ARBITRATION COURT.

Press, Volume LII, Issue 15699, 19 September 1916, Page 3

ARBITRATION COURT.

CHRISTCHURCH SETTINGS,

Tho Christchurrih sittings of tho Arbitration Court opened yesterday. His Honour Mr Justice Stringer pre-

sided, with Mr W. Scott as the employers' representative, and Mr J. Mc Cnllough representing the employees.

BUTCHERS' DISPUTE.

In the Christchurch . Operative Butchers' dispute, the representatives of the union asked for the adoption of the Conciliation Council's recommendations with a few- minor alterations. It was asked that a clause should be inserted to the effect that

"all holidays mentioned shall be deemed to be a day on which nine hours shall deem to have been worked, although no work shall be done." The employers raised an objection on the ground that this would mean payment for a whole week and the holiday as well, and his Honour pointed out to the employees that the inclusion of holidays in the weekly pay was provided for. The application was thereupon withdrawn by the union's representatives.

Both sides agreed that men employed as small goods men for twothirds of their time should be classed as such in the matter of wages. Tho union aFked that January 2nd should be deleted as a holiday and Anniversary Day substituted, and to this the> employees agreed. The union further asked that country workers should be paid double time for Sunday work instead of receiving time off. The application was eventually waived. These being the only points in dispute, his Honour intimated that an award on the lines asked for would oo made. Applications for exemption from the award were made on behalf of Messrs T. Kincaid, 6enr., Wardell Bros., and the New Zealand Farmers' Co-opera-tive Association, on the grounds that they -were grocers, and not butchers, although they mado small goods. It was decided that if assistants of those firms were employed two-thirds of their time in small goods' work they should come under the wages clause of the award. Messrs G. W. Robertson and W. L. Murray appeared for the Union, Messrs F. H. Steel arid G. Tillotson for the employers, and Mr J. Bollinger for the country workers. DISPUTES SETTLED ' On behalf of the Christchurch Opera- 1 tive Plasterers' Union, Mr F. Ellis ! asked that the recommendation of the Conciliation Council be framed into an award. Mr F. Cooper agreed on behalf of the employers, and this course was adopted. A similar couree was taken in the dispute of # the Christchurch Bootmakers' Union, and the Christchurch Engineers' Union (electrical workers). • In the latter case the Waimairi County Council applied for exemption, which was granted. An award in accordance with. the agreement previously arrived at between the parties, was granted the Canterbury Coachbuildeie' Union of workers. A complete agreement was reported in the dispute of the Canterbury Drivers' Union (taxi branch), and an award was made accordingly, for tho same term as the general award of the Ih-ivers' Union. APPLICATIONS TO ADD PARTIES. Application was made by Mr F. Ellis on behalf of the Canterbury Engine Drivers' and Firemen's Union, to add as parties to the award Messrs H. Burgess, H; H. Cooke, Wallis and -Brown, .and Topliss Bros;, -the Ricearton Borough Council, Rangiora.- County Council, and Waimairi <sounty Council. No objection was raised on behalf of the four first-named firms, and thev were accordingly added. The Waimairi Council was also added, excepting with regard to traction engine drivers. In tho case of the Rangiora County Council, the Court intimated that it would make provision with regard to the one driver in the Council's employ. Tho Rieearton Borough Council wag exempted, as it employs no engine drivers at all. No objections were raised to the various names cited by tho Canterbury Retail Drapers' Employeee' Union, all of which were accordingly added to the award. Mr H. Hunter asked that, the Farmers' Co-opera tive Association, Rangiora, should be added to the Canterbury Livery Stable Employees' award, in respect of ono employee, who did livery stable work, but was covered by no j award. He was earning £2 os weekly, I whereas the livery stable' employees' | award provided for £2 12s. ■• i His Honour said that tho caso certainly could not come under the Livery Stable Employees' award, but the Court would see what could be done when it 1 wag considering the Drivers' award." A long ilst of parties was cited in regard to tho Canterbury Grocers' Assistants' award. The only applicant for exemption was S. T. Harris, of Little River, who explained that hi% store contained a butchery, bakery, ironmongery, grocery, etc.. and he. could not keep an assistant exclusively on one lino of work. He T>aid his assistants a fair wage. Tho application was granted. The Canterbury branch cf the Amalgamated Society of Engineers aoplied for provsions to meet the alterations caused by the inclusion of the sheetmetal workers, electrical workers, range makers, and tinsmiths' awards. The Court intimated" that it would make the necessary provisions. The Court then * adjourned till 10 a.m. on Thursday.