TAWA FLAT

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 16, 20 January 1928, Page 8

TAWA FLAT

CONTRACTOR'S VIEWS MR. FURKERT'S EVIDENCE COST OF PUBLIC WOKKS The hearing of evidence on both sides in the Tawa Plat tunnel dispute was concluded shortly befqre 6 p.m. yesterday by the special tribunal appointed. Some interesting views vn the cost of public works were expressed by the Engineer-in-Chief of the Public Works Department (Mr. F. W. Furkert) in the course of cross-examination. Addresses by advocates on either side will be heard at 2.15 p.m. to-day, when the tribunal will consider its decision. Mr. E. Page, S.M., presided. The employers were represented by Messrs. T. O. Bishop and H. D. Vickery, and the men by. Messrs. J. Roberts and R. Semple. Mr. J. Burnside put the case for the contractors (Messrs. Burnside and Matthews), and Mr. A. Cook for the workerg. Mr. A. E. Waite was present on behalf of the Labour Department. Evidence was given on behalf of the men by Messrs. R. Knight, E. Young, W. Cooper, and J. M'Guire, who all statod that the work was harder ea the Tawa Flat job than on similar works on which they had .been engaged in other parts of New Zealand, and gave evidence of having obtained higher , wages for similar work elsewhere. Considerable stress was laid by the witnesses on the fact that shovellers had the hardest and most dangerous work in a tunnel, involving the lifting of heavy timbers, and, having to clear out the spoil before timbers could be put in, working with their heads down they were less able to keep an eye on overhekd dangers than other workers. BASED ON P.W.D. FIGURES. Mr. J. Burnside, for the employers, said that he had secured the contract by tender based on what was paid by the agreement in force on Public Works jobs, and by what was paid in the case of the Armstrong-Whitworth Company. In both cases there were agreements in operation, and he had taken it for granted that these rates would not be exceeded. The majority of the contracts by both the employing parties he had mentioned were in the backblocks, yet when he had taken a contract within five minutes of a city he was asked to-pay higher wages. It would cost £3 to get to some of these outside jobs, while it only cost 6d to get to Tawa Flat tunnel. It was said that the Public Works contracts provided huts, and so many holidays a year, but there was accommodation at Tawa Flat. Mr. Cook: "That's quite incorrect." It was'stated that accommodation was provided in the ease of only one man, a compressor attendant, and that transport between the work and the .men's homes was not provided. Mr. Burnside said that a hot and cold shower was provided, also changing room, so that men could come to work in their city clothes,- change and go to work, change, again, and leave dressed for the street. There were drying rooms— ■ A worker (who was called to order): "Cut out the drying rooms, please." Mr. Burnside contended that men with families living at Lake Coleridge or Arapuni could not live so cheaply as in Wellington, nor had. they the same facilities for their families, and he did not see that the rates of the agreements in 'force between Armstrong-Whit-worth 's and their men and the Public Works Department and their men should be exceeded in his case. The work in the Tawa Flat tunnel was no different from that in any other tunnel in New Zealand. It was true that men working on co-operative contracts made ■ more money, because they expected to, but they worked harder than men on day work. As regarded the question of night shifts, he quoted the ease of the Omana tunnel, where the tunnellers got 2s 3d, shift bosses 2s 4Jd, and labourers 2s. It was true that they got accommodation, but they were expert tunnellers. DOWNWARD WAGE TREND? He asked the tribunal to consider that at the present time wages showed a tendency, in the centres to drop, and there was a good deal of unemployment in the country. He had been approached by men to put them on at wages lower than he was offering, but he had not accepted them so far. . The Engineer-in-Chief of the Public Works Department (Mr. F. W. Furkert), called by Mr. Burnside, said that though there were a number of other tunnels in New Zealand, it was not a common occurrence to put men at work in them on day wages. Tho Department put the men on co-operative work, as much as possible, and day wages wore only paid on what were more or less odd ;jobs. The men worked harder on cooperative work as a rule and made more money, but some organisations kept to the rates of the agreement with his Department on day wages. NO SPECIAL DIFFICULTIES. He did not consider the Tawa Flat tunnel more difficult than any other tunnel. There were certainly no special difficulties about it. As far as the danger of the No. 1 heading was concerned, if a face were left standing for six i weeks he would not expect to go back and find it in good order, but he was informed that while the work was going on it was kept safe. It would have to be cleaned up before work was started. Cross-examined by Mr. Cook, Mr. Furkert said that there was only one man in a hut at the Tawa Flat job. There were three huts there, that could be used if desired, but they were in the gorge and not on the Hutt road. It was.not a fact that the Department was paying Is more on the Tawa Flat work than elsewhere, and if the men had been paid extra on the Hutt Valley deI viation in order to compensate them for the amount of travelling he had #ot heard >•? it. As far as he knew Ihe'agruL'DH... was being adhered to. To Mr. Bishop: Witness said that he •csired the Public Works agreement to form the basis of any registered agreement, leaving him the option of payIng higher, rates if they were justified. Mr. Cook raised the objection that Mr. Burnside was now going back on the offer.made in conference recently, tut Mr. Pago said that.it was the practice in the Arbitration Court wherever an offer was not accepted, not to ajlow it to be referred to again as a basis. Mr. A. F. Dowiu-i, Assistant Engineer for tho Public Works Department on the tunnel, gave evidence regarding the state of the face above the entrance. . The tribunal . adjourned until 2.15 p.m. to-day. Mr. Cook: "This country is full of 'greasy back'l"—"There are some in it, but not more than in most places. It is less dangerous than most places." "You have not personally inspected the approach ?'' —'' No.'' "MUCH TOO HIGH." Questioned regarding the co-operative system, Mr. Furkert said that in his opinion co-operative wages were much too high. Mr. Semplo said that the presence of' clay seams and "greasy backs" made' the ground dangerous. Mr. Furkert replied that if men were tut careless in a tunnel nineteen feet wide as if they were working one six

feot wide they would kill themselves, but he thought the tunnel Jess dangerous than some others. Mr. Semple: "Do you think that shovellers, who, do the hardest work, are not entitled to consideration?"— "It is universally considered all over the world that shovellers get the least pay." Asked whether the shovelling in the Tawa Flat tunnel was not harder than most, Mr. Furkert said that one lot of rock shovelling was much like another. In some of the northern tunnels where the spoil was like glue, it would certainly be harder than in this tunnel. QUESTION OP RENTS. To Mr. Roberts, Mr. Furkert said that the huts erected on somo of the northern contracts at a cost of about £150 would k-t at about 9s a week, but he did not think they would comply with the city bylaws here. It was not the responsibility of the Department to make the batter at the entrance safe, but that of the contractors, who would be advised to do so if i* were necessary by the Department's engineer. If the contractor were asked by one of the men to make the face safe he would not be bound to do so unless he thought it necessary. Mr. Roberts: "What is the price of the contract?" —"I do not know." Mr. Vickery: "It is a public matter." Mr. Semple: "Why this secrecy? The people's representatives should know." It was stated that some machinery and plant had been supplied by the Public Works Department. CONTRACT PRICE UNDISCLOSED. Mr. Page said He did not think it was necessary for the contractors to disclose the price. It was not a relevant matter in any case, because the tribunal was not going to cut wages because the contractor had offered a low price, any more than it would necessarily^ raise wages if the contractor had got a good price. Mr. Roberts: "That satisfies me." To Mr. Bishop, Mr. Furkert said that while the agreement in force between the Department and its men was not in any sense an award, it had been arrived at by mutual consent. He did not see any reason why those rates should be exceeded at Tawa Flat. There had been a slightly downward tendency in wages during the last twelve months. A SMALL JOB. Mr. Page: "What is this job, really J" —"It is merely putting a hole through the smaller hill. Not the big hill at the back, but merely a hole along what, will be the bottom of the shorter tunnel, to enable the contractor in the big tunnel to put his spoil from the back tunnel straight into the harbour. It is not in any sense finishing the first tunnel. It represents about one-for-tieth of the expenditure on the deviation as a whole." Mr. Bishop: "Would you consider the leading man in the tunnel entitled to the same wages as an expert mechanic or fitter, who gets 2s 3d per hour?"—"I would consider that a tunnel man should not get so much. It takes a man years of training from youth up to become a competent mechanic or fitter, whereas anyone who has never seen.a tunnel can become a good tunnel man in a few months. But there is the disagreeable nature of the work and a certain amount of danger which the mechanic does not have to consider." SUFFICIENTLY SKILLED. "Mr. Bishop: "Do you consider Mr. Burnside sufficiently skilled to make the job safef" —"Yes, the people on the board were those under whom ho has worked, and they considered that he was a suitable man to put the work through." Mr. Vickery: "Do wages made on co-operative work fix the day wages?" —"No, it's the other way round. We fix the price of the jobs so that they will give a man a reasonable chance of a living wage. The co-operative men make more because of their team work and extra assiduity, and also, perhaps, because they pick better jobs." THE DISCHARQED MEN. Joseph Burnside, giving evidence regarding the question of reinstatement, said that he had dismissed five men in one day, including Kelly and Penazzo, whose reinstatement was desired. All the leading men on the two shifts were then dispensed with. A week before he had told them that they would be discharged unless better progress was made, and at the end of the week he discharged them. They took their money but did not ask the reason they were dismissed, which was because they were not doing their work. To Mr. Page: If the tribunal fixed an increased wage for the men witness's contract would not allow him to pass it on to the Government. Mr. Semple: "You did not discharge Kelly because oi his loyalty to his union?" —"No, I did not." Mr. Roberts: "Did Kelly as president of the union discuss conditions in the tunnel with you?"—"He did not. He might have discussed them with my partner.'' A MINIMUM WAGE. To Mr. Page, Mr. Burnsido said that while he considered the wages paid by him reasonable to good men, he thought them too high to form the minimum of an award. He had dismissed Penazzo primarily because he was an unsatisfactory worker and also because he did not know the language.