CONCILIATION BOARD.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVII, Issue 195, 16 August 1906, Page 5

CONCILIATION BOARD.

THE SUGARWOREERS' BENEFIT

FUNDS?

Tlie Conciliation Board, presided oyer by Mr. J. Fawcus (chairman), resumed this morning at the Harbour Board Buildings to hear the evidence of a witness who was not yesterday available, in connection with the application of the Sugar Refining Company for ratification of an agreement between the company and its employees under the provisions of clause 14 of the Workers Compensation Act, 1900. The evidence of all the. witnesses examined yesterday was entirely favourable to the granting of the application, but at the instance of Mr. Rosser it was resolved, before coming to a decision in the matter, to hear further evidence. Messrs. Philson and Miller represented the company, the men being represented by delegates as yesterday.

William Wallace, at present engaged as a conimission agent, said he was a member of the Sick and Benefit Society in question. He was not satisfied with it, and he considered that there were a number of others who would exprss their opposition to the scheme were they in a position to do so. A resolution was passed at a meeting of sugarworkers in December last, asking the Government to have the clause relating to exemption (clause 14) deleted from the Act. At several times a wish had also been expressed that the validity of the certificate should be tested. He himself moved a resolution to this effect at the Trades and Labour, Council, and it was supported by the five delegates present from the union. A similar resolution was also carried at the Trades and Labour Conference at Christebureh. He himself was of opinion that the present benefit and sick fund was not equivalent to the advantages to be gained under the Act.- ' . I

In answer to Mr. Rosser, he said that in one instance the men had to .be levied an additional 3d a week for two or three months, in order that the necessary •funds should be raised to meet the expenses accompanying an accident at the works. This was notwithstanding the £ for £ subsidy by the company. Prior to the exemption, five years ago, there was a sick aud accident fund, in which at the end of each year the members received a rebate, as in the case of the Kauri Timber Company's employees. When the exemption came into force this fell to the ground. In answer to Mr. Alison, he admitted that he was still a member of the fund, although he had paid double subscriptions, owing to being not an einplovee now. He did not cavill at the existence of a benefit society, but he considered it should be run independently of the company. The existence of the society should not free the company from liability for compensation in ease of accident. Under the scheme a mans relatives received £15 in the event of his death through accident, while under the Act they would be entitled to £300. As far as insurance was concerned, he maintained that a man could insure his life cheaper outside the company than in it.

Mr. Alison: You have, then, very strong convictions on this point, and have' used your best endeavours towards getting this clause 14, which provides for exemption from the provisions of the Act, deleted from the book?—Well,-no, I haven't done much to upset it,'l didn't say that, although I certainly have strong 0 convictions on the matter.

Chairman: You consider that the sick behefit fund is not an equivalent for the advantages.to the worker under the is so.

';L'''