SEMEN'S DISPUTE

New Zealand Times, Volume L, Issue 11652, 17 October 1923, Page 2

SEMEN'S DISPUTE

LITTLE PROGRESS MADE CASE WILL PROBABLY GO BEFORE COURT. DISCUSSION YESTERDAY. Little progress was made before Mr W. Newton (Conciliation Commissioner) yesterday when discussion of H’ e dispute between the Federated Union of' Seamen and Firemen and, the shipping companies was continued. Messrs W. GT Smith, W. Bennett, Hammond (secretary), and Captain P. A Peterson appeared for the employers. and Messrs W. T. Young, A. Clark, and Anderson for the men. Only minor clauses were agreed upon in the course of the afternoon. SUNDAY WORK. Mr Young stated that it was not hy any means customary to clean tops on Sundays at sea. The employers were asking for the right to work men for two hours on a Sunday morning. He asked whether the work could not wait until the Monday morning. Mr Bennett: Certainly not. If you were an engineer, you would do it yourself rather than have it not done. Mr Hammond: Mr Young doesn’t object merely to the cleaning, but to all work on Sunday. Mr Smith: All work other than that necessary for the navigation of the ship is objected to. That is the position. Mr Young stated that it was admitted that drawing oil was necessary to the navigation of the ship. That was admitted. The difference between the clauses submitted was that the employers wished such work as cleaning included. The clause ae they submitted it confined the washing of decks to passenger ships. The court had 1 extended this to all ships, and extended the hours hy one. SAFETY OF THE SHIP.

The owners’ proposals in regard to the safety of the ship, said Mr Smith, were the same as the present award. They proposed l also that where vessels were detained in port in quarantine or for Customs or other Government or port authority purposes, watches might be maintained if required by the master in either ior both departments (deck and engine). The men could not see that this was necessary. .The clause, said Mr Young, had been done without for many years.

On the subject of mooring and unmooring Mr Anderson stated that he could not understand why men should not be paid for mooring or unmooring a ship, which, after all, was just as much a portion of her voyage, and a position where sho could be operated with profit. At present the man was paid, if working outside his own time of labour, only when the work of mooring or unmooring went over half an-houv.

Under the previous award, said Mr Young, a ship was not in port until i she.reached her mooring berth. Oon- : s'deration of this clause was agreed to | bo deferred. DEPARTURE. Mr Smith pointed out that the owners could not agree to the men’s proposals concerning departure. In the first place they would involve the payment of overtime should the vessel not get away within a specified time. Secondly it could not be overcome by setting watches. The watches had to be set at some time or other; they had once been set at midnight and midday; .they could not be postponed until a vessel left port. Mr Young stated that tho paragraph concerning work in port for donkeymen and firemen was now in the employers’ proposals extended to all and sundry. Now they wanted greasers, oil burners, wipers and trimmers all to work any consecutive eight hours (exclusive of meal hours) in the twentyfour. They objected to the whole of this paragraph; but if it was to stand they agreed to the definition clause stating that “keeping steam” or maintaining power” includes looking after engines and auxiliaries as customary. MEN OBJECT. The clause tjiat “any of the foregoing men may be employed at overtime rates for any time prior to 8 a m. on tho day of commencing their consecutive eight hours, and time so worked shall not count as portion ot the eight consecutive hours,” had been refused the employers by the court when the last award was framed. The employers would not withdraw it; but the men objected strongly to the clause. A new clause “that whilst a ship is engaged at lightering the master shall have the right to maintain sea watches in either or both departments as he shall deem necessary,” affected Napier and Gisborne more than any other ports, said Mr Hammond. The men contended that the ship in this case was in port and that watches, therefore, should be broken. CLAUSES AGREED TO. The following clauses were agreed to : —- “On the day of departure from a port the chief engineer may set watches not earlier than three hours before the time fixed for the vessel’s departure.” A clause that “except as herein otherwise provided this clause shall not operate to prevent, payment being made under clause 10 of this award for work actually performed m port prior to sailing on a Sunday or a holiday,” was also agreed, to. The sitting was adjourned until today, when discussion of the remaining clauses will take place. So far agreement- han been reached in few instances, and it seems probable that tho case will go before the Arbitration Court.