ARBITRATION COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume LVII, Issue 94, 22 April 1926, Page 7

ARBITRATION COURT.

! . . CARPENTERS AND "DUST" MONEY. CLAIM AGAINST CONTRACTORS. , DECISION RESERVED. -An application brought by Mr. J. Hollows, Inspector of Awards, against C. A. Lee, contractor, for the enforcement of payment of an additional threepence per hour to carpenters employed in a dust-laden atmosphere, was before the Arbitration Court this morning. Mr. Stephens appeared for the contractor, while Mr. Bloodworth represented the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters. Mr. Hollows quoted a section of the award which provided for the payment of threepence an hour above the award rate to men when employed where the atmosphere was laden with dust. He called carpenters; employed by Lee to build a freezing chamber at Westfleld, and their evidence was that it was pumice country-aid that for two or three weeks they had to work midst pumice dust, aud did not receive the allowance as provided for in the award. They complained to the foreman, who informed them that the contractor would not'pay the extra money. In answer to Mr. Stephens, the witness admitted they did not complain to their employer, the reason being because they were advised by the union secretary to take no action till after the job was finished. For the defendant Mr. Stephens said that in the present case it was not only a mere shilling or two that they were defending, but a principle. Not only the defendant, but all the builders were dtsirous of knowing exactly where they stood. The awards of the Courts should be interpreted as they were meant to be. and in the present case he maintained that the men were not entitled to any pay above that paid by Lee. He held that for the air to be impregnated with dust meant to be Irrevocably mixed, not for five minutes or so at a time, but for hours. The witnesses had admitted that the chamber at Westfleld was draughty, but their statements that so thick was the pumice dust at times that it obscured their vision he hoped to show was exaggerated. The defendant and his foreman gave evidence that the pumice dust was not such as would entitle the payment of an additional threepence an hour. The wares t>aid were above the award rate, and if necessary defendant said, he could have told tbe men that the "dust money" was included in the wa<re he was ■paving. The dust was not thick in the air. neither was it continuous, and the chnmber he was well ventilated. The Court reserved its decision.