REASONS FOR PRICE REDUCTIONS

Dominion, Volume 31, Issue 154, 26 March 1938, Page 8

REASONS FOR PRICE REDUCTIONS

Woollen Manufacturers’ Explanation ARBITRATION COURT CASE CONCLUDES Reasons why the prices of woollen goods had been reduced at a considerable loss to manufacturers, and factors with which the industry would have to contend in meeting any wage increases, were outlined by Mr. J. Evans, one of the employers’ representatives, during the hearing by the Court of Arbitration, at Wellington, yesterday, of the application for a new award to cover the wages and conditions of employment of workers in New Zealand woollen mills and hosiery factories. A Mr. Justice O’Regan presided. Associated with him were Mr. W. Cecil Prime (employers’ representative), and Mr. A. L. Monteith (employees’ representative). After extending over four days the hearing concluded yesterday, the court reserving its decision. When the case for the employers was resumed, Mr. Evans announced that an agreement had been reached so far as the classification of all woollen mill worker? was concerned, it being left to the court to decide into what group they would be placed. Classification had also -been agreed on regarding hosiery workers, but not the grouping. This had greatly simplified the employers case. Statement Resented. Stating that he strongly resented the deliberate attack made by the ‘employees’ advocate, Mr. W. T. Young, on his company, William Edwin Winks, managing director of the Manawatu Knitting Mills, Ltd., said he desired to refute Mr. Young’s statements, which, he alleged, were placed before the court in .such a manner as deliberately to. mislead it. lhe employment of young girls by his farm was due to the fact that in Palmerston North it was impossible to secure any skilled labour in the trade as there was no other such class of work in that centre. He said that he would much prefer to employ experienced adults . if he could get thlm and have very few young workers. It was a class of trade in which the employees had to be trained. When they left he had to get other young girls in and train them. I. In cross-examining witness, Mr. Young contended that Mr. Winks had distorted and misquoted his statement. ‘Mr. Prime said Mr. Young’s inference obviously was that once the company had to pay young women £2 and £2/5/- it dismissed them and engaged young girls at 15/- a week. Mr. Winks repeated that this suggestion was contrary to the facts. Evidence as to the value of the work in the mills was given by John Hatrick, mill manager, Prestige, Ltd., and George Greenwood, mill manager, Kaiapoi Woollen Company. Reasons for Price Reductions.

When the afternoon.session began Mr. Monteith said he wished to hear evidence as to whether any price reductions had been made and to question any witnesses on this point. Mr. Evans said that the price of woollen goods had been reduced by 5 per cent, on general lines as from March 1, and knitting lines had been reduced by 1/a pound. These reductions had been agreed to by the New Zealand Woollen Mjll Owners’ Association. Explaining the reductions, Mr. Evans said they were not justified.by the present position of the industry in New Zealand, but had been necessary to meet Home competition. He went on to explain that the conditions applying to New Zealand manufacturers were vastly different from those obtaining at Home. In New Zealand it was necessary to buy the whole season’s requirements in three or four months, and to keep stocks in hand. Goods now being sold were manufactured from last season’s wool, which had been bought at higher prices than prevailed at this season’s sales. The industry in the United Kingdom, however, was run on different lines. There it was the general practice of manufacturers to buy yarns on the open market from day to day at present day prices. As the result of the United Kingdom manufacturer being able to buy from day to day at prices paid for greasy wool at this season’s sales, he was able to quote cheaper prices for his goods than the New Zealand manufacturer. This had~caused the local woollen mills to get together and decide, on price reductions to meet the competition, although it meant a considerable loss to them. Mr. Evans quoted an instance to illustrate his argument. In reply to Mr. Monteith, Mr. Evaris said this was the only reason for the reductions. The fact that the dispute was coming on had nothing to do with the reduction.

Asked if the industry would be able to bear increases in the wage rates, Mr. Evans said that if the wage rates were increased every mill would be compelled to recost, and there might have to be price increases. ■ Mr. Monteith: Are w_e to understand that the industry cannot meet the competition from Home? Mr. Evans said he understood that millowners were anxious to approach the Government for further tariff protection. So far as the textile industry -was concerned there had been no alteration in the tariff since 1888. Mr. Monteith: But irrespective of this is it not a fact that the woollen mill-own-ers have been securing a greater proportion of New Zealand business year by year? Mr. Evans said he could not say offhand. Only statistics would prove this. Mr. Monteith : But your returns have increased despite increased costs?—“l could not say offhand.” After both advocates had summed up the court announced that it would reserve its decision.