ARBITRATION COURT.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 150, 19 March 1908, Page 4

ARBITRATION COURT.

YESTERDAY'S BUSINESS. Tlio sittings of fcho Arbitration Court at Wellington woro resumed yesterday morning, Judge Sim. and Messrs. S. Brown (employers' representative) and .J. A. M'Ciillongh (workers' representative) taking-their seats at 10.30 o'clock.' ! COOKS' AND WAITERS' AWARD. APPLICATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS.' , Application. was made by the employers for amendments to the Cooks' and Waiters. Award. Sir. Pryor appeared on behalf of the employers, and Mr..Carey for the Union., Mr.' Pryor.stated that in'the recont awardno : wages had : been, fixed for hotel .waiters other "than first, second, and third waiters, whoso wages had been set down at £2 10s., £2, and £1 7s. Gd.' respectively.- In view of the fact that provision had been made under the heading "Kitchen" for the wages of first, second, arid third kitchen hands, also for others, it was believed that the intention of tho Court was to fix a rato of wages for other waiters, and that such provision had been 1 inadvertently-omitted." Tn the opinion .pf- the omployors ;tho rate tor other waiters'should be fixed .at,2_s. 6cL Then, 1 again. Clause 2 of the,award provided for th'o'omployment of waiters and waitresses as .probationers in hotels. ' At 'tho hearing, of tho dispute application - was made on behalf of the employers cited for a similar provision to 'be made applicable to all- classes of workers' covered by-the'award. It .wasbelieved by tUo,.employers 'that it was not the intention of the'. Court- that, the. vision made should bo. confined in its oporations to hotels. . . . . . Mr.'lCaroy, in reply, hold that in hotels; where three waiters or over wero employed the wages, for. waiters, other than tho. head and second waiters should not ho loss than' 275. 6d., the.rate fixed for third waiters by, the; award except in tho case of probationers. After tho head and- second waiters all other waiters -performed similar ; duties, and ! were on an equal footing in other' respects. : Further, that' the custom, of the trade was to recognise no, other classification ■ after second and third waiters. Tho'other, proposed amendment was-an to defeat' tho minimum wage provision, of the award;- Members of tho Union were, of, opinion that tho present minimum wage was only a living wage. The clauso relating to probationers was found not to bo applicable,, and it was "considered undesirable to extend tho provisions to other employees. •• The' Court intimated that it would take time to consider its . decision.., .