Defence of the Workers

Maoriland Worker, Volume 12, Issue 301, 6 December 1922, Page 9

Defence of the Workers

fact that the average number ofmei working these hours- for the year:= quoted Js stated to be only 832, and •who fn his ordinary sense wouM suggest il-at this- .number of ..men would be sufficient to perform the work ra.tiirireft by the shipowners? ,A.t the present time 100Q are required, and 'd-i-rin-K the busy years 1916 to at least an average of 120? men ''wei'-e ■ •requires 'by the* Shipowners. So much far Mr. Bishop's statement .rescarding the hoiu-ri wo.rfced' per week on 'the Wejy.n.:sto2s. .wharf. ,- May Xviiow ask the question: Who is misleading , the puli-, HO? - ..■:: .■: .> .;■■.;. r . : "■'■ -'"-The secretary of Zealand Dmployevo' Federation states {hat fef 1 waiters ide , workers-:eairie;H:U> £4/11/7 per week working on an average of 38.8 hours. I't/isiirc- "him that lie uau .euiiiij-,.f;ad this .ccui.troyeiiyy, ..imd further, that We will not grumble for another moment-.about the,, -award, ii he will, on behalf'of the shipowners, ■s,uaj;a,i!tet: tilki wage. ; 1 "know 1 ..shall be mot., with the usual reply that under the casual labo;;r system it is iiTijpossuble etc etc.. - Will Mr. Biaho]j. v.'ho is ;-o cockswre that ;tlie w'aier.-irie workers can find employment on aqi avevase "38.8 hours per ■\y..eck. yo lo_ tl\o .shipowners ,and set Irani "them "an" agreement ; ' J --- , the effect that they guarantee a 33.3 .hpn.r week to all men.regaired to efticicntly carry on the work fit ah ports? He can average the basis on one, three, six ;>r twelve months as he pleases. I do not wish to include in this guarantse what is called 'the 'fringe' or the very casual. I want him to include only tho * '.average-* waterside worker who is seeking work 'from rU'.y-'Eb day on the wharves of New Zealand. IT. us Mr. Bishop guys, tlie waterside workers work thni-v.; hours, there is .no reason why tUis> MUciraniee should not be given. J await his reply, and assure him thai if it is stl the aftii'malive, it will end most, if jtiof all, of the complaints concerning- thle- recent judgment of j tf-.e coui't. •'l>.t mc here give Mr.-XJi-slio-p some j of the figures of v.hat the actual facts diHciom; regarding the -number of j ho.urs" worked per wee!;: — ■'At the iivT: main polls 20 hours per •c. ■week approximately. At tlie tii'sM intermediate port ,, , i! 6 hours per wse'k. apprcx. At the four smaller ports, 22 to fi4 hoiii's per week. This -esti-ma-ts has not. been arrive,' at by .miessiiiK. but on the v, r a.2f«s re;turns supplied by ifce -employers .au-'ft on the members of the unions who are constanUy -sciklag work on the wake*-: .fronts. - •■-.'■■ BATF.B OF PAT, "The figures submitted by the employers regarding -waterfront wayja were , , as oi\e would naturally expect/ confined to the highest-paid men. However,-when the wages return:-; ye. , week -were- analysed and dealt with on a monthly- moving average basis, it was found that lorihe i?a«t year, after omitting the very' casual men, Uie'Toi'-' lowing wages t>px -week have • heeji earned: For Auckland during-the-six rnnnrhs" period eruied February, 1D22, the total jru.i-ve for -10.38 men for thxi actual week?, worked was £'.l/o/S per week, and on a 3G weeks' basis £2/13/10 per week. -The Auckland : Central Pay Office-rlid not give figures for the sialic period during the winter months. " i "At"' Wellington the wages for 1174 me,n -(omitting the Har.bour Jpoar.d --:m~' pfoyeeb-)- for twelve months ©mied; August, 1922, were £3/1-1/6. For ■..■Harbour Board employees for the same period the amount earned is nraeh leys, due to these men not being employed at coa'i or ••freezer woik. for which higher rates are paid. "At Dunedin Tor the busy perloil, Decommber 15th, 192.1, to June J 4th, 1522 1!)2 highest-paid men -earned .£3/0/8 peer week but if we divide ' the total-number of nien -employed into the actual wages paid the average per man is less than,. £3/5/6 -per week. "New Plymouth, 65 -highest-paid ■men ea-rn-od £3/11/9 per week, but if.,all the ;T»eju employed .are included. the average week falls to -£3/1/7.;.J..^! .. :;'ldt>rt- •Chailrne'rs, iasn average £.2/14/11 ,j>er week for the; sa-rae peinod.; 220 men working at tliat port averaged £2/7/7 per week. ~" :■-;■ . ■'''«'L.>tfct«-K'dn, SB6 nxeai; fining ' tie' busy period -ending IMay Ist, 1922, parted £4/7/8,, but if the 600 nTlti, 'who ; e3SVl>noy.«d ,is the weekly average falls to £3/9/4.- : v=: .."Timaru, average weekly wage tor the 100 Mgliest-paia" men is :£'2/l-8/?r •per man.. There are 50.men wlio Wftrk. ■ port who ,&&m iiesfia _..-•

n "Westporiy/. average for 192, .72----■s highest-paid , m=a was £3/3/9 pard. week. ~ - - -ri ■" "The foregoing Is for the highest-; " aaid and .tlie-wages include aSv| : ~ time Tvorked —crflinary tinie, overtlmv;,j 0 special time, meal hours, Sunday anrl ; " holidays-work—-and in moat cases the! *• results were obtained from 11*3 figures'.; c supplied by the employers. This bears : out my -contention that the total .wage j = earned per v»eek on the .wattrfronts. c ; -is less than £.3/7/6 per week. -.J ' .«*-GiAK7*fft " ; "Space forbids my dealing further with Mr. Bishtfp-5 stat-eiuent regard-. . ing Avage-s, but .there are a few gjar- \ ing .inaccuracies .which I cannot allow l '_ to pass. He states that an increase '„' .was granted to /vVestport .and .Grey-, 1 mouth in 19:1:', made- the' rate, J for those pb.r«i 2/9 per hour. May I point out -to ■•Mγ. Bishop that the '\ : rates for coal work at Westport and 1 I Greymouth -wer-e .increased by 2d. per ' hour in 1919, .and all other rates for ,r waterside work : v.?ere increased e-y the [ same amount. To -put it another w;iy, c the total iacrease-on:the coal rare., or- "- rlinary time, .for Westport and Gruy-. 5 , mouth -JErQiu ldl~ to -1v)23.-was Bd. pw I hour. For .ail oilKr ports the increase on the ordina-ry vate was lid. per hour, 1 foi'-tt'h-e- same or .3d. per Iro'ur;- ---\ I.more'than -irheas t.wd .ports?,- where -tlte- * huge reductions have been mad;?. The r ' flat ,-i'Jite ...for Yy'estpor.t in 1912 was 2/: V 1 J per hour. At the name -period, in 1 j Wellington.the "coal rate was 1/6 ;per' ' hour, or Bd, per hour less. ' I "Hegnrcdng Waitara, Mr, Blshoj)'. ■ has -quoted-the wage £2 per day, and \ would lead your readers to believe that it was r 3£i for ,a day of . • I eight. Hours. I beg to inform. .Mr. Bishop that the day is one :of 24 ! hours, and the judgment of the court_ provides that these men must work, if required, for the 24 hours at 1/8 per '-hour ordinary and overtime in tv freezer—splendid piece-work rates! "Mr." Bishop must have solved the problem'of perpetual motion, for he - states that the watevside workers can nov/ continue v/ovk -afiier 10 -p.m. i£ they so desire, The award provides for it, ho says, a-n-d the men can now j obtain the hiyh ovtrlime rates. One cannot help-reminding M.r. Bishop that ■waterside workers are human beings, and just a few hours , resi -after they ha-ve workeu' from 14-to 16 hours —the usual custom at all ports, One would imagine from the renia-rks r,f Mr. Bishop thai the waterside -worker Is a- sort of human camel -with a liump of stored energy to be oxpx-iKJed by working day and ■rdglit when tJ:.e