DELAYS IN ISSUE OF AWARDS

Dominion, Volume 31, Issue 271, 12 August 1938, Page 13

DELAYS IN ISSUE OF AWARDS

Criticism Of Courts

DISCONTENT STILL VERY PREVALENT . Discontent, among various sections of industry over delays in the issue ot awards and difficulty in securing fixtures with: the Courts of Arbitration U still reported to be prevalent. A further disconcerting feature, it is stated, is the dissatisfaction existing over the provisions of several awards recently issued. Inquiries indicate that two opinions exist over the trend of industrial disputes in New’ Zealand. On the one hand the courts have come in for severe criticism. The delays are stated to mean the loss of thousands of pounds to workers. On the other hand the view is taken that the accumulation of work set u problem for both courts, but that this is steadily being overtaken. It is considered that within a few months the machinery of the courts should be functioning to the satisfaction of all concerned. Accumulated Work. The Second Court of Arbitration was established in November, 1937, with the object of assisting in clearing accumulated work and in expediting future proceedings. Both courts have visited all the four centres. The Court of Arbitration is at present in Auckland. having just concluded sittings in Otago and Southland. The Second Court is how sitting in Christchurch, after having spent several months hearing Wellington disputes. Quite a number of awards are still awaited in disputes already heard by both courts. According to the legislation, the courts are to issue awards within a month of the hearing of the disputes unless special circumstances prevail. Approximately 12 awards are still waited in which, over two months has elapsed since the court hearings, and in which it is contended there are no special circumstances. It is expected that both; courts will have completed their present fixtures by October, and that by that stage the bulk of the accumulated work will have been overtaken. It is pointed out,' however, that the present slow progress of the courts has resulted in the banking up of applications for fixtures. Disputes heard in the Conciliation Council in Wellington several months ago are still awaiting fixtures with the courts. Further, by the time they are disposed of, many awards, the majority of which are now of one year’s duration only, will have expired, and in many instances applications for fresh awards may come forward. Irritated at the delays, several workers’ unions have pressed for retrospective pay. This has been opposed in principle by the employers on the ground that they have not been responsible for the delays. In some instances, however, retrospective pay has been agreed upon in Conciliation Council, but this, it is contended, does not discount the justification of the protest by the employers. It is further contended that as many of the industries seeking awards are not new’, the courts are not burdened with the task of inquiring into technical conditions, these having already been well set and fixed in previous awards. It appears on The surface that the major questions are wages and hours, and that the courts should not have great difficulty in deciding these. Pronouncements of Courts.

The opinion that there was no excuse for the courts delaying their decisions was expressed toy an assessor who has had considerable experience of industrial disputes, He pointed out that Mr. Justice I’age had made definite pronouncements on hours and wages, the latter not to be less than prior to 1931, vfhen the 10 per cent, reduction was imposed under an amendment to the Finance Act. Very little difficulty was experienced during the period Mr. Justice Page presided over the court Both parties knew exactly where they stood and decisions by the court were prompt Such was not the case at present, and was responsible for the discontent. Following Mr. Justice O’Regan’s appointment, a pronouncement was given that weekly wages would be increased by 5/- a week, and rates were fixed for skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled work. It was felt that these would be the fixed rates for 12 months. At that stage one of the disputes awaiting the decision of the court related to carpenters. . When they met in Wellington, the meu demanded lid. an hour above the 2/9 an hour fixed by the court because it was necessary to find tools. The employers conceded 2/9J an hour for carpenters and joiners whether tools were provided or not. This had the effect of swinging the rates again, because it could be shown that bricklayers, for example, who had more broken time than any other trades, had in the past received more than carpenters. They held out for 2/10i an hour, which was given by the court at a later stage.

The advent of the second court had not helped matters. Decisions were delayed, and further inconsistencies had occurred. These delays deprived a large number of workers of wages to which they claimed they were entitled under the pronouncement of the Court of Arbitration. They were also responsible for preventing other sections of industry from securing fixtures with the courts for the hearing of applications for new awards. This was a distinct hardship on these industries, particularly if there should develop a lesser period of prosperity by the time their disputes reached the courts. Overdue Awards. Dominion awards affecting large sections of workers which are being awaited are: Shop assistants, butchers (except Auckland), chemists, saddlers, soft goods warehouse workers, stonemasons, and bakers. With the exception of the bakers’ dispute, fully two months and more has elapsed since the disputes were heaid. Five awards are awaited In Otago and Southland. In addition a numlier of other district awards are awaited, in which more than a month has passed since the hearings.