Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

MUNICIPAL WORKERS

New Award Being' Discussed Discussion of the conditions of work of Wellington City Council employees under the Wellington municipal labourers’ award was commenced by a Conciliation Council yesterday and will be continued to-day. Agreement has been reached on some of the minor points. The proposed award which the workers claim is a complex one providing for each specialised task. The wages the workers seek vary for the different jobs, hut a minimum of £4/15/- a week is claimed for all adult male workers instead of £4/6/4 provided by the existing award, and a minimum of £3/16/- for adult females. Proportionate increases are claimed for each kind of work. The holidays claimed also vary according to the work an employee is doing. The city council’s counter-proposals are the same as the existing award, made in 1929 and amended in 1933 and 1934. In it hourly wages are set out for each class of worker.

Mr. S. Ritchie, conciliation commissioner. presided. The advocate for the ■Wellington Labourers’ and Related Trades Union and the Municipal and General Workerg’ Union was Mr. I’. M. Butler, and tbe assessors were Messrs. M. O’Grady, P. E. Wright. V. 11. Blair, and R. Summerfield. Mr. W. J. Mountjoy was the advocate for the city council. and the assessors were Messrs. E. R. McKillop, M. J. Casey, F. S. Marchant, and J. G. MacKenzie.

At the beginning of the sitting, Mr. A. Pnrlane, on behalf of the Drivers’ Union, asked that refuse collectors and drivers of mechanical shovels be excluded from the provisions of the proposed award, as they were already covered by the drivers’ award.

Mr. Butler replied that there was no intention of including in the proposed award any members of other unions; there was a specific clause excluding workers covered by _any other award. ,

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19370730.2.158.8

Bibliographic details

Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 260, 30 July 1937, Page 18

Word Count
301

MUNICIPAL WORKERS Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 260, 30 July 1937, Page 18

MUNICIPAL WORKERS Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 260, 30 July 1937, Page 18

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert