HOURS OF LABOUR.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXXI, Issue 15331, 14 June 1910, Page 5

HOURS OF LABOUR.

I INTERESTING DIALOG!' K IN ARBITRATION COURT. JUDGE AND UNION SECRETARY. [Per Press Association-.] WELLINGTON, June 13. An interesting dialogue between bis Honor ~Mv Justice Sim and Mr E. J. Carey, secretary of the Conks and Waiters' Union, took placa in the Arbitration Court to-day. Mr Carey was contending for shorter hours for the class of labour he represented and foi more holidays. Ho cited a case where one employee had worked for 365 clays without a holiday. His Honor: But when the Court was considering your claim for holidays yon got a section slipped into an Art of Parliament providing for a half-holiday per week. Why do you ask the Court to interfere now? ! Mr Carey: We say the Court is hero to rectify any grievances that may exist. His Honor: The Legislature has dealt with tho matter. Why ask the Court to interfero with legislation ? Mr Carov said the Unions would be glad if' both tho Court and the Legislature granted them concessions. His Honor: What is tho goal at which you aim!' Ts it all play and no work?" When is there going to be I poace? j Mr Carey: When the hotel wo: ker I is treated like other workers. ! His Honor: What limit do you sugi gest? When will your Unions cease i their labours? i Mr Carov: We have considered that matter. We' will cease asking for I shorter hours when the week is fixed lat forty-eight hours for males and I forty-two for females. i His Honor: What minimum wage? ! Mr Carey: We have never consider- | ed. Wo may say what the minimum I wage is to be later. I His Honor: As hours go down ar» wages to so up? Mr Carey: I don't say that. 1 claim that a man working forty-eight hours per week, and a woman working fortytwo hours, should be paid a living ' wage. That wage should maintain a ! man and his family. At present wo are onlv asking for a week of fifty-six hours for males and fifty-two for females. His Honor: That is only a step towards jour ultimate goal? Mr Carey: Yes. His Honor: Y.ou may yei ask tor a week of forty hours. Mr Carey: If everyone worked thirty-six hours per week it would probably create all the wealth that is necessary. His Honor then referred to the principle the Court had laid down in the 'Gisborne. painters' dispute regarding applications lor new awards. In that case tho Court made it clear that tho party applying for a new award had to show" that conditions had varied since the old award had been made, otherwise the Court would not enterI tain the requested variations. Mr Carey said this was not a doublebarrelled claim. His Honor eaid it was the Unions third, application to the Court. In this instance the Union, bearing in mind the Gisborne precedent, would have to show that the Court was hopeless y j wrong in 1907. Could the Union do that? Mr Carey said the Union would show I that married men were unable to keep themselves. Proceeding, Mr Carey stated that every endeavour was made by unions nowadays to avoid bringing cases before the Arbitration Court. As a matter of fact, very few unions would come before the Court. If they could not, get their grievances remedied before the Conciliation Council and obtain the concessions they desired thev would give way. M ltb all due respect he said there was a amongst the unions that the Court ■ had not that .sympathy with them which it might have. He went further, and could s.iy that the Union in this case had been taunted by the employers with the statement that if it went 'to the Court it would get nothing. 11l tho face of that, however, the Union was before the Court. Thev believed they could show that conditions should be altered. His Honor said that if that was so they brought themselves within the rulo laid down in tho Gisborne case previously referred to. His Honor here read the rulo Jat4 down. _ . . Answering a remark by Mr Carey, Ins Honor said : Some workers seem to regard the. Arbitration Court as a machine for eternallv reducing hours ano. etemallv increasing wages. That is not the" function of tho Court. It IS here to hear bona fide industrial disputes. • Mr Carey : Few Umons are now asking for a " reduction of hours. Proceeding, Mr Carey declared that he would show that there had been an increase in the price of commodities, and he hoped to be able to show that sixtyfive hours per week for women workers was not tolerable in this country. His Honor: Would it not be very much more satisfactory to get the Legislature to fix the hours? Mr Carev : When tho Legislature did fix the hours at fifty-two under the Shops and Offices Act tho Court fixed those to be worked in saloons (under the Act) at sixtv-fivo. an increase of thirteen on those fixed by Parliament. His Honor said that it was no doubt the case that if the Court had reduced the hours it would also have been obliged to reduce wages. The employer had to have some profit. Mr Carey: When the Arbitration Court lays down the number of hours that are to l>e worked in a particular industry it practically frames a piece of .legislation. •His Honor said that in " making laws " it was doing so in the same way that a county council would. Mr Carey said that that being so the Court was entitled to take into consideration the awards mado in other countries. In Australia the wages were much higher. The Federal Arbitration Court had obviously gone on the lines of framing a living wage for the unskilled men in this "trade, and then arranged for the wages of the skilled tradesmen. After this the question of preference was introduced into the discussion. Mr Carey said tho Union had a grievance against the Court in this respect. At one' time under preference the Union had 880 members. Now. after having put 2000 men through its books, its I membership had dwindled to 200. This i ' was after the preference clause bad | ' been revoked by the Court. These 200 men kept the Union going, and were responsible for any benefits non-union-ists in tho trade enjoyed. Under the circumstances, if was not to be expected that they were going on for ever and ever like this. His Honor said that under preference previously dozens and dozens of cases had boon brought against employers where they had simply tumbled into error through ignorance. For that reason the Court considered it advis- | able, in the interests of peace, to re- ! move the cause of the trouble. -Mr Carey: To follow that to its logical conclusion, your Honor, all the employers have to do is to commit breaches and in time got rid of any preference clause. His Honor: My opinion at the time was that tho preference clause had been worked to deathThe hearing of the dispute was then I proceeded with.