CONCILIATION COUNCIL.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 17989, 5 February 1924, Page 6

CONCILIATION COUNCIL.

TAXI-DRIVERS' DISPUTE. • A dispute between the, Canterbury Motor Car, Horse Drivers' and Livery Stables Employees' , Union, and the employers, for a new award giving bigger wages and shorter hours,' was heard before the Conciliation Council yesterday, Mr W. H. Bagger, Conciliation Commissioner, presiding, ' The assessors were—For the employers i Messrs W. Hayward, G. Dickinson and W.' Cecil Prime, For : the. union 1 Messrs E. Parlann, R. Quickonden and P. S. Balfour.

The. union asked for- a 54 houia' week, Sundays to bo paid at the rate of 2s 3d an hour, the minimum amount to bo 6s 9d. If mora than 10 consecutive hours Were worked on one "day,. the ' excesß time should bo considered overtime.

The minimum wage demanded was £i 6a a week overtime to be 2s 3d an hour, and night shifts .to.be Ss a week entra. Christmas Day, Good.Friday and Anzao Day were to be worked as Sundays. Wages asked for improvers ox learners were £3 10s a week for the first three months.

A special clause was inserted that a taxidriver might.be required to assist at any work .other than driving for the purpose oi nl.ing m time.

I The employers filed a..- counter-proposal and alternative counter-proposals. The counter-proposal was as follows: "That the present.award should be cancelled and no new award made; on the ground that conditions aro so variable, not only in Christchurch, hut throughout- tho" district. U-urther, that conditions 'of business competition are such that it is a • hardship that any of. the few employers of drivers should be bound by an award." The alternative counter-proposals were substantially the same as the conditions of the present award, except that 60 hours were ottered as a week's work, 70 hours to constitute a long week." Mr Hagger pointed out that the first counter-proposal could not be accepted by the Council. The reason was that tho pre. sent action was taken by the union. Mr Prime said that if the union were disposed to accept the suggestion, it would be useless to discuss the proposals. Therefore he asked that the Council should discuss the counter-proposal. Mr Parlane: I'm quite positive that the union, is not prepared to accept that prcFw \i. v award ia necessary. We know ™!,, M -, I" men ia Christchurch. who would work for any wages at all. If there were no award, you would have a lot of ne er-dc-weila driving the cars" for very low wages dragging conditions down so that the present men would not be able to survive against them. If no union existed to keep wages and conditions up, Mr Hayward and Mr Dickinson could not compete against the others m the same business. ■ Mr Dickinson: Past and present experience has proved exactly to the contrary. . Mr Hayward said there were men who preferred being free-lances and not under an award—prepared to put in any number of hours to get somewhat higher wages. Tho only taxi business that could be worked properly under an award w aß the Rink J-axis because of the number of men - employed, who could be arranged in shifts. Ihe conditions in the industry made it difficult to reduce the hours. There wcro 100 tans in Christchurch, and of these there were only 25 owned by the Rink That showed there were only 25 men who could work the award hours. He thought if the - men were without an award they would work longer hours for bigger money, and - he thought they would be just as well off. The people who could not work under the award generally made an honourable arrangement with tho men to work different hours and for larger wages.

Mr Dickinson ■ said it would be absolutely impossible for him to work -under the award, owing to the hours laid down. Some dayil the drivers might come homo with only 2a 6d as their earnings. There were the boat train in the morning and the picture patroi. traffic in the evening, and the cmployci could not afford to miss either of those.' So the men had to be kept on longer. If the award conditions were insisted on, he woukl have to go out of business. Mr Parlane said the- wages were ridiculous in. comparison with the hours worked. The

men got only £3 15s a week, and. they had to work long, hours for that. Mr Hagger suggested that the clause in the old award. should bo adopted with regard to hours, 54 for a short week and 63 for a long week. Mr Hayward intimated that if the employers got a 10-hour day he would be willing to consider agreeing to a rise in wop-cs to £4 5s a week. Mr Parlano pointed out how the men were tied down to their business frr lon» hours and on Sunday. Nor had they any annual holidays. • Mr Dickinson replied that the work was very easy. The men read most of the timeand sometimes did not niovo from ' the one, p.ace all day. They were not producing results for their employer for the greater Part of their time, and it was that fact which made it so'hard. _The • union offered to accept the 60 and 70 hours conditions, the hours to be worked over a 12' hours' spread; wages to' be £t ss a week; overtime 2a an hour; an annual holiday to be granted on full pay; improvers £3--a week; and tho rest of the conditions as in the old award. The employers refused tho offer on account of the overtime proposal. Tho union brought the overtime proposal down to Is 9d an hour. The employers accepted -this offer and a complete agreement was arrived at.