ARBITRATION COURT.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 42, 13 November 1907, Page 5

ARBITRATION COURT.

THE TAILORS' AWARD. IMPORTANT JUDGMENT. Tho Court resumed its sittings, yestorday morning. Mr'. Justice Sim (president) and Mossrs. R. Slater (workers' representative) and S. Brown (employers' representative) took their seats at 10.30 o'clock. Reserved judgment was delivered on an important question arising out of an application for an enforcement against M. Cohen, tailor, Manners Street. His' Honour, on behalf of tho Court, said that it was alleged that tho respondent had committed a • breach of the Wellington Tailors' Award, by distributing work on what was known as the team system. The "team" consisted of a tailor named Ballendon and four fenialo workers. The Tailors' Award applied only to male workers, and the Wellington Tailorosses' Award did not contain any prohibition of the team system. If tho respondent had committed any breach of the Tailors' Award it could only bo in respect of tho employment of Ballendon as a member of the team referred to. It had been contended on behalf of tho respondent that as he .carried on the'business of a ladies' dressmaker the provisions of the award did not npply to him. The Court thought the provisions of the Award did not apply'to respondent if, and so long, as he was carrying on the business of a ladies' dressmaker only. If,' however, he made what were known as ladies' tailor-made garments, then to the extent of,that work he came within the scope of tho Tailors' Award, and he must comply with the provisions of '• tho Award. His Honour pointed out that tho evidence did not show what particular work Ballendon had been engaged on. The matter could be mentioned again in the afternoon or this morning. 'In the moantime, Mr. Herdman' (counsel'for the respondent) and Mr; Aldridge (Inspector of Factories) might confer with reference to the facts.'

THE PLASTERERS' DISPUTE. '.• \ ' .'."■■" The hearing of tho Plasterers' dispute was then proceeded with. Mr. W. A. Grenfell appeared on behalf of the employers and Messrs. W. : H. Wcstbrooke and W. Boavis represented the Union. On the application of Mr. Lodder, the Gear.Meat Company were granted exception from the provisions of the Award on the usual conditions. Exemption was also granted to Mr. W. J. Helyer, monumental mason. . Mr. Mee asked the Court to exempt the Carrara Ceiling Company. His Honour pointed out that tho Conciliation Board had decided that the Company were, competing with otlier employers. Mr. Mee submitted that the'men in the Company's employ were not plasterers. His Honour' said tho application could be renewed later. His Honour said he understood that the Union wished the Court to mako an award the provisions of which should apply in Wellington and the country districts alike. Mr. Westbrooke replied in the affirmative. : - His Honour then intimated that the Court was not' prepared to do that. Ho pointed out that it would bo unreasonable to fix the same rate of wages for workers in the country as workers in Wellington, where tho cost of living was so vory much higher. ' 'Mr. Westbrooke said he had been informed that rents were just as high .in Napier as they wore in Wellington. Mr. Brown (the employers' representative) remarked that in,every town-the Court visited there Was always some witnoss prepared to say that his town was tho dearest place in New Zealand to live in. That statement had, he pointed out, been made oven in Nelson. '''.'■

His Honour said tho Court was prepared to make an award. affecting Wellington and within a radius of, say, fifteen miles. Mr. Westbrooke, submitted that the award should also be made to apply to the country districts. There had, he stated, been constant friction. "-. Longer, hours were worked in the country and loss wages wero' paid. ' ■'• Mr. Gronfoil said that, so far as he knew, chore had been hq friction. In his opinion, it' was unlikely that men would'' so' readily accept work in the country if the conditions were, as Mr. Westbrooke had stated! His Honour thought that, if there bad been much friction, the matter would have been taken before the Board or the Court long ago. '"' Mr. .Westbrooke replied that tho Union had been until it had a larger,member-, ship. ; His Honour said it would be impossible at the presont sittings,for the Court to investigate the conditions . obtaining in the country districts. 'The _ Court would advise the Union to accept a limited award. Mr. Westbrooke thought it would bo-better to defer consideration of the matter until tho. Court'had, time to deal with an application for an award,,the provisions of which should apply to the city and country districts'.

His.Honour pointed,out that an.award affecting the country districts could be made at the next sittings. . '

Mr. Westbrooke accepted His , Honour's suggestion. ' ••' . ' On behalf of the employers, Mr. Grenfell said it was hoped the Court would not insert a clauso in the award providing that only plasterers should be allowed to do lathing. He pointed out that, at times, tho services of plasterers could not be obtained to do:that class of work. Plasterers had, .he mentioned, refused to cover laths which had been fixed by carpenters, and, as a result, v serious delays had been occasioned. The. employers held that they should be al-lowed-to work apprentices for two years at tliß expiration of their tirho at loss than journeyman's wages. Thoy were willing to pay Bs. per day during the sixth,year, and 10s. per day during the seventh year. In their opinion; owing tothe'scarcity of labour, and the fact that many of the men offering wore incompetent, the rate of wages should bo fixed at Is. 7d. per hour. Tho present rate was, he said, about 15.,71-sd. per hour. The employers objected to tho provisions, relating to surburban work and submitted counter-proposals. They .also asked tho Court not to grant preference to unionists. Evidence in support of the employers' counter-proposals was given by Thos. Foloy, plasterer, A. H. Fullford, plasterer, and W. L. Thompson, builder. Mr. Westbrooke said thqt the Union had accepted the Board's recommendation, but the matter had been referred to tho Court by tho employers. When tho dispute came on for hearing before tho Board, tho employers had, he -said, agreed to the'' clauses relating to classification ,of labour, overtime, apprentices, country work, and clause 11 under .'the heading "General Provisions." Evidence on behalf of tho Union was given by Messrs. J. Carroll, H. Charman, K. Frood, E. Gordon, A. Tilai, J. Rogers, W. Beavers, and A. Wilson.

Mr. Mee renewed his application to the Court to exempt the Carrara Ceiling Company's factory. Having addressed the Court, ho called a number of witnesses. Mr., Grenfell asked that other factories should bo exempted if the application of. the Carrara, Ceiling Company were granted. ; His Honour said that the Court would take time to consider its judgment.