WHAT'S IN A NAME?

Auckland Star, Volume XLVII, Issue 51, 29 February 1916, Page 2

WHAT'S IN A NAME?

BOARDING-HOUSE OR HOTEL?: TO BE BOUND BY COURT AWARD. UNION ADVOCATE IK KHAKI. The application to ' the Arbitration Lourt for an award to govern the employees in large boardinghousea on similar lines to those laid down for licensed hotels came up for consideration by the Court at Auckland this morning. His Honor Mr. Justice Stringer presided, and with him were Messrs. J. A. and W. Scott, workers' and employers' representatives, respectively Lance-Corporal T. Long, on leave from Irentham, and .secretary of the Auckland Hotel and Restaurant-Employees' Union, appeared in support of the application, and Mr. S. E. Wright, secretary of the Auckland Employers' Association, appeared o n behalf of the boardinghouse proprietors to oppose it. LONG-STANDING APPLICATION. Lance-Corporal Long said that this case had been coming before the Court for the past six years, the first application to have employment in boardinghouses defined by an industrial award having been made in 1909. The reason given for the refusal of the Court to go into the merits of the dispute was that it had not been submitted to a Council of Conciliation, and it was referred back. His Honor, the president of the Court, had insisted that a bona fide effort be made to reach a settlement by conciliation. The application was again before the Court in 1911. When the Court refused to make an award it was understood that the Legislature would deal with the urgent question of the hours of labour and the holidays of employees in boardinghouses. The advocate explained to the Court the circumstances of the action brought against the proprietors of the boardinghouse "Glenalvon," and the ensuing appeal. The Minister of Labour had said at the that he intended to give effect to the representations made on behalf of the employees. SMALL HOUSES NOT BOUND. Admittedly, said ISince-Corporal Long, it was an exceedingly difficult matter to state the difference between a private hotel and a boardinghouse, and to define just exactly .what constituted a private hotel. Mr. Justice Sim had said that a private hotel was merely a boardinghouse under another name. There was no intention on the part of the union to bring the small places within the scope of any award that might be made. ' "We are endeavouring," he said, "to get reasonable conditions for workers in establishments that are being conducted in direct opposition to the licensed hotels." SOUTHERN CONDITIONS SATISFACTORY. The advocate then traced out for the information of the Court the futile proceedings that had been taken in the Conciliation Council. The delay by the other side had been, he submitted, merely to gain time. His union was quite prepared to accept the conditions that had already been laid down for Wellington and Dunedip.-- The; -class of establishment sought {a Sound here was on all fours with the houses that had been bound under the Wellington and the Dunedin awards. These were on all fours with the licensed hotels. For instance, in Auckland, "Cargen" and "Glenalvon" were in direct competition with the Grand Hotel, which (although it had a license) was for all practical purposes n purely residential establishment. It was unfair that there should bo this competition at the expense of the employees. It had been decided not to offer lengthy evidence. The Court had already heard the position argued very fully, and was familiar with the evidence given before the Labour Bills Committee. At this stage Lance-Corporal Long asked for an intimation from the Court whether it agreed that an award could properly be made. His Honor observed that, in view of the fact that Mr. Wright contended there should he no award at all, the Court 'had better hear Jiim before deciding whether it wanted to hear evidence. THE OBJECTION TO AiN AWARD. Mr. Wright objected that only' 33 out of 200 boa-rdingnouse-kecpere in Auckland .had been cited as parties to the proceedings. It was estimated that there were 200 boardinghonscs in Auckland atnd suburbs, boairdinghouses Hkelj' to employ assistance. Of those cited the tariffs ranged from -CI -to £3 3/- per week, showing the difficulty there would be in framing an award to cover those 33 alone. Since the Court had boon in existence it had boon very oharv in making award's relating to boardinglrouflcs. Mr. Wright quoted references showing the Court's attitude in this respect. INCREASED COST OF COMMODITIES. Another reason for not granting on award at the present time was the high cost of .commodities. Prices had showi from 25 per cent to 50 per cent increase. The employees were all supplied with meals, and the extra, cost of their keep fell on the employer. Busincse h«d also fallen away considerably. His Honor: That is a. matter affecting the rate of •wages if am award were made. It- docs not affect the general principle ■whether or not an award ehould be made. • Mr. Wright submitted that the time was inopportune for an award. Bc&rdinghousce did not cater for single meals here in Auckland. In Wellington some of thorn did. There was no eataMishtnent in Auckland similar to the Coffee Palace or the Bristol in Wellington. So far as hotels were concerned, eoid Mr. Wright, they had licensee and wero in a better position to pay high wages. The secretary of tlie union -woa asked by Mr. Scott upon what principle he had prepared his list of citations. Why were some included and others* left out. He explained that he had chosen tliow -who definitely catered for casual business and had a daily tariff. A PRINCIPLE ESTABLISHED. After consultation with 'his colleagues His Honor intimated that the Court could not depart from the .principle laid down in the Wellington Private Hotels Award. Those establishments were known as private ibotele; they were hotels in all respects, except that they did not have a license, and should he placed under some sort of regulation. That must apply in Auckland also. The Court.realised the difficulties, but each case must be decided on its merits. They realised they would get into difficulties as they went on, but a line must , be drawn somewhere. All they could say Tvas that establishments which could be proved to be carrying on 'business as hotels must bo brought into line. Tho - Court suggested that a conference should tie held between the parties to see if they could mutually. agree •which" ■houses should be, brought under the regulation, _._,;,_. \±j2.;S\i -iltUjiuK

.A'CONFERENCE ARRANGED. Mr. Wright said that he failed to see where the boardinghouses of Auckland ■were on all-fours with those of Wellington. . Hotels supplied casual meals; boardrnghouses did not. ' • Hie Honor: We quite reaJise the ditficulties of the position. But .there are some houses where the hours of work, the wages, and the holidays of the employees must foe regulated. '. ' Mr. Wright: The larger houses have their own regulations. His Honor: If that is co there will be no hardship in an award,. Mr. Scott: It is a matter of reorganisation. ■ Lance Oorpoi-al Long suggested that the employers- might take the ruling of the Court with a good grace.. He thought a conference should facilitate 'matters. The union was prepared to accept Wellington conditions. The adjournment was hopefully granted.