Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SUGAR WORKS DISPUTE.

CONDITIONS O*F WORK.

DANGEROUS NATURE DENIED

The hearing of the sugar workers' application for an increase of 5s per week was concluded in the Arbitration Court on Saturday. The application was presented by Mr. J. Purtell, secretary of the Sugar Workers' Union, and was opposed on behalf of the employers by Mr. S. E. Wright and Mr. Ashley Campbell, manager of tho sugar refinery at Chelsea.

In rebutting the evidence of Stuart Billman, a raw store worker, who said he had been refused an insurance policy by an Auckland cdinpany while he was at work, apparently on the ground that his work was dangerous, Mr. Campbell said that Billman, being insured under the Workers' Compensation Act, would not be eligible for further insurance with a company. If he were, it might be a very payable proposition to maintain oneself in a permanently injured condition.

Mr. Justice Frazer; In other words, the companies ■will not dcuble-bank. Regarding the housing scheme undertaken by the Colonial Sugar Company at Chelsea, Mr. Campbell said that 35 employees already owned their own houses under the scheme, 23 had left tho company's service still owning houses under the scheme, while 15 men were paying from 8s to 14s a week in rent for houses worth 30s a week. There were 77 men who. chose to reside across the water in Auckland for family and private reasons. These could obtain a weekly ticket on the ferries for 3s.

O. Harnden, foreman of the raw store, described the process of breaking down stacks, consisting of sacks of sugar, 20ft. to 30ft. high. Care had to be exercised to ensure that the stack did not overhang men working below, but the work -was no more dangerous than other work. The proportion of accidents was. very small. *He had been 18 years in the raw store, but had only met with one serious accident. On that occasion he fell about 34ft., and was in hospital seven weeks. The accident was not due to faulty construction of the stack or to any neglect on tho part of the management. Sir. Campbell said that to the layman the stack appeared at times to have a dangerous overhang, but in reality it was quite, safe, and he had been told by men at the works that they could sleep under the stack with safety. Piles and binders were driven in to hold it together. Mr. Wright submitted that no advance in wages was justified unless conditions had altered since the last award was made. This, he said, had not been shown. The Sugar Workers' Award could be fairly compared with the Storemen and Packers', except that the shop packer required more knowledge of the goods he handled—

Mr. Hiram Hunter, assessor for the workers: And does not work so hard as these fellows.

Mr. Wright disagreed on the point. He said that it seemed strange that the Government could not provide a worker's cottage for less than 22s 6d to 30s a week,, whereas the Colonial Sugar Company did it for 14s a week. Stuart Billman, recalled, said his impression was that a policy had been refused him because his work in the raw store was deemed to be dangerous. He now realised that that was not the reason, which was that the insurance company would not encroach upon the risks covered* by the Workers' ' Compensation Act. Mr. Purlell said ' he believed the company would, do far better if it co-operated with the men instead of taking up its present attitude. As regards conditions, he had observed that temperatures of 86 and 98 degrees prevailed in certain departments, where heavy work was performed, and this called for special rales of wages. No one would contest the ability of the company to pay the increases asked for. As regards the watchman, Richard Hill, Mr. Purtell maintained that it was unfair, when 48 hours was the ruling working week in this country, to make a man work 60 hours a week and so deprive him of time for recreation. It was manifestly unreasonable to pay a man the small wage of £4 Is for 60 hours a week, with no holidays in the year and no extra pay for Sunday work. Tho Court announced "that, it would endeavour to make its award before the Christmas holidays.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19231217.2.142

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18584, 17 December 1923, Page 11

Word Count
724

SUGAR WORKS DISPUTE. New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18584, 17 December 1923, Page 11

SUGAR WORKS DISPUTE. New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18584, 17 December 1923, Page 11