doubt that. I don't think any New Zealander would care to tacklo a Sydney fourpenny dinner. Witness: Any more than, one would care for an eightpenny dinner here. Mr. Brown said that his recent visid ito Sydney did not bear put witness' statement. He had heard so much about cheapness in Sydney that ha was astonished at what he found. Mr- Way said that he couM keep house for 30/ a week on the other side, but not here. Mr- Brown said that things had altered very much in the last three or four years, since Mr. Way left the other side. His Honor: We all know that thera I has been a general complaint about the rise in the cost of living since the tariff. Mr. Way: In Auckland prices have advanced 30 per cent in the last three years. A man could live comfortably on £2 2/ a week a few years ago, but he cannot now. Continuing, witness said that the Tramways Union was almost unanimous in desiring a case to be submitted to the Arbitration Court. Amos Holingsworth, motorman, stated that he had had five years' experience in Boston, U.S.A., as a motorman, and I considered the Auckland service a hard one to work on. He had never worked jon so continuous a service as this, and j considered that he was in a decidedly i better position in America than here. ;He found the expenses of living were j out of proportion to the wages received, and had to draw on his private re- ! sources. In America the conductors and i motormen were paid on the same scale. He had acted in Auckland as motor inj speetor during the incapacity of the ! regular men. The cars often* travelled [at the rate of over 20 miles an hour [down Coffey's Hill. Epsom. It was not j the custom in America to sign off when j men were waiting for sports or enterj tainments to conclude. He considered jthe eight hours here harder than the ten iin America, because there they had a j break for meals. He thought that there j would be some difficulty in the spare men .relieving the regular men for meals, because the cars only running 17 hours per day. it would be impossible for the n _n to get in their full eight hours per day. By Mr. Scott: In Boston he received equal to 9/5 per day, the hourly rate being 22J cents. He would prefer to have an hour off in the middle of his shift than work under the present system. He would rather work eight hours out of twelve than the eight hours' straight stretch. AN EX-CONDUCTOR'S EXPERIENCE. H. Gorton, an eX-conductor, said that he had had three months' expereince on the ears as a spare man, and had averaged £1 to 25/ per week. He left the service because the conditions did not suit him, what with being dogged about with inspectors, other officials, and the general public, he could not stand it. When complaints were made the men got no chance to reply to them. He had been asked to resign or to apologise to a Chinaman who had reported witness for carrying him past a stopping place. He wouldn't apologise to a Chinaman when he was not in the wrong, and as he had already resigned he took no action in the matter. George Curson, conductor, said that he found the conditions under the horse car system much preferable to the present. The work was more difficult, and the responsibility was greater, while the cost of living had greatly increased. He had been signed off while waiting for races to conclude at Alexandra Park and had been kept waiting for over two hours without payment. The men received nothing for the time occupied each evening in "cashing up." William Williams gave evidence of a similar nature. The Court then adjourned until 10.30 a.m. to-day. TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS. The court resumed its sitting at 10 40 a.m to-day. Michael O'Neill stated that he had been employed as a conductor by the Tramways Company for fifteen months. He objected to the one-sided regulation under which employees were compelled to give a week's notice of intention to resign, whereas the company could discharge a man at a moment's notice without giving any reason. He had been frequently ordered by the company's officers to overcrowd his car, and at times the inspectors had taken down the chain which he had put across the step, in order to allow no more passengers than the car was licensed to carry to get aboard. Under the bylaws of the City Council a conductor was liable to have his license cancelled after being twice fined for overcrowding. The penalty for disobeying a superior officer was the imposition of demerit marks, but he could not say what would happen if he refused to obey an inspector's order to overload his car. On the Onehunga route he collected an average of £8 or £9 per shift; on extraordinary occasions he had taken £16 or £ 17. He had been kept an hour and a-half in cashing up at the end of the day and received nothing for this. He thought it reasonable that the men should be paid for this. By Mr Scott: He had formerly been a shearer, and had made better wages than at present. Regarding overcrowding, he had been told to let as many aboard as he could on four or five occasions. Some of these occasions were exceptional. He had once known the inspectors to call the assistance of the police to prevent the overcrowding of the car. Mr Way: Was not this when the Traffic Inspector was about? Witness: I don't know whether he was there or not.

