TO-DAY'S SITTING

Evening Post, Volume CIII, Issue 73, 28 March 1922, Page 7

TO-DAY'S SITTING

QUESTION OF PROCEDURE.

When the case was resumed this morning Mr. Smith said that since the ad-< journment last night the employers hadi considered the, proceedings and," in, view; of the short time at the disposal at the court, with his Honour's permission, hi proposed to go on with, his case in the ordinary way.- Mr. Roberts could conduct his case as he pleased.and where he pleased—Auckland or anywhere else.- ---_ His Honour agreed that this was the right way. "I am sorry," he said, "that the time of the court is so limited, for that, is the cause of the trouble. We felt -yesterday we.were hot in a position to dictate to either side how it should' conduct its case." Nothing would be •lost, he added, by the procedure Mr.. Smith proposed to adopt. The fact that Mr. Roberts Would have more time to get ready would" hot prejudice the case' of the other side. At. the conclusion of the evidence both sides would have the-' opportunity of addressing the court, so Mr. Smith would really be on an equal': footing with Mr. Roberts in having the < last word or next to the last word. .''Wo can certainly assure both sides," said.; his Hbnour, "that any little hitch in the', proceedings will not .prejudice either 1 side. We shall have ampleopportunity to give attention to everything whether brought forward at the beginning or the end." ■ -•...-■ Mr. Roberts expressed himself quit* satisfied, and the case proceeded. OVERTIME AND OUTPUT. ■ Captain Walton, wharf superintendent ofc the Union Steam Shift Company, continued.' his evidence, dealing with the technical side of the claims and counter-claims. He gave reasons for supporting the" proposal to work overtime at night with: night shifts without the restrictions proposed by ; the union, limiting the period' to midnight. Turning to the "stop- . work" meeting, the. witness described the excessive waste of'time involved, tliev holding up of the carriers and general transport, arid the increase of overtime that, had to be paid. There was a "stopwork" regularly once a month, and a number of irregular ones held -whenever the union thought fit. .The employers were hot consulted. Half the men were ■ inside the meeting and half outside. As' regarded the rules of the tinibnf inimical to the agreement, the witness said the decision as to the output of coal' wit a result of ft resolution <jf the union; Whether easy or difficult coal, the output kept to the same low level.' Similarly, there was the resolve not to work after 10 p.m. _^ This concluded the examination of the witness. . ' In ■ cross-examination, Mr. Roberts asked Captain Walton whether he had any evidence as to a resolution. of the union to restrict output. The witness said his evidence was quite clear—there were clear indications of an organised attempt to restrict output. The union took good care he didl riot get any evidence. As to cessation ofr work at 10 n.ni, the witness said he hadurged the union at Lyttelton to continues to work overtime. This was. in 1916.They had slopped,the."go-slow" .in Lyfctelton. - ■ ..-' : Mr. Roberts then referred to the judg-1 ment of Mr. Justice' Stringer in the AraWa case in favour of the men on the question of overtime after 10, o'clock. In answer to a question, the witness said the "stop-Work" meetings usually lasted till noon, and the work was lost for half a day. sometimes. They could . hot make up for "stop-work" losses bji overtime. ' Mr. Roberts; "Do you. think the waterside workers desire overtime? Do..they hold the meetings to increase overtime?" —"I do not know what their intention is." The witness said the general body .of the waterside workers would work overtime, if they had the opportunity.. Mr. Roberts: "Who stops them?"—'l suppose the union." "How do you know?"—" That is my opinion." ".. His Honour: "We know ba cannot give us direct evidence." • Mr. Roberts: "I am only a layman in. these matters, your Honour. ;ffis Honour: "Ddn'fcl.worry, Mr...Rob-' erts. You are doing very well indeed." His Honour said it was only Captain | Walton's opinion, what he had been led to believe. Mr. Roberts: "As long as that is all, we are satisfied." . ■ Continuing, -Mr. Roberts asked if ths witness was aware that the uniou h'a«s taken a ballot on the question over- , I time after 10 .o'clock. The reply, was in | the 'negative/ Witness, said he did not know that Mr. - Bruce had asked- th« union to work; after"lo o'clock. What Mr. Bruce would say'on the stand andji what he..would say-off,,the. stand vvere| two different things.' ' Mr. Roberts; "Have you : any < ev£< dence?" '" ■ "'.'""■.'.- The Witness.: "No. It is my opinion., What Mr. Roberts, would say to, theunion at our request might be very dif-,, ferent from -. what he - wcfhld sayji privately." '.; ' ■ ' " ■■"' Mr. Roberts : /'lf the Court will, aw.'. oepfc it that I have not had enough in-* fluence with the union to get, them toj work after 10 o'clock., I am satisfied, but I am not going to accept the charge that I have been dishonest." His Honour explained again that, cvii den.tly.the witness's opinions were derived from his general experience," buj could not be x supp6Vfced "with facts. In further examination} the .witness Said there were 1400 to 1700 men, works ing generally oil the wniirf at the present time. He did not know how many men were required for the whole of the wharves.^ It would, not be 2000 is normal times. ■ ■ ■-. RIGGING-EXTRA GEAR, * ' In regard to rigging extra gear in trS same hatch to facilitate unloading, the witness said he could rig t-en gears ii one hatch, but the waterside workers would not work under them. The met had refused to work under two yardanns, The men could rig it themselves. Hi personally did not rig any gear. Ris ging. of gear was not an expert's -..jot It w«o possible to rig two. gears, but tli

