GARDENERS' AWARD

Evening Post, Volume CXXVI, Issue 12, 14 July 1938, Page 11

GARDENERS' AWARD

CONDITIONS IN INDUSTRY

EVIDENCE FOR EMPLOYERS 9 y i

The Second Court of Arbitration yesterday afternoon was engaged ia further consideration of the Wellington nurserymen's and gardener's dis- % pute commenced on Wednesday morning.

•Mr. Justice Hunter presided and had with" him Mr. V. Duff (employers' representative) and Mr. A. W. Croskery (employees'- representative). ' - Mr. H. J. Bishop, appearing for employers in the industry, continued his submissions regarding the- exemption of certain incorporated sporting clubs. which the union asked should be joined as parties to the award.'- .

Mr. Bishop submitted that-the Court, at its jurisdiction, could exempt golf, bowling, croquet, and tennis- clubs. Racing and trotting clubs were already under a separate award.

Mr. P. M. Butler, appearing 'for the workers, said that since the application had been made an agreement had been reached with the bowling clubs, and he accordingly asked that' all bowling clubs cited be struck out. An agreement had also-been reached with the racing clubs which had agreed to a. separate award.

Mr. Butler then proceeded to deal with Mr. Bishop's legal arguments,, contending that the wording of the « relevant statutes precluded the exemption of any incorporated body- . The Court then proceeded to hear evidence from nurserymen and others engaged in the industry concerning .conditions of trade, wages, effects of competition, and other matters bearing upon the ability of the industry to i pay. This evidence occupied .the re- . jmainder of the afternoon and was continued when the Court resumed today. Witnesses for the employers contended that the effects of competition- 4£rom family nurseries not employing labour, . employee nurseries' run by nursery employees in their spare' time, and nurseries run by other people not employing labour had had the effect of depressing conditions "andf* causing price-cutting through chain stores. Witnesses contended that nurseries had been closed down or sold and men put off. They claimed that it was impossible to pay higher wages under present conditions. A witness called by Mr. Butler in rebuttal said that his business had increased 100 ;per cent. ; during the last two years, and'this ia spite of the fact that he was paying high wages. He was supplying a chain store at what werfe quite ' reasonable prices and was satisfying his cus» tomers, his workers, and himself! He admitted, however, that he couldj not comply with the conditions of-other chain stores, as they would not allow him to pay a living wage. <■ The advocates did not address the Court, which intimated that it'would give its decision later.

TINSMITHS' AWARD. The Court then, dealt with an application by the Inspector of Factories at Palmerston North, for, an interpretation of the Wellington Tinsmiths', Coppersmiths', and Sheetmetal Workers' Award as to whether the Glaxo Manufacturing Company of ' Bunny* thorpe should be added as a subsequent party to the award

The Court was engaged in hearing argument .on the point whea it adjourned. . * <•-■:.