.Mr Way: Is not the cry, "Keep yguF eye on Turner?" His Hoi,__: Who's Turner? ? . Mr Way: The Traffic Inspector. Mr Scott: They do .that for their own sakes. t Mr Way: They should not be called upon to do it. .Samuel Grpves, armature/ winder, stated that his duties consisted in windirg the wires in the motors under the ears. He considered tbe car examiners held a highly responsible position. By Mr. Scott: He had had 25 years' experience in his present occupation. He received 11/ a day,but found that the purchasing power of this was about 1/ or 1/G less than it was in the oouth. For instance, he paid 12/6 a week rent here, and for a similar house, with balf an acre of land, at Mornington, Dunedin, he paid 5/ a week. -His Honor: How long ago? Witness: Five years. His Honor: You would not get it fqr that now. THE FIREMEN. Ernest Lancaster, fireman at the power-house, stated that he worked 56 hours a week, receiving 1/ an hour. He considered the 48 hours per week asked by the union was sufficient, .and that the men should receive £ 2 14/ per week for this. He thought that they should get a week's holiday in full pay every year. John Douglas, another fireman, gave evidence of a similar character. A CONDUCTOR'S EVIDENCE. J. Johnson, conductor, stated that a eertaint amount of risk was involved in a conductor's work. He had been crushed between a couple of cars while swinging the pole. > He considered 9/ a fair wage for conductors, in view, of their work and responsibility. He considered that there was considerable mental strain connected with his work. His Honor said that it could be taken for granted that the Court understood that the occupation required considerable vigilance, and that there was therefore a mentai strain. It was not, "how- j ever, the only occupation in which there wa3 a mental strain. PERMANENT WAY LABOURERS. Patrick O'Shea, a member of the permanent way staff of the Tramway Co., stated that he received lO&d per bour, and considered that the work was worth 1/ per hour. They were called on to work in all weathers. He had usually received 1/ per hour for labourer's work. In his present employ he received 1/2 per hour for Sunday work. Although he ! had now no idle time he considered the; . work harder than that for which he had j received 1/ per hour. John Green, also on the permanentway staff, gave similar evidence, and stated that he was also called upon to do pipe-laying and rough-brick workJ. L. Burgess, employed by Messrs McLean in the extension works at Remuera, stated that he had been on the permanent-way staff for about eleven months, and considered the work more difficult than that of the ordinary rough labourer. He received 1/ per hour in his present employment, but all his fellow employees did not receive that rate. CAR EXAMINATION. C S. Bailey, a mechanic employed in the fitting shop, stated that his duties were to overhaul the cars and see that they were fit for service. He believed ■, he was in the companyjs books as a truckman, and received 1/ per hour. His work was highly responsible. Up to a. fortnight ago he had to test the 120 brakes on the 30 cars in the Ponsonby barn, and to see that all the running gear was in perfect order, replacing anything that. was worn, broken or bent.: The men in the night shift, by mutual j arrangement, got one night off in a fortnight. Witness had previously held : responsible positions in connection with machinery in various parts of the colony. By Mr Carey: He did not remember that he had described himself as a handy labourer at the inquest on the Kingsland accident. What he did recollect was that at that inquiry he was classified by the company's officials as a mechanical electric hand. AN EXPLANATION WANTED. A witness named Wm. Williams, who gave evidence on behalf of the employees of the Tramway Co. at the Arbitration Court, ivas recalled this morning by Mr Way, who asked witness, 'Tlave you reported yourself since you gave evidence ?" Witness: Yes. Mr Way: And what were you told? Witness: I was informed that I need not take my bag over this morning or until after the Arbitration Court case was finished. Then I had to see Mr Carey. " Mr Way (to His Honor): I have called this witness because I do not want any suggestion of intimidation, and I think this savours of ftHis Honor (to witness): Who told you not to go on? Witness: The foreman of the depot at Epsom, who said he had received a telephone message from Mr Lysaght, traffic manager. Hi 3 Honor: If any suggestion of thsii kind is made we shall, of course, have to investigate the circumstances. Mr Scott (employers' representative): I may say that the general manager is absolutely in the dark in regard to this matter. We shall make inquiries and satisfy the Court. The Court then adjourned until the afternoon, the explanation of the eir. eumstances being then given by the Tramway Co. When the Court resumed after lunch Mr. Scott stated that he was not in a position to clear up the transaction, which appeared at first blush to be like an arbitrary proceeding. His Honor said that unless the matter was investigated it would look like contempt of Court. Mr. Scott stated that the case was one in which an order passing through several hands had been misunderstood on the way. In giving his evidence Williams had admitted that he. had stayed inside the ear in order to avoid the dust. Mr. Carey heard this, and, knowing that it was a flagrant breach of the regulations, bad ordered that the man should report to himself today. It was not on account of the man having given evidence that this was done, but on account of his having admitted committing a breach of the regulations of the company. Mr. Scott called evidence in support. Mr. Carey stated that he had given verbal instruction to Mr. Lysaght, traffic inspector, that Williams should report to him after to-day's sitting of the Arbitration Court. His intention was to caution the man, not to dismiss him. The matter was a very serious one. His Honor: Why? Mr. Carey: Because there is danger to the public. ♦, (Proceeding.)