Disruption to supplies of meat again?

Press, 16 June 1979, Page 1

Disruption to supplies of meat again?

Meat supplies in Christchurch are threatened by another strike by butchers over a breakdown in award talks. This emerged yesterday after talks between the Federation of Labour executive and the Shop Employees’ Union. The butchers’ advocate (Mr R. J. Campbell) said last evening that the F.O.L. had not taken over the dispute, but he would keep in touch because of threatened legal action by the Meat Retailers’ Federation.

Butchers in most parts of New Zealand Would have to hold additional meetings to vote on a strike for Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday of next week, said Mr Campbell. However, the strike could go ahead in Christchurch under a resolution already passed.

A conciliation session last Monday failed to resolve the dispute, centred on an industry allowance claim of $l5 a week. Mr Campbell said that communication after the session was “virtually nil.” “We are still hopeful we can resolve it without another stoppage, but at this stage the employers are not prepared to move,”

he said. However, the union would have discussion with some employers over the week-end.

The employers have offered a 9.8 per cent wage increase, and a short-term award to be renegotiated in December, but have continued to reject the industry allowance. The employers’ advocate (Mr G. T. Perfect) said that the new offers were a “significant advance.” They represented an overall increase of about 12 per cent for butchers.

The union is holding out for a 10 per cent increase in wages, and the full industry allowance. “We don’t mind how we get it, but we want a significantly better over-all rise than 9.8 per cent,” said Mr Campbell. The union was concerned about the effect on consumers of more industrial action. For this reason it would not seek to close owner-run shops during a butchers’ strike. “This will bring more pressure to bear on employers of labour,” he said.

About 90 employers throughout New Zealand, including 11 in Christchurch, had now signed agreements with the union to pay the industry allowance from July 3, when the present award expired, Mr Perfect disputed the number of employers who had given this undertaking. It was an insignificant proportion, he said. “This has not altered the attitude of the nsrtional assessors,” he said. “Anyway, it is not uncommon for tradesmen to be paid above-award wages.” Mr Perfect said that the Meat Retailers’ Federation was taking action against the union, under section 81 of the Industrial Relations

Act. The federation had instructed solicitors to prepare papers alleging that the act was broken when the butchers took action previously, without withdrawing claims from conciliation. “We don’t agree; but it is something we have to take seriously,” said Mr Campbell. Mr Perfect said that he could not understand why the union would not take the dispute to the Arbitration Court. The union had been interested in a shortterm award, and this was one aspect of negotiations which had to go before the court for approval, he said. The employers were prepared to continue negotiations, but not while there was a threat of strike action by butchers, Mr Perfect said.