ARBITRATION COURT

Evening Star, Issue 20586, 11 September 1930, Page 16

ARBITRATION COURT

THIS MORNING'S SESSION The Arbitration Court sat this morning, Mr Justice Frazer presiding. The first case to occupy the attention of the court was an application by the Labour Department for an interpretation of the shop, assistants’ award, with particular reference to the hours of storemen and packers. The award of 1927 directed that “ the ordinary hours of work shall not exceed forty-eight in any week and, save as hereinafter provided, shall bo worked between 8.15 a.m. and 5.30 p.m. on four days of the week, 8.15 a.m. and 12.30 p.m, on one day of the week, and 8.15 a.m. and 9 p.m. on one day of the week” The award also stated that “ notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein contained, an employer may require his employees to commence work at an earlier hour than those provided for in sub-clauses a and c of this section, provided- that equivalent time off shall be given at the end of any working day or days in the same week, and notice of the commencing and finishing hours of such workers is given to the union by the employer concerned within three days after such hours shall have been put into operation,” and also that “ all time worked in excess or outside of the hours prescribed by this award shall be paid for at time and a-half, with a minimum payment at the rate of Is 3d per hour.” Mr Grandison, on behalf of the Labour Department, submitted the following questions to the court; —(1) Is an employer who employs porters and, packers before 8.15 a.m. obliged to allow these workers equivalent time off at the end of any working day or days in the same week? (2) May he, instead, allow them equivalent time off during the midday meal intervals? (3) Must ne give notice of the commencing and finishing hours of such workers to thp union? (4) If equivalent time off is given and forty-eight hours per week are not exceeded, is he obliged to pay overtime rates to such workers for time worked before 8.15 a.m. ? Mr Batchelor said that they were greatly surprised on receiving notice tliat an interpretation was sought in reference to the hours of work clause in this award, especially as the court had previously given decisions on the matter. Mr Cookson stated tiiat the point at issue was whether the employers were entitled to start storemen before 8.15 a.m. and give them equivalent time off , or pay overtime if they exceeded fortyeight hours. He contended that the starting and finishing hours prescribed in clause 9 applied only to assistants engaged in the actual sale of goods, and that the employers had the right, subject to the provisions of the Shops and Offices Act, to employ storemen, packers, and porters at any time, so long as they paid overtime for any work done in'excess of forty-eight hours per week. . , , His Honour intimated that the court would give a decision in writing. ENGINEERING TRADE.

The Dunedin branch of the Amalgamated Engineering and Allied Trades Industrial TJnion ot Workers submitted an application for an amendment to the engineering trades apprenticeship order. Mr A. J. Rice represented tho union, and asked that clause 6 should be amended to provide that the proportion of .apprentices to journeymen in tho engineering branch of the trade should be one apprentice to three journeymen, and not one to one as at preMr Cookson opposed the application on behalf of the employers. Decision was reserved.