(men. would not work under thant. In liyttelton a collier had been discharged iii 52 hours by the continuous gang system. Whenever a vessel required it, it was customary to work relieving gangs. : SKILLED - LABOUR, ■' The witness was then examined as to skilled labour on a statement mad* yesterday that native labour was just as skilled as British labour in this class of ■work. To-day Captain Walton said that an this particular class of work tho native was sometimes a great deal more skilled. New Zealand ' cargo was tho simplest cargo to handle in the world. In India, for instance, there was a great tleal of rice to handle,'which was difficult, as it had to be stacked so as to ventilate properly. - His Honouv: "Can't we cut this short? The Court distinguishes between general classes of skilled work. A pick and shovel man may have some skill. In our awards we understand a skilled trade to fee one in which it is necessary to serve iomc apprenticeship.";,.,., „ ■ . . ? Mr. Roberts: "I quits admit the fact, that there is a distraction between the average, stevedor who has,not served an apprenticeship,and the avorage engineer. But a large number of the waterside workers are seamen—who have been to jiea since the age of 16 as ordinary seamen. They serve an apprenticeship in their business—-of ten if our yeaisas ordin-' iry seamen until they are made A.B.'s." ; COURTS-OPEN- MIND.; ';; His Honour : "Certain jobs have to be done on the wharf which, may approximate to' those'pf skilled 'tradesmen more than other jobs.' Until; "we hear of pariicular jobs we cahnrit express any particular opinion. We are approaching this case with an open mind. If we find a skilled'man we shall regard that'man as skilled.- But we don't want to eiit«r into any ■ discussion as to whether a Coloured man is superior to a whiteman. We hope, the white man is going to retain his superiority in everything. Captain Walton's opinion is that general stevedoring work-is-not skilled labour in the ordinary,use of the tarmi". . ; Mr. Roberts^ expressed the strongest objection to British waterside workers being compared with native races. He ■was a .waterside worker,.himself, ; ,and the. witness's,reference • was -insulting. \ He lioped they could carry on without insult- •• . , . > . „ . • His Honour : "I ' think Captain Walton hardly means to institute a comparison of that nature." . '.' Mr. Roberts : "Outside the Court I am equal in every way.'' ' His Honour: "The witness had evidently no intention to ctrnvey; anything tnoTo' in his words than that the ordinary waterside work in foreign ports was performed by men who were not in skilled professions or qualified tradesmen. In some cases the work .*cas done by the coolie class. It was the same in ports all over the world. Where a man; no matter what ■his race, performed one class 'of work, he hatiirally got more and moTe expert. Pick and shovel men were commonly called unskilled, though.. they might be very expert men. ■ . ■ ■ Mr.. Roberts remarked that the union did not draw any distinction between Hack, and white. • ' ■: ' : In further evidence,- the witness declared that Mr. Bruce had threatened to stick a coal ship, up unless extra rates were paid. The suggestion was denied by Mr. Roberts, who produced, copies of .agreements to show that: an offer made by the employers had been accepted by the'union'.; • .■■..■.'■ v During the afternoon Captain Walton was further cross-examined by Mr. Roberts in reference to several clauses in the claims. He would be surprised to learn, he said, that travelling to and from Miramar would cost a nian 8s 8d a week. LAn average time of five minutes had been conceded to men working at the two extreme ends of tho wharves. In the case of, transfers, the witness argued that if /the Harbour Board men were unable to ;do certain work on wharves, then the emtployers should have the right to employ .jinen. They ( wanted the same thing in i'Wellington as in Auckland. The witness said there weTe cases of men clear- , dng out from coal, trucks and meat trucks and'not coining bapk. i Ma 1. Roberts: "Are the foremen on the Wolliugton wharves incapable?"— "You know they are not. Bnt we don't want to be continually having trouble." „ ' (Proceeding.)