THRESHING MILLS AWARD.

Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 20776, 9 February 1933, Page 3

THRESHING MILLS AWARD.

- EXEMPTION ASKED FOR BY "TIN-MILL" OWNERS. An application for part exemption from the North Canterbury Threshin<» Mills Award by a tin-miJl" owners was heard by the Arbitration Court yesterday. The application had to do with shifting and travelling time. Mr Justice Frazer presided, and with him were Mr W. Cecil Prime (employers' representative) and Mr A. L. Monteith (employees' representative). Mr D. J. Macdonaid appeared for the "tin-mill" owners and Air C. E. Baldwin for the workers under the award. Mr Macdonaid asked that tin-mills be exempted from the clause in the present agreement relating to shifting and travelling time. Under the present clause, lie said, there was considerable doubt m the minds of employers regarding travelling time on the road and shifting time on the farm actually being threshed. To clarify the position he asked that Clause 16 of the award be declared inoperative and the following clause added:— "Time shall commence when ttie mill reaches the first set on any farm and shall continue until the mill loaves such set. Each set shall stand on its own, and these conditions shall apply for each set until the whole of the threshing is completed for each farm. Fifteen minutes in the morning and 15 minutes in the afternoon shall be allowed for lunch and shall be treated and paid for as time worked. Reasonable time shall bo allowed for dinner, but the interval shall not be treated or paid for as time worked. Time lost through the mill being stopped for a period of over 15 minutes for repairs or for other unavoidable cause, or time lost in excess of 15 minutes iu shifting from set to set and all time occupied in shifting from farm to farm, shall not be computed as time worked." Mr Baldwin submitted that, the proposed clause would be unfair to owners of. standard mills, since it would give tin-mills an advantage over them. He strongly opposed the principle of altering awards and pointed out that the employers had had the opportunity of attending the Conciliation Council, which had decided on the original clause, and had not taken it. Thev had only found out afterwards that the clause was not what they wanted. His Honour said the tin-mill owners would have to satisfy the Court that, whether the clause was good or bad, the conditions under which the tin-mills operated were so substantially different from those under which the standard mills operated as to warrant the tinmills being exempted from the ' lause. The Court could grant an exemption to a particular branch of a trade only if it ■was shown that that branch operated under conditions which £id not make the general award applicable. Decision was reserved.