SEAMEN’S EARNINGS

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 11295, 22 August 1922, Page 6

SEAMEN’S EARNINGS

MAXIMUM £416 ANNUALLY COURT UNABLE TO ACCEPT INCOMPLETE RETURN. SPECIAL WAGES INCLUDED. The hearing of the seamen’s and firemen’s dispute was continued before the Arbitration Court yesterday morning. The Court comprised Mr Justice Frazer (president), Mr W. Scott (employers’ representative) and Mr M. J. Reardon (employees’ representative). Mr W. G. Smith, labour-superintend-ent fer the Union Steamship Company; end Air T. O. Bishop, secretary of the New Zealand Shipowners’ Federation, appeared for tlio employers. Mr W. T. Young, secretary of the New Zealand Federated Seamen’s Union, appeared for the unions, together with the secretaries from several other 'centres and representatives of the Australian organisations.

Kenneth McLeay, general manager of the Richardson Shipping Company, who had been under examination since the hearing opened on Thursday, was further questioned by Mr Young upon the various clauses of the claims and counter-el aim 6.

_ Called upon to explain the variations in the time taken by coastal vessels between ports, witness stated that bad weather frequently held steamers up and made a difference of as much as two hours per mile in speed. Witness maintained that the wages statement ho had previously submitted to the court was a true return of the actual payments made by the company. Mr Young: That may be. But your figures show- that you' were not making the payments required under the agreement.

Mr Young submitted to the court that the return contained errors and discrepancies. Tile witness, he maintained, was unable to swear to the accuracy of the document, and had not personally checked the figures. His Honour said that witness had already told the court that the return had been prepared on his iu'structions, and that he was willing to call his assistants -as witnesses if required. Witness denied that on many occasions seamen had to go without their meals.

Mr Young: Can you explain why in your return yon have picked out 13 days in a month of 28 days, and only two days in another month of 31 days? Witness: I did not compile the return.

Mr Young said that the average earned per day per man in February, according to the return, was Is Id ip-ore than the average for March. The return presented to the court, he contended, in one instance showed that a man had earned £416 per year. ‘‘What was your object,” he asked the witness, “in presenting these figures to the court?” Witness: To demonstrate that the present wages and conditions that we have to contend with -tre too heavy; they are -arguments for the reduction of' wages. Mr Young: And to accomplish that you wish to show the oourt what you consider to be enormous amounts earned by the men in the course of a year? Witness: The present state of the trade will not bear those rates of pay. Mr Young: I submit that your object in picking out February was that in a month of 23 days a larger average per man is shown than in a month of 31 days.

Witness denied the allegation. AN UNRELIABLE RETURN.

His Honour said the court could not place much reliance upon the witness’s statement of earnings, because the amounts earned for overtime were not set out separately. Excess rates were also paid for certain classes of work and these were included in the total. The court had been presented with the gross totals earned by the men, including overtime and payments for. special Work.

•; Witness said ,he thought he could furnish a more detailed statement. -His Honours That will be of more assistance to us.

Mr Bishop: I think we will he able to satisfy the court on that point. Mr Young said he, too, could! show the oourt the amount of overtime worked. The man shown to have earned £416 per year had worked 1662 hours overtime at 2s 6d per hour. Witness denied that jthe busiest period of the year had been taken for the purpose of the averages. Although tho months quoted were -during the shearing season, the actual shipment of wool did not commence till later. He maintained that the averages were fair. The wa-ges shown for A.B.’s were not excessive, hut he had been surprised to find that the average of the “day man” waa so large. Mr Young said it -was evident from the employers’ claims that they proposed to reduce the men’s earnings by £250,000 pdr year. His Honour: The witness has said tfiat he regrets his company’s finances make reductions necessary. Further questioned by Mr Young, Mr McLeay said he had ho objection to paying a imnSfcu-m half-hour overtime rate.

The count adjourned till 10 -a.m. today.