ARBITRATION COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 13481, 7 May 1907, Page 6

ARBITRATION COURT.

TWO PEOBAiBLE SETTLEMENTS The Arbitration L Court, consisting of Mr. Justice i Sim (president) and Messrs. R. Slater and S. Brown, resumed its sittings in Auckland yesterday morning. The President, referring to the slaughtermen's dispute,: suggested thai; in view of the * award given in the Gisborne dispute, the union and the employers should hold a conference to see if they could not come to some; agreement. . Mr. Grosvenor, appearing on behalf of the employers; stated that they wcrald consider the Gisborne award that evening. Perhaps after that they could; arrange to hold a conference. ' * Mr. Bust, representing the employees, stated that they were perfectly willing to hold a conference, but up to the present their overtures had been refused. His Honor said there should be no difficulty about that now. He thought they should be able to settle the- dispute without coming before the Court. " With regard to the Westfield manure workers' dispute, Mr. A. Rosser, appearing on behalf of the men, stated that two conferences had been held, and that the men had decided to accept certain conditions which had been mutually agreed upon. It was only a question now of wording the conditions, which would be presented to the Court in due course. He asked that the case be placed on the bottom of the list. : The application was granted. ' , The hearing of the ' cooks '; and stewards' dispute was set down for Thursday, it being stated that the hearing of the tramways dispute would take up all Tuesday and Wednesday. ' . '''" - BOOKBINDERS' AWARD. In connection with the bookbinders' dispute, it was announced that an agreement had been arrived at between the employers' and employees' unions, and the parties concerned asked that an award be made accordingly. Mr. Grosvenor appeared for the employers' union, and Mr. Banfield for the workers' union. . _\ Two employers, not parties to the agreement, raised the question as to* the payment of cutters if not fully employed at cutting and put on to other work. The Court pointed out that this was covered by a clause in the agreement, and made the award as requested. The award provides for a week of 48 hours, with payment to competent binders and rulers at the rate of £3 per week, 55s ' per week for first cutters, 50s per weeik for second cutters, 37s bd per week for third cutters, and 30s per week for all other outters. Any cutter taken off guillotine work ;to do journeymen binders' work is to be paid at the rate of £3 per week for the time during which _he is so employed. It shall also be permissible for any binder to be taken from the bench to do cutting, provided that whilst, so employed he shall, be paid the rate prescribed. Competent journeymen employed as casual hands shall be paid riot less than Is 4£d per hour. Overtime is to be paid for at the rate of time and a-quarter. on ordinary workdays, at the rate of time and a-half on five' annual holidays, and at the rate of double-time on Sundays, Christmas Day, and Good Friday. Apprentices are to be paid as follows:—First year, 7s 6d per week; second, 10s 6d; third, 15s; fourth, 20s; fifth, 255; and sixth year, 30s. The award is to remain in force for two years. ALLEGED ILLEGAL AWARD. An application was made by Mr. F. R. Bust, on behalf of the Butchers' : Union, to annul the butchers' award made on June 25, 1906, on the ground that it was illegal. Asked as to what section of the Act he made his application under, Mr. Bust said he relied on sections 25 and 26 and section 54, sub-sections "A" and "I" of the Act of 1905. :' - '• ;,N - Mr, Scott, appearing on behalf of the employers, submitted that the application was not in order, and that Mr. Bust was really 'asking the Court-to sit in judgment on v- itself. •■'.* Any such ' application should be made to the Supreme Court. Mr. Bust contended that the Arbitration Court only had jurisdiction. The agreement upon which the award was made was, he stated, illegal. ■?. \ The award - was d also dated to be in -'' force ■ for r a'" longer period than the agreement specified.' • . His Honor said they would not go -into the merits of the case. If the Court'had : made an award beyond its. jurisdiction, then the applicants should go ;/ to the Supreme Court. ■ The' Arbitration Court had no ! power to annul an award. How'was it, •-. he asked, that the union, which was one of the parties 1 to the application, was now seeking to annul it? ' ".:"■■ . .'.■•■', Mr. Bust stated that the union was federated with other butchers' unions throughout the colony, and that" the present award could not be observed without permitting things which were■;' illegal under other awards. He withdrew his application, and also that for a fresh award. ..:

s SECURITY FOR COSTS. ; > A joint application for stay of proceedings until the claimants find security for costs was made in the cases of Giovanni Rosso and another' v. John Henry Skinner and others, Johannes Olsen and another v. John Henry Skinner and others, and Johannes Karlsen and another v. William 0. Caldwell and others. Mr. J. R. Reed appeared for the respondents in ■ the '■ first; two cases, and Mr. Thos. Cotter for the respondents in the latter case.' Mr. MoVeagh appeared for the claimants in each case. Olsen and Rosso, who reside in Norway [ and Sicily respectively, allege that their respective sons were drowned in the wreck of the Aotea, off (.he New Zealand coast, last winter, and claim compensation under the Workers' Compensation for Accidents • Act. Karlsen also claims compensation under the same Act for the death of his son. -The deceased, it : was- stated, was boarding one of respondents' scows, on. which he ■; was employed, when he fell on to the dedk, and received injuries from which he subsequently died. "A Mr. Reed, in making the application, pointed - out the enormous cost the respondents would be put to in order.-.'to obtain evidence in Sicily and Norway. If the application, was not granted, the respondents, should they win their case, had not the slightest possible chance of recovering anything from the claimants, as they 'resided out of the colony, and the money could not be collected. ~He submitted that * the respondents should be protected as asked. , He argued that there was.an inherent jurisdiction in /Courts of law by which they could make rules regulating their own procedure, and that, therefore, the Court, in oases where .the claimants reside out of the colony, could make an order, for the finding of security for payment of costs. He quoted a number of oases in support of his contention.

Mr. ;; Cotter, supported Mr. Reed. Mr. McVeagh, in. reply, claimed that the proceedings under the Workers' Compensation for Accidents Act were not of a litigious character, and that they differentiated the present cases from those quoted by counsel. The Workers' Compensation for Accidents Act was designed in a large measure for the; protection of people in impoverished' circumstances, and ;be : submitted 5 that if such an order as that applied for were granted it would practically debar his clients from their rights altogether. • --; ' .The Court reserved its decision. ' DUNEDIN CASES. FELT-HATTERS AND HAIRDRESSERS. [BY TELBGBAPB.— ASSOCIATION.] ■■■■■'-- • " , Dukedin, Monday. The Arbitration Court has given an interpretation of clause 2 of the felt-hatters award. It holds' that the "clause means that there is to be weekly employment, and that a worker is to be paid at the. rate of not less'. than £3 per week for a week of 48 hours. ," He .is not entitled to be paid for holidays or for days on which, through sickness or other similar cause, he is not at work, but he is entitled to be paid for days on whioh he is. ready to work, but his employer does not give him any work to do. An ;; industrial dispute between, the hairdressers' assistants and the master hairdressers of Dunedin and suburbs has been set' down for hearing before the Arbitration Court. The reference, which has been sent direct to the Court for settlement, makes the following, amongst other demands, viz.: That' the hours of labour shall be 52 per week, exclusive of meal hours; the recognised regular hours of work shall be fixed by each employer in each establishment , according to the circumstances of ; his business, but that a day's work shall end not later than six p.m. on four days of the week, not later than one o'clock >in the afternoon on the weekly half holiday, and not later than ten o'clock on Saturday evening; that the employer shall so arrange his hours as to enable his workmen to have one hour for dinner between , the hours of twelve, noon and two p.m., and that in all establishments arrangements shall be inado by employers, to enable their workmen to have, Saturdays, one ■ hour for; dinner between noon and two p.m., and one hour for tea between five and seven p.m. ; and that-the minimum wages to be paid to journeymen shall be £2 10s per week, and to hairworkers;v£2 15s per week.. . J :