Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

ARBITRATION COURT

ENGINEERING DISPUTE. OVER HOURS AT DISPATCH FOUNDRY. The Grey mouth sitting of the Arbitration Court was hold yesterday, and was presided over by Ml Justice, Frazer. His associates were: Mr H. Hunter •. employees ’ representative), and Mr W. Scott (employers’ representative). The dispute was heard of the Westland Branch of the Amalgamated Engineering Union v. Dispatch Foundry Ltd. Mr G. T. Thurston, Secretary, represented the applicants, ami Mr P. Hambleton the defendants. The Branch which is new-ly-formed. had its claims heard at the Conciliation Council last week, and a settlement was reached on all clauses, with the exception £>f those relating to hours and wages. Mi Thurston said the Union asked for a 44-hour wook, as granted by the Court in the General "Engineers ’ A.ward ami for 2/6 an hour. The application really meant tlmt they were desirous of a compliance with awards existing in districts covering the same class of workers, and the retention of the present weekly income. Mr Hambleton said the employers wore in favour of Dominion award conditions. (To could not see why higher wages were claimed than those existing elsewhere, as the cost of living in many particulars was lower on the Coast. The married men wore in favour of .a 48-hour week, and he had brought three men to give evidence. Timothy O’Donnell said he was an employee of the Dispatch Foundry, and a married man. He was in favour lof sticking tn a forty-eight-hour week. He would sooner lose the extra half (hour than the money. Mr handed in a \petit ion signed by the married men, who asked for a 4$ hour week and the extra money. Mr Hunter: Yon arc only speaking for vonrself and not for others. Witness: It is the opinion of most of the married mon. Mr Thurston: Did yon attend flit' meeting lasi night?—No. Mr Thurston explained that a meeting was hel<l on Monday evening on question of 44 hours a wook, ami members were asked to place their views before him. A. Poddy said he was satisfied to work IS hours, too, rather than lose the 9s a week. Other employees in the moulding shop wort' of the same opinion. A. Kilpatrick said he was <»1 the same opinion as the other two wit nosses. He was quite satisfied with th- 1 present conditions. Mr Thurston: Yon were given the opportunity of staying Hie proceedings last night? Witness: I don’t knov a nyi Idng about that. I had my s ay at the meeting. His Honour: Was a vote ‘alien? — No. Mi Thurston said that Ihe mon from the whole district, including Hokitika. were present at the meeting, and were in favour of a 44 hour week. I Thirty present were Union members. His Honour said ho would consider dhe application, au<l the agreement would include the metal workers as well as ihe engineers.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GRA19241204.2.43

Bibliographic details

Grey River Argus, 4 December 1924, Page 8

Word Count
479

ARBITRATION COURT Grey River Argus, 4 December 1924, Page 8

ARBITRATION COURT Grey River Argus, 4 December 1924, Page 8

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert