ARBITRATION COURT.

Press, Volume LXV, Issue 13475, 15 July 1909, Page 8

ARBITRATION COURT.

COMPENSATION CASES

The Christchurch sittings of the Arbitration Court were resumed on Tuesday morning, Mr Justice Sim presiding. In the caso Frederick Powell (Mr Dougall) v. Gordon Holmes (Mr G. Harper), claimant sought £200 compensation in respect to an injury to Ins leg, sustained ,at Pigeon Bay througn being struck by liis horse and knocked over a small cliff while in respondent s employ as a shepherd. . Mr "Dougall made a preliminary application for an extension of the timo of filing, as the action had not been instituted until after three months naU expired. , ~ Mr Harper objected to the application. The accident, he said, had happened on November 2nd, and claimant had remained in Mr Holmes's employ for three months afterwards on tuU time and full pay, and had then given a month's notice. The day before the notico expired claimant went to see a doctor for the first time, and had subsequently brought the action. His Honour said he would consider the application, after the facts had been hoard. Mr Dougall stated that claimant had been engaged by respondent as a shepherd, receiving £90 a year, a free house, and firing. On November 2nd, while ho was walking his horse, the animal struck him and knocked mm over a small cliff, injuring his leg. The leg became troublesome, and on February 24th claimant saw Dr. Guthrie, who told him his leg was in a serious condition. The following day he told Mr Gordon Holmes he wanted compensation, and Mr Holmes said ho would see tho insurance company, and fix the matter up. On March 2nd witness again saw Mr Holmes, who told him he had not had time to see tho insurance company. Claimant communicated with his solicitors, who wrote to Mr Holmes. Later claimant again saw Mr Holmes, and Mr Holmes told him ho would have nothing further to do with the question of compensation, as claimant had treated him in an underhand manner in seeking legal advico without saying anything about it. Respondent had then paid him his wages. Evidence was given by tho claimant. Mr Harper said the defence was that claimant had worked full time, and full ,p*ay for three months after tho laecident, and had not seen tho doctor until tho day before his month's notice expired, and the application had not been made until March 25th.

Evidenco for the defence was given by Huntley Holmes and Gordon Holmes.

Before calling the medical evidence, Mr Harper asked for a ruling on the point as to whether the application had been mad-e soon enough.

His Honour replied it was a case in which the time should be but the Court was not satisfied that the conversation that liad taken place between the parties, on which the claim for the extension was based, was sufficient grounds for granting the application. The medical evidence was then called, Drs. J. Guthrio and R. W. Anderson describing the injuries to claimant's knee-cap. The Court reserved its decision. In the case, of John Thomas Footo (Mr Hunt) v. S. P. Andrews (Mr G. Harper), claimant asked that a lump sup be granted him for injuries received By being caught in machinery while working in respondent's qua.rry, as the result of which he had been totally incapacitated. Mr Hunt said tho application was made- to enable claimant to. "start a email store, as the 30s a week (halfpay) he was receiving at present was not sufficient to keep his wife and family. . Mr Harper asked that a declaration of liability be made. . Dr. Crooke, medical superintendent at the hospital,. eaid that on August 31st, 1908, Footo wae admitted to the hospital suffering from c compound comminuted fracture in both bones of the left leg, the fracture of two ribs on the left side, and several small cuts. Claimant had been in the hospital since that date. He was unable to bear any weight on the leg, which hac shortened by three-quarters of an inch, and his foot was elightly turned in. His ankle and kneo were affected, and he also hod neuralgia in the left side. Witness did not. think claimant would be able to do any manual work for a very long time. Dre. Tlracker, Fenwick, Moorhouse, and Jennings also gave evidence. Tho Court awarded claimant £220, and £5 6s costs and witnesses' expenses. SADDLERS, HARNESS AND COL-LAR-MAKERS' AWARD. The Saddlers' Award, which will come into operation from July 19th until December 31st, 1909, was practically agreed upon by the parties. A memorandum to the award states that the clauses were all agreed on excepting those relating to preference and wages. The provisions- as to preference are those contained in the last award, which were agreed to by the parties. The minimum wage fixed by the previous award, the memorandum continues, was Is per hour.' The Union had asked that this should be increased to Is 3d, and the employers had objected to any increase. When the parties were before the Court in 1907, the Union had proposed to ask for an increase in the minimum wage, but in view of the fact that the, Wellington Union had agreed to accept Is an hour the Union had recognised that it was useless to press the application, and had agreed to accept an award on the lines of the Wellington Award, but without any provision for piecework. The oondition of the trade, continues the memorandum, is certainly not any better than it was in 1907," and the Union in the present instance had not made out a case for any increase in the existing minimum. A wage of Is an hour was a low wage for a tradesman who had to serve an apprenticeship of 5 years, but the conditions of the trade had rendered a low minimum necessary, and tho Union had failed to satisfy the Court that there had been any change in these conditions. The employers had asked to have the Wellington log for piecework adopted in the present award, but the Court thought that the provisions of the last award on the subject should not !x» altered save to tho extent that employers should he allowed to have work done on piecework if they could first agreo with the Union on a log for tho work. STONEMASONS' AWARD.

