MILL WORKERS

Evening Post, Volume CXXV, Issue 71, 25 March 1938, Page 8

MILL WORKERS

DOMINION DISPUTE

HEARING CONTINUED

CASE FOR EMPLOYERS

Submissions made during the past few days by the workers' organisation were replied to by the representatives of the' employers at the' continuation of the hearing in the Court of Arbitration yesterday afternoon of^, the application for a new-Dominion award for' woollen mill and hosiery factory employees. Evidence was also called on behalf of the employers in .respect of the operations' of various ■ companies'. .....'. . Mr. Justice O'Regan presided/, and with his Honour were Messrs: W. Cecil Prime and A. L. Monteith. Mr. W. T. Young and Mr. W.- W: Batchelor conducted the case for the workers, and Mr. A. S. Cookson and Mr. James Evans the case for the employers. THE WAGES PAID. Before reading' the employers' proposed submissions, Mr. Cookson commented in a general way oiv the case submitted on behalf of the. .workers. Throughout his submissions," ihe .-said,Mr. Young had made accusations of unfairness by the employers, and attempts to', evadei\V they- award. Mr. Young also said, if riot'in so.many words, in effect at''any rate, that the woollen mill -workers were ..the worst treated oi :'-'any: ■ worker'■•<■ in the Dominion. The woollen mill workers, Mr. ..Young had ..suggested, had _ received no increases in' wages since about 1921. Mr. ■'. Cookson-, said .he wished to point out that in 1928; when the. present award was made, the standard 'rates of the Arbitration, Court had not been changed since 1921. In 1928 the court repeated the 1926 award without alteration. He thought that possibly a wrong impression had been created in the minds of the court from what had been said by the other side. : His Honour: No, I don't think bo. Mr. Cookson said he .thought1 it might appear from the statements that had been 'made that while other workers had received increases since i 928 the wages of the woollen mill workers had; remained stationary. The position was that until; the end of 1937, subject of course to the 10 per cent, reduction and the'■'restoration .in 1936; the standard rates'of wages remained unaltered.... It was not until the end of 1937 that increases in wages had been granted.'to workers; who. had then got their cases before,:,the court. Mr.■■CpokEqri>:referred;.the ;cour.t. to the percentage increases -in ;wages, which-he said had.taken place 'between 1914 'and .'''i^a.'. -They- were: ■ Adult femalesi, ■80 ■ :per cent;;-;' :,wool 1 sorters, -100 per cent.; .tuners,. 78.57,-.per 'cent.; J1 warpers,' >1J78'.57; ' per: - -cent:; 'weavers, 108.33 perc ent.; spinners, 100 per cent.; --wool; sciourers,'. :chainminders, assistant combers.,and:,'.head pressers,.-104.44' per .-cent.; :> general hands, 95.55 :per.;cent. . This,, he^sudi. ■mittfed, would show that the workers had not. been'so harshly treated'.;as 'had been'attempted to be, ■madeVwt ;by'thjs,;other side::. ■ ■]<;':^'li ''■■ CIiASiIFIGATION OF|'WpßK;|t ; ' Z M^.' Cookson';': then proceeded^to. deal with -'.certain aspects^: ':&?.[] the workers' claims. Regarding-.-the'.'-clas-sification of' work submitted by '-'the, employees; lie said that the' workers representatives 'had now, modified the classification to ■ some ■ extent, ■ and he thought it might be.possible to narrow it down still further: Mr. ;Cooks.on. suggested a conference of-the-parties on the point later in the afternoon, and this was agreed upon. - _ ■ Mr. Cookson contended also that some of the statements contained in Mr. Young's address were contrary to fact. He referred to, certain statements in respect to ' the position of some' of the mills and said that he ;would-be .calling .evidence on the ! -Mr.-'James.. Evans,- also, for the ; em-,: iployers, addressed the :Court on-piece? workers and .referred to;'.the conditions of work. He; said that Mr. Young had suggested that the ■ conditions were unhealthy to,/..various-;;, depart-; mentft'hv'the industry. : ; -,; :fi^, -His Honour . observed.': that;: that would not-appear to be.';so, from'the healthy" appearance of the female witness that had been called .by; the; other, side.-'. ~-"•■ !,'.- , '>■['■'■>'■ ■■;. , : !.-...;■ ii ' •"■'-' ■ Mr Evans said that the majority of the workers in the industry were, of; the-same type.- >..„,,, ■:-.',/-, : '■;; ."; , A DEFA*TBpiri: v :,;:';•■■,■;■,'•.■ =: •• Continuing, Mr.'J'Clobksoh read'vfroni: his written statement :,He;' contended; that the" greatest 'obstacle, t0,.-a;-settle-* ment in- conciliation council :was the; complete departure :,by the workers' organisation in the preparation of itsclaims from the recognised industrial conditions ' which; had ..prevailed. without material since' the industry was, ' first;. covered; by an award; ' The,;,'., hours and holidays provisions . were necessarily changed' to conform to. the amended legislation, but, apart .from this, there was no .single clause of the, claims which corresponded with the award now in operation. It was admitted that a branch of the industry not previously provided for—that of hosiery factories not carried on in conjunction with a woollen mill—was now to be included, but that surely was not a sufficient, reason for phang-, ing /."the 'whole teiiorYof the- award; Had;-there been substantial ch'ahges m types of machinery and processing methods there would have been some justification for the radical and revolutionary changes in the award which the workers now asked. "Without fear of contradiction, he would say that in the case of at least 90 per cent. of the workers who would be affected by the award, the industry was carried on in exactly the same way'as when the,first,award was made.- Un- : doubtedly changes in fashions-and 'in the classes of, goods - produced had taken place, but -the ■ processes of manufacture remained - unaltered. Therefore many of the claims were regarded as quite unreasonable and Unwarranted. . , ■ -, . - CLASSIFICATION PRACTICE. The practice in past awards, had been to group'the, adult male workers in classes graded .according to the degree of sliill required for the work they were called upon, to perform. He wished strongly, to emphasise the fact that this .'grouping always had been decided by agreement between the parties themselves. While on. occasion it had been necessary for the Court to settle the rates of wages, the question of classification never had been referred to it. In the present. claims the .objective appeared to be to -provide for every worker individually. A peculiar feature was that in the 32 'classes of workers mentioned, there were . but five separate rates of wages.' The claims-indicated that-it was the desire of the Applicant to confine each worker to the occupation specified, but that obviously would be fatal to the industry. The employer must retain ihe right given in the present award to divide or subdivide labour in any way he might deem necessary.

With regard to the rates of wages, the position of the industry today was such that it was quite unable to bear any increased labour cost. Mr Cook-