Labour Turn-over And Pay On Manapouri Job

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30393, 18 March 1964, Page 8

Labour Turn-over And Pay On Manapouri Job

The settling-in period associated with a big job, isolation, and rugged conditions in the early stages, intensified by almost continuous rain, were the reasons why a great number of men left the £9| million Manapouri tailrace project at Deep Cove, said the acting national president of the New Zealand Workers’ Union (Mr W. Whitty).

He was commenting on the labour turn-over and rates of pay for the job. A news item on this subject was published in “The Press” on Saturday, from information given by the secretary of the New Zealand Labourers’ Union (Mr P. M. Butler) and from a former Deep Cove bulldozer driver (Mr B. Carter). Mr Whitty said that this information was, in his opinion, both “definitely wrong and misleading.” “I am concerned that your readers could be under a misapprehension as to the correct position at Deep Cove,” said Mr Whitty. “I asked the union’s South Island secretary, Mr W. A. Dempster, to supply me with the correct information.

“The true picture Is as fol lows:

“There was a large turnover of labour before the Manapouri industrial agreement was signed on November 22. I am unaware how many men left the job from August to November 22. “This was a settling-in period. Workmen were being paid as in accordance with the terms and conditions of the 27 separate awards then covering the project. “I know of one man in this period who stopped two hours. The rates of pay, as under the various awards, were unacceptable to him.”

Mr Whitty said that a new industrial agreement was negotiated by the New Zealand Federation of Labour on November 22 on behalf of all but three industrial unions (hotel workers, seamen’s and wharf workers). Since then, the union’s total membership for the project had been 400. “To the best of my knowledge and by my books, a few more than 310 men are still on the job," he said. “All men who were actually on the job on the pay roll on November 22 were paid retrospective pay as from the day of their taking up employment with the Utah-William-son-Burnett consortium.

“This was made up of the difference between the rate of pay previously paid under their union rates on an hourly basis and other allowances, and the new rate and allowances negotiated by the F.O.L. “The new rates were incorporated in the new Manapouri Power Project Employees Industrial Agreement, coming under the New Zealand Workers’ Union.”

Mr Whitty said Mr Carter had supplied figures that were incorrect. On the basis of Mr Carter’s own arithmetic, as applied to the Manapouri industrial agreement, he had a claim to back pay, if he had not already received it. “Mr Carter states that he was the highest paid basic wage worker on the job at 8s 3d,” said Mr Whitty. The highest basic wage rate was, in fact, 9s Old an hour, there being no such rate as 8s 3d. The rate Mr Carter was paid as a special operator was 8s 3}d an hour. “Mr Carter gave a figure of 179} hours worked for the fortnight in review, as follows:—80 hours at 8s 3}d ordinary time, £33 Is 8d; 43} hours at 12s 5d an hour time and a half, £27 0s l}d; 33 hours at 16s 6}d double time, £27 5s 10}d; plus £l4 at £1 a day for wet time, £l4; plus an extra 5s a day if he was

working shift work, £3 10s; a total of £lO4 17s Bd. “Also, Mr Carter received free food and lodging for total hours worked, equalling 156} hours.

“Yet Mr Carter stated that he received £69 Is 8d for 179} hours worked. “Under the Manapouri industrial agreement, Mr Carter has a claim. It can be readily seen that there is a figure of £35 16s not accounted for by Mr Carter, There is 23} hours he evidently worked with no payment whatsoever.

“On the other hand at the moment there is a trial tunnel contract in operation that ensures all workers in the tunnel a minimum of 10s 6d an hour plus £1 a day wettime allowance, plus shift work, 5s a day, 30s a week, plus gumboot allowance and a travelling time allowance still to be compiled. “I readily admit that the settling down period has been somewhat protracted and drawn out,” said Mr Whitty. “But that has been no fault of the company's, or the union. “It has been because of the remoteness, isolation, weather conditions and the industrial agreement being difficult to complete.

“The union has received a full report from Mr S. W. Armstrong on the recent investigation he presided over. “Only two major technical legal questions remain to be answered. “I feel sure that in the near future the majority of the union’s complaints will have been willingly rectified by the U.W.B. consortium. “The initial settling-in is a thing of the past, and it will become just another construction job. “But intending applicants for jobs should be warned that it has a climate all of its own,” said Mr Whitty. “Applicants should be accustomed to working on backcountry jobs before applying.”