ARBITRATION COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XLVII, Issue 50, 28 February 1916, Page 2

ARBITRATION COURT.

' ' •. i AUCKLAND SESSION OPENS. ORDER OF HEARING ' AKRANGED. The Arbitration Court, his Honor Mr. Justice Stringer, presiding, with Messrs. ■W. Scott (employers' representative) ■ and J. A. McCullough (workers' representative.), opened the sesions at the 5 Arbitration Rooms, Supreme Court, this morning. The list of industrial cases and of compensation claims set-down for ' hearing was considered, and dates of ' hearing were arranged. The following is a tentative list of fixtures:— Tuesday,.. 29th February. — BOartKng- ' house employees' dispute; restaurant employees' dispute. Wednesday; Ist March. — Young v. New Zealand Sulphur Company, claim for compensation; adjustment of industrial agrecmnts for Seamen' 4 Union. Thursday, 2nd March. —Meyer, v. McCardle, claim for compensation. Friday, 3rd March. — Rimington v. Talisman Gold Mining Company.:;"; : Monday, 6th March. — General labr ourers' dispute. . . .... Wednesday, Bth ■ March. — Drivefß' dispute. Friday. 10th March. — Auckland farriers' dispute. .-.,.-■ '.'•, . Monday. 13th March.—Bakers' dispute. Wednesday, 13th March.—Moat pre- . servers' dispute. Thursday. 16th March. — Certificated engine-drivers' dispute. i Monday; 20th March. —Court sits at Hamilton. SEAMEN AND THE COURT. An .application was before the. Court for the adjuslmerft. of existing agreements controlling seamen in our New Zealand waters. Mr. W. T. Young, general secretary of the N.Z, Federated Seamen's Union of Australasia, appeared for the seamen, and Mr. JCG, McGregor ' for the Shipowners' Federation.' : The position.. to .be adjusted is thc~ nfteriuath of., the. .union formed during the general strike by employees of the Northern Steamship Co. This union hab been absorbed by the Federated. Seamen's Uh-ionj-lkit tho agrsemeht.it registered is , still in existence. The-name has to be legally altered in the "new" agreement to make it apply to" the "old" union. 'Mr..Young entered" a pretest against the appearance of a solicitor in the case. - He—submitted- that the - proceeding was not an enforcement of an award, but was more in the nature of an industrial dispute, in which Mr. McGregor had no standing. Mr. McGregor submitted that the application before the Court—for the amalgamation of'unfcns — was made under sectioa .20 of, the: Act, and was not .an industrial dispute! Mr. Young explained that all that was to.be done was the adjustment of terms in certain industrial agreements. "It is a very simple mater," he said. ■.His Honor.: Quito These.; apparv ently" "''simple" things arc" not always, what.they seem. . "The Court intimated that where there was a matter purely of law the Court should hot be deprived of legal advice. I The present matter; seemed to be simple, [but the .side that had retained Mr. McGregor apparently did not think so. ■Mr. Young: "It would be quite possible ]to smooth this thing' over- in a cb'hfcrieh"cc' with the Northern Co., your Honor.. - it is>not-a-matter for lengthy legal argu--jment. If the law isnotintroduccd.it is simplicity itself. We have the; two agreements in front.of us. The Court expressed approval, and a conference was' arranged' forthwith, the parties to report progress on Wednesday. . COMPLETE AGREEMENTS. It "was, announced in Court by Mr. A. •Rosscr, on behalf of the Gasworks Employees and of the Hairdressers' Unions, thht practically complete . agreements bad been reached by conciliation an these two disputes, and that partial agreements "had been reachefd in' respect of the Meat' .Preservers and Farriers arid Blacksmiths' Unions. A fuU agreement was announced in the Gunrworkers' dispute. . ADDLNG PARTTEg; Applications to add parties to existing awards were heard on behalf of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers (Mr. S. J. Elsion) and of the Furniture Workers' Union (Mr. \V. Marisori).' A DESIRE TO REVOKE. An interesting legal position was revealed in applications for exemption from the Plumbers,' the Carpenters, and t the Bricklayers' awards. In each case :. of the union,3lr. J.. Clark, Mr. T. Moodwbrth, and' Mr. At. ■Rosser, 're"sp"ectively, submitted that .the application was not properly before, the Court, and "the Court was. inclined to agree that this was so when judgment ■was reserved. Mr. Bloodworth, for the Carpenters, submitted: references'for the guidancc,of the Court where similar applications affecting existing awards'liaci been, "rejected. "■' The Gas Company's application "Wasf or an alteration from the 44-l>bur';ib "the .47-hour -week. "In this case, trtb, Ith'e; union -submitted"that the 'Cpurt-nad"rio*; jurisdiction to*' interfere with an existing award... - ± , ,""., ~