BOARD OF CONCILIATION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCIX, Issue 11593, 31 May 1898, Page 3

BOARD OF CONCILIATION.

A mflAfringr of the Conciliation Board ■was held in the Provincial Chamber yesterday Bakers’ dispute, particulars of which have already been published. MrW. H. Cooperpresided. Mr C. W. Newbury, president, and Mr G. Burt, secretary of the Bakers’ Union, represented the employes, and Messrs W. Edwards and W. Thompson represented the master bakers.

Before business was commenced, MrT. Gapes made an explanation regardiug_his action on a orovious occasion in withdrawing from : the Board. He disclaimed any intention to obstruct business, but paid f.Ka.t his action was due to the faetthat he did not consider the question then before the Board was one for conciliation. Mr Newbury, in opening the case for the Union,, said the baking industry was in a very disorganised state. He believed that a great number of master bakers were quite willing to treat their men fairly, but the trouble was caused, to a large extent, by persons who were not proper tradesmen entering the trade, and, in order to make their business pay, their first step was to arrange the wages of, their employes in an unprincipled manner. They were thus able-to cut prices. Under this system in some cases what was practically slavery and tyranny existed. Men frequently were very badly accommodated, without

regardito sanitation.. He-asted-that journeymen bakers should'be paid afahr-wags, and that the industry should be placed -on a level with others. He thm speoifiedftie details of ih© men’s? demands. . ■ MrThompson objected to theinteadoc-tion-of a number of matters by Mr Newbury, which, he stated, had not been referred toiirthonotices forwarded to employers. The Chairman replied that- application could be made forthe anch matters until the master bakers had an opportunity to consider them- said prepare a defence. ■ Mr Newbury, in supporting "theadoption of an eight hours’ day, said that a good day’s workcould h edone in ..that time, and as the trade was not of the healthiaßkit wasquitalongenoagh. The wages, £2 6e, £2 10s and £3, he considered were fair* when the conditions of the tradewere taken into account.. If caxters wer* allowed to work in the bakehouse,' that* would not be many bakers. So len£ as a Master had work that- wanted to be done it would have to be done, whether twelve or fourteen hours were required. He-complained that-an aggressive attitude had been adopted by some against the Union. . With regard to;"'this>‘Statement, Thompson said'that at a meeting of the master bakers the feeling; of the meeting was one-bf sympathy.with.the'Union. Mr Newburyreonlanuedi and stated that an employer hadroiade a'dismissal since the present proceedings had; been instituted. Ho called v John Clark, journeyman •hater, who -stated that he commenced ; work-at, five o’clock in theimorning, andconchxded on an average between four and -five o’clock. There was no specified time allowed-.for meals. He also worked an hour between seven and eigM in the evening. ’He considered a goodday’s work could be done in eight hours. His wages were 16s a week and board and lodging. ■ To Mr Edwards: Had been engaged ten years in the baking trade. ' To Mr Gapes-- His employer treated him well and his lodgings were perfect, i R. JenningSL, journeyman baker, deposed that he had been engaged in the trade twenty-eight years. He was a forehand. He considered eight hours fair for a day’s work, and approved of the other stipulations made by the Union. He received £2 ss, and bread and flour, equal to £2 10s. He worked about nine hours. G. H. Williams, a second-hand journeyman baker, stated that he had been in the trade for twelve years. He considered eight hours fair for a day’s work. He had previously been receiving £1 5s a week and his food. His sleeping accommodation had been bad and food poor. To Mr Edwards: He was aware that the conditions of the Factory Act dealt with ; sleeping accommodation, and had often wondered why the Inspector had not come round. He knew of many cases such as his own. John Willis and Edward Geach gave .similar evidence. Messrs Blake, Ricketts, Shields and Gilmour announced their intention of conduct.ing their-own cases. A. L Huhne deposedthat he had winked at the trade for forty-five years. He was now getting 25s per week and liis board-and lodging, but-could; getamiiar Doard andlodging elsewhere for 7s6d perweek. The trade in Christchurch wasdifferent from that-in other centres. He thought the conditions proposed by'the’Union. as to wages-and hour* were reasonable. The.- baking trade required as much, skill and intelligence as any 'trade. He dMnM'tninkitjlairtO'«mployers in cases where a man and a boy canid do the work that they should be compelled to-employ two men. He thought it would be unadmaible to ' make a hard-and fast rule about starting at three and four o’clock in the- morning; J. W. Roberts gave similar evidence to other witnesses. He was niot a competent baker, but thought he-sbould be in the Union along-with 1 the rest, and get-the best wages he could. He received £1 a week and his bnnrrl and WloHng. thirteen a day. Jago Grett, journeyman baker, thought no hard and.fest ruleshould be made-regard-ing the time -of starting work, as long as the employee worked eight hours. Thus, .a man could start at 2 aun., 4 a.m., or 6 a.m., as might bo convenient. It should be a matter of convenience between, master and roan. A competent roan could get a batch of bread out at 7 if he started at 3 a.m., but sm.-in-competent man would take longer. Hecould not agree to the limit of two boys. A hoy shrmld be allowed to every two men,- ; He agreed with the rate of wages asked. He thought it only fair that the men shotdS'd» paid oni statutory holidays, to compensate for the time taken up on Sundays in setting the sponges, for which the men did not , receive extra pay, A man with- a boycoUid, as a rule, turn out two batches of from'9o to 130 loaves in eight hours. It was root necessary that a man should deep on the premises. P. Plmmidge thought it was better to sleep on the premises. There should be one apprentice to every two men. It would be unfair for a master to have to employ a man to do a lad’s work. ■’ The Board adjourned at 4'.30 p.m. until 11 rum. this morning.