trusts require li"!m. A 1; present he places Ma services at the disposal of the «m----pployers ;for 78 uoui'.s per vr.eek. Would Mr. Bishop ask for more? May I also say that tes remarks would lead one to believe that,- with the excep- 1 --j tlon or the four main ports, men haveworked all night on the other water-' ' J fronts. It Is necessary to remind him; ■] that only i.v/o ports, viz., Westrpprt: h and G,reymou!]i, had worked all night; for ,y,ea,rs. His ;.r.e,p.ly to this statornent will he: Why don't the men work- : shifts? Shifts would increase tho, number of men .em-ployed at least double, and >wheu that is , , done, will -the j shipowners guarantee a living wage - t for all the men? T shall he pleased to - have a reply in -the affirmative from Mr. Bishop. . •? EoJWlttiN"®oAl,. • ; J " "S-Vith reference to foreign coal, Mr.' c Bishop has "stated that .the extra rale j" of »Gd. per liour applied only to T iiug'ton. -Aill 1 can aay is .that he haii---. |. dies the truth somewhat indifferently, j for at the -meeting of the shipowners' and Waterside Workers' Fedev.ation,i held on May 10th, 1921, it was agreed j" that "Welsh coal landed in any port of A New Zeaila-nd be -paid .-for at Sd. per-hour-:extra, and :I may say ■'t-Ivat prior: y to that tirae Welsh .coal was paid for g at : even higher rates than 6d. ;per hoiu; extra at Bonie Of the -poi'ts. Tlie saineapplies .to Port KemMa and other far-, eign coals. This judgment of the court ~ .preveaits this, .as it specifically states; a that the i:ate shall be the same .for a New Zealand, Australian • or .foreigu ; ll -coaiV^ n(i it does not, as Mr. Bishop c states, provide that -other rates may s be .flgveed '.apon ;by- the local disputes; comrditt-ee. . • t i 0 J3AT.tIIiD.A3: AFT'E'I?.N4Oi\ HYMlli. g "The -1921 rate wan .voluntarily ■con-, v ceded by the in the .confer-. , ien-c*. in 192 ft; .au-fl the difference-:be- c •twtosu the (v/atorsicle ■■ warfe-ers imcl thei c men e;mj>i©yed iji obher induatries is ° that some of the waterside .workers. a .work oa e,y«ry a-tt&nnoon,| " a : w3iiJ.e M other ijiclustries tlie <!t& ©ot. ta this -there is tlie .un-I, c] : -cer-ta£aty all the time as to wliether ,p they fu;e going to work on SaTiTr<iay' W ♦fternQoa vpr ,wlie,ther they will cease i (

2- work -at midday.- 'Double -rates ase f- paid in Aiistraila-,- Great Britain mid ■' 'in dthei , countries.' -Way -not v ia Neiv J 'Zealand? -"- : - •..'■• j^< y - ■ ■ -mm® , &im& = " I' "in 1920 the-shipowners, in reply .to g" the .waterside workers -claims, voluii- - - tarily offered the -of-3/- per hour g for this work '.when Bien are 'Ordered 2 'Oiiton Sunday, -w-ith a minimum of, 3 three rhours. If it; wzs worth 5/- : ■ hour -it is certainly worth it now, and' ', when it is taken .into consideration that a man may be'called out on .Sunday between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m; the L following anoruing, and possibly lose "j the whole nig-ht's sleep, surely-15'/-- ---" [is. not too much for that , night's work. , v "Special rates for Sunday," Christ-, . -mas Day, Good Friday, Anzac Days , : .and holiday work have been rpald on.:, ,' the waterfront since 1912, and the: j employers- Imve never-, dbjecte't! to [[ these rates until the -'present -time, . -and why should the■-court alter a •c.us-i . which has existed in some po.rfe { Tor 12 years, and in all ports for .nine These CKtni pajinfiiis wero . included in the lhing v/aio of th-j r . -WPterHicle workers, and ai> they iicc n0 , , , . citL off tJiey »!'Li>t, of course, be , ad'lc-fl to <he drastic re-hictions made \' m iho hourly rate, v.-bu-h ./ill bring- •: ■?

the standard of living of :the water-' side workers down to the starvation, level. ; "I do not 'blame the secretary -o'fthe "-Employers' Federation :for his obsurd statement on this question. His knowledge of waterside -work and ths. methods of working ships is absolute-; •1-y nil, -anfl 1 am surprised indeed that he should -make such a blunder as to Ideal .with this question all.' He I states that-my remarks were 'scathing,' and "further -states 'that '■waterside! work is subject to 'the supervision of 'Government inspectors, and adds that neither the regulations nor the inspection was at all affected hy the ■award. \ "Clause 2 of these regulations reads —-'All running gear and all subsidiary appliances, whether such gear and appliances are used on the ship or not, used for shipping .or discharging cargo,, including coal, on -to or from ships sl/all from time to time be inspected by a surveyor of ships appointed lorthe .purpose. Such surveyor or other! , officer may prohibit the use of any i gear or .appliances wjMch he oonsid.ers; , : unfit far use, or -he may order any al-- ; ■terations or repairs that he thinks necessary <to he made. The -owner -shall' carry.out the order of tbe . or other officer, -hut he may appeal- ',* against it to the Marine Department ' as he t-hfnks 'fit-to 'do so;' , . "I may point but that my-reference:. • clealtonly with hatelrmen heihg em-: 9,nd 1 ..would tike to ftnew if \ >■ Mr. .Birfhop suggests that a liatehmah ! -3 is .'.either running -gear 0,r% -subsidiary * A

?e'-f appliance ;tp. tt. In; 1815, lylien thesi p. regulstions^were.- -gazetted, ■ the .agree iv' i con- s r|rf.B.t , t4iß.^a:|;e- : •■ l?iiaeci ihe ■-£ ollo.wing : '-.vi«oyisions" re ; ■i :garding'-. hatcjimen: ....'A corapeien hatchman or bullrope man .shall b< .0 -employed on deck at .each hatoh wher [- vessels (othSr .thaiTt lighters) are loadx ing or discharging .cargo. JS.H the casf d of lighters present practices stall.cpn>f, tinue. Xliis crlause shall .not apply tc a' under'i'so '<tons regis-ter. 6 or in .cfg-e^: ? J^'"- , T^i^-qiily"' , of 11J the ship's crew are employed to Jeacl L- 'Or discharge the cargo. When ■come 1 petent hatchmen are not available, c- employers have the right to itransfer '-[men from other ships, -provided that :/ the men sp v transferred ..'ihatl-raot , lose .;■ .fl-uancrally by such tran-s*er. v qiies--4 tibn as to whether the after hatches x : of Wellington small ..ves-sels require-a c - hatchman is referred i'or settle event .to ,y the union and the employei 3 cfra-cerii*- ".' "'.When, the -.question of" 'i-iatc.h.meu' ; .was : -^brottghr:up ; beJo-i'S >tiiQ C'o-nmis;- - - sion the employers' ropreseala;tives ; - 1 stated that they .woulcl-aiof-.di-eam of J ' working.a vessel without:.a hatcliman, J yet ttiy court, at the rs.gu.est -,of :t3ie - % employers, included th-e xoll&wing in i -its r-:cs?nt judgment: In all cases -irr = . which the view of -tjic •.winch-man, crane-driver or yardarm uian ,is obstructed In loading or 1% ;eratidns; a,.-..competent .hatchman' or ! bulirope man shall-be omplayed on - : neck at each hatch -.when .vessels ; (other than .lighters) aae loading or ; ciischarging cargo or .ccal- T.iiv£ r })v6- '■■ .vision -shall -not apply to .vessels ran- 1 , der 3.50 tons gross a'egisteivar in .cases : ia only mejiibers ..of the ship's crew** are employed to load or riia.change cai'go or coals.' The clause in the 191-9 .-agreement, at least p.covMed--5 ordinary .safety for the roei\ Clown be--il low.'but ..under the- .'coavt's award it -in competent for-the employers to work 3 j any vessel without a hatoh-iiiau-if they . desire to ao so, or if the men are fOOI--1 ish enough to risk their- lives .without , that safeguard. I would artvise Mr. '■ Bishop that, when he deals. ques--5 tions of this kind,, that* he-first finds out the facts for himself, .or leaves • i it to men vvho do under.?taud -v'a.ter- ">' Sjcle'.work. « i Ca?OSS'EXA.CWi;:KASfIOa'»* , * ,-: "llegarding 'gross exasperation,' it '- seems that Mr. Bishop ,not -Uke to deal .with facts. His .method is sim- , •■ ply 'that of the propagandist. His reply to my -statement tuat -the- slil-p- , ', .pvv'ners would benefit througrh t'-onew I 1 award by from £230,000 to t£ 270,000 | • per annum was that this is -'gross- ex- j i. ag-geration.' He 'followed, this uv> by a statement that the figures Tiad been.; '.. worked out in 'Wellington, and that: the calculation showed that 'th-? -reduc- : - tiooi ..in rates in the new awurd, coui- ;. pare-d with the rates in -!f>2l, -.wnulilmean a difference to the : workers of 4/- per week. It is at P?*ce admitted" ' that the reductions at WeUj-ri2;*on .will" be less than at other ports, but if the wage reductions on all Hasss? of car-' ; go are taken and these retluefciotia are ' averaged -over- all the parts, tfc wil! ha ] seen, -.on the reductions 'I naT-s- n'viAzz, ; that it will amount to F from 1:5/-' to 4il 1 per week. Added to.lhb* : iy tlie -r-educ-' T tion in the pay for standing-by -time, : men ordered down, miraraaitt .pay-' ments, travelling time and ilroliday pay, which would easily make : g-regate reduction average £1 px-r , Aveek. Tlie total reduction la wages i will, of course, depend on the amount I .of. iVrOi-k perfonrned-—the nxore hours the men are employed the greater the ; reduction. During this pas': slump; year the total average, number ol men' employed was slightly over 60(?0 This number -at '£1' per week reduction-' 'would mean £312,000 per annum. So that my calculation was based on a very estimate cii ci'.s total wage reductions. ■ ■ "May J I tell Mr. Bishop-that-whoever; told him that -a calculation .wu-s-made" at Wellington on the reduciion ot-t-ho' court and it amounted to about 4/week was, to put -it.anildl}', ■pul.Ung *liSs leg. Hwv could such a calculation be made? To do this the -calculator' j would rhave to perform the following'; feat:—Estimate: .(!:) The amount ofwork for the coming year; (2) all the wet weather *tanding-by tiaie: (3) all th« .meal ,lio.iu-s to be worltsd dur-" •ing the coming r paymeiit for time ,or,dered down.; (5) all the -sta-nfl-iiig-by time; j(;6). the special' cargoes handled and the. .vessels bunkered -alf all the-po-i'ts. •( ••'To cap it alii, he':s\fould be -contpel-* :.led to ihav«e * S:und«.y, 'Ghriatmas Day, ;G«jm><s Aawac sD&y,,.-&&&■ all the statutory holidays in one week to be able to arrive at ej r en an ai\in'O3ci-[ ■mately correct .caluclation. Is li any' wonder that *hey fawivctl at a 4/'» *p^l , : reduot ; ion on the crude •alStempts made at.a calculation 'by this rtjfethod?' propaganda, of -the aaor«tai'.s: ot>

c r the New iZealaml JSuinio^ars , Fc-dera*- ■ ;- tiQn availeth not. The court has ma.de. L-. the, reduction, stated,, the standard of i-_ living of the '.waterside wqrkers ka£ Lt been lowered to the .point *W rftarv** ' e s ,tion for them and th.e'ir dependantsn. We 'know.rftjr.'Bishop-does -not accrue td " [-V a starvation standard of-livin-; -theree fore, I would suggest to him that a3 - ; these unjusiiflfibie reauction& have 0 been now fully explained he will'iise % his influence nvita the ■•-shipowners} to f at least remedy some of -the drastic - cl reductions made. -As Mr. Bishop ha* - stated ■■•that -on the watfer- !/ side worKers are-,employed «8.8 iroura" r per,r»veak througlioiit .New Zealandfc t and as hs has stated that the average 2 reduction, JJased on the 1921 rate, ii • - only 4/- per week on this number of 3 hours, I would to him that 1 tlio best w.ay-of'rovereoiniiis the uat--31 versal robjection to the recent award - ! of.-the court is tiitit he .will .jfuara'atee,- ----; on behalf of the .shipownev?, a 38.8 ■".:;. hour week for all men required to efL -ficieiitly carry-.on the waterfront inr> "; dustry, only the 4/- per week;' ',*1 reduction be' made on .all classes o€ L work. I am of the .opinion that such. [■ an agreement would .overcome ': if not all. .the .objections ,to the judg-> V ment of the Arbitration Court."