ARBITRATION COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 12818, 18 March 1905, Page 7

ARBITRATION COURT.

CARPENTERS AND JOINERS' DISPUTE. The Arbitration Court, consisting of Mr. Justice Chapman (president) and Messrs. Brown and Slater, continued the, hearing of the carpenters and joiners' case yesterday. Mr. S. I. Clarke, who bad commenced the opening of the caso for the builders on the previous clay, continued his remarks. He stated that objection was offered to the clause providing for three months' probation for apprentices, but considered that the present rate of pay for apprentices should be retained. He opposed preference to unionists. He agreed that the preference system had some advantages, but these were outweighed by disadvantages. When the secretary of the union was asked to supply men, ho did his best to .send suitable men, but he could not guarantee their suitability. He thought, however, that if preference were granted to the employees, it should also be granted to the employers. L. J. Bagnall, sawmiller and timber merchant, said that in August, 1903, he had, in reply to an inquiry from the. United States, made the following statement regarding the effect of the operation of the Arbitration Act:— course of time, perhaps, the increase of wages may bring about an increase in rente and cost of commoditiessuch as to materially diminish the workers' advantage, and thus to react upon the whole community." He considered that the time baa arrived when this state, of tilings could bo said to have commenced. In regard to the application for an increase of Id an hour in the present caso, ho considered that it wages went up it would tend to diminish the j quantity of work available, and thus lessen : the workmen's chances of employment.

In answer to Mr. llosser (representing the union), the witness said that, as chairman of the Conciliation Board, he had found that there had been little or no friction between the employers and employees in regard to the working of the existing award. John Mitchell, architect, said that in 1903, when he assisted Mr. Bagnall (a member of the Education Board) in replying to an inquiry from America as to the effect of the working of the arbitration laws, ho had expressed the opinion that soino provision should be made for community representation in the hearing of the disputes.' There was a large section of the community not represented before the Court, and he thought this question should bo considered. The President said that the Court's inquiries in the hearing of disputes had boon more extensive than Mr. Mitchell ; ppeared to suppose. There was no legal provision for specific community representation, but it, was always open for any witness to address himself to any general considerations.

Mr. Mitchell expressed tho belief that it would be very interesting to tho community to have evidence on the economics of the question tendered to the Court by a trained intelligence, such as that of (Professor Segar. The making of a provision for bringing those questions tinder the consideration of the Court would excite a great deal of interest amongst thinkers in both America and England.

Witness said ho thought that thoroughly skilled carpenters were worth the wage asked ■for in the award. The Education Board, to which witness was architect, paid its carpenters lis a day in town, and 12s in the country. ! Mr. Brown: But it docs not come out of tho Board's own pocket. In reply to Mr. Clarke, witness said he thought a workable classification system might be obtained by discontinuing the use of tho term "incompetent," and dividing men into three classes, viz.: (1) Al carpenters and joiners, (2) carpenters, and (3) generally handy men, who might be termed " associates." He would suggest as tho respective wages, 12s, 10s, and 8s a day, as being better than a uniform scale of 10s Bd. There was a great deal of the rougher class of work in the common class of structures, which tho third-rate men could do, but on which tho highest class of men could not be profitably worked. At present a great many workingmen were living in houses unfit for habitation, but with the present rate of wages it would not pay to erect workmen's houses. If the rougher class of work were done by the -unskilled workmen it would enable workmen's .houses to be provided at lower rents. . There was no doubt that every increase- in the rate of carpenters' wages tended to discourage building. He thought that having to pay 15 per cent, extra for work in the country would probably have tho effect of inducing employers to employ country men instead of getting men from town, or else to reduce the amount of country work. As to indenturing apprentices, there were arguments to be used on both sides; it was a difficult problem. A provision for transferring apprentices might work satisfactorily, but transfers should not be made until a sufficient cause was established. He thought that provision should be inr.do for giving apprentices a good technical training by the employers, and that this should lie provided even if tho remuneration had to be made a little less. Ho would approve of preference to unionists if tbo unions were thoroughly organised, with proper classification on the lines he had indicated. The basis of preference should bo the making of union work preferable, and he thought the union should accept the- responsibility of classification to this end. The factory system fended to tie men to one particular kind of work. Tho effect of raising the factory wages would necessarily be to raise the price of joinery to the general public.

