ARBITRATION COURT

Dominion, Volume 16, Issue 156, 20 March 1923, Page 9

ARBITRATION COURT

TWO DISPUTES HEARD THE CITY TRAMWAYS CASE In th© Arbitration Court yesterday, 'the dispute between the Wellington City Corporation and the tramway employees was heard. Mr. Justice Frazer presided, and with him on the bench wore Messrs. W Scott (employers’ assessor) and 11. Hunter (employees’ assessor). Mr. W. A. Grenfell appeared for the corporation and Mr. A. L. Monteith for the employees. In opening the case, Mr. Grenfell said that prior to the present case the tramway; employees were working under an agreement made under the Labour Disputes Investigation Act. The council decided to give effect to the Court’s order reducing wages by ss. per week or IJd. per hour, but it was found that the deduction could not be made, as the Court’s order did not apply. When the agreement expired notice was given to the men of a reduction of 3s. per week and lid. per hour. Tlio men had desired to create a fuithei dispute under the Labour Disputes Investigation Act, but the council refused the. proposal, "and took steps to file the claims under the Arbitration Act. Before the Conciliation Council, an agreement was practically arrived at on all matters except wages. The council asked for a reduction of 3s. ner week bonus and lid. per hour. If the Court agreed to that the tramway men would not have the November cut deducted, and their pay would compare favourably with that of other trades—in fact, they would have gained about £lOOO. Tire council was only seeking a continuance of existing conditions. Mr. Monteith claimed that the matter was not 4o simple as Mr. Grenfell suggested. Instead of favouring the men by deducing only the 3s. bonus, it had first given onlv 35., when it should have given 75., which meant a loss of £7OOO a year to the workers instead of a profit, as alleged, of £lOOO. -He compared the pay of the Wellington workers with that of workers in a number of other places, including America atid England. Ho contended / that the work on the tramways was semi-skilled. The Auckland men received free passes, while the system in Wellington provided for a free pass only to and from work. This meant an advantage to the Aucklanders of Ad. an hour, which should at least bo made tin to the. Wellington men.. Mr. Monteith called formal evidence in regard to certain documents put in. Mr. Grenfell called Mr. R. O. Petersen, acting-assistant general manager of the Wellington Tramways, who produced a number of returns showing that the Auckland employees were not paid as much per hour as those in Wellington. Cross-examined bv Mr. Monteith: He did not know that the Auckland tramwaymen worked only 46 hours. He had merely made a comparison in rates per hour between the two places. Mr. Grenfell asked that the Court should continue the conditions the parties had hitherto agreed upon, and grant the claims of the City Council, especially as no evidence had teen brought to show that a change was necessary. Mr. Murray, secretary of the Metal Workers’ Union, asked that members of his union should not be compelled to join the Tramways Union, while they worked for the corporation. Mr. Monteith contended that tha men were not compelled to join the union—they joined either if they chose —but they had always been members of the Tramways Union, a statement Mr. Murray denied. His Honour did not agree with Mr. Monteith—if tho agreement were confirmed the men referred to must icin the Tramways Union. Finally the matter was left to the Court. Mr. Grenfell raised the question of the coachworkers’ relations with the Tramways Union. » His Honour replied that the award did not apply to coachworkers. Ths coach workers were like Mahomet’s coffin, suspended between the awards. If metal-workers were left out. of the award tho council had tho right to apply for exemption in regard to those workers.

Mr. Grenfell considered that the question of granting free passes was a matter for the council to consider, and did not properly coma within the scope of the award. Judgment was reserved.

METAL WORKERS’ ASSISTANTS. Tho claims of the metal workers’ assistants had been dealt with by the Conciliation Council, apd. several points were reserved for the Court Mr. Murray appeared for the union and Messrs. Grenfell and H. F. Allen for the Wellington Engineers’ Industrial Union of Employers. Mr. Murray stated that in the first case tho employers cited the union, and tho latter cross-cited the employers. The case was before the Conciliation Council when a complete agreement was arrived at, except for the definition of overtime pay. His Honour said there was a question thafi might be cleared out of the way. In 1921 tho question was raised in the Court whether firms engaged in manufacturing roofing iron, ridging, etc., should bo included in the award.

The decision was that there was not sufficient evidence to enable*, the Court '■ to decide whether, as in- other districts, there should be a classification. Mr. Grenfell contended that all the union could claim was that those en-

gaged as assistants should be included, and not those engaged in the actual operations themselves. He submitted the union was not entitled to include main operators of machines. Considerable discussion took place on the point, and His Honour said he was satisfied that some’thir/f would have to.be done to qualify the word “machinists.” Mr. Grenfell asked that in regard to the employment of youths, the employers should be placed in as a position as in other centres. The Otago rates of pay were lower .than he was asking for. Mr. Scott remarked that if the clause proposed went' through it would mean the cutting out of all new industries, such as the manufacture of easements. Mr. Murray contended that if tho Court intended to put in a youths’ clause, his union preferred to leave out the new parties altogether, and let them have an award of •their own. His Honour pointed out that they must recognise that there was room for boys in tho work carried out by some of tho - firms Mr. Murray was trying to bring in. Mr-. Murray admitted that that was

so. Mr. Scott reminded Mr. Murray that he was trying.to “rope .in” nearly every industry in the country, by including engineers “not covered with any other award.” The Court adjourned for half an hour to enable a settlement to be arrived at, and finally a mutual arrangement was made. His Honour said that the award would be made as soon as possible, and the Court adjourned until 10 a.m. tottay.

For Influenza, take Woods’ Great Peppermint Cure. —Advt.