GROCERS' DISPUTE.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 460, 19 March 1909, Page 7

GROCERS' DISPUTE.

ATTACK OF CHINESE "SMALL MEN." PLEA FOR A LIVING WAGE. WORST "TRADE" FOR FIFTEEN YEARS. The Court of Arbitration was engaged yesterday hearing the grocers' dispute in connection with which Mr. Carey and Mr. Ford, secretary, appeared for tiio workers and Mr. Grenfcll for the employers. RESULTS OF THE CONFERENCE. All tho matters in dispute between the parties had been settled excepting those relating to the wages of assistants and carters. It had been decided that the week's work for shop assistants should consist of 52 hours. Time and a half was tho rate fixed for overtime. Sunday work, it had been agreed, should be prohibited. The hours of work for carters were fixed at 47}, exclusive of the time required for necessary attendance upon horses and meal hours. Eleven holidays wore agreed upon. Employers were to bo required under the agreement to employ unionists in preference to non-union-ists, provided that any unionist on tho employment book was equally competent with non-unionist availablo to do tho work and willing to accept the employment within 24 hours. Tho award should not apply to clerks and other office assistants, females employed solely in confectionery department. The- scope of the proposed award was to bs within a radius of 20 miles from the G.P.0., and the term two years, from April 7 next. Tho workers claim in regard to shop assistants' wages, which was contested, was as follow:—15 to 16 years, 155.; 16 to 17, 17s. 6d.; 17 to 18, 225. 6d.; 18 to 19, 275. 6d.; 19 to 20, 325. Cd.; 20 to 21, 405.; 21 to 23, 475. 6d.; over 23 years, 525._ 6d. With regard to carters, tho workers claimed the following rates-.—Driving a single horse. 485.; two horses, 525.; for each additional horse, 4s. No counter-proposals wero submitted by the employers, who contended that the provisions of the old award should be adhered to. CASE' FOR THE WORKERS. Mr. Carev, in opening the case for the workers, said that thoy agreed to an application which had been received from the United Farmers' Co-operative Association for exemption on certain conditions. The claims of the workers acknowledged departures from the old award, which camo into operation' in 1902, and was tho first that was mado in tho Dominion. It was hoped to prove that a much higher rate than that mentioned in the existing award had ruled. Tho union was willing to accept the recommendations of the hoard. As to wages it was contended that the ratos fixed six ana a half years ago were not commensurate with tho present rate of living, which had increased from. 18 per cent, to 20 per cent, during that period. The claim of tho carters was tho minimum granted to bakers' drivers, whoso work was less arduous. Originally; the workers claimed that the proportion of youths should be one to five, but the board had reduced the percentage to one to three. He confidently expected that the Court will hold that £2 ss. per week was not a living wage. Tho union had no desire to debar boys from getting employment in the trade, but men who had spent from eight to ten years in tho trade should have some guarantee of continued employment. EVIDENCE OF EMPLOYEES. Michael Mouat, storeman at Wardell's, deposed that he was in receipt of 555. per week. During a conference ho had agreed that tho minimum rate should ho 505., but only on condition that all the other claims were iicccptcu. Melville Ford, clerk at Wardell's, stated that he received 655. per week. He commenced work when he was 13 years of age, and received the minimum rato when ho was a little over 20 years old. Ho paid 16s. 6d. per week for a four-roomed house. To Mr. Grenfcll: It did not always •follow that an especially competent worker received more than the award rate. The firm by which he was employed found tho number of bad debts were increasing. Herbert Arnold, grocer's assistant to Mr. ,Luks, Brooklyn, stated that ho was paid £2 15s. por week. Ho Had never received less than 50s. for the past seven years. Evidence was also givoa by Henry Simmonds, Samuel W. Cope, Walter La Bone, and Geo. Williamson. ATTITUDE OF THE EMPLOYERS. ' Mr. Grenfell, for the employers, contended that workers wore paid according to their ability. He urged that tho Court ought to say that tho least competent worker should be paid a comparatively low rate. There was a real difficulty in securing suitablo boys for the trade. He thought it was shortsighted policy on tho part of the worker to try to curtail the number of those who wished to enter tho nursery which ultimately provided tho union with members. Henry Wardell, of Messrs. Wardell Bros., said that, generally speaking, the present award had worked very satisfactorily. Only one of his shop assistants and four of his carters received only the minimum wage. If tho minimum wage wero fixed any higher it would mean that they would riot be able to engage inexperienced workers. Mr. Carey: Do you expect tho Court to fix less than tho living wage as a minimum wage?— That is a matter for tho Court. In reply to further questions, witness stated that he believed £2 ss. was a living wage for a married worker with one child. He would not care to avail himself of the clause relating to incompetent workers. Some workers after eight years' experience were not worth Is. per hour. To Mr. M'Cullough: Six of his assistants also benefited by the operations of a bonus system. To Mr. Grenfell: Generally speaking, he paid his assistants whilst they were absent through illness. COST OF LIVING CHEAPENING. David William Anderson, of D. Anderson and Co., stated that threo men in their establishment who were receiving the minimum wago were recent arrivals. To Mr. Carey. Are thero men about who would accept employment at any rate? —I don't know. If the minimum wage were 355., would there be applications for employment?— Yes, I suppose so. Replying to a further question, the witness stated that the reason why boys did not enter the trade was not because they feared non-employment when they reached middle age. His Honour: Supposing a youth started in tho trade at 15, what should ho be worth at 23, if ho be competent?—Fro;a 455. to 50s. To Mr. Grenfell: Owing to the largo number of small shopkeepers and the competition of Asiatics, the trade was not very lucrative at present. During tho past few months had debts had shown a tendency to increase.

W. I''. Eggers, house and land agent, stated that ho had less trouble in collecting rent from Asiatics than from Europeans. It was a well-known fact that Chinese employed their own countrymen at low rates. Since he gavo evidence before tho Court in March last year, in connection with tho drivers' dispute, liouso rents had fallen appreciably, more particularly in the city. Wm. Campbell, grocer, Manners Street, stated that on the whole groceries were cheaper now than was tho case in 1902. Thero were one hundred Chineso shops in Wellington, and at every one of them groceries were sold. Only two of his assistants over 23 received only tho minimum rate.

To Mr. Carey: He did not know whether it was becauso Chinese were better business men than Europeans that they wero doing so well.

To Mr. Grenfell: Tho state of tho trade had not Wu worso during the past fifteen years than it was at the present limo. Evidence was also given by R. Scott, manager of the Wellington branch of the Wairarapa Co-opnrativo Farmers' Association. Tho Court decided to take time to consider the matter.