ARBITRATION MATTERS

New Zealand Times, Volume LXXII, Issue 4636, 15 April 1902, Page 7

ARBITRATION MATTERS

A memorandum concerning " Arbitration Court awards was lorwarded to the Wellington .Provincial Industrial Association last night by Mr S. Brown, a member of the Arbitration Court. The paper was read at last night’s meeting, and an opinion was expressed that it could with advantage be discussed by the Employers’ Association. A vote oi thanks was passed to Mr Brown for his paper, and it was decided that it be lorwarded o Q to the Employers’ Association for consideration. Tho text of the memorandum is as follows: “One of the duties imposed ou tho Arbitration Court is that of dealing with cases arising out of tho Workmen’s Compensation for Accidents Act. Some ten cases are pending, and several have been before tho Court. Some have been only formally dealt with, that is to say, they have been agreed upon previously to coming to tho Court. One case dealt with was that of a girl who had the ends of her fingers cut otf; the Court awarded Js per week, that being one-third of her earnings. It was shown that she could earn two-thirds, and the Court only permits an award up to one-half of tho total earnings. In this case the amount, if not commuted, would probably run on for her whole life, as it would not exceed the sum of A'3oo, the limit. Another case was that of death by accident. Ihe defence was that deceased had been discharged. The evidence substantially showed that the deceased, a dreclge-raas-ter, was required by telegram to pay off all hands, including himself, lay up the dredge, and place it in charge of a caretaker. The evidence showed that while doing necessary work on the dredge, preparatory to laying her up, the dredgemaster was drowned. Tho Court awarded tho full amount of ,£IOO, with =£ls 15s costs. Recently it was stated, in reference to an award of the Arbitration Court, that wages had been made lower than some of tho workers were getting. In all these cases it must be remembered that the law only allows the Court to fix the minimum wages; that is to say, the lowest wages that can be paid to a competent worker in his calling; to fix the highest would bo an injustice to workers. For those that are not able to earn these wages, machinery is provided. As the Court has to administer the Act iu tho interest of tho whole of tho community, it has to provide for all classes, old and young. -It was recently pointed out by the Court that it saw no reason why youths should not continue to get their living in callings in which they had hitherto been employed, and in which they were competent to do the work; that it recognised that youths had got to. live as well as men. a maxim which I think all rightthinking persons will agree with. It further laid down a scale of wage for various ages up to 21, so that youths would be as well protected as men. One question which almost always comes up is preference to unionists. Though iu some cases this is not asked, as a rule it is. Employers sometimes most strenuously oppose this, sometimes they are indifferent, sometimes they agree that it shall he a condition that the worker shall belong to the union as a precedent to getting employment. Sometimes where preference is given, it has been mutually agreed that the employers should use all their influence to cause any workmen in their employ to join the union. Generally speaking, the unions urge that preference is of tho most vital importance to them; that if not given the union would dwindle away. I have not been able to find from tho Government returns of unions that preference of employment has had any either in the increase or the maintenance of the numerical strength of the union. Yet there is, 1 think, no doubt from what employers have told me that preference 'sometimes causes unnecessary irritation. I have not been able to ascertain that preference even got a worker employment that could not havo been got equally as well without preference. Personally, I think from what I have seen in various parts of the colony that the clause the Court put in, making it a breach of award to discriminate against a unionist, is much more in the real interest of the unions, and does not seem to cause any irritation with the employers.”