SHIPWRIGHTS

Evening Post, Volume CXXV, Issue 71, 25 March 1938, Page 6

SHIPWRIGHTS

AWARD SOUGHT

SHORTER WEEK OPPOSED

I •". Proceedings .. before the Arbitration Court to secure an award 'for ship-wrights-and boatbuilders in the Aucki land (including Gisborne). Wellington, and Otago industrial districts were continued in the Arbitration Court yesterday afternoon when the employers' representations were heard. Mr. Justice Hunter presided, with him being associated Mr. W. E. Anderson (employers' representative) and Mr. A. W. Croskery (workers' representative).

Mr. F. P. Walsh appeared for the applicant workers, and Mr. G. H. Norman "represented the employers.

; Mr. Norman opposed the.workers' application for a 40-hour week, arguing that a 40-hour week for shipwrights would upset the arrangements for ship repair. The'employers asked for a 44----hour weekj and Mr. Norman referred to, the/Dominion plumbers' award, in which !Mr. Justice O'Regan had granted a>.44-hour week for ship work. Since September 1, 1936, when the Factories Act commenced to operate-, said Mr. Norman, the question of a 44-hour week for ship work had ■ been before the Court on many occasions, and the 44 hours for ship repair work had been allowed in a. number of awards. In some cases when a ship was overhauled twelve shore awards or agreements became , operative,' and when other workers engaged were counted there could be a total of 26 awards operating on a ship, and all of \ these provided: for Saturday work., The employers submitted that there should be some relationship between the conditions'of all .:ot'»the awards. The shipwrights .constituted a comparatively small number of the men employed on ship repair work, and if they were granted a 40-houi^week it would be a case of "the tail wagging- the dog."

Mr.' Norman also opposed the payment of travelling time under certain conditions. Since the, advent of the Floating Dock, he said, larger ships had been repaired at Wellington, and a large.part of the overhaul work was done at Clyde Quay. The union claimed travelling time from the Patent Slip, although actually some'of-the workers had to travel less to get to Clyde Quay. The employers claimed that the travelling time should be paid when the men were transferred but hot when they went ' straight -to the work at Clyde Quay.; .They agreed that travelling time should be paid to the Floatling -Dock. ■ . ■■~. .\: ;\

;:,^;Mr,:.-.Norman' ;,tben called evidence regarding the ytotk that was. done on ship repairing on Saturdays.

The case was • unfinished when the Court, adjourned at 5 p.m. until today. , ■...