The industrial agreement in the dispute between the Operative Stonemasons Union and the Employers' Union has been filed as an award, which will remain in force from August Ist until July 31st, 1911. The principal conditions of the award ;.re as follows:—Hours of work, forty-four hours per week; minimum wages of journeymen, Is 6d per hour; overtime, time and a quarter for the first four hours, and time and a half afterwards' and on holidays, and double time after 5 p.m. on Saturdays. Under-rate permits are provided for, and the preference clause provides that an employer, if called oi! to do so by the Union, shnll dismiss any worker who within seven days of ■us enjoyment does not join the Union. The award prohibits piecework. All stonework required for an} , building, with the exception of light coring, is to be worked and fixed by stonemasons employed by the builder, and in the event of the .builder subletting the work, tho contractor must supply all materials, labour and piant necessary for working, firing and finishing the work. In,the event of no ftonemasotu being available qualified and -willing to T>lock cut blue etono

rubble with a spelling.hammer, qnarrymen may be employed. No stonework shall be light coring which is more than nine inches high. Cleaning down, pointing joints, or anything connected with cut stone-work shall bo dono by masons only, and no labourer or tradesman other than a bona fide stonemason > shall bo allowed to do stonemason's, work. When a workman is discharged or at tho completion of any work, all tools shall bo sharpened at tho employer's expense. The usual provisions are made in regard to country and suburban work. The apprentice clause provides for wages of 9s, 14s, 20s, 27s (>d, and 3."">s for tho five years. Throo months' probation is allowed, to bo included in the apprenticeship. Ono hour's notice on either side is provided for. Tho award will not apply to monumental mason's work, but any monumental mason employing masons on buiidinc: work other than monumental work will come under tho award. RATTAN AND WICKER WORKERS' AWARD.

Tho following award has boen made in tho Rattan and Wicker "Workers' disputo:— Tho hours of J work shall be 44 per week.

Overtime shall bo paid for at tho rato of time and a quarter for the first threo hours, and time and a half nfconvards, and double time for work <iono on Sundays. Tho minimum wage shall be Is 2d per hour. AH piecework and bonus system shall bo prohibited. No employee shall bo a contractor whilst working for an employer. All work shall be performed on tho factory of the employer. One week's notice of tho termination of service shall bo given on either side. Nothing in the award shall restrict the right of tho employer, if the slackness or exigency of the trade shall render it necessary, to require any section of workers employed on any particular class of work to work for a part only of any day, but a part of a day shall not bo less than four hours. Each employer shall notify the worker of any lost timo tho day preceding that on which the lost time commences.

All wages shall bo paid not later than fifteen minutes after work ceases on the regular pay day. The proportion of apprentices shall be limited as follows:—One apprentice to two, three, four, or five fullypaid journeymen; two apprentices to six, eeven, or eight fully paid journeymen ; and thereafter, one apprentice to every three fully-paid journeymen. The proportion shall be gauged by the full employment of journeymen for twothirds of the preceding six months. The ratos of wages shall be: —First year 5s a week, second year 103 a week, $bird year 15s a week, fourth year 20s a week, and fifth year 30s a week. The period of apprenticeship shall be five years. The usual provisions for one employer transferring an apprentice to another employer are made. Boys other than apprentices may be allowed bo do lapping, mottling, varnishing, picking and Singeing, but these boys shall not be allowed to engage in any other work pertaining to the trade. The holidays shall be:—New Year's Day, January 2nd, Good Friday, Easter Monday, Prince of Wales's Birthday, Labour Day, King's Birthday, Show. Day, Christmas Day and Boxing Day; no payment to be made for these days. Work done, on Christmas . Day, Good Friday, or Labour Day, shall be paid at rate of double time t and other holidays time and a half. The provisions relating to under-rate work, and preference to unionists, are on tho usual terms. The award shall come into * force on July 19th, 1909, and continue until July 19th, 1911. YESTERDAY'S SITTINGS. Tho Arbitration Court resumed ita sittings in the Provincial Council Chambers yesterday morning, Mr Justice Sim presiding. PRIVATE HOTELS. An application was made to have the private hotel proprietors brought under a new award, the Hon. Jas. Barr representing the employees, and Mr H. Broadhead the employers. ■ Mr Barr said that it had been recognised that a mistake had been made in previously citing all the private hotels and boarding-house and, in the present dispute the boarding-house keepers had been left, out altogether, only t'he proprietors of the following private hotels in the city having been cited: Federal Coffee Palace, Leviathan Private Hotel, City . Buffet, Britannia Private Hotel, Mrs R. Hall's Bellevuo House, Holmes's Hotel, Trocadero, Smithson's Private Hotel, Mrs Rogers's Private Hotel, A. F. Pa-rsons's Boarding-house, and Guthrie'e Private Hotel. These were businesses being carried on as combined restaurants and private hotels, and it was asked that the awards apply to them only, and not to boardinghouses. His Honour said there v/as no difference between private hotels and board-ing-hduses, and it would be impossible to make an award dealing with board-ing-houses generally. Mr Barr said that these were only private hotels practically in the heart of the city. Continuing, he said that three private hotels in Dunedin—the Palace, Wood's, and tho Leviathan— had been joined to the award there, and there had been no friction and he thought there need be no friction in the present cage. They did not want the award to apply to boarding-houses at all. At present, although the employees were interchangeable, a hardship was often inflicted by proprietors of private hotels refusing to employ union members. His Honour said that the Court could only deal with specific cases, and if the union wanted the private hotels to work under the same provisions as those contained in the Otago award, they would have to show that they were on exactly the same basis. Mr Barr said he would show that the three houses in Dunedin and the private hotels cited in the present case, were on exactly the same footing. Ho quoted the following figures:—Palace Hotel, Dunedin, 78 bedrooms, 14 employees, tariff 8s 6d per day, 33 boarders; Wood's Hotel, Dunedin, 23 bedrooms, tariff 35s a week, 2a to 30 boarders; Leviathan, Dunedin, 21 bedrooms, tariff oe 6d to 6s 6d per da<v, 30 to 56 boarders. Tho Chmtchurch figures available were:—Federal Hotel, 50 bedrooms, 13 employees, 40 to 50 at lunch each day; Leviathan, 150 bedrooms,- 12 employees; Trocadero, 30 bedrooms, 15 employees, 80 to 100 to lunch; Holmes' Private Hotel 53 bedrooms, 15 employees, 80 to 100 to lunch. Aftei quoting further statistics Mr Barr said it would be seen that these houses were on "all fours"' with those in Dunedm. Mr Barr called Arthur Lightfoot, porter, who said he o PP J , - somo time a S° at tie Federal Hotel tor the r-osition of porter. Mrs Uayies said his references were very satisfactory, but when he told her be was a member of the Union she said she was vv.rv sorry she could not engage him, owing to previous members* oi the Union she-had engaged making complaints. . John Pobmbo said he w.as previously day porter ■in Bellevue Hause. He started at 5.40 a.m. and left off at 7.30 p.m., with intervals for meals. He drew los a week besides his board. Robert John Wiffen, general hand, said he formerly worked at'the Leviathan Hotel for betweu 8 or 9 months. He was day porter, and his wage was £1 a week. Ho started at 7.15 a.m. and left off about 11 p.m. He had his meals when ho could get them. He worked seven days a week, and had no halfday holiday.

