INDUSTRIAL COURT

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 23156, 30 September 1938, Page 14

INDUSTRIAL COURT

VARIETY OF SUBJECTS APPRENTICESHIP ORDERS A DRAINAGE BOARD'S CLAIM Application was made to the Industrial Court yesterday for the lirst apprenticeship order in the sea-grass and wicker-working industry. The three matters in dispute were wages, the deduction of wages for time lost through sickness or accident, and the proportion of apprentices to journeymen. The same three matters were argued in Ihe hearing of the application for a revised apprenticeship order in the furniture trades industry. In each case the magistrate, .Mr. A. Gilmour. reserved h's decision. Partial exemption from the terms of tho Dominion local bodies' labourers' (rural section) award was sought by the Thames Valley Drainage Board. Tho board claimed exemption from the fixed hours of starting and finishing on tho ground of impracticability for the board's workmen, and also asked extension of hours from 40 to 44. .Mr. I. C. Howard, for the board, said that the workers concerned were essentially seasonal workers engaged in the dry months from January to June in maintaining and clearing out drains. Three gangs each consisting of six men and a foreman were engaged in the work. Tho chairman of the hoard, Mr. F. E. Hughes, who said that the board had 300 miles of drains on the Haurnki Plains serving an area of 220 square miles, gave evidence that it was impracticable either to increase the number of the gangs or the number of men employed in each gang Mr. T. Stanley, on behalf of the union, opposed the extension of hours, although lie made no objection to exemption being granted in respect of times of starting and finishing. Tho magistrate reserved his decision. Turners and Growers, Limited, applied for partial exemption from the drivers' award for junior assistants ein- | ployed on van? delivering butter and eggs to retail shops. Mr. Gilmour said that on the evidence submitted he was not satisfied that grounds had been made out for an exemption. It was necessary, however, to hold over decision until the new drivers' award, at present under consideration by the Second Court of Arbitration, had been issued