In answer to Mr. White, witness said that the men who were receiving lis a day from the Board of Education were men who were in the position of foremen. When other men were employed with them those additional were paid tho rate provided in tho award.

In answer to Mr. Itosser, witness said that his experience went to show that the present price of building was'such as to preclude any considerable number of buildings being put in. Tho greater cost of building was duo to the increased cost of laud, timber, brick?, and all classes of labour employed. Tho increase of tho cost of materials was moro or less due to the increase in wages. Ho had, as an architect, received complaints from men that they wore not allowed sufficient time or proper material to do good work, but when lie Lad brought tho men face to face with the employers tho statements had not been substantiated, and it had in certain cases turned out that the men complaining had not done the particular work in question. lie thought this was a matter which the union should investigate. Mr. T. White, in opening the case for tho sawmillers, said that tho millers did not come in contact with the builders. In 1899 thoy were cited before the Arbitration Court, and they then claimed that it was unfair to class them as builders. Their joiners at that time were receiving fis por day, or 48s for 47 hours' work. This, after hearing ©vidonce, was the wage fixed by the Court, and the award was fixed for two years. Some six months after the fixing of tho award tradeimproved, and they voluntarily raised the wages to 8s 6d per day, without oven being requested by tho men to do so. At the expiration of the award they wore again cited (in 1902). They were still paying 8s 6d per day, and after hearing evidence this was tho wago fixed by the Court. Some six months after this award came into operation, trade having got better, they again voluntarily raised the wages, in most cases, to 9s, which they were at present paying. Ho did not think tho time was opportune to further increase wages, as trade could not bo considered brisk Their men would sooner work in tho factories at a lower rate than work outside for a builder, tho reason being that the work is cleaner and of a lighter nature, and also constant. Ho handed in a statement showing that mon had been in their employment for as long as 24 years, which he considered was a proof of their satisfaction with existing conditions. Ho objected to the union's proposed hours of work as l>eing unworkable. No exception was taken to the overtime clauses, but ho thought there wore too many holidays, and that the mon would gladly work on some of the statutory holidays if the restrictions wore removed. The clause in reference to incompetent workmen was hardly fair, as it might prevent men suffering from old age or some physical defeet from earning a living. x Mr. Rosser said that in regard to old men at present employed on piecework the union would agree that existing conditions should not bo disturbed. Mr. White and the other employers agreed to this proposal. Mr. White said he did not agree to the clause referring to the five years' period of apprenticeship, but ho favoured what might lie termed a registration system, under which a beginnor on leaving an employer would receive a certificate stating the time he had been employed and tho wages ho had received. This certificate could be presented to the next employer, who would pay him. according to the time he had already worked, and so op. until the boy had learned the trade. Ho considered preference to unionists altogether unnecessary. Ho agreed that employers should be bound not to discriminate between members of the union and those who are not members. There were many men who were not members of the union, and some had conscientious scruples against joining a union, and he did not see any reason why those men should be prevented from getting employment. '

Mr. "Whit© then went into the box and gave evidence in regard to several other matters mentioned in his statement. He held that the factories should not be compelled to pay the same wage as was paid to outside hands. Mr. E. Morris, as an individual employer, also addressed the Court. Ho stated when the last award came into force it made a difference to his firm on then existing contracts of £50 or £60, and should the present demands be conceded it would affect them to the extent of about £40. The present claim for an increase of wages was inopportune, owing to the building trade being on the wane.

Mr. Grosvenor asked that the Tramways Company should be exempted from the preference clause, and the president asked him to nut tho request in writing. The .examination of Mr. Morris was postponed till Monday next, when the hearing of the dispute will be resumed. Mr. Walter Punch, who gave evidence on Thursday, states that what he intended to make clear was that whilst ho did not believe in men working on holidays he considered they should be paid double pay when they did work on such days: also that he believed' in the transfer of indentured apprentices only in the caso of tho death or bankruptcy of the employer. The word " incompetent" was inadvertently substituted for "competent" in yesterday's report of the following sentence of Mr. S. ]. Clarke's address to the Court:—"lt had been stated that the employers had shown a strong dislike to employ competent workmen, but that was not so."

Tre Court will sit this morning to deal with compensation cases.

Mr. Rosser applied to have tho evidence of the Whangaroa shipwrights, in the shipbuilders and shipwrights' dispute, taken in Auckland. The application was refused.