Frank William Crawford, cook, said he was previously cook at the Federal. His ordinary wages were £3 a week. Mr Broadhead said tho application was unjust, as the substance of it was precisely -the same as tho case before the Court in December last. The hotels cited were on a footing with those houses which had been struck out of the Dunedin award. Ho contended the caso had been brought solely by the Hotel Employees' Union, and not by tho employees themselves, who were perfectly satisfied. He would show that at present the establishments were doing less business than when they were previously exempted from the award. He called"

Mrs Davies. proprietress of the Federal Coffee Palace, who stated her tariff ranged from Ss 6d to 6s a day. Her employees were quite satisfied with their "wages and treatment. In reylv to his Honour witness said she thought she was paying as much in wages as the three Dunedin hotels. She paid as much as she possibly could. Continuing, witness said she had £650 a year rent to pay, and her wages were £50 a week. At present she had onjy 27 boarders, and they were getting less. It had been a shocking winter, and if she had to pay her hands more she would have to close down. There had been very few travellers for the. last 12 months. She did not expect matters to improve. She simply considered her place was a boarding house, doing precisely the same business as other private, boarding houses, which were- making a bettor living. If her hotel wore brought under an award sho considered boarding houses should also bo included. Sho did .not think her house did as much business as tho Palace and Leviathan in Dunedin. She considered her restaurant was only a minor part of her business. It was j a despcrato struggle to live. j Mrs Howey, proprietress of the City Buffet, said her tariff was from 3s to 5s a day. Business was much slacker this year than List year, her takings in May this year being £58 less than tho corresponding month of last year. The price of coal and gas had increased. Her rates of wages were: —First cook £2 10s, second cook £1. seiillerymaid 17s. waitresses £1 and 16s, two housemaids 16s, pantr.ym.aid JOs, night porter 255. She considered sho competed with tho largu boarding-houses in the city, which charged as much as sho did. Richard C. David, proprietor of tho Trocadcro, said his tariff ranged from 2s loa to 5s a day. He had about twenty-five permanent and casual bcardere at present. Ho had taken £65 less in May and Juno this year, as compared with tho samo two months of last year. He was losing money at present. Boarders often left him to go to private boarding-houses. According to the City Council license, his house was a common boarding-bouse, and was in competition with private boarding-houses. His wages were:— Cook 355, scullerymaid 17e 6d, pantryraaid los. waitresses 15s, housemaids 15s, scullerymaid 17s 6d, nigh£ porter 255. His hands were perfectly 6atis-j fied, and did not want to have any-! thing to- do with the union. Alexander Heaton. night porter at the Federal Coffee Palace, gave evidence as to the satisfaction prevailing among the employees in the establishment. He got 5s a week more than the union wage. After Mr Barr and Mr Broadhead had addressed the Court, his Honour said judgment would be reserved. The Court then rose. CYCLE MAKERS' DISPUTE. The'following award has been made by tho Arbitration Court in the Canterbury "Workers' dispute. The award will take effect from July 26th, .1909, to July 26th, 1911. The week's work shall consist of 48 hours, the hours to be between 7.45 a.m. and 5.30 p.m. on'five days of the week, and between 7.45 a.m. and noon on one day. In South Canterbury the hours shaft be from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., and 8 a.m. to 1 p.m. Overtime to "be paid at the rate.of time and a.quarter tor the first three hours, and one and a half for the second three hours, and after that double time. Work on Sundays, Good Friday; and Xmas Day shall be paid at the rate of double time, and on New Year's Day, Anniversary Day, Boxing Day, Labour Day, Easter Monday, King's Birthday, and Show Day, at time and a half. In South in addition to the days specified,. January 2nd, from noon, Trades Picnic Day, Easter , Saturday, Empire Day. and Show Day from noon, shall be paid for at the rate of time and a half.

Workers over 22 years of age employed in polishing, plating, enamelling, frame and wheel building, turning repairing and assembling shall receive a minimum wage of Is lfd per hour. Boys shall be paid as follows: —First', year 10s, second 15s, third 20s, fourth , 255, fifth year, or on attaining the age of 21 years, 50s. On the completioil of the sixth year, or on attaining the age of 22 year?}, not less than the minimum rate of wages shall be paid. Boys employed shall be in the proportion of one boy to one man in receipt of the mum wage. Workers unable to earn

the minimum rate may be paid such less rate as may be agreed upon between the employer and the secretary of the Union and the Inspector of Factories. All persons engaged in the industry shall, within a month of the award eoniiug into force, become members of the Union, and the entrance fee shall not exceed 2s 6d, and subsequent contributions shall not exceed 2s 6d per week. Any person refusing to become a member may be dismissed from his employment by tho Union, and the Union shall provide a member to fill the vacancy equally qualified to perform the work required to be done. In the case of a dispute the matter shall be referred to the Inspector of Factories. The memorandum attached to the award states that the award embodies, without alteration, the , agreement of the parties. ' BREACHES OF AWARDS. Mr W. R. Haselden, S.JML, h«ld a npecial eitting of the Magistrate's Court yesterday afternoon to deal with a number of breaches of awards. Mr W. H. Hagger, chief inspector of factories at Cbristchurch, prosecuted. Hugh Roberts, a builder, admitted a charge of failing to give preference to unionists, as required by the Carpenters' Award. Defendant said that when he engaged a certain carpenter he was under the impression he. was a unionist, but as soon as the inspector informed him he was a non-unionist defendant immediately dismissed him, and employed a member of the union in his place. The Magistrate thought a fine of 20s and costs would meet the case. James Maxwell was charged with employing a youth under eighteen to drive two drays, thereby committing a breach of the Drivers' Award.

Mr Anthony, who appeared for defendant, said that he would admit that his client employed his son. seventeen years of age, to drive the drays; but he'pa id hiiri fulJ journeymen's wages, and there were special circumstances in tlie case. Tha boy was medically advised to obtain outdoor work, and his father tried to get him into various positions without success. Ho therefore decided to take him on as a driver, and in order to act. as he thought, legally, he paid him £2 8s a woek. Counsel contended that under the award defendant acted ptoporly. and ho "was justified in employing the boy, even though he was under eighteen years of ago. Mr said that an application for a rilling was made to the Arbitration Court in connection with this matter, and the Court held that an employer was not entitled to employ a youth un'.'er eighteen. Mr Anthony again submitted that a boy could bo employed as a man, provided lie received a man's wages. It was lawful for a boy of sixteen to drive one or two horses and there was nothing in the award to say such a boy should not bp employed in this particular work. If the Magistrate held the boy could not be employed, boys under the age of eighteen years would be de-

barred from various trades: pointed out that a ruling obtained froS® the Arbitrate Court in rceardteT«3S same point by the Dunedm biitch2*i shewed that a boy could be emriSi provided ho received wages eXf!! those received by a youth of efgh4a^ of tho butchers award may bedUfaull The Magistrate, after hoarbs «Ji evidence of the defendant and h» *r«m imposed a fine of £4 and coste -m G Simpson (Mr Alpers) with iailmg to give preference?! unionists. J*sM Mr Alpers said ho would admit ttutfi his client employed a man named SSli rett as a carpenter, but he did nM Know that ho was not a member of this! union. Tho man had been empbyrfl previously by defendant and other raSl minent builders about CfoistchnreSi whon a member of the union ConselPi quently defendant took it for granted?! that he was still a member, and ttrtft! him employment. MThen defendant '*M certained Barrett was not a menuWsi of tho union, he suspended him tmtfll he had paid his entry fee and madeun.l the arrears. "i*g§ Evidence was given by the seeretiali of the union t-o show that Barrett hiffl been struck off the roll in August, 190P| I because ho was unfinancial. LaterTwll was again enrolled. '•^Nβ The Magistrate imposed a fine o f £it and costs. m ■ ■ - "Jf J. Schumacher admitted allowing ''Or carter to work in his bakehouse, -£%• was fined £2 an<* costs. ■ vSjj F. Blogg (Mr Frazer) pleaded' &&$ to committing a breach of the oarpetS tors' award by failing to give prefer*! ence to unionists. ' . .^ Mr Frazcr said that Blogg was -WE really responsible for the broach, lly wns away from a contract for sonj£ time, and his foreman was left , fog charge and engaged a non-unionist c*iS| psntcr. As soon as defendant taevl that, tho carpenteT wne not a of tho union, ho made him join, aanS then re-engaged him. ' ™^S Tho Magistrate fined defendant , |a| and costs. . •'^Jμ Sharman and Sons were charged Willi committing a breach of the butchSra award by employing a greater numnjgS of apprentices in proportion to ioittawi! men than allowed by .the award, '.-'-mi Mr Johnston explained that the broil ness had for years boon carried on -fil J Sharman, who died a few moiiSi ago, and it was then carried on by;!® widow and sons. They thought tiro came under the meat preservers' awaraf and not under the butchers' awardsl|j that, had boen bo, there would «&$ have been one boy in excess number allowed. The business , fcadbefcfi run in exactly tho same way by sons as their father had carried it and if they had committed 'a -'brom it was purely in ignorance.- b ; l^l The Magistrate fined defendants £? and coste. ■ - : ■■• ■ :; ':---''; i ',i l ?i3