GOLD MINERS’ AWARD

Grey River Argus, 13 June 1931, Page 6

GOLD MINERS’ AWARD

FOR INANGAHUA 11 Arbitration Court ‘ Proceedings j‘ B.EEFTON, June 1?. At the Arbitira'tion Court, the hear- ; ing was continued of the application for a new award made by the Blackwater Mines lA<l., Consolidated Gold I Piolds o.f New Zealand, Progress Mineis of New Zealand, New Big River Gold Mining Coy., and Alex- i tinder Mines. Mr T. O. Bishop ap-' peared for the applicants and Mr P. McKane for the Inangahua Union of. Workers.

The fh|iee points in dispute were; Employment of youths, working on Saturdays, and wages.

Mr Bishop stated that as to the differential rate at. the tiine of the original award one rate applied throughout thei district. In 1920 a differential rate was applied to Big River Mino, 18 milosi from Reef ton and an extra, rate of 2s per day allowed the road out being moamtainous. Previously Big River Mine had been exiceptionally prosperous an'd could af[ford the extra rate-. When the Ale.x ander Mine commenced, it was more inaccessible fh.an Big River and an 1 extra rate of 4s was allowed by agree' ment. At the time Alexander Mine

was -expected to be highly payable, but the mine had not; paid working expenses owing to low values. Blaek water Mine’s figures would show that unless some relief could be afforded, thd industry would be penalised. The present Clause limited employment of youths about a. mine, and the .Clause d-e'sired to be substituted was at present in existence around the coal mines, viz.,—Youths under fifteen

years 5/5; fifteen to sixteen 6/3; six e<m to seventeen 7/11; seventeen feighteen 9/5; eighteen to nine teen years 31/6: over nine

teen 15/- per day. As for Saturday work it was now' four hours for mid erground men and six hours for surface workers. It was a most unprofitable shift, for the underground workers and the employers sought to •have alternate Saturdays an idle day us had been the custom, at the Alex; ander Mines and was the custom, in the coal mines.

W. Gore Porter, local secretary, Blackwater Minos Limited, produced statements of mining operations from 1914, showing that breaking costs had increased from 21/8 per ton in .1914., to 29/4. Thei grade of ore 'had fallen by 5/- per ton. Development charges had risen from 46/3 per foot, in 1914, to 74/11 in 1930, and milling costs had

risen also. A certain amount of development wa s necessary. The ore reserves gra dually diminished. Including the gold premium, the profit shown last year was £4,915, but without this

premium, the loss would have been £139. This did not include office chargo H at Reefto n or London. 'iWere had been no dividend since 1918.

To Mr MeKanej; At the round table eonferen,ce, Mr Spencer stated he would not ask for a. cut at the present time. In 1914 there w‘‘re a number of mines working but the rise

i n charges could not be charged to the staff instead of wages. There were no more staff employed now at Black water than in 1914. The statement that Blackwater Mines made a profit of £B,OOO last year was not'true. The development costs were charged against rising, sinking and driving. Had it not been for the money received from, Blackwaten Mines would likely be closed. They had paid 2/6 in dividends since 1918. Since 1926 the Company had been working at a loss There had beer, no fall la the cost of explosives, and drill st oct would he about £7O per year. Thertj were fewer on the staff to-day’ than In 1914.

To Mr Monteith: The capital of the Company in 1908 wa s £250,090 fully paid up and wasi the same today. The labour cost per ton of ore to-day wa ft 21/5.78. A proportion of I the superintendent’s salary was charged to this. The. monthly salaries were £330 a.nd the wages under £4,000. The dividends paid to date totalled 15/6. He could not s ay exactly what the capital palue of the assets were. The realisable value was 3/- per shalr© or about ai seventh of the original capit-

al value I To His Honour: The market value of the shares was am approximate value of the assets. There- had been only about one dozen transactions in shares in the last two years.

Tliosk H. Lee, secretary, Alexander Mine(s, and New Big River G*«M., Coy , stated: The Big River Coy., ceased mining operations in July 1927. Up l 0 1924 it had been prosperous, but up to its closing had been run at a loss. The last dividend wa s paid in Decern jbeir, 1924. The resumption of operaltions would depend cn the formation 'of a new company and all expenditure 'would be expenditure for a 'start. The figures shown, did not i n ' 1 elude capital expenditure and included | ! management and working charges, i I The epnpe’rience of the last 12 months I showed a loss of £1922 per year at | Alexander Mines, and with the grade I i of over £2/16/11 per ton they made a! jloss. The mine could not carry on I with value s less than £4 to £4 16s per i i ton. Last month gape £845 worth of I gold from 390 tons with a gold premium of about £7O. This was a record tonnage worth just over £2 per. ton. The crushing done by tho former i owners previous to 1926 was £8 to £lO per ton. 'The present Company was formed in 1926. The present agreement wa a made in that year and they made estimates on those values. The present values would not allow them i to pay the higher wage. To Mr McKane: He had been sucto New Big River Coy., since' 1898. The amount* of dividendspaid. was £4 14s per share. To Mr Monteith: The Big River | Company had paid £4 14s on 2/- paidup shares. To Mr McKane: The Big River

Company had paid a dividend in 1924, br.it. in 1927, when eoasc-d, the Company- was £5OO in debt. At present, only a caretaker was, employ;ed. The working cost was about £3 per ton, and the yield p«'r tun of ore, I from all sources was £4 10s. Dor the;

amount invested, the Big River Company had been the best mine in New Zeaiand.

| To Mr Monteith: Tike old company still owns the mine, and the future de-j]-ended o-n the investing public, as tv whether it re-opened. There was uo connection except the main shaft, between No. 19 level to the surface, but they’ had no complaint from the Union or Mines Inspector.

| Mr McKane* contended that this Company could afford to pay their employees a living wa.ge. The Company had sunk a lift of 150 feet and driven la cross-cut of 1200 feet, and had paid a dividend.

Witness said, that at the Alexander iMinefe 22 men were employed, lip was a. big shareholder. The mines were) not looking better tha. T 1 before. The; charges) for the new work last year wche made on capital provided by the ’ sliarehoklers. The shareholders had 1 Ihflxl no return. Tbb Ale-xnuder Mines ’paid a fair salary, only three being employed,. The|y paid for ability in their employees', they- did not infer that Blackwater did not. There wa.s only one man employed as a shift boss. J The men do not get paid for tramping time at the Alexander Mines. The men a.r»< paid from the tunnel mouito, not for climbing the hill. | To Mr Monteith: The men are 'paid at Blackwater from bank to bank. lie- could walk to the top of McKay’s block in half an hour. To His Honour: The rates of board |at Big River were 30/- wt the hotel, land 25/- per week at the Company’s |board,i nghouse. At Alexander Mines, It he Company had a boardinghouse, and! charged 32/6 per week. At. Waiuta 25/r per week was charged fo<r board only and 30/- for board and Hedging; others made charges of 25/ jfor board and 27/6 for board and dodging. Thei boardinghouse-keeper at I Alexander approached the Company about four months ago regarding an ’increase in charges. Packing material there cost J4d per lb. There v/ere no roads when he visited the Alexander a year ago. There wag no bothhousei at the mine. On t'h© Maruia road and other public works the men ihad to make their own camps and con veniences. So far, the mine wa s only’ | a prospecting one. i To Mr Monteith: The New Big IRivelr mine closed diown in 1927 owing to the Company not being able to locate payable ore. | To Mr Prime: He had not been approached regarding Saturday work. | To Mr Bishop: The list of men supplied by Mr MeKanei contained the names of several men w'ho were old. Joseph Bolitho, stated he had been Alexander Mine Manager almost since

the beginning with the exception of a. short break. The men worked a full day one Saturday and then had an idle Saturday. The men approached him for this condition, and it was

mm tor tnis condition, ano ij whs granted. They only reverted to th«‘ four hours on Stt-turday following Mr .McKane’s visfi.t. Some of the men were unfavourable to it. i To Mr McKane: The wages of £1 jper day was too much for a. working miner. He had worked for 9/6 and 'lO/- per d-ay. The conditions at the {Alexander Mines were better than when he went, there. | To His ITon-our: The distance above the camps to the workings was about 1500 feet, and they did not get paid for walking time. To Mr McKane: Some of the °kb er men left their camps at daylight and got home before dark. He preto bach. He had worker at. (rougher places than- the Alexander /Minc.-i and walked to and fro to the Globe. There were no change houses lor crib places at the mine. The. suggestion of working a whole day on an I alternative Saturday did not. come from I'Mm. He was unaware of instructions isent to the cook a:t Alexander Mines. The conditions of the outside worker wer’e not gpod there, but he” received more) pay than he was entitled to, to make up for any lost time. On the leurfacte the men were now getting £1 pen’ day when they were ctutitl-ed to ! 18/6. To Mr Bishop: They had no difficulty in obtaining labour. In reply t 0 Hi rS Honour, witness Joseph Bolithlp, said the Alexander Mines should pay 2/- per day extra owing to- thei living conditions there. He was a director when the wage was raised from 17/6 to 19/6 owing to th® men complaining about the rate of pay when it was increased in 1926. The values at that timei were good. M.r M-cKanc called John -O’Shea, who stated he was Mine Manager at (Big River from December, 1922, to July, 1926, amd hiad spent hi s lifetime at mining, having worked in most mines on the field. The Big River mine yas one of the dirtiest mines on the fiefld, andthe conditions were bad for living. Hd would sooner work in ithe Reefton Mines for £1 per weok loss. He was now incapacitated from further mining. To Mr Bishop: He would not g° on toi Big River flor less than IS/- per day. He* did not work at Victoria ‘Range. He never worked at Alexander Mine, and did not know about the conditions there. The depth at which he worked at Big RivcY was ultimately 2000 feet. ' He would nut expect the conditions in the upper levels at Big River were as dusty as at the; bottom <)f th c shaft. He would not expect unhealthy conditions on the surface workings at Alexander Mine. To His Honour: The nature of the country at Big River was dusty and th© temperatures were higher ir th* battom levels. ' Mr Coxal-1' stated he had 214 years’ 'experience in mining at Big River. He •started there* in 1909. It was the dirties mine he had ever worked in. 'i n his life. He considered it. an unIhealthy mine. There' was no return airway from No. 10 to the surface. The bottom level crosscuts were in up to 1200 feet. Should any thing go

twrorig in tflfie shaft above No. 10 Level one would be shut in. It was a rich Imine. Living conditions there were ‘rough. Waiter was scarce, and wood had to be carried. The half-day on, Saturday was acceptable. He bad been, snowed in. He was now in receipt of the Miners’ Pension. To Mt /Bishop,: Jlc iiad. worked there on various spells, in 1909 he was there eig'hit months. Then he came nearer Reefto(n. There was a good deal of mining activity about the year 1 'l9ll on the Reefton field. Every time witness went to- Big River he was contracting, and at such he worked ‘harder. He worked in places at Big River that had to. be stopped owing to bad conditions. There were no prosecutions for dry boring at Big River. The Alexander Mine would be a much healthier mine to work in owing to its workings all being connected with' ithe surface. The hearing of evidence ha a not vet concluded.