CONCILIATION BOARD.

Evening Star, Issue 10393, 14 August 1897, Page 1

CONCILIATION BOARD.

THE BAKERS' DISPUTE. The following evidence was given on behalf of the Workmen's Union yesterday afternoon, before the Conciliation Board, in support of the union's demands : "William M'Cronc, a journeyman baker, deposed that he had had twenty-four years' experience. He had been six years in Duncdin, and. had worked in five, shops. With Mr Latbara, of he worked as foreman for forty-eight hours, and received £2 10a as wages. After this he worked with Mr Collar as journeyman,, at £2 ss, and worked fifty hours. He was then for fifteen months with Mr Wright as second hand, and received £2 10s per week, working forty-eight hours, and receiving overtime for all extra time worked. For Mr Walker, of King street, he worked as foreman for £2 5s per week-of forty hours. He had been in his present employment with Mr Miller, of Caversham, about four years as foreman, and received £2 17s 6d per week and bread, and tho hours just now were from fifty-two to fifty-six per week. He could not say he was dissatisfied with the wages, but was to tome extent - not seriously—dissatisfied with the hours. He considered a man with a hand working with him turning out 200 loaves in a day of eight hours was doing a fair day's work. JooepU Ayres, journeyman baker, deposed he had been at the trade eight or nine years, and was a qualified journeyman. He worked for Mr Searle jobbing once, and received 5s per day, starting at three in tho morning. Mr Searle gave him an. offer, of a steady place at £1 a wtek, but he did not accept it. He now worted for Mr Wright. He started at 2 a.m. on Monday la3t, and knocked off at three, receiving 103 for the day. He had half an hour for breakfast. He had nothing to eat from starting until nine o'clock. This did not seem just to him. He received 10s for thirteen hours' work. Woxking for Mr Anning he got 17s 6d a week and wa3 found.

William Simpson, journeyman biker, gave evidence that he had been nine years at the trade, and regarded himself as competent. He had only been in one shop—Mr Wright's. For the last three months, with the exception of last week, he had worked on the average sixty hours, and received £2 103 per week. They generally got a snack to eat about five o'clock, and at eight they had half an hour for breakfast. He thought a man could do a fair day's work in eight hours, and that anything beyond that should be paid for as overtime. For Christmas week they had been paid overtime. I hey used to startat fouro'clock, but onebaker started at thiee, and the others had to start at the same time to cope with them. On Saturday last he worked twilvo hours, but that was to oblige another tradesman. He had not been forced to stop in the bakehouse to his meals, but had done so of his own choice. All the men were not working the tamo hour3-lots were drawn as to who should stay, and he was one that was drawn to stay. Last week was an exceptional case. It was correct to say that Mr Wright's foreman studied the interests of the workmen. He thought that if a journeyman turned out 150 loaves a day that was a good day's work. To Mr Ferguson: If all bakers could bs bound to start at the same time, work could very well start at four o'clock iu the morning. Jacob Jenkins, a journeyman baker, deposed he had been eighteen years at the trade, and seventeen years inDunedin. He had been foreman for Mr J. Jack for nine years ; received £3 a week and worked nine hours a day. When the union was iu vogue ho worked eight hours a day. The second baud received £2 10s per week, and worked the same hours. He worked after this for Mr Rua?ell, at Kaikorai, for ten hours a day, and received £2 7s 6i per week. He was now working for Mr Wright as table hand for £2 5s per week, and worked on the average ten hours per day, not counting time for meals.

James Arthur, a journeyman baker who had been twenty-two years in the colony, gave evidence that he was employed by Mr Philips, at Caversham, as foreman, and received 353' per week, working nine and a-half hours per day. He had previously worked for Mr Wright as second hand, receiving £2 10s per week, but working pretty long hours. As foreman f<>r Mr Kussell at Kaikorai he had received £2 10s per week and worked eight hours per day. There was a lad at work with him now who had been seven years at the trade, and he received £1 a week. This lad was a good workman. Witness did not reckon that he was being paid enough at present. He could make his 400 loaves in nine hours if he had a good man with him. He was a member of the unioD, and so was the man who worked with him.

William Wood, oiled by Mr Brown, said that he was a master baker and a practical baker. He had only worked for two years as a journeyman in the colony. He was formerly foreman for John Sinclair. Since then he hid employed a lot of labor, but never had any dispute with his men. When the society existed his men worked eight hours per day, and anything over that ho paid them for. He could not tell if he had at any time started his men on a Sunday night. He did not remember of any such thing. He considered 200 loaves per day was a fair day's work for a man. He did not remember what he could do. He did not confine hii men to fixed hours They had certain work to perform, and they could go as soon as they liked. To the Chai man : He thought the starting hour should be left an opan question. He never interfered with his men at all. Personally he had no objection to the men starting at 4 a.m. on every day except Wednesdays or days preceding holiday*, when they should start at three o'olook. He did not care if these _hours were adopted, bo long as the required work was done. He paid hiß foreman £3 5s per week, the second man £2 53, and the two table hands either 30s or 35s per week. The foreman also got bread. To Mr Hewton : Witness would be placed at a disadvantage if he were compelled to pay union wages and start at four, and another man working alongside who did not pay union wagep, and who started at two o'clook. It would be awkward, but he thought he could compete with him if he did not cut the prices. There was no advantage in getting out too early. To the Chairman: He did not suffer from competition during union time. Alexander Langwell gave evidence that he had been at the trade thirty-five years, and in Dnnedin twenty-five years. He worked at Covent Garden e : ght hours a day and got £3 per week. At the previous place he got £2 10s and worked eight or nine hours per day. He got paid for overtime. He considered 180 loave3 per day was enough for any man to produce.

To the Chairman: There were himself, a second hand, and two boys working at Covent Garden. The second hand go f . £2 53 per week, one boy got 25s a week, and the other 123. They turned out 500 loaves a day. They did no small goods. Mo3t of the men in the bakerytrade were union men. There were fifty men in the union, and there were from ten to twentjmen outside the union in Dunedin. /This closed the case for the ucion. Mr Purches said he would only call one witness on behalf of the Master Bakers' Association. 1 William Nesbit, working for Mr ?eavle, said ho got £2 10s per week. He worked nine hours a day. He baked 3CO to 350 lea* es a day and small goods, with three men working To Mr Brown: Witness bad been foreman up to a week ago. Ho had been reduced to second hand on account of the union. He was getting the same wages as formerly, but had no responsibility. He did not work more than fifty-four hour 3 per week. Burrow, who did tho jobbing at the shop, got 10s per day. Mr Millar said that the Board ought to have further evidence from the employers to warrant their contention that the profits of the trade would hot,.juitify what was demanded of them. Some discussion followed, in which it was stated that it hid been decided not to go on with the case against pastrycooks. Mr Wright stated that there was a difficulty about fixing an hour to start work. The fixing of an hour had previously broken up the union. Ho considered from 180 to 200 loaves a good day's work. He was certain his men did not average more than 180 loaves. Mr Wood considered that it was an injustice to the other masters to allow Mr Wright to start an hour or so earlier because he had a dough machine.

Mr Anning explained the working of tho machine, and said that the difficulty could not be obviated.

The Board then concluded its sitting. The Chairman intimated that judgment would be reserved.