WOMEN WORKERS

Evening Post, Volume LXXXIX, Issue 105, 5 May 1915, Page 8

WOMEN WORKERS

IN PRIVATE HOTELS EVIDENCE IN THE ARBITRATION COURT. Conditions of employment, particularly of women workers in three classes of work, were the subject of argument and evidence before the Arbitration Court today. His Honour Mr. Justice Stringer presided, and on the Bench with him were: Messrs. J. A. M'Cullough and E. F. Duthie, representing workers and employers , respectively. The dispute was between the Hotel, Club, and Restaurant Workers' Union and private hotelkeepers, oyster-saloon keepers, restaurant keepers, and luncheon and tearoom keep ere. The demands relating to private hotels were for the following wages : — Male kitchen and scullery workers, £4 10s, £2 los, £1 15s, and 27s 6d, according to the number and status of hands; female workers, three-fourths of the rate prescribed for males; waiters £1 126 6d, waitresses £1 2s 6d, housemaids 20s. Where board is not provided, the worker ehall be paid 15s a week additional, and where lodging on the employers' business premises is not provided 7s 6d a week extra shall be paid. In the provisions relating to oyster j saloons, restaurants, tea and luncheon rooms, and refreehment rooms, the wages asked were : — Kitchen and scullery, £1 -to 27s 6d; females, threefourths of the above rate; waiters, £1 12s 6d ; waitresses, £1. In the general provision^, minimum rates of pay for casual work were sought. The hburs of work in all establishments covered by the award shall be as follow: — Male workers over 18 years of age, 56 hours a week ; female workers, or youths under the age of 18, 52 hours -a week; not more than ten hours to bo worked in any one day, or spread over a longer period than thirteen hours in the day. One half-day's holiday shall be allowed in Bix-day nouses, and ono full day in seven-day houses. Preference to unionists is also sought. Mr. E. J. Carey appeared for the union and Mr. W. A. Grenfell for the employers. In opening his case, Mr. Carey said that in the matter of regulating hours and holidays, the union had been a shuttlecock between the Arbitration Court and the Legislature. He proceeded to refer to the different attempts that had been made to regulate the hours of workers in hotels and restaurants, and especially, private hotels, which competed with licensed houses in all except the selling of liquor. The conditions asked for had been recognised in many cases as fair and reasonable, and in some cases wages had been paid considerably in excess of the demands. The union's whole desire was to get at what was described as the "disreputable employer." As to .accommodation for employees, who paid 7s 6d a week for it, he gave instances in which men had had to sleep in quarters close to hotel conveniences, some cases on beds which had been in use for 20 or 30 years, and added that in the cases referred to the police had condemned the quarters, and insisted on better quarters being provided. Certain employers had said that if the 7s 6d lodging allowance was made in the award they would build a house afc Lyall Bay and insist on ,the girls living there, or else they would not give the 7s 6d. The "living in" system was, he urged, not for the good of the community, and it was not right that workers should be charged 7s 6d a week for something that was not provided. (Proceeding.)