ARBITRATION COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XLVII, Issue 206, 29 August 1916, Page 8

ARBITRATION COURT.

COUNTY COUNCIL'S LABOURERS OBJECTIONS TO INCLUSION IN AWARD. CASUALS NEARLY ALL FARMERS. The industrial dispute in which twentyone county councils and country drainage boards objected to their employees coming under the terms of the Labourers' award recommended by the Conciliation Council was continued before the Arbitration Court yesterday. Mr J. B. Cow conducted for tlie majority of the objecting county councils, and Mr W. E. Richards represented the Labourers' Union. Wilfred Micklejohn, surfaceman, said he could not see any advantage in the men joining the union, as the present conditions prevailing under country local "bodies were satisfactory. There might be a benefit in the towns in belonging to the union. In answer to the president, the witness said that they were quite capable of solving their own problems in the country. 11. Greenwood, surfaceman in the Rodney County, expressed accordance with the views uttered by the previous witness. He would rather forgo the work than join the union. Witness stated tihat he was a farmer and orchardist, and had a holding of about twenty acres. The President: You arc a farmer, and would not come under the award at all Another witness who doee work for the Waitemata County Council expressed satisfaction with the present conditions. He added that a number of settlers who had taken up orchard holdings would not be able to live until their farms reached a profitable stage were it not for the work they received from the County Council. Tlie judge remarked that from the evidence there seemed to be very limited scope among the County Councils for the operation of the award. He asked what workers it .was expected to bring under the award.. Mr. Richards: The casual workers, your Honor. The President: Well, among the casual workers you don't get farmers. And if you don't get farmers or settlers, who will you get? Mr. Richards: Well, men who go round the country looking for work. We have got men who arc working for these bodies already. His Honor remarked that there seemed to be very little left for the union if settlers and farmers were excluded. Mr. Gow pointed out that 21 out of 28 country bodies had entered objections, while he believed some of the remaining seven had acquiesced under a misunderstanding. The president pointed out that the County Councils seemed to be willing to pay the minimum rate of pay recom-mended-»by the Conciliation Council. Mr. Richards said that the chief objection now was the preference clause, but there were other matters upon .which no evidence had been heard. Mr. Gow said that the attitude of the County Councils was not from any feeling of antagonism to unionism, but because they felt that they were peculiarly situated. Had there been any grievances to redress, he believed those grievances should be heard before the Court, but lie contended that no grievances had been established. Mr. Cawlcwell said that tlie wages paid by the County Councils in many cases exceeded those sought by the union. Mr. Richards pointed out that the union was not producing evidence because evidence was .produced at the various places when the dispute was before the Conciliation Council. The union had no objection to the exclusion of farmers and .settlers, but he urged that 105 local bodies had accepted the recommendations. of the Conciliation Council in toto as against 21 objections. Borough Councils had entered no objections whatever. As to the preference clause, the clause calling for notification to the union of employees was suggested Iby the employers themselves. I 'The Court reserved its decision.