SHOP ASSISTANTS.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18015, 6 March 1924, Page 5

SHOP ASSISTANTS.

CLAIM FOR DOMINION AWARD

(raiss issociATiow teligbajO WELLINGTON, March 4

The Dominion industrial disputo concerning the shop assistants was advanced a, further stage today when argument from both sides was Tieard by the Arbitration Court. Application is made by tho employees for a. Dominion award covering tho Auckland, Wellington, Nelson, Otago and Southland industrial districts.

In opening for tho workers, Mr Croskery said tho Conciliation Council had been, unable to decide on a numbar of clauses in view of tho drastic changes made by the Court on the last occasion and the further changes asked for by the employers on this occasion. H© asked at the outset that tho Court should not base the now award upon the Christchurcli agreement, which he chuirrtcterised as a disgrace.

Mr B. L. Hammond, the. employers' advocate, resented this remark, claiming that the agreement was just in every particular. The employers' case, he aaid, would be based on that settlement.

Mr Justice i'razor pointed out that tho Court had added a memorandum to tho Christchurch award stating that it was not to be taken as a precedent in other disputes. Mr Croskcry said tho employees desired that the departmental managers or manageresses should (receive extra remuneration according to the extra, responsibility entailed. In support of his claim that porters should again be provided for in the shop assistants' award ho called three witnesses to show the wages received by such workers at present and the bonuses and deductions they had'been subject to sinco they wero previously included in tho award. Regarding tho wages claims the union advocate submitted a graduated scale for managers and manageresses according to their responsibility. AVmdow dressers wages were based upon "those of departmental managers, as provided for in the last award. Provision wafi sought to mako it clear a worker should not suffer in comparison' with another of 'the samo period of service-through traiififer to another department. . The Judge gave an assurance that the clause affected would not bo interpreted in such a. manner. Mr Croakery placed before tho vourt returns comparing the present wages with those nrovided by Mr Justice Sim m Inland later by Mr Justice Stringer, and ehowinf their relationship to similar awards in other parts, also .showing the wages of other shop assistants' unions, such as grocers and butchers. On tho last occasion the Court made drastio alterations in some or tho wages clauses, reducing them even further than tha employers, asked. Tho effect of the changes in the scale of wages was to put somo junior workers biMjk several years. U'nder ono altered clause, all workers wJio ontered the trade after tho ago of 16 years lost ono year's service,, and u.3 a oonsequeuoe lost an increase in wages which would itavo been duo under, alt other itw-uras an tho industry in all part 3 ot tile British k.anpire. Undor ihe present awitrd a worker entering tho trado at 11 yeaxfl ol age was years at aiju beloro no was entitled to tuo minimum rate oi wages, lie pointed out several instances ol unomaoica oausca by the Court s alterations, unaer wincli eome workers were retarded m receiving increments m wages. The lames Handed into iho Court a&'oiued a comparison with tho waged acalcs in Australia, wmeu were, in workers' favour. Xlie Union asKod mat all male seniors ehouiU be piacod provided by Mr Justice blringer, on uvo yciura' service, aa iu all otner tiadcs, instead oi seven years. Air CroiKcry said it was anomalous tnat wnile tuo jates oi wages in tne lor i umaica wore an moat instances higner m Now Zealand than m (Queensland, tuu rates lor msioa in vueeiisland were generally liigner man in 7ae uominoii. in regaid mo weekly Liuplovmunt clause, iur rostery objected to {lie contention tiiat no deduction ho made from wa-es "except lor tinio lost uuvugh mo woiu.er'3 sicKiiess or default." in evJiy otner industry, lie aaid, a worker's aDaenco liom vorii u. direct loss to uie employer, but in. uus shop trade other workers diviued ino txUa wor*. among tnein. iio agreed n v. as liusetoary to provide a"ainat ''malingerers, and submitted tnat piovision nagUb oo made ror employees to produce doctors ccriuicat-ea li rmjuued vo uo so. , ill putting tho caso for the employers, Mr Hawmoud taid mat alteratiyus in mo cxiaUnp awaid were inevitable u justice wns to b-j uone. ±ho prc*sent wa&e soaia Uiul operated to the disadvantage ol all concerned. some oi the v.age iatc3 were yroiuuiuvo, preventing, aa uio award cud, jio employment ox mote nands, and in consequent uepriving persons oi avemiua oi ein:>iojmem. ine employers objected seriatim io uio Union's demands lor via io c -Lslralion ot porters, to tno new deuniuon ol maiiageis and manageresses, to any reduction in uie (xuaiilying periods ui uio trade, and also to aaiy discrimination between the jseses. The employers, 6aid Mr M:\mmniid. submitting a new x j roposal in regard to wages, in doing go, he dosued impress upon the Coiut tho met that this was not a minimum offer, but the maximum to winch they tnought tho C-t»u:t should go. Tho employers claimed reduction m the hrit, second, third, and iourth year rates. The present rates wero out- of all proportion to tho valuo of tho service rendered in return. Shop assistants had received increases since Uli lar m excess of any giaJited to any othcj class of worker and out ol all proportion to ;iny increase m tho con oi living. A first-year uo>" is d'J.5 r cent, belter o2 now man in l'jii, .males 32.j per cent, oetter oil, and lor the third-year class tno employers olier ol i'l H)s represented a o'J per cent,, increase on the ltul rates. For uie fourth year tno employees present wages were lot per- cent, acove iUil, and toe oilier classes enjoyed similar advantages, if the. co-1 o: were tho sole determining :aetor in. the ci ages, tiie issue would be simple, iioweva. i: was not. Whilst the worker plight na"c ft (,'iaiiti t</ oocuw his 1914 position, the Court should also have regard tor ths value o: the services rendered ir. return. An ana 1 yc.s of the wage variations siDco 191-4 would emphasise the Jact that tliEso workers had been exceptionally well treated in the past, and that the reductions claimed by the employers could be given effect to, and yet enable the workers to occupy a vastly improved position to that, which they occupied in 1914. The | employers o;ltred an increase in senior ratec in return fcr a reduction in < first four junior rates, The trade was more or less a skilled one. A3 such t. five years' apprenticeship was, :f anything, too short allow on ass. start becoming an efficient saisomar:. The rmploytrs claimed that they s-iou.d net be deprived rf the?r right aaduc* »a ? e« ;, r timr lest through sickn«£s ?r defau.t of ti« worker.