MEAT MEN'S GOAL

Auckland Star, Volume L, Issue 222, 18 September 1919, Page 6

MEAT MEN'S GOAL

ONE AWARD AY ANTED. FOR SHOPS AND FREEZING WORKS. AUCKLAND UNION'S CLAIMS. Glaiming that meat preservers employed by the leading -butcher* of toe city should work under conditions equally advantageous to those prevailing in the freezing -works, the Auckland Abattoir Assistants and Freezing Works Employees' Union conferred in the Conciliation Council -this morning before Air. T. Harle Giles, the Canuni__ioner, with the representatives of the Auckland lileat Company and others to settle the conditions of a new award. The position was an involved one. The Commissioner described the dispute as an old friend under a new title, inasmuch as on July 1 the Meat Preservers' Union had filed a dispute against the two leading meat companies, which was partly settled and then withdrawn by the union, on the ground that it "was desirable to have the meat preservers ■working in an industry under one award, as was the case at that time. A further complication set in when Mr. S. E. Wright, for the employers, asked that the two freezing companies, W-hangarei and Westfiekl, should be struck out, as they .were already working to a Dominion agreement at in regard to the freezing works of- New Zealand, ■which, for some reason best known to themselves, had not been signed by the Auckland Union. Mr. W. E. Sill, the union advocate, explained the complications when he statedthat the object of the union was to get for the employees of the meat companies conditions as good as those prevailing in the freezing works. The union was prepared to accept the conditions obtaining in the We-tfield •works.

.Mr. Wright, replying to Mr. Sill's statement that last dispute the employers asked for the 'inclusion of the freezing companies, and that now they wanted their exclusion, .because of the ■better standard set by them, contended that the conditions in the meat shops and the freezing works were dissimilar, in that work was continuous in the formeT and seasonal in the latter. A higher rate of wages for seasonal work had been recognised by the Court; once the conditions for regular work were equivalent to those for the seasonal work the union would again plead for the separation of the classes of work for the advantage of the seasonal workers.

The Commi—sioner intimated. that because the Dominion agreement was not signed, and all the parties were nominally under an existing award, lie could not exclude the freezing works, ■but he noted the application which the employers dntimated probably -would be renewed in the Arbitration Court.

The Commissioner then spoke hopefully, of effecting a settlement, and the Council settled down to the consideration of the claims in detail in committee. The /workers asked for a 44----hour week, overtime at time and a-half, 2/3 per hour for boners, 2/ an hour for preser>:ere,.supervising pans or retorts, -/ "for tinsmiths, .'and 1/10 per hour for all other workers. Regarding boy 6 and youths, the union asked £1 5/ under 1(5, £1 10/ under 17, £1 15/ under 18. £2 under £19, and £2 10/ under 20. There •were several other clauses, including the observance of nine public holidays a year, no stoppage of pay for weekly workers' sickness, a "fifteen-minutes' spell for smoke-oh eivery two hours, and compulsory membership of union. The employers counterclaimed "the old award.

Messrs. George Gavan, J. Hodgson, and W. E. Sill 'were the asses-ore for the union, and Messrs. S. Wing, G. F. Lane, and S. E. Wright iwere the assessors for the employers. iMr. F. Tolerton watched the dispute in the interests of the applicants for exclusion.