ARBITRATION COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XLVIII, Issue 138, 11 June 1917, Page 7

ARBITRATION COURT.

UPHOLSTRESSES" DISPUTE. The Arbitration Court this motnmwas engaged in the hearing of the up hoUtreeeee- dispute. His Honor Mr. Justice btnnger, and Messrs. W. Scott assessor for the employers), and J. McCullough (assessor for the employees) Wer Lr,f he , benCh - Mra Baume appeared on behalf of the union, Mr a E. Wright for the employers, and Mr J. W. Tattersfield for TattersfieM, Ltd. Mrs Baume stated that the dispute affected from 50 to 70 women and girls, whose wages ranged at present, in" the case of women, from 19/ to £2 10/ per week, and in the case of girte, from 5/ to 15/ per week. Three schedules were before the Court—the union's claims, counter-claims on the part of the Employers' Federation, and counter-claims on the part of Messrs. Tatterefield, Ltd. In the apprentice clause the union asked for a four years' apprenticeship for a girl who is taught the full trade, and a two years' apprenticeship for a girl apprenticed to a firm which specialises. The union was in agreement with Tattersfield, Ltd., on certain points, and in agreement with the employers on others. The dispute was therefore narrowed down to wages for journeywomen and apprentices, overtime, the rate of wages to be paid for cutting loose covers blinds, draperies and cushions, and, lastly, the technical training of apprentices. On the question of wages, Mrs. Baume stated, the employers offered journeyworaen £1 2/6, Tattersfield £1 5/ and £1 7/6, plus a war bonus of 7 J per cent, wkile the union asked £2. For apprentices the employers offered for the first, second and third years respectively 8/, 12/, and 16/ per w"eek. Tattersfielrl offered 5/ and 7/6 for the first year, and 10/ and 12/6 for the second year. The union asked for 126 at the beginning ol •the apprenticeship, with rises to 30/ at the conclusion of the apprenticeship. With regard to hours, the union asked for a 44-hour week, made up of \8 hours per day on five days, and 4 hours on Saturday, the hours to be from 8 a,m. to 5 p.m., and 8 a.m. to 12 noon respectively. A weekly engagement waa asked for. The usual statutory holidays were asked for. including Anniversary Day. It was asked that three classes of workers only be recognised, namely, journeywomen, apprentices, and underrate workers; that the usual preference clause be included; that the work done be on the employers' premises; that overtime be paid at the rate of time and ahalf. and that the term of the award be one year. Mr. J. W. Tattersfield, for Tattersfield. Ltd_ slated that his firm had no counterclaim before the Court, as had been stated. He applied for exemption for quilt makers, in which branch of wotV his firm specialised, on the ground thai if they were compelled to pay the higher rate they would not be able to compete againet imported goods. °Mr Wright stated that the employers were prepared to agree to the 44-hour week. With reference to the demand that i work must not be sent away from the firms' premises, he pointed out that the houses to which the work was sent were registered as factories, and subject to the usual inspection as such. He pointed out also that the women did not. as a rule, co into work wfth the intention of staving but only until such time as they married, consequently they could hardly be placed on the same basis as men. The employers were prepared to accept the Dnnedin award as it stood, with the exception of the proportion of learners permitted. . . The Court reserved its decision.