CONCILIATION COUNCIL

Gisborne Times, Volume XXXIIII, Issue 3625, 11 September 1912, Page 3

CONCILIATION COUNCIL

SITTINGS IN GISBORNE. BAKERS’ DISPUTE. 1 The Conciliation Council opened its sittings in. Gisborne yesterday morning. Mr T. Harte Giles, Commissioner, presiding. The bakers dispute was _ the first matter to occupy the attention of the Council', and the employers’ representatives wore Messrs Clare and Oatridge while Messrs Walsh, Wall worth, Fryer, and 0., J. Veale (Auckland) represented the Union. The Commissioner /said that this was an application for a new award to supercede the one at present in force. When an award was made it remained in operation until the registration of the Union was cancelled, or until it was superceded. He was given to understand that the Gisborne Union were applying for a purely local award, and their representatives were anxious that a settlement should he made on a purely local basis. Mr. Veale said that the Union representatives hoped that a settlement would he come to if possible. He had been given to understand by the Clerk of A wards that in a letter the employers stated they did not want to he joined to the Auckland district, and wanted a separate award, as Gisborne was isolated, and in their opinion a separate award would be better. ‘The clauses in the Union’s demands might look formidable hut the employers would find that as early as possible the demands of the bread bakers and pastrycooks were the same. There were certain things which the Union were, perhaps, willing to delete, and be .suggested" they should, go through every danse in order to endeavor to come to an agreement on the points now before them.

Mr Clare said that seeing there was no possibility of coming to an agreement at the Council, that they all might prefer to allow the matter to stand over until the whole of the clauses had been gone through by the employees’ representatives and the master bakers who> were made parties to the dispute. 'I he Commissioner : Might T ask you are you in touch with other branches <:i the bakers throughout New Zealand—are you working in concert with thmu ■' Mr. Clare: To a very large extent. Wo are not a registered association here, hut realise that what will suit one baker will suit us too. There is m> possibility of a settlement here. We have already asked for three representatives of the Union to meet ns privately and they refused us, so we fail to see if we cannot meet pri\ately how we can fix it up here. Therefore it is unnecessary to prolong this meeting, unless the Union is willing to give wav.

Th<‘ Commissioner: I never saw claims that were 1 it'drook. Supposing that wo wore to discuss this dispute in tiit' ordinary way. and the Cnion was tn considerably modify their claims, would there he any pesdhility of an award—are von pledged? Mr. ('lare ■ Xo. Mr. Oatridge pointed out that tk c Cnion did not actually refuse to meet the employers. They warded to consult- Mr. Yeale first. The Commissioner said that lie was satisfied the claims did not represent what the Union wanted. 'Hie l nion never asked for anything less than tliev wanted. Air Yeale: The demands are snh-je-t. to Court discount. Tin* Commissioner pointed <.ut that th ‘ Council., before it passed over any dispute was supposed to use every effort to come to a friendly settlement and if such was not done the Court weuhi refer the matter hack. Mr Yeale said that a letter was suit t-i Auckland some time ago. showing that the present Gisborne employers attitude was somewhat inconsistent. Tire letter asked for Gisborne to he separated from Auckland. Now the employers wanted to change their tactics and get a. Dominion award. The Union were asking for a purely local award. In Auckland they were asking for n Dominion award, hut the application was abandoned for a local award, and it was presumed Gisborne would fall in line. The Auckland onto layers charged them with insincerity.

The Commissioner wanted to know if rim demands wore very considerably mi tlified was there a possibility of the parties coming to a settlement. Mr. Ontridge: We would be only *t> pleased to arrive at a settlement here. The Commissioner : Other branches of the association have been in conitntinioaiicn with you? .Mr Clare: Mr Fiddy knows about that, and I thought be would be here. I consider the last a\\;nrd was as reasonable as could b£ expected between masters and men. T do not wish to stand in the way if the Union wilting to deal what we may call iairlv and squarely. lam unite willing to discuss the matter, but you must admit. some of the thine* in tlm Union's demands are absolutolv ridiculous. For instance: No man shall touch flour when it goes into the bakehouse. Tf that, was carried out who would pk’ r "“ it, in the trough?

Mr. Veal 1 said that Mr. Clare was referring to Clause 17, (No hak°r or partrycook shall carry floii' - in bulk from the carrying van +o- the bake-, house) hut this had been deh'ted. Tliov wen* prepared to. niodifv tlm clauses somewhat. ’Regarding what had happened in N‘wv Zealand ever the Dominion award ho pointed out, that the I ninn had made applications in Christchurch. Tim.am. Dunedin, and 'Wellington (including Wanganui, "Palmerston North and Nan-ier) but "Wellington went back on them. Tim employers were against the award, but now tlmy ?,av +li-ay are in favor ot it. and will not n’lmr the men to depart from their application for a Dominion award. Judge Uim said 1m was going fo nule uniform awards'all over the Dominion. The Council thou, adjourned for half-an-hour in order to enable l!r Fiddy to attend and subsemtentl.v went into committee to consider ti e demands. The Commissioner informed a ■'Times 1 ’ reporter last evening that a satisfactory settlement bad been arriv'd at, but it would lvt- lie made public until the agreement, was signed. The drivers’ dispute will be